Barbarian Two Weapon Fighting

[elyktsorb]

In my ongoing quest to play a barbarian/druid I've come to two weapon fighting and wanted to ask people if they have experience with it and how well it worked out for them, Two Weapon Fighting as a Barbarian.

[Leon]

Haven't explicitly played it as a Barbarian but by and large TWF works the same for most classes that might be interested in it ~ Barbarian differences are in that depending on your subclass there may be more things you wish to do with your Bonus Action than swing an extra attack on any given turn.

My recent experience with TWF was with a Ranger and i found it to work very well, although i was DEX heavy and used shortswords, as a Barbarian your somewhat limited in that you need to be using Str if you want to get the rage bonus and that makes the Duelwielding feat a lot more attractive for the larger weapon dice in addition to the extra AC and draw capability. Staying with smaller weapons like Handaxes however will let you throw them if the need arises.

[Kane0]

Its not amazing but not terrible. On one hand you suffer from lack of access to the weapon style but on the other hand you have bonus damage from rage to make up for that, but on the gripping hand starting rage costs you your Bonus Action which is also used for TWF...

[elyktsorb]

Haven't explicitly played it as a Barbarian but by and large TWF works the same for most classes that might be interested in it ~ Barbarian differences are in that depending on your subclass there may be more things you wish to do with your Bonus Action than swing an extra attack on any given turn.

My recent experience with TWF was with a Ranger and i found it to work very well, although i was DEX heavy and used shortswords, as a Barbarian your somewhat limited in that you need to be using Str if you want to get the rage bonus and that makes the Duelwielding feat a lot more attractive for the larger weapon dice in addition to the extra AC and draw capability. Staying with smaller weapons like Handaxes however will let you throw them if the need arises.

Well for the first point, I was thinking about Zealot Barbarian as part of my choices, because getting an additional 1d6 + half level, on an attack feels nice, and TWF would make the most sense to be able to get it as often as possible and it also ties into my want for more attacks for spore rider damage.

As for the second point, Duel wielder is neat, but it's not really a big thing imo. At most you move up from a d6 to a d8 (unless there's a weapon I don't know about that you can wield in 1 hand that does a d10 of damage)

Additionally, since I'm being a Druid/Barbarian, I could use Shillelagh on a Club (just use a club and a handaxe) And that would give me a weapon with a d8 of damage since Shillelagh makes the clubs damage die a d8 outright and allows you to choose between strength or your spellcasting ability for the attack, and being a barb I'd use strength.

Admittedly that's another bonus action thing in my cavalcade of bonus action things going on. But I'm not overtly worried about that since it's not that big of a deal.

Ultimately if I took dual wielder, it would mostly be for the AC, and at that point I could probably just up my Con instead.

[Crucius]

When going for damage, I think two weapon fighting is quickly overshadowed by a polearm master barbarian, which gives you the same action economy for higher damage, reach, and a neat reaction option.

You mentioned going Zealot so you have up to three chances to land the extra damage. While true that having the extra attack is nice for landing at least one hit, with Reckless advantage I doubt the third attack is necessary a lot of the time. If you don't plan on using reckless that often, then two weapon fighting becomes more worthwhile for sure.

The main benefit I see with two weapon fighting is in conjunction with throwable weapons and the Ancestral Guardian subclass, which allows you to 'tag' an enemy with the spirits at range, before continuing shredding the target in front of you in melee.

[Pildion]

In my ongoing quest to play a barbarian/druid I've come to two weapon fighting and wanted to ask people if they have experience with it and how well it worked out for them, Two Weapon Fighting as a Barbarian.

Sadly in 5e, Two Weapon Fighting is almost never the answer =(

Barbarian is really made for big hitting weapons, Reckless Attack works better when paired with Great Weapon Master to make up for the -5atk and bringing alot of damage.

[stoutstien]

Sadly in 5e, Two Weapon Fighting is almost never the answer =(

Barbarian is really made for big hitting weapons, Reckless Attack works better when paired with Great Weapon Master to make up for the -5atk and bringing alot of damage.

Not necessarily. Thanks to rage damage being static per hit they actually do get decent value from twf (and it decreases the value of GWM) as long as they don't invest in it. Getting an extra attack just by picking up two weapons is a big deal when you compare it to the feat cost GWM has in its corner. Most of time you are getting less than ~10 DPR which is ain't much to write home about.

Just don't invest in it and it's fine.

