ways to allow players to use a two handed weapon one handed.

[The_Blood_Sword]

Hey everyone, i have seen a lot of people say that to allow this would be overpowered because of Great Weapon Master and GwF. But i have thought of a way to allow players to do this, and not break the game. Now, i have no name for the feat and i'm sure something like it has been posted here before. But i'm tying my hand at this, to see what everyone thinks.

(Enter Feat name here)
Requirement: Strength Score of 17
Through training, and experience you can wield a two handed weapon with one hand.

You increase your strength score by +1 to a max of 20

The weapons damage die becomes a d10, and when wielded one handed it loses the two handed, and heavy property and can't be used with Great Weapon Master.

-------------------------
Now this is a very simple feat, and it gives something while taking away. The idea behind this feat, is to reduce the damage die. Because say the greatsword, gets it's damage from the use of two hands, and the weight of the weapon. Reducing the damage die to a d10, compensates for the loss of the extra hand. While the great sword only weighs 6 pounds anyways, it's not like someone swinging a 15 pound weapon one handed. I see this is a fair feat, that allows those who wish to wield a weapon with higher damage then a longsword with a shield. While not breaking the game with a combo like Shield master and Great weapon master. Now as a DM i would allow something like this, because i see it as fair, and it takes a feat investment.

Thoughts? Concerns?

[Spectrulus]

So a two handed martial weapon averages 7 damage, while 1 handed martial weapons average 4.5 damage.

With this feat you propose it would enable a character to trade get about 1.5 damage a swing, basically on par with Dueling fighting style.

This would be a ridiculous boost to a dual wielding characters, if it paired with TWF and Dual Wielder.

I would not allow this feat as is, and I think bringing back anything close to the old Monkey Grip feat is too dangerous to delve into.

[intregus]

I made that a sub class feature of a barbarian and it worked out fine only I didn't change the damage die. Its abusable though, my table doesn't really abuse anything though so anything that usually id OP doesn't really end up being too bad.

You could maybe make it so you can world 1 twohanded weapon in one hand and it'll lose the heavy and two handed weapon properties. That way you could have 1d10 main hand 1d6 off hand, with the dual welder feat it'd be 1d10 and 1d8. And that's a 2 feat commitment.

This would probably be a STR build too since the twohanded weapon wouldn't be a finesse weapon if you planed on dual wielding.

Its also an ok damage boost for sword and board getting a d10 one handed weapon but I think that's totally fine for a feat

taking the dual wielder feat, this feat and the dual welder fighting style isn't THAT much better than a normal heavy twohanded weapon with the GWM feat

GWM would be 1d12 or 2d6+ 5(STR mod)+10 = 27 damage AND if you knock something to 0 can attack again as BA

Dual wielding 2handed weapons with your feat AND the DW feat AND a fighting style would be 2d10+5 (STR mod)+5 (STR mod)=30 damage

So it does out damage the normal GWM feat but your also expending an additional feat and fighting style to do so. I think that's fair.

[Ignimortis]

So a two handed martial weapon averages 7 damage, while 1 handed martial weapons average 4.5 damage.

With this feat you propose it would enable a character to trade get about 1.5 damage a swing, basically on par with Dueling fighting style.

This would be a ridiculous boost to a dual wielding characters, if it paired with TWF and Dual Wielder.

I would not allow this feat as is, and I think bringing back anything close to the old Monkey Grip feat is too dangerous to delve into.

Two feats for extra 2 damage per attack on average? No, I think it's fine. You can dual-wield two shortswords (3.5 avg dmg each) with zero feats and no fighting style. Having to take two feats so that you can dual-wield two d10 2handers (5.5 avg dmg each) isn't too good. It's actually pretty bad, and in fact only worth it if your STR is already maxed out and you've got 2 feats to spare (so at best comes online at level 4, and probably later, in fact) and you're using a STR build for dual-wielding in the first place.

[CTurbo]

I like it but I would make 1 change.

