ALL THE ATTACKS! Light, Nick, and Dual Wielder in D&D 5e 2024 | Nerd Immersion
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 11 ก.ย. 2024
- So I'm sure you've heard about this already, but rules as written there's some wild stuff you can do with Light weapons, Nick Mastery and even more so with the Dual Wielder feat.
Thanks for watching!
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
📧 For marketing/business/sponsorship inquiries, email nerdimmersion@gmail.com
📬 Shipping: P.O. Box 416 Salisbury Mills, NY 12577
💻 Discord Server: / discord
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
🔥 Support 🔥
📈 Patreon: / nerdimmersion
💵 Direct Donation: paypal.me/nerdi...
👕 Merchandise: teespring.com/...
🎁 Amazon Wishlist: www.amazon.com...
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
🎤 Social Media 🎤
🎮 D&D Actual Play Channel: / nerdimmersionplays
🐦 Twitter: / nerdimmersion
🕒 TikTok: / nerdimmersion
📷 Instagram: / nerdimmersion
🎭 Facebook: / nerdimmersion
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
🎵 End Credit Music: benbriggs.net/...
▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬▬
Nerd Immersion is an entertainment network focused on Dungeons & Dragons. Our TH-cam Channel currently has over 1000 D&D videos covering everything from D&D advice, D&D product reviews/unboxings, Top 10 videos, DM's Guild Module reviews, and play throughs of over 13 different D&D campaigns, and more.
Any links to products or services may be affiliate links that give me a small kickback at no cost to you, with no influence on the content. #dnd #dnd5e #nerdimmersion
1:22 Regarding the Nick weapon mastery "When you make an extra attack of the Light property, you can make it as part of the Attack action instead of as a Bonus Action". I think that can reasonably be interpreted as moving the extra attack granted by the Light property from the Bonus Action to the Action. Notice it says "Instead". Not in addition to. So you free up the Bonus Action for some other purpose unrelated to the Light weapon property. It does not allow you to use the Light weapon property both with the Attack action AND later on with the Bonus Action as well.
D&D Beyond's post on weapon mastery states: "Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean you can make a third attack as a Bonus Action, as the Light property specifies you only get one extra attack. But, while it may not pump your damage, this frees up your Bonus Action to use class/species abilities, such as the Rogue’s Cunning Action, while still getting an additional attack in."
2:10 Regarding the Dual Wielder feat "When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a weapon that has the Light property, you can make one extra attack as a Bonus Action later on the same turn with a different weapon which must be a melee weapon that lacks the two-handed weapon property" - This enhances the extra attack given by the Light property to include weapons that don't have the Light weapon property themselves. Like a rapier, longsword, battleaxe, etc. - From the quote, I'm not sure whether the Nick weapon mastery still works and allows the not-"two-handed" attack to be moved to the attack action as well, but either way it's still only 2 attacks. Not a third or forth.
Two Light weapons: 2 attacks using Attack action and Bonus Action
One of them has Nick: 2 attacks using only Attack action. None using Bonus Action.
Dual Wielder feat: 2 attacks using Attack action and Bonus Action. Or both using the Attack action if Nick still applies.
Two-weapon fighting style: You get to add damage modifier to the second attack.
Unless the wording changed from UA you can't switch your weapon after each attack. You can draw OR stow a weapon before OR after each attack but it's not before AND after each attack so what you describe won't work (except for thrown weapons).
When you read that, "EITHER equip or unequip ONE weapon as part of the action".. seems to work as intended. Despite how many attacks you might be able to make, you are still only taking ONE Attack Action, so you would only get one free weapon interaction as part of that action...if you attack, then drop your weapon, that's your ONE unequip...
Either way, someone tries these shenanigans in my game and they bonked.
I believe your right, that is similar to the wording on the swords bard's blade flourish.
Exactly this. It's either equip or unequip, not both. The Dual-Wielding while holding a Shield discourse is straight up misinformation at this point.
Edit for clarity: the 2024 rules now state that dropping a weapon is equivalent to drawing or stowing it.
Interesting, with the current/OG/Legacy rules we understood dropping an equipped weapon as a free/object interaction, since unlike shields you don't need to do much to drop a weapon. So this has led to/enabled fighters to attack, attack, drop weapon, draw/attack etc etc.
But if this is not how that works I'll have to look more into it.
Well if you enforce dual wielding per RAW I wouldn't go near your game as I don't like dealing with stupid people. 😅
I would also add, if that's how it's worded I would interpret 'as part of the action' meaning that you can only do it once per attack action. So as you said, no matter how many attacks you have in the attack action, it's still one action. I certainly wouldn't allow the multi-draw interpretation at my table outside of...is it dual wielder that allows you to draw or stow two weapons simultaneously instead of one? That's spelled out, so it's fine, otherwise, this example he's using...no go.
I'm pretty sure what the Dual Wielding feat does is only change the bonus action attack that the Light property gives you so that you can do it with a different type of feature, but it doesn't give you a second attack. Meaning that if you activate the Light weapon property to do a second attack, as a bonus action, with a light weapon, and the activate Nick to move that attack to your action, you don't get another attack with the Light weapon property even if you stow/draw a different weapon. It's been used already.
