| 10 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
If i have a +6 or better BAB and am holding a second weapon do i apply my full str bonus or only half of it two one of the weapons if i attack with both?
Figured i would give this its own thread for its own FAQ numbers.
You can only have one primary hand. Your off hand weapon always damages with half your strength bonuses.
And of course the normal attack modifiers apply for two weapon fighting, which is what you're doing, no matter what you call it.
Check the FAQ! SKR has said that you can attack w/ a 2nd weapon as your 2nd ititerave (or more) attack WITHOUT TWF draw backs.
I'm assuming the half Str on off-hand is to balance with the Str-and-a-half for two-handed weapons. So if you're using your iterative attacks (which have nothing to do with TWF or off-hand), you get full Str on all attacks.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can only have one primary hand. Your off hand weapon always damages with half your strength bonuses.
And of course the normal attack modifiers apply for two weapon fighting, which is what you're doing, no matter what you call it.
New FAQ clarifies that I am in fact not TWF
Which is why I'm wondering if I am still dealing with Primary/off hand or not.
If i have a +6 or better BAB and am holding a second weapon do i apply my full str bonus or only half of it two one of the weapons if i attack with both?
Figured i would give this its own thread for its own FAQ numbers.
I always thought the 1/2 str was a twf penalty (& two handed balance) so i say full str!
Just consider it from the standpoint of a character with BAB 6+ who doesn't have TWF- that character will always get the full STR bonus on all his iterative attacks because he is always using his primary hand. Then TWF adds a bonus attack with restrictions specific to just it.
The penalty to off hand attacks isn't listed under TWF. It should apply in all cases where you attack with your off hand.
It is listed in the combat section under damage and in the equipment section under Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons.
It is also hinted at in the Power Attack feat.
It's mentioned in the definition to strength at the beginning of the book.
It's mentioned for natural attacks.
You get 1/2 strength in the same way you get 1 and 1/2 strength for two handed weapons.
Mind you if you only attack with one weapon throughout the course for the round there is no reason that weapon has to be off hand.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Off-hand attacks and damage are also called out under the monk Unarmed Strike ability.
Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.
Given that Pathfinder does not have handedness and you can choose which weapon to start with in a series. The way I would rule it is that which ever weapon you start with is your primary for that round and the other weapon would be your off hand and take the 1/2 STR dmg.
Given that Pathfinder does not have handedness and you can choose which weapon to start with in a series. The way I would rule it is that which ever weapon you start with is your primary for that round and the other weapon would be your off hand and take the 1/2 STR dmg.
Problem with your suggestion... as you said pathinder does not have handedness. Except in a TWF scenario (which is where you have an off-handed attack). What the damage for an off-hand is is irrelevant as you do not currently have an off-hand or a primary hand.
You simply have a normal attack. You gain full STR on regular attacks. So full STR wins the day.
I think that you would get full Strength bonus. There really isn't an off-hand unless you are using the Two-Weapon Fighting. However I think it's more than reasonable for a GM to say that your first weapon is a primary and your other hand(s) are all off-hand.
Pathfinder does not have handedness.
Where does this come from?
Sure Pathfinder doesn't have right or left handedness. The only difference between pathfinder and 3.5(regarding off hand) is that in 3.5 you always applied a -4 to the off hand attacks. Unless you reduced those penalties.
Even in 3.5 you could change which hand was your primary hand at the start of your turn.
It makes sense that if a Two-handed weapon deals 1 and 1/2 times strength damage and primary hand attack deals 1 times strength damage that an off hand attack would deal only 1/2 str damage.
Pathfinder does not have handedness.Where does this come from?
Generally attributed to James Jacobs' Post stating "Tracking right or left handedness isn't something we bother with in Pathfinder."
He then says "The ONLY time an attack is considered an off-hand attack is when you make an attack with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon."
But as that implies you're always TWF if you use a weapon in each hand, it could be argued that post-FAQ it only applies when TWF.
Thus, some people say you only have an off-hand if you're TWF.
However, even if you rule that any limb you use after the first is an off-hand, people can still switch weapons as a free action, avoiding the half strength, but making things 'overly complicated and muddled and annoying.'
So I think it's most reasonable to only deal with off-hand if you're TWF, and for iteratives treat them all as separate attacks.