Up the Str requirement to 19 if you want the feat to give +1 Str or just 20 if you want to drop that part.


The DW feat is still required to dual wield two 2 handed weapons. I like that it gives a boost to TWF.

[Kadesh]

So a two handed martial weapon averages 7 damage, while 1 handed martial weapons average 4.5 damage.

With this feat you propose it would enable a character to trade get about 1.5 damage a swing, basically on par with Dueling fighting style.

This would be a ridiculous boost to a dual wielding characters, if it paired with TWF and Dual Wielder.

I would not allow this feat as is, and I think bringing back anything close to the old Monkey Grip feat is too dangerous to delve into.

Monkey grip was a pile of crap. What is it you think is too dangerous about it?

[Legendairy]

Seems like a slight boost to TWF, but a costly one, the damage comes nowhere close to GWF or SS. With 2 feats and a fighting style you are looking at what, 21 average damage a round if they both hit and you have a maxed str? Add in 10.5 for each additional attack? Yeah that’s not bad but not great either. Go with the rule of cool, if you like it have at it, with it ditching the properties it shouldn’t be too abusable either.

Edit: close at higher levels, 1 attack action (and bonus for the TWF) they are equals. Yes you don’t have the -5 to hit but it doesn’t scale as well and imho, most characters that take the minus from GWF have ways to mitigate it.

I’m not the best at the math breakdowns. But let’s see I get it right just wish the damage numbers (this is assuming TWF)
1 attack action
GWF 2d6+5+10 average of 22
Your feat 1d10+5 x2 average 21

Now extra attack
GWF 2d6+5+10 x2 average of 44
Your feat 1d10+5 x3 average 31.5

[JellyPooga]

The question I have is; why?

I mean, I can see for example, enabling a pike and shield style with this, but two-handed weapons are two-handed for a reason and it's got little to do with game mechanics. If you want a one-handed weapon, why not just use a one-handed weapon? What functional difference between, say, a longsword and a greatsword are you looking for, apart from a marginal increase in damage, which you can pretty much achieve with the Duelling Fighting Style anyway?

[Ignimortis]

The question I have is; why?

I mean, I can see for example, enabling a pike and shield style with this, but two-handed weapons are two-handed for a reason and it's got little to do with game mechanics. If you want a one-handed weapon, why not just use a one-handed weapon? What functional difference between, say, a longsword and a greatsword are you looking for, apart from a marginal increase in damage, which you can pretty much achieve with the Duelling Fighting Style anyway?

http://i.imgur.com/Rl3EWez.jpg
http://gameplay.tips/uploads/posts/2017-04/1491859806_ds3.jpg

For this, obviously.

[Callak_Remier]

I think 3.5 has everything you need.

[The_Blood_Sword]

The Reason why I have decided to post this idea is because I have had people at our table ask if DMs would allow this since 5e came out. No matter if i play online or in person. But no one has come up with a feasible answer for balance. The whole point if this 'feat' is to give DM's an option if said players are willing to take a hit to damage for this opportunity.

Now, with it losing its properties it would not gain the Benifit of GWM or GWF because it essentially is strictly a one handed weapon, with no versatile feat. It allows the use of a shield, so say someone wanting to up the damage of sword and board. Or to allow someone to use say a pike and a shield. Since most shield walls in world history had long spears to negate a charge. It balances, with the math, and negates one ASI while giving a small boost to strength. If DM's on the forum, think it's good enough. They can add it to their game, name it what they wish, and impliment it. Maybe even add that, in order to duel wield such things add a secondary higher strength requirement.

[Asmotherion]

I'd allow it for someone who lost a hand, and taken a custom feat for it.

Then, perhaps allow him a hook as an off-weapon that deals 1d4 or something. Just Sayin'

[Angelalex242]

Well, maybe they wanna do the Cloud Strife (Advent Children) thing, and dual wield greatswords in each hand.