The quote saying you can "equip OR unequip ONE weapon as part of the action", in the UA unequipping includes dropping the weapon, so let's go through a sequence where you start with one weapon equipped:
You attack with the weapon and unequip it as part of the attack
You equip a weapon as part of a second attack
Now you want to make a third attack with a third weapon so you unequip the second weapon as part of the third attack and attack with no weapon
And now you want to make a fourth attack
Edit: I just realized a different intent behind the equip or unequip rule.
It says "as part of the ACTION" not attack, so this might be limited to the number of ACTIONS which might be limited to one per attack action, one per bonus action and zero per reaction.
This could mean that once you start an attack action with 3 or 4 attack, you can only equip or unequip one weapon
That's a good point regarding actions
@@williamgordon5443 if you unequip a weapon as part of the action you then can't equip another weapon because you have already used up the one equip/unequip you have. You only take one action (unless you use action surge). A class feature may allow you to attack more than once when you take the attack action, but you only ever take 1 action. So you cannot equip and unequip a weapon at once.
In response to your edit - That's clearly not the intention. They removed the part of the text for thrown weapon fighting style where you could draw a thrown weapon as part of an attack made with a thrown weapon for this very reason. The intention is now everyone can do that all of the time with any weapon.
This is both correct according my interpretation of 2024 rules as well as the historic rule of drawing and stowing.
I'm not sure what this creator is thinking.. but he completely forgot that you have to stow the weapon also as part of the attack. So at level 5 even if you liberally read that "you can draw as many weapons as you have attacks in the attack action"(which is not historically accurate or the correct interpretation of the rule in 2024) then you would draw-attack-drop (which is not explained in the video) then continue with a second draw and attack. But could not drop again because that was your "free item interaction" for the turn.
You get one draw or stow per "attack action" without the dual wielding feat.
The duel wielder feat doesn’t have the wording about drawing and stowing two weapons instead of one because if it does then you can’t switch weapons as you say
This (the swapping) doesn’t actually work RAW either. The reason isn’t the lack of specificity in the Light property; it’s the fact that you can either draw or stow a weapon as part of an attack. And just below where that gets mentioned, dropping a weapon is specifically called out as a form of stowing. So you could draw a dagger, attack, drop it…and then what? You can’t draw your next weapon, because you stowed. Now, if you has your weapon out already you could attack, attack, stow, draw and Nick attack, but then dual wielder isn’t your friend, I think, because you’re not attacking with a different weapon than one of the ones you did the Light weapon attack with. You MIGHT be able to equip a shield at the end of your attack action (I’m less clear on the shield rules), but if you can’t get a new weapon into your sole available hand prior to your bonus action, you won’t be able to do it during your BA and the full version of this exploit doesn’t work.
PSA: dropping a weapon during your attack action is no longer a free interaction! Action chains that rely on zero action economy cost to dropping your weapons may very well not work, if you are reading the rules closely!
I would say that the rogue could attack with the light crossbow, and throw a dart or a dagger easily.
It's hard to tell if the the extra attack from duel wielder was intended or not. It's clear that the feat IS meant to allow you to use a non-light weapon for the bonus action attack, and while I get the same reading on how it's wording works with the nick mastery I couldn't say for sure it was intentional. I do think the idea that someone committing to duel wielding nick weapons would get extra attacks makes sense, as a flourish of multiple attacks is kind of what duel wielding typically evokes.
The weapon switching stuff I'm pretty confident was not intended though. I think the wording was changed to make it easier to understand that drawing a weapon and attacking with it can be the same action. I think they used the "a different weapon" terminology to make it clear that you could still draw that second weapon if you hadn't yet. They also seem to be avoiding the phrase "off-hand" for some reason, likely to avoid having to have player determine a dominant hand or being ambidextrous and that mucking up the rules, though it could also be meant to make space for species with more than two arms in the future.
Regardless, unless WotC says something to the contrary, I'm probably gonna rule at my table that drawing weapons to technically duel wield while holding one weapon at a time and a shield is not gonna fly.
I think that this edition is going to be very much leaning on the rules as intended Rather than the rules as written. I do like the idea of being able to pull out a loaded weapon and firing a different one. The reason I like this is because Pirates used to do this in real life with loaded pistols. They'd have like 3 or 4 loaded pistols and when they fire one rather than loading it they would just drop it and fire the next one.
Four Attacks at level 5 with light weapon + Nick and the Dual Wielder feat might be intentional (even tho I hope it isn't). But if you're a melee Rogue, then it might actually be more beneficial for you to go Short sword and Rapier since they both have Vex and that could lead to Advantage on every attack so long as you hit. If you look at the damage done by the Rogue (who won't have Two weapon fighting style till later levels), 4 attacks, 2 with short sword and 2 with Nick weapon has comparable damage to 3 attacks with a SS and Rapier. The calculation is very different if you're a Fighter or Ranger with Two Weapon fighting style. Nick is the way to go for them.
With regard to weapon switching while wearing a shield, every time there was a playtest with two weapon fighting in it, I wrote in my survey about that and they never corrected. Adding in the wording "in your other hand" or something similar would have solved the problem.
