In real life and historically speaking two weapon fighting was as much defensive as offensive in nature. A simple fix to the use of two weapon fighting in 5E would be to keep everything the same, base mechanics, fighting style, feat, everything, but add to the two weapon fighting mechanics something like "...your AC increases by +1."
Run the math for yourself versus dueling, archery, and heavy weapon fighting, with and without fighting styles and feats. It's pretty solid.
What is the problem that most people have with it? Damage output? I hope not. Two little blades would never do as much damage as a heavy axe wielded with two hands.
What is the problem that most people have with it? Damage output? I hope not. Two little blades would never do as much damage as a heavy axe wielded with two hands.
the main problem is fanatasy most people see dual wielding as sort of tornado of swords and strikes and without feats and fighting styles you get 2 little blades making one additional attack that both deals less damage and is less likely to hit then normal you barely deal deal damage with 2 daggers then 1 for peet's sake
I see. I guess I’m coming at it from a escrima stick perspective where it is used for some defensive tactics and allows for multiple quick little strikes. Nothing like wielding a big axe, great sword, or even a baseball bat.
I see a shield user favoring defense on one side of the spectrum and a two handed heavy weapon user favoring offense on the other side. The two weapon fighter should sit in the middle with a little bit more damage output than the shield user and a little bit more defensive capabilities than the heavy weapon user. The feat tries to do this but seems to fail, as you loose the ASI doing so which negates the benefit of the feat.
Think that could be a decent tweak, honestly. It half-obsoletes the Dual Wielder feat, but then again the Dual Wielder feat is a huge issue in and of itself, and you're correct - dual-weapon styles have traditionally been more about blending offense and defense than about the 'Tornado of Swords" thing popularized by action movies and anime. In real combat, damage comes from leverage, and leverage happens when you have two hands spaced far apart on a big ol' whackin' stick. There are so many reasons pole weapons were the warfighter's weapon of choice back in the day and swords were relegated to sidearms and so-called 'courtly' combat.
I will say that if this were an Official Rule, you'd be likely to see numbers weenies trying to pull sketchy shit with their Free Item Interaction to get the bonus AC for holding two weapons without having to actually have the second (or first) weapon in their hands during their turn. Shields requiring an action to don/doff was put in specifically to avoid that sort of Combat Juggler mentality. Yeah, people with Dual Wielder can technically already pull those shenanigans, but the people who take Dual Wielder are the ones who'll be using two weapons properly in the first place. Letting your School of Munchkinry wizard pull combat juggling with a couple of athames on straps might run afoul of Unintended Consequences territory. It's one of the reasons a lot of my attempts to fix two-weapon fighting tend to focus on fixing the feat or the fighting style, rather than the default rule itself.
Think that could be a decent tweak, honestly. It half-obsoletes the Dual Wielder feat, but then again the Dual Wielder feat is a huge issue in and of itself, and you're correct - dual-weapon styles have traditionally been more about blending offense and defense than about the 'Tornado of Swords" thing popularized by action movies and anime. In real combat, damage comes from leverage, and leverage happens when you have two hands spaced far apart on a big ol' whackin' stick. There are so many reasons pole weapons were the warfighter's weapon of choice back in the day and swords were relegated to sidearms and so-called 'courtly' combat.
I will say that if this were an Official Rule, you'd be likely to see numbers weenies trying to pull sketchy shit with their Free Item Interaction to get the bonus AC for holding two weapons without having to actually have the second (or first) weapon in their hands during their turn. Shields requiring an action to don/doff was put in specifically to avoid that sort of Combat Juggler mentality. Yeah, people with Dual Wielder can technically already pull those shenanigans, but the people who take Dual Wielder are the ones who'll be using two weapons properly in the first place. Letting your School of Munchkinry wizard pull combat juggling with a couple of athames on straps might run afoul of Unintended Consequences territory. It's one of the reasons a lot of my attempts to fix two-weapon fighting tend to focus on fixing the feat or the fighting style, rather than the default rule itself.
*i thought it was clear the ac bonus only occured if you used the dual wielding bonus action*
In the most recent sage advice compendium it is made clear that the off hand weapon must be held at the start of the action. Cheaters gonna cheat. 🤷♂️
I don't think it's cheating so much as players forgetting that "turns" is an abstraction forced by the limits of human focus. Nobody's standing still and letting everybody else wander up and hit them - every action in a combat round takes place in the same sloppy, messy, desperately bloody six seconds of strained, lethal combat. Combat Juggling is an awesome way to lose a key item in the heat of battle, or leave yourself open to attack. Folks who veer a little too gamist and forget the narrative are the ones who try and cheese the rules that way.
