| 8 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
Question: Does it say clearly anywhere that a double weapon doesn't get a _damage_ bonus for using 2 hands? I'm hoping there's something very clear so I can see if this is cheese or detail.
The description accompanying a double weapon says (PSRD*):
* I've read the core books but I feel more comfortable quoting the PSRD.
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
Two-weapon combat says (PSRD):
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.
Damage from Strength bonus reads (PSRD):
Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed: When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus (Strength penalties are not multiplied). You don't get this higher Strength bonus, however, when using a light weapon with two hands.
Question
In the case of a double weapon (for the sake of this example) you are wielding it with two hands. I'm not trying to tie this into the one handed double weapon argument.
Damage is not an Attack Penalty
If the second attack is a two handed light weapon attack you don't get the strength damage bonus but do you suffer the off hand damage reduction?
It makes a certain amount of sense that you get more leverage\power with both arms (and it happens to bolster a less popular weapon style).
ie
Two handed fighting with a Gnome Hammer:
Attack penalties - as Two weapon fighting.
Damage Penalties as a two handed medium and two handed light weapon:
1 1/2 x damage and 1 x damage.
Do you improve upon each attack by half damage?
Is there anything that clearly spells out the damage for double weapons?
You do get the 1.5 strength bonus on your weapon. Just 1 on the main hand and 1/2 on the off hand. :grin:
No, no, no, and to NV, HECK NO!
Alright here's what the rules state:
A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
It states all the normal attack penalties associated with two weapon combat.
Not just the attack bonus, and specifically states that it is "Just as though the character were wielding a one handed weapon and a light weapon".
So it is no longer a two handed weapon but a combined light and one handed weapon.
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.
Off hand attack:
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.
So in summation:
If you use a double weapon to two weapon fight you are completely treated as if you are using a light weapon and a one handed weapon, with the light weapon in your off hand.Since you are using a one handed weapon (no longer a two handed weapon) you only get your strength modifier in your primary hand.
Your off hand (as shown above) only applies 1/2 your strength bonus (penalties apply completely as shown above).
Though if you perform a single standard attack (not twf) using a double weapon two handed you would receive 1.5 STR mod to damage.
I think single attacks are pretty clear. What isn't clear is what changes when you use both ends of the weapon. Seemingly your other hand disappears rather than contribute.
@Abraham, I think you jump to calling it an off hand one handed weapon without support.
I don't see anything that contradicts my example.
Attack penalties - as two weapons - check
All the two weapon penalties only affect the attack penalties as well.
This is consistency imho.
Two weapon fighting - as if you attack with a normal and a light weapon. This is important because it's a reduction in the attack penalty.
You have to describe the weapon as handed and offhanded because the rules aren't biased to favour 'left' and 'right' hands. You have to follow the rules for Two Weapon Fighting or people would be simply doubling their attacks. The core rules draw a distinction between off handed weapons and the end of a two handed weapon. The results of the whole attack are described as:
"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."
Notice it says 'light weapon' not "off hand weapon".
So by RAW, I read it as a two handed weapon, that gains an extra attack with one end, as a light weapon. IT makes in game sense as well. In terms of momentum and control by two limbs it should have a bonus.
Two Handed - primary 1.5 x damage
Light Two Handed - Secondary 1 x damage
The penalties for attack and two weapon fighting don't modify the damage of the weapon except to say that one side is light and its a two handed weapon.
That's my reading anyway.
It's consistent with most of the game where a feature or power is added without rewriting the original.
It tells you to treat it as a one handed weapon and a light weapon. Nowhere does it go back and alter that for the damage portion of it.
You get 1x for the "one hand" and .5x for the "light weapon".
It tells you how to treat it and you are ignoring that in favor of trying to squeak out more strength damage.
1x and .5x.
-S
I think single attacks are pretty clear. What isn't clear is what changes when you use both ends of the weapon. Seemingly your other hand disappears rather than contribute.
@Abraham, I think you jump to calling it an off hand one handed weapon without support.
I don't see anything that contradicts my example.
Attack penalties - as two weapons - check
All the two weapon penalties only affect the attack penalties as well.This is consistency imho.
Two weapon fighting - as if you attack with a normal and a light weapon. This is important because it's a reduction in the attack penalty.
You have to describe the weapon as handed and offhanded because the rules aren't biased to favour 'left' and 'right' hands. You have to follow the rules for Two Weapon Fighting or people would be simply doubling their attacks. The core rules draw a distinction between off handed weapons and the end of a two handed weapon. The results of the whole attack are described as:
"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."Notice it says 'light weapon' not "off hand weapon".
