Can any creature other than PCs use Two-Weapon Fighting?












10














As per the rule on PHB, page 195:




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.
If either weapon has the thrown property, you
can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee
attack with it.




Now, let's take for example a drow (MM, page 128):



Under its Actions, it can use a shortword, which is a light melee weapon. Should said drow find itself wielding a second shortsword, would it be able to use Two-Weapon Fighting within the normal limitations of the feature?










share|improve this question









New contributor




Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.

























    10














    As per the rule on PHB, page 195:




    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.
    If either weapon has the thrown property, you
    can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee
    attack with it.




    Now, let's take for example a drow (MM, page 128):



    Under its Actions, it can use a shortword, which is a light melee weapon. Should said drow find itself wielding a second shortsword, would it be able to use Two-Weapon Fighting within the normal limitations of the feature?










    share|improve this question









    New contributor




    Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
    Check out our Code of Conduct.























      10












      10








      10







      As per the rule on PHB, page 195:




      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.
      If either weapon has the thrown property, you
      can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee
      attack with it.




      Now, let's take for example a drow (MM, page 128):



      Under its Actions, it can use a shortword, which is a light melee weapon. Should said drow find itself wielding a second shortsword, would it be able to use Two-Weapon Fighting within the normal limitations of the feature?










      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      As per the rule on PHB, page 195:




      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.
      If either weapon has the thrown property, you
      can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee
      attack with it.




      Now, let's take for example a drow (MM, page 128):



      Under its Actions, it can use a shortword, which is a light melee weapon. Should said drow find itself wielding a second shortsword, would it be able to use Two-Weapon Fighting within the normal limitations of the feature?







      dnd-5e monsters npc






      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.











      share|improve this question









      New contributor




      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      share|improve this question




      share|improve this question








      edited 2 hours ago









      Rubiksmoose

      48.2k6239365




      48.2k6239365






      New contributor




      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.









      asked 3 hours ago









      Emmanuel Acosta

      513




      513




      New contributor




      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.





      New contributor





      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






      Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
      Check out our Code of Conduct.






















          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes


















          8














          Yes, if you want it to be able to



          NPCs in D&D 5e are designed differently from, and often do not follow the same rules as, the player characters - but in this case the same rules should apply. The guidance for reading monster stat blocks states:




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action.




          By a strict reading, the weapon attack options described in the monster's stat block are not uses of the Attack action - they're special actions that the monster can use, so if it uses one of those actions it's not taking the Attack action and so can't qualify for two-weapon fighting. (Functionally, these options are usually equivalent to taking the Attack action and making an attack with that weapon, and in most cases I'd personally rule as if they were the Attack action for situations where that's relevant, but that's not the rules as written.)



          However, the monster explicitly retains the ability to use actions which are available to all creatures - including the Attack action - so it can take that action and make an attack with a weapon it's holding and then invoke two-weapon fighting just like a PC can.



          Where things get a bit funky is when the Multiattack action is in play. A monster with Multiattack can make several attacks with a single action - which is much the same as a player character using the Attack action with the Extra Attack feature - but it is not the Attack action, so a monster that uses Multiattack cannot use those attacks to qualify for a two-weapon-fighting bonus action attack. A monster with Multiattack is probably better off using that than trying to use the two-weapon fighting rules though, since its Multiattack almost certainly has better stats and doesn't use up a bonus action.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
            – SevenSidedDie
            2 hours ago












          • @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago






          • 1




            That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
            – SevenSidedDie
            1 hour ago



















          5














          Yes.



          Two-weapon fighting rules apply to monsters per the MM's guidance on monsters and what actions they can take.




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from...one of the actions available to all creatures...as described in the Player's Handbook. (MM page 10.)