Bonus points if he has it set up that the greatswords can combine to an even greatersword (2d8 Greatsword?) when only one weapon is used. (First Tsurugi)

[MThurston]

Spirit of the Spartan
Requirement: Strength Score of 18
Through training, and experience you can wield a two handed polearm with one hand.

Not usable with PAM because of the use of one hand and can only use a shield in the opposite hand.

[Legendairy]

Some people enjoy playing a dark souls character. Different styles and all that, me personally I don’t feel it’s overpowered. I have played and seen many people want to play a character from a game or comic or manga. Like GUTS from Beserk, main characters from other anime’s like Bleach. Cloud is another one that’s been mentioned, even some Conan.

[Ganymede]

This looks like something that would have been in a 3.5e splat book. I really don't think it has a place in 5e.


And if your character's roleplay theme means you wield a large weapon, just describe your weapon as being large. You don't need a mechanical advantage for every single roleplay decision you make.

[ciarannihill]

I wouldn't make it doable with an average weapon -- the biggest issue with the massive fantasy weapons thing isn't the strength they take to lift (although that's a huge factor), it's their weight when swinging relative to the weight of the wielder. Cloud swinging the Buster Sword would likely send him flying if it had enough force to be wielded effectively.


You can achieve this effect through magic weapons, though. Have a weapon that to someone attuned to it feels nearly weightless (or of substantially reduced weight), but to other creatures (such as those struck by it) feels as if it has the weight it appears to have. Describe this magical phenomenon and denote it's mechanical benefit -- that it can be wielded in 1 hand by medium creatures (not small creatures thanks to the size making it unable to be swung effectively). It makes it functionally a +2 weapon (assuming GWF and Greatsword) compared to a Longsword with Duelist (~8.33 damage vs 6.5 damage), which is strong but perhaps not overpowering, assuming that it's used alongside a shield.


Just my 2 copper.

[Legendairy]

It’s not really that big of a mechanical boost and also if you come across a greatsword that has magical properties or something they could still use it without having to reevaluate their concept.

Yeah the overly large weapons bugged me for awhile as well but they can be fun and as you said magic being a thing helps, also materials in the game used for crafting etc. there is a few ways to do it, none of it by the rules.

[DarkKnightJin]

Why muck with mechanics?
Just fluff it as the PC swinging the heavy weapon with 1 hand, and using the other arm for balance, so they don't fall prone.

[Legendairy]

I actually do this with my current pc ^^^, but I was thinking they were wanting it more for sword and board or pike and shield.

[Specter]

Take the easy way out: create a magic item.
-
GAUNTLET OF POWERFUL GRIP
This gauntlet fits like a plate glove, but its back is rugged like unpolished stone. A humanoid wearing this glove can ignore the two-handed property of a melee weapon.
-
This way you can control who does it (so it's not a universal rule), and still avoid TWF exploitation.

[Legendairy]

Take the easy way out: create a magic item.
-
GAUNTLET OF POWERFUL GRIP
This gauntlet fits like a plate glove, but its back is rugged like unpolished stone. A humanoid wearing this glove can ignore the two-handed property of a melee weapon.
-
This way you can control who does it (so it's not a universal rule), and still avoid TWF exploitation.

Be careful tho, cause that doesn’t remove the heavy two handed properties so it makes it exploitable via GWM and PaM on a sword and board user. (It needs to remove he heavy weapon property....I don’t think I’ve ever noticed that the first part of GWM applies to all melee attacks)

[Specter]

Be careful tho, cause that doesn’t remove the heavy two handed properties so it makes it exploitable via GWM and PaM on a sword and board user. (It needs to remove he heavy weapon property....I don’t think I’ve ever noticed that the first part of GWM applies to all melee attacks)

If that's the case, I wouldn't even do it. As was said above, the only thing that would really change is the damage, and that can be matched with Dueling. I think the 'fun' of these things is to give a player a real boost (like a Fighter that's not doing as much damage as other members).