He then says "The ONLY time an attack is considered an off-hand attack is when you make an attack with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon."But as that implies you're always TWF if you use a weapon in each hand, it could be argued that post-FAQ it only applies when TWF.
Thus, some people say you only have an off-hand if you're TWF.
.....
So I think it's most reasonable to only deal with off-hand if you're TWF, and for iteratives treat them all as separate attacks.
First of all, hi to all. In the Example the Fighter has +6+1 (2 attack). If he wields 2 weapon also if he don't have TWF feat, wath if he strike with a lomg sword (+6) and with a light mace (+1)? sure reading faq he can do it, but he can add his full strenght to the second attack? FAQ don't tell us nothing to Off Hand STR malus but is reasonable to me believe that a weapon is always primary and the other is secondary.
If a new player was making a TWF ranger for the first time they wouldn't necessarily run into the rule regarding off hand damage. Although, as I have said, the rule does appear in many places throughout the book including the combat section.
The rest of the rules are fairly intuitive regarding attacks and can be explained easily to him by a fellow player. It seems easy to assume that they wouldn't mention the Off hand strength rule.
And the formula is even in bold for a normal attack.
Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + size modifier
And the weapons table in the book has a special section for light weapons.
|
So what if the 'off hand' weapon is a two handed weapon? Barbarian with BAB +6/+1 throws javelin @ BAB +6 with a longspear in his 'off hand', uses his 'primary hand' to grip it with the 'off hand', then attacks with it using the BAB +1. He'll get 1+1/2 STR, of course.
Similarly, couldn't the man simply swap hands if he's not using TWF to avoid the question of 'off hand' altogether? James assumes using two weapon fighting, as the later covers in FAQ.
If you have a longsword in your right hand and a shield in your left, and you only attack with a shield bash in a round, that shield bash is NOT considered an off-hand or secondary attack for that round.
It's a relatively easy bit of house rules to institute handedness, though, if you're looking for that level of additional detail... but that's not a level of detail we want to assume for the core game.
Yes. Basically, you only incur TWF penalties if you trying to get an extra attack per round.
Let's assume you're a 6th-level fighter (BAB +6/+1) holding a longsword in one hand and a light mace in the other. Your possible full attack combinations without using two-weapon fighting are:
(A) longsword at +6, longsword +1
(B) mace +6, mace +1
(C) longsword +6, mace +1
(D) mace +6, longsword +1
All of these combinations result in you making exactly two attacks, one at +6 and one at +1. You're not getting any extra attacks, therefore you're not using the two-weapon fighting rule, and therefore you're not taking any two-weapon fighting penalties.
If you have Quick Draw, you could even start the round wielding only one weapon, make your main attack with it, draw the second weapon as a free action after your first attack, and use that second weapon to make your iterative attack. As long as you're properly using the BAB values for your iterative attacks, and as long as you're not exceeding the number of attacks per round granted by your BAB, you are not considered to be using two-weapon fighting, and therefore do not take any of the penalties for two-weapon fighting.
The two-weapon fighting option in the Core Rulebook specifically refers to getting an extra attack for using a second weapon in your offhand. In the above four examples, there is no extra attack, therefore you're not using two-weapon fighting.
Using the longsword/mace example, if you use two-weapon fighting you actually have fewer options than if you aren't. Your options are (ignoring the primary/off hand penalties):
(A') primary longsword at +6, primary longsword at +1, off hand mace at +6
(B') primary mace at +6, primary mace at +1, off hand longsword at +6
In other words, once you decide you're using two-weapon fighting to get that extra attack on your turn (which you have to decide before you take any attacks on your turn), that decision locks you in to the format of "my primary weapon gets my main attack and my iterative attack, and my off hand weapon only gets the extra attack, and I apply two-weapon fighting penalties."
As stated in the bold, it is when using two weapon fighting that the off-hand penalties apply. The off hand damage is intended for using two weapon fighting only, not just fighting with two weapons.
The 1/2 strength to Off-hand attacks isn't a penalty.
If it was than the 1 and 1/2 strength would also be a penalty and most people think of that as a bonus.
Of course neither of these are penalties or bonuses there just how how the damage is defined for each weapon.
Even power attack shows a link between these two definitions.
Right or left handedness isn't important in pathfinder. It also wasn't important in 3.5.
It is mentioned in 3.0. Looking it up in my well loved first printing with the cover worn off. :D
A character's weaker or less dexterous hand (usually the left). The only thing that this implies different from pathfinder and 3.5 is that you couldn't swap which hand was your primary hand between rounds.
This implies that in 3.0 you couldn't change which hand was your primary hand between rounds. In both pathfinder and 3.5 you can change which hand is your primary hand between rounds.
The only difference that I know about between 3.5 and pathfinder is that you don't receive the -4 to attacks with your off hand.
In 3.5 the -4 was kept but the Ambidexterity feat was combined with the TWF feat. and the TWF section never mentions that the penalty to off hand attacks is actually -4(off hand) + -6(TWF to both weapons) it just says a -10. I remember the questions about this on the wizards boards.
In pathfinder the -4 was removed and the penalties to off hand was simply intrinsically -10(TWF off hand) and -6(TWF primary hand.)
Its regular strength. Off hand only exists in pathfinder in the context of using two weapon fighting to gain the extra attack or a similar ability (such as secondary natural attacks, using natural weapons after attacking with manufactured weapons, or using spiked armor as an "offhand")
Its regular strength. Off hand only exists in pathfinder in the context of using two weapon fighting to gain the extra attack or a similar ability (such as secondary natural attacks, using natural weapons after attacking with manufactured weapons, or using spiked armor as an "offhand")
There is nothing that leads me to believe this is so.
If 1/2 strength for off hand only matter for TWF, and similar gaining of extra attacks, then why isn't it defined under TWF?
If 1/2 strength for off hand only matter for TWF, and similar gaining of extra attacks, then why isn't it defined under TWF?
It is... note the word off-hand attack only appears in a TWF context... with the exception of the damage section (and the power attack damage section) which outlines how much an off-hand attack does in terms of added str.
At the onset of character building you declare which hand you want to be your primary hand. Any attacks made with that hand have the full STR bonus. Conversely your other hand will only get 1/2 STR bonus when you attack. You cannot change which hand is your primary or off hand once decided at character creation. You can however pick up the double slice feat in the core rule book to gain your full STR bonus on attacks made with your off hand.
Note that you will always only get the 1/2 STR bonus with your off hand even if that is the only hand that you attack with that round. Unless of course you have double slice.
As a person who loved playing a TWF ranger, I suggest using a light weapon in your off hand, using a one handed weapon in your primary hand and picking up double slice. This will reduce your negatives to hit to only -2 for both hands and it will give you your full STR bonus to damage with both hands.
It is... note the word off-hand attack only appears in a TWF context... with the exception of the damage section (and the power attack damage section) which outlines how much an off-hand attack does in terms of added str.
Certainly "Off hand" is mentioned in as it is an important part of the special attack.
The 1/2 strength bonus isn't mentioned in the TWF section... why isn't it if it only applies in such a situation?
To a greater extent why not get twice the strength score for fighting with a two handed weapon if you would normally get full strength for each hand normally in a round?
Off hand is actually defined in two more sections then you have mentioned. (Off hand as it pertains to Strength/damage)
On page 16 of the CRB it is defined under
STRENGTH (STR)
Along with the strength added to Two handed weapons.
On page 141 of the CRB is is defined under
Light, One-Handed, And Two-Handed Melee Weapons:
under
one-handed:
also mentioned under
Two-Handed:
the strength added to two-handed weapons.
Notice that when off hand is mentioned so is Two-handed.
Notice that: primary hand (1) + off hand (1/2) = two handed (1 1/2)
It is mentioned once with regard to TWF in the feat Double Slice on page 122 of the CMB.
At the onset of character building you declare which hand you want to be your primary hand. Any attacks made with that hand have the full STR bonus. Conversely your other hand will only get 1/2 STR bonus when you attack.
This isn't true.
A character can choose which hand is there primary hand before they make any attacks on there turn.
This has been reiterated many times on the boards with links to official rulings on the matter.
The 1/2 strength bonus isn't mentioned in the TWF section... why isn't it if it only applies in such a situation?
I don't write or organize the rules, karl. Why isnt the melee damage listed under full attack? I think its because the melee damage was meant to be grouped together.