So by RAW, I read it as a two handed weapon, that gains an extra attack with one end, as a light weapon. IT makes in game sense as well. In terms of momentum and control by two limbs it should have a bonus.
Two Handed - primary 1.5 x damage
Light Two Handed - Secondary 1 x damage
The penalties for attack and two weapon fighting don't modify the damage of the weapon except to say that one side is light and its a two handed weapon.That's my reading anyway.
It's consistent with most of the game where a feature or power is added without rewriting the original.
The intent is for it to work just like fighting with two weapons if you are using both ends. Double Slice was specifically made to give you your full strength modifier in your off-hand. The ability is not written as clearly as it should be. It should have said a double weapon used for TWF follows the exact sames rules as if you were actually fighting with two separate weapons for the purposes of attack and damage.
Double Slice (Combat)Your off-hand weapon while dual-wielding strikes with greater power.
Prerequisite: Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting.
Benefit: Add your Strength bonus to damage rolls made with your off-hand weapon.
Normal: You normally add only half of your Strength modifier to damage rolls made with a weapon wielded in your off-hand.
The bolded area shows that offhand(not second weapon) attacks only do half damage, and from your own first quote:
PSRD wrote:
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.
edit:If the second end is treated as an off-hand weapon then it only does half the strength damage.
It would also stand to reason the even when fighting with a double weapon that you have to follow all of the TWF rules meaning the first attack only does regular damage.
I am not sure that is the intent. How does this interpretation not follow your PSRD quote?
The penalties for Two-weapon fighting clearly stick to the attack bonus and frequency of attacks.
Damage definitions for Light and Normal weapons are clear within the Two Weapon fighting Rules. The core has rules for light weapons wielded in both hands - No Bonus. I think all the rules have been followed.
Double Slice is a separate feat. It's still a fine feat for single weapons.
More leverage and momentum is logical for a weapon wielded with two hands. I don't see anything that says its no longer a two handed weapon for the sake of its damage done.
Dual wielded kukri's and falcatas etc... eat double weapons for lunch. I think this is better balance too.
For the main hand, of course, it`s subject to `the attack penalties of 2WF as if using 1-handed and Light weapon`. You AREN`T told that your weapon is treated `As if using a 1-handed and Light weapon` for ALL purposes, but only within the scope of the attack penalties of 2WF. Even `willfully ignoring` that it specifically says `attack penalties`, THERE ARE NO DAMAGE PENALTIES FOR the main hand/1-handed weapon within 2WF rules or anywhere else that you could apply, and you`re obviously wielding the weapon in 2 hands.
Since you ARE now 2WF`ing, you DO need to follow those rules, which state that off-hand attacks use half-STR bonus to dmg. If you want to make an off-hand attack, that`s what you get. One COULD try and interpret that as stacking (mulitiplicatively) with 2-handed STR bonus (i.e. for 75% STR bonus) but I think it`s prudent to take the `only half of your STR mod` at face value - `only` CAN be a diminutive but it`s also commonly denominates an exclusivity, so let`s go with that. But for the main hand, there is no wording anywhere telling you the main-hand damage is giving a damage penalty, much less `ONLY your STR bonus`, i.e. equivalent to the wording for off-hand weapons.
I find it very bizarre that arguments are made against this on a balance basis, or that it is illegitimately trying to `squeeze out more damage`. WotC specifically clarified that using a Greatsword (2-handed) in conjunction with Armor Spikes as the off-hand weapon while 2WF`ing is completely allowable, and that gets exactly the same damage bonuses as I just described for a Double Weapon... I don`t see why that still doesn`t apply to PRPG, since the relevant rules didn`t really change at all. It isn`t a far out stretch or ignoring of the RAW to think that the main hand gets 150% STR damage... and the interpretation of 75% STR damage to off-hand IS A VALID ONE per the RAW, though I don`t try to force it on anybody. It seems like opposition to this stems from `when you 2WF it`s always the same, 1x main and .5x offhand... Except that falls apart when Greatsword+ArmorSpikes/UAS do in fact work while 2WF.
As a plus, Double Weapon can doubly benefit from Weapon Focus/Training, but as a negative it requires an Exotic Proficiency Feat, has worse damage/crit than `2Handed` weapons (or 1-Handed wpns. wielded 2Handedly) which applies whenever you CAN`T 2WF and you can be disarmed of `both` weapons with one Disarm check (no CMD bonus for 2-handed weapons in PRPG). Instead of Armor Spikes, Improved Unarmed Strike should also be usable as the off-hand to a Greatsword, but allows you to continue to 2WF when the Greatsword is disarmed. So basically, doing this takes more Feats on top of the 2WF Feat Chain, all to only get more attacks when Full Attacking, or under specific circumstances with builds like the Pounce Barbarian, or Mobile Fighter, and your weapon damage isn`t really that amazing. Taking Great Cleave, Lunge, and some other more interesting Feats is certainly not going to overshadowed by this in actual game play... At the most it makes Double Weapons look nicer in narrowly focused Full Attack-only DPR contests.
edit:If the second end is treated as an off-hand weapon then it only does half the strength damage.
It would also stand to reason the even when fighting with a double weapon that you have to follow all of the TWF rules meaning the first attack only does regular damage.
off hand attack? yes. main hand? sure you follow all the 2WF rules, but nowhere do they discuss damage penalties to main hand, and nowhere are you directed to treat the `main hand` attack as a 1-handed weapon for any purpose other than attack bonuses. as i wrote above, it`s completely possible to use a 2-handed weapon as the main hand of a 2WF set-up, and I`m just not seeing any actual text in the description of double weapons as to why they would be inferior to that regime.
End game run of this argument:
Please note the following from the "Two weapon fighting" section of combat:
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.
I am not sure that is the intent. How does this interpretation not follow your PSRD quote?
Dual wielded kukri's and falcatas etc... eat double weapons for lunch. I think this is better balance too.
Read my post again. The rules for half damage reference off hand attacks, not light weapons.
Omce again-->Normal: You normally add only half of your Strength modifier to damage rolls made with a weapon wielded in your off-hand.
When you fight with TWF the second attack is an off-hand wepaon, but not necessarily a light weapon, since you can also TWF with long swords, but it is not a good idea. The long sword in the off-hand still only applies 1/2 strength damage even though it's a one-handed weapon.
End game run of this argument:
Please note the following from the "Two weapon fighting" section of combat:
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.
I am willing to bet that won't end the argument. We might need a published module with a double weapon using TWF'er to prove the point. I just can't think of any I have played in that have any.
If it's as two weapons, then you must wield the off-hand weapon with a hand, only allowing you to use one hand for the main attack.
I am sure you dont really believe that so I will say argue the point, not semantics.
I am not sure that is the intent. How does this interpretation not follow your PSRD quote?
The penalties for Two-weapon fighting clearly stick to the attack bonus and frequency of attacks.
Damage definitions for Light and Normal weapons are clear within the Two Weapon fighting Rules. The core has rules for light weapons wielded in both hands - No Bonus. I think all the rules have been followed.
Double Slice is a separate feat. It's still a fine feat for single weapons.
More leverage and momentum is logical for a weapon wielded with two hands. I don't see anything that says its no longer a two handed weapon for the sake of its damage done.
Dual wielded kukri's and falcatas etc... eat double weapons for lunch. I think this is better balance too.
In retrospect I'll just stay out of this.
|
If it's as two weapons, then you must wield the off-hand weapon with a hand, only allowing you to use one hand for the main attack.I am sure you dont really believe that so I will say argue the point, not semantics.
Yes, I do believe this. I'll let the PRD do the talking for me in this case, however.
Emphasis mine below:One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.
Attacks are divided into primary and off-hand attacks, each requiring a hand to use. You follow the rules above for dealing with damage applied by strength.
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.
If it is wielded as a two handed weapon then you may not make off-hand attacks with a weapon that requires a hand for wielding.
I thank all of you for your comments.
I will roll them around in my head for a while and I appreciate that you have your opinions.
I don't know that the difference is too severe and I certainly don't think its worth an 'argument'.
In retrospect I'll just stay out of this.I am not sure that is the intent. How does this interpretation not follow your PSRD quote?
The penalties for Two-weapon fighting clearly stick to the attack bonus and frequency of attacks.
Damage definitions for Light and Normal weapons are clear within the Two Weapon fighting Rules. The core has rules for light weapons wielded in both hands - No Bonus. I think all the rules have been followed.
Double Slice is a separate feat. It's still a fine feat for single weapons.
More leverage and momentum is logical for a weapon wielded with two hands. I don't see anything that says its no longer a two handed weapon for the sake of its damage done.
Dual wielded kukri's and falcatas etc... eat double weapons for lunch. I think this is better balance too.
If you get into the threads where they discuss weapon realism you would notice that historical research into how weapons work was not done. Katanas could never cut through fullplate, as an example. Now in real life the double weapon will do more damage, but in the game the double weapon's strength(assuming anyone ever tried to combine both fighting styles) is the ability to switch between attack modes. I don't see anything that says double slice is only for single weapons. I did FAQ this thread though. This debate came up before, but I guess my searchfu was weak.
I thank all of you for your comments.
I will roll them around in my head for a while and I appreciate that you have your opinions.
I don't know that the difference is too severe and I certainly don't think its worth an 'argument'.
It is not an argument until people start calling name. :)
If it's as two weapons, then you must wield the off-hand weapon with a hand, only allowing you to use one hand for the main attack.I am sure you dont really believe that so I will say argue the point, not semantics.
Yes, I do believe this. I'll let the PRD do the talking for me in this case, however.
Emphasis mine below:One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.Attacks are divided into primary and off-hand attacks, each requiring a hand to use. You follow the rules above for dealing with damage applied by strength.
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.If it is wielded as a two handed weapon then you may not make off-hand attacks with a weapon that requires a hand for wielding.
So you are saying it is illegal by the rules to use a two-handed weapon for TWF since you have to perform the first attack with one hand?
The rules clearly state an offhand for the weapon in such cases. If the RAW contradicts the RAW then you have to look at intent. They wrote double weapons as being able to TWF so they intended for it to be used.
So you are saying it is illegal by the rules to use a two-handed weapon for TWF since you have to perform the first attack with one hand?
The rules clearly state an offhand for the weapon in such cases. If the RAW contradicts the RAW then you have to look at intent. They wrote double weapons as being able to TWF so they intended for it to be used.
I'm saying this:
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.
Already tells us how to apply the double weapon. As such this is how we apply it. This is not the way you say therefore you are not correct.
It isn't a case of contridition it's a case of specific rules for a specific situation.
Ok, In the spirit of being clear.
1. Two handed weapons are wielded with two hands and have a damage bonus for doing so.
2. Attack Penalties are just that.In and of themselves they do not affect damage rolls on a successful hit.
3. The rules for two weapon fighting state that:
"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 offhand end of the weapon was a light weapon."
The rules for fighting with two weapons concern themselves primarily with frequency of attacks and attack penalties.
I read the above passage to mean you may swing a two handed weapon (this is the category of weapon we're talking about) normally 1.5x damage. With a double weapon you may also take a second attack in the style and frequency of two weapon fighting. Penalties apply as if the offhand side of the 2 handed weapon is light.
4. Page 141 describes the various strength bonuses to damage. A light two handed weapon receives no extra strength bonus but is _not_ 1/2 strength.
In this interpretation the frequency and chance to hit for a double weapon is modified by the attack penalties for two weapon fighting. The damage of the weapon is determined as if it is a light weapon. The double weapon does have its damage reduced for its second attack from 1.5 to 1. in a similar way that two one handed weapon goes from 1 to .5.
I don't think it says anywhere that the off handed end is treated as a one handed weapon for damage, TWF and Weapon Type discuss attack bonus\penalty only.
In two instances the rules say the off hand end is treated as 'light'. There are rules for two handed light weapon damage. They receive full strength bonus but no deductions
|
|
I thank all of you for your comments.
I will roll them around in my head for a while and I appreciate that you have your opinions.
I don't know that the difference is too severe and I certainly don't think its worth an 'argument'.
The difference between that interpretation is a lot. A fighter with 26 STR. +8 damage. They way you are trying to interpret is is +12 damage per hit. The way the rule is intended, is 12 damage if both hit. If the fighter has +12 BAB and greater two weapon fighting, assuming all hit, gives him +72 damage from the way you see it, +36 for the way I see it as intended (treated as using 1 handed and light). This also effects greatly with crits. Gnome hooked hammers would be the most popular weapon ever (x3/x4)
I don't even have to number crunch to understand that with a double bladed sword I'm getting 2d8+1.5xStr (if both hit). The penalties are lessened here from fighting with two actual longswords.
With two longsword attacks (TWF) you get 2d8+2xStr damage, but your penalties are greater.
You do NOT get 1.5xStr to damage for each end of a double weapon. That isn't balanced.
Sigurd that's cute and all, but it's by no means correct.
Consider:
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.
First off it specifically refers to the "off hand end" and as I pointed out the "off hand" only gets 1/2 strength. You have nothing to avoid that. Also In the above quotes from the double weapon quality it says "as a one handed weapon and light weapon".
A one handed weapon only gets strength bonus -- not 1.5 strength.
Please note that it doesn't say "all normal attack roll penalties associate with two weapon fighting"
It states, "all normal attack penalties associated with two weapon fighting just as though the character were wielding a one handed weapon and a light weapon."
For the purposes of the attacks you are treated as if you are two weapon fighting with a onehanded and a light weapon (in your off hand) Since you have an off hand attack you follow the rules for off hand attacks -- which state you only get 1/2 your strength bonus -- since you treat the attacks as if you are using a one handed weapon and a light weapon you do not treat them as if you are using a two handed weapon.
Please note the following from the double weapon line:
The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
As such it specifically states that to get the two handed bonuses you can only use one end of it.
Basically the problem is that you are trying to nitpick the lines you are applying in the order you want to so that you can try and force it to say what you want it too.
Instead you should look at it like this:
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
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.
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.
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.
Taking the entirety of the rules and reading them as a comprehensive unit instead of cherry picking the lines you think you can force into agreeing with the position you want it to support.
Even with "A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."
Show me a single damage reduction in the two weapon fighting rules. It says "The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon." That is the only limitation on the type of the _extra_ attack.
Table 8-5 on page 195 lists attack bonuses and modifiers. When did attack penalties become damage penalties?
The description for double weapons says _nothing_ about the primary attack. It describes an extra attack - an extra attack that is treated as a light weapon.
If I say that the extra lunch you will receive has pickles, I tell you nothing about the original lunch.
There is no logical basis for modifying the first attack which is a blow from a 2 handed weapon. People are so used to two weapon fighting being about two rapiers or kurkris etc... that I don't think they consider the merits of a double weapon properly.
A double weapon starts with two ends. It is intrinsically different from two single weapons. If you take away this extra ability is the first attack still transformed into a one handed attack? no.
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can't use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
A double weapon can be wielded as a one-handed weapon, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.
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.
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.
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.
Ok so you are purposefully obtuse. Nevermind wasting my time here.
"A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons...just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."
|
|
So you are saying it is illegal by the rules to use a two-handed weapon for TWF since you have to perform the first attack with one hand?
No, just that you cannot do this with a double weapon. Clearly, you should be able to use a two-handed weapon and armor spikes together with the spikes counting as off-hand. This case only applies to a double weapon because of the way in which it is wielded.
1) Two-Handed. That's given, you must use two hands to make use of the weapon without penalty.
2) You may make attacks with the weapon using a single end as a two-handed weapon. You will do dX+(1-1/2 str) with just one end.
3) You may make attacks with the weapon using both heads. One counts as an off-hand, leaving only one hand remaining to wield the primary end. Therefore you have an attack with one end at dX+str and and off-hand of dX+(1/2 str). If you hit with both you deal 2dX+(1-1/2 str)
Does this make it any clearer?
Tell you what sigurd. Show me where it explicitedly states you do get 1.5 with both ends with a double weapon while fighting as if you were using two weapons a one handed and a light weapon.
I am not trying to be obtuse.
I have nowhere said that you get 1.5 with both ends.
You have a number of attack changes for a two handed weapon. See twf and double weapon, and combat rules. For the sake of two weapon fighting the attack is resolved as a normal attack (In this case 2 handed) and a light attack. "The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon." With TWF this gives you -2,-2 to hit.
You're still wielding a 2 handed weapon. There are rules for light 2 handed weapons.
Primary attack is 1.5
Secondary attack is light so that it is only 1. Light two handed weapons receive no extra strength bonus.
The weapon doesn't morph because you attack with it twice. You just have to attack differently with a penalty, like iterative attacks.
Even with "A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."Show me a single damage reduction in the two weapon fighting rules. It says "The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon." That is the only limitation on the type of the _extra_ attack.
Table 8-5 on page 195 lists attack bonuses and modifiers. When did attack penalties become damage penalties?
The description for double weapons says _nothing_ about the primary attack. It describes an extra attack - an extra attack that is treated as a light weapon.
If I say that the extra lunch you will receive has pickles, I tell you nothing about the original lunch.
There is no logical basis for modifying the first attack which is a blow from a 2 handed weapon. People are so used to two weapon fighting being about two rapiers or kurkris etc... that I don't think they consider the merits of a double weapon properly.
A double weapon starts with two ends. It is intrinsically different from two single weapons. If you take away this extra ability is the first attack still transformed into a one handed attack? no.
Based on the outcome the last time this topic came up, if a person wants to believe that either end of a two-ended weapon gets 1.5xSTR damage then they are going to believe it no matter how much evidence is brought up against the fact.
Consider the merits of a two bladed sword. The point is to get a main-hand and off-hand d8 19-20/x2 attack one of which can be considered a light weapon to mitigate the to hit penalty. If you were using a longsword in either hand would you give yourself STRx1.5 to the damage bonus? How about if you used two longswords but held them pommel to pommel, would you get the STRx1.5 then?
The problem people always run into is that the (probably poor) wording says attack penalties which to them translates to mean to hit penalties.
