D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character - D&D Compendium
Well I don't think there is a good way to do twf that will satisfy everyone
(the trapiest of traps!) it was in 3E.
Once you start down the TWF path, forever will it dominate your feats.Every extra attack meant another TWF feat to get that extra extra attack, all the while demanding any stat increase go straight to dex.
Once you start down the TWF path, forever will it dominate your feats.Every extra attack meant another TWF feat to get that extra extra attack, all the while demanding any stat increase go straight to dex.Hey, now to be fair, at least soem of those TWF feats aren't completely, 100% worthless, just mostly worthless. The Spring Attack tree is just a complete waste of three feats. The trapiness is strong in that tree.
D&D Home Page - What Class Are You? - Build A Character -
Playtest2's version should be the default 'untrained' option, with a chain of feats making it progressively better.Investing three or four feats for potiential double damage isn't beyond reason, so long as it doesn't degenerate in the trap option (the trapiest of traps!) it was in 3E.
"The Apollo moon landing is off topic for this thread and this forum. Let's get back on topic." Crazy Monkey
Now hold on, i admit that while the current version is certainly not to my liking (even as an untrained baseline), packet 2's first feat is too much for a baseline. It wasn't spectacular but anyone wielding a light weapon was better off dual wielding making it a no brainer option should one remove the feat cost.
... There are certainly some issues to work out (off the top of my head: shields)
In memory of wrecan and his Unearthed Wrecana.
5e should strongly stay away from "I don't like it, so you can't have it either."
When you wield two one-handed melee weapons at the same time, you gain a +1 bonus to AC. You can make can attack with both weapons as part of the same action but with disadvantage on the off-hand weapon. Attacking with both weapons negates the bonus granted to AC for that round.
I just grant Shields cover against missile weapons, after all that is predominately why they were used irl. This concept was used in 2nd Edition.
Once you start down the TWF path, forever will it dominate your feats. .
Improvisation in 4e: Fave 4E Improvisations - also Wrecans Guides to improvisation beyond page 42The Non-combatant Adventurer (aka Princess build Warlord or LazyLord)
Reality is unrealistic - and even monkeys protest unfairnessReflavoring the Fighter : The Wizard : The Swordmage - Creative Character Collection: Bloodwright (Darksun Character)
... There are certainly some issues to work out (off the top of my head: shields)I would suggest working in a defence mechanism along with the second weapon. On the player's turn, he can decide if the second weapon will be a boost to AC or a boost to damage. If AC, he can parry one incoming attack. If damage, roll the damage die for the second weapon without attribute bonus and add it to the single attack (rather than making two attacks).I'm not totally solid on this suggestion, since I've seen a LOT of two-weapons fighting (as I'm married to a master of the art), and there's a lot more that could happen there, especially if some Maneuvers take it into account. But sometimes playability has to compromise with realism to get somewhere that's neither overpowered nor totally lame.
... At the end of the day, what it needs is to make sure that there are different options and that none of them are traps. So as long as two-handed weapon, two-weapons, and weapon/shield are all roughly balanced, it will be a good system. If one choice is much better or worse than another choice, there is a problem.
The real question is: What do you expect TWF to do? Do you want a 2nd attack? How often? If so, damage should be adjusted relative to the frequency of use. If you get 2 attacks all the time, probably they should be half damage (advantage is 2 targets and/or 2 chances to Crit). Do you want a damage boost? If so, just treat TWF as fighting with a 2H weapon. Flat damage boost vs 2 separate attacks. Do you want awesome fighting style action? Then your off-hand weapon should determine what happens when you TWF. For example, if you have an off-hand flail, you might get an free disarm or trip check as part of your attack action. If an axe, you might get to ignore resistance on your attack. So, as a community, what do we want? To look cool? To do cool things? To attack twice sometimes? All times? What? Once we answer that, we can approach a solution. So far, I think we've been yelling "Not it!" Let's examine what "it" is.
I feel there is certainly a way to make two-weapon fighting work, because it just comes down to math.You have two base options:1) Make two-weapon fighting available to everyone, with no cost. In this case, it shouldn't be any better or worse than picking a different option, such as a two-handed weapon.2) Make two-weapon fighting require a cost, such as a feat. In this case, it should be better than other options, because you don't need a feat to use a two-handed weapon.I like 1. I don't see any real reason why fighting with two weapons would require a cost.So now we just have to make it balanced.
Thought Switch Higher level build that grants upto 14 attacks on turn 1. If your allies play along, it's broken.
Elven Critters Crit op with crit generation. 5 of these will end anything. Broken.
King Fisher Optimized net user. Moderate.
Boominator Fun catch-22 booming blade build with either strong or completely broken damage depending on your reading.
Very Distracting Warlock Lot's of dazing and major penalties to hit. Overpowered.
Pocket Protector Pixie Stealth Knight. Maximizing the defender's aura by being in an ally's/enemy's square.
Yakuza NinjIntimiAdin: Perma-stealth Striker that offers a little protection for ally's, and can intimidate bloodied enemies. Very Strong.
Chargeburgler with cheese Ranged attacks at the end of a charge along with perma-stealth. Solid, could be overpowered if tweaked.
Void Defender Defends giving a penalty to hit anyone but him, then removing himself from play. Can get somewhat broken in epic.
Scry and Die Attacking from around corners, while staying hidden. Moderate to broken, depending on the situation.