To a greater extent why not get twice the strength score for fighting with a two handed weapon if you would normally get full strength for each hand normally in a round?
Because the rules state 1.5 when you make a two-handed attack?
Off hand is actually defined in two more sections then you have mentioned. (Off hand as it pertains to Strength/damage)
And all those references you just quoted pertain to strength and damage...
Notice that when off-hand is mentioned so is Two-handed.
Notice that: primary hand (1) + off hand (1/2) = two handed (1 1/2)
Now you can notice that off-hand attacks don't exist outside of TWF special attacks, but two-handed attacks do.
Show me a rules example that illustrates where a character makes only an off-handed attack. It doesn't exist. But, you see plenty of examples of two-handed attacks.
Now you can notice that off-hand attacks don't exist outside of TWF special attacks, but two-handed attacks do.
As soon as I see it written. I will be able to notice it. Until then there is no reason to assume that what you say is a fact.
Off hand damage is in many sections of the CRB that we have both mentioned.
Including, as you have stated, in the combat section.
Off hand damage isn't mentioned in the TWF section and Off hand isn't mentioned as being exclusive to TWF either.
To a greater extend there is no reason to assume that it isn't outside the TWF section.
It is logical both realistically and with in the context of the rules.
I am not saying that it matters much. After all the 1/2 strength extra that you gain isn't going to be a huge boon to a character that wanted to use there off hand during iterative attacks. It's still a corner case.
As to my question about Two-handed weapons. You mearly stated:
Because the rules state 1.5?
Being as this is something that I already showed knowledge of. I think you really didn't think about that question or why I asked it.
Seriously this time.why not get twice the strength score for fighting with a two handed weapon if you would normally get full strength for each hand normally in a round?
I should mention that I am not stating this as a preference.
Here we see an example: Shield Bash. In the Core rules it describes it as being an off-handed attack, however, the FAQ clarified for us:
If I make a shield bash (page 152), does it always have to be an off-hand attack?
The text for a shield bash assumes you're making a bash as an off-hand attack, but you don't have to. You can, for example, just make a shield bash attack (at your normal, main-hand attack bonus) or shield bash with your main hand and attack with a sword in your off-hand.Update: Page 152—In the Shield Bash Attacks section, in the first sentence, delete “using it as an off-hand weapon.”
—Sean K Reynolds, 08/30/11
It does not have to be an off-handed weapon. In fact there are no attacks that are off-handed attacks in a vaccuum.
why not get twice the strength score for fighting with a two handed weapon if you would normally get full strength for each hand normally in a round?
Again, because the rules say so, I can't make a statement that's any clearer on the RAW position. 1.5x is the number the developers hit upon. However, if you'd like to get into a game design chat and speculate we can:
I imagine that it would be because 1.5x is the same as using a primary (1x) and off-hand attack (.5x) in the TWF configuration. Thus, the theoretical STR outputs would be the same. This is true if we assume a character with a single attack that is getting an extra attack with TWF.
However, if you're using iterative attack forms this changes *wildly*. This is because we remember that Pathfinder does not have "handedness" nor "ambidexterity", and that each character is equally proficient in having a primary left or right hand when they attack, then it should not make a difference. We know that under normal circumstances (a character with a single attack or AoO), a single attack from either hand will grant a 1x STR bonus, then it only makes sense that if you are *not* using the TWF special attack then you can't possibly have an off-handed attack when you use iterative attacks.
Mace (right hand) +6 1d6 + str
Sword (left hand) +1 1d6 + str
this is the same as
Mace (right hand) +6 1d6 + str
Mace (right hand) +1 1d6 + str
Under the rules. This is what the new TWF FAQ clarifies, because these two instances would both be primary iterative attacks. Again off-hand does not enter the picture as it is an exclusive term to describe the extra attack for the TWF Special Attack.
I don't understand your damage argument because a character that using a two-handed weapon for their iterative attacks will get:
greataxe +6 1d12 + 1.5x str
greataxe +1 1d12 + 1.5x str
is the same as:
greataxe +6 1d12 + 1.5x str
Unarmed Strike (kick) +1 1d3 + 1x str
Is the two-handed fighter getting cheated out of his strength bonus for using the second attack routine? No, thats what they chose, it is suboptimal, but suppose they need bludgeoning or non-lethal damage? It's all very circumstantial.