When wielding a dual weapon you get STRx1 main hand damage and STRx.5 off hand damage. That's the way the rules work as people have pointed out. Further arguing of the point just says that you're not going to accept the way it works and you're going to do it your way anyway.
Um no. It says you have an off hand attack that uses a light weapon.
off hand is something specifically covered in the combat rules:
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.
So the second attack, which is with the off hand, is made with only 1/2 your strength bonus.
It has nothing to do with "if it's light or not" it's completely to do with the fact that it is a off hand attack.
Also there is this independent line that is being ignored:
"A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons"
fighting with two weapons means fighting with an off hand attack -- just like the rules for fighting with two weapons state.
Um no. It says you have an off hand attack that uses a light weapon.
It describes two ends. It certainly doesn't say off hand attack.
off hand is something specifically covered in the combat rules:
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.So the second attack, which is with the off hand, is made with only 1/2 your strength bonus.
That would be a second penalty beyond being 'light'. The weapon is not just in my off hand, you're penalizing my primary hand as well. Two handed weapons have better damage bonuses than single weapons - that is plain.
It has nothing to do with "if it's light or not" it's completely to do with the fact that it is a off hand attack.
"The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon."
That's pretty clear. If it said the 'small end' of the weapon were light would you rewrite the weapon to make a small end do less damage? Even if you couldn't find it in the weapon description?
Also there is this independent line that is being ignored:
"A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons"
It hasn't been ignored at all. Two weapon fighting is the feat and framework for this combat. The double weapon description details how the weapon changes. It attacks as if light. This is a feature of the double weapon.
fighting with two weapons means fighting with an off hand attack -- just like the rules for fighting with two weapons state.
You have a primary attack and an off hand attack. In each of these cases, as I stated, the weapons are being wielded by two hands. If you fight with it in one hand you can't use it as a double weapon. The to hit penalties make sense. That's what the special attack is about but changing the weapon form doesn't. Its just like iterative attacks the chance to hit is reduced but its still the same weapon.
Certainly if you tried to wield it with with just your off hand you'd take penalties, you couldn't even double attack. This is being fought with 2 handed though. That's where you look to determine strength damage bonus.
The two weapon fighting feat is even more clear.
Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting in Chapter 8.
It explicitly talks about a attack rolls and doesn't talk about the resolved attack or damage rolls at all. The fighting style doesn't change damage except as stated in the weapon description. In this case the second attack with a double weapon is treated as a light weapon.
It is perfectly true that if you fight with two separate weapons the one if your off hand does less damage but these weapons are two handed weapons. They can't even be used one handed and still be double weapons.
You can make them one handed weapons for the purpose of dual wielding but I think you are adding rules to make two handed weapons behave as one handed weapons. Says so.
An orc double axe (15lbs) is the heaviest exotic weapon in the core rules. If using it as a light double weapon really changed its damage wouldn't it receive some sort of penalty, or something to address its weight?. The two weapon fighting feat and combat rules don't address weapon damage.
All the penalties they talk about are on your attack roll, like it says in the feat. Damage and Strength Bonus are a function of the weapon description, and that's still 2 handed and 2 handed light.
This is a friendly discussion. I hope I have supported anything that I have said.
I don't even dispute that there might be errata for 3.5 with different rules. Perhaps game balance will want the two handed double weapons to be exactly like fighting with two separate weapons.
As written though, I don't see that a two handed axe does damage as a one handed axe just because you swing it twice.
I don't see that a two handed axe does damage as a one handed axe just because you swing it twice.
The problem here is that you're applying both "hands" worth of Strength modifier damage to both ends to get the full 1.5x out of both ends for it being a two-handed weapon, when it is intended to be treated as two weapons for the purposes of attacking. Attacking includes dealing damage. Attack ROLLS and damage rolls are different but attacking still results in damage, and I think you are splitting too many hairs to justify the extra damage.
First of all, I'd like to point out that if you ever tried to use something like an Orc Double-Axe as a double-weapon IRL, you would either A) hurt yourself or B) not do a whole lot. The double weapon is (and forgive my use of this word, but it's only for the lack of one better) a bit of a 'finesse' weapon in that you are not supposed to rely on strength but rather momentum and fluid movements that in most cases attempt to maximize the use centrifugal force.
This is NOT the same as Str damage. Str damage is more solid and is static. The game-world translation for the addition of the centrifugal force is the extra attack with higher-than-normal weapon damage (1d8 'off-hand' as opposed to 1d6).
