Dual Wield vs 2 Handed

[Lyntz_fr]

Tell me if i am missing something, but actually it looks like 2H outclass completly DW.

First problem is that the OffHand attack share the same cooldown with all free action, so DW lose some damages when 2H doesn't.

Second problem is that all reset action feat, like warrior Action Surge, only reset main hand.

Third problem is that the OffHand doesn't get another attack per round, so 2H late game win again.

Solutions :
Offhand attack must be a free attack that doesn't count like a free action, and be reset when you use a reset action feat.
Give OffHand another attack bonus per round at some lvl (for a total of 2 attacks per round max to the offhand).
All 2H should have 2m range when 1H have 1.5m range.

[TheBlueFox]

It does, but the thing is, not all classes CAN use a two handed weapon.

These classes can increase their damage by using two smaller lighter weapons at the cost of a bonus action to attack with them.

Some classes don't get Multi attack, so larger weapons don't benefit them. As a result, they can use two lighter weapons to gain damage.

This is intended

[bullse]

Depends really. Two hand is very strong, but be assured, given certain builds and weapon combos (i.e.: str/dex dual wield rogue, ranger knight dual wield, fighter dual wield), dual wield is just as strong.

[Rez Elwin]

Works better with a thief, they get an extra attack with their off hand for 3 per round. However if you have a warrior with "normal" weapons it should be equal. 1d6 for each shortsword for 2d6 which is that same die roll for a greatsword.

With the dual wield feat a thief can wield two longswords and attack 3 times every round. Warriors hit harder per attack (And are harder to kill) than a rogue, but might not be able to outperform them in dps. Perhaps later they can when they get multiple attacks per round but not at level 4.

[TheBlueFox]

Originally posted by GrandMajora:

Does your offhand weapon still get a penalty to attack in 5th edition?

It isn't supposed to. It's supposed to get a penalty to DAMAGE.

Normally, you cannot give your offhand the damage bonus from your dexterity or strength. Taking the Two weapon fighting style from Fighter or Ranger allows you to add your damage to your offhand

[BW022]

Originally posted by Lyntz_fr:

Tell me if i am missing something, but actually it looks like 2H outclass completly DW.

It follows the PnP rules and it works fine. You are missing a number of things.

1. Only certainly classes and builds can use 2H weapons. Nearly all two-handed weapons are martials so- pretty much fighters, rangers, gith (greatsword), or taking the martial weapon feat (at 4th). Far more classes can make use of two weapons -- wizards, warlocks, rogues, etc.

2. Such builds must use strength and no two handed weapon is finesseable. A lower dexterity means you aren't great at ranged combat which BG3 is especially good at. It is also harder to get a reasonable AC in BG3 due to the lack of good armor in the game.

3. TWF can do more damage per round (depending on the build). Math gets complicated and situational, but 2d6+3 (str) is obviously less than 1d6+3 (str) + 1d6+3 (str) if you have the dual wielder fighting style (fighter or ranger). Likewise 1d8+1d8+3 (or +6) (two long swords or rapiers) is more than 2d6+3 if you have a great sword.

4. TWF will do far more damage if your weapons have any added damage. Hunter's mark, hex, etc. 2d6+3 + 2d6 for two short swords is better than 3d6+3 for one great sword. Yes, bonus action for hunter's mark/hex reapply may reduce this, but BG3 has a lot of switching between ranged so typically you often have rounds you can't melee attack anyway.

5. TWF doubles the chance that one attack will hit (or 50% at 5th+ when implemented). This is massive for cases where you have once/per round bonuses (say sneak attack), causing them to fail concentration checks, getting rid of mirror images, etc. It is also good if your weapons has some type of magical effect -- say fire damage. Two attacks vs. one means twice the chance of hitting, activating, etc. and say setting them on fire.

6. TWF doubles the chance one of the weapons will crit.

7. TWF helps avoid wasting damage. For example, if a goblin only has 3hp left, a greatsword only does 3hp of damage. A TWF can hit once (3hp damage), move to another goblin and hit him for say 6hp with the offhand.

