Two Weapon Fighting
Added 2024-11-05 21:37:31 +0000 UTCI'm not crazy about how D&D '24 handles two-weapon fighting. I was never crazy about it in 5e in general, but it feels like it has gotten harder to use. Here is my patch.
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you use the Attack action, you can choose to use two-weapon fighting if you wield two or more one-handed weapons. You make this choice before using any of your attacks.
When you opt to use two-weapon fighting, pick a weapon you wield. That is your off-hand weapon for this turn.
You can make one additional attack with the off-hand weapon this turn. You do not add your ability modifier to this attack's damage roll unless that modifier is negative.
You cannot make all of your attacks with your off-hand weapon this turn. You must either forgo one attack or make at least one attack with a different weapon.
You have disadvantage on all attacks this turn, and cannot gain advantage with them.
Light Weapon Property
If you choose this weapon as your off-hand weapon for two-weapon fighting, your attacks that turn do not have disadvantage and can gain advantage.
Nick Weapon Mastery
If you choose this weapon as your off-hand weapon when using two-weapon fighting, you gain a +1 bonus to AC while you wield this weapon and until the start of your next turn.
Design Notes
This is what I want:
Two-weapon fighting that does not compete with bonus actions. I hate that it pushes into the same space as class features and spells.
Rapier/dagger and battle axe/hand axe combos. Requiring both weapons to be light is too punishing. It's +1 damage overall, which I am not convinced is worth the hit to AC versus a shield or the damage ceiling of a two-hander.
Seamless integration with ranged attacks.
I think this hits all the notes. The key to me is making it clear which weapon you use for two-weapon fighting, and making sure that it accounts for at least one attack.
Comments
It's a great question, and part of the challenge. What do players actually want when they use two weapons, aside from more damage? Crowd control is tricky, because of the way hit points scale (a TWF character who can take down lots of creatures needs to do so much damage that they also are great against single targets.)
Mike Mearls
2024-11-25 15:39:15 +0000 UTCI feel this essentially solves nothing. Like, I accept and understand the premise, but it's really the bonus action the problem? Is the need for a +1 to AC necessary? Like, why i would dual wield to begin with? What's the draw? If i want to wirld stuff with both hands and deal more damage can't i just use heavy weapons? If it's only a matter of flavour could i just not use "item sets" of two weapons counting as one that act like dual wierlding instead? Or it needs to deal with some tactical stuff? Conceptually, the melee fighter wields a shield because, compared to the bowman that deals damage in the short term before engaging, the shield grants more long lasting benefits in a battle. The bowman drops the bow and picks the sword while the fighter has already sword and shield. Two weapon fighting or two handed fighting is more reckless and more offensive. Usually in video-games i see the TWF to be useful against single target enemies, while the THF against multiple targets, or that's how i have seen the fantasy being sold, but in a TTRPG it ends up being a golf bag scenario where one just favors one tool on the moment. Which can be fun, but not on such a defining level. 2024 does this decently with feats - TWF has an additional BA attack, triggering on hit effects on a target, while THF has GWM that increases damage on each hit. The two damage patterns have different curves, one being more bursty and one being more rampy. Not worlds of difference, but it's there. Additionally, if there were no BA uses, it would mean TWF users have abseline access to two masteries - which is not bad, it can be defining, but masteries are another stuff to deal with.
Enrico Boccardi
2024-11-25 08:04:19 +0000 UTCI think 2WF needs to fulfill a few expectations: 1 - You need to *attack* with your off-hand weapon, so it can't just be a flat bonus; 2 - You want to reward the use of Light off-hand weapons (mimicking rapier + main gauche or other dual styles); 3 - You don't want to be too restrictive as to disallow dual non-Light wpns (like Leonardo's dual katanas). Re: 1, giving an extra attack isn't much for PCs with Extra Attack, but it doubles the attack rolls of everyone else. What if 2WF costs *a bonus action or an attack*, so a Rogue or Cleric needs to spend a bonus action, but a 5th-level Fighter can just decide on the spot which weapon they'll use for this attack or that? Light weapons would get a bonus to this attack, non-Light get nothing. And while we're at it, why not roll Shield Bash into 2WF, so a sword-and-boarder can choose to bash with a shield? Or go even further: dual-wielders (be they 2WF or S&B) could use a reaction when attacked to divert an attack, imposing disadvantage (maybe replacing the flat +2 AC of the shield?). Maybe recreate the buckler closer to its real-world use (a small, off-hand, handheld disk used to punch and divert attacks). Lots of possibilities.
Claudio Pozas
2024-11-24 19:38:59 +0000 UTC
