Rogue: is there any good reason not to dual wield ?

[Kingslayer]

Astarion can dual wield. You gain 2 attack actions, left hand and right hand. If you wield main hand only you only get 1 attack action.

so, is there any reasons not to dual wield for a rogue?

[[OTS]EchoZenLogos]

I mean, dual-wielding weapons aren't as likely to hit unless they are light or you have the right feat, so the reduced accuracy is the main downside.

But yeah, dual-wielding is totally viable for a rogue, or even a fighter or ranger. Barbarians are probably better off using two handed heavy weapons though to maximize single-target hits.

[Chairface Chippendale]

The offhand attack requires a bonus action, that's the trade off.

[Noctoculus]

The off-hand attack uses your bonus action. So if you want to do more damage with main attack and save bonus action for utility then there ya go.

[Kunomatata]

Yeh, dual wield sucks. I use a finesse 2hander. A little broken that sneak attack just needs a weapon with the finesse tag on it.

[teksuo]

theres a finesse 2hand sword in the underdark that could be good if you find it early enough but im pretty sure dual weild is the way to go on rogue.

[rservello]

Dual daggers is a pretty staple rogue arsenal.

[-= Dc_Dave =-]

I have found that sneak attack triggers automaticly on main hand AND secondary hand with hand crossbows when attacking from hiding and not in anybody's cone of sight...
It doesnt say it but shows it in the damage logs (and you see 4 numbers appear above the targets head , 2 normal attacks and 2 sneak attack )
So you get an extra sneak attacks with the right setup ...
That outperforms any 2H damage increase i think ...

[LArc7thHeaven]

dual wield only good with fighter because you can add your modifier bonus through fighting style which mathematically damage wise is better 2-h sword (2d8). if you're not fighter forget dual wield

[Mr. Steel Your Rabbit]

Thief Supremacy

[Jonkenden]

Origineel geplaatst door LArc7thHeaven:

dual wield only good with fighter because you can add your modifier bonus through fighting style which mathematically damage wise is better 2-h sword (2d8). if you're not fighter forget dual wield

Rangers also get dual wielding style and college of swords Bard

[x_equals_speed]

There's no accuracy penalty for dual wielding. There was in previous editions of d&d but not in 5th.

The effect is to permit an attack using the bonus action that does not add your stat to damage (So -3 to -5 damage).

Sneak attack can only trigger once per round, so you don't get more sneak attacks, but you are more likely to get your sneak attack (If you set up the conditions for it, but your first attack misses, the off hand attack can trigger it).

The reasons not to dual wield are:
You've got a better use for the bonus action
You want to use a shield
You want to hold something odd in the offhand, like a moonlight lantern
You want your off hand empty (some feats and abilities require this)

In the early game there's usually no reason not to do it, by the late game you'll find you have better uses for your bonus action a lot of the time.

[Bad Brad]

Origineel geplaatst door «ÐKG»Kimberly-696-:

Yeh, dual wield sucks. I use a finesse 2hander. A little broken that sneak attack just needs a weapon with the finesse tag on it.

ooh there's a finesse two hander? Awesome

[ayrtep]

Dual wield makes sense for thieves as they get an extra bonus action, and duel wielding helps to ensure the extra bonus action is not wasted.

[Blame]

Origineel geplaatst door Bad Brad:

Origineel geplaatst door «ÐKG»Kimberly-696-:

Yeh, dual wield sucks. I use a finesse 2hander. A little broken that sneak attack just needs a weapon with the finesse tag on it.

ooh there's a finesse two hander? Awesome

But if I remember correctly it's a martial weapon, so make sure you have proficiency in that if you're gonna use it.

[x_equals_speed]

I think it's a versatile longsword that can be one handed for D8 damage or two handed for D10 - so you'll be proficient if you you longswords off your race (most elves do).