Still. The AC bonus kicking in only if you make an offhand TWF attack might work, though it seems a little convoluted to me. Hm. Worth kicking the idea around, at least.
I have made a “magic item” for the Main-Gauche for players who use TWF. (The +1 makes it “magic,” the rest is just because of the nature of the weapon.) Anywho, it grants the +1 AC if they don’t make the BA attack. So it’s either/or an additional stab or the additional AC as a parrying thing. 🤷♂️ I don’t see why that doesn’t make sense as a general houserule too.
In real life and historically speaking two weapon fighting was as much defensive as offensive in nature. A simple fix to the use of two weapon fighting in 5E would be to keep everything the same, base mechanics, fighting style, feat, everything, but add to the two weapon fighting mechanics something like "...your AC increases by +1."
Run the math for yourself versus dueling, archery, and heavy weapon fighting, with and without fighting styles and feats. It's pretty solid.
okay cool does not fix the problem that most people have but it makes it somewhat viable without a feat
Check out my homebrew subclasses spells magic items feats monsters races
i am a sauce priest
help create a world here
What is the problem that most people have with it? Damage output? I hope not. Two little blades would never do as much damage as a heavy axe wielded with two hands.
the main problem is fanatasy most people see dual wielding as sort of tornado of swords and strikes and without feats and fighting styles you get 2 little blades making one additional attack that both deals less damage and is less likely to hit then normal you barely deal deal damage with 2 daggers then 1 for peet's sake
Check out my homebrew subclasses spells magic items feats monsters races
i am a sauce priest
help create a world here
I see. I guess I’m coming at it from a escrima stick perspective where it is used for some defensive tactics and allows for multiple quick little strikes. Nothing like wielding a big axe, great sword, or even a baseball bat.
I see a shield user favoring defense on one side of the spectrum and a two handed heavy weapon user favoring offense on the other side. The two weapon fighter should sit in the middle with a little bit more damage output than the shield user and a little bit more defensive capabilities than the heavy weapon user. The feat tries to do this but seems to fail, as you loose the ASI doing so which negates the benefit of the feat.
Think that could be a decent tweak, honestly. It half-obsoletes the Dual Wielder feat, but then again the Dual Wielder feat is a huge issue in and of itself, and you're correct - dual-weapon styles have traditionally been more about blending offense and defense than about the 'Tornado of Swords" thing popularized by action movies and anime. In real combat, damage comes from leverage, and leverage happens when you have two hands spaced far apart on a big ol' whackin' stick. There are so many reasons pole weapons were the warfighter's weapon of choice back in the day and swords were relegated to sidearms and so-called 'courtly' combat.
I will say that if this were an Official Rule, you'd be likely to see numbers weenies trying to pull sketchy shit with their Free Item Interaction to get the bonus AC for holding two weapons without having to actually have the second (or first) weapon in their hands during their turn. Shields requiring an action to don/doff was put in specifically to avoid that sort of Combat Juggler mentality. Yeah, people with Dual Wielder can technically already pull those shenanigans, but the people who take Dual Wielder are the ones who'll be using two weapons properly in the first place. Letting your School of Munchkinry wizard pull combat juggling with a couple of athames on straps might run afoul of Unintended Consequences territory. It's one of the reasons a lot of my attempts to fix two-weapon fighting tend to focus on fixing the feat or the fighting style, rather than the default rule itself.
Please do not contact or message me.
*i thought it was clear the ac bonus only occured if you used the dual wielding bonus action*
Check out my homebrew subclasses spells magic items feats monsters races
i am a sauce priest
help create a world here
In the most recent sage advice compendium it is made clear that the off hand weapon must be held at the start of the action. Cheaters gonna cheat. 🤷♂️
I don't think it's cheating so much as players forgetting that "turns" is an abstraction forced by the limits of human focus. Nobody's standing still and letting everybody else wander up and hit them - every action in a combat round takes place in the same sloppy, messy, desperately bloody six seconds of strained, lethal combat. Combat Juggling is an awesome way to lose a key item in the heat of battle, or leave yourself open to attack. Folks who veer a little too gamist and forget the narrative are the ones who try and cheese the rules that way.
Still. The AC bonus kicking in only if you make an offhand TWF attack might work, though it seems a little convoluted to me. Hm. Worth kicking the idea around, at least.
Please do not contact or message me.
I have made a “magic item” for the Main-Gauche for players who use TWF. (The +1 makes it “magic,” the rest is just because of the nature of the weapon.) Anywho, it grants the +1 AC if they don’t make the BA attack. So it’s either/or an additional stab or the additional AC as a parrying thing. 🤷♂️ I don’t see why that doesn’t make sense as a general houserule too.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting