|
| 38 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
when you're two weapon fighting, you take a penalty on attacks.
are you considered two weapon fighting until the start of your next action, and thus take the same penalty on attacks of opportunity?
or
are you no longer two weapon fighting after your turn ends, and take no penalty on attacks of opportunity?
No longer TWF after your turn is over. AoO are made at your normal single attack bonus.
No longer TWF after your turn is over. AoO are made at your normal single attack bonus.
TWF only applies to the action in which you are TWF (A full round action to full attack).
For instance, if you made a full attack using TWF, then after that action you cast a touch spell as a swift action and made an attack for free, that free attack would not suffer TWF penalties even though it was made during your turn.
|
Generally I agree with Grick and Tarantula, they're both very intelligent individuals, but from what I can see in the RAW you suffer the penalties for all attacks when you use two weapons, basing my thinking from this statement:
"When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand."
Is there any RAW that disproves this?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
"Making an Attack of Opportunity: An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round."
Emphasis mine. Penalties from previous attacks do not count toward the AoO attack. (Penalties from things like power attack, which state they apply until your next turn do apply however, as do their benefits)
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
"When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand."
Is there any RAW that disproves this?
Yes.
Fighting that way means getting an extra attack with your off-hand.
Getting an extra attack with your off-hand can only happen in a full attack.
A full attack cannot be made as an attack of opportunity.
It says "you can get one extra attack per round" because that's how often you can do it. You can't get more than one extra attack per round, but you can get more than one extra per minute, or hour, or whatever else.
That doesn't mean the penalties last for one round, they only last as long as you are fighting that way, which is only during the full round action to full attack.
when you're two weapon fighting, you take a penalty on attacks.
are you considered two weapon fighting until the start of your next action, and thus take the same penalty on attacks of opportunity?
I have always played it this way, due to the nature of an attack of opportunity: you are in the middle of fighting, see an opening and strike at it. It's not as if you have stopped fighting with two weapons in order to make the attack of opportunity, you have simply lashed out when an opening presented itself. I always took it as 'your full BAB as your first attack of your round would be' as 'full BAB'.
However I can see the question is quite relevant, and how it may not be that way. I'd be interested to see if there is a clarification on this either way.
FAQ'ed.
Master Arminas
"Making an Attack of Opportunity: An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round."
Emphasis mine. Penalties from previous attacks do not count toward the AoO attack. (Penalties from things like power attack, which state they apply until your next turn do apply however, as do their benefits)
Well that's about a cut and dry as it gets.
So I've been doing it wrong the whole time, always took that if you chose to TWF you did so till the start of you next turn where you could again choose to TWF or not. This is good though, my attacks of opportunity just got better, whoohoo!
I can see the other side though, as, like casting a spell that takes a full-round action, you are casting the spell until immediately prior to your next turn. Damage you take until then causes you to make concentration checks.
Full-attack is the same kind of action, and presumably are busy full-attacking until immediately prior to your next turn. However, the AoO text does say normal attack bonus even if you have already attacked. Which I think negates the penalties from being in the middle of a full-attack action.
"Making an Attack of Opportunity: An attack of opportunity is a single melee attack, and most characters can only make one per round. You don't have to make an attack of opportunity if you don't want to. You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round."
Emphasis mine. Penalties from previous attacks do not count toward the AoO attack. (Penalties from things like power attack, which state they apply until your next turn do apply however, as do their benefits)
Well that's about a cut and dry as it gets.
So I've been doing it wrong the whole time, always took that if you chose to TWF you did so till the start of you next turn where you could again choose to TWF or not. This is good though, my attacks of opportunity just got better, whoohoo!
Unless you are a monk using flurry of blows.
Master Arminas
I can see the other side though, as, like casting a spell that takes a full-round action, you are casting the spell until immediately prior to your next turn. Damage you take until then causes you to make concentration checks.
Full-attack is the same kind of action, and presumably are busy full-attacking until immediately prior to your next turn. However, the AoO text does say normal attack bonus even if you have already attacked. Which I think negates the penalties from being in the middle of a full-attack action.
Or did they merely mean that it is not an iterative attack, which I always assumed?
Or did they merely mean that it is not an iterative attack, which I always assumed?I can see the other side though, as, like casting a spell that takes a full-round action, you are casting the spell until immediately prior to your next turn. Damage you take until then causes you to make concentration checks.
Full-attack is the same kind of action, and presumably are busy full-attacking until immediately prior to your next turn. However, the AoO text does say normal attack bonus even if you have already attacked. Which I think negates the penalties from being in the middle of a full-attack action.
It isn't completely clear, so I have hit FAQ on it. I've always seen it as AoO don't take any penalties for any attacks you have made previously.
Say there is a monk/bard TWF with whips (I know, why?) He doesn't threaten with the whips, but whip 1 was his mainhand, and whip 2 was his offhand when he made his full-attack action. If someone takes a provoking action in a square adjacent to him, he can attack with an unarmed strike. What bonus does this AoO use?
To me, it uses normal "mainhand" attack bonus without any penalties for any previous attacks he has made. I'm curious how you would rule it for having previously TWF with 2 different weapons. Is it main hand? Off hand? Off off hand?
Full attack is completed on your turn just as a move and attack would be.
Full round spell casting takes the entire round and is NOT done yet when the next person in iniative goes.
The Combat Round:
"When the rules refer to a “full round”, they usually mean a span of time from a particular initiative count in one round to the same initiative count in the next round. Effects that last a certain number of rounds end just before the same initiative count that they began on."Full-Round Actions:
"Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
The only movement you can take during a full attack is a 5-foot step. You may take the step before, after, or between your attacks.
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first."
Nothing in full attack says you are finished "full attacking" until immediately prior to your next turn. However, it is weird because you resolve all the attacks during your turn.
This is the thing, a round is six seconds of action, initiative is merely a determining factor for order - you don't do your full attack in the first second and then stand around in the next five doing nothing.
This is the thing, a round is six seconds of action, initiative is merely a determining factor for order - you don't do your full attack in the first second and then stand around in the next five doing nothing.
I agree, which is why your reading of it makes sense, but doesn't appear to be supported in the text.
Still curious how you'd handle the TWF monk/bard with 2 whips taking an AoO with an unarmed strike.
As I understood it, TWF isn't a mode that you stay in for all actions; it's a modification to a normal full-attack action. Other attacks, such as attacks of opportunity, wouldn't apply the penalty, as for those attacks you aren't utilizing TWF--you're just making an attack.
Hopefully FAQ will straighten this out.
My group had this discussion recently and came to the conclusion that AoOs should be done with the full bonus, not penalized. Think about it this way: are you permanently penalized to attack for wielding a (normal) shield? No, but you can use the shield as an offhand weapon in two weapon fighting if you so choose (though most do not). Holding a dagger in your off-hand is no different. If you make an attack of opportunity, your attack will be with your main hand and at the full bonus, just as if that dagger was a (non functioning) shield.
So, using this logic and example the two-weapon fighting penalties only apply during the actual full-round-attack action not at all times.
(I also like Grick's analogy in post #3, works well to help seperate the mechanics a little bit.)
This is the thing, a round is six seconds of action, initiative is merely a determining factor for order - you don't do your full attack in the first second and then stand around in the next five doing nothing.Except the rules don't really handle it this way...
You can die and be denied your actions, which treats it like you were standing around doing nothing before your initiative came up, while they took all of theirs before you.
Except that you are not, of course. The reason combat does things this way is not because combat happens like this, it's because the system is complicated enough. I have played systems where multiple attacks are clocked along a time track for the round, and they can get...convoluted.
That the system handles it like this is just a simplification to make the game playable.
I think the line in the AoO description pretty much settled this topic though, unless you think TWF somehow changes your "normal attack bonus" rather than just injecting a penalty to those rolls.
When you are using TWF in a round, it is - for the reason cited above - the whole round. For that round, your normal attack bonus is the highest bonus to hit when TWFing, so yes.
Be interesting to see what the devs say, though.
I have played systems where multiple attacks are clocked along a time track for the round, and they can get...convoluted.
Shadowrun does that, and it works fine. Most combats are over in one combat turn.
Yes, I've played Shadowrun, and Hero Games too. D&D doesn't work that way, though, for better or worse the combat system is more abstracted.
not to get too off topic in regard to TWF ... does a spellcaster with a weapon bonded item who is casting get to make attacks of oppertunity.
An attack of opportunity “interrupts” the normal flow of actions in the round.
When you are using TWF in a round, it is - for the reason cited above - the whole round.
Replace "round" with "action" and you have it right.
You have the same reason to extend the penalties to the whole round as you do to extend them to the minute, or hour, or adventure path.