[Legendairy]

That does make sense, but I think the OP was asking if it was overpowered or not, personally I don’t think it is. Saying weather or not we would allow it cause it doesn’t fit with our narrative or it’s unduly messing with mechanics when there are a slew of other ways to get the feel. Or comments like 3.5 has what you need just don’t help.

Is the feat overpowered imho no it’s not, is it making a solution to a problem that doesn’t exist, sort of. Should you just go back to 3.5 cause you want something like this in your game, not at all. Do I have a feat like this in my game? No I don’t, I have other issues with it and share an opinion like many others on here. But to answer the OP’s question not other people’s concerns (concerns at their table), no it’s not overpowered or really abusable.

You could make a mithral greatsword or something that does not have the heavy property but can be treated as versatile. 1 hand 1d10 and 2 hand at 3d6 or something.

[Ganymede]

My favorite part of the feat is how it lets halflings wield greatswords in one hand but not in two hands.

[Legendairy]

My favorite part of the feat is how it lets halflings wield greatswords in one hand but not in two hands.

Ha! That is actually amazing lol. Obviously the wording might need to be changed a bit. Ahh the imagery. lol

Edit: not just but it allows them to duel wield them with the DW feat.

[Kadesh]

If a Character is using Great Weapon Master, what would be the point in giving them the ability to do it one handed? There are also Dancing Swords and Animated Shields available, so I don't see it as too much of a big deal.

[CheddarChampion]

I would take the original suggested feat and tweak it to:

Requirement: Strenght 17
+1 to strength score
You can ignore the two-handed property when wielding melee weapons. However, you take a penalty of -2 to hit and to damage.

I think this would come close enough to being balanced but it is clunky and doesn't fit in well with the rest of 5e's ruleset.

[Ignimortis]

I would take the original suggested feat and tweak it to:

Requirement: Strenght 17
+1 to strength score
You can ignore the two-handed property when wielding melee weapons. However, you take a penalty of -2 to hit and to damage.

I think this would come close enough to being balanced but it is clunky and doesn't fit in well with the rest of 5e's ruleset.

This would make it strictly subpar to dual-wielding light weapons.

There's nothing unbalanced in giving players dual two-handed weapons if you remove the heavy property. As in, even if you don't nerf the damage dice, that's basically 1d8 vs 2d6, which is 2.5 damage on average hit. If you nerf the weapons to d10, that's reduced to +1 damage for a price of a feat. A feat is worth far more than that, because you could get a +1 to hit and to damage for that same thing.

OP's version is overbalanced but playable. Anything worse than that would be actively punishing players for making stylistic choices.

[Man_Over_Game]

Could do something like:


Weapons you wield have these changes to their traits:




Heavy: With this weapon, you can pull off a Power Strike. When you make an Attack, you can instead opt out of that attack to adjust your timing and grip, adding your attack modifier bonus to both your hit and damage rolls on the next attack you attempt this round. This can stack multiple times. You may also ignore the restriction on your size due to the Heavy trait.

Versatile: You can deal the two-handed damage with this weapon even if you're wielding it with one hand.

Thrown: Does not get disadvantage due to range.

If a weapon lacks the Two Handed trait, it now has Finesse.
If a weapon lacks the Versatile trait, it now has Light.



Adds a lot of diversity, doesn't really increase maximum damage all too much, and everyone gets a slice of the pie. You might not be able to be a Halfling and use two Greatswords, but you could definitely rock this and Dual Wielder for some crazy damage with some Longswords.

My main deal is messing around with Reach. It's inherently something difficult to obtain and that looks very intentional. This does give you a lot of room to play with, though, and opens up a lot of builds for Strength characters.

[GlenSmash!]

Rather than a feat.

I think I might toss out a Magic item. Like a Mithral greatsword that can be wielded in one hand by medium adventures and wielded without disadvantage by small adventurers.

[Kadesh]

Rather than a feat.

I think I might toss out a Magic item. Like a Mithral greatsword that can be wielded in one hand by medium adventures and wielded without disadvantage by small adventurers.

If it's just a Magic Item, have you considered an animated shield or dancing sword?

