D&D 5E Scaling the number of off-hand attacks?

[doctorhook]

Thanks.

I guess you could make it into a class feature, say "improved twf" or something, and then add this feature to the fighter class at level 11...

...as well as level 11 rangers (respect of tradition), even though they do not get a regular third attack.

I really like your suggestion. I had kinda suspected level 11 would be the way to go. But let's talk about the details:

1. Which feature do we bake the extra bonus attack into? If we're targeting fighters and rangers, the obvious answer is to rewrite the TWF Fighting Style to grant an extra bonus attack at 11th level.
2. What do we do about multiclass characters? If a character dips into fighter or ranger for the fighting style then returns to their original class, should they get the extra bonus attack at 11th level too? If not, why not?
3. Why only fighters and rangers anyway? TWF could be a common archetype (thematically, if not mechanically) among barbarians and rogues too, but they don't have access to fighting styles. Is TWF a viable (read: non-trap) option for them? If not, how can we make TWF viable?
4. What if we build the extra attack into a different feature? For example, what about the Dual Wielder feat, which most TWFers will take anyway? Or what about directly into Extra Attack?

There's obviously a lot of details to consider. My goal here is to see if we can make TWF as effective across the level-range as great weapons/two-handed weapons seem to be.

 

[Delandel]

The real problem that nobody has mentioned is feats: Sharpshooter and Great Weapon Master. These are what leaves TWF in the dust, because TWF has no feat available that matches their power.

Both feats offer "power attack," aka -5 attack penalty for +10 damage. This damage boost is enormous -- if you hit. Combat advantage pretty much negates the attack penalty, making it a good time to go for the power attack. There are many ways to get advantage: many abilities and spells knock prone for melee advantage, spells/abilities to stun, popping out of hiding, or being a Barbarian and having it on-demand whenever you want. When you're adding +10 damage to your hits, and TWF can't do that, you quickly leave it in the dust.

And the cherry on top, GWM's bonus action attack: crit or kill and you get to swing again as a bonus action. Watching my friend's barbarian go at it for 7 levels now, he cleaves through enemies so quickly that he's using this bonus action more often than not. And when he does, it's another 1d12+5, which is even better than the TWF's bonus action 1d8+5 (or 1d6+5 without feat).

What TWF really needs is a feat that is equally potent to GFM. 2hr's spend a feat for that enormous boost, likewise TWF should be able to spend a feat to stay relevant.

The only time I'd ever consider TWF is as a rogue so I have another shot at applying Sneak Attack.

 

[Rune]

A few points:

1: The OPs suggestion doesn't just devalue other fighting styles, it also seriously devalues the monk's flurry of blows from level 5 on.

2: As per the previous suggestion, limiting the extra TWF attack to level 11+ fighters shouldn't break anything if you think the option in RAW is too weak.

3: I'm not so sure it actually is substantially weaker at high levels; these are the levels you are most likely to be surrounded by lots of weak foes and having an extra attack is actually stronger than, say, 2H style in such situations. Put another way, as the TWF specialist levels, s/he trades depth of damage potential for breadth.

 

[ZombieRoboNinja]

Why only fighters and rangers anyway?

Because most other classes get static damage bonuses to every hit at high levels, meaning they already get a more significant benefit from TWF than fighters do.

In fact, I'd probably leave rangers off too. Build the extra offhand attack into the level 11 fighter Extra Attack ability.

 

[spinozajack]

Personally, I wouldn't give the player any more than one additional off-hand attack. It's just too many dice.

Agreed. I also think the problem of too many dice rolled every round is made worse by choosing weapons that have multiple dice per attack, like the 2d6 weapons. Once you get to 3 attacks, and a crit, it gets a little much. Actually a lot much. 6d6 is similar to 3d12 and 3d12 is half the dice, but still plenty.

What they might have done for dual wielding is made your main hand and off hand attacks all do 1/2 damage unless you have the fighting style which makes it full damage, and force the player to alternate hands. So it's not, main attack, main attack, off hand, at level 5, it's main, off, main. At level 11 it becomes even again, main, off, main, off. That way the fact that you chose the two weapon fighting style remains important as you gain more attacks, and even discourages dual wielding at higher levels unless you took that fighting style at level 1.

Normally I'm against encouraging people to take a 1 level dip in fighter, but this is a solid reason to.

I would much rather rogues have 1d6 + half dex per each of their short sword attacks, than 1d6 + dex for main, and 1d6 for off hand. Or give people the choice, at least. That way you can't have to remember which d20 was rolled for which attack, and you can roll both d20s at the same time. The current way the system works is, you need to call out which d20 is for which arm's attack, and that's annoying (to me).