Skimisher Fly in, attack, and fly away. Also prevents enemies from coming close. Moderate to Broken depending on the enemy, but shouldn't make the game un-fun, as the rest of your team is at risk, and you have enough weaknesses.
Indestructible Simply won't die, even if you sleep though combat. One of THE most abusive character in 4e.
Sir Robin (Bravely Charge Away) He automatically slows and pushes an enemy (5 squares), while charging away. Hard to rate it's power level, since it's terrain dependent.
Death's Gatekeeper A fun twist on a healic, making your party "unkillable". Overpowered to Broken, but shouldn't actually make the game un-fun, just TPK proof.
Death's Gatekeeper mk2, (Stealth Edition) Make your party "unkillable", and you hidden, while doing solid damage. Stronger then the above, but also easier for a DM to shut down. Broken, until your DM get's enough of it.
Domination and Death Dominate everything then kill them quickly. Only works @ 30, but is broken multiple ways.
Battlemind Mc Prone-Daze Protecting your allies by keeping enemies away. Quite powerful.
The Retaliator Getting hit deals more damage to the enemy then you receive yourself, and you can take plenty of hits. Heavy item dependency, Broken.
Dead Kobold Transit Teleports 98 squares a turn, and can bring someone along for the ride. Not fully built, so i can't judge the power.
Psilent Guardian Protect your allies, while being invisible. Overpowered, possibly broken.
Rune of Vengance Do lot's of damage while boosting your teams. Strong to slightly overpowered.
Charedent BarrageA charging ardent. Fine in a normal team, overpowered if there are 2 together, and easily broken in teams of 5.
Super Knight A tough, sticky, high damage knight. Strong.
Super Duper Knight Basically the same as super knight with items, making it far more broken.
Mora, the unkillable avenger Solid damage, while being neigh indestuctable. Overpowered, but not broken.
Swordburst Maximus At-Will Close Burst 3 that slide and prones. Protects allies with off actions. Strong, possibly over powered with the right party.
@mellored That's fine, but I don't think it should cost a feat. The feat ought to offer some improvements to that baseline.
I'm I the only one who liked two attacks at 1/2 damage? I think it doesn't even need to be a feat if you use light weapons. The feat can allow you to use 1 handed weapons and get a +1 shield bonus to AC while dual wielding.
You know instead of making the shield an inherently inferior option what if we set it up so that the three styles have distinct advantages and disadvantages compared to each other?
• Two-Weapon Fighting:-Advantages: Ability to attack two separate targets in 1-turn. Better percentage to trigger effects.-Disadvantages: Lower AC than Sword/Shield (assuming no Two-Weapon Defense), lower DPR than 2-handed style. Limited Weapons (light only).
• Two-Weapon Fighting:-Advantages: Ability to attack two separate targets in 1-turn. Better percentage to trigger effects.-Disadvantages: Lower AC than Sword/Shield (assuming no Two-Weapon Defense), lower DPR than 2-handed style. Limited Weapons (light only). Ability, yes. Likelihood, no. In melee, most dual-wield people (IRL) will attack often with the primary weapon and use the second weapon for defence against multiple opponents for the most part, and only occasionally target a second opponent with an attack only if the opportunity really presents itself. I think the base mechanics shouldn't take "two separate targets" as a commonality.
I'm sure someone has already posted this somewhere, but I did some number crunching. That last option seems like the most balanced one we have seen so far, but it still isn't perfect. It is important to note that the numbers for my dual-wielding calculations are going to be a hair low because I assumed 2 x d6 weapons to make the math a little easier. I also think that is more realistic because it will mostly be high-dex warriors that choose to dual-wield. That said, if you were really trying to max damage you could use one d8 weapon and one d6 weapon.
I don't want it to do more damage either... but it seems like it should be comparable to the damage you get by using a 2-hander. That is the trade off for giving up a shield.In my mind a 2-hander does more damage by hitting harder, 2-weapon does more damage by hitting more often. You could argue that even if it does the same damage (using a 1-hander as the baseline) that would be ok because you can attack two-creatures. I would be ok with that. I'm not ok with it being a universally worse choice, however. Right now it does less damage than a 1-hander... by a pretty wide margin at mid to high levels.You do have the choice to spread the tiny bit of damage you do between two creatures though...
I like some of the ideas here, but I think to a degree, everyone has forgotten about a few things. First I am sure that you guys are thinking of primarily fighters and rangers when you talk about making a balanced TWF system. Well you left one out. The monk (or even just a simple unarmed brawler fighter. How would you figure in unarmed TWF that the monk has done in the past (although he was actually doing unarmed multi-weapon fighting, but that's technicalities really) and still make it balanced. Keep in mind that unless they give the monk a similar treatment as they did in 3.X, having scaling unarmed damage (I doubt it) his damage will be naturally low.
Also there are more than 3 fighting styles. Everyone here has assumed full hands for fighting while fighting in melee. Sword and board. Two-handed great-weapons. Two Weapon Fighting. What about what I refer to as Dueling? That is a single weapon in one hand and nothing in the off hand. Or what I refer to as Swashbuckling? That is a single weapon with a light ranged weapon (throwing dagger, hand crossbow, powder pistol etc) in the off hand? I think all of these should be available as possible 'fighting styles' that are balanced as equal options.