          Further guidance on the next page of the MM specifically references the attack section of the PHB which contains the rules for Two Weapon Fighting.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 3




            Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
            – Carcer
            2 hours ago










          • So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
            – Token
            2 hours ago












          • I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
            – Rubiksmoose
            2 hours ago










          • Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
            – Token
            1 hour ago










          • I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago













          Your Answer





          StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function () {
          return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function () {
          StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix) {
          StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
          });
          });
          }, "mathjax-editing");

          StackExchange.ready(function() {
          var channelOptions = {
          tags: "".split(" "),
          id: "122"
          };
          initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

          StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
          // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
          if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
          StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
          createEditor();
          });
          }
          else {
          createEditor();
          }
          });

          function createEditor() {
          StackExchange.prepareEditor({
          heartbeatType: 'answer',
          autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
          convertImagesToLinks: false,
          noModals: true,
          showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
          reputationToPostImages: null,
          bindNavPrevention: true,
          postfix: "",
          imageUploader: {
          brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
          contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
          allowUrls: true
          },
          noCode: true, onDemand: true,
          discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
          ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
          });


          }
          });






          Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138309%2fcan-any-creature-other-than-pcs-use-two-weapon-fighting%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown

























          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes








          2 Answers
          2






          active

          oldest

          votes









          active

          oldest

          votes






          active

          oldest

          votes









          8














          Yes, if you want it to be able to



          NPCs in D&D 5e are designed differently from, and often do not follow the same rules as, the player characters - but in this case the same rules should apply. The guidance for reading monster stat blocks states:




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action.




          By a strict reading, the weapon attack options described in the monster's stat block are not uses of the Attack action - they're special actions that the monster can use, so if it uses one of those actions it's not taking the Attack action and so can't qualify for two-weapon fighting. (Functionally, these options are usually equivalent to taking the Attack action and making an attack with that weapon, and in most cases I'd personally rule as if they were the Attack action for situations where that's relevant, but that's not the rules as written.)



          However, the monster explicitly retains the ability to use actions which are available to all creatures - including the Attack action - so it can take that action and make an attack with a weapon it's holding and then invoke two-weapon fighting just like a PC can.



          Where things get a bit funky is when the Multiattack action is in play. A monster with Multiattack can make several attacks with a single action - which is much the same as a player character using the Attack action with the Extra Attack feature - but it is not the Attack action, so a monster that uses Multiattack cannot use those attacks to qualify for a two-weapon-fighting bonus action attack. A monster with Multiattack is probably better off using that than trying to use the two-weapon fighting rules though, since its Multiattack almost certainly has better stats and doesn't use up a bonus action.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
            – SevenSidedDie
            2 hours ago












          • @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago






          • 1




            That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
            – SevenSidedDie
            1 hour ago
















          8














          Yes, if you want it to be able to



          NPCs in D&D 5e are designed differently from, and often do not follow the same rules as, the player characters - but in this case the same rules should apply. The guidance for reading monster stat blocks states:




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action.




          By a strict reading, the weapon attack options described in the monster's stat block are not uses of the Attack action - they're special actions that the monster can use, so if it uses one of those actions it's not taking the Attack action and so can't qualify for two-weapon fighting. (Functionally, these options are usually equivalent to taking the Attack action and making an attack with that weapon, and in most cases I'd personally rule as if they were the Attack action for situations where that's relevant, but that's not the rules as written.)



          However, the monster explicitly retains the ability to use actions which are available to all creatures - including the Attack action - so it can take that action and make an attack with a weapon it's holding and then invoke two-weapon fighting just like a PC can.



          Where things get a bit funky is when the Multiattack action is in play. A monster with Multiattack can make several attacks with a single action - which is much the same as a player character using the Attack action with the Extra Attack feature - but it is not the Attack action, so a monster that uses Multiattack cannot use those attacks to qualify for a two-weapon-fighting bonus action attack. A monster with Multiattack is probably better off using that than trying to use the two-weapon fighting rules though, since its Multiattack almost certainly has better stats and doesn't use up a bonus action.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 1




            MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
            – SevenSidedDie
            2 hours ago












          • @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago






          • 1




            That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
            – SevenSidedDie
            1 hour ago














          8












          8








          8






          Yes, if you want it to be able to



          NPCs in D&D 5e are designed differently from, and often do not follow the same rules as, the player characters - but in this case the same rules should apply. The guidance for reading monster stat blocks states:




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action.