 

[guachi]

Not counting any feats the damage at 11th level is, if I have it correct:
3d8+21 (34.5) - one weapon, d8, duelist, 20 ability score.
4d6+20 (34.0) - two weapon, d6, Two-weapon fighting, 20 ability score.
6d6+15 (40.0) - one weapon, 2d6, Great Weapon fighting, 20 ability score.
3d8+15 (28.5) - ranged weapon, 1d8, archery, 20 ability. Lower damage but, of course, higher hit.

Two-weapon fighting is worse duelist from a damage stand point AND you don't have a shield and you used your bonus action. Maybe that's not a terrible thing as TWF doesn't have to always be better for every class. It's still fine for other classes.

But if you do add a second bonus attack at level 11 (or some higher level) the damage becomes:
5d6+25 (42.5). Perhaps this is a little too high as 5 attacks is better than 3 as you are less likely to have wasted damage. Maybe grant that fifth attack with no ability bonus for 37.5?

Although if you have players taking Sharpshooter/Great Weapon Mastery you might have to look again at the damage. I've done the calculations but it's probably beyond the scope of this post.

 

[jgsugden]

2WF is already amongst the strongest options. Improving it would hamper balance.

 

[brehobit]

3d8+21 (34.5) - one weapon, d8, duelist, 20 ability score.
4d6+20 (34.0) - two weapon, d6, Two-weapon fighting, 20 ability score.
6d6+15 (36.0) - one weapon, 2d6, Great Weapon fighting, 20 ability score.
3d8+15 (28.5) - ranged weapon, 1d8, archery, 20 ability. Lower damage but, of course, higher hit.
4d8+20 (38.0) - two rapiers, two-weapon fighting and dual wielder.

I've fixed the math on great weapon fighting and added in one feat just to show it can be good. Now that's not an apples-to-apples comparison, but it is something an 11th level two-weapon fighter will have. In any case, at 11th level the two-weapon fighter is still doing just fine. AND probably is DEX based which has a number of significant advantages. Plus they can split damage more easily.

As a player of a two-weapon fighter as my main 5e character, I don't feel gimped.

 

[TornadoCreator]

A two-weapon warrior (fighter, barbarian, etc.) gets Extra Attack at 5th level. Rules as written, he or she now gets three attacks (2 main hand + 1 off hand) rather than two (1 main hand, 1 off-hand). Why not just let off-hand attacks scale upwards as well? For example, why not let a TWF 5th-level barbarian have two main-hand and two off-hand attacks for the cost of an action and bonus action?

I'm not looking for an explanation so much as a discussion of the rationale. What would be the consequences of allowing this in my game?

As always, thanks for your input, gang.

It slows combat down because there's too many attacks, too many dice, too much book-keeping. Secondly, it'd be simply too powerful. It would allow you to do more damage per round with an ability that is basically the same as the monk Martial Arts ability, in effect it's giving the two weapon fighter a very powerful class feature for free.

Lastly, it's just stupid. I've trained with weapons in real life. Two weapon fighting is banned in my games outright. It makes no sense, and I don't allow it. For theme, I will allow someone to duel with a sword in one hand and a dagger/main gouche in the other, but that's just for theme, it has no actually stat effect. The reality is, you shouldn't get ANY additional attacks just because you have a weapon in your off hand. You need to use your legs, hips, back, and finally arms to swing a weapon with any force. Your entire body is being used, not just an arm, meaning I could probably hit someone faster with one sword in my right hand, than two swords, one in each hand. It's not faster, it's not better, it's just stupid. Duel wielding only makes sense with light pistols, and last time I checked, D&D doesn't include modern guns...

So yeah, that's my take on two weapon fighting.

 

[guachi]

You didn't fix the GWF numbers. You made them wrong. GWF allows rerolls of 1s and 2s. The average damage on a 2d6 weapon with the rerolls is 8.3333 versus 7.0 without it. My original number of 40 was correct.

If you want to add feats, taking GWM and NEVER using the -5/+10 portion will add (if a Champion) 10%+ damage from the bonus action attack. You'll get at least one crit 27.1% of the time which will yield (2d6+5)*.271 = 3.6 extra damage or 9% more plus whatever extra attacks you might get from dropping an opponent to zero on the 72.9% of the rounds you don't get a crit.

Dual wielder increases your damage by 4. GWM for a Champion at it's worst increases it by 3.6 (1.9 for a BM).

Heck, a duelist can even take GWM and get almost as much. He'd get 3.1 as a Champion just from crits.

If you assume you drop a creature to zero on 1 round in 4 you get an extra attack from that feature 18.2% of the time as a Champion. Multiply the rounds you don't get a bonus attack from a crit (72.1%) by 25%. That would add an extra 2.4 damage for a GWF for a total of 6.0.

For a duelist it's an extra 2.1 for a total of 5.2 damage.

6.0 > 5.2 > 4.0. And that's NEVER using the -5/+10 part of the feat (which a duelist can't use, anyway).

EDIT: So a duelist using a feat that isn't even optimized for one weapon increases his damage lead from .5 to 1.7 and still has a higher AC.