[strangebloke]

TWF is great at low levels for barbarians. The high accuracy and early second attack combined with rage damage is really really good and requires zero race or feat investment, so you can swap it out for a greatsword or whatever later on. You can take a level of fighter for the style if you want and then trade the style for something else later, or you can not do that. Either is fine!

Barbarians have few uses for BA, which is conventionally why PAM is so good for them, but it also makes them one of the better TWF classes.

[Frogreaver]

I have played a TWF barbarian/rogue and this was before you could take the feat for the TWF style.

I highly recommend this.

Also, Since barbarians won’t be bonus action attacking due to bonus action raging in turn 1 they don’t really need the dual wielded feat.

[Amechra]

It should work just fine. That said, you might want to pick up the Dual Wielder feat early (ideally as part of your race), and dual-wield Versatile weapons.

Then you can two-hand your "main" weapon on the turn when you Rage — going from 1d6+Str+2/3/4 to 1d10+Str+2/3/4 is basically just a QOL thing.

EDIT: I just noticed that Frogreaver just posted and said not to take Dual Wielder. :p

[diplomancer]

If you get the Dual Wielder feat and use your Druidic power to befriend a mount, you can dual wield lances.

[Psyren]

This works fine but I'm curious about what the druid levels are doing. You don't want to crowd your bonus action or impact your rage progression too much.

[loki_ragnarock]

I can't speak to the specifics of adding druid levels in, but basic TWF is pretty dope before you get extra attack on the barbarian progression. The extra accuracy, especially when enhanced by rage bonuses, makes for a greater output than just swinging a greataxe outside of specific edge cases.
Just don't play a Berserker and you're fine. But no one wanted to play those, anyway.

It even works pretty well after if you're a player who likes versatility. For me, I had alot of fun two weapon fighting until I ran out of rages and then sheathing the off-hand for a shield to turtle up afterwards, or to leave it sheathed if I needed to do some grappling. This way you can run off of your main hand enchanted weapon and switch out the off-hand to meet your needs, something you can't well do with a two hander as the opportunity cost is... not using your magic two handed sword. With a one handed weapon, all those options are supplemental, but with a two handed weapon they are substitutions.

So long as you don't specialize, you can get alot of utility out of it.

Sure, a barbarian with a great axe and GWM will outdamage you... but screw that, you can spend your feats learning how to Misty Step, or spot traps easily, or other stuff that lets you interact with the game more broadly.

As for how druid will interact, there? Not the greatest, I would think; if you plan on relying on shillelagh, that's alot of competition for your bonus actions; a bonus action to cast, a bonus action to rage, a bonus action to finally attack with the off hand. I don't see it working out that two weapon fighting is going to be up there on your list of things to do. Add to the needing a free hand for the somatic and material components, and shillelagh and two weapons becomes an increasingly meh option.
I don't think it'll work well for that specific build, but if you wanted to have an option to compensate for delayed extra attack? It works, I'm just not sure it'll synergize.

[elyktsorb]

This works fine but I'm curious about what the druid levels are doing. You don't want to crowd your bonus action or impact your rage progression too much.

The way I'm doing this, Barbarian will likely go to 5 or 6, maybe 8 for the ASI. Then It will primarily be Druid.



Just don't play a Berserker and you're fine. But no one wanted to play those, anyway.


As for how druid will interact, there? Not the greatest, I would think; if you plan on relying on shillelagh, that's alot of competition for your bonus actions; a bonus action to cast, a bonus action to rage, a bonus action to finally attack with the off hand. I don't see it working out that two weapon fighting is going to be up there on your list of things to do. Add to the needing a free hand for the somatic and material components, and shillelagh and two weapons becomes an increasingly meh option.
I don't think it'll work well for that specific build, but if you wanted to have an option to compensate for delayed extra attack? It works, I'm just not sure it'll synergize.

I mean, I did briefly consider Berseker since I'm playing a Druid, but even if I eventually get Greater Restoration, that's level 9, and I could only Frenzy once per long rest without any downside. So that isn't really an option.

Shillelagh would mostly be for lower levels anyway I wager, all it really does is make a weapon go from d6 to d8, which isn't really a big deal, 2 damage, and make a weapon magic, which might matter more in a multiclass with delayed progression.

For the record, I want to be a Spore druid for more damage on attacks. I understand the temp hp thing and such, I am not overly concerned and will find out how well I can keep it up.

