TWF redux thoughts after table time

[stoutstien]

so i have been testing a few house rules lately and after having 5 players with a hand full of different build try this out i think i am finally happy with it.


base rule change: anyone can draw/stow two weapons as a single free action if they have free hands.

fighting style change: weapons no longer need to be light to be duel wielded. +1AC while have separate weapons in each hands

feat:
add ability modifier to offhand attack.
If you have advantage on the bonus action attack you can choose to forgo the advantage to make an additional attack as part of the same action.

weapon master feat change:
can choose +1 str or dex and one fighting style from the fighters list



so far we have tried a twf vs one handed and thd versions of each of the following
totem barbarian
battle master fighter (this one was very strong due to generating advantage. got within 5% of GWM user alot.)
champion fighter
swashbuckler rouge (also went against a BB build)
hunter ranger
devotion paladin

so far every time twf out damages 1hd but is behind 2hd and is below 1hd in AC and above 2hd.

conditions to note:
no magic weapons
fights fluctuated from 2-8 rounds with 2-10 fights per adventuring day. short fights favor 2hd/1hd but if the fights where longer than 4 rounds twf could pull ahead especially with lots of low/mid heath npcs to hit.
no multi classing was used

[Man_Over_Game]

I like that, once you have all the TWF bonuses, it's basically the same thing as the current TWF build.

My one concern is that basing the bonus off of advantage makes some builds MUCH better than others.

For example, how exactly does a Ranger compete with TWF compared to a Barbarian? Or, in your example, the Battlemaster Fighter?

One thing I could see is something like "When you make an attack that's eligible for Two Weapon Fighting, you can spend your Bonus Action to roll another d20 to the attack roll. If one roll is high enough to hit, you make two attacks that both hit." It deals less damage than your example, but it has more accuracy, which gives it a different niche than Heavy-Weapons or Sword-And-Board. With this wording, having Advantage would result in another d20, but wouldn't increase the damage output (limiting class-specific favoritism).

[Bjarkmundur]

I've seen so many Houserules regarding two-weapon fighting, the fighting style and the dual wielder feat. I've never seen any of them used, what is the fundamental problem that people are trying to solve?

[stoutstien]

I like that, once you have all the TWF bonuses, it's basically the same thing as the current TWF build.

My one concern is that basing the bonus off of advantage makes some builds MUCH better than others.

For example, how exactly does a Ranger compete with TWF compared to a Barbarian? Or, in your example, the Battlemaster Fighter?

One thing I could see is something like "When you make an attack eligible for Two Weapon Fighting, you can spend your Bonus Action to roll a second attack roll. If one roll is high enough, you make two attacks that both hit." It deals less damage than your example, but it has more accuracy, which gives it a different niche than Heavy-Weapons or Sword-And-Board.
I didn't do a lot of cross class comparisons only class compared to other weapon focused builds in the same class.

Rangers are in a rough spot when it comes to bonus actions conflicts.

I have a player going to test run it with gloom stalker seems to be the most open as far as that's concerned.

I went with the advantage trade because I wanted something that allowed the twf to increase damage spike like GWM or SS but not as boring as Trading hit for damage.

[Man_Over_Game]

I've seen so many Houserules regarding two-weapon fighting, the fighting style and the dual wielder feat. I've never seen any of them used, what is the fundamental problem that people are trying to solve?

Compare it to Polearm Master (which works well with Sentinel, Great Weapon Master and Spellcasting). Assuming that the PAM Reaction-based attack only activates once every 2 turns (for 50% damage) and you have a +4 mod and a single attack, you're jumping from 9.5 damage per round to 23.5

TWF, when getting the Fighting Style and the feat, goes from 11 damage per round to 17. The AC bonus from DW does count for something, but since we're applying Fighting Styles, PAM can just pick up the +1 AC Fighting Style and be better than TWF in virtually every way. TWF also continues to get weaker the more Extra Attacks you have when the Halberd is one of the best weapons with Extra Attack.

The only time TWF would be a "competitive" choice with RAW is if feats weren't allowed. Even then, it starts becoming less valuable after level 5.

-------------

Of course, this is all under the assumption that you're strictly going TWF and comparing it against melee combatants without considering ranged options. The fact that you can use Ranged Weapons and TWF with the same character is enough of a validation for me. If the DM lets the ranged characters get 2 or so attacks off before the melee specialists can, you'll find that the TWF comes out on top.

[Kane0]

I've seen so many Houserules regarding two-weapon fighting, the fighting style and the dual wielder feat. I've never seen any of them used, what is the fundamental problem that people are trying to solve?

In a vacuum TWF isn't bad, but when you start encountering more things to do with your bonus action and especially add feats into the mix it doesn't keep pace with other options. It is also the only weapon option that introduces extra caveats like light weapons only and no stat to damage, encouraging you to spend resources to get what other styles have by default (exception: small creatures using two-handers).
The challenge is in fixing this elegantly so that it A: isn't outright UP or OP (especially at lower levels), B: doesn't favor some builds over others and C: doesn't just mimic other fighting styles

[Misterwhisper]

Double bladed scimitar made TWF style and use completely useless. Revenant blade absolutely puts the nail in the coffin.

[jh12]

totem barbarian
battle master fighter (this one was very strong due to generating advantage. got within 5% of GWM user alot.)


I'm surprised the totem barbarian wasn't similar.

[Kane0]

Double bladed scimitar made TWF style and use completely useless. Revenant blade absolutely puts the nail in the coffin.

I would argue those were attempts to address it without retconning the PHB, like with UA and Xan's ranger.

[Misterwhisper]

I would argue those were attempts to address it without retconning the PHB, like with UA and Xan's ranger.

If that was the plan they failed horribly.

Instead of fixing two weapon fighting work, they just made sure nobody will ever take it again or dual wielder.

[stoutstien]

I'm surprised the totem barbarian wasn't similar.
The Barbarian losing out on the first round due to rage activation keep this from happening. During non raged fights hand axe tossing was very effective

[Kane0]

If that was the plan they failed horribly.

Instead of fixing two weapon fighting work, they just made sure nobody will ever take it again or dual wielder.

Some might argue that is a fix :smallamused:
I'm not saying the devs are perfect, and in many regards their hands are more tied than we who can merrily homebrew away the problem. They can't simply rerelease the PHB without a 5.5 edition, there would be terrible power creep vibes if they address it in splat, and errata is only capable of so much. Releasing unofficial alternatives that are like TWF but not really is one avenue they have open to them.