Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Xeviat-DM May 30, 2015 23:56:13	Hello everyone! There's been some talk about two weapon fighting in 5th Edition going around lately; a lot of it by yours truly. Since the day of 3E, TWFing has been my pet project; in my first 3E game, one of the players was an Elven Ranger dual wielding shortswords with Weapon Finesse and a Str 10 and Dex 17. The concept seemed like it would be fine, but it fell apart quickly. The ranger was constantly outshined (in combat) by the Half-Orc Barbarian with his Str 17 and a greataxe.   Since then, I have strived to rebalance TWFing in my games. 4E let me largely ignore it, as TWFing was baked into powers. 5E offered promise; The greatsword's 2d6+Str was equal to two shortswords' 2d6+Str/Dex. I was worried about it falling behind as multiple attacks began to rack up, but then I recently showed that TWFing (for the fighter, comparing GWFing style to TWFing style) kept up reasonably with GWFing as long as magic items were in play. In another thread in the Player page, I showed a quick overview of all of the other classes, with who benefitted from TWFing and what would affect it. I said numerous times that I wanted to look at how TWFing affects the Rogue.   So I did. I won't post everything, but it is safe to say that a rogue should always use two weapons over using a single weapon. Yes, if you intend on using your bonus action for movement and hiding every round, then you're better off with a single non-light weapon, but TWFing is the only way to keep pace with fighter damage if you care about that.   Comparing two shortswords to 1 rapier, temporarily ignoring the other bonus action effects the rapier wielder has access to, against the standard AC, the twfer deals +1.5 more damage at first level, up to +7.5 at 19th level; this is including hits and crits.   Finding myself wanting to find a way to make a single weapon style work for the rogue, I tried out some ideas. One ended up being tied into the creation of a "single weapon" style, where the offhand is left empty. I'd call this "Duelist" style, but that name is already (inappropriately) taken by a fighting style. So, how would a single weapon style differ from the others? Well, great weapons are used for damage, two weapons are used for multiple attacks, and a shield is used for defense. The only thing not really represented is a higher attack bonus; the archery style already does something. So, not in a style (since a single weapon user could still choose the Dueling style), I decided to try out giving single weapon (empty offhand) users a +2 bonus to attack.   Giving the rapier wielding rogue a +2 bonus to attack brought up their damage a bit, but it still didn't catch up quite with twfing. Then I thought some more. Why doesn't a sneak attack hurt more from a bigger weapon? What would happen if sneak attack dice were associated with the weapon wielded? So I switched the sneak attack dice from d6's to d8's, and then checked what happened. Again, against the standard AC for level, the shortsword wielder was now only +0.7 damage ahead at 1st level, and -0.5 behind at 20th level. Against higher ACs, the TWFer's edge increased, and gainst lower ACs the Rapier's edge increased (becoming as high as +3.8 ahead against an AC 3 below standard at level 20).   TL:DR: In an attempt to balance the Twin Shortsword Rogue against a Rapier Rogue, I propose giving a blanket +2 to hit to weapon attacks for characters with an empty off-hand, allowing the shield to be a choice between offense or defense without having to use a big weapon. I also propose tying sneak attack damage to weapon damage dice. This will hurt daggers, but daggers can be thrown.   More to follow.
#2 Xeviat-DM May 31, 2015 0:01:27	More TWFing house rule thoughts:   I'd like to not require a bonus action for TWFing. It burden's TWFing in ways that other styles aren't burdened. TWFer's cannot utilize spells and class abilities the same. Fighter's lose out on action surge with two weapons. Paladin's can't smite with two weapons. They do get added benefits from certain spells (like hex, hunter's mark, and elemental weapon), but these could be addressed separately.   How would removing the bonus action requirement affect gameplay? I've already shown that a TWFing fighter (champion, for simplicity) can keep it's damage up reasonably with a GWFer if magic weapons are used, but they still fall behind and are burdened with bonus actions. But what else would it affect?
#3 RCanine May 31, 2015 9:46:38	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#4 Xeviat-DM May 31, 2015 11:40:32	I only look to the fighter as a metric for damage to check if something is out of hand. As the rogue is already rather close to the fighter (fighter has a slight lead) when the rogue uses two weapons, I don't see any reason why a rapier rogue shouldn't be approaching the same level. The fighter doesn't just have damage; over the rogue, they have +1 or more HP per level (depending on rogue's consitution), second wind, and +1 AC from heavy armor. Also, because of Backgrounds, I don't think the fighter lacks in out of combat abilities either; heck, champion gets their +1/2 proficiency bonus to phyiscal ability checks, battlemaster gets their size up opponents that could prove useful in social situations, and the eldritch knight gets spells that can have utility in exploration scenes.   +1 to hit simply doesn't get the rapier's damage up to par with the twin shortswords on the rogue. Also, look what +2 to hit for empty offhand would do for the fighter:   Level 1 Fighter, combat styles (assuming 16 Str or Dex):   Archery (+2 to hit with ranged weapons): Longbow, +7 1d8+3 damage (7.5): vs AC 13, 5.85 damage per round, AC 15 (studded leather, dex 16) Defense (+1 AC with armor): Longsword and shield, +5 1d8+3 damage (7.5): vs AC 13, 5.1 damage per round, AC 19 (chainmail, shield) Dueling (+2 damage with one-handed weapon; with shield): Longsword and shield, +5 1d8+5 damage (9.5): vs AC 13, 6.4 damage per round, AC 18 (chainmail, shield) Dueling (+2 damage with one-handed weapon; house ruled empty offhand): Longsword, +7 1d8+3 damage (7.5): vs. AC 13, 5.85 damage per round, AC 16 (chainmail) Great Weapon Fighting (reroll 1s and 2s once): Greatsword, +5 2d6*+3 (11.33): vs. AC 13, 7.78 damage per round, AC 16 (chainmail) Protection (reaction to impose disadvantage on enemy's attack against ally): Longsword and shield, +5 1d8+3 damage (7.5): vs AC 13, 5.1 damage per round, AC 18 (chainmail, shield; reaction) Two-Weapon Fighting (add ability modifier to offhand damage): 2 Shortswords, 2x +5 1d6+3 (6.5 each): vs. AC 13, 4.4 each, 8.8 damage per round, AC 16 (chainmail) or 15 (studded leather, Dex 16)   TL: DR:   Archery: 5.85 dpr, AC 15 Defense: 5.1 dpr, AC 19 Dueling (shield): 6.4 dpr, AC 18 Dueling (single): 5.85 dpr, AC 16 Great Weapon: 7.78 dpr, AC 16 Protection: 5.1 dpr, AC 18 plus reaction defend Two Weapon: 8.8 dpr, AC 15/16   Now, at this point, TWFing is quite a bit ahead. It costs a bonus action in core; this is fine at this point, as it is a gain. Later, it falls behind, even if magic weapons are given out fairly.   My +2 to hit doesn't do too mch to it. As there is no "Combat Expertise" to establish a trade off of +1 to hit for +1 AC, it's hard to evaluate Defense against the others.
