D&D (2024) Ranger 2024 is a bigger joke than Ranger 2014:

[Micah Sweet]

Then D&D 5e is not the game for you.

Oh, I know. WotC no longer makes a game I want to play.

 

[Micah Sweet]

In what simulation would anyone risk their live without having the strongest combination of skills and powers they can could?

Availability? Awareness? Flair?

 

[Corinnguard]

So, are you asking why everyone being able to make a single bonus action attack with their off-hand,

Not really. TBH, it does seem pretty odd to me that everyone in 5e can fight with two weapons at the same time without some measure of training. Instead of not being able to add their DEX modifier to their offhand attack, their primary and offhand attacks should be done at Disadvantage.

looking it up you got a single extra attack with your off-hand, as long as you took a -6 penalty to your main hand and a -10 penalty to your off-hand...

In 3.5, those penalties could be reduced to -2 to your main hand and -2 to your offhand by picking up the Two-Weapon Fighting feat and wielding a light weapon in your offhand. Later on, you could pick up Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting to increase the number of offhand attacks.

I'm not seeing the nerf anywhere.

Have you role-played a martial with this fighting style?

 

[mellored]

Availability? Awareness? Flair?

The technique would spread. If only because being able to safely kill things means you come back alive when others don't.

Every army in the world switch to guns over swords, because it's just a better technique. Took a few generations, but every soldier is aware of and has access to guns.

And you don't risk your life for Flair.

 

[Rocker26a]

The technique would spread. If only because being able to safely kill things means you come back alive when others don't.

We're getting back into "why doesn't every peasant simply become a master wizard" style logic. There are (usually) meaningful barriers to (greater) power, including but not limited to; knowledge, and access.

Every army in the world switch to guns over swords, because it's just a better technique. Took a few generations, but every soldier is aware of and has access to guns.

They did! But when global knowledge of and access to firearms became the norm, and not before. D&D armed forces (typically) do not feature dragoons/other firearm wielding troops, because they lack knowledge of and access to them. Same applies to more individual cases and exotic sources of power.

And you don't risk your life for Flair.

Some people/characters definitely risk their lives for flair. Ill-advisedly, for sure, but.

 

[mellored]

We're getting back into "why doesn't every peasant simply become a master wizard" style logic. There are (usually) meaningful barriers to (greater) power, including but not limited to; knowledge, and access.

Hence "military".
You don't usually play as a peasant.

They did! But when global knowledge of and access to firearms became the norm, and not before. D&D armed forces (typically) do not feature dragoons/other firearm wielding troops, because they lack knowledge of and access to them. Same applies to more individual cases and exotic sources of power.

Global knowledge and access to whatever is best at killing without being killed is going to spread.

That's simulationist.

Not necessarily the most fun gane to play.

Some people/characters definitely risk their lives for flair. Ill-advisedly, for sure, but.

Fair.

 

[Chaosmancer]

Not really. TBH, it does seem pretty odd to me that everyone in 5e can fight with two weapons at the same time without some measure of training. Instead of not being able to add their DEX modifier to their offhand attack, their primary and offhand attacks should be done at Disadvantage.

No, I don't think it should. There is no reason to penalize two-weapon fighting to that degree.

In 3.5, those penalties could be reduced to -2 to your main hand and -2 to your offhand by picking up the Two-Weapon Fighting feat and wielding a light weapon in your offhand. Later on, you could pick up Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting to increase the number of offhand attacks.

Right, hence the whole "5e isn't a nerf" part. Because WITHOUT taking multiple feats, everyone can do it far easier. I don't particularly see "we could do it with large penalties that we could then spend resources getting rid of" as a superior version.

Have you role-played a martial with this fighting style?

Yes, multiple times.

 

[Rocker26a]

You don't usually play as a peasant.

I mean sure, but I'd argue PCs that start as relative "commoners" are pretty normal?

Global knowledge and access to whatever is best at killing without being killed is going to spread.

Sure, but that still doesn't mean it's gonna work for/be available to everybody. For one reason or another. Some people simply will not enter a Warlock pact, because they believe it's a bad idea, they're genre savvy.

 

[Scribe]

In what simulation would anyone risk their live without having the strongest combination of skills and powers they can could?

One in which people feel they need to try and make a difference, no matter the cost?

 

[Corinnguard]

No, I don't think it should. There is no reason to penalize two-weapon fighting to that degree.

Compared to how 3.0/3.5 was penalizing anyone who used Two-Weapon Fighting without the feats, being at Disadvantage for fighting with your primary hand and your offhand isn't much of a penalty. Yes, you are put into the position of having to use the lower attack roll whenever you make an attack with either hand. But depending on the AC of your opponent, you can still hit something even with Disadvantage.

Right, hence the whole "5e isn't a nerf" part. Because WITHOUT taking multiple feats, everyone can do it far easier. I don't particularly see "we could do it with large penalties that we could then spend resources getting rid of" as a superior version.

Okay. When I made my initial comment, I was focusing only on how Two-Weapon Fighting worked in 5e. Compared to 3e, Two-Weapon Fighting in 5e is a lot easier. It doesn't require feats to use.

When I started playing 5e three years ago, I decided to play a Dragonborn Fighter who had the Two-Weapon Fighting style. And to me, it initially looked okay. My character could make two attacks, one primary and one offhand. When my character gained Extra Attack, TWF was still okay in my book because he could make 3 attacks, two primary and one offhand. I wasn't even bothered by Action Surge because I was using the extra action from this feature to make breath weapon attacks. He would breathe on his opponent or opponents and then use TWF. However, as he approached 11th level, I didn't like the idea of him making three primary attacks and only one offhand attack. The number of attacks he could do with both hands looked rather lopsided to me at that level. So, I went looking around for a homebrewed feat that would fix this problem.

Today, I like how Level Up approaches TWF. If you are a Fighter in Level Up and you get Extra Attack at 5th level, you can use your Bonus Action to make two attacks with your offhand weapon. Fighters in Level Up have only two Extra Attacks, one at 5th level and one at 11th level. The Extra Attack at 20th Level was dropped in favor of a better capstone ability. So, an 11th-level Fighter with TWF can make up to five attacks, 3 primary and 2 offhand.