Two Weapon Fighting Options?

David Kalber
Level 4
Newsletter Link Kickstarter Backer
7 months ago

I have a Dwarven Ranger that finally hit level 4 and I was excited to grab the Dual Wielder feat so I could dual wield non-light weapons, get an AC bonus for two-weapon fighting, and become a whirlwind of blades.  When I looked at the list of the feats available, however, I did not see anything for Dual Wielder or similar effect.  I know the Feat names and what some do are different form the SRD but I was curious if there was plans to have the Dual Wielder feat added to the game or if it was already in and I am blind lol.


If we are stuck with only being able to two-weapon fight with light weapons and don't get any bonuses such as +1 to AC while two-weapon fighting it would weaken my enthusiasm a bit about trying to dual wield.  I know it's not the most popular option versus a shield or a two-handed weapon in base SRD games so not having the feat would increase the disadvantage to that style further.  I did pick up the two-weapon fighting style of course and if the game is coded to allow two-weapon fighting with non-light weapons and I am just a dummy, let me know lol.


I do hope that if the Dual Wielder or a similar feat is not in Solasta it is added, or comes at a later point since a Dwarf Ranger dual wielding battle axes is pretty cool ;) 

Ifusaso
Level 4
Kickstarter Backer
7 months ago

I agree, Two-Weapon Fighting is already behind other combat options in tabletop play with the feat available. It becomes almost unusable without it. It's also harsh not being able to take Variant Human to take it at level 1, but I can live with that as long as its made available. Until then, scrapping my "main" character concept.

7 months ago

Hi there,

I am sorry, but indeed this feat is not SRD and we simply cannot copycat it.

Cheers,

Ultimaty
Level 4
7 months ago (edited)

Hi there,

I am sorry, but indeed this feat is not SRD and we simply cannot copycat it.

Cheers,

Hmmmmmmmmm.... that is unfortunate...

What if you change just the name of the skill? Or change something, like making that feat available in other level, or something like that)

Would that violate the copyright?

Or...

How much does it cost to buy the proper D&D license? If such is allowed?

Duriel15
Level 6
7 months ago

I'm kind of hoping that if Solasta gets enough support they can either purchase more access to the WotC license or get some type of royalty deal set up with them. Not sure how WotC handles any of that though. I feel Tactical Adventures is being much more faithful to 5e and the general concept of DnD than Larian is with their fully licensed product.

ekimami
Level 6
7 months ago

I'm kind of hoping that if Solasta gets enough support they can either purchase more access to the WotC license or get some type of royalty deal set up with them. Not sure how WotC handles any of that though. I feel Tactical Adventures is being much more faithful to 5e and the general concept of DnD than Larian is with their fully licensed product.

These are exactly my thoughts. But if the SRD is what we have to work with, then that is also fine. It is their first game after all, and who knew there was such a market for a faithful, rules based 5e game? I think the conversation should revolve around the homebrews they are going to be using for the game, stuff like Greenmage, and Mountaineer. How much can you do without stepping into PHB territory?

There's a ton of great homebrew out there that can be used for ideas. 

Kelborne
Level 3
7 months ago

I'd like to propose the feat "Offhanded Fighting."   Allows the use of non-light weapons when dual wielding, +1 to both weapon attack rolls.

Hot Stuff
Level 4
Newsletter Link Kickstarter Backer
7 months ago

Yes, we absolutely need a way to dual wield non-light weapons.  I've noticed some very creative feats already in the Early Access, so surely there is a way to allow this, either via a similar-but-not-exactly-the-same feat, or just allow it outright.  Simply remove the "must be two-light weapons" portion of the existing dual wield rules.


-Hot Stuff

RJM
Level 8
7 months ago

One frustrating aspect of the SRD is its lack of feats. It contains precisely one. However if TA can get away with a feat that gives advantage on concentration checks because it also says that up to 10 damage is an automatic pass, I would hope something very similar could be done for dual wielding. 

Allow offhand attacks when wielding any single handed weapon but give a +1 to hit if both weapons are light would be my suggestion. That allows the player to choose between slightly better accuracy or better damage.

Bhelogan
Level 4
7 months ago

You have the two-weapon fighting style in the SRD. So, maybe they could homebrew a Two-Weapon Master feat that does something like give an extra attack with the off-hand, without using your bonus action. It wouldn't be quite the same as the dual wielder feat in the PHB, but would give it some love that a lot of people would like to have.

7 months ago

Ever consider just letting us dual wield one handed weapons as a change to the standard rules?  I'd like to use two longswords for my ranger.

RJM
Level 8
7 months ago

The one thing they don't want to do is break the rules that are in the SRD, and I entirely approve of that.

Mike Donais
Level 6
Kickstarter Backer
7 months ago

Perhaps one of the ranger fighting styles that you can pick from lets you use 2 non-light weapons at level 3.

Maybe add a fighter style or series of feats that lets you use two 2 handed weapons at a very high level.



bonedealer74
Visitor
7 months ago

Perhaps create a feat that is called Swashbuckler or something. It could say that for 2-weapon fighting only your offhand weapon needs to be light.

Then it could either give a +1 bonus to STR or DEX, or instead you could give it a “you can use a reaction to add your prof bonus to AC” kind of thing.

RJM
Level 8
7 months ago

Call it advanced duelling or another name, Swashbuckler is a feat that means something else in 5e.

7 months ago

They could knock something together with a Strength check, I'm sure, and call it something else.