8. The great weapon master feat in BG3 is rough. Yes, +10 damage is wonderful, but the -5 to hit is pretty big at lower levels. It likely decreases your hit chances by 50% and almost doubles the damage. Probably equal except in cases where you have advantage or something. At 5th+ as your attack bonus, strength, etc. might increase beyond folks' AC, but it's ify in Act 1.

9. The TWF dual wielder feat is a solid +1 to your AC. This is huge in BG3 where heavy and medium armors are hard to find/mediocre, so many creatures have advantage to hit you, and ways of boasting your AC are pretty rare. In many fights it means you are taking 20% less hits, damage, failing concentration checks, etc.

I don't see action surge as that much of an issue. It is only on fighters and once per rest. In most cases when you use it... you are equally likely to be using it in say ranged, to do a pushing attack, get a spell off, use a dash action, or (5e) use the dodge action because you are in trouble. Best case, it might be an extra 1d6 damage. That's is probably not its best use vs. most other actions.

All two handed weapons to not need reach. Pole arms have reach. Great swords, great clubs, and staffs do not.

The rules play fine in 5e. No need to change them.

[Lyntz_fr]

Originally posted by BW022:

Originally posted by Lyntz_fr:

Tell me if i am missing something, but actually it looks like 2H outclass completly DW.

It follows the PnP rules and it works fine. You are missing a number of things.

Thx for the time to spend to explain that, i had in mind some of your points, and it's right that i forgot the add bonus that you can get on the offhand.

But even if all you said are pretty right, it's work at low level, i can't stop to question myself about late game when the warrior get 4 attacks per round with 2H, and only 5 attacks per round with TWF.
Free actions like jump, stealth, potion etc are very strong in combat, and TWF lose the advantage of the offhand if he wants to use it.

Late game TWF doesn't double chance to crit, only add 20%

Early game (1D8+3)x2= is stronger than 2D6+3 but late game TWF will do (1D8+4)x4 +1D8+4= 25 to 60, when 2H will do (2D6+4)x4= 24 to 64

It seems pretty fair and adding a second attack per round on offhand must be too OP ok.

But there is always the free action loss for TWF that seems to be a big disadvantage. Or maybe i overestimate it.

[BW022]

Originally posted by Lyntz_fr:

Thx for the time to spend to explain that, i had in mind some of your points, and it's right that i forgot the add bonus that you can get on the offhand.

Welcome.

But even if all you said are pretty right, it's work at low level, i can't stop to question myself about late game when the warrior get 4 attacks per round with 2H, and only 5 attacks per round with TWF.

Few 5e games go past 10th or 12th-levels. Statistically, most campaigns don't last that long. BG3 won't likely go past 11 or 12. Only fighters get more than two basic attacks per round. Even then... you are 11th. There is no point worrying about how good/bad something is at those levels since so things happening at those levels won't really depend on an extra 5 or 10hp of weapon damage per round. My 7th-level warlock can put out two +9 attacks at 3d10+6 with reach using polymorph (great ape).

Free actions like jump, stealth, potion etc are very strong in combat, and TWF lose the advantage of the offhand if he wants to use it.

Stealth and disengage are actions (not bonus actions) in 5e. Thus, no one (other than rogues) can do this and get any attacks. And even rogues would still prefer TWF since they can't use heavy weapons, don't get sneak attack with them, and would always have the option of ensuring their sneak attack lands. Drinking a potion is an action (not bonus action) in 5e also.

Late game TWF doesn't double chance to crit, only add 20%
...
Early game (1D8+3)x2= is stronger than 2D6+3 but late game TWF will do (1D8+4)x4 +1D8+4= 25 to 60, when 2H will do (2D6+4)x4= 24 to 64

You seem fixated that you are somehow going to get 4 attacks per round. Not likely. There are 12 core classes. Only barbarians, bard (valor), fighters, monks, paladins, rangers, and warlocks (blade) get the extra attack ability. Only fighters get two (11th) or three (20th) attacks. Bards, monks, and warlocks are highly unlikely to strength-based and/or lack heavy weapon proficiencies. Even the ranger is likely to go dex-based.