The really interesting thing about the RAW vs RAI conversation is that SO MANY creators made these arguments during the UA and called out the assumption that it would get fixed before production… but here we are. Despite so much feedback about how broken it is, the language still doesn’t say “off-hand” or “in a different hand” and we still get a draw or stow per attack… that sounds like an intentional choice to keep these mechanics.
4 attacks at level 5 checks out...
With a shield is a big RAW abuse case
Yesssss! I’ve been waiting for this post!!!
Great video. But from a player's perspective, I think DM's should enforce, that the light weapon bonus action attack, must be with your off hand.
Honestly? I think they should do 2 things in regards to shield combat with "dual wielding" or the Nick property:
1) Clarify that you cannot switch weapons with the shield equipped (without dropping the shield if it's capable of being dropped).
2) Allow for the option to strike *with* the shield as your other attack. Maybe give it a weapon mastery.
Because let's face it... if you're going "sword and board", a shield bash is pretty iconic.
When flint lock pistols were used it took too long to reload them so people would carry multiple and just use multiple guns rather than try to reload. I would be fine letting people do it with hand crossbows or light. I think a heavy crossbow becomes a different issue but then again there are types of crossbows that have rapid loading features or tools that come with them. I probably wouldn't be too hung up on it if that's the fantasy they wanted to play.
I doubt most DMs would allow single hand shenanigans for a character that takes dual wielding / two-weapon fighting options. The RAI is obviously when wielding a weapon in the other hand.
If you did this with the thrown fighting style could you add the +2 to all attacks, even the off hand ones?
if it states: you can draw a weapon as part of "the action", then it doesn't function because it's concidered as a "bonus action". maybe i'm wrong
also, the extra attacks are not additional actions, the are part of the same "action". am i wrong?
4 attacks great, doing it with one hand and a shield is definitely not intended and I would soft veto it at a table; the crossbow thing the same at least without XBE to remove the loading issue.
I'm soooo curious how this will work with the Soulknife's psychic blades. Next campaign will use 100% PHB 2024 and I was leaning towards the Soulknife that was a dual wielder.
I think that was intentionally writen like that. If you are doing thrown build, you can throw 4 weapons. Concidering loading propertie, the thing that came to mind was a pirate that has like 20 guns strapped to himself and throws gun away after it uses it
WOTC needs to bring in optimizers as consultants when they think the material is at 90%. Optimizers will find where the language needs to be cleaned up better than their normal editors.
You only have one bonus action to use for either the offhand attack OR the weapon mastery ability not AND/both.
@@chrishigbee7502 maybe. The feat specifically states extra attack, not just an attack, which seems to indicate you could take two attacks as a bonus action.
But really Nick would pretty much remove that issue anyway
Im just waiting for people to remember that the Thri-kreen exists. It doesn't matter If this raw interpretation where if you hold a shield you can still do the 4 attacks gets errata'ed.
Just play a Thri-Kreen and do it anyway.
action surge and do it again. lol
First .i thought you were doing your demo with platic cutlery! "Beware my sprork!"😂
Haha. Please try this at my table.
In a world of spellcasters who are broken beyond reason, martials making a lot of attacks is NOT a problem for 5e. Heck, they may be able to keep up in damage with the wizard.
Get a fifth with a free shield bash from the shield master feat!
I pointed this issue, or similar issues to it, every single playtest until 7 or 8, where I just gave up.
Does it say "stow and equip as part of the attack action" or is it "stow or equip as part of the attacks action"? To me they would have to drop the first weapon to pull the second weapon and so on for the following attacks. If they move or are forced to move then they can't keep attacking as such because three weapons are on the ground.
I don't think it works like that, it says: "you can equipp OR unequipp as part of that action", you can't do both with the same attack. Even dropping the weapon is consider unequipping so you can't equipp a weapon, attack, unequipp that weapon and then do the same with another weapon with just one hand.
Yep, sad that Ted missed it as its the biggest obstacle in doing what Ted describes
So if you have a weapon in your hand, you can attack with it twice (with extra attack). You then unequip thst weapon after the second attack. You then draw a different Light weapon as part of the Nick weapon attack, and attack with it. The rules for Dual Wielder seem to also allow this new weapon you drew as part of Nick weapon attack to also qualify as the dual wielder bonus action attack
Unless you argue that since the equip/unequip doesn't say before or after just "As part of the attack" you could say you unequip the weapon after one attack, and equip as part of the next.
@@NerdImmersion Thats fair. I also forgot that Dual Wielder attack needs a weapon different that the one used in the very first attack which enables Dual Wielder attack, not the one you used before. so that works, although you are kinda wasting opportunities with mixing up weapon masteries if you attack twice with a weapon with the Nick property. And if you have the Dual wielder you could pull out two weapons at start and end your turn with a shield maybe? Anyways good video
@@NerdImmersion that technically works but you if take the Dueling feat you would not add the ability mod to that extra attacks. Sure, if you have something like Hunter's Mark or Hex up you would still do more damage but without that kind of bonus, that is almost like two attacks with a greatsword and the Defense feat. And there is always the DM permission to consider.
All this weird stuff with dual wielding are easily solved by playing as a Thri-kreen, you DO have enough arms to make all these attacks AND wear a shield! 😅
Haven’t read all the comments, but - where are all the weapons you have drawn going? You draw a second weapon. Ok, where’d the first go? Also, literally my first question as a DM: “Where are you carrying all of this?”. PC’s bringing a squire to hand them weapons in combat like a modern crew served gun?
Back in the day, people would carry multiple muskets and draw them all instead of spending the time to reload them because it took too long. I can absolutely see that happening with crossbows.
Crossbows dont work the same as a flintlock and even then theres many kinds of "loaded" for a flintlock.
Carrying a loaded crossbow would
1. Steadily damage the weapon
2. Have a huge chance of it misfiring while walking around
3. Make the weapon more bulky to carry unless you're carrying it equipped which means you dont have hands available to do things.
You say it is "you can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of the action. You can do so before or after the attack"
So, it doesn't match your interpretation. It is part of the action, not part of the attack. Even if you have fighters 4x multi-attack that is still only one action so you are only able to do one equip or unequip.
Which means the way it works is a fighter makes the first attack with the sword, then unequip the sword. That is the one equip or unequip as part of the action, so now the next three attacks are unarmed.
There is no flurry of weapon swapping. It is once per action, not once per attack
You're not wrong, you can't do as much equips as he says, but still he is not wrong in the interpretation: If you have extra attack, you have an additional attack WHILE using the Attack Action. With the Nick Property, you add the extra attack from the Bonus Action into the Attack Action. So RAW: You could do 1 equip before or after each of those 3 attacks.
The bonus action additional attack wouldnt allow for an extra equip. (with Dual Wielder Feat: You could get 2 of the same equip action (Draw OR Stow) before or after any of those. (the 3 attacks from Attack Action.)
@@shaldrake I guess it comes down to is "as part of the action" modifying 'attack' or is it 'equip or unequip one weapon'? One reading gets you a draw/stow per action, and the other per attack. However if you read it as per attack then this would be one of the tamest abuses of that option.
So, when one reading gets you perfectly normal and smooth gameplay, and the other gets you wacky abusive shenanigans I know which one I am going to use.
@@spikehammer3112 sure, just remember dropping and stowing are mechanically the same now, so whatever juggling your players are thinking, its not that easy RAW. Even with Dual Wielder. Also shield is now interaction to don or doff
This sounds like a lot of "not-RAI" shinanigans that the DM should prevent....
Though it bugs me that there are all these non-RAI loopholes in the text still...
Did Hasbro fire all the writers before they were finished??
So a Monk at 4 taking Weapon Mastery feat could make 4 attack at 4 and 5 at 5.
You can't equip a weapon to a hand that is already holding a weapon. Is dropping the weapon a free action was it is in 2014? Even so you would have to drop the weapon. So maybe you do this once? Picking up a dropped weapon is an action as I recall. Picking up a weapon as an included action only works if it's on a table or you're on the ground. Crossbows might work if they are on a lanyard.
If I heard well, it's "as part of the action", not "as part of the attack", correct? You only have one action, regardless of the number of attacks...
I had a fighter in my game who wanted to dual wield light crossbows. I told him he could absolutely do that, but he'd have to burn his action to reload them on the following turn simply because he only had the two hands.
I think the same rules apply for the light property. If you can draw or stow a weapon as part of an attack, that's great, but you can't do both. So if you want to get the shield and still get the benefits of Nick or dual wielding, you've got to be dropping your weapons on the ground. This means they aren't at the ready when you need them and picking them up off the ground takes time. A free object interaction would let you recover one, but not all. So this system wouldn't be sustainable in my opinion as a DM.
Also, at my table, you get what you earn, and rules lawyers who tweak stuff beyond the bounds of common sense find out that the monsters know those rules too.
For the hand crossbows: I think the new crossbow expert feat pretty explicitly allows for this from what I've heard, removing the hand requirement for loading.
For the weapon juggling: First, let me say that I absolutely believe this is intended for dual wielding and would probably not allow someone to be using a shield (and especially duelist) for this kind of shenanigans. However, I understand the mechanical proposal here where there is no need to drop weapons.
Starting with a shield in one hand and an empty other hand:
1) Draw a light weapon (weapon 1) and attack with it. (now that you have done this the light property has triggered for both Nick and Dual Wielder).
2) Attack again with extra attack and stow your weapon (weapon 1).
3) Draw a Nick weapon and attack with it (this is a new weapon that wasn't weapon1, it is still part of the attack action)
4) Attack as a bonus action from Dual Wielder (optionally, stow this second weapon)
It looks like the new rules say that dropping a weapon counts as unequipping a weapon which means you can't just drop a weapon
@Blackwoodcwc That makes sense, but where I disagree is with the number of draw/stows. I read the equipping and unequipping rules as "you can either equip or unequip ONE weapon when you make AN attack using THIS action." As in you cannot both draw and stow a weapon as a part of the action, and you don't get a separate draw or stow for each attack, unless specifically called out.
A similar argument could be made with regard to the thrown property. Thrown states directly that the weapon can be drawn as part of an attack, not the action, so the light/nick shenanigans could still apply with a shield if you're throwing some daggers. Ultimately though, in my mind, if you're not holding two weapons, you're not dual wielding, so the dual wielding feat wouldn't apply at the time of the attacks.
Also, the player hot swapping crossbows was using Light Crossbows, not hand crossbows. I thought a Halfling trying to John Woo two two-handed crossbows was funny, so I let him get away with it, but told him he had to use his action to reload. That way, it evened out the math.
I don't have access to the new book, but, based upon what was said in the video. You get one free "draw weapon" per "attack action" not per attack. Does the dual welder feat allow for additional draw/stow?
Part of the new Dual Wielder says "You can draw or stow two weapons that lack the Two-Handed property when you would normally be able to draw or stow only one."
But I don't think that saves this one-handed duel weapon shenanigans.
What it does allow you to do is:
* start a fight empty handed and draw your weapon(s) as part of the first attack
* Attack with a bow, then stow it. Next turn draw melee weapon(s) and attack
* Attack with a sword, then stow it. You will be unarmed until your next turn when you attack a draw a weapon.
The only way to switch weapons inside a turn is to use multiple actions. So a fighter could attack with a maul, stow it, then action surge to draw and attack with a sword.
Depending on the exact wording in the book, it is possible that the bonus action attack could give you one more draw/stow.
@@spikehammer3112 yeah, I think your last point about wording is very important. Is this happening on each "attack" or each "attack action". Once on each of your "attack actions" is much more limiting, and that would make this feat potentially more desirable.
Keep seeing folks say new equip per attack rules meaning loading is irrelevant RAW, but forget the ammunition property states “Drawing the ammunition from a quiver, case, or other container is part of the attack (you need a free hand to load a one-handed weapon)”. Thus RAW you can’t have a crossbow preloaded.
The crossbow feat explicitly removes that restriction. If you don't have that feat the ammunition property still applies.
@@XanderHarris1023 yup! It’s rad :)
Do you still get 1 free object interaction on your turn? Could be used to draw or stow
Beast barbarian can do this at level 5 already with claws
Also dungeon coach made a video about it but 2014 rules, great weapon master was so good, even with dual wielder feat, two weapon fighting style, and allowing the offhand to attack the same number of times as the main hand gwm still outperformed it.
Brace of crossbows? Nah, just introduce flintlocks. Still have the loading issue, but doesn't require arguing the logic of you decisions that much.
tbh for me day for day it gets clearer to me, that they didn't listen to the players feedback and that the books were released before they were ready ....
The bandolier of crossbows idea is really similar to how they used early pistols. Draw, fire, drop the gun, repeat. Not sure it’d work with a comparatively larger crossbow.
I wouldn't allow more than 1 large crossbow, or bow for that matter, either.
Please refer to this new edition as something other than 5E. It's confusing. Most call it 5.5.
Love your work 👍
Is there no restriction on how many free actions you can do?
Is there a reason why the Dual Wielder feat doesn't just say "You treat melee weapons that lack the Two-Handed property as if they had the Light property."?
I guess they don't want people duel wielding non-light weapons anymore for some reason? With this new version of the feat, the initial weapon attack still must use a light weapon...
@@jessetravis5230 yes. It is specifically worded to allow you to make an attack in addition to the attack you gain from the light property. So if you have the feat and a weapon with the Nick property you can attack three times.
So how does this change the thrown weapon fighting style/feat? (I don't remember if it's a style or a feat)
How does that interact with thrown weapon. If you can draw and throw at the same time just have a bunch of daggers
Any character carrying around loaded crossbows is absolutely going to shoot themselves! That's just absurd. Also those crossbows would loose distance and damage as the tension is reduced over time.
do paladins still get the extra radiant 1D8 at 11th or so level? a dual wielding paladin would mow.
Yeah, I'll allow 1 free equip per hand per round. That's it.
And DUAL wielding literally means fighting with TWO weapons at the same time, not 1 and then another one, rinse and repeat. If you want to use 1 weapon and a shield, you can equip each item at the start of your round, and that's it. Take the Dueling fighting style if you do this.
If you want 2 weapons in your hands, to use TWO-Weapon Fighting, you can equip each hand's weapon once in your round, and that's it.
If you want to throw more than 2 daggers or axes, I'm going to return that ability to that Fighting style, because you are just throwing the weapon, not readying it for melee combat, so it's closer to drawing arrows from your quiver and firing them ASAP. Without that Fighting style, you can equip and use (or throw) just 2 weapons in a round.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dual_wield If the game is going to use conventional language, you have to know and understand what the words mean instead of trying to find loopholes like "it doesn't literally say both weapons MUST be used at the same time, so...." No, of course it doesn't, because understanding that is inherent in knowing the meaning of the phrase "dual wielding." ("Dual wielding is the technique of using two weapons, one in each hand")
www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/dual
dual
1 of 2
adjective
du·al ˈdü(-ə)l
also ˈdyü-əl
1
of grammatical number : denoting reference to two
a dual pronoun
2
a
: consisting of two parts or elements or having two like parts : double
families with dual incomes
held dual citizenship in France and the U.S.
a dual function
a dual exhaust system
b
: having a double character or nature
So I don't think this works the way you say. You're forgetting I think at least that each weapon you equip would have To be unequipped in order to equip a new weapon in the same hand so I only think this would work the way you are describing if you were dropping the weapons on the ground as you use them. Because there are actually two things involved in switching weapons in the same hand : Unequipping the one you you are holding and equipping the next weapon.
yea, you are allowed to draw a weapon every attack, but you are clearly not allowed to stow them too. so you would have ti drop then, which hurts
@@nic6569 I believe you can only draw with every action not every attack.
