So, I recently created a Samurai, well balanced and what not. Decided to give her the Defensive Duelist Feat with her short sword (Wakizashi). It's all well and good until we ran into a little debate in which my Samurai was unable to use Defensive Duelist due to her carrying her Katana in her other hand (Dual Wielder Feat). It was a split discussion in which one side said it is not applicable while the other half said it should be since in the feat itself did not state that I had to keep a free hand open or not, merely stating that PC had to be carrying a finesse weapon which they are proficient with (which she is).
Yes, it's applicable. You can have a weapon in each hand, or a weapon and shield even. So long as you meet the requirements for the feat (a finesse weapon) then you can have whatever you want in the other hand.
There may of been some confusion with the Fighter's Dueling fighting style which states you can use a melee weapon in one hand only?
If not then they may of had some preconceived notions of how it worked or should work. But you can indeed duel wield weapons and still use that feat.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
Yes, I should of been clearer. You are right, if you use 2 weapons they both have to be finesse as wielding a non-finesse weapon is either hand will negate the use of the feat.
But if using only 1 weapon then the other hand is free to do other things with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
"A rightful place awaits you in the Realms Above, in the Land of the Great Light. Come in peace, and live beneath the sun again, where trees and flowers grow."
— The message of Eilistraee to all decent drow.
"Run thy sword across my chains, Silver Lady, that I may join your dance.”
When you are wielding a finesse weapon with which you are proficient...
Nah. "When you are wielding a finesse weapon" is satisfied by one finesse weapon and one empty hand, one finesse weapon and one non-finesse weapon, a finesse weapon in two hands, two finesse weapons, a finesse weapon and a bologne sandwich...... Got yourself a finesse weapon? Congratulations, you're "wielding a finesse weapon."
I never understand this urge to take Feats and Fighting Styles and squeeze them into tight little boxes. What skin off anyone's back is it whether this is used by a character with a Shortsword/Longsword combo, or anything else? The feat doesn't ask you to discriminate, doesn't even hint that you need to, and yet...
For an example of what an "X and only X" rule looks like, see Monk's Martial Arts. If this is what they'd meant, they could have written it:
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons...
When you are wielding a finesse weapon with which you are proficient and another creature hits you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you.
i don't know why so many people are over thinking it. nothing in it says you can't be dual welding.
if you as dms feel its op, so be eat, but RAW does not say you cant.
i do agree you should be wielding two finesse rather then wielding one none finesse, as that feels more fair. But again, RAW doesn't demand that.
I come late to the party on this one, but yes, as long as the requirements of RAW are simultaneously satisfied, then it makes sense that both the Duel Wielder and Defensive Duelist advantages apply. This accommodates the classic Rapier/Dagger Renaissance-like model as much as the Longsword/Shortsword variant.
Interestingly, the Defensive Duelist without the Duel Wielder could still be useful when even just using something like Club/Dagger:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
Or even if you violate the Two-Weapon Fighting fighting requirement with no light weapon(s) in either or both hands, losing the ability to make a bonus attack, the Defensive Duelist would still apply in unconventional cases like Longsword/Rapier or Flail/Whip, etc. Further, it looks like Defensive Duelist could still work with a shield as long as the finesse weapon condition is satisfied. Consider a Rapier/Shield combination as an example.
I come late to the party on this one, but yes, as long as the requirements of RAW are simultaneously satisfied, then it makes sense that both the Duel Wielder and Defensive Duelist advantages apply. This accommodates the classic Rapier/Dagger Renaissance-like model as much as the Longsword/Shortsword variant.
Interestingly, the Defensive Duelist without the Duel Wielder could still be useful when even just using something like Club/Dagger:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
Or even if you violate the Two-Weapon Fighting fighting requirement with no light weapon(s) in either or both hands, losing the ability to make a bonus attack, the Defensive Duelist would still apply in unconventional cases like Longsword/Rapier or Flail/Whip, etc. Further, it looks like Defensive Duelist could still work with a shield as long as the finesse weapon condition is satisfied. Consider a Rapier/Shield combination as an example.
but the Dual Wielder feat specifically states :
"You add a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light, and can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one."