Well over half the classes and subclasses only get a single attack. Of those who get multiple half again probably are dex-based. This pretty much leaves the barbarian, paladin and fighter as they only likely folks with multiple heavy weapon attacks... and some of them would choose shields. And of these... only the fighter is going to get more than two attacks.

So... for 75% of folks it is doubling your chance to hit. For another 20%... it is 50% more. For that rare 0.1% (fighter in that small portion of a campaign above 10th) you it is 33% more.

But there is always the free action loss for TWF that seems to be a big disadvantage. Or maybe i overestimate it.

They aren't called free actions. They are bonus actions. Yes, in many classes they are important, but... these are typically not the classes standing in front of a troll and trying to hack it down with weapons. For those classes who really do use a lot of bonus actions (say a cleric with spiritual weapon or a rogue), typically using heavy weapons isn't an option and even if it is... TWF is still a choice. A rogue standing in front of a troll with 10hp left who missing with his first shortsword can still decide if they want to use their off-hand attack with the hope of getting sneak attack damage in... or use cunning action to disengage and run away.

[Lyntz_fr]

sry i wanted to say bonus action when i said free action, in the game you can move, perform a bonus action (jumping, sneaking, apply effect on your weapon, drink potion, pushing, some spells...) and one action ( attack, help a friend from knockdown, sprint, stun to not kill, some spell...)

I don't know well the 5e rules, but in BG3 you can disengage by jumping without taking attack from a moving disengage, then go into the back of the ennemy and attack him with back hit bonus (and its huge ! ). As warrior if i do that with my TWF style i lose everytime my offhand attack when 2H doesn't lose anything.

You are speaking a lot about other classes, but my point was on the warrior TWF vs 2H choice, i should have say it early sry. It seems to me that 2H will be stronger for them than TWF in late game, because of the bonus action system that are very important in combat.

[Enigmatory]

TWF is great joke cause it's uses your bonus acton to do offhand attack. So it's only usable for classes that's have nothing to do with bonus action. It's usefull early but drop down on higher levels. TWF drops even more when "fighter type" classes getting extra attack.

[☸𝕵𝖔☸]

Originally posted by BW022:

Originally posted by Lyntz_fr:

Tell me if i am missing something, but actually it looks like 2H outclass completly DW.

It follows the PnP rules and it works fine. You are missing a number of things.

1. Only certainly classes and builds can use 2H weapons. Nearly all two-handed weapons are martials so- pretty much fighters, rangers, gith (greatsword), or taking the martial weapon feat (at 4th). Far more classes can make use of two weapons -- wizards, warlocks, rogues, etc.

2. Such builds must use strength and no two handed weapon is finesseable. A lower dexterity means you aren't great at ranged combat which BG3 is especially good at. It is also harder to get a reasonable AC in BG3 due to the lack of good armor in the game.

3. TWF can do more damage per round (depending on the build). Math gets complicated and situational, but 2d6+3 (str) is obviously less than 1d6+3 (str) + 1d6+3 (str) if you have the dual wielder fighting style (fighter or ranger). Likewise 1d8+1d8+3 (or +6) (two long swords or rapiers) is more than 2d6+3 if you have a great sword.

4. TWF will do far more damage if your weapons have any added damage. Hunter's mark, hex, etc. 2d6+3 + 2d6 for two short swords is better than 3d6+3 for one great sword. Yes, bonus action for hunter's mark/hex reapply may reduce this, but BG3 has a lot of switching between ranged so typically you often have rounds you can't melee attack anyway.

5. TWF doubles the chance that one attack will hit (or 50% at 5th+ when implemented). This is massive for cases where you have once/per round bonuses (say sneak attack), causing them to fail concentration checks, getting rid of mirror images, etc. It is also good if your weapons has some type of magical effect -- say fire damage. Two attacks vs. one means twice the chance of hitting, activating, etc. and say setting them on fire.

6. TWF doubles the chance one of the weapons will crit.

7. TWF helps avoid wasting damage. For example, if a goblin only has 3hp left, a greatsword only does 3hp of damage. A TWF can hit once (3hp damage), move to another goblin and hit him for say 6hp with the offhand.

