two TWF qu

[BeefGood]

These questions are about the generic option to fight with two weapons, described in the Combat chapter.
(1) "....with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand." I find the word "different" a little confusing in this context. I think the clearest way to pose the question is, can you two-weapon-fight using two shortswords?
(2) Rogues are called out as potential beneficiaries of TWF because they get a second chance to hit with the sneak attack, if the first attack misses. But a rogue using Hide to enable the sneak attack would not get this second chance. After the first attack, he would no longer be hidden. He could of course use the bonus action granted by Cunning Action to try to re-Hide, but then that bonus action would not be available to use for the second of the two-weapon-fighting attacks. Is this correct?

[DeTess]

These questions are about the generic option to fight with two weapons, described in the Combat chapter.
(1) "....with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand." I find the word "different" a little confusing in this context. I think the clearest way to pose the question is, can you two-weapon-fight using two shortswords?

The mention of different means that you actually need two weapons for two-weapon fighting. You can't do your main attack with a dagger, and then toss this dagger to your off-hand for an off-hand attack, so twf with two short-swords is perfectly fine.



(2) Rogues are called out as potential beneficiaries of TWF because they get a second chance to hit with the sneak attack, if the first attack misses. But a rogue using Hide to enable the sneak attack would not get this second chance. After the first attack, he would no longer be hidden. He could of course use the bonus action granted by Cunning Action to try to re-Hide, but then that bonus action would not be available to use for the second of the two-weapon-fighting attacks. Is this correct?

If you use a bonus action to hide, you can't also attack with your off-hand weapon. However, you don't need to be hidden to get sneak attack. Either having advantage(which can be gained a in a lot of different ways), or having an ally within 5 feet will also grant you sneak attack. In those cases, having the off-hand attack is really quite useful.

[Easy_Lee]

I think he's saying that a rogue who misses the first attack is automatically revealed, and so does not have advantage on his second attack.

[Aett_Thorn]

I think he's saying that a rogue who misses the first attack is automatically revealed, and so does not have advantage on his second attack.

I think that you're right, but Randuir was simply pointing out that there are other ways for Rogues to get Sneak Attack, and that in those cases, potentially doubling your chance to land the Sneak Attack can make TWF worth it.

[Easy_Lee]

I think that you're right, but Randuir was simply pointing out that there are other ways for Rogues to get Sneak Attack, and that in those cases, potentially doubling your chance to land the Sneak Attack can make TWF worth it.

Ah, in that case I agree. TWF is generally worth it for rogues who don't take specific feats or multiclass.

[Willie the Duck]

TWF and hiding are, for most rogues most-of-the-time, the two best things to be doing with their bonus actions, and they will be competing for attention/use. You will often finding yourself in the situation of wanting to do both.

[samcifer]

I had a related question. Does the TWF feat grant the extra damage to the second attack? The wording is a bit vague on that.

[Willie the Duck]

I had a related question. Does the TWF feat grant the extra damage to the second attack? The wording is a bit vague on that.

The twf Fighting Style (so, for fighters and rangers) grants that ability. No feat does.

[Aett_Thorn]

I had a related question. Does the TWF feat grant the extra damage to the second attack? The wording is a bit vague on that.

If you're asking what I think you're asking, which means the TWF fighting style (not feat): yes.

Normally, your off-hand attacks are for weapon damage only, and do NOT add your ability modifier. The fighting style allows you to apply your ability modifier to the off-hand attack.

[DivisibleByZero]

I had a related question. Does the TWF feat grant the extra damage to the second attack? The wording is a bit vague on that.

The Dual Wielder feat does not.
The Two Weapon Fighting style does.

[Easy_Lee]

The Dual Wielder feat does not.
The Two Weapon Fighting style does.

Right, and this is one of the reasons why many rogues consider the feat Crossbow Expert instead of TWF.

[DivisibleByZero]

Right, and this is one of the reasons why many rogues consider the feat Crossbow Expert instead of TWF.

It is my opinion that the benefit of the style (providing mod to damage) and the benefit of the feat (providing better weapons) should have been reversed. But the fact that feats are optional makes this unreasonable, as there would have been no way to TWF with mod to damage in a game where feats weren't being used. And so they swapped those benefits for that reason.
In our home game, they have been reversed.
This way anyone can dual wield effectively at the cost of a feat, but only Fighters and Rangers can do so with better (non-light) weapons at the cost of a style.

[Easy_Lee]

It is my opinion that the benefit of the style (providing mod to damage) and the benefit of the feat (providing better weapons) should have been reversed. But the fact that feats are optional makes this unreasonable, as there would have been no way to TWF with mod to damage in a game where feats weren't being used. And so they swapped those benefits for that reason.
In our home game, they have been reversed.
This way anyone can dual wield effectively at the cost of a feat, but only Fighters and Rangers can do so with better (non-light) weapons at the cost of a style.

Yeah, I've done the same. Non-light weapons adds a lot of weapon variety and +(attacks) damage per round, which is closer to the other fighting styles than a static +(attribute) damage per round on rounds where you use your bonus action to attack.

[MeeposFire]

Yeah, I've done the same. Non-light weapons adds a lot of weapon variety and +(attacks) damage per round, which is closer to the other fighting styles than a static +(attribute) damage per round on rounds where you use your bonus action to attack.

I did something similar where attribute to damage was gained when and if you get extra attack. Larger weapons were allowed if you took the style. The feat gives the AC bonus, the ability make an additional attack with your off hand weapon as a bonus action, and the ability to use both weapons on an opportunity attack.

Lastly two weapon fighting no longer required a bonus action as now it could be done essentially with any action used to make a weapon attack as part of that action.

To fix throwing weapons and drawing weapons I give every character an object interaction for every attack they could make when they use an attack action and you can draw two weapons with one interaction so long as you draw both weapons at the same time.

Fixes most of my issues with two weapon fighting and allows it to play nice with all the classes and abilities in the game like every other fighting style can.

[DivisibleByZero]

To fix throwing weapons and drawing weapons I give every character an object interaction for every attack they could make when they use an attack action and you can draw two weapons with one interaction so long as you draw both weapons at the same time.

I treat any light weapon with the throwing property as ammunition. That means any light weapon with the throwing property doesn't use any interaction, drawing it is part of the attack.
Non-light weapons are not changed, and require drawing normally.
If it should be fast to toss, it is.
If it shouldn't, it isn't.

[samcifer]

I treat any light weapon with the throwing property as ammunition. That means any light weapon with the throwing property doesn't use any interaction, drawing it is part of the attack.
Non-light weapons are not changed, and require drawing normally.
If it should be fast to toss, it is.
If it shouldn't, it isn't.

"It's all in the reflexes." Kurt Russell as Jack Burton - Big Trouble in Little China

[MeeposFire]

I treat any light weapon with the throwing property as ammunition. That means any light weapon with the throwing property doesn't use any interaction, drawing it is part of the attack.
Non-light weapons are not changed, and require drawing normally.
If it should be fast to toss, it is.
If it shouldn't, it isn't.

That works too though the reason I do it the way I do is that I want all weapons (and weapon styles) to essentially be treated roughly equal. SO unless a weapon gives a large bonus that another weapon does not I tend to try to treat them the same. I also like the extra object interactions since it makes tool using characters (weapons are a kind of tool) better at using tools over those that use magic as their primary activity. Then again I am also experimenting on ways to make using objects and items a bigger part of the game so getting extra interactions is a nice boost but not one that breaks the game.