This is likely one of the first things that gets errata from a new sage advice column.
I bet there won't be any sage advice for 2024, they will up just shadow update dndbeyond.
Dual wielding feat I believe will be first but maybe.
@@JackOfHearts42 That sounds like WoTC, but will probably cause a lot of confusion.
You could definitely draw and throw four weapons using four attacks while holding a shield, but this wouldn’t work for any weapon you hold on to.
yes you can. but understand it on interaction per attack. so Draw attack, for you next attack you couldn't stow and draw another weapon, stow and unarmed strike yes but not stow, draw and attack that would be too many interactions. where this truly comes into play with a shield is with thrown weapons such as a dagger, you don't need stow your next attack cause you just threw your weapon. and it the thrown weapon which i believe is the intent of the wording. though if you time your interactions right, you can abuse this with using a melee weapon like a short sword or scimitar
This is definitely a situation of raw isn’t rai.
It is even questionable if this is even raw. "you can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of the action."
So depending on how you read that "as part of the action" it could be that raw is one equip or unequip per action
I thought the Attack Action is just the single action, not number of attacks you can make; even if you have Extra Attack, you still take the Attack Action once as your action on your turn and then make a number of attacks as part of that action, therefore, no swapping per attack.
The rule specifically says you can draw or stow when you make an attack from the action. Not when you take the action, but when you make the attack. It at least means a bonus action attack can't get a draw/stow because that's not the attack action, but it is otherwise 100% once per attack.
What about thrown weapons will nick apply ?
I think narratively, this really works for a character throwing daggers all over the place.
It was definitely intended to work with thrown weapons.
@@XanderHarris1023
Thrown Weapon Fighting Style 2024 no longer has "draw your thrown weapon as a part of your Attack Action" because you can do that already. It would be redundant to mention it twice.
This. I think this interaction does work ONLY in the case of throwing weapons, because this is the use-case where you attack and are left with an empty hand. They’ve even made it so Soulknives can’t exploit it with psychic blade summons. Really honestly, people - we should just stop trying to break this because yeah, maybe there’s some esoteric way of lawyering our way to making this sort of work, but it
looks to be a janky solution at best and likely will absolutely trash tables’ game experience by slowing combat down to a crawl. DMs: enforce the dropping isn’t free rule, or if you want to allow it to be free, then house rule that twf requires a free hand as before and you’re good. But again - there is a rule already in place. Homebrew is not needed here. They could have been clearer, and I bet you Sage Advice will clarify, but yeah.
I will be playing a Kensei monk with a 1-2 level dip into ranger. Eventually I will have 6 attacks with d10 weapons, can add a plus 3 to one of my weapons, and can hunter's mark for 3-6d6 extra damage on meatier targets.
Such messy wording with that feat. Originally I thought it was a nerf because you used to be able to duel weild non-light weapons & now you still have to initially attack with a light weapon.. but this 4th attack interpretation is actually quite nice.
I am confused as to how they missed clearing this up. All they needed to do is add "that you're holding in a different hand".
@@PillowOfEvil I think it is clear. The problem seems to be coming from people using the UA/2014 rules instead of the wording on the 2024 rules. Which is a by product of only a select few people having physical copies of the book right now.
I think if you read the rules in the 2024 book they are for the most part fairly clear. There are a couple of exceptions, but even then I think the issue is not paying attention to the wording.
They basically made a UA and changed everything from it.
I love the thumb nails
Doesn’t it say draw or stow a weapon as part of an action? Key word being or
Wouldnt you have to drop each weapon after attacking with it though?
"You can either equip or unequip one weapon when you make an attack as part of this action. You do so either before or after the attack. If you equip a weapon before an attack, you don't need to use it for that attack. Equipping a weapon includes drawing it or picking it up. Unequipping a weapon includes, sheathing, stowing or dropping it."
@@NerdImmersion Right. It's an either or, not both. So wouldn't you have to drop them? Or am I just reading this wrong?
Yeah as written you're having to drop them to do any of this.
Wait. As written you literally can't do this cheese. You can only equip or unequip each attack. Dropping is unequipping so you only can uss what you have in your hands unless you're throwing your weapons.
@@projectrallusGood point.
Good.
It's less powerful than fireball, so why is anyone worried?
I don't really see any sane dm ever allowing people to do all of that while holding a shield in the other hand.
I played in the DND Open at GenCon and the question about the nick property came up. The official ruling that supposedly came from JC was essentially this: There is an order of operations in this. The light weapon property gives you a bonus attack. THEN the nick property comes into play. The light weapon property does not apply again after you apply the nick property. . Put differently, Light gives you BA attack. Nick moves that BA attack into the attack action freeing up the bonus action. Because you have already used the light weapon property you CANNOT use that property again. My resting of the feat is that it replaces the light property instead of stacking allowing the player to use weapons that don’t have the light property.
Interesting. I hope this is the case.
That’s the way I understand it too.