#5 Horwath Jun 01, 2015 0:14:23	Only thing that two weapon fighting needs is that off hand attack be joined in attack action with main hand attack.   If that cost a dual wielder feat, so be it.     P.S.  about "empty off hand" style. You dont need special advantage with that style, you already have it. An empty hand.
#6 Xeviat-DM Jun 01, 2015 0:29:44	But what advantage does the empty hand really give you? You can hold a torch? Possible advantage, but not a huge one, especially considering something like half the races have darkvision. Able to make grabs? Marginal at best. Able to cast spells? This is a definite thing, but it doesn't apply to everyone evenly. A few of those I could see players arguing could be done in one's shield hand (shield handles aren't so large that you couldn't hold a little something, someone could attach a torch to  shield ...).
#7 Horwath Jun 01, 2015 0:36:13	Xeviat-DM wrote:
(Reply to #5) arnwolf666	Horwath wrote:
(Reply to #7) AdrastusDarke	Horwath wrote:
#10 Horwath Jun 01, 2015 5:33:01	arnwolf666 wrote:
#11 FFSAA Jun 01, 2015 12:57:59	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#12 Xeviat-DM Jun 01, 2015 17:37:49	I don't want to weaken TWFing to make single weapon fighters better. I also really don't care about historical or practical martial arts; D&D is a game where there are wizards, dragon people, and monks that can super jump. As the fencer/duelist is a fantasy trope, I'd like to see it represented in the game. It could be a fighting style, but that wouldn't help the rogue out and the rogue already gets a huge advantage from two-weapon fighting (or crossbow expert).   What would come into play if the bonus action requirement was removed?
(Reply to #6) Macv12	Xeviat-DM wrote:
(Reply to #12) Macv12	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#15 Xeviat-DM Jun 02, 2015 0:19:38	I don't like the current "duelist" fighting style name because sword and shield isn't what I picture when I hear "duelist".
(Reply to #13) AdrastusDarke	Macv12 wrote:
#17 FFSAA Jun 02, 2015 9:50:10	Xeviat-DM wrote:
#18 Xeviat-DM Jun 02, 2015 11:21:07	It's not so much the empty hand, it's the way you change your stance. When fighting with a single weapon, especially in the fictional representations that I think D&D should be striving to emulate, one's stance has them lead with their primary hand. It's an aggressive stance, as your off-hand is behind you and wouldn't be in a position to defend even if you had a shield. Of course, this style in film is typically done with finesse weapons like rapiers, but I seem to remember weapon finesse penalizing you for having a shield back in 3E.   I wouldn't want to add in disadvantage on twfing. A TWFing rogue barely keeps up with the damage of a GWFing or TWFing Fighter as it is (again, fighter's strengths vs. the rogue lay in their defenses). A TWFing Fighter has the tiniest advantage over the GWFing Fighter at low levels, but this is instantly lost at level 5; I'd be more than happy to revise the GWFing and TWFing styles to correct this (maybe bring back the Str 1 and 1/2 damage for GWFing, and have 1/2 str damage in offhand for TWFing, so that at 18 Str 2d6+6 balances with 1d6+4 and 1d6+2); I do like this thought as it also would balance the 2d6 weapons with the 1d12 weapons for GWFing (2d6 reroll 1s and 2s is 8.33 average damage; 1d12 reroll 1s and 2s is 7.33 average damage). It's also closer to the damage boost of Duelist (+2), and without magic weapons it would allow for TWFing to simply be doubling one's attacks.
#19 Ironxxx Jun 03, 2015 7:05:45	Without feat investment I think it would be fair to give an extra off hand attack for free but at disadvantage, freeing up the bonus action. I also think the Dual Weapon fighting feat could be changed so it removes the disadvantage to the off hand attack and you get the benefits of Defensive Due list if you don't attack with your off hand that round, I think that would bring the three main melee styles closer together when any of the three main melee style feats are taken yet still have each style feel different and unique
#20 Slit518 Jun 03, 2015 9:37:20	Xeviat-DM wrote: