TWF - Fighter or Barbarian?

[Ranor95]

In short I'm wondering which class suits two weapon fighting best. STR based. I'm inclined to say fighter. Heavy armour makes up the lack of a shield, less bonus action features means less turns swinging for effectively half damage, etc. Not played a TWF character before and interested which class compliments it the best as a frontline. I know it's not the most optimal playstyle compared to great weapons but from what I understand the numbers aren't actively terrible.

[Corran]

Rogue. Two chances at sneak attack is a big deal. If you hit with your first attack you can choose to use your bonus action to disengage instead.
Bladesinger, paladin and ranger perhaps, have some features that would profit from twf. Not the best choice, but it wouldn't be terrible once you hit level X.
Barbarians.... eh... it pales in comparison to using a two hander, but they are probably better than fighter.
I'd say that fighter is the worst option for playing a twf character (well, worst among the logical choices, not saying that a twf fighter is worse than a twf evoker wizard). What I say, is that I think twf is by far the worst weapon setup for a fighter.

[Ranor95]

Rogue. Two chances at sneak attack is a big deal. If you hit with your first attack you can choose to use your bonus action to disengage instead.
Bladesinger, paladin and ranger perhaps, have some features that would profit from twf. Not the best choice, but it wouldn't be terrible once you hit level X.
Barbarians.... eh... it pales in comparison to using a two hander, but they are probably better than fighter.
I'd say that fighter is the worst option for playing a twf character (well, worst among the logical choices, not saying that a twf fighter is worse than a twf evoker wizard). What I say, is that I think twf is by far the worst weapon setup for a fighter.

Well as I was hoping to go STR based that rules out pretty much everything but Barb or Fighter. What is it about Barb that makes it better than fighter? Afaik TWFs biggest issue is consuming your bonus action, and doesn't Barb have more stuff to use it's BA on?

[ArkenBrony]

Well as I was hoping to go STR based that rules out pretty much everything but Barb or Fighter. What is it about Barb that makes it better than fighter? Afaik TWFs biggest issue is consuming your bonus action, and doesn't Barb have more stuff to use it's BA on?

Aside from starting a rage as a bonus action, as long as you stay away from berserker, there really isn't anything for them to use a bonus action for. so the first turn of combat it might be annoying but that's not even every combat, cause limited uses. so it works pretty well. though dipping into fighter for the weapon style to get strength added to offhand is pretty nice

[Rusvul]

Strength rogue is a surprisingly viable build, actually, especially if you start with a level of Fighter for the fighting style and heavy armor proficiency (or, even better, Barbarian for rage). You're limited to finesse weapons, but rogues make excellent grapplers because of expertise, and a level Barbarian only improves that. Strength rogue + twf doesn't really synergize, though, because you want at least one free hand to grapple with.

As far as Strength twf... it's just not a very good strategy, mechanically speaking. Generally, if you're using two weapons, there's no reason to favor Str over Dex. That said, if you're set on Str twf, I'd go with barbarian: rage bonus damage does well with as many attacks as possible, and carrying lots of axes is a very barbarian thing to do.

[Corran]

Well as I was hoping to go STR based that rules out pretty much everything but Barb or Fighter. What is it about Barb that makes it better than fighter? Afaik TWFs biggest issue is consuming your bonus action, and doesn't Barb have more stuff to use it's BA on?
What ArkenBrony said, also because of rage damage that adds to attacks, so more attacks works well with that. About twf, generally, I think that the more attacks you get the worst it becomes. It's not that better on a barbarian than on a fighter, and fighters do get extra feats, so... go for it if you want (I know I like this fighting style, so don't et me dissuade you). Though don't go with high expectations, as it's a fs that is generally a bit on the low side of power (though it works really well for most rogues, so you could as well consider sth like a swashbuckler).

[Crucius]

Rogues can work on strength; sneak attack says you must use a finesse weapon, but does not state it must be used on dex. Swinging two scimitars on strength is a valid method. The only downside is having poop AC. Selecting a race with natural armor goes a long way in mitigating that.

The battlemaster fighter doesn't use their bonus action that often I believe, while still benefiting from many hits per round to dish out maneuver status effects (and damage).

Barbarian does it slightly better, since the rage bonus damage benefits maximizing attacks per round, and some subclasses have pretty poor action economy besides raging (zealot, non-eagle totem warrior, ancestral guardian).

[Man_Over_Game]

Fighter would be better if you had some reason for on-hit abilities to activate. For example, a level into Warlock for Hexblade's Curse or Hex would compliment the Fighter very well. A Dexterity-based TWF Fighter will almost always do better than the Strength version, due to the fact that Dexterity works fine with ranged or melee weapons, but Strength is limited to melee weapons. The +1-+2 AC difference by using Strength isn't enough compared to the option of using a Longbow.

Barbarian should really only be considered if you're avidly against magic and Dexterity, but it is fairly competitive (if you don't mind a low AC). You don't have a lot of options for subclasses, though. Battlerager already has a Bonus Action Strength attack, as does Storm Herald and Berserker. Totem doesn't really have any on-hit synergies. You're effectively limited to Zealot or Ancestral Guardian. Zealot would just gain more damage output, and Ancestral Guardian would have more options to protect the team. Either scenario would have to use Reckless Attack less, which makes you a bit tankier against swarms of enemies compared to a GWM equivalent build.

Key note: Mobile does exceptionally well with TWF. I'd recommend Mobile before getting the Dual Wield feat, especially if you are Barbarian (so you can spam Reckless Attack safely).

[GlenSmash!]

At high levels fighters get so many attacks, that a single bonus action attack even with ability mod to damage just isn't much. It even falls behind the static +2 from dueling style when that's added to all those attacks (especially when action surging).

At low levels it's ok. And if you think it's fun go for it.

That said Barbarian with 2 hand axes is pretty fun. And at low levels without feats will give you more bonus damage from rage than a two-hander would.

[GreyBlack]

Well as I was hoping to go STR based that rules out pretty much everything but Barb or Fighter. What is it about Barb that makes it better than fighter? Afaik TWFs biggest issue is consuming your bonus action, and doesn't Barb have more stuff to use it's BA on?

Fun fact of the day: a rogue's sneak attack keys off either a ranged or finesse weapon. Doesn't say anything about having to use dexterity...

That said, barbarian is an extraordinarily poor choice for strength based TWF. In order to be effective with TWF, you need to have access to the TWF fighting style which barbarians don't get access to; ergo, you don't add your modifier to your damage rolls. By comparison, V.Human Fighter is dual wielding longswords (assuming the feat), so assuming both attacks hit, you're dealing 2d8+6 damage per turn (assuming 16 strength). By about level 6, you're dealing 2d8+10. Average damage is 19/ turn

Comparatively, the Barbarian at level 6 while raging will be doing 2d8+8 on hit because they can't add their strength to their second attack. Average of 17/ round.

Rogue is at 5d6+4 damage/ round, which puts them well ahead at 21 damage/ round, which goes through the roof with the assassin archetype. However, they're also the squishiest, with a lower average AC than either of the other two options, so maybe not the best route to go if you want to be heavily armored.

[stoutstien]

Not optimal but twf works just fine especially for Barb's who usually don't have a use for their Bonus action.
A zelot barbarian is going to be doing
(1d6+mod +2)+(1d6+2)+1d6+1/2 Barb lv. With no feat investments.
You can max your strength before the Pam or great weapon master.

[GlenSmash!]

Fun fact of the day: a rogue's sneak attack keys off either a ranged or finesse weapon. Doesn't say anything about having to use dexterity...

That said, barbarian is an extraordinarily poor choice for strength based TWF. In order to be effective with TWF, you need to have access to the TWF fighting style which barbarians don't get access to; ergo, you don't add your modifier to your damage rolls. By comparison, V.Human Fighter is dual wielding longswords (assuming the feat), so assuming both attacks hit, you're dealing 2d8+6 damage per turn (assuming 16 strength). By about level 6, you're dealing 2d8+10. Average damage is 19/ turn

Comparatively, the Barbarian at level 6 while raging will be doing 2d8+8 on hit because they can't add their strength to their second attack. Average of 17/ round.


This isn't factoring in extra attack.

At level 6 Fighter is 3d8+15 if you had the feat at level one and spent both ASIs to get strength to 20. Barb is 2d8+12 in the first round 3d8+ 14 in subsequent rounds assuming feat at level one and bumping strength to 18.

At 8 it's still 3d8+15 for fighters, but 2d8+14 in the first round 3d8+ 16 in subsequent rounds for the Barb. At 9 fighter is still the same but Barb is 2d8+16 in the first round 3d8+ 19 in subsequent rounds.

But compared to other options TWF still falls behind for Fighter or Barbarian.

Edit: and if you are out of Rages on the Barb you are way behind. 3d8+10 in all rounds.

[GreyBlack]

This isn't factoring in extra attack.

At level 6 Fighter is 3d8+15 if you had the feat at level one and spent both ASIs to get strength to 20. Barb is 2d8+12 in the first round 3d8+ 14 in subsequent rounds assuming feat at level one and bumping strength to 18.

At 8 it's still 3d8+15 for fighters, but 2d8+14 in the first round 3d8+ 16 in subsequent rounds for the Barb.

But compared to other options TWF still falls behind for Fighter or Barbarian.

Edit: and if you are out of Rages on the Barb you are way behind. 3d8+10 in all rounds.

Yeah I wound up doing that math too. In most cases, the Barbarian lags behind in damage given how many attacks the fighter gets; fighters by level 20 are dealing 5d8+25 average of about 46/round. The Barbarian is dealing 3d8+26, average of about 39 per round.

And that's when the barbarian is burning a resource; at level 20, if the fighter burns their Action Surge, they can deal a whopping 10d8+50 damage in 1 round after burning their resource. The die calculator I was using didn't want to spit that number out, but considering that 5d8+25 is more average damage than the Barbarian deals, I think we'll comfortably say that it deals less.

[Willie the Duck]

I think the optimal user of Str-based twf would have one level of fighter (or two of ranger) for the fighting style, enough barbarian for rage (and maybe archetype abilities, perhaps zealot), one or the other of them up to level 5 for two attacks, and then a lot of rogue levels. Rage gives you extra damage per attack. Sneak attack (plus zealot special ability) gives bonus damage as long as at least one attack hits. Two attacks is the break point where twf and 2hf are closest. This limits you to fighting with finesse weapons using your Strength score, so you are effectively a fancy Strogue who doesn't do as much grappling.

My build would be Fighter1/Zealot Barbarian 1-5/Rogue (any archetype) 1-14. It is not the most optimized martial ever made, but it works acceptably.

Sadly, I don't think there really are many optimal Str-based twf builds who actually use Str-weapons (paired handaxes, paired longswords with dual wielder, etc.) -- it is what you do in a pinch. Maybe a high-Strength mountain dwarf wizard would do, if forced into melee (you know you'll do acceptably with paired handaxes, so you don't choose shocking grasp or a SCAG cantrip as your backup plan), but again, not as an action of first choice.

[stoutstien]

Yeah I wound up doing that math too. In most cases, the Barbarian lags behind in damage given how many attacks the fighter gets; fighters by level 20 are dealing 5d8+25 average of about 46/round. The Barbarian is dealing 3d8+26, average of about 39 per round.

And that's when the barbarian is burning a resource; at level 20, if the fighter burns their Action Surge, they can deal a whopping 10d8+50 damage in 1 round after burning their resource. The die calculator I was using didn't want to spit that number out, but considering that 5d8+25 is more average damage than the Barbarian deals, I think we'll comfortably say that it deals less.
With primal champion a feat that allowed Barb's to gain a fighting style without a dip would help close up the gap. Also hardd to factor reckless attack

[GreyBlack]

I think the optimal user of Str-based twf would have one level of fighter (or two of ranger) for the fighting style, enough barbarian for rage (and maybe archetype abilities, perhaps zealot), one or the other of them up to level 5 for two attacks, and then a lot of rogue levels. Rage gives you extra damage per attack. Sneak attack (plus zealot special ability) gives bonus damage as long as at least one attack hits. Two attacks is the break point where twf and 2hf are closest. This limits you to fighting with finesse weapons using your Strength score, so you are effectively a fancy Strogue who doesn't do as much grappling.

My build would be Fighter1/Zealot Barbarian 1-5/Rogue (any archetype) 1-14. It is not the most optimized martial ever made, but it works acceptably.

Sadly, I don't think there really are many optimal Str-based twf builds who actually use Str-weapons (paired handaxes, paired longswords with dual wielder, etc.) -- it is what you do in a pinch. Maybe a high-Strength mountain dwarf wizard would do, if forced into melee (you know you'll do acceptably with paired handaxes, so you don't choose shocking grasp or a SCAG cantrip as your backup plan), but again, not as an action of first choice.

2 of Ranger nets you Hunter's Mark. Just saying. :smallbiggrin:

[GlenSmash!]

Yeah I wound up doing that math too. In most cases, the Barbarian lags behind in damage given how many attacks the fighter gets; fighters by level 20 are dealing 5d8+25 average of about 46/round. The Barbarian is dealing 3d8+26, average of about 39 per round.

And that's when the barbarian is burning a resource; at level 20, if the fighter burns their Action Surge, they can deal a whopping 10d8+50 damage in 1 round after burning their resource. The die calculator I was using didn't want to spit that number out, but considering that 5d8+25 is more average damage than the Barbarian deals, I think we'll comfortably say that it deals less.

True.

Sadly that only pronounces the weakness of DW fighting style. Dueling catches up without even costing a feat and gets you shield AC. With a single feat like PAM becomes a real monster. 52.50 average damage in around without a reaction attack but 63.00 in one with it at level 20 with Spear & Shield +PAM.

Even back at level 6 it's 31.5 average damage a round without the AoO and 42.00 with. Nasty.

[stoutstien]

True.

Sadly that only pronounces the weakness of DW fighting style. Dueling catches up without even costing a feat and gets you shield AC. With a single feat like PAM becomes a real monster. 52.50 average damage in around without a reaction attack but 63.00 in one with it at level 20 with Spear & Shield +PAM.

Even back at level 6 it's 31.5 average damage a round without the AoO and 42.00 with. Nasty.
Without a few house rules twf falls behind as soon as a a player grabs PAM Even if one disallow the one handed polearm builds.
Not to persuaded OP from twf. at most tables people never notice the discrepancy

[GlenSmash!]

Without a few house rules twf falls behind as soon as a a player grabs PAM Even if one disallow the one handed polearm builds.
Not to persuaded OP from twf. at most tables people never notice the discrepancy

Indeed. Playing what is fun for you is way more important than squeaking out extra damage.

Hell, I like Barbarian/Fighter/Rangers with Longbows and Longswords, that grapple whatever they can. Optimization be damned.

[Misterwhisper]

Now that the power creep has lead to the creation of the Double Scimitar, there should never be an example of a str based dual wielder.

If your DM is fine with allowing that, even though it is official.

The feat that goes with it, makes it 2 handed, finesse, +1 ac, 2d4 + stat off hand AND gives +1 to str or dex.

So not only was TWF horrible to start with, now it is officially useless.

[GlenSmash!]

2 of Ranger nets you Hunter's Mark. Just saying. :smallbiggrin:

HM does spread well across a lot of attacks. So it's a great way to buff a TWF attack.

[stoutstien]

HM does spread well across a lot of attacks. So it's a great way to buff a TWF attack.
If only it didn't eat the same action as the offhand attack 🤔. Hunter mark applied like pally divine smite?

[qube]

Yeah I wound up doing that math too. In most cases, the Barbarian lags behind in damage given how many attacks the fighter gets; fighters by level 20 are dealing 5d8+25 average of about 46/round. The Barbarian is dealing 3d8+26, average of about 39 per round. This, obviously, has a huge haping hole in the logic - in that barbarians can fight recklessly - chaning it from a 5 attack roll situation for the fighter to a 6 attack roll situation for the barbarian.

Honestly, go Zealot. I've been playing one with two shortswords. The fact they get +1d6+half level on their first hit (not attack roll; hit), that really ramps up their damage, and allows them to skip reckless attack ... which at turn means there's no mitigating factor for the huge defense boost of rage.

Plus, even more insane, using two short swords, despite using STR for them, allows you to use defensive duelist
(yeah, sure, you could use rapiers ... but I didn't see that going for my character. Two huge rusty knives for me ! )

[Willie the Duck]

2 of Ranger nets you Hunter's Mark. Just saying. :smallbiggrin:

Ranger5-6, Barbarian 1-2, and then maybe Arcane Trickster (to raise your spell slots, in particular) 12-14 would be helpful in having Hunter's Mark up and running quite a bit. The issue is that, between spending bonus actions to cast it at low levels, making concentration saves if damaged, plus opportunity cost of the ranger levels in general, I just don't know if it is worth it. Maybe. Hunter's mark in general seems to be the spell everyone always suggests for rangers, but never works out for me as well as advertised (exception: XBE/SS ranged ranger who rarely has to make a concentration check does wonders with it).

[GlenSmash!]

If only it didn't eat the same action as the offhand attack 🤔. Hunter mark applied like pally divine smite?

In the first round yes.

I do feel like Gloomstalker offsets this by getting a first round only attack.

[GreyBlack]

This, obviously, has a huge haping hole in the logic - in that barbarians can fight recklessly - chaning it from a 5 attack roll situation for the fighter to a 6 attack roll situation for the barbarian.

Honestly, go Zealot. I've been playing one with two shortswords. The fact they get +1d6+half level on their first hit (not attack roll; hit), that really ramps up their damage, and allows them to skip reckless attack ... which at turn means there's no mitigating factor for the huge defense boost of rage.

Plus, even more insane, using two short swords, despite using STR for them, allows you to use defensive duelist
(yeah, sure, you could use rapiers ... but I didn't see that going for my character. Two huge rusty knives for me ! )

If you're referring to the Berserker Frenzy Attack, that eats your bonus action that would normally be used for your offhand attack, so that's already accounted for and is still better with GWF.

ETA: Alternatively, you're referring to Reckless Attack which does nothing to damage calculations; it just allows you to attack with advantage, so it doesn't increase your average DPR. Well, it does because you're hitting more but that's neither here nor there.

[stoutstien]

If you're referring to the Berserker Frenzy Attack, that eats your bonus action that would normally be used for your offhand attack, so that's already accounted for and is still better with GWF.

ETA: Alternatively, you're referring to Reckless Attack which does nothing to damage calculations; it just allows you to attack with advantage, so it doesn't increase your average DPR. Well, it does because you're hitting more but that's neither here nor there.

Zelot is in xans.
Depending on targets AC, advantage can add a ton to DPR. Hard to put a solid Value on hit chance

[GreyBlack]

Zelot is in xans.
Depending on targets AC, advantage can add a ton to DPR. Hard to put a solid Value on hit chance


This, obviously, has a huge haping hole in the logic - in that barbarians can fight recklessly - chaning it from a 5 attack roll situation for the fighter to a 6 attack roll situation for the barbarian.


Yeah, I specifically was referring to this part.

[Willie the Duck]

Depending on targets AC, advantage can add a ton to DPR. Hard to put a solid Value on hit chance

I think he means that all the math laid out in-thread so far has been 'DPR, assuming you hit with every attack.'


Honestly, go Zealot. I've been playing one with two shortswords. The fact they get +1d6+half level on their first hit (not attack roll; hit), that really ramps up their damage, and allows them to skip reckless attack ... which at turn means there's no mitigating factor for the huge defense boost of rage.

The issue with this is that a 2HF zealot can also get the '+1d6+half level on their first hit (not attack roll; hit)' bonus. Sure, it is wasted if you hit with no attacks, but by level 5, the % chance of a round with no hits with 3 attacks vs. no hits with 2 attacks (especially when using reckless attack) becomes a relatively low amount of rounds. So it's not a situation that argues all that strongly towards TWF.

[Man_Over_Game]

Advantage grants about a +4 on the die from a roll. Assuming you have a 50% chance of hitting a target, this means that Advantage roughly increases your chance to hit by 33%.

Or, put in another way, Advantage increases your average damage by 1/3.

[Ranor95]

My takeaway from all of this is that TWF is in a rough spot overall. Especially for STR. One has to wonder if it could be addressed in someway. I've seen a few homebrew rules lying around but most either don't fix the issue or make TWF godlike.

[Misterwhisper]

My takeaway from all of this is that TWF is in a rough spot overall. Especially for STR. One has to wonder if it could be addressed in someway. I've seen a few homebrew rules lying around but most either don't fix the issue or make TWF godlike.

The only way that TWF will ever be worthwhile would be in a game that does not allow feats, and does not allow eberron content.
or in a game that will not last past level 5.

[GlenSmash!]

The only way that TWF will ever be worthwhile would be in a game that does not allow feats, and does not allow eberron content.
or in a game that will not last past level 5.

Even up to 10 I don't think it will be too bad. Especially if no one in the party is taking PAM (and yeah no double bladed crap.)

[djreynolds]

I recently played a strength based ranger.

Human variant, I took human prodigy at 1st and got expertise in athletics. At any time I could sacrifice one of my main attacks to prone someone

I took dual wielder at 4th

I didn't concentrate on hunter's mark all the time, but instead used hail of thorns, works with a bow or spear or hand axe or dagger

I later grab a level of fighter for defensive style. And I took hunter and horde breaker

[Man_Over_Game]

The only way that TWF will ever be worthwhile would be in a game that does not allow feats, and does not allow eberron content.
or in a game that will not last past level 5.

There are a few instances where TWF does rather well.

Abusing on-hit effects (like Hunter's Mark/Hex) can grant about +4 damage per hit
Forcing multiple Concentration Checks
Wielding multiple magical weapons

But mostly, it works well for characters who use ranged attacks.

Yes, you could be a Fighter with a Great Axe who deals +4 more damage a round in melee combat, or you could be the Dual Wield + Archer who gets two rounds off before the mosh pit. If the Dex character gets +15 damage in the initial skirmish while the Great Axe guy is waiting/dodging, the Great Axe guy is going to be hard-pressed to come out on top.

[Misterwhisper]

There are a few instances where TWF does rather well.

Abusing on-hit effects (like Hunter's Mark/Hex) can grant about +4 damage per hit
Forcing multiple Concentration Checks
Wielding multiple magical weapons

But mostly, it works well for characters who use ranged attacks.

Yes, you could be a Fighter with a Great Axe who deals +4 more damage a round in melee combat, or you could be the Dual Wield + Archer who gets two rounds off before the mosh pit. If the Dex character gets +15 damage in the initial skirmish while the Great Axe guy is waiting/dodging, the Great Axe guy is going to be hard-pressed to come out on top.

I am talking about twf the style.

Polearm master
Crossbow expert
Using a double scimitar especially with the broken feat that goes with it
And really every way in the game to get a bonus action attack is better than fighting with two weapons and the fighting style twf.

[MeeposFire]

Honestly it is not the damage that hurts TWF so much it is the action economy. Losing your bonus action on many classes is noticeable sacrifice and RAW TWF just does not really rise up to the level to require that. For instance TWF is the only style you cannot combine with warmagic on an EK. Two handed weapons, sword and shield, ranged combat all work with it but TWF EK fighters have to choose between using war magic and their fighting style and its not like TWF is better than the others. Same thing happens with hunters mark. All other fighting styles can cast it and then make use of it that same round using their style but TWF cast it and then cannot make use of their distinctive style until the next round (yes they still get their normal attacks but they are essentially operating the same as a single weapon user for that round and that is just sad). Also rage and things like second wind interfere with a TWF character but does not prevent the use of any other fighting style.

That being said I still find TWF fun especially on a barbarian though multiclassing barbarian, fighter, and rogue can be pretty sweet (though you do have to make compromises on your level progression).

[Misterwhisper]

Honestly it is not the damage that hurts TWF so much it is the action economy. Losing your bonus action on many classes is noticeable sacrifice and RAW TWF just does not really rise up to the level to require that. For instance TWF is the only style you cannot combine with warmagic on an EK. Two handed weapons, sword and shield, ranged combat all work with it but TWF EK fighters have to choose between using war magic and their fighting style and its not like TWF is better than the others. Same thing happens with hunters mark. All other fighting styles can cast it and then make use of it that same round using their style but TWF cast it and then cannot make use of their distinctive style until the next round (yes they still get their normal attacks but they are essentially operating the same as a single weapon user for that round and that is just sad). Also rage and things like second wind interfere with a TWF character but does not prevent the use of any other fighting style.

That being said I still find TWF fun especially on a barbarian though multiclassing barbarian, fighter, and rogue can be pretty sweet (though you do have to make compromises on your level progression).

All true.

Also as noted, every other form of bonus action leaves you a free hand if you have to have one for casting or In emergencies

[Man_Over_Game]

I am talking about twf the style.

Polearm master
Crossbow expert
Using a double scimitar especially with the broken feat that goes with it
And really every way in the game to get a bonus action attack is better than fighting with two weapons and the fighting style twf.

Polearm Master doesn't gain the benefits of a long range weapon, Crossbow Expert also has limited range in comparison to a Long Bow. The Double Scimitar is an unofficial item.

You can compare TWF without ranged weapons, but that's like comparing Polearm Master without considering the benefits of Heavy Armor, or Great Weapon Master without Reckless Attack.

Similarly, Eldritch Blast isn't a big deal unless you start including on-hit effects. For a full balance comparison, you gotta consider all the options.

[djreynolds]

IRL, would two-weapon fighting be optimal?

[GlenSmash!]

IRL, would two-weapon fighting be optimal?

I'm no historian, but as far as I can tell fighting with 2 melee weapons was more a dueling technique rather than battlefield technique.

I also don't think that should have much if any bearing on a fantasy game. I play D&D to be Conan it doesn't bother me if someone is playing Miyamoto Musashi.

[Man_Over_Game]

IRL, would two-weapon fighting be optimal?

According to our ongoing Real World Weapons/Military Questions thread, Miyamoto Musashi (Japan's most famous swordsman of all time) said that you use a sword in one hand to kill an easy target in one blow, two hands if it takes more than one blow, or a weapon in each when outnumbered. He'd practice with two weapons to become equally talented in both hands (mostly just to make things harder), but he'd still almost always prefer wielding one sword in combat.

It also seems that many duels required special rules as part of the challenge, including odd weapons or fighting style requirements. Sometimes, these would be things like "Must fight using the chair you sit on", or "Fight with a sword in each hand", and these would often be chosen to get an edge over your opponent. Sure, fighting with two swords is awkward as hell, but it'll be in your favor if you had practice with it when your opponent has not.

[Misterwhisper]

Polearm Master doesn't gain the benefits of a long range weapon, Crossbow Expert also has limited range in comparison to a Long Bow. The Double Scimitar is an unofficial item.

You can compare TWF without ranged weapons, but that's like comparing Polearm Master without considering the benefits of Heavy Armor, or Great Weapon Master without Reckless Attack.

Similarly, Eldritch Blast isn't a big deal unless you start including on-hit effects. For a full balance comparison, you gotta consider all the options.

None of the above options preclude you from using a ranged weapon.

Crossbow experts could easily just shoot someone with a long ow all day but they can bonus action shoot with a hand crossbow on the same turn they shoot one normally.

Also all those other options only need one weapon, no issues with drawing two weapons buying or finding two weapons and other issues.

1 hand crossbow for normal and bonus attack with a much better fighting style. Heck you don’t even need the style.

If they are far away, use a long bow, if they are closed use the hand crossbow, or just keep the longbow all the time.

Unless you plan to throw something at the enemy twf with melee weapons is even harder to switch to ranged.

If you have casting to do as well you could either take warcaster to cast with your hands full or just take a feat that lets you twf with one weapon.

You could also take levels in monk or go battlerager barbarian to bonus action attack with either unarmed as the monk or as the barbarian attack with your armor and use any weapon you want, could even go sword and shield.

Only actually twf has all the limitations.

It is the worst way to bonus action attack

[MeeposFire]

IRL, would two-weapon fighting be optimal?

By and large it is better than going with a single one handed weapon but generally if you are using a one handed weapon a shield beats it as the better 2nd hand option. It could defend yourself and could be used offensively in many cases (depending on the type of shield of course). Two handed weapons also had their uses on the battlefield and in those areas they are unmatched. Now if I had to choose between two shorter swords or just one take 2 because that second sword can be used to help defend yourself and makes them have to disarm you of both before you are unarmed (I guess the second weapon could also strike but generally from what i have seen the 2nd weapon was often used more for defensive purposes than offensive).

[djreynolds]

Perhaps it was the games intention that TWF is limited.

I have seen in the past, forum member give their homebrew rules and duelist style was strictly for 1 handed weapons only, no shield. In a game like this TWF then has more appeal

[Misterwhisper]

By and large it is better than going with a single one handed weapon but generally if you are using a one handed weapon a shield beats it as the better 2nd hand option. It could defend yourself and could be used offensively in many cases (depending on the type of shield of course). Two handed weapons also had their uses on the battlefield and in those areas they are unmatched. Now if I had to choose between two shorter swords or just one take 2 because that second sword can be used to help defend yourself and makes them have to disarm you of both before you are unarmed (I guess the second weapon could also strike but generally from what i have seen the 2nd weapon was often used more for defensive purposes than offensive).

Really depends on the weapons you have to choose from.

Ex. I would take one colichemarde over a pair of kama but I would take a pair of knives over a flail.
All just my personal preferences though.

Not a fan of big heavy weapons, I prefer fast and light or just a shortspear.

[Man_Over_Game]

Really depends on the weapons you have to choose from.

Ex. I would take one colichemarde over a pair of kama but I would take a pair of knives over a flail.
All just my personal preferences though.

Not a fan of big heavy weapons, I prefer fast and light or just a shortspear.

Best I can tell, the formula is really simple. Pick something long and light. The further away from your opponent you are, and the more lethal your attempts are, the better.

Hand Axe to Short Sword.
Short Sword to Long Sword.
Long Sword to Spear.
Continue improving upon this until you invent a gun.
Then make that gun able to shoot further, until you can hit someone a mile away.
Keep improving this until you can kill someone from halfway across the planet (missiles).


You can kind of see where our mindset is. Defenses are far more expensive than something small and fast, so as long as you can kill the thing before it can hurt you, you're winning. So we just got better at killing things before they can do anything about it.

[Eragon123]

Another angle to consider. It will be much easy to find a miniature for a dual wielding barbarian than an fighter.

If you are into that sort of thing.

[stoutstien]

Easy homebrew.
Switch the twf style and feat .+~1 damage and +1 ac is a good style
Add the ability to trade Advantage with bonus action attack for two attacks or an additional attack as a reaction if your worried it may actually catch up to Pam.

[Man_Over_Game]

One thing I've been considering for the sake of realism and how to use TWF is to have simplified Flanking rules implemented, and have TWF help deal with that.

For example, something like this:

When more than one enemy is adjacent to you, those enemies have +1 to hit you for each enemy adjacent to you. So if three enemies are adjacent to you, they have +3 to hit you. If you have a weapon or shield in your off-hand, reduce the flanking bonus by 1 (so 3 enemies adjacent to you would have +2 to hit you).

[GreyBlack]

According to our ongoing Real World Weapons/Military Questions thread, Miyamoto Musashi (Japan's most famous swordsman of all time) said that you use a sword in one hand to kill an easy target in one blow, two hands if it takes more than one blow, or a weapon in each when outnumbered. He'd practice with two weapons to become equally talented in both hands (mostly just to make things harder), but he'd still almost always prefer wielding one sword in combat.

It also seems that many duels required special rules as part of the challenge, including odd weapons or fighting style requirements. Sometimes, these would be things like "Must fight using the chair you sit on", or "Fight with a sword in each hand", and these would often be chosen to get an edge over your opponent. Sure, fighting with two swords is awkward as hell, but it'll be in your favor if you had practice with it when your opponent has not.

Musashi is probably not the best example in this, though; the Gorin No Sho was basically intended to communicate the secrets of his style, and probably half of what he wrote is not indicative of his actual style. For example, contemporary accounts indicate a discrepancy in his grip style. It's probably better looked at as a philosophical text rather than a descriptive swordsmanship manual.

Oh, hey, look at my background showing. Better hide that right now...

[Rukelnikov]

I calced the expected damage of Figters and Barbarians with and without rage. Both are Vhumans with TWF feat dualing longswords, Ftr has the style and eventually more attacks, Baba does reckless attack, ftr maxes str at 6, baba at 8, crits on 20 added 4.5 damage. No other class feature was taken into account:

Lvl 2: Barbarian is better against AC 11 and above, Raging Barbarian is always better.


Ftr

AC = 6, damage = 14.7
AC = 7, damage = 14.7
AC = 8, damage = 13.95
AC = 9, damage = 13.2
AC = 10, damage = 12.45
AC = 11, damage = 11.7
AC = 12, damage = 10.95
AC = 13, damage = 10.2
AC = 14, damage = 9.45
AC = 15, damage = 8.7
AC = 16, damage = 7.95
AC = 17, damage = 7.2
AC = 18, damage = 6.45
AC = 19, damage = 5.7
AC = 20, damage = 4.95
AC = 21, damage = 4.2
AC = 22, damage = 3.45
AC = 23, damage = 2.7
AC = 24, damage = 1.95
AC = 25, damage = 1.2
AC = 26, damage = 1.2

Baba

AC = 6, damage = 12.85
AC = 7, damage = 12.85
AC = 8, damage = 12.76
AC = 9, damage = 12.61
AC = 10, damage = 12.4
AC = 11, damage = 12.13
AC = 12, damage = 11.8
AC = 13, damage = 11.41
AC = 14, damage = 10.96
AC = 15, damage = 10.45
AC = 16, damage = 9.88
AC = 17, damage = 9.25
AC = 18, damage = 8.56
AC = 19, damage = 7.81
AC = 20, damage = 7.0
AC = 21, damage = 6.13
AC = 22, damage = 5.2
AC = 23, damage = 4.21
AC = 24, damage = 3.16
AC = 25, damage = 2.05
AC = 26, damage = 2.05

Baba Rage

AC = 6, damage = 16.84
AC = 7, damage = 16.84
AC = 8, damage = 16.72
AC = 9, damage = 16.52
AC = 10, damage = 16.24
AC = 11, damage = 15.88
AC = 12, damage = 15.44
AC = 13, damage = 14.92
AC = 14, damage = 14.32
AC = 15, damage = 13.64
AC = 16, damage = 12.88
AC = 17, damage = 12.04
AC = 18, damage = 11.12
AC = 19, damage = 10.12
AC = 20, damage = 9.04
AC = 21, damage = 7.88
AC = 22, damage = 6.64
AC = 23, damage = 5.32
AC = 24, damage = 3.92
AC = 25, damage = 2.44
AC = 26, damage = 2.44


Lvl 6: Barbarian is better against AC 16 and above, Raging Barbarian is always better.


Ftr

AC = 8, damage = 27.75
AC = 9, damage = 27.75
AC = 10, damage = 27.75
AC = 11, damage = 26.33
AC = 12, damage = 24.9
AC = 13, damage = 23.48
AC = 14, damage = 22.05
AC = 15, damage = 20.63
AC = 16, damage = 19.2
AC = 17, damage = 17.78
AC = 18, damage = 16.35
AC = 19, damage = 14.93
AC = 20, damage = 13.5
AC = 21, damage = 12.08
AC = 22, damage = 10.65
AC = 23, damage = 9.23
AC = 24, damage = 7.8
AC = 25, damage = 6.38
AC = 26, damage = 4.95
AC = 27, damage = 3.53
AC = 28, damage = 2.1
AC = 29, damage = 2.1

Baba

AC = 8, damage = 22.76
AC = 9, damage = 22.76
AC = 10, damage = 22.6
AC = 11, damage = 22.33
AC = 12, damage = 21.96
AC = 13, damage = 21.47
AC = 14, damage = 20.88
AC = 15, damage = 20.18
AC = 16, damage = 19.38
AC = 17, damage = 18.46
AC = 18, damage = 17.44
AC = 19, damage = 16.31
AC = 20, damage = 15.08
AC = 21, damage = 13.73
AC = 22, damage = 12.28
AC = 23, damage = 10.72
AC = 24, damage = 9.06
AC = 25, damage = 7.28
AC = 26, damage = 5.4
AC = 27, damage = 3.41
AC = 28, damage = 3.41
AC = 29, damage = 3.41

Baba Rage

AC = 8, damage = 28.75
AC = 9, damage = 28.75
AC = 10, damage = 28.54
AC = 11, damage = 28.2
AC = 12, damage = 27.72
AC = 13, damage = 27.1
AC = 14, damage = 26.34
AC = 15, damage = 25.45
AC = 16, damage = 24.42
AC = 17, damage = 23.25
AC = 18, damage = 21.94
AC = 19, damage = 20.5
AC = 20, damage = 18.92
AC = 21, damage = 17.2
AC = 22, damage = 15.34
AC = 23, damage = 13.35
AC = 24, damage = 11.22
AC = 25, damage = 8.95
AC = 26, damage = 6.54
AC = 27, damage = 4.0
AC = 28, damage = 4.0
AC = 29, damage = 4.0


Lvl 11: Barbarian is better against AC 22 and above, Raging Barbarian is better against AC 14 and above.