So the way you get four attacks is because of the changes to Dual Wielder which gives you an extra attack as a bonus action. It does look like this extra attack does not benefit from gaining your ability modifier. But the feat would allow you 4 attacks.
What a disaster...
Tales of Valiant is a better update of 5e
Monk5/Fighter 1 gets 5 attacks
This is why there is a DM/GM, to rule on these issues. DND is a set of rules but does not cover everything. To be a DM you have to be smart, to be a player you have to have a smart DM that knows what is intended for there game. Telling people about all the missed rules just causes problems. And forces more issues.
*Between this and the people talking about no spell slot dual casting, both in my opinion extremely obviously not intended, I'm starting to think that they rushed out this player's handbook way too fast.* Not exactly careful wording from the magic of the gathering company of all folks lol
A newbie question :
Does it cost something to switch weapon during a turn ?
As a Barbarian for instance, can I attack with my Greataxe by default (cleave), and If I want to "Push" someone switching for my Pike ?
drawing or sheathing/dropping is part of the Attack action, and you can do it once per attack before or after the attack, and you don't have to make the attack with the weapon drawn
you are limited to no more than one equip/unequip per attack unless you have the Dual Wielder feat (which increases it to two per attack)
first example: a level one barbarian already has his greataxe out but wants to use his maul. he can attack with the axe or an unarmed attack and drop/sheathe it this round, but he won't be able to draw and attack with the maul until next round
second example: same barbarian at level five could attack with the axe and sheathe it, then draw the maul and attack with it in a single round
Okay so you say it makes sense that we get to add our DEX/STR bonus on some of our attacks, but for "reasons" those same bonuses shouldn't be applied to some attacks. Please make that make sense!
Literally there's even less of a reason to pickup the two weapon fighting style now and you're for it?
So, the argument that WOTC and you are supporting is our characters are so dextrose and nimble with our blades making quick debilitating strikes OR so strong in our attacks that when landing blows causing severe damage but do to the characters lack of skill they're incapable of doing this all the time. How can they be both skilled at unskilled at the same time?
So, when does a person suffer a penalty for wielding a two handed weapon get implemented?
You can't have it both ways and say it's perfectly acceptable to grant dex/str to two handed weapon attacks but then penalize those choosing to dual wield!
In fact you actually unbalance the two fighting styles.
1d6+(×) +1d6+(×) (x being str or dex bonus) is equal two 2d6+(×) it's simply the player making a cognitive decision to play a certain way and as long as the outcome is the same i.e. the same damage who cares. It's not F'ing rocket science. K.I.S.S keep it simple stupid.
Why are you defending stupidity?
The fact that you like a convoluted, more complicated system that punishes player choice is baffling.
saying duel wielding fighting style is useless because you could get +2 damage with dueling fighting style when dual wielding lets you add your ability mod (probably gonna be +4 or +5) to the damage of your second weapon is actually dumb. ill acknowledge that its +2 to every attack not just the second weapon attacks, but thats a stupid thing to say
But unfortunately, you have to drop your first weapon in order to draw the other weapon
I like how this works. Makes me think of a samurai drawing and sheathing multiple blades on their attacks
I have a feeling that these rules are being misinterpreted and taken advantage of.
More than likely yes
Chris from Treantmonk’s Temple was able to confirm some things with dual wielder about the attack amount at least.
As far as Ted’s video, I think he is RAW but not RAI.
They always are
They asked Crawford at GenCon and Dual Wielder + Nick getting two extra attacks was intended
@@PsyrenXYThis exactly. It's not misinterpreted.
The part about doing it all with 1 hand does sound like it's misinterpreted.
The easiest way to fix this is to just say that you can’t swap your weapon on a bonus action attack weapon swapping is written as part of the attack action. A bone action attack is not part of the action so therefore you shouldn’t be able to swap your weapon.
You mean read the rules?!
As long as your good with Marilith's only being able to attack once with its main hand and then making another attack as a bonus action. The rest of its six arms only flail about menacingly.
No, not okay? Each of its six arms plus its tail should get to make an attack on its action. I see rules for me but not for thee.
You choose to Duel wield you make two attacks as your action. If you want to make a third attack as a bonus action fine its no different then a fighter wielding a two handed sword.
@@johnfree1717toss the rules there assine!
@@kazzdevlin5339multiattack ≠ dual wielding and you know it. Your entire argument is terrible.
@@trexdrewRight because a creature with 6 arms and can make six attacks, one with each arm is totally different than a creature with two arms who can only attack once per attack action because reasons.
The Marilith is a perfect correlation human with 6 arms. You don't like the fact that it poses a logical contradiction it's perfectly fine for this six armed creature to be able to make six attacks on one action and players are restricted. Rules for me not for thee! (Ignoring tail attack not relevant)
There's literally no difference in making two attacks with short swords or a two handed sword. 1d6(ability) + 1d6(ability) OR 2d6(Ability)
If any player tries to pull off dual-wielding one handed, I’m gonna yell at them. It’s so clearly bs. My game group wouldn’t try to pull this off afaik so at least I’m safe there, but I know if I go to an adventure league or other organized play event people are gonna pull this and that’s just so annoying.
Don't see the issue. Is proper English. You can equip *OR* unequip as part of that action. It's one or the other, not both.
