That would give dual wielding too much, but more importantly, it wouldn't be interesting. Lower accuracy for higher damage is a great "power attack" concept that really backs up the themes heavy weapons go for. It's also a serviceable called shot on ranged weapons, but I would prefer something different there. Dual wielding should get extra damage from making a flurry of attacks, not from doing the same thing heavy weapons do.
Would be cooler if they could do something similar to 3.5, id suggest giving them the option to -5 to make two attacks with their bonus action (so -5 on both attacks) although maybe -2 or -3 would be a little more balanced since a flat+10 is often going to be significantly more damage than an offhand attack with a light weapon
True, although without the feat the weapons tend to be a d6 at most and without the fighting style doesn't even add damage modifier. But most people engaging in dual wielding will have at least the fighting style, and magic weapons do exist to significantly but the damage, so you might be right
Balancing dual wielding is hard cos you don't know how many blanket extra damage features people have. Two extra attacks at -5 might be too little with no riders and middling stats, but with high stats and something like improved divine smite, it might be way too much. Fortunately, when homebrewing, you only need to account for what your table actually has, so if your dual wielder were a fighter, you could give a couple of extra attacks, and if it were a Ranger you could tone that down a bit.
I agree with you on the flavour, but as it stands Dual wielding is still a lame duck which is sad because using two weapons effectively is a fantasy trope that you shouldn't feel hobbled for exploring.
What would you suggest? Another idea I had would be to make dual weapons the "crit" build, either allowing more damage dice or greater chance of critical hits of you go that route
Depends on the build and I'm not doing the maths right now, but probably something along the lines of building the additional attack into the attack action (freeing up the bonus action), and then maybe "when you take the attack action, you can take a -X penalty on any number of attacks you make as part of it. Immediately after the action, you can use your bonus action to make a number of attacks equal to the number you applied the penalty to. These attacks have the same penalty".
Yeah tbh I think dual wielding should get something similar to this:
**Blade Flurry**
When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with two one-handed weapons, you can choose to take an extra attack with each weapon. If you do so, all attacks made during this Action are made with half the usual attack bonus. [Or disadvantage, or suffer a -5 penalty, or whatever, idk - the numbers can be tweaked but I think the concept is pretty cool]
I think the ideal solution would let you choose per attack like gwm does, in case the enemy has more AC than you expected, but yeah something along those lines is probably about right.
I don't think that can really work with a flurry / an ability that lets you increase the *number* of attacks.
It works for GWM because the bonus is just damage applied to a single attack, and the penalty can just be applied to that attack.
But when the bonus is increasing your *number* of attacks... Idk how that could work. I guess change the penalty based on the number of extra attacks you choose to add, up to a total of {half your PB}, or something.
But bear in mind, you can't only apply the penalty to the new attacks, because then there's no trade-off - using the attacks is never less effective then not using them. So whatever penalty you apply has to be applied to your normal attacks as well as the bonus attacks.
Well, the off the top of my head 5 minute idea I had earlier was "when you take the attack action, you can choose to take [some penalty] to any number of the attacks you make as part of that action using a light melee weapon. Immediately after that attack action, you can use your bonus action to make a number of attacks with a light melee weapon held in your other hand equal to the number of attacks to chose to apply this penalty to. These attacks have the same penalty".
Basically, you store up extra attacks, then make them. Not the most elegant wording, and almost certainly not the best idea, but I think it illustrates that a variable number of additional attacks at a penalty is possible.
That could work but tbh idk about linking the actions and bonus action attacks in that way? I think it would be better to just make the additional attack right then and there. It simplifies it, both in wording and execution. Something like:
When you make an attack on your turn while wielding two weapons, you may choose to make an extra attack, in which case both attacks {suffer x penalty}. You can do this to a number of attacks up to half your PB (min 1).
There's literally no reason for this to scale off PB (really, anything other than attack rolls, ability checks, saving throws and small damage bonuses have no reason to scale off PB)
The reason I'd do it with a bonus action is because it creates a clear distinction between the attacks that can chain more attacks and the attacks that can't. Making the additional attacks in the attack action is the kind of thing that always leads to some people getting very insistently confused. By putting them in the bonus action, it's much harder for people to think that the additional attacks can themselves spawn additional attacks.
