Need Clarification on Weapon Swap

[BaloTheJester]

I saw a post about this buried in the archives that no-one responded to, so I'm resurrecting this; we're coming up on the level where I'll qualify for Weapon Swap, and I want to be sure I understand it correctly. I suppose these may require answers from the Paizo folks themselves, but it can't hurt to throw it out into the community.

#1: Just to make sure, as I had a disagreement about this with my DM--Weapon Swap is intended to be done while you are wielding two weapons, correct? My DM suggested that the intention of the feat was to wield a single weapon but still gain the extra attacks from wielding two weapons, and I can see where that might come from given some small grammatical oddities in the mechanical description, even though the "flavor" description suggests that you are wielding two weapons and swap them around from hand to hand when you use this feat.

#2: This is more of a mechanics issue--how do you calculate the bonuses on your attacks when using this feat? Which of the myriad possible advantages of this feat are the ones Paizo intended to give me?

All the feat says, in my version of the rules anyway, is "Make your off-hand attacks with your primary weapon". Do you use the same attack bonuses to calculate your attack rolls, or do you calculate the off-hand attacks as though they were being done with your primary weapon? And thus, do you also calculate them as though you were wielding two of that weapon, including any possible penalties for your off-hand weapon not being a light weapon?

E.G.: My primary hand's attacks, when I get to a +11 attack bonus, are +17/+12/+7 (magic longsword with a bunch of feats stacked on it), and my off-hand attacks are +12/+7 (silver short sword that is mostly there to give me my shield bonus from TWD). So, is my attack chain calculated:

The same as it would have been without WS, but with higher damage done? (+17/+12/+12/+7/+7)

As though I were making off-hand attacks with my primary weapon at its highest and second-highest bonus?
(+17/+17/+12/+12/+7)

As though I were wielding a magic longsword in each hand?
(+15/+15/+10/+10/+5)

Or do I do all the attacks with my primary hand, and then roll at the highest and second-highest bonus again?
(+17/+12/+7/+17/+12)

I'm so confused, and I'm not sure I explained this clearly--and apologies if this was covered somewhere else. Thank you in advance?

[Tholas]

The description of Weapon Swap seems very ambiguous to me. It first talks about swapping your weapons but then says that you can swap your primary weapon in your off hand. No word on what would happen to your original off hand weapon.

#1
Without further clarifications I would tend to follow your GMs interpretation.

#2
I guess that the intention was that all attacks resolve as if you where really fighting with two weapons. So swapping an one handed weapon into your off hand without having the Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting feat would impose the usual penalties to all attacks.
But there seems to be a RAW vs RAI catch:
Since you're not wielding a second weapon in your off hand when you are making your primary attacks it could be argued that you only suffer two weapon fighting penalties for your off-hand attacks. (Edit: Bogus thinking, the penalties are not for wielding but for attacking with your off hand)

Another Question: Let's say you made an full round attack and swapped your single weapon into the off hand. Do you have to swap your weapon back into your main hand before you can use the Weapon Swap feat again? If yes, would that be a free or swift action?

[Kalyth]

In my opinion the Weapons Swap feat really needs some clarification on how it is to be implemented in game.

Additionally I find the entire concept of the Weapons Swap feat flawed. The benefit of two weapon fighting is more attacks per round with the logic being that you are attacking simultaneously with both weapons (the one in your primary hand and the one in your off hand). Weapon swap is allowing you to make your normal number of attacks with your primary weapon then apparently switch that weapon to your off hand and make additional attacks. How does the correspond to the logic of Two weapon fighting allowing you to make more attacks by wielding two weapons simultaneously? This feat to me seems (while an interested mechanic) to totally throw realism and logic out the window. It seems like a gimmick mechanic with some flavor slapped on that really makes no sense. I know casting fireballs and raising the dead fall far beyond the realm of realism and science but they atleast have a in game explaination for how they break reality. How does switching my long sword to my left hand after attacking 3 times with it in my right hand suddenly warp space and time and allow me to attack one or two more times?

Weapon Swap would be fine if it was some form of "fient manuever" and gave a bonus to attach by throwing your opponent of guard or by passing his defenses as he did not expect you to attack with your off hand. But allowing more attack per round with the same weapon simply by switching it into your off hand makes no sense. Shouldn't that actually lower the rate of attacks one could make? Your spending time switching the weapon to your off hand.