So if she has the Dual Wielder feat and the defensive dualist, she isnt violating the TWF requirement because the Dual Wielder feat is the DnD rule of Specific over General. I mean, I agree with you that both advantages apply, just pointing out that on the basis of her feats, they both work as intended. Also like to point out, if she took the Two-Weapon fighting style (which we dont know what style she picked), she would get her attack modifiers on her offhand attacks.
So, I recently created a Samurai, well balanced and what not. Decided to give her the Defensive Duelist Feat with her short sword (Wakizashi). It's all well and good until we ran into a little debate in which my Samurai was unable to use Defensive Duelist due to her carrying her Katana in her other hand (Dual Wielder Feat). It was a split discussion in which one side said it is not applicable while the other half said it should be since in the feat itself did not state that I had to keep a free hand open or not, merely stating that PC had to be carrying a finesse weapon which they are proficient with (which she is).
So my question is, is it applicable or not?
Yes, it's applicable. You can have a weapon in each hand, or a weapon and shield even. So long as you meet the requirements for the feat (a finesse weapon) then you can have whatever you want in the other hand.
There may of been some confusion with the Fighter's Dueling fighting style which states you can use a melee weapon in one hand only?
If not then they may of had some preconceived notions of how it worked or should work. But you can indeed duel wield weapons and still use that feat.
My reading of the feat is that you have to be wielding only finesse weapons.
Short sword in both hands, feat applies.
Shortsword and long sword, feat doesn't apply.
Yes, I should of been clearer. You are right, if you use 2 weapons they both have to be finesse as wielding a non-finesse weapon is either hand will negate the use of the feat.
But if using only 1 weapon then the other hand is free to do other things with.
Nah. "When you are wielding a finesse weapon" is satisfied by one finesse weapon and one empty hand, one finesse weapon and one non-finesse weapon, a finesse weapon in two hands, two finesse weapons, a finesse weapon and a bologne sandwich...... Got yourself a finesse weapon? Congratulations, you're "wielding a finesse weapon."
I never understand this urge to take Feats and Fighting Styles and squeeze them into tight little boxes. What skin off anyone's back is it whether this is used by a character with a Shortsword/Longsword combo, or anything else? The feat doesn't ask you to discriminate, doesn't even hint that you need to, and yet...
For an example of what an "X and only X" rule looks like, see Monk's Martial Arts. If this is what they'd meant, they could have written it:
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
A little pedantic but:
"When you are wielding "A" finesse weapon with which you are proficient...
"A" is usually used before a singular object. Just sayin.
A does mean singular but it doesn't mean exclusively. We have several words which modify it to mean exclusively like just or only.
When you are wielding a finesse weapon with which you are proficient and another creature hits you with a melee attack, you can use your reaction to add your proficiency bonus to your AC for that attack, potentially causing the attack to miss you.
i don't know why so many people are over thinking it. nothing in it says you can't be dual welding.
if you as dms feel its op, so be eat, but RAW does not say you cant.
i do agree you should be wielding two finesse rather then wielding one none finesse, as that feels more fair. But again, RAW doesn't demand that.
Hence my use of "Usually", duh.
Is this Canon?
When wielding a finesse weapon and another weapon you should qualify for Defensive Duelist.
I come late to the party on this one, but yes, as long as the requirements of RAW are simultaneously satisfied, then it makes sense that both the Duel Wielder and Defensive Duelist advantages apply. This accommodates the classic Rapier/Dagger Renaissance-like model as much as the Longsword/Shortsword variant.
Interestingly, the Defensive Duelist without the Duel Wielder could still be useful when even just using something like Club/Dagger:
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
Or even if you violate the Two-Weapon Fighting fighting requirement with no light weapon(s) in either or both hands, losing the ability to make a bonus attack, the Defensive Duelist would still apply in unconventional cases like Longsword/Rapier or Flail/Whip, etc. Further, it looks like Defensive Duelist could still work with a shield as long as the finesse weapon condition is satisfied. Consider a Rapier/Shield combination as an example.
but the Dual Wielder feat specifically states :
"You add a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand, can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light, and can draw or stow two one-handed weapons when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one."
So if she has the Dual Wielder feat and the defensive dualist, she isnt violating the TWF requirement because the Dual Wielder feat is the DnD rule of Specific over General. I mean, I agree with you that both advantages apply, just pointing out that on the basis of her feats, they both work as intended. Also like to point out, if she took the Two-Weapon fighting style (which we dont know what style she picked), she would get her attack modifiers on her offhand attacks.