8. The great weapon master feat in BG3 is rough. Yes, +10 damage is wonderful, but the -5 to hit is pretty big at lower levels. It likely decreases your hit chances by 50% and almost doubles the damage. Probably equal except in cases where you have advantage or something. At 5th+ as your attack bonus, strength, etc. might increase beyond folks' AC, but it's ify in Act 1.

9. The TWF dual wielder feat is a solid +1 to your AC. This is huge in BG3 where heavy and medium armors are hard to find/mediocre, so many creatures have advantage to hit you, and ways of boasting your AC are pretty rare. In many fights it means you are taking 20% less hits, damage, failing concentration checks, etc.

I don't see action surge as that much of an issue. It is only on fighters and once per rest. In most cases when you use it... you are equally likely to be using it in say ranged, to do a pushing attack, get a spell off, use a dash action, or (5e) use the dodge action because you are in trouble. Best case, it might be an extra 1d6 damage. That's is probably not its best use vs. most other actions.

All two handed weapons to not need reach. Pole arms have reach. Great swords, great clubs, and staffs do not.

The rules play fine in 5e. No need to change them.

Good post!

The issue currently is heavy armour sucks while they should give more armour at the cost of dex bonuses. Otherwise dex tank is as good as str, dual wield as hard as str with rapiers, and shoot better then str.

Idk what to think of great weapon master either, the penalty seems hard. I think its meant to be used to hit paralysed targets for 100% hit and crit?

Someone said:
''Ranger + Hunter (Colossus Slayer) + Hunter's Mark + Great Weapon Master.
Get 16 Strength, or buy x3 Potion of Hill Giant Strength from Auntie Ethel every day.
Get Light of Creation, then Whispering Promise and/or Ritual Dagger for bless.
= 1d10+1+5+10+1d6 (slashing)| 1d8+10+1d6 (slashing)| 1d6+10+1d6 (electric)
That's 60 damage on average if you hit. Unsure how GWF would interact.
Bonus if you get the "wet" status, since it doubles the electric damage (2d6+20+2d6).''

[MyLittleJohny]

You are missing few things which make DW actually even worse. See if you decide to go Dual-Wield, you will probably have Two Weapon Fighting and Dual-Wielder feets.

1. Now for example BW022 says:

Originally posted by BW022:

TWF can do more damage per round (depending on the build). Math gets complicated and situational, but 2d6+3 (str) is obviously less than 1d6+3 (str) + 1d6+3 (str) if you have the dual wielder fighting style (fighter or ranger).

This is a misconception, because you don't have 2x 1d6+3, The STR bonus isn't in DnD added as your Damage bonus:

When you take the Attack Action and Attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a Bonus Action to Attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus Attack, unless that modifier is negative

The bonus should be on the other hand added to your Chance to hit. Which is not. It is added to your damage. That means that you less likely to hit with your offhand weapon, basically -3AC in described scenario. This is a huge issue in the current state of the game.

2. Currently, the melee in the game is problematic because so many enemies have some sort of disengage, AoO is not applied on passing by enemies, and there is so many range fights. This is extremely problematic for DW because you always have to get to them, which often cost you a bonus action = you only use 1 attack. Because the game relies so much on positioning, you often find yourself jumping over enemies to be able to backstab them to have at least 1 succesful attack.

ad 2H

Originally posted by BW022:

Yes, +10 damage is wonderful, but the -5 to hit is pretty big at lower levels. It likely decreases your hit chances by 50%

This is a big misunderstanding, since GWM is especially useful against low AC enemies = lower levels. It also doesn't decreases your hit chances by 50% but it might be significant. The bigger issue is, that it also doesn't work properly because it doesn't give you the extra attack after kill as it is suppose to.


I played both fighters, 2H and DW and DW is definitely inferior in this game iteration. Mostly because you will often find yourself without having the bonus action attack.

If you really want to go melee, it is best to go Hunter (Ranger) with DW dexterity or GWM. I would stay away from Fighters in this version at all costs.

[Indure]

I'm currently playing a dual wielding light cleric and it preforms really well. Obviously it cant compete against a GW hunter in melee because nothing can come close, and it will most likely underperform late game, but for EA I think it is stronger than the average build.