Full round spell casting takes the entire round and is NOT done yet when the next person in iniative goes.
Not true.
Metamagic Feats: "If the spell's normal casting time is a standard action, casting a metamagic version is a full-round action for a sorcerer or bard. (This isn't the same as a 1-round casting time.)
Example spell: Sorcerer casting Empowered Fireball
It takes a full round action, then the spell effect appears.
Casting Time: "When you begin a spell that takes 1 round or longer to cast, you must continue the concentration from the current round to just before your turn in the next round (at least). If you lose concentration before the casting is complete, you lose the spell."
Example spell: Summon Monster I - "Casting Time 1 round"
It takes a full round action, and you concentrate until the beginning of your next turn, then the spell effect appears.
not to get too off topic in regard to TWF ... does a spellcaster with a weapon bonded item who is casting get to make attacks of oppertunity.
Combat chapter, Standard Actions, Cast a Spell:
Concentration: "If you start casting a spell but something interferes with your concentration, you must make a concentration check or lose the spell."
Attacks of Opportunity: "Generally, if you cast a spell, you provoke attacks of opportunity from threatening enemies. If you take damage from an attack of opportunity, you must make a concentration check (DC 10 + points of damage taken + the spell's level) or lose the spell."
and under Full Round Actions, Cast a Spell:
"You only provoke attacks of opportunity when you begin casting a spell, even though you might continue casting for at least 1 full round. While casting a spell, you don't threaten any squares around you.
This action is otherwise identical to the cast a spell action described under Standard Actions."
Since the part about not threatening squares is under full round actions, it could be said that it doesn't apply to standard action spells.
Like Grick said: "Full-Round Action" is not the same as "1 round action". Spells that take a Full-Round Action are completed before the next player is able to do anything. 1 Round actions are completed just before your next turn.
There is no such thing as a "1 round action" outside of spellcasting that I am aware of, since there is nothing that can be interrupted in that way. You can't interrupt someone who is TWF. He starts his action on his turn and all of its effects (the extra attack AND the penalties) are completed at the point the player ends his turn and the next player starts his. Otherways it you would be able to kill someone who is TWF on your turn and stop him from tacking all of his attacks (since he would still be in the middle of attacking... which he might be cinematicaly, but isn't rules wise).
You can't interrupt someone who is TWF. He starts his action on his turn and all of its effects (the extra attack AND the penalties) are completed at the point the player ends his turn and the next player starts his.
When he completes his action, not his turn.
Example:
Full round action: Full attack, two-weapon fighting
Free action: drop weapons
Swift action: cast quickened shocking grasp
Not an action: 5-foot step
Free action: touch attack to discharge shocking grasp
The touch attack would not take TWF penalties because he is not TWF.
Otherways it you would be able to kill someone who is TWF on your turn and stop him from tacking all of his attacks (since he would still be in the middle of attacking... which he might be cinematicaly, but isn't rules wise).
I'm not sure this means what you intended.
If someone is in the middle of their full attack, TWF or not, and something kills him, he doesn't get to finish his attacks while dead.
|
|
I look at it like this. You gain the penalties because you have another weapon in your hand. Let's say you have a full attack action and you only attack with your primary hand, you still take the penalties. You don't take away the penalties just because you don't attack with your off hand.
Wrong.
See here:http://paizo.com/products/btpy88yj/faq?Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Core-Rul ebook#v5748eaic9onf
I look at it like this. You gain the penalties because you have another weapon in your hand. Let's say you have a full attack action and you only attack with your primary hand, you still take the penalties. You don't take away the penalties just because you don't attack with your off hand.Wrong.
See here:
Linkified for truth and importance
|
|
this is grick's favorite phrase:
You have the same reason to extend the penalties to the whole round as you do to extend them to the minute, or hour, or adventure path.
He keeps repeating that in some form like he expects you to say "yes, you get a -2 to all attacks for the adventure path because you fought with two weapons for 1 round".
The penalties are not being extended arbitrarily.
When you're two weapon fighting you're doing it for the round, that is part of your actions taken that round.
Example:
Full round action: Full attack, two-weapon fighting
Free action: drop weapons
Swift action: cast quickened shocking grasp
Not an action: 5-foot step
Free action: touch attack to discharge shocking grasp
even in the example, your round is not over when you're casting the quickened shocking grasp. so you would take a penalty on your attacks with it, -2, for two weapon fighting.
by your own logic, you are two weapon fighting during your turn. you stop two weapon fighting when your turn is over. so you would take a penalty for two weapon fighting on the attack roll with shocking grasp.
now you're arguing that you're only two weapon fighting when you're taking your full attack part of your action during your turn, narrowing the timing even more. once you finish your attack portion of your turn you think you're no longer two weapon fighting.
but your character is two weapon fighting, and you are using a game system to summarize several attacks/feints and thrusts in a mechanic to symbolize attacking with two weapons multiple times, within 6 seconds. all of this does not occur within 1 second before moving on to the next character, since its a turn based strategy game, order is important. otherwise you could have scenes where characters attack simultaneously and knock each other out before that split second is resolved. but we can't, because any tie is resolved first to determine order of actions.
thus i play that when you are two weapon fighting, you maintain the penalties until the start of your next turn. I think most people that use TWF use their twf stats when an attack of opportunity comes up.
i interpret the attack of opportunity to rules to indicate that you use your highest bab , including all penalties /bonuses, clarifying that if you've already attacked you don't need to use an iterative bab.
I posted here to see what other people thought, and whether it was FAQ worthy since the rules do not seem to clearly suppport it one way or another.
Otherways it you would be able to kill someone who is TWF on your turn and stop him from tacking all of his attacks (since he would still be in the middle of attacking... which he might be cinematicaly, but isn't rules wise).I'm not sure this means what you intended.
If someone is in the middle of their full attack, TWF or not, and something kills him, he doesn't get to finish his attacks while dead.
Ok, I'll try to make my point clearer:
It's the turn of Tom the Two-Weapon Fighter. He uses is turn to do the following Full-Round Action: Full attack with both weapons (including penalties).
He's done with this action before the next character starts his turn.
Now it's Bill the Babarian's turn: He attacks Tom with a mighty blow of his great axe and kills him (as a standard action).
Now let's look at this situation:
Cinematically, both characters act at the same moment (= the same round = the same 6 seconds). But nontheless Tom gets to make all his attacks without interruption, even though his Full-Round Action would logically take longer to complete then the babarians standard action to attack and kill him.
And this is what a Full-Round Action is: An action that takes the whole time of your turn (excluding stuff like free actions), but is completed before the next character gets his turn (and again, excluding stuff like AoO - which might actually interrupt Tom and keep him from making all attacks as Grick stated).
Now, in comparison, there are "1 Round" actions. If we replace Tom with Willy the Wizard who is casting a spell with a casting time of "1 Round", he wouldn't be able to get his spell off before dying through Bills mighty axe and thus the spell would be interrupted and lost (together with his life).
This is why Two-Weapon Fighting (along with any other Full-Round Action) is completed at the end of a characters turn - including all penalties except if noted otherwise (for stuff like Power Attack).
Was that better explained, Mr. Grick sir? ;)
The penalties are not being extended arbitrarily.
When you're two weapon fighting you're doing it for the round, that is part of your actions taken that round.
Why the round instead of the minute or the hour?
I have yet to see a reason. That's what arbitrarily means. Where do the rule say that a full attack lasts longer than the full round action in which it happens?
even in the example, your round is not over when you're casting the quickened shocking grasp. so you would take a penalty on your attacks with it, -2, for two weapon fighting.
But you're not fighting with two weapons to gain an extra attack. You're fighting with one weapon (the charge) to gain one single attack (the free touch granted by casting).
This is the case without support that TWF lasts beyond the action in which it is taken.
now you're arguing that you're only two weapon fighting when you're taking your full attack part of your action during your turn, narrowing the timing even more.
Correct, this is my argument. TWF can only happen during a full attack. Thus, if you're not performing a full attack, you're not TWF. My justification for this is the rules of TWF, that state you only are TWF when wielding two weapons and gaining an extra attack. This rule has to follow the rules for gaining an extra attack, which can only happen with a full attack.
When you take a move action to move, you move during that action. After the move action is over, you're no longer moving.
When you take a standard action to cast a spell, you cast the spell during that action. After the standard action is over, you're no longer casting a spell.
When you take a standard action to perform the attack action, you attack during that action. After the attack action is over, you're no longer attacking.
When you take a full round action to full attack, you attack during that action. After the full round action is over, you're no longer attacking.
When you are using TWF in a round, it is - for the reason cited above - the whole round.Replace "round" with "action" and you have it right.
