| Post/Author/DateTime | Post |
|---|---|
| #1YunruSep 02, 2015 5:29:27 | ... Can't think of a way to make it about food. ... Damn.
Anyway, running some basic numbers, changing the Two Weapon Fighting (Fighter?) Fighting Style from adding +mod, to applying Extra Attack to it seems to make it actually viable.
Compare: A Greatsword with GWF deals 2d6 damage, rerolling the first 1 or 2. That's an average of 8.33333. A Shortsword with TWF would deal 1d6 damage, twice. That's an average of 7, and it uses your Bonus action.
Throw in Extra Attack, and we get 16.6666666, vs 14. But Fighters can get three attacks: 25 vs 21. Or even four: 33.33333 vs 28.
Of course, the Greatsword does more evenly distrubted damage, while the Shortswords are heavily weighted towards the average.
Oh and we can't forget Hex (or the whimpy Hunter's Mark) now can we? No Extra Attack: 11.83333, vs 10.5 Extra Attack 1: 23.6666, vs 28 Extra Attack 2: 35.5, vs 42 Extra Attack 3: 47.3333, vs 56 Of course, this isn't accounting for the fact that Hex/Hunter's Mark can't be used in the same turn as you would benefit from TWF, which actually brings the numbers more in line (on those rounds TWF's output is halved).
Thoughts? |
| #2ModusPonensSep 02, 2015 6:35:16 | Addressing a need that isn't there. Bonus actions don't grant Extra Attack for a number of very good reasons. |
| #3melloredSep 02, 2015 6:50:04 | You forgot dex > str. |
| #4DeathMutantLivesSep 02, 2015 7:08:51 | Why aren't you adding the ability modifier to your damage rolls, the option to use DEX or STR, the chance to hit/miss or the option to split damage between 2 targets?
Take a STR 16 (+3) Fighter, for example. By your math, the Greatsword would inflict an average of 8.3 + 3 = 11.3 damage and the Shortsword would inflict and average of 7 + (2x3) = 13 damage. Not to mention a two-weapon fighter has 2 chances to inflict ANY damage, using a Finesse weapon allows use of DEX instead of STR thus increasing his AC and, if you kill a target with the first attack, you can attack a second target so less damage is "wasted."
|
| #5YunruSep 02, 2015 7:44:52 | How are you gettin (2×3)? Only the main attacks have any modifiers. Yes the TWF makes more attacks, which means they suffer more from disadvantage, less from advantage, and it still consumes their bonus action. Compare with GWF which, whilst Str only, benefits more from advantage, suffers less from disadvantage AND does more damage without using their bonus action. |
| (Reply to #5)DeathMutantLives |
|
| (Reply to #6)Yunru |
|
| (Reply to #2)Xeviat-DM |
|
| #9ElfcrusherSep 02, 2015 17:00:42 | So how about reducing GWF to only re-rolling 1's? Why does 'balancing' always have to be upward? |
| (Reply to #9)Macv12 |
|
| #11Greenstone.WalkerSep 02, 2015 18:53:09 | Two-weapon fighting has another advantage - chance of critical hit.
A non-multiattack fighter with a two-handed weapon has a 5% chance of doing a critical in their turn. The same fighter with two weapons has a 10% chance of doing a critical in their turn.
|
| (Reply to #9)Xeviat-DM |
|
| (Reply to #11)Xeviat-DM |
|
| #14ElfcrusherSep 02, 2015 20:03:21 | Don't forget all the damage bonuses (e.g. Hunter's Mark, e.g. Improved Divine Smite) that get applied to all attacks, and other bonuses that only get applied to one attack per turn (e.g. Colossus Slayer) but that have a decreased chance of being wasted with more attacks. Those things all favor TWF.
Can Battle Masters use Superiority Dice on multiple attacks in a turn, or just one? (Don't have PHB handy...)
As for GWF, the tweak I like does increase damage slightly, but is nice for being fast and simple: just treat all 1's as the maximum value for that die. I.e., on a d6 the 1's get treated as 6's. Average damage is only slightly higher than "reroll 1's and 2's, keep the new value". |
| (Reply to #14)Macv12 |
|
| (Reply to #14)Xeviat-DM |
|
| #17RastapopoulosSep 06, 2015 11:52:03 |
People don't actually attack faster because they're wielding two weapons. Striking speed comes from body balance mostly and not flailing your arms about with more weapons.
Two-weapon fighting is something D&D has always handled poorly.
Wielding a second weapon in the off-hand (which was rare enough) was mostly for parrying purposes.
If I were to rewrite the rules for two-weapon fighting (which I usually do in my games) I'd make it grant something like +1 or +2 AC against melee attacks. And yes, shields are just plain better in this regard, and this is why mostly everyone opted for a shield in real life. The one advantage of dual-wielding I could see there over using shields is possibly switching from one weapon to another whenever each is more appropriate (if they have different properties). |
| (Reply to #17)AaronOfBarbaria |
|
| #19Xeviat-DMSep 07, 2015 3:27:04 | Realism doesn't matter very much in D&D, at least the way most people play (my assumption, based on the way the game has been written the last 3 editions). Believability is more important. Genre emulation is important as well. Giving each style a unique thing is important to gameplay. Thus, personally, I don't care what historic fighting with two weapons entails. All I know is that I want TWFing to be an equal style compared to the other styles (I've even polished up single handed weapon, empty off-hand in my games), and I want it to have it's own thing. It's thing is multiple attacks.
I've never sparred with weapons (outside of some foil fencing), but I have sparred unarmed. I sure as heck would throw a lot less punches if I could only throw them with my right hand, especially when you can use the movement of pulling back one arm to throw the other arm. It's that kind of simple logic, whether it is accurate or not, that people are going to want. Maybe there aren't more swings with TWFing. Maybe they're responding to more openings then someone with a single weapon is able to. Or they're a furious tempest of whirling blades. This is a game with wizards and elemental monks and shapeshifting druids for Pete's sake. |
| #20ElfcrusherSep 07, 2015 4:31:48 |
|