Beast Barbarian is on the table because Claws means I don't have to worry about TWF stuff, but if I can still do TWF with other subclasses, then I don't think Beast is really that good, because for instance, Zealot can have as many attacks as a Beast Barbarian with TWF, and has the 1d6+half level necrotic/radiant damage per round on hit.

So I'd ultimately do more damage as a Zealot TWF than as a Beast relying on Claws, even if Claws gets both attacks in the first turn, Zealot makes up for that with that 1d6, provided the first attack hits.

Totem Barbarian is something I'm considering for the Eagle totem at 3rd level, because I am not operating this Barbarian like a tank and more like a skirmisher.

Wild Magic Barbarian I'm completely unsure of how to approach, it seems like it could be good for what I want. For instance, one of the 'surges' they get gives one of your weapons the Light property while Raging. This means that you could have a d8 weapon that becomes light and then works with another light weapon you have without taking Dual Wielding. Another is a bonus action teleport. These are great effects, but I can't really build around them because you randomly get them when you rage. I think I could work around most of them though.

[LudicSavant]

Just don't invest in it and it's fine.

Adding to this, here's what I had to say about making TWF builds a while ago:


You can -- and should -- make your TWF builds without the Dual Wielder feat or the TWF Fighting Style.

(Snip)

The better TWF builds are generally those that take advantage of this low overhead. For example, the TWF competitor for PAM isn't "a guy with the Dual Wielder feat." It's a guy who got their bonus action attack without a feat, and therefore had space to get something like Inspiring Leader or Fey-Touched or Elven Accuracy or something that is competitive with PAM.

In fact, I'd say the best classes for TWFing are often the ones that don't even get access to the fighting style (like Rogue, Paladin, or even Barbarian).

and in another thread...


The point of TWFing is its low overhead -- you can get a bonus action attack to apply your Hunter's Mark and Improved Divine Smite and such to without spending a precious ASI. If you're taking the Dual-Wielder feat, you are taking that ASI, throwing it in the garbage, and lighting it on @#$%ing fire. Why? Because all you got from that ASI is a worse version of RB or PAM.

Instead, TWFing is an option for people who would rather do things like, say, max Charisma ASAP, or get Inspiring Leader, or the like. People keep assuming that they need to take Dual-Wielder and the TWF Fighting Style in order to TWF. Do not be those people. Use that ASI you didn't have to spend to get your bonus action attack on something that is actually worth an ASI. Use that Fighting Style to get Blind-Fighting or something. This is the way.

Basically, TWFing itself is not so bad, taking the Dual Wielder feat or the Fighting Style is.

[kazaryu]

Well for the first point, I was thinking about Zealot Barbarian as part of my choices, because getting an additional 1d6 + half level, on an attack feels nice, and TWF would make the most sense to be able to get it as often as possible and it also ties into my want for more attacks for spore rider damage.
keep in mind, the zealot barb extra damge is 1/rounds. specifically the first creature you hit on your turn. So while getting several attacks is good, like the rogue, it increases the odds of getting the extra damage, you're not actually proccing it multiple times per turn.

[elyktsorb]

keep in mind, the zealot barb extra damge is 1/rounds. specifically the first creature you hit on your turn. So while getting several attacks is good, like the rogue, it increases the odds of getting the extra damage, you're not actually proccing it multiple times per turn.

Yes, I mention further down that it is a per round, and not a per attack, bonus. But having that per round bonus means that doing Zealot as TWF is actually better than Beast's Claws, since even though you can't do the bonus action attack with Zealot first turn, unlike Beast where you get both claw attacks first turn, if you hit the Zealot attack, you get an additional d6 on it, so it's like you did the same damage as a Beast Barbarian in the first turn. After that, you get the same amount of attacks as a Beast Barbarian, but also still have the additional 1d6, which puts you ahead of a Beast Barbarian's claw attack.

In fact it's even better than that, because in practice, a Zealot only has to hit once to achieve relatively similar damage to a Beast Barbarian's 2 claws, and given both the Claw and the Zealot's attacks will be made with the same modifiers to hit, this means a Zealot should be doing more consistent damage.

Which I think means I can drop Beast from consideration at all.

[strangebloke]

Basically, TWFing itself is not so bad, taking the Dual Wielder feat or the Fighting Style is.

SLIGHT disagree, insofar as its possible retrain fighting style. So you can pick TWF style as a level 1 fighter, then retrain the style to dueling at level 4. Fighting styles aren't a marriage contract anymore, or at least, divorce has been made easier.

