If someone runs by you, can you get an AoO on them with your shield?
Do you need to declare before hand that you are threatening with it?
Would you lose your AC bonus from the shield until your next turn?
Thanks!
If someone runs by you, can you get an AoO on them with your shield?
Do you need to declare before hand that you are threatening with it?
Would you lose your AC bonus from the shield until your next turn?
Pg 180 of the core rulebook says "You Threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn."
Pg 152 reads "If you use your Shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn."
The way I read this you threaten (and can therefore make AoO into) all the squares around you whenever you have a shield strapped to your arm. However, once you use your shield in a shieldbash you lose its bonus to AC until next round. (unless you take "Improved Shield Bash" Pg 128 core rule book.)
To expand:
pg 180 of corebook states: "Making an attack of opportunity: An attack of oportunity 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."
My interpretation of this is as follows. I believe it's widely known that your "normal" attack is also your best attack. If I were the GM I would rule that an AoO must be taken with your main-hand weapon when two-weapon fighting.
EDIT: In addition, a shield bash using TWF can only be used as part of a full round attack, same as an off-hand weapon, by the RAW. So in accordance with the RAW, no you cannot use shield bash as an AoO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In addition, a shield bash using TWF can only be used as part of a full round attack, same as an off-hand weapon, by the RAW. So in accordance with the RAW, no you cannot use shield bash as an AoO.
Message board posts are not official errata, but:
The ONLY time an attack is considered an off-hand attack is when you make an attack with a second weapon in the same round you make an attack with a first weapon.If you have a longsword in your right hand and a shield in your left, and you only attack with a shield bash in a round, that shield bash is NOT considered an off-hand or secondary attack for that round.
|
pg 180 of corebook states: "You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round."
My interpretation of this is as follows. I believe it's widely known that your "normal" attack is also your best attack. If I were the GM I would rule that an AoO must be taken with your main-hand weapon when two-weapon fighting.
It doesn't say "normal" attack. It says "normal attack bonus." This speaks to how to calculate the attack modifier, not what can be used to make an attack. Without this, a 7th level fighter with a attack of longsword +12/+7 might result in confusion about whether he attacks at +12 or at +7. As GM, you can certainly rule that an AoO must be made with main-hand weapon only, but it leads to odd circumstances and isn't supported by the word "normal."
EDIT: In addition, a shield bash using TWF can only be used as part of a full round attack, same as an off-hand weapon, by the RAW. So in accordance with the RAW, no you cannot use shield bash as an AoO.
Likewise, the 7th level fighter can only attack more than once per round when using a full round action. By the logic you've provided here, no one can take an AoO in a round where the character has already attacked. Full round attack is a non-issue here, as is when TWF penalties apply.
Additionally, the 7th level fighter in this the example could make full round attack using his longsword for one attack and his shield for the second attack without invoking TWF penalties. The shield bash AoO doesn't involve TWF penalties, which are associated with taking more attacks than indicated by BAB.
It is reasonable to rule that a character can only attack with a weapon that threatens the opponent. It does get dicey when using an AoO with an attack that would invoke penalties or lose bonuses had it been part of a regular attack. This can also come up with bucklers or other feats that require using a weapon combination in a particular way. If making an argument about not using particular attacks during an AoO, this probably is the basis of the strongest argument.
This can also come up with bucklers
You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.
|
|
This can also come up with bucklersYou can't make a shield bash with a buckler.
I didn't say you could, but I understand the ambiguity when taken out of the context of the paragraph. If you attack using a weapon in your buckler hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus. If you AoO with the dagger in that hand, for instance, the situation is then analogous to shield bashing.
If you attack using a weapon in your buckler hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus. If you AoO with the dagger in that hand, for instance, the situation is then analogous to shield bashing.
I guess, I don't really understand.
If you go with James' rule about shields being normal weapons, then you could take AoOs with them, and would lose the shield bonus if you attack with them. If you used it during your turn, you lose the shield bonus then, if you use it for an AoO, you lose the shield bonus after that AoO.
If you go with strict RAW which implies shield Bash can only be made as an off-hand attack (and thus, as part of a full-round TWF attack), then you couldn't bash with it to take an AoO.
If you have a buckler and dagger on the same hand, the -1 to attack would apply when taking an AoO with the dagger, and you would lose the shield bonus to AC after doing so.
Sound right?
pg 180 of corebook states: "You make your attack of opportunity at your normal attack bonus, even if you've already attacked in the round."
