Is two-weapon fighting any good in 5e?
>>46355881
It is definitely passable. Especially if you buff up your modifier to DMG.
Is two-headed fighting any good in 5e?
Is two-handed weapon fighting any good in 5e?
>>46355881
It's okay. The higher level you are the more ineffective it is relative to other styles.
>>46356040
Heavy weapons can put out the most damage in the game by a large margin, so yes.
>>46356040
Two-handing a large weapon has always been good. It will never not be good.
>>46356143
Is there any real difference between using a greatsword vs. a greataxe, or are all large martial weapons pretty much the same?
>>46356195
Greataxe is good for critical damage, it even become better if you are Barbarian or Champion Fighter.
Greatsword and Maul do average damage of 7 and it become better with help of fighting style Great Weapon Fighting.
>>46356195
It comes down to simple probability math
The Greatsword with its 2d6 has higher chances to roll 6-8 damage, beeing rather consistent and reliable. Also it always gets at least 2 damage.
The Greataxe with 1d12 has almost the same range of results, but each result has the same chance of occuring. This means the damage will vary a lot more and you either roll shit or destroy stuff with a bunch of 10+.
>want to play a swashbuckler
>look up the Swashbuckler archetype
>there's a sidebar explaining how it was designed for two-weapon fighting
Why?
>>46355881
It's considered weaker compared to other fighting styles but it works perfectly fine. It's also the quickest way to gain two attacks. It has +1 AC over 2h users
>>46356584
The rapier and the dagger? Or the main gauche and the side gauche?Are those the right terms?
>>46356870
>main gauche
Main gauche translates to left hand, and since most people are right handed, it's named that because it's an off hand weapon.
>>46357013
Ah. Right. Never got into fencing enough to learn the terms.
Still, you get my point.
>>46356870
>The rapier and the dagger?
That's what I thought, but guess what? The rapier doesn't have the "light" property.
You can use two-weapon fighting with two scimitars, but not a rapier and a dagger.
>>46357184
Only the second one must be light
>>46357213
Nope.
>Two-Weapon Fighting
>When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you’re holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you’re holding in the other hand. You don’t add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
>>46357213
They both have to be, unless you have Dual Wielder, then neither have to be.
>>46357184
>>46357213
>>46357274
If the rules suck, change them.
House rules are a thing.
>>46357515
Of course, I just don't understand why this is the case.
They tested this archetype with UA, and yet it barely feels like the archetypal swashbuckler.
>>46357597
You don't have to dual wield as a Swashbuckler, the archetype is just good at it. Rapier and Main-Gauche two weapon fighting not being a thing is a problem with the core rules, not Swashbuckler specific.
>>46355881
Better than in dungeon world.
>>46356143
Two-handing sucked in 4E, though. Also Basic D&D, where it was pretty damn bad.
I'm not really sure how good it was in AD&D, but from a cursory glance at the Weapon vs. AC and damage vs. size tables they look alright? They're fairly accurate, hit hard, and will most likely strike first on a charge. I don't think the magic item tables have that good support for non-longswords, though.
3E and 5E are the only ones where I know for a fact that two-handing is the way to go, although it's for different reasons. AC in 3e is a fool's game, for instance, and the Power Attack multiplication was real.
>>46357740
It's still pretty good for avoiding those opportunity attacks in a cleverly limited way, I just find it really odd how they focus on two-weapon fighting to the point of having a sidebar explaining it.
Do an image search for swashbuckler, there's a few drawings of characters holding a gun and a sword, or a rapier and a dagger, but the majority of the artwork shows a character holding one sword.
Why not bake in some limited Extra Attack type feature where you can make an extra attack with a finesse weapon as a bonus action?
I know, house rules, I just find this a really bizarre design decision. It fits Drizzt more than "duelists and pirates".
It's great for Rangers, solid for dex-based Fighters, and just sorta average for anyone else. Shields are useful too, though.
>>46357906
>I just find it really odd how they focus on two-weapon fighting to the point of having a sidebar explaining it.
The sidebar is the only thing that focuses on dual wielding, and that just explains that fancy footwork lets you dual wield and avoid attacks of opportunity, not that it's the be all end all of the archetype. What I would do, is take a level or two of fighter with this for the Mariner fighting style to get a climb and swim speed, and dash every turn to climb and swim around like a madman while still not getting counter poked by the guy I ran in and stabbed before climbing the mast or whatever.
>>46358115
It says it in the introductory paragraphs too:
>A Swashbuckler excels in single combat, and can fight with two weapons while safely darting away from an opponent.
Yes you can read all this as optional, but why doesn't this apply to single weapons too? That's what the classic swashbuckling characters are known for.
And if you want multiple attacks, add it to those weapons. Swashbucklers are fancy and fast, so that bonus action (important to rogues) could be used to get another swing in with your rapier. Maybe add some condition, like it's only if you miss with a previous attack.
You're probably right about multiclassing into fighter though. You could even just grab the Dueling fighting style, which feels more swashbuckler to me.
Polearm mastery is better two weapon fighting than twf itself. With polearm mastery you also get another attack with the buttspike, but you also benefit from polearm's bigger damage die, reach and combo with sentinel cheese. Only thing it doesn't have is +1 ac.
Polearm mastery even has its own fighting style now in UA with Tunnel Fighter
>>46357889
Two handing was great in 4e, considering how most tactics involved setting up nova rounds and abusing the hell out of leaders.
Of course, it came with a feat tax for Fullblade, Greatspear etc.
>>46358285
More importantly than Sentinel, they qualify for Great Weapon Mastery.
So you can slap +10 damage onto that 1d4 butt strike roll.