          By a strict reading, the weapon attack options described in the monster's stat block are not uses of the Attack action - they're special actions that the monster can use, so if it uses one of those actions it's not taking the Attack action and so can't qualify for two-weapon fighting. (Functionally, these options are usually equivalent to taking the Attack action and making an attack with that weapon, and in most cases I'd personally rule as if they were the Attack action for situations where that's relevant, but that's not the rules as written.)



          However, the monster explicitly retains the ability to use actions which are available to all creatures - including the Attack action - so it can take that action and make an attack with a weapon it's holding and then invoke two-weapon fighting just like a PC can.



          Where things get a bit funky is when the Multiattack action is in play. A monster with Multiattack can make several attacks with a single action - which is much the same as a player character using the Attack action with the Extra Attack feature - but it is not the Attack action, so a monster that uses Multiattack cannot use those attacks to qualify for a two-weapon-fighting bonus action attack. A monster with Multiattack is probably better off using that than trying to use the two-weapon fighting rules though, since its Multiattack almost certainly has better stats and doesn't use up a bonus action.






          share|improve this answer














          Yes, if you want it to be able to



          NPCs in D&D 5e are designed differently from, and often do not follow the same rules as, the player characters - but in this case the same rules should apply. The guidance for reading monster stat blocks states:




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from the options in the Actions section of its stat block or use one of the actions available to all creatures, such as the Dash or Hide action.




          By a strict reading, the weapon attack options described in the monster's stat block are not uses of the Attack action - they're special actions that the monster can use, so if it uses one of those actions it's not taking the Attack action and so can't qualify for two-weapon fighting. (Functionally, these options are usually equivalent to taking the Attack action and making an attack with that weapon, and in most cases I'd personally rule as if they were the Attack action for situations where that's relevant, but that's not the rules as written.)



          However, the monster explicitly retains the ability to use actions which are available to all creatures - including the Attack action - so it can take that action and make an attack with a weapon it's holding and then invoke two-weapon fighting just like a PC can.



          Where things get a bit funky is when the Multiattack action is in play. A monster with Multiattack can make several attacks with a single action - which is much the same as a player character using the Attack action with the Extra Attack feature - but it is not the Attack action, so a monster that uses Multiattack cannot use those attacks to qualify for a two-weapon-fighting bonus action attack. A monster with Multiattack is probably better off using that than trying to use the two-weapon fighting rules though, since its Multiattack almost certainly has better stats and doesn't use up a bonus action.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 1 hour ago









          GreySage

          13.8k44992




          13.8k44992










          answered 2 hours ago









          Carcer

          21.8k462119




          21.8k462119








          • 1




            MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
            – SevenSidedDie
            2 hours ago












          • @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago






          • 1




            That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
            – SevenSidedDie
            1 hour ago














          • 1




            MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
            – SevenSidedDie
            2 hours ago












          • @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago






          • 1




            That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
            – SevenSidedDie
            1 hour ago








          1




          1




          MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
          – SevenSidedDie
          2 hours ago






          MM p. 10 specifically calls out named monster actions as Actions, so the natural reading of the rules is that they are attacking using custom-named Actions, not the Attack action. This answer’s logic still works regardless of that , and I’d like to upvote it, but the bit about reading monster Actions as being already secretly the Attack action means I can’t bring myself to.
          – SevenSidedDie
          2 hours ago














          @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
          – Carcer
          1 hour ago




          @SevenSidedDie fair enough - I've edited to clarify that my interpretation isn't strictly RAW on that particular issue.
          – Carcer
          1 hour ago




          1




          1




          That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
          – SevenSidedDie
          1 hour ago




          That works for me! I like how what is and what’s sensible to rule are distinguished. (And the reason for personally ruling that way is clear and makes good sense, now that I consider it separately.)
          – SevenSidedDie
          1 hour ago













          5














          Yes.



          Two-weapon fighting rules apply to monsters per the MM's guidance on monsters and what actions they can take.




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from...one of the actions available to all creatures...as described in the Player's Handbook. (MM page 10.)




          Further guidance on the next page of the MM specifically references the attack section of the PHB which contains the rules for Two Weapon Fighting.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 3




            Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
            – Carcer
            2 hours ago










          • So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
            – Token
            2 hours ago












          • I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
            – Rubiksmoose
            2 hours ago










          • Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
            – Token
            1 hour ago










          • I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago


















          5














          Yes.