My interpretation of this is as follows. I believe it's widely known that your "normal" attack is also your best attack. If I were the GM I would rule that an AoO must be taken with your main-hand weapon when two-weapon fighting.
It doesn't say "normal" attack. It says "normal attack bonus." This speaks to how to calculate the attack modifier, not what can be used to make an attack. Without this, a 7th level fighter with a attack of longsword +12/+7 might result in confusion about whether he attacks at +12 or at +7. As GM, you can certainly rule that an AoO must be made with main-hand weapon only, but it leads to odd circumstances and isn't supported by the word "normal."
EDIT: In addition, a shield bash using TWF can only be used as part of a full round attack, same as an off-hand weapon, by the RAW. So in accordance with the RAW, no you cannot use shield bash as an AoO.Likewise, the 7th level fighter can only attack more than once per round when using a full round action. By the logic you've provided here, no one can take an AoO in a round where the character has already attacked. Full round attack is a non-issue here, as is when TWF penalties apply.
Additionally, the 7th level fighter in this the example could make full round attack using his longsword for one attack and his shield for the second attack without invoking TWF penalties. The shield bash AoO doesn't involve TWF penalties, which are associated with taking more attacks than indicated by BAB.
It is reasonable to rule that a character can only attack with a weapon that threatens the opponent. It does get dicey when using an AoO with an attack that would invoke penalties or lose bonuses had it been part of a regular attack. This can also come up with bucklers or other feats that require using a weapon combination in a particular...
I disagree with your assessment. And you're incorrect when interpreting my logic, my logic is directly quoted from the corebook. I didn't say he couldn't take an AoO, in fact I said he could but it would have to be with main-hand only. Directly in accordance with RAW. I'll put it another way.
When the TWF character moves 10 feet in a round and makes an attack, what kind of attack is it? main-hand or off-hand? That's right, main hand. Why? Because TWF only works when you can make a full attack action, the character does not get to pick and choose which hand to use when making a single attack as a standard action. Same thing applies to AoO. An AoO is not a full round action hence shield bash cannot be used.
Also, mechanically speaking, there is no distinction between main-hand or off-hand in terms of threatening squares around you, you threaten all adjacent squares if you're holding a melee weapon and are not immobilized in some way.
When the TWF character moves 10 feet in a round and makes an attack, what kind of attack is it? main-hand or off-hand?
It depends on if it's a shield or two weapons.
If a guy with rapier/dagger moves 15' then makes an attack, it can be with either weapon. The only time he takes TWF penalties is when he's Two-Weapon Fighting.
If it's a sword and shield, then depending on how much stock you put in developer board posts vs somewhat ambiguously worded rules, then he may or may not be able to make a Bash attack.
You can choose to take your normal attacks with a shield. Heck, you can take Improved Shield Bash and make a character that dual-wields shields if you really want to (though since shield bonuses to AC won't stack there isn't much point I would think). Shields are listed in the weapon table. They are martial weapons. You threaten when using one.
In fact, with Shield Slam it might even be worthwhile to attack with your shield and try to get a bull rush for free on the AoO.
|
|
I disagree with your assessment. And you're incorrect when interpreting my logic, my logic is directly quoted from the corebook. I didn't say he couldn't take an AoO, in fact I said he could but it would have to be with main-hand only. Directly in accordance with RAW. I'll put it another way.
Our disagreement stems from whether a shield can only be used to bash as part of a TWF sequence. Given that there does exist two camps on this, I'll acknowledge that both positions have merit to different readers. I didn't realize that this is where your original post was stemming from.
However, your logic isn't "quoted from the corebook." Your logic is, at least in part, dependent upon a constructed definition of the word normal. Specifically, you've said that it equates to "best attack" and thus must be made with main hand when two-weapon fighting. However, when two-weapon fighting, the first attack with main hand and the first attack with off-hand are at the same attack bonus. So, even were "normal" to mean "best attack," the two attacks are equal. As it is, as I explained above, "normal" doesn't have the meaning you've assigned to it.
You've said that a shield bash using TWF can only be part of a full round attack, and thus a shield bash cannot be used as part of an AoO. Ok, I may have gotten a bit off track in making the analogy to the fighter making a full round attack. Thanks for reining me in. It's a weak analogy and I'll concede it.
You can use a shield bash as the only attack in a round. You can use it as the only attack, as the main hand attack, or as an off hand attack. Doing so is an interpretation of the RAW, and it is supported by developer posts.
Yes, the bash description says "using it as an off-hand weapon." And, off-hand weapon only has meaning in TWF. I suppose this is the basis for your position that a shield bash can only take place in a TWF sequence and thus can't be used as an AoO. It is an interpretation that a shield can only be used to bash as an off-hand weapon in a TWF sequence. It also has been explained by developers that this is not the only way a shield bash can be used. So, it is your interpretation of RAW, and it is interpretation that does not have the support of the developers.
When the TWF character moves 10 feet in a round and makes an attack, what kind of attack is it? main-hand or off-hand? That's right, main hand. Why? Because TWF only works when you can make a full attack action, the character does not get to pick and choose which hand to use when making a single attack as a standard action. Same thing applies to AoO. An AoO is not a full round action hence shield bash cannot be used.
It is neither main-hand or off-hand. The terms only have meaning in TWF. The character most certainly DOES get to choose which weapon to use when making a single attack as a standard action. I agree that if you follow your interpretation of shield bash only being possible when TWF, then you will come to your interpretation. Your interpretation will be meaningful to those other readers who chose this interpretation. My experience in playing with a couple of hundred players in 3.5 and PF that this interpretation is the minority opinion. I'm answering from the perspective of what I have seen as the majority.
Also, mechanically speaking, there is no distinction between main-hand or off-hand in terms of threatening squares around you, you threaten all adjacent squares if you're holding a melee weapon and are not immobilized in some way.
I didn't say there was, but thanks. What I said was "It is reasonable to rule that a character can only attack with a weapon that threatens the opponent." I was making a nod to the idea that you can have attacks that threaten at different ranges, and if so, only an attack that threatens the target can be used. Examples would be a character with a reach weapon and a natural attack, a reach weapon and spikes, a monk with a reach weapon, etc. The main point that I was referring to was that I think it gets dicey when a shield has been used for defense to subsequently use it for an AoO. I think there is an argument that, when used for defense, it no longer threatens. It is a weak RAW argument through the inversion of the shield definition, "You can bash with a shield instead of using it for defense."
So, we'll disagree and have provided perspectives for both groups of readers, those that see shield bash as only possible with an off-hand attack, and those who see it as an attack that can be used in other ways as well.
@ Howie23. My apologies sir. After reading your responses, it occurs to me that my GM may have ruled this wrong, which sadly most of my interpretation comes from. I was under the impression that this was a full attack action and it does not state that, only that you get an off-hand attack. Thanks for leading me to water. :)
I also reread the TWF rules again and they are ambiguous at best, to say the least I know. Now I have a question. Is it just the one extra attack per round or per attack?
Let's use your 7th level Fighter as an example. Will his attacks be +7 MH, +7 OH, +2 MH, +2 OH? Or would it be +6 MH, +6 OH, +1MH?
So after re-reading everything I still came to the same conclusion for an off-hand shield bash though, albeit with a better understanding of the mechanic. At lower levels it's pretty innocent, but later on when you're getting the free bull rush with it, it seems overpowered for a free attack such as an AoO. I would still rule that the AoO must be with the main-hand weapon.
I also reread the TWF rules again and they are ambiguous at best, to say the least I know. Now I have a question. Is it just the one extra attack per round or per attack?
Let's use your 7th level Fighter as an example. Will his attacks be +7 MH, +7 OH, +2 MH, +2 OH? Or would it be +6 MH, +6 OH, +1MH?
TWF gives one extra off-hand attack per full-round action. Improved TWF gives second off-hand attack and Greater TWF gives third.
Thus 7 level Fighter with TWF gets attacks with BAB of +7 MH, +7 OH, +2 MH while 7 level Fighter with Improved TWF would get +7 MH, +7 OH, +2 MH, +2 OH.
Note that there is separate debate about actual sequence of attacks - if it is +7/+7/+2/+2 r if it is main hand first, off-hand after all main hand attacks are made.
So after re-reading everything I still came to the same conclusion for an off-hand shield bash though, albeit with a better understanding of the mechanic. At lower levels it's pretty innocent, but later on when you're getting the free bull rush with it, it seems overpowered for a free attack such as an AoO. I would still rule that the AoO must be with the main-hand weapon.
Except main-hand isn't constant. You declare your character's main hand when you start to attack and only for that full attack action. You can change it next round if you wish to. So ruling that AoO must be maide with main-hand weapon is actually meaningless* - main-hand weapon is the one you want to attack while adding full Strength bonus to damage instead of half Strength bonus.
*unless you first introduce house rules for handedness
@ Drejk. Yes that makes sense. I forgot about the other feats that increase the number of off-hand attacks you get. Thanks for clarifying.
As far as the AoO goes, it would absolutely be house ruled the way I wrote it. I guess I wasn't successful in conveying that notion in my last post. In the RAW I agree with you, when using TWF you should "want" to use the attack that deals most damage, off-hand attacks are not optimal as you pointed out. However the initial question of the OP was can he shield bash with his off-hand as an AoO and that is the question I was trying to answer. In the RAW, sure knock yourself out. What I was trying to say was, at 6th level when you have the Shield Slam feat you get a free bull rush as a result of a shield bash attack, while that seemed overpowered to me for a free AoO, it's still within the RAW for a TWF character.
I agree with Howie and Drejk.
Further Shield slam would be a great feat for this.
3 feats to do low damage and a chance for a great manuever over rated?
Would be a little broken I guess if a person was using a heavy sheild with 2 hands.
2WF penalities end after a full action. So barring some weird circumstance where an AoO could interupt a person Full Attack option. A player could alternate his weapon hands for AoO's without penalty, I can't conceive two AoO's on the same person with an immediate action.
But multiple in a round with combat reflexes sure.
I agree with Howie and Drejk.
Further Shield slam would be a great feat for this.
3 feats to do low damage and a chance for a great manuever over rated?
Would be a little broken I guess if a person was using a heavy sheild with 2 hands.
2WF penalities end after a full action. So barring some weird circumstance where an AoO could interupt a person Full Attack option. A player could alternate his weapon hands for AoO's without penalty, I can't conceive two AoO's on the same person with an immediate action.But multiple in a round with combat reflexes sure.
I was not referring to the damage output. I was referring to the effect the shield slam and subsequent free bull rush has on an enemy that is trying to get into a position and possibly can't now because he got bull rushed 15 feet out of the way. Great for the party, not so good for balance, again imo.
Also, remember this, turnabout is fair play. If the PCs can do it, so can everyone else.
If I was still doing homebrew games I would use that tactic. Yeah, it could be a bit hampering, but great for a sickley mages bodyguard, for both sides.
But I don't think it is over powered really, bab+str against 10 +str+dex.
Overpowered would be Power Attack-TWF-Improved Bull-Rush- Greater Bull Rush- Improved Shield Bash And Shield Slam.
So if you wanted to be a bad GM you get something like an Ogre apply ranger levls, or something to get him these feats, add his brother who has these feats and play, ping pong, bull rush +4 plus Size mod.
Update: In the combat section of corebook page 187 under Full Attack...
"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonues in Chapter 3), 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 it looks as though my original assessment was correct. An AoO is an immediate action and not a full round action so, AoO is main-hand only. That's my final interpretation on this.
Update: In the combat section of corebook page 187 under Full Attack...
"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonues in Chapter 3), 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 it looks as though my original assessment was correct. An AoO is an immediate action and not a full round action so, AoO is main-hand only. That's my final interpretation on this.
I don't see any relevance in your quoted rule.
It's saying, if you want more than one attack, you have to use a full-round action to get it. This applies if your extra attacks are coming from high BAB, TWF, Haste, etc.
Since there is no main hand if you're not TWF, restricting an AoO to main hand is meaningless. To avoid the shield-offhand-only debate, assume a guy has rapier/dagger. He can make a standard attack with either weapon. He can make iterative (high BAB) attacks with either weapon. He can take an AoO with either weapon. The only time mainhand/offhand matters is if he uses Two-Weapon Fighting to gain an extra attack during a full attack.
-edit-
wait, are you thinking people are getting an extra attack during the AoO with their offhand? I don't think anyone has suggested that. You can't make an AoO with both weapons no matter what.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it looks as though my original assessment was correct. An AoO is an immediate action and not a full round action so, AoO is main-hand only. That's my final interpretation on this.
AoO is NOT an "immediate action." In fact, I don't think it technically fits into any of the action types.
It probably should be explicitly defined in free actions
like "Speak":
In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn't your turn. Speaking more than a few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action.
Something like:
Attack of Opportunity: An AoO is a special type free action that you can perform even when it isn't your turn. See the rules for AoAs.
In any case, off-hand is really only defined in the context of making multiple attacks. If youa re only making a single attack--regardless of the action used--you can make it with any available weapon.