Reading this is clear to me that Off Hand STR malus is always active. You could have TWF or not, but if you strike an opponent with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon the second one is always off hand
** spoiler omitted **
Reading this is clear to me that Off Hand STR malus is always active. You could have TWF or not, but if you strike an opponent with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon the second one is always off hand
I like James, he makes great contributions to the community, but SKR's FAQ sure seems to be in contradiction with this idea. You're not TWF when making iterative attacks *even when using different hands*, so no off-handed penalties. (sean even covers this in the FAQ).
From the FAQ:
All of these combinations result in you making exactly two attacks, one at +6 and one at +1. You're not getting any extra attacks, therefore you're not using the two-weapon fighting rule, and therefore you're not taking any two-weapon fighting penalties.
I see this will be a struggle for the community to grasp for the forseeable future (especially those whoe don't frequent the forums), so expect this question every week or so.
I like James, he makes great contributions to the community, but SKR's FAQ sure seems to be incontradiction with this idea.** spoiler omitted **
Reading this is clear to me that Off Hand STR malus is always active. You could have TWF or not, but if you strike an opponent with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon the second one is always off hand
I don't believe it. Here we aren't talking about TWF, but only about Off Hand STR malus and FAQ don' tell us nothing, but hey if you are a Fighter with STR 30 it make a lot of difference adding +10 or +5 to damage and hey, you make an attack eith lonsword and a mace? ok also if don't have TWF, one of this is an off hand. FAQ alway speak about Character with TWF feats
I don't believe it. Here we aren't talking about TWF, but only about Off Hand STR malus and FAQ don' tell us nothing, but hey if you are a Fighter with STR 30 it make a lot of difference adding +10 or +5 to damage and hey, you make an attack eith lonsword and a mace? ok also if don't have TWF, one of this is an off hand. FAQ alway speak about Character with TWF feats
Off-handed Attacks *don't exist* outside of TWF. You can't make an off-handed attack without using TWF, it's just a normal attack *even if you use two weapons* - as Sean shows you in the FAQ.
All of these combinations result in you making exactly two attacks, one at +6 and one at +1. You're not getting any extra attacks, therefore you're not using the two-weapon fighting rule, and therefore you're not taking any two-weapon fighting penalties.
One of the penalties of TWF is the STR reduction for off-handed attacks.
** spoiler omitted **
Reading this is clear to me that Off Hand STR malus is always active. You could have TWF or not, but if you strike an opponent with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon the second one is always off hand
By the way james' quote would also mean that if i throw two weapons using quick draw and the same hand the second one is 1/2 str.
Thats where it gets weird if i attack with the same hand with 4 different weapons in a round its full str if i use two different hands then one of those attacks loses some str.
Off-handed Attacks *don't exist* outside of TWF. You can't make an off-handed attack without using TWF, it's just a normal attack *even if you use two weapons* - as Sean shows you in the FAQ.
Why? the first TWF feat don't give us nothing it only reduce penalties: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with
two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary handlessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6.
if you wields two weapon you can strike with –6 –10 malus, with TWF penalties are only reduced
Again, because the rules say so, I can't make a statement that's any clearer on the RAW position.
And it should state so because it makes sense.
It makes sense that you would get 1 X strength for your primary hand.
It makes sense that you would get 1/2 X strength for your off hand.
It makes sense that you would get 1 and 1/2 X strength when using both hands.
It is true that there isn't handedness. Actual handedness hasn't been an issue since 3.0. This discussion has nothing to do with actual handedness.
In 3.5 and pathfinder you can choose which hand is your primary hand before you make an attack on your turn.
I feel that this quote sums up the specifics clearly.
The ONLY time an attack is considered an off-hand attack is when you make an attack with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon.
There is no reason to believe that just because you are not using TWF that you get two primary hands.
Is the two-handed fighter getting cheated out of his strength bonus for using the second attack routine?
Of course not. It makes sense because there fighting with both the primary hand and off hand at the same time.
No, thats what they chose, it is suboptimal, but suppose they need bludgeoning or non-lethal damage?
Whether or not fighting two handed or duel wielding is optimal is irreverent to this conversation.
