After using a dual weapon character I found the feat very lacking when compared GWM and PAM. I was thinking on it and came up with this.
-you may draw or stow two weapons when you would normal can do only one (edited)
-you may use one non-light weapon and still engage in two weapon fighting
-you may make reaction attacks using both weapons
-before making a melee attack while two weapon fighting with weapons your proficient in you may choose to make a two weapon attack taking a -4 penalty to attack. On a successful attack, roll damage with both weapons plus modifiers.Choose a leading hand to determine attack bonuses.(A two weapon fighting bonus action attack may not be done this turn)
I think it gives two weapon fighters a good option for attacks when they need to use their bonus action on something else. It also gives scaling with multi attacks. I took away one of the non light weapons but could go either way really. What do you guys think?
So generally weaker than dual wielding? Dual wielding lets you use 2 non-weapons. You also trade the +1 AC and ability to draw 2 weapons at a time for the ability to free up your bonus action by making your TWF attack at a penalty and (the one improvement) be able to make 2 attacks with AoO.
Your right the 1AC is good but dual wield feels bad at later levels. I feel like giving it the ability to scale with multi attack and still leave your bonus action available (which a lot of classes use once they get a few levels) is worth it. I also think it makes you feel like a two weapon master rather than oh you get +1AC and can hold d8 weapons.
Polearm and great weapon feats give players a new way to attack with their weapons dual wield by comparison is boring and not as useful. The last ability is just a scaling GWM variant. GWM is -5 +10. This one is -4 + 1-6+Modifiers let’s say around 5-6 early but could be around 10 or more later. (It definitely could use tweeking it’s just a rough idea, perhaps -3 is better or maybe Keep -4 if it allows you to dual wield two non light weapons, or perhaps not have the bonus action attack clause)
Maybe just letting them have 2 attacks with their BA if they have extra attack?
Or letting them choose to add their second weapon's damage dice (just damage dice) to their weapon attacks for no other penalty besides not being able to attack as a BA (this should balance nicely against the -5 hit/+10 damage model of other feats).
I think two attacks per BA is good. It’s like putting the feat taker on mechanically even ground with flurry of blows instead of GWM. And that makes more sense thematically with the fighting style. But monks have to spend ki to do two strikes per BA. Is it OP that the dual wielding feat can use their BA every turn to do this, or is the fact that they don’t get to add the ability modifier to the second attack (unless they also use TWF) enough of a balance?
I think two attacks per BA is good. It’s like putting the feat taker on mechanically even ground with flurry of blows instead of GWM. And that makes more sense thematically with the fighting style. But monks have to spend ki to do two strikes per BA. Is it OP that the dual wielding feat can use their BA every turn to do this, or is the fact that they don’t get to add the ability modifier to the second attack (unless they also use TWF) enough of a balance?
At later levels, being able to add your ability mod to damage more than doubles the average damage output of an offhand weapon (even a non-light one like a longsword, assuming a +5 ability mod). I’d say taking that away more than balances the addition of a second attack.
Although we’re not really comparing against the fighting style, are we?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
After using a dual weapon character I found the feat very lacking when compared GWM and PAM. I was thinking on it and came up with this.
-you may draw or stow two weapons when you would normal can do only one (edited)
-you may use one non-light weapon and still engage in two weapon fighting
-you may make reaction attacks using both weapons
-before making a melee attack while two weapon fighting with weapons your proficient in you may choose to make a two weapon attack taking a -4 penalty to attack. On a successful attack, roll damage with both weapons plus modifiers. Choose a leading hand to determine attack bonuses. (A two weapon fighting bonus action attack may not be done this turn)
I think it gives two weapon fighters a good option for attacks when they need to use their bonus action on something else. It also gives scaling with multi attacks. I took away one of the non light weapons but could go either way really. What do you guys think?
So generally weaker than dual wielding? Dual wielding lets you use 2 non-weapons. You also trade the +1 AC and ability to draw 2 weapons at a time for the ability to free up your bonus action by making your TWF attack at a penalty and (the one improvement) be able to make 2 attacks with AoO.
I'd say regular dual wielding is better.
Ah I forgot about the drawing two weapons, I’ll keep that just for convince sake.
I would still prefer the +1 AC over improved opportunity attacks most of the time.
Your right the 1AC is good but dual wield feels bad at later levels. I feel like giving it the ability to scale with multi attack and still leave your bonus action available (which a lot of classes use once they get a few levels) is worth it. I also think it makes you feel like a two weapon master rather than oh you get +1AC and can hold d8 weapons.
Polearm and great weapon feats give players a new way to attack with their weapons dual wield by comparison is boring and not as useful. The last ability is just a scaling GWM variant. GWM is -5 +10. This one is -4 + 1-6+Modifiers let’s say around 5-6 early but could be around 10 or more later. (It definitely could use tweeking it’s just a rough idea, perhaps -3 is better or maybe Keep -4 if it allows you to dual wield two non light weapons, or perhaps not have the bonus action attack clause)
Maybe just letting them have 2 attacks with their BA if they have extra attack?
Or letting them choose to add their second weapon's damage dice (just damage dice) to their weapon attacks for no other penalty besides not being able to attack as a BA (this should balance nicely against the -5 hit/+10 damage model of other feats).
I think two attacks per BA is good. It’s like putting the feat taker on mechanically even ground with flurry of blows instead of GWM. And that makes more sense thematically with the fighting style. But monks have to spend ki to do two strikes per BA. Is it OP that the dual wielding feat can use their BA every turn to do this, or is the fact that they don’t get to add the ability modifier to the second attack (unless they also use TWF) enough of a balance?
At later levels, being able to add your ability mod to damage more than doubles the average damage output of an offhand weapon (even a non-light one like a longsword, assuming a +5 ability mod). I’d say taking that away more than balances the addition of a second attack.
Although we’re not really comparing against the fighting style, are we?