[LudicSavant]

SLIGHT disagree, insofar as its possible retrain fighting style. So you can pick TWF style as a level 1 fighter, then retrain the style to dueling at level 4. Fighting styles aren't a marriage contract anymore, or at least, divorce has been made easier.

True. It's not a bad Fighting Style specifically at levels 1-3.

[RogueJK]

When going for damage, I think two weapon fighting is quickly overshadowed by a polearm master barbarian

Or Longtooth Shifter Barbarian.

Both of those offer superior options for BA 3rd attacks.

[elyktsorb]

Or Longtooth Shifter Barbarian.

Both of those offer superior options for BA 3rd attacks.

I would probably be doing this if I hadn't already decided to be a halfling.

[RogueJK]

I would probably be doing this if I hadn't already decided to be a halfling.

PAM is still an option on a Halfling. Use a Quarterstaff or Spear.

And unlike TWF, you can still use a Shield while PAMing with a Staff/Spear.

[strangebloke]

Actually the worst thing about TWF is magic weapons. You're going to waste two attunement lost on having two magic weapons? Good Grief!

[elyktsorb]

PAM is still an option on a Halfling. Use a Quarterstaff or Spear.

And unlike TWF, you can still use a Shield while PAMing with a Staff/Spear.

Doesn't that bring your Staff/Spear down to a d6 though? Since you can't wield them 2 handed while holding a shield in one hand.

The way I see it is.

Two Weapon Fighting (The fighting style) gives you and additional +STR to your bonus action attack. (consequently, you can't wield a shield as well)

Dual Wielding lets both of your weapons be d8's, overall this is probably worse later in the game when you have items to give you higher STR than a +5, but it also gives you +1 AC, which somewhat mitigates the lack of a shield.

Polearm Master gives you a d4 bonus attack with STR mod, and the ability to OA creatures that come into your reach. This also allows you to keep a shield, but your staff/spear can't go above a d6 in damage. (Playing a halfling, so the other weapons wouldn't matter, nor would they let you hold a shield either.)

To me, this all looks very similar in terms of what you get. TWF Style and PAM probably mean the most if the game gets into higher levels.

The only relevant Barbarian related thing I can think of that factors into this is Wild Magic Barbarians and they're 1 ability that can activate when they rage, which gives 1 of your weapons the Light property. Which only benefits the Two Weapon Fighting style, as it would temporarily allow you to wield a d8 weapon, such as a Flail, and still Two Weapon Fight with it. Which is such a niche thing to mention both because that would mean having to have the d8 weapon in your hand when you Rage, as well as the 1 in 8 chance of actually getting that particular effect when you Rage.

Druid wise (since this is also a druid) PAM is more flexible, given that a Druid's spell focus can literally just be a staff, and shillelagh means that the d6 attack could be a d8. Though this would have to be done before you rage, so probably something that only happens on occasion due to layout and setup.

Though a Druid's spell focus can also be a totem or a sprig of mistletoe, I don't think any dm would have issue with you putting those on a necklace, or just tying mistletoe to your weapons in order to make that work. Of course the spells that require a hand to be free to cast would be a problem. But unless the situation is absolutely dire and I have to cast X spell to make sure we don't die, I likely won't be spellcasting during combat anyway, more than likely before or after, and primarily with healing or utility spells.

So while this is probably the most important point, I'm not sure 'how' important of a point it is yet.



Actually the worst thing about TWF is magic weapons. You're going to waste two attunement lost on having two magic weapons? Good Grief!

With the setup I have, if it works, I could have Zealots 1d6 Necrotic or Radiant Damage per round, and could have Spore's 1d6 Necrotic damage, per attack. So I feel like I would primarily aim for other magic items, but having 2 magic weapons could also be pretty neat depending on what they do.

[kazaryu]

Actually the worst thing about TWF is magic weapons. You're going to waste two attunement lost on having two magic weapons? Good Grief!

+# weapons don't require attunement...in fact there are a decent number of magic weapons that don't. at least..based on browsing DnDbeyond.

[strangebloke]

+# weapons don't require attunement...in fact there are a decent number of magic weapons that don't. at least..based on browsing DnDbeyond.

sure but the whole point of TWF historically was leveraging magic weapons for more attacks for getting big damage. It's a niche high investment strategy but it doesn't pay off as well as it should because it doesn't work with the best weapons.

[RogueJK]

Doesn't that bring your Staff/Spear down to a d6 though?