You have the same reason to extend the penalties to the whole round as you do to extend them to the minute, or hour, or adventure path.
I look on a full round action as taking up the round for the person doing it. Maybe it's because it says 'full round' in the name. For this reason I'd extend the penalties and benefits of things done in this action to extend to things like attacks of opportunity in the round in which the particular action takes place. Not the round after, or the next hour, it says 'full round' so that round is when it happens. Clue is in the name.
However, that's just my reading of it. I don't insist that this is the 'right' interpretation, it's just the way I have always done things and the way I have always seen them done. I certainly appreciate that by RAW the way you suggest is a viable interpretation. As I said, I'm interested in what the devs say about this, but I know how I'll play in my games until they do.
I look on a full round action as taking up the round for the person doing it. Maybe it's because it says 'full round' in the name. For this reason I'd extend the penalties and benefits of things done in this action to extend to things like attacks of opportunity.
So what's the difference between a spontaneous empowered fireball and a summon monster I? The full round casting time explicitly says it isn't the same as a 1-round casting time. But by your definition they both take the entire round of the person doing it.
By the rules, a sorcerer can cast empowered fireball (full round action) then quickened magic missile (swift action) then take an attack of opportunity when the orc provokes by bullrushing him (not an action), then cast feather fall when he's knocked off the cliff (immediate action).
None of which is possible if a full round action takes the entire round.
So what's the difference between a spontaneous empowered fireball and a summon monster I? The full round casting time explicitly says it isn't the same as a 1-round casting time. But by your definition they both take the entire round of the person doing it.
I worded my argument poorly, my apologies. A full round action takes up MOST of the round with time to do something very quick either side (or during) the action, a 1 round casting time requires ALL of the round.
By the rules, a sorcerer can cast empowered fireball (full round action) then quickened magic missile (swift action) then take an attack of opportunity when the orc provokes by bullrushing him (not an action), then cast feather fall when he's knocked off the cliff (immediate action).
None of which is possible if a full round action takes the entire round.
On the flip side, you seem to be proposing that a full round action doesn't take up any time at all. How does that work? you make all your attacks in a split second, then presumably stand around, chat with the guy you are fighting while the other characters take their turns, make your AoO, take a quick puff on your roll-up and then do another blazing sequence of attacks in a split second when it's your initiative order again?
I don't buy that.
A full round action takes up the round, with a bit of time in here or there for you to take a few steps, make a swipe at a foe that leaves himself open, but primarily what you are doing is that full round action. As such, you are still in effect TWFing when you make that AoO.
A full round action takes up the round, with a bit of time in here or there for you to take a few steps, make a swipe at a foe that leaves himself open, but primarily what you are doing is that full round action. As such, you are still in effect TWFing when you make that AoO.
Which is true in a cinematic scence, but not ruleswise. You are suggesting that I'm still in the middle of my full round action even after i finished my turn. Thus someone would still be able to keep me from finishing what I'm doing. But they are not. Thus the action is completly done after my turn ends as per my last post.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A full round action takes up the round, with a bit of time in here or there for you to take a few steps, make a swipe at a foe that leaves himself open, but primarily what you are doing is that full round action. As such, you are still in effect TWFing when you make that AoO.
This notion creates differences between how long different full-round actions take.
When Grick the Magical casts his metamagic fireball, he completely finishes before his turn is up. Anyone killed by it doesn't get to act, even if they were next in intiative. Even if they had a readied action to do something if Grick leaves his space, and then he does with a 5ft step after the fireball, they don't get to do it because the full-round action is over and its effects have been fully resolved.
Meanwhile, Dabbler the Two-Bladed takes a full-round action to mince my face. Afterwards, I scream in pain and stagger away (a normal move), and you take your AoO. It seems to be your contention that you are, in a sense, still performing your full-round action and therefore take the TWF penalty on your AoO.
Grick's fireball and your full-attack were both the same action type. But the fireball was DONE before his turn even ended. If you believe your full-attack isn't done, then you have to explain why two full-round actions can take different lengths of time.
This is interesting. I’ve always (and will continue to) rule it that “at your full normal attack bonus” to mean you use your full BAB, as opposed to an iterative attack bonus, and that any and all modifiers that you incur during a round last the entire round. That’s the benefit that using initiative based rounds gives us, a time for your previous choices/consequences to end and a start for your next choice/consequence.
