D&D 5E Rogues (melee-based) & Two-Weapon Fighting: Why not always do it?

[malph]

Is there any reason for a melee-fighting rogue not to hold a light weapon in his/her off-hand (two-weapon fighting)?

A few points:

• From my experience, it seems clear that dealing Sneak Attack is the primary goal for a rogue (in terms of combat).
• Rogues need to use finesse weapons (for melee), so they won't be using any two-handed weapons.
• They are not proficient with shields, so that's not an option.
• While the off-hand attack uses up the bonus action (which the rogue might otherwise use for Cunning Action), he/she only needs to use the bonus action for an off-hand attack if they miss with the first attack. Given that Sneak Attack is their one big gun (in combat), this seems like a darn good trade to say the least.

Therefore, it seems like a no-brainer for the rogue to always hold a dagger or shortsword in his/her off-hand. If you hit with your first attack, great, you can hold off using your off-hand attack, and use Cunning Action to skidaddle (or whatever). If you miss, then you might as well use your off-hand attack in order to actually do something worthwhile this turn.

Two quick points (as preemptive retorts):

• A rapier is higher damage than shortsword but cannot be used in two-weapon fighting sans a feat. Sure, that's true, but 1d8 vs 1d6 is not significant when we're comparing it to the xd6 tagging along behind it (particularly at higher levels, when we're talking 5d6, 8d6, or even 10d6). IMHO, setting off Sneak Attack is your primary goal; the actual damage die of the blade is not a significant factor.
• This discussion is based on a rogue without any special bells 'n whistles (such as multiclassing or feats). Additionally, it's for a melee-based rogue, not one using ranged attacks.

Thanks!

 

[Paraxis]

99% of the time you want to dual wield as a melee rogue, it was true in 3rd edition too.

The other 1% of the time is normally because of utility things that don''t come up all the time. You need to be holding a torch or lantern, you need a free hand to climb a ladder or hold onto something, speaking of holding there might be a rogue grapple build but I doubt it very little synergy.

 

[Rhenny]

Most rogues will duel wield, but if the rogue wants to use his bonus action for cunning action (one of my favorite 5e inventions) then on those rounds the rogue can't make an off-hand attack.

 

[Trit One-Ear]

I feel like just the other day I saw a post asking why a rogue would ever go melee, as opposed to ranged. It may have been on another message board, can't recall. Not trying to spark up that debate, I'm just curious the variety of responses I've seen regarding this issue. To me, it's a strong point of 5E that no single combat style (for rogue at least) is widely thought of as "best."

Aside from the reasons [MENTION=13009]Paraxis[/MENTION] listed above, I agree that dual-wielding is probably general practice. It also fits nicely in with the rogue archetype most people are now familiar with. In my mind, rogues are about having tricks and options, and the choice to get a second attack, dodge, disengage etc. is very appealing.

Trit

 

[miniaturehoarder]

Having at least a hand free can be a valuable thing when you want to climb in a pinch.

But mostly it comes down to cunning action. If the other players see you can get your sneak from an off hand attack, the other players may start expecting you take one for then team and make that second attack when you don't want to stay in melee.

 

[miniaturehoarder]

To me, it's a strong point of 5E that no single combat style (for rogue at least) is widely thought of as "best."

Sneak opportunities vary enough to where the rogue has to be ready for ranged or melee. Drop your dagger because you want to get out your short bow and you screwed up your stealth as the dagger you were holding clatters to the dungeon floor

 

[Celtavian]

I don't two-weapon fight in melee too often because I like using Cunning Action to move in and out of range. If I were to take a feat to maximize damage, I tend to prefer Crossbow Expert because it gives more bang for the buck. Crossbow Expert and Sharpshooter for the rogue are very good. Resilient Con and Skulker round about perfect for the silent killer I like to play.

 

[Kobold Stew]

I feel like just the other day I saw a post asking why a rogue would ever go melee, as opposed to ranged.

Yup, it's right here.

These parallel conversations make it clear how flexible the rogue is.

 

[Celtavian]

Yup, it's right here.

These parallel conversations make it clear how flexible the rogue is.

5E rogue is pretty amazing. Not the damage dealer 3E was, but overall package is fun, flexible, and powerful. One of my favorite classes to play. This is coming from someone that didn't touch a rogue in 3E/Pathfinder.

 

[PnPgamer]

Reason they might not use it is that it is dangerous to be in melee. Using a bow is a lot safer.