Unless you are the DND version of FF's Gilgamesh and carry around 8 different weapons on your back so you can just toss daggers and scimitars to the ground as you pull the next ones in line you can't really use this strat.
DUEL WIELDING doesn't need to be this complicated.
If you have a Duel weapon fighting style you add you dex or str bonus to damage.
If you Duel wield a light or finesse weapon you make two attacks as an attack action.
Lastly if you pickup the Duel wielder feat you get to use larger weapons and get a bonus to AC of Plus one and make an additional reaction/opportunity attacks.
We've played this for years it's fine just ignore the minutiae WOTC have introduced. Instead of doing the simple thing they're trying to pigeon whole the whole nic property to justify weapon mastery.
All it does is complicate dual wielding!
Frankly, the simplest solution don't buy this book! At the very least implement things that make the game simpler not more complicated!
This fails on the face of it for at keast one thing. The name of the rule letting you do all this is 'Dual Wielding'. If you arent using a weapon in both hands then you cant claim to be dual wielding now can you?
Also, youd have to drop your weapon each time to draw a new one, which kills the viability of this past the first round
I love how this new edition was made to "fix" 5e but ended up adding even more broken stuff.
I only heard draw a weapon, not sheath one... I thought there was something that says you can only hold one weapon in a hand. So you'd need to drop the weapons to grab a new one.
I just checked the Article on Weapon Mastery Dndbeyond posted back in June, Looks like if your using a Nick weapon you lose the ability to BA Attack.
It says:
The Nick mastery property allows you to make the additional attack you receive from wielding two Light weapons as part of the initial attack action.
Keep in mind that this doesn’t mean you can make a third attack as a Bonus Action, as the Light property specifies you only get one extra attack. But, while it may not pump your damage, this frees up your Bonus Action to use class/species abilities, such as the Rogue’s Cunning Action, while still getting an additional attack in.
The intention is that you cannot use the Bonus Action attack granted by the Light weapon property during the Attack action because of the Nick property and still use another Bonus Action attack unless you gain it from a different source. Otherwise, you wouldn’t need the feat and could simply attack twice with your action and once with your Bonus Action, as long as you have the Nick property. The Dual Wielder feat grants you an additional Bonus Action attack.
Enhanced Dual Wielding: When you take the Attack action on your turn and attack with a weapon that has the Light property, you can make one additional attack as a Bonus Action later in the same turn with a different weapon. This weapon must be a Melee weapon that does not have the Two-Handed property. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of this extra attack unless the modifier is negative.
the light weapon property bonus attack is a different rule than the dual wielder feat bonus attack, otherwise the feat would say "when making the extra attack granted by the light weapon property..."
this could absolutely be an oversight, however
@delroland Crawford is on record saying 4 atks was intended.
Those are light weapons. As in d6 or d4 only. So at best d6+4 four times and you spent your bonus action to do so.
If you compare it to a vanilla 5th level barb who gets to attack twice for d12- 2d6 +9 ( +4 Str, +2 rage, + 3 great weapon master )with advantage from reckless atk it doesn't sound broken at all.
@@mappybc6097 dual wielder would allow one attack with a non-light weapon. also 4 attacks is my point, i was replying to op who said 3 was the max
@@mappybc6097@mappybc6097 so basically 8d6 + 16 (with feats allowing ability to all attacks and hunters mark) which is about 40 damage on average without any other abilities and a ranger by 5th level is going to have ways to increase that.
As a DM, it just doesn't sound fun. It's too much to keep track of, keep from being abused, and provide any sort of challenge against.
Even if you can unsheathe a new weapon on each attack, wouldn't you have to drop them to take the new one? draw a crossbow, attack, drop it, draw another crossbow, attack.
Yep.q
dual wielder lets you do two swaps per attack
Dropping is now the same action cost as drawing or stowing. You cant do both.
Does nik have a once per turn limit? Could someone use double daggers and get 2 nik attacks
The extra attack from the Light property does.
@@shaldrake right but does having multiple attacks or the bonus attack from the dual weapon feat, trigger an additional nik effect?
I think the idea behind the change to drawing/sheathing is to easier including characters who's fighting style is Iado(apologies if I spelled it wrong) or similar. That min max players would find ways to optimize this is just what we have to expect nowadays
That Red background bunny youtuber named The_Twig (I think) brought this up way back during play testing and UA. I'm sure they read some comments.
Believe fighter can put nick on a hand crossbow. Which would make this apply to ranged weapons too.
nick is not on the list of fighter bonus mastery properties: push, sap, or slow
but what about sheating? unsheating? yes. But sheating? if i have to drop the weapon each time.... it does not work.
Dropping and sheathing are both considering unequipping
@@NerdImmersion i hope it does not sound pretentious or aggressive, but. The reading you gave of the weapon readying is the almost same as 4e as of right now it clearly states "either" equip or unequip, and that allowed for thrown weapons more than weapon switching so it feels like a stretch. So it sounds more like the rules are for allowing "thrown weapons" to "be a thing again" after having been completely unviable in 5e than allowing people to sheathe and unsheathe weapons between attacks. You could unequip and attack with an unarmed strike then equip with the 3rd and 4th attack but then you need 3 attacks for the 2nd round onwards to do it consistently.