There’s nothing in TWF that states that it takes a full round action. What it says is “When fighting in this way” you take these penalties. Why wouldn’t they last the entire round?
If your argument is that you use your ‘normal attack bonus’ for AoOs then what about if you’re flanking the enemy that provokes. Do you get your flanking bonus or not? You’re not normally flanking, just like you’re not normally TWF. What if you’re dazzled, shaken or sickened?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@zag01: You're correct that the "at your full bonus" language in AoO rules is irrelevant to the discussion. I'll address the following:
There’s nothing in TWF that states that it takes a full round action. What it says is “When fighting in this way” you take these penalties. Why wouldn’t they last the entire round?
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks.
So to get your extra attacks, you must use a full-round action.
To be TWFing, you must be taking an extra attack.
Therefore, if you have to use a full-round action to get an extra attack, and you have to get an extra attack to be TWFing, then simple logic shows that you have to use a full-round action to be TWFing.
From there, only one question remains: once you use a full-round action to take extra attacks via TWF, do the associated penalties last until your next turn, or only while you're taking that full-attack?
This is where we get to TWF's "when you fight this way". It's obvious to anyone with english as their first language that "this way" refers to gaining an extra attack.
• You take TWF penalties only "when you fight this way".
• "Fight this way" means gaining an extra attack via TWF.
• You can only gain an extra attack during a full-round action (a full attack).
Therefore, you only take TWF penalties during a full attack.
The difference would be, that TWF is tied to the full attack action (since that is what you need to do to get an extra attack, like any other extra attack beyond the first). An that is a full round action. So TWF resolves as a full round action too.
I see TWF as a modifier for the full attack action. You trade in some of your attack bonus of all attacks within that action to get one additional attack (at a relativly low attack bonus). But it's still part of that one full attack action. You just modify that one action.
It's a bit like casting defensively. You get something negative (a concentration check that might end your spell) to get a different positiv effect (ignore the risk for an AoO). In both cases this modification of your action is resolved within that same action. Casting defensively has no effect on other spells (like a quickened fireball) you cast in that same round (even though in that case I can of course choose to cast defensively again, but that would only modify that single action again).
Another example: It's basicly like Power Attack, just that Power Attack trades attack bonus for extra damage (instead of an extra attack) and that it actually states that it keeps up until your next turn. TWF doesn't say this.
Edit: Took me to long to type... Jiggy was faster :)
• You take TWF penalties only "when you fight this way".
• "Fight this way" means gaining an extra attack via TWF.
• You can only gain an extra attack during a full-round action (a full attack).
Therefore, you only take TWF penalties during a full attack.
None of that is specifically spelled out that way in the TWF section. Granted the first two leaps of logic make perfect sense but that last part is where you make your interpretation. And I don't think that opinion is RAW. RAI maybe, but I disagree.
To me its a shorter leap that the penalty lasts the entire round.
When do you choose to TWF? At the start of your turn. When do you choose to stop TWF? On your next turn. It doesn't matter what else you do on your turn. That round you chose to TWF, therefore you chose to take those penalties for that (entire) round.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
When do you choose to TWF? At the start of your turn.
Incorrect. You choose whether or not to employ TWF when you begin your full-attack. You can start your turn, then 5ft step up to a nearby foe, then cast a quickened, toppling magic missile to knock him down, then use Vicious Stomp to take an AoO against him. And you STILL haven't decided whether or not to TWF that turn. (Or even whether or not to use a full-round action at all.)
In fact, the rules for a full-attack explicitly state that you can attack once, see how it turns out, and then decide whether to continue as a full-attack or to call it a standard action and then still have a move action to make.
When do you choose to stop TWF? On your next turn. It doesn't matter what else you do on your turn. That round you chose to TWF, therefore you chose to take those penalties for that (entire) round.
Now, if that first part that I quoted had been correct, I could see this part making sense. There's lots of precedent for something that's decided at the start of your turn to last until the beginning of your next turn (i.e., last 1 round).
But that's not the case. You do not choose to TWF at the start of your turn. You choose to TWF when you initiate a full-attack (or potential full-attack). Not a moment before.
And without the "round to round" model that you thought it used, you really don't have a leg to stand on to say that the penalties extend beyond the full-attack.
The only text stating a duration for the penalties is "when you fight this way". You only ever "fight that way" during a full-attack.
There is no logic leap. It's simply what the text says.
And so far, every argument to the contrary has contained at least one premise which is contrary to other rules.