If you're attacking with 2 weapons do the attacks occur simultaneously?
If so, if you're invisible is the target flat-footed for both attacks? I'm not talking about surprise round here - middle of fight, wizard casts invisibility on rogue, rogue 5 ft. steps and has full attack action on 2 seperate opponents - are they both flat-footed?
This is widely open to interpretation, what i'm looking for is a specific reference to the rules pls.
|
From the PFSRD:
Of course, the subject is not magically silenced, and certain other conditions can render the recipient detectable (such as swimming in water or stepping in a puddle). If a check is required, a stationary invisible creature has a +40 bonus on its Stealth checks. This bonus is reduced to +20 if the creature is moving. The spell ends if the subject attacks any creature. For purposes of this spell, an attack includes any spell targeting a foe or whose area or effect includes a foe. Exactly who is a foe depends on the invisible character's perceptions. Actions directed at unattended objects do not break the spell. Causing harm indirectly is not an attack. Thus, an invisible being can open doors, talk, eat, climb stairs, summon monsters and have them attack, cut the ropes holding a rope bridge while enemies are on the bridge, remotely trigger traps, open a portcullis to release attack dogs, and so forth. If the subject attacks directly, however, it immediately becomes visible along with all its gear. Spells such as bless that specifically affect allies but not foes are not attacks for this purpose, even when they include foes in their area.
You make 1 attack roll, your visible. All of your attacks do not happen simultaneously, they happen in an order of your choosing. 1 sneak attack.
|
As per invisibility 'If the subject attacks directly, however, it immediately becomes visible along with all its gear.' By this wording, the subject becomes visibile immediately after making an attack. I don't think the rules have anything determining the time between attacks in a full attack.
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.
It is open to interpretation, but this passage suggests you have to take all your attacks with the first weapon in order, then the second. It may also mean you can alternate between either weapon but must go from highest to lowest either way. As in, no making your +15 attack before your +20. Either way, it seems you do not make the offhand attack at the same time, therefore it would not gain the bonuses from invisibility.
Ninja'ed by three seconds. Ain't that a b. :)
This (plus a small table) is the totality of the information regarding two-weapon fighting that is contained in the rulebooks (as far as I could find).
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. 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 when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.
Table: Two-weapon Fighting Penalties summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
Double Weapons: You can use a double weapon to make an extra attack with the off-hand end of the weapon as if you were fighting with two weapons. The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon.
Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon.
It just says "you can get an extra attack per round". It doesn't even specify that you need to full attack to do so. You just get it with the appropriate penalties.
Since you don't need to take the full attack action (which involves iterative attacks) and can (by RAW, it seems) take two attacks with a standard action, it seems that, if they don't happen simultaneously, they happen within a very short time of each other.
However, having seen people fight using two-weapons, simultaneous strikes are rare. Quick but successive strikes seem to be much more common. Again, however, we have martial characters doing all sorts of things I've never seen in an arena, so real life fighting tactics is not really particularly relevant.
OPINION TIME
I stated how my table rules attacking from invisibility in the other thread, so I won't retread that here. Making two-weapon attacks simultaneously or successively would be a decision I would leave to the attacker. Both have their advantages. If the first attack drops the opponent but the attacker chose his strikes to be simultaneous, then the off-hand strike was wasted, while the successive striker could redirect that attack at another foe. On the other hand, some bonuses only apply to the first attack (such as from Invisibility by very strict RAW) so the simultaneous attacker would receive the bonus on both strikes while the successive attacker would only get it on the first.
RAW, as far as I can tell, is pretty silent on how the attacks occur, so it's going to have to be Rule Zeroed at most tables. Pathfinder Society will probably need an official standing, though.
|
|
Should have posted this as well.
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.
This restricts you from making a second attack in a round you do not take a full-round action.
Dang it. Why is none of this stuff compiled together? A single sentence such as "you must use a full attack action to benefit from additional attacks" added to the two-weapon section would be handy. And make me look like less of a fool...
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.
Yep, that seems pretty clear, thanks for using actual rules. Seems they've specified that attacks happen in sequence to stop people getting more bang for buck with invisibility.
@Mauril - in 2nd ed. that's exactly how we played it.
@Tanis - Because 2ed had such excellently thought out rules on two-weapon fighting. *smirk* I sometimes cross my editions too. It's weird when my short stint in 4e starts confusing me on how things work.
@TriOmegaZero - Yeah. I don't blame them either, really. I was more or less letting off steam about missing that bit. However, this is something that Paizo could do with 2nd and further printings of the core books.
That's prob. why we could get away with it :) it was so ambiguous!