All of these combinations result in you making exactly two attacks, one at +6 and one at +1. You're not getting any extra attacks, therefore you're not using the two-weapon fighting rule, and therefore you're not taking any two-weapon fighting penalties.One of the penalties of TWF is the STR reduction for off-handed attacks.
The 1/2 X strength to off hand attacks isn't a penalty. It isn't listed anywhere in the TWF section.
Penalties are usually negative numbers.
Two things Karl I see your line of thinking however when i take double slice i don't get a bonus to Two handed damage so why would getting full str on BAB only attacks do so.
Also I'm fine if its ruled that my second hand used is an off hand however that means its more effective to to attack drop attack than to give em the old one two.
Two things Karl I see your line of thinking however when i take double slice i don't get a bonus to Two handed damage so why would getting full str on BAB only attacks do so.
Also I'm fine if its ruled that my second hand used is an off hand however that means its more effective to to attack drop attack than to give em the old one two.
That's actually a nice argument. I thought about it and I just think that it is so unlikely that anyone would fight with two weapons and not have the TWF feat.
It seems like it would rarely happen and so Paizo didn't think that feat needed to be made more universal.
Interestingly I would like to know how people were planing on using the rules now that we KNOW.
Is there anyway to make use of fighting with two weapons for iterative attacks?
The 1/2 X strength to off hand attacks isn't a penalty. It isn't listed anywhere in the TWF section.
Penalties are usually negative numbers.
The reduced damage is a byproduct of your extra attack, called on off-handed attack.
According to your position, there are no hard damage numbers for TWF in the TWF fighting section so clearly they are not subject to any other rules.
You've still yet to address iterative attacks. Because they are different than TWF. TWF =/= using two weapons with iterative attacks.
Finally, you don't have to choose a primary hand and an off-hand at the beginning of your turn *if you aren't TWF*. I can't be any clearer on this issue.
My plan is a character who fights with a dwarven war axe and throwing axes with the ability to throw the axes if i kill everything within reach.
The reduced damage is a byproduct of your extra attack.
I thought the -10 and -6 were the byproducts. Because they are actually mentioned as such.
Off hand damage isn't mentioned in the TWF section.
Penalty: Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another.
My plan is a character who fights with a dwarven war axe and throwing axes with the ability to throw the axes if i kill everything within reach.
I like it, remember that throwing axes only have a 10 foot range increment.
Off hand damage isn't mentioned in the TWF section.
Getting an off-handed attack (and it's damage) seems like the main byproduct of TWF, to me at least.
Begin Snark --
Damage is not mentioned in the TWF section at all, therefore TWF attacks do not deal damage at all.
-- End Snark
But, as I have been saying all along, TWF, the TWF section of the rules as well as off-hand attack damage do not apply to the question the OP has asked. This is because the OP's question deals with iterative attacks outside the TWF special attack context.
According to your position, there are no hard damage numbers for TWF in the TWF fighting section so clearly they are not subject to any other rules.
I'm not sure your protraying me correctly or my position. I certainly never said that TWF rules aren't subject to other rules. That would be silly. Was this meant to discredit me?
You've still yet to address iterative attacks. Because they are different than TWF. TWF =/= using two weapons with iterative attacks.
Iterative attacks is what we are talking about. Specifically using two different weapons in two different hands for iterative attacks and what amount of strength is applied to each weapon.
TWF is not equal to using two weapons with iterative attacks? Yes. I believe I had a long argument with people on another thread about this. Fortunately this isn't what we are talking about and this was cleared up in the FAQ.
Finally, you don't have to choose a primary hand and an off-hand at the beginning of your turn *if you aren't TWF*. I can't be any clearer on this issue.
I though we weren't talking about TWF? :D
Off hand and primary hand are not exclusive to TWF. If they were they would only need to be defined once and in the TWF section.My plan is a character who fights with a dwarven war axe and throwing axes with the ability to throw the axes if i kill everything within reach.
If you drop your War axe you would have to pick it up later. which is a move action at least. I would just use my off hand.
Thats why i need to know what my damage is its a plan of swing waraxe kill if nothing threatens throw axe at something at range.
I though we weren't talking about TWF? :D
Off hand and primary hand are not exclusive to TWF. If they were they would only need to be defined once and in the TWF section.