A level 1 fighter with a 14 Str (assuming Weapon Focus and TWF feats) using a double-bladed sword would attack at a +2 with the primary hand dealing 1d8+2 damage, and again at a +2 with the off-hand dealing 1d8+1 damage, for a total of 2d8+3. A greatsword would give you a single attack at a +4 (at least) dealing 2d6+3. Notice that the strength damage remains the same in both. Both weapons are two handed, but one spreads damage over multiple attacks for a greater maximum damage potential, while the other favors higher hit ratios for top-end damage.
You cannot get blood from a turnip, friend.
I am not trying to be obtuse.
I have nowhere said that you get 1.5 with both ends.
You have a number of attack changes for a two handed weapon. See twf and double weapon, and combat rules. For the sake of two weapon fighting the attack is resolved as a normal attack (In this case 2 handed) and a light attack. "The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon." With TWF this gives you -2,-2 to hit.
You're still wielding a 2 handed weapon. There are rules for light 2 handed weapons.
Primary attack is 1.5
Secondary attack is light so that it is only 1. Light two handed weapons receive no extra strength bonus.The weapon doesn't morph because you attack with it twice. You just have to attack differently with a penalty, like iterative attacks.
Since I have made the quote for you twice already and other have as well we will do this another way.
First you keep mentioning light weapons. The rules we keep quoting have to do with off-hand weapons, which are not always the same as light weapons since a longsword can be wielded in your off hand, but is not a light weapon and it only gets 1/2 strength added. When you read this respond, and I will get back to you with the rest of it.
So you are saying it is illegal by the rules to use a two-handed weapon for TWF since you have to perform the first attack with one hand?No, just that you cannot do this with a double weapon. Clearly, you should be able to use a two-handed weapon and armor spikes together with the spikes counting as off-hand. This case only applies to a double weapon because of the way in which it is wielded.
1) Two-Handed. That's given, you must use two hands to make use of the weapon without penalty.
2) You may make attacks with the weapon using a single end as a two-handed weapon. You will do dX+(1-1/2 str) with just one end.
3) You may make attacks with the weapon using both heads. One counts as an off-hand, leaving only one hand remaining to wield the primary end. Therefore you have an attack with one end at dX+str and and off-hand of dX+(1/2 str). If you hit with both you deal 2dX+(1-1/2 str)Does this make it any clearer?
We actually agreed then, but I misunderstood you.
|
|
We actually agreed then, but I misunderstood you.
So you are saying it is illegal by the rules to use a two-handed weapon for TWF since you have to perform the first attack with one hand?No, just that you cannot do this with a double weapon. Clearly, you should be able to use a two-handed weapon and armor spikes together with the spikes counting as off-hand. This case only applies to a double weapon because of the way in which it is wielded.
1) Two-Handed. That's given, you must use two hands to make use of the weapon without penalty.
2) You may make attacks with the weapon using a single end as a two-handed weapon. You will do dX+(1-1/2 str) with just one end.
3) You may make attacks with the weapon using both heads. One counts as an off-hand, leaving only one hand remaining to wield the primary end. Therefore you have an attack with one end at dX+str and and off-hand of dX+(1/2 str). If you hit with both you deal 2dX+(1-1/2 str)Does this make it any clearer?
No worries! :D
Thanks to everyone who cared to respond.
Sigurd
For what it's worth, this issue was also hashed out in this thread. I don't recall any official response there, but I seemed to be the only one who thought that there was nothing in the rules that directly stated that double weapons deal 1.0/0.5 damage while using TWF.
A = two weapon fighting with a one-handed and light weapon.
B = double weapon fighting.
For attack rolls:
A=B
Why would damage rolls be different? For every previous calculation, we've been told A=B. RPG's usually benefit best from consistency and Pathfinder has done a lot to improve 3.X's consistency. Therefore, A=B for damage as well.
Why would damage rolls be different?
Because all 'treat as one-handed and light weapons' notes in the rules refer to attack penalties only. There's nothing that I've been able to find that says that a double weapon ceases to become a two-handed weapon for damage purposes when TWF. Yes, it makes sense that it would be the case. But it's not stated anywhere.
|
Why would damage rolls be different?Because all 'treat as one-handed and light weapons' notes in the rules refer to attack penalties only. There's nothing that I've been able to find that says that a double weapon ceases to become a two-handed weapon for damage purposes when TWF. Yes, it makes sense that it would be the case. But it's not stated anywhere.
FWIW same issue arises with lance being able to be wielded 1 handed weapon on charges, but it also never stops being a 2 handed weapon and gets 1 1/2 str on damage.