[GlenSmash!]

If it's just a Magic Item, have you considered an animated shield or dancing sword?

Neither of those seem to fit the fiction being able to wield a two handed sword in one hand.

Edit: Mechanically they offer the same effect, but in the narrative tossing your magic [blank] in the air and activating its power word is a far cry from wielding a two handed weapon in one hand.

[Kadesh]

Neither of those seem to fit the fiction being able to wield a two handed sword in one hand.

If it is mechanically the same or similar effect, though, given that 2h only takes effect when making an attack, the animated shield lets you do that.

The exception is obviously getting Duelling vs GWF Fighting style to trigger, but that is generally icing on the cake of 1h a weapon for theme rather than the goal of 2h. If someone wanted to einhand a 2h weapon without using a shield or second weapon, sure it's just fluff. If they wanted to 2WF or Shield Up, then Dancing Sword or Animated Shield gets the same effect with slight refluffing of the effects. Dancing Sword might struggle to keep up if you are doing lots of movement however. The exception is dual wielding twin halberds Dynasty Warriors style, but hey ho. Refluff a pair of battleaxes.

These get the key things you want: Heavy Weapon in one hand, one hand using a shield, or making bonus action attacks with a second weapon.

[Legendairy]

Rather than a feat.

I think I might toss out a Magic item. Like a Mithral greatsword that can be wielded in one hand by medium adventures and wielded without disadvantage by small adventurers.

My vote would tend towards this, it doesn’t change the hard rules really, you control how it works, gives you a chance to gauge how it interacts and see if you want to make it a feat available for everyone.

[GlenSmash!]

If it is mechanically the same or similar effect, though, given that 2h only takes effect when making an attack, the animated shield lets you do that.

And yet I don't care that it is mechanically the same. The feel is very often more important to players.

The player wants to stand with 2 oversized swords cris-crossed across there back, drawing both of them when combat starts. Not toss a floating magic item to move independently. They want to feel special. they want to feel epic.


These get the key things you want: Heavy Weapon in one hand, one hand using a shield, or making bonus action attacks with a second weapon.

I don't think those things would get what player that wants to one hand 2-handers what they want unless that player is only concerned about numbers on a character sheet.

[Maxilian]

If you want to balance it, the easier way is to make it a magic item, why? cause its easier to "nerf" a magic item if needed (though not recommended as players would not be fan of it), and the power it could bring to the player compared to the other players can be worked around with the magic item distribution.

[Maxilian]

Rather than a feat.

I think I might toss out a Magic item. Like a Mithral greatsword that can be wielded in one hand by medium adventures and wielded without disadvantage by small adventurers.

Totally agree, even more as a magic item is easier to balance when its compared to other players (As you can control what items and how many items each players get)

[Kadesh]

And yet I don't care that it is mechanically the same. The feel is very often more important to players.

The player wants to stand with 2 oversized swords cris-crossed across there back, drawing both of them when combat starts. Not toss a floating magic item to move independently. They want to feel special. they want to feel epic.



I don't think those things would get what player that wants to one hand 2-handers what they want unless that player is only concerned about numbers on a character sheet.

Hmm, fair. Still agree with you it is nowhere near broken given the above already exist to allow technically TWF/Shield. As long as it is rare, I don't see a problem with allowing a something like you've suggested.

[GlenSmash!]

Totally agree, even more as a magic item is easier to balance when its compared to other players (As you can control what items and how many items each players get)


Hmm, fair. Still agree with you it is nowhere near broken given the above already exist to allow technically TWF/Shield. As long as it is rare, I don't see a problem with allowing a something like you've suggested.

It's pretty much how I handle a lot of these requests.

"I want a finessable Longsword/Katana" "Cool one Mithral Longsword. It has the finesse property" Along your line of reasoning Kadesh, it's pretty much a lesser Sunblade anyway.

(I don't really give it to them, but it could be in a horde, gifted by an NPC, or commissioned from a smith by a player)