Without the Dual Wielder feat, you're limited to Light weapons while TWF, the biggest of which are d6 anyway.


To me, this all looks very similar in terms of what you get.

Assuming 18 STR on a Level 5 Halfling Barbarian, compare...

Baseline of 2x shortswords/light hammers/handaxes:
- 3d6+8 damage potential over 3x attacks (18.5 average)

2x shortswords with TWF Fighting Style from the Fighting Initiate feat
- Adds 4 damage to your 1d6 BA attack from STR bonus
- 3d6+12 potential (22.5 average)

Dual Wielder feat with 2x Longswords
- Adds up to 3 damage (+1 to each of your three attacks, by using 1d8 weapons instead of 1d6)
- 3d8+8 potential (21.5 average)
- Plus +1 AC

Polearm Master with Staff/Spear and Shield
- Adds effectively 3 damage to your BA attack (+4 from STR, but -1 from 1d4 instead of 1d6)
- 2d6+1d4+12 potential (21.5 average)
- Plus additional Reaction attack
- Plus +2 AC from a shield

(Rage damage is a wash... All four examples have 3x attacks per turn, so all could apply the Rage damage bonus equally.)


So in the grand scheme, PAM puts you +1 AC and equal damage compared to Dual Wielder, and +2 AC and -1 damage per turn compared to TWF style. Plus PAM gets that frequent Reaction attack to land an additional 4th tick of 1d6+STR+Rage damage in many rounds. PAM is the clear winner in my book.


If you go further and invest in two feats, at both Barbarian 4 and 8, you can combine TWF style and Dual Wielder. This adds another +4 to your BA attack and bumps your potential damage to 3d8+12 (25.5 average), but costs you a 2nd ASI, which could have instead been used to boost STR to 20, for +3 damage potential (24.5) in a turn plus a +1 higher attack bonus to more frequently land more of your potential damage. PAM and +2 STR is still the winner here.

[elyktsorb]

- Plus a frequent additional Reaction attack
- Plus +2 AC from a shield


These are probably the 2 most important things.

The first is important, because, if the build is working correctly, that reaction attack gets an additional 1d6 necrotic (spore druid), in fact, it's probably much better than that, because this means I have more chances to get that 1d6 extra damage because I can do it before an enemy attacks me, and possibly removes my temp hp.

+2 AC is quite good for my purposes of not wanting to be hit.

Those alone are the most compelling reasons to pick PAM. +3 damage overall is eh.

Currently the main possible benefit to wielding 2 weapons, is if I get 2 magic weapons that are worth using both at the same time. But that's a very minor point.

So, I may ultimately end up getting PAM, though until I hit level 4 in 1 class, I'll likely be TWFing.

[animewatcha]

Just to throw a couple of extra options.

Double scimitar + Revenant blade feat.
Beast Barb with two-weapon fighting feat can use claws to attack 4 times a round.

[stoutstien]

True. It's not a bad Fighting Style specifically at levels 1-3.

Neither is the feat at that point honestly as long as it didn't cost you. E.g a table that adds free first lv feats or those who use first lv feats with the exception of half feats.

[sithlordnergal]

As for the second point, Duel wielder is neat, but it's not really a big thing imo. At most you move up from a d6 to a d8 (unless there's a weapon I don't know about that you can wield in 1 hand that does a d10 of damage)


There IS a weapon you can wield in 1 hand that deals 1d10 damage. However, you need to be mounted to use it. XD You can dual wield Lances if you're riding on a mount.

[elyktsorb]

There IS a weapon you can wield in 1 hand that deals 1d10 damage. However, you need to be mounted to use it. XD You can dual wield Lances if you're riding on a mount.

Also requires not being a small race

[x3n0n]

Also requires not being a small race

I don't think that's true: lance has reach and special, but not heavy.

[elyktsorb]

There IS a weapon you can wield in 1 hand that deals 1d10 damage. However, you need to be mounted to use it. XD You can dual wield Lances if you're riding on a mount.


I don't think that's true: lance has reach and special, but not heavy.

I stand corrected but it also deals 1d12 damage, not 1d10.

[sithlordnergal]

Also requires not being a small race

That's even better if you're a small race! Cause then you can get a medium sized mount and ride it in dungeons

[diplomancer]

That's even better if you're a small race! Cause then you can get a medium sized mount and ride it in dungeons

Clawfoot Raptor is CR 1/2 (like a Warhorse). See if your DM lets you ride one :)