Between warding flare and dual wielding Shattered flail + Faitherbreaker or Xyanyde its survivability is through the roof. Shattered flail gives 2-12 healing per turn when dual wielding, and Xyanyde giving faerie fire makes positioning less important.

I'm playing a dwarf and even with the less movement speed I find that most of the time, getting in range and keeping a bonus attack isn't too bad. Especially once you get Crushers ring. A benefit to having an attack on a bonus action is that you can cast a spell and still get a free attack. So if I really need something to die quickly I can inflict wounds and then offhand attack.

[BW022]

Originally posted by .Cute-Dei. Quake:

1. Now for example BW022 says:

Originally posted by BW022:

TWF can do more damage per round (depending on the build). Math gets complicated and situational, but 2d6+3 (str) is obviously less than 1d6+3 (str) + 1d6+3 (str) if you have the dual wielder fighting style (fighter or ranger).

This is a misconception, because you don't have 2x 1d6+3, The STR bonus isn't in DnD added as your Damage bonus:
...

Except my post/math assumed you have the fighting style (should have said "two-weapon fighting style"). This allows you to add your ability attribute to your bonus attack damage. You can then factor in GWF style if you like (although rangers can't take it) and then critical hits. TWF still ends up as good until 5th.

This is a big misunderstanding, since GWM is especially useful against low AC enemies = lower levels. It also doesn't decreases your hit chances by 50% but it might be significant. The bigger issue is, that it also doesn't work properly because it doesn't give you the extra attack after kill as it is suppose to.

Sorry it isn't a misunderstanding, it is basic statistics. If you have a +5 attack (+3 strength, +2 proficiency bonus) and you are attacking AC 16 (typical at low levels) you hit on a 11-20 (50% of the time). If you take the -5, you now only hit on a 16-20 (25% of the time). That means you hit half as often, or a decrease in the chance of hitting by 50%. The decrease various by AC, advantage, disadvantage, etc. However, on average, it isn't great at low level unless say your opponent is prone, held, etc.

I played both fighters, 2H and DW and DW is definitely inferior in this game iteration. Mostly because you will often find yourself without having the bonus action attack.

So have I. If we are talking BG3 only... the combats are so skewed to ranged attacks that most of the time you will be using bow or crossbow anyway... so it is moot. Given this and the fact good heavy armor isn't available in the game... you are probably better off with a reasonable dexterity (so you have some ranged attack ability and can use medium armors) and using a shield in melee (so you have some AC).

If polearm master existed, if good heavy armors existed, if disengage was an action, if battles weren't fought over 200' areas, if height wasn't an automatic advantage, if 80% of the combats didn't have creatures with ranged attacks and/or teleporting, if drinking potions and shoving someone were actions, etc. then... sure... 2H weapons would be great. TWF would be fine also. Then again, we'd be following the 5e rules where both would be fine and 2H weapons would (over time) do more damage, but not as available and certain classes would still enjoy the use of TWF for things such as hex, hunter's mark, sneak attack, etc.

[MyLittleJohny]

Originally posted by BW022:

replying

1. you are right, my bad, should have understood it as obvious feat in this case.
2. AC 16 isn't low level AC. That is AC of several bosses in BG3. Trash low level mobs has 12-14 as far as I know but we can look it up (Auntie Ethel has 15, Gnolls have 14-15, Phase Spiders 13 I think). The other thing is that this would matter if you face them front, but since "BG3 has" this ridiculous mechanic of backstabbing warrior, all your melee attacks are basically always applied with advantage. Especially if you are using GWM, otherwise it would be of course completely useless in current situation. So it is good in low levels, since higher levels = higher AC more often. GWM is directly build to attack minions with lower AC, there wouldn't be a pointto take it otherwise, if it ads only +10 dmg but reduces your chance to hit by 50%.

Hopefuly they will do something about Fighters, cause currently, this is probably worst class in the game vs one of the best in DnD, cause they are pretty self-made.

EDIT: Anyway lets not get stuck on details, I think our point is clear. I don't wanna sound like I am against what you are saying, cause I am not, no matter if we create mine or yours situation to prove the point.

[Lyntz_fr]

Seeing you all debate with respecting each other gives me hope in humanity