Not sure if I'm phrasing this in the best way but I hope my point comes across.

[Sueki Suezo]

This feat is poorly worded. Hopefully we'll get clarification as to how it works in the Beta.

[stonechild]

I personally hope it just goes away. It's got too many problems, as has been already pointed out.

[darth_borehd]

I think it's oddly worded too... The way I picture it is that you are fighting with two weapons and literally flip your weapons from one hand to other in a juggling-like manoeuvre. Your opponents still have to react to you as if you are armed with a weapon in both hands, giving you the two-weapon fighting attacks but with a likely larger weapon always doing the damage.

I guess another way to picture it would be that you don't literally swap weapons, but change positions. You "parry" (cinematically speaking, not rules-wise) with your off-hand weapon and attack again with your main weapon.

[Kalyth]

darth_borehd wrote:

I think it's oddly worded too... The way I picture it is that you are fighting with two weapons and literally flip your weapons from one hand to other in a juggling-like manoeuvre. Your opponents still have to react to you as if you are armed with a weapon in both hands, giving you the two-weapon fighting attacks but with a likely larger weapon always doing the damage.

I guess another way to picture it would be that you don't literally swap weapons, but change positions. You "parry" (cinematically speaking, not rules-wise) with your off-hand weapon and attack again with your main weapon.

I still dont understand the logic/science behind it? How is it possible to attack more often with a single weapon by switching it from one hand to the other than you can attach by just wielding it in one hand all the time and not spending time switching from one hand to the other. Is gimmicky feat with no real logic behind it and I really dont like gimmick game mechanics like that.

Just my feels in the feat. I hope they just ditch it.

[darth_borehd]

You have to picture it with a bit of artistic license.

Remember that an attack roll doesn't represent a single weapon swing, but an abstraction of a whole pattern of feints, swings, blocks, parries, thrusts, spins, etc. The reason you get multiple attack rolls at high levels isn't that you are swinging your weapon more often its that you can make more of them have a chance of connecting.

So if you are fighting with two weapons, imagine that you are not just hitting with your weapons, but also blocking, parrying, feinting, holding opponents at bay, etc.

So with that abstraction between game mechanics and "cinematic" action, picture somebody with this feat either literally swapping weapons by swashbucklingly throwing them in the air and catching them, or just positioning the other side of his body to "attack" with his main weapon while doing the cinematic feinting, parrying, etc with his off-hand weapon.

[Majuba]

Just as far as the numbers go, I believe it should be:

(+15/+10/+5/+15/+10)

It specifically says the new attacks come after all your primary hand attacks, and it should have the two-weapon fighting penalties IMO.

[Kalyth]

darth_borehd wrote:

You have to picture it with a bit of artistic license.

Remember that an attack roll doesn't represent a single weapon swing, but an abstraction of a whole pattern of feints, swings, blocks, parries, thrusts, spins, etc. The reason you get multiple attack rolls at high levels isn't that you are swinging your weapon more often its that you can make more of them have a chance of connecting.

So if you are fighting with two weapons, imagine that you are not just hitting with your weapons, but also blocking, parrying, feinting, holding opponents at bay, etc.

So with that abstraction between game mechanics and "cinematic" action, picture somebody with this feat either literally swapping weapons by swashbucklingly throwing them in the air and catching them, or just positioning the other side of his body to "attack" with his main weapon while doing the cinematic feinting, parrying, etc with his off-hand weapon.

Using that logic I would have to ask "What does this manuever have to do with Two-Weapon Fighting?" It seems to be a maneuver focused for a Single weapon wielding combatant not someone trained to fight with a weapon in each hand Simultaneously. I still wwould have to say there seems to be little logic with the base design of this feat. If you are switching hands and there-by gaining a better chance to hit then isnt that better represented by a variation on Fient? Why more chances to hit rather than a HIGHER chance to hit with the same number of chances or even few chances? Why is the increase in chances to hit based on the number of "Two Weapon Fighting" feats someone possesses? These feats represent someones skill at wielding weapons in each hand Simultaneously not the use and skill of one weapons and spins and weapon swapping. Weapons swap should be a maneuver for single handed weapon wielding combatant and should not be based on Two weapon fighting. The feat was designed as a gimmick mechanic and should really be rethought and rework or removed all together.