Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 18, 2016 20:06:18 GMT
This is more hypothetical than an actual play problem...
Say you wanted to run a 5e game without the optional feats system. One of your players wants their PC to dual wield non-light weapons (e.g. two long swords). Do you let him, and if so, would you impose any sort of penalty/requirement?
|
|
|
|
Post by dmsam on Jun 19, 2016 1:14:20 GMT
I would not let him. Rules are rules! - lawful
No feats? What are we, peg-legs? - chaotic
Sure, do whatever you feel like man. . . - neutral
You better have a good reason. - good
On a natural one, expect losing the ability to dual wield. - evil
|
|
|
|
Post by joatmoniac on Jun 19, 2016 2:01:09 GMT
I would let them but impose disadvantage on the off hand attack to compensate for how potentially difficult it would be to wield. Maybe after a certain number of attacks the disadvantage goes away, as to indicate that they have learned how to use it.
If there were a strict rules person at my table though, it would be a no go. RAW definitelty wouldn't allow for it, and it would be a very difgicult, if even possible, argument from a RAI perspective.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 19, 2016 8:39:32 GMT
Yeah, part of the situation is that I'm looking at ways to reduce the complexity of the game without sacrificing characters options. Not allowing feats certainly reduces complexity, but it feels like a necessary dimension for some character concepts in 5e.
The bigger issue is that I've been growing slowly discontent with the class and advancement systems in D&D, and have begun investigating alternative games. Whether I switch remains to be seen. The fact is, D&D has most of what I want in a game, but there are some deeply entrenched systems that kind of bug me as a storyteller.
|
|
|
|
Post by swordnut on Jul 22, 2016 21:29:51 GMT
Real world dual wielding of longswords is so much less effective than one in two hands.
There are disarming techniques that end up with you holding 2 lingswords, but you are advised to drop one as soon as possible.
The longsword is useable in one hand, but only if you have no option of using it in 2 or you are dong a quick technique that gets you more distance/frees up your off hand for grappling.
I would penalise the hell out of them or require a 20 strength unless they made it the most awesome story device ever.
|
|
|
|
Post by dmxtrordinari on Jul 27, 2016 7:54:01 GMT
I honestly would just let him dual wield. Your using your only bonus action per turn to make a melee attack but you sacrifice the +2 AC from a shield as well as the increased damage from simply using 2 hands to swing your sword. Dual wielding in 5E is pretty lack luster mechanically though from an imagination stand point it's really cool to a lot of people myself included. If I were to impose any limitation I'd say something like you need 20 Str to be able to dual wield so maybe the player can't do it initially but after an ASI or two they're able to.
|
|