You keep bringing up off-hand attacks, which only exist when making a TWF special attack. Outside of TWF, Iterative attacks are not labeled as an off-hand. You've yet to provide any evidence for your claim that they do. Other than providing text about how much damage they do.
So inevitably we talk about TWF because you keep bringing up that topic. I am trying to move the main topic forward to the place it should go.
I did not create the PF rules, but please read SKR's FAQ about iterative attacks and see how many times he calls the second iterative attack the "off-hand attack".
But, he's very clear to spell out primary and off-hand in the second half of the FAQ when TWF is factored in.
That being said, you're welcome to houserule.
@talonhawke
Returning WarAxe!
Thats why i need to know what my damage is its a plan of swing waraxe kill if nothing threatens throw axe at something at range.
What about of damage are we talking about here.
If your character has a +4 mod he's only losing +2 damage for off hand attacks. I know that adds up but is it going to be worth picking up you waraxe later?
Thats why i need to know what my damage is its a plan of swing waraxe kill if nothing threatens throw axe at something at range.What about of damage are we talking about here.
If your character has a +4 mod he's only losing +2 damage for off hand attacks. I know that adds up but is it going to be worth picking up you waraxe later?
Im throwing the hand axe's not the others also Power attack is based around off hand and such.
Im throwing the hand axe's not the others also Power attack is based around off hand and such.
I don't think Power Attack works on Throwing Axes... it reduces melee attack rolls and boosts melee damage rolls, not ranged ones.
Deadly Aim would be more appropriate if you want to use it with the Thowing Axes.
Im throwing the hand axe's not the others also Power attack is based around off hand and such.I don't think Power Attack works on Throwing Axes... it reduces melee attack rolls and boosts melee damage rolls, not ranged ones.
Deadly Aim would be more appropriate if you want to use it with the Thowing Axes.
True still it is still a need to know issue on how all this works.
True still it is still a need to know issue on how all this works.
Why? Deadly Aim doesn't reference off-handed attacks... don't tell Karl.. *teehee*
There's an interesting question: How does Deadly Aim interact with TWF & Off-handed attacks?
You keep bringing up off-hand attacks, which only exist when making a TWF special attack. Iterative attacks do not have an off-hand. You've yet to provide any evidence for your claim that they do. Other than providing text about how much damage they do.
For every time I don't provide any evidence for my claim you fail to show evidence for your claim.
I consider Two handed weapons evidence for off hand weapons existence.
I consider the find the fact that Off hand damage isn't mention in the one section of the book in which you claim they only exist as evidence that they are universal rules that go beyond a small section of the book.
I consider this evidence.
Once you take a two-weapon fighting penalty, the penalty applies to all the attacks you make with that hand during your current action. It does not apply to attacks you make during some other character's turn.
If, after you made two-weapon attacks with your sword and torch, a foe later provokes an attack of opportunity from you that same round, you can strike that foe with your longsword with no two-weapon penalty at all. (You also can use just the torch, also with no two-weapon penalty, though you still take the -4 penalty for an off-hand attack; you also still take the -4 penalty for an improvised weapon for a total penalty of -8.)
I suggest reading the whole thing but. The important thing to note is that although he's talking about TWF is states the the penalties don't extend past the current action. Yet the player still takes the off hand penalty to attacks with the torch.
Mind you pathfinder doesn't have such a penalty but it does have the 1/2 strength to damage just like 3.5. This describes ab instance when off hand exist out side of the TWF action.
Sure this isn't a perfect example but you pushed me to show you some evidence because you weren't happy with what I have previously shown you.
also.
Force Athame (Sp): At 2nd level, a spellblade magus can sacrifice a prepared magus spell of 1st level or higher as a swift action to create a dagger of force in his off hand. The athame lasts for 1 minute or until dismissed, has an enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls equal to the level of the spell sacrificed (maximum +5), and is considered a weapon the spellblade is holding for purposes of his arcane pool feature (using the pool to add abilities to a held weapon applies to the magus's physical weapon and to the athame for no additional cost). The athame acts as a dagger, but the hand holding it is still considered free for the purpose of casting spells and delivering touch attacks. The magus can use the athame as if he were fighting with two weapons, or can use that hand to cast spells as part of the spell combat class ability (but not both in the same round). Attacks with the athame are force attacks and deal force damage. This ability replaces the spellstrike class feature.