Ftr

AC = 10, damage = 37.0
AC = 11, damage = 37.0
AC = 12, damage = 35.1
AC = 13, damage = 33.2
AC = 14, damage = 31.3
AC = 15, damage = 29.4
AC = 16, damage = 27.5
AC = 17, damage = 25.6
AC = 18, damage = 23.7
AC = 19, damage = 21.8
AC = 20, damage = 19.9
AC = 21, damage = 18.0
AC = 22, damage = 16.1
AC = 23, damage = 14.2
AC = 24, damage = 12.3
AC = 25, damage = 10.4
AC = 26, damage = 8.5
AC = 27, damage = 6.6
AC = 28, damage = 4.7
AC = 29, damage = 2.8
AC = 30, damage = 2.8

Baba

AC = 10, damage = 24.76
AC = 11, damage = 24.76
AC = 12, damage = 24.58
AC = 13, damage = 24.29
AC = 14, damage = 23.88
AC = 15, damage = 23.35
AC = 16, damage = 22.7
AC = 17, damage = 21.94
AC = 18, damage = 21.06
AC = 19, damage = 20.06
AC = 20, damage = 18.94
AC = 21, damage = 17.71
AC = 22, damage = 16.36
AC = 23, damage = 14.89
AC = 24, damage = 13.3
AC = 25, damage = 11.6
AC = 26, damage = 9.78
AC = 27, damage = 7.84
AC = 28, damage = 5.78
AC = 29, damage = 3.61
AC = 30, damage = 3.61

Baba Rage

AC = 10, damage = 33.74
AC = 11, damage = 33.74
AC = 12, damage = 33.49
AC = 13, damage = 33.09
AC = 14, damage = 32.52
AC = 15, damage = 31.79
AC = 16, damage = 30.89
AC = 17, damage = 29.84
AC = 18, damage = 28.62
AC = 19, damage = 27.24
AC = 20, damage = 25.69
AC = 21, damage = 23.99
AC = 22, damage = 22.12
AC = 23, damage = 20.09
AC = 24, damage = 17.89
AC = 25, damage = 15.54
AC = 26, damage = 13.02
AC = 27, damage = 10.34
AC = 28, damage = 7.49
AC = 29, damage = 4.49
AC = 30, damage = 4.49


Lvl 20: Barbarian is better against AC 24 and above, Raging Barbarian is better against AC 16 and above.


Ftr

AC = 12, damage = 46.25
AC = 13, damage = 46.25
AC = 14, damage = 43.88
AC = 15, damage = 41.5
AC = 16, damage = 39.13
AC = 17, damage = 36.75
AC = 18, damage = 34.38
AC = 19, damage = 32.0
AC = 20, damage = 29.63
AC = 21, damage = 27.25
AC = 22, damage = 24.88
AC = 23, damage = 22.5
AC = 24, damage = 20.13
AC = 25, damage = 17.75
AC = 26, damage = 15.38
AC = 27, damage = 13.0
AC = 28, damage = 10.63
AC = 29, damage = 8.25
AC = 30, damage = 5.88
AC = 31, damage = 3.5
AC = 32, damage = 3.5
AC = 33, damage = 3.5
AC = 34, damage = 3.5

Baba

AC = 12, damage = 28.32
AC = 13, damage = 28.32
AC = 14, damage = 28.32
AC = 15, damage = 28.32
AC = 16, damage = 27.92
AC = 17, damage = 27.41
AC = 18, damage = 26.78
AC = 19, damage = 26.04
AC = 20, damage = 25.18
AC = 21, damage = 24.21
AC = 22, damage = 23.12
AC = 23, damage = 21.92
AC = 24, damage = 20.6
AC = 25, damage = 19.17
AC = 26, damage = 17.62
AC = 27, damage = 15.96
AC = 28, damage = 14.18
AC = 29, damage = 12.29
AC = 30, damage = 10.28
AC = 31, damage = 8.16
AC = 32, damage = 5.92
AC = 33, damage = 3.57
AC = 34, damage = 3.57

Baba Rage

AC = 12, damage = 40.1
AC = 13, damage = 40.1
AC = 14, damage = 40.1
AC = 15, damage = 40.1
AC = 16, damage = 39.44
AC = 17, damage = 38.63
AC = 18, damage = 37.66
AC = 19, damage = 36.54
AC = 20, damage = 35.26
AC = 21, damage = 33.83
AC = 22, damage = 32.24
AC = 23, damage = 30.5
AC = 24, damage = 28.6
AC = 25, damage = 26.55
AC = 26, damage = 24.34
AC = 27, damage = 21.98
AC = 28, damage = 19.46
AC = 29, damage = 16.79
AC = 30, damage = 13.96
AC = 31, damage = 10.98
AC = 32, damage = 7.84
AC = 33, damage = 4.55
AC = 34, damage = 4.55


Magic weapons make it more favorable for the fighter, I didn't do the calcs, but I guess its around +1 MW => +1-2 AC until baba is better, +2 => +3-4 AC until baba is better, +3 Weapon => +4-5 AC until baba is better