Offhand Light Weapons

[DracoKnight]

Disclaimer: There is historical context for what I'm asking.

So, I understand by RAW you have to be wielding two light weapons to dual wield, unless you have the dual wielder feat. However: would you allow someone wielding a rapier to also wield a dagger? Not as a shield (some people I've encountered allow a parrying dagger that can't attack), but as a dagger. It makes sense to me that you could wield a regular weapon in your dominant hand, and then a light weapon in your offhand.

Would you allow this?

[Kryx]

Disclaimer: There is historical context for what I'm asking.

So, I understand by RAW you have to be wielding two light weapons to dual wield, unless you have the dual wielder feat. However: would you allow someone wielding a rapier to also wield a dagger? Not as a shield (some people I've encountered allow a parrying dagger that can't attack), but as a dagger. It makes sense to me that you could wield a regular weapon in your dominant hand, and then a light weapon in your offhand.

Would you allow this?
I wouldn't. Offhand is only used for the bonus attack. What about the Opportunity Attack? What about times when you use your bonus action for other things?

It's not a major balance concern if you do, but I wouldn't.

[PotatoGolem]

Probably not, because it makes an already iffy feat even worse (instead of +1 damage on all attacks, it's just +1 damage to offhand attacks). Might be worthwhile as part of a full TWF overhaul.

[Daishain]

There doesn't seem to be a good reason not to, sure. Certainly not a game breaker. I would however be limiting the offhand weapon to a dagger, nothing more robust or difficult to wield than that.

[PoeticDwarf]

Disclaimer: There is historical context for what I'm asking.

So, I understand by RAW you have to be wielding two light weapons to dual wield, unless you have the dual wielder feat. However: would you allow someone wielding a rapier to also wield a dagger? Not as a shield (some people I've encountered allow a parrying dagger that can't attack), but as a dagger. It makes sense to me that you could wield a regular weapon in your dominant hand, and then a light weapon in your offhand.

Would you allow this?

I wouldn't, a rapier and a dagger is maybe same damage average as two scimitars or shortswords. But you just need two light weapons, if you allow dagger/rapier you also have to allow a morningstar and a handaxe, to say something.

[Inevitability]

If this applied only to daggers and rapiers, or other weapons comparable in damage to two shortswords, I'd probably allow it. No going down the path EnderDwarf describes, though.

[Ninja_Prawn]

I don't allow it, mostly out of respect for the RAW. I see no point in making one specific exception here, when so many other parts of D&D are not accurate representations of real life.

I'm fine with refluffing shields as 'parrying daggers', and I'd also be fine with a homebrew class feature that lets you treat rapiers (or longswords) as having the 'light' property.

[HoarsHalberd]

I don't see any problem as long as the off hand weapon is a 1d4 weapon. So club, dagger, light hammer or sickle. 1d8 and 1d4 have the same average damage as 2d6

[ZenBear]

I want to allow it, but any class with Extra Attack, especially Fighters, will get a significant boost to their damage. If I allowed it I would allow any combination of light and non-light one-handed. Battleaxe/handaxe, Warhammer/Throwing Hammer, etc., and upgrade the TWF feat to include extra off-hand attack(s) based on Extra Attack feature.

[Once a Fool]

I would not allow it, but I would allow objects carried in the off-hand (such as a wide-brimmed hat, a cloak, or a d4 light weapon--including an improvised one!) to be used as an improvised +1 AC shield, if they are used for nothing else during the round.

[coredump]

I would allow using Rapier/Dagger instead of Shortsword/shorsword. But it would be a specific exception for those two specific weapons.

[Orbis Orboros]

A d8 weapon in the main hand and a d4 weapon in the offhand is strictly better than a d6 in each once the character gets extra attack (especially if they get even more as a fighter).

d8+mod and d8+mod and d4
is better than
d6+mod and d6+mod and d6

[DracoKnight]

A d8 weapon in the main hand and a d4 weapon in the offhand is strictly better than a d6 in each once the character gets extra attack (especially if they get even more as a fighter).

d8+mod and d8+mod and d4
is better than
d6+mod and d6+mod and d6

Actually they come out to the same average damage.

5 (d8) + mod and 5 (d8) + mod and 2 (d4)
Assuming both have a modifier of +3 it is equal to
4 (d6) + mod and 4 (d6) + mod and 4 (d6)

and they both come out to

8 + 8 + 2 = 18
7 + 7 + 4 = 18

[GiantOctopodes]

Actually they come out to the same average damage.

5 (d8) + mod and 5 (d8) + mod and 2 (d4)
Assuming both have a modifier of +3 it is equal to
4 (d6) + mod and 4 (d6) + mod and 4 (d6)

and they both come out to

8 + 8 + 2 = 18
7 + 7 + 4 = 18

only because of your rounding.
4.5+3+4.5+3+2.5 = 17.5
3.5+3+3.5+3+3.5 = 16.5

Still, I hardly think 1 damage per round is going to break anything. Besides, it allows them to emulate the sword + dagger style of Artemis Entreri.

Also, the best comparison is not against existing two weapon fighting options from my viewpoint, it's against duelist. And this certainly does not outpace that, so imho it's totally fine.

[Orbis Orboros]

Yeah, DracoKnight, you rounded everything up except the d4.

And it further gets out of wack (by 1, granted) for each additional attack gained, such as with Hoardbreaker, Whirlwind Attack, Fighter's extra extra attacks, Haste, and so on.

But it IS just one damage per attack. Still. I thought I'd point it out.