Why would damage rolls be different?Because all 'treat as one-handed and light weapons' notes in the rules refer to attack penalties only. There's nothing that I've been able to find that says that a double weapon ceases to become a two-handed weapon for damage purposes when TWF. Yes, it makes sense that it would be the case. But it's not stated anywhere.FWIW same issue arises with lance being able to be wielded 1 handed weapon on charges, but it also never stops being a 2 handed weapon and gets 1 1/2 str on damage.
The lance specifically says you can weild it one handed though.
Benefit: A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.
It simply states that it does double damage, and it allows you to also wield it with one hand while mounted. The benefit section is always lets you know when something is an exception to the rules.
Example:
Rapier
Benefit: You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a rapier sized for you, even though it isn't a light weapon.
Why would damage rolls be different?Because all 'treat as one-handed and light weapons' notes in the rules refer to attack penalties only. There's nothing that I've been able to find that says that a double weapon ceases to become a two-handed weapon for damage purposes when TWF. Yes, it makes sense that it would be the case. But it's not stated anywhere.
Yes, I agree, it's not STATED. The logic is stronger on the side of one-hand/light than two-handed/light.
A double weapon exists in both hands at the same time, similar to a two-handed weapon. But you cannot make extra attacks with a two-handed weapon using the TWF feat. Therefore, the weapons are treated differently.
The interpretation of 1/0.5 can arrived at by logic.
The interpretation of 1.5/1 can only be arrived at by pointing out that the rule is not clearly stated.
Yes, I agree, it's not STATED. The logic is stronger on the side of one-hand/light than two-handed/light.
A double weapon exists in both hands at the same time, similar to a two-handed weapon. But you cannot make extra attacks with a two-handed weapon using the TWF feat. Therefore, the weapons are treated differently.
The interpretation of 1/0.5 can arrived at by logic.
The interpretation of 1.5/1 can only be arrived at by pointing out that the rule is not clearly stated.
This may be your belief but that is simply not objectively true. I have seen no comprehensive or exclusive logic for this question.
TWF uses one example with a one handed weapon in one hand and a light one handed weapon in the other. The feat was probably written for two weapon wielding rogues. In spite of 2 handed combat never mentioning damage it is assumed that all two weapon fighting follows that example. Not just for hit probability, the focus of the combat and feats, but also for combat style and hit resolution (Damage). I don't know of another 'attack roll' that determines handedness for damage.
It is not clear whether the description of how the feat functions has any bearing on another type of weapon. Any description of damage based on handedness comes from a third source (the description of weapons on p141).
These double weapons are two-handed weapons. You cannot attack with them in one hand and have them be double weapons that is plain.
The issue is the strength and intent of the feat description describing how the attacks occur. The only plainly stated weapon penalty is "The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon."
A = two weapon fighting with a one-handed and light weapon.
B = double weapon fighting.For attack rolls:
A=BWhy would damage rolls be different? For every previous calculation, we've been told A=B. RPG's usually benefit best from consistency and Pathfinder has done a lot to improve 3.X's consistency. Therefore, A=B for damage as well.
'Simpler and more consistent' to just get rid of double weapons and two handed weapons entirely. Then A will always be the same.
game end argument with support --> two handed fighting(rules of the game part 3
First example: Alcantar has a base attack bonus of +7, a Strength bonus of +3, and two longswords, one with +2 enhancement and one masterwork.
Fighting with a Double Weapon: Now let's suppose Alcantar has the same ability scores as in the first example and the following feats: Two-Weapon Fighting, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (two-bladed sword), Weapon Focus (two-bladed sword), and Weapon Specialization (two-bladed sword).
Let's also assume that Alcantar has a two-bladed sword that has one end with a +2 enhancement bonus and one end that's just masterwork. The bonuses and penalties when Alcantar attacks with both ends of the two-bladed sword are mostly the same as in the previous example, except that Alcantar gain the benefits of his Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization for both ends of the weapon. The two-bladed sword also deals a little more damage, as shown below:
Attacks and Bonus Damage*
Primary hand +11/+6 1d8+7
Off hand +10 1d8+3
*The damage bonus for the double weapon's primary end is +3 Strength, +2 enhancement, +2 weapon specialization. The damage bonus for the double weapon's off-hand end is +1 Strength (1/2 of +3) and +2 weapon specialization.
Now before the "this isn't 3.5" argument comes up. The verbage is the same, and it shows intent.
I don't even dispute that there might be errata for 3.5 with different rules. Perhaps game balance will want the two handed double weapons to be exactly like fighting with two separate weapons.
As written though, I don't see that a two handed axe does damage as a one handed axe just because you swing it twice.
I have seen this example (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060912a) and it is clear. It doesn't reword the rules for 3.5 or Pathfinder but this is the official example from 3.5 so far as I can tell.
It just isn't written in the rules.