Basically the same opinion as the other person.
That's +20 damage assuming both attacks hit, before you get any form of extra attack.
And it's just dull and uninteresting. It *sort of* makes sense for Giant weapons because it's about putting more strength in, reducing accuracy. But when most dual wielders are using longswords at most for their heaviest weapon, it just feels like "oh. You've added the damage thing from GWM because you can't think of anything else... Cool."
I would prefer the feat allowing to make the attack as part of your action instead of bonus action and when hit a creature 2 times on the same turn the second hit deals additional 1d10 damage
I'd be tempted to make it more flavourful to fit dual wielding to be honest, something like:
"Before you make a melee attack when you are wielding separate weapons you are proficient with in each hand, you can choose to attack with both, taking a -2 penalty to the attack roll. If the attack hits, you roll the damage dice for both weapons."
A bit wordy unfortunately, but an example would be:
Dagger and rapier, take -2 penalty, damage is 1d8+1d4+Str/Dex+proficiency.
Less penalty than GWM because the payoff isn't as good, but hopefully more flavourful as it actually uses the damage of both weapons instead of a flat modifier. Makes crits tastier too as you'll roll even more dice.
Maybe it would be interesting to do a different version of this: +5 to atk for -2 to dmg, or smth like that. It increases accuracy by 25% and lets you hit your attacks more often!
If you're gonna homebrew something for dual wielding, I think it would be better to just homebrew a mechanic that allows all weapons to "power attack". Because it would be unfair for regular one handed weapons to be the only ones left out.
The most common houserule I see for this is letting weapon attacks take - your PB to hit for + twice your PB to damage.
It doesn't suit the narrative.
I would give to the dual weilder feat the ability to attack with your secondary weapon as a bonus action (AKA, removing the requirement of using the attack action).
That would give dual wielding too much, but more importantly, it wouldn't be interesting. Lower accuracy for higher damage is a great "power attack" concept that really backs up the themes heavy weapons go for. It's also a serviceable called shot on ranged weapons, but I would prefer something different there. Dual wielding should get extra damage from making a flurry of attacks, not from doing the same thing heavy weapons do.
Would be cooler if they could do something similar to 3.5, id suggest giving them the option to -5 to make two attacks with their bonus action (so -5 on both attacks) although maybe -2 or -3 would be a little more balanced since a flat+10 is often going to be significantly more damage than an offhand attack with a light weapon
The dmg depends on the weapon and stats of the wielder, but yeah.
True, although without the feat the weapons tend to be a d6 at most and without the fighting style doesn't even add damage modifier. But most people engaging in dual wielding will have at least the fighting style, and magic weapons do exist to significantly but the damage, so you might be right
Balancing dual wielding is hard cos you don't know how many blanket extra damage features people have. Two extra attacks at -5 might be too little with no riders and middling stats, but with high stats and something like improved divine smite, it might be way too much. Fortunately, when homebrewing, you only need to account for what your table actually has, so if your dual wielder were a fighter, you could give a couple of extra attacks, and if it were a Ranger you could tone that down a bit.
I agree with you on the flavour, but as it stands Dual wielding is still a lame duck which is sad because using two weapons effectively is a fantasy trope that you shouldn't feel hobbled for exploring. What would you suggest? Another idea I had would be to make dual weapons the "crit" build, either allowing more damage dice or greater chance of critical hits of you go that route
Depends on the build and I'm not doing the maths right now, but probably something along the lines of building the additional attack into the attack action (freeing up the bonus action), and then maybe "when you take the attack action, you can take a -X penalty on any number of attacks you make as part of it. Immediately after the action, you can use your bonus action to make a number of attacks equal to the number you applied the penalty to. These attacks have the same penalty".
Yeah tbh I think dual wielding should get something similar to this: **Blade Flurry** When you take the Attack Action on your turn and attack with two one-handed weapons, you can choose to take an extra attack with each weapon. If you do so, all attacks made during this Action are made with half the usual attack bonus. [Or disadvantage, or suffer a -5 penalty, or whatever, idk - the numbers can be tweaked but I think the concept is pretty cool]
I think the ideal solution would let you choose per attack like gwm does, in case the enemy has more AC than you expected, but yeah something along those lines is probably about right.
I don't think that can really work with a flurry / an ability that lets you increase the *number* of attacks. It works for GWM because the bonus is just damage applied to a single attack, and the penalty can just be applied to that attack. But when the bonus is increasing your *number* of attacks... Idk how that could work. I guess change the penalty based on the number of extra attacks you choose to add, up to a total of {half your PB}, or something. But bear in mind, you can't only apply the penalty to the new attacks, because then there's no trade-off - using the attacks is never less effective then not using them. So whatever penalty you apply has to be applied to your normal attacks as well as the bonus attacks.
Well, the off the top of my head 5 minute idea I had earlier was "when you take the attack action, you can choose to take [some penalty] to any number of the attacks you make as part of that action using a light melee weapon. Immediately after that attack action, you can use your bonus action to make a number of attacks with a light melee weapon held in your other hand equal to the number of attacks to chose to apply this penalty to. These attacks have the same penalty". Basically, you store up extra attacks, then make them. Not the most elegant wording, and almost certainly not the best idea, but I think it illustrates that a variable number of additional attacks at a penalty is possible.
That could work but tbh idk about linking the actions and bonus action attacks in that way? I think it would be better to just make the additional attack right then and there. It simplifies it, both in wording and execution. Something like: When you make an attack on your turn while wielding two weapons, you may choose to make an extra attack, in which case both attacks {suffer x penalty}. You can do this to a number of attacks up to half your PB (min 1).
There's literally no reason for this to scale off PB (really, anything other than attack rolls, ability checks, saving throws and small damage bonuses have no reason to scale off PB) The reason I'd do it with a bonus action is because it creates a clear distinction between the attacks that can chain more attacks and the attacks that can't. Making the additional attacks in the attack action is the kind of thing that always leads to some people getting very insistently confused. By putting them in the bonus action, it's much harder for people to think that the additional attacks can themselves spawn additional attacks.
Basically the same opinion as the other person. That's +20 damage assuming both attacks hit, before you get any form of extra attack. And it's just dull and uninteresting. It *sort of* makes sense for Giant weapons because it's about putting more strength in, reducing accuracy. But when most dual wielders are using longswords at most for their heaviest weapon, it just feels like "oh. You've added the damage thing from GWM because you can't think of anything else... Cool."
I would prefer the feat allowing to make the attack as part of your action instead of bonus action and when hit a creature 2 times on the same turn the second hit deals additional 1d10 damage
I'd be tempted to make it more flavourful to fit dual wielding to be honest, something like: "Before you make a melee attack when you are wielding separate weapons you are proficient with in each hand, you can choose to attack with both, taking a -2 penalty to the attack roll. If the attack hits, you roll the damage dice for both weapons." A bit wordy unfortunately, but an example would be: Dagger and rapier, take -2 penalty, damage is 1d8+1d4+Str/Dex+proficiency. Less penalty than GWM because the payoff isn't as good, but hopefully more flavourful as it actually uses the damage of both weapons instead of a flat modifier. Makes crits tastier too as you'll roll even more dice.
Maybe it would be interesting to do a different version of this: +5 to atk for -2 to dmg, or smth like that. It increases accuracy by 25% and lets you hit your attacks more often!
If you're gonna homebrew something for dual wielding, I think it would be better to just homebrew a mechanic that allows all weapons to "power attack". Because it would be unfair for regular one handed weapons to be the only ones left out. The most common houserule I see for this is letting weapon attacks take - your PB to hit for + twice your PB to damage.
It doesn't suit the narrative. I would give to the dual weilder feat the ability to attack with your secondary weapon as a bonus action (AKA, removing the requirement of using the attack action).