          Two-weapon fighting rules apply to monsters per the MM's guidance on monsters and what actions they can take.




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from...one of the actions available to all creatures...as described in the Player's Handbook. (MM page 10.)




          Further guidance on the next page of the MM specifically references the attack section of the PHB which contains the rules for Two Weapon Fighting.






          share|improve this answer



















          • 3




            Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
            – Carcer
            2 hours ago










          • So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
            – Token
            2 hours ago












          • I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
            – Rubiksmoose
            2 hours ago










          • Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
            – Token
            1 hour ago










          • I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago
















          5












          5








          5






          Yes.



          Two-weapon fighting rules apply to monsters per the MM's guidance on monsters and what actions they can take.




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from...one of the actions available to all creatures...as described in the Player's Handbook. (MM page 10.)




          Further guidance on the next page of the MM specifically references the attack section of the PHB which contains the rules for Two Weapon Fighting.






          share|improve this answer














          Yes.



          Two-weapon fighting rules apply to monsters per the MM's guidance on monsters and what actions they can take.




          When a monster takes its action, it can choose from...one of the actions available to all creatures...as described in the Player's Handbook. (MM page 10.)




          Further guidance on the next page of the MM specifically references the attack section of the PHB which contains the rules for Two Weapon Fighting.







          share|improve this answer














          share|improve this answer



          share|improve this answer








          edited 19 mins ago









          Rubiksmoose

          48.2k6239365




          48.2k6239365










          answered 2 hours ago









          Token

          4076




          4076








          • 3




            Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
            – Carcer
            2 hours ago










          • So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
            – Token
            2 hours ago












          • I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
            – Rubiksmoose
            2 hours ago










          • Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
            – Token
            1 hour ago










          • I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago
















          • 3




            Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
            – Carcer
            2 hours ago










          • So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
            – Token
            2 hours ago












          • I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
            – Rubiksmoose
            2 hours ago










          • Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
            – Token
            1 hour ago










          • I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
            – Carcer
            1 hour ago










          3




          3




          Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
          – Carcer
          2 hours ago




          Being able to use TWF isn't strictly the same as Mulitattack - Multiattack is a single action whereas TWF requires expending a bonus action to get the extra attack, which has implications for their action economy. (Possibly functionally irrelevant implications in many cases, I do concede.)
          – Carcer
          2 hours ago












          So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
          – Token
          2 hours ago






          So it seems that Multiattack, though similar to TWF, is distinct from TWF and that TWF is usable by any creature that fulfils the pre-reqs, (bonus action, both weapons light, etc.) Any edit to make?
          – Token
          2 hours ago














          I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
          – Rubiksmoose
          2 hours ago




          I would add support for why you say that TWF rules can apply to monsters. That is the core of the question so you really need to expand your logic there. Also, what is the point of bringing up multiattack? I don't get what point you are trying to make there.
          – Rubiksmoose
          2 hours ago












          Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
          – Token
          1 hour ago




          Changed supporting information from the previously mentioned and unrelated Multiattack to the answers current state.
          – Token
          1 hour ago












          I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
          – Carcer
          1 hour ago






          I think it was a worthwhile note in the original version that allowing a monster to TWF does make it more dangerous and could potentially justify increasing its CR (though a TWF attack with a mundane light weapon would only be a few points of damage, with is within the margin of tolerance for offensive CR calculation in most cases).
          – Carcer
          1 hour ago












          Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










          draft saved

          draft discarded


















          Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













          Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












          Emmanuel Acosta is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















          Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.





          Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.


          Please pay close attention to the following guidance:


          • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

          But avoid



          • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

          • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


          To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




          draft saved


          draft discarded














          StackExchange.ready(
          function () {
          StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f138309%2fcan-any-creature-other-than-pcs-use-two-weapon-fighting%23new-answer', 'question_page');
          }
          );

          Post as a guest















          Required, but never shown





















































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown

































          Required, but never shown














          Required, but never shown












          Required, but never shown







          Required, but never shown







          Popular posts from this blog

          404 Error Contact Form 7 ajax form submitting

          How to know if a Active Directory user can login interactively

          TypeError: fit_transform() missing 1 required positional argument: 'X'