Primary hand and off hand - are these fixed or declared with attacks?

[HappyDaze]

If I'm using a light shield and rapier with two-weapon fighting, can I declare at the beginning of a full attack which is the primary (and gets the full strength bonus plus more iterative attacks), or does a character have a fixed 'handedness' that I'm not seeing.

Likewise, a character with battleaxe and heavy shield (NOT two weapon fighting - can he elect to attack with either as his primary (and only) weapon?

[TriOmegaZero]

Your primary hand is whichever one you attack with first.

[HappyDaze]

TriOmegaZero wrote:

Your primary hand is whichever one you attack with first.

So there is no penalty for using your non-dominant hand? If I switch from using my rapier in my right hand to using it in my left hand (while the other hand in both cases is empty), there are no adjustments to hit or damage?

Does the concept of a dominant hand even exist in the Pathfinder world, or are all creatures assumed to be ambidextrous (though not necessarily capable of two-weapon fighting)?

[Pirate]

Yar.

HappyDaze wrote:

So there is no penalty for using your non-dominant hand? If I switch from using my rapier in my right hand to using it in my left hand (while the other hand in both cases is empty), there are no adjustments to hit or damage?

Does the concept of a dominant hand even exist in the Pathfinder world, or are all creatures assumed to be ambidextrous (though not necessarily capable of two-weapon fighting)?

There is no handedness in Pathfinder. You do not have a dominant hand in Pathfinder. All that matters is what you use for your first (primary) attack, and what you use for your secondary attack.

You may use your rapier in your right hand for one round, then switch to using it in your left hand the next. There is no mechanical difference (no penalty) for doing so.

When it comes to two-weapon-fighting, the weapon you attack with first is your primary. It could be your rapier one round, and it could be your shield-bash the second round. All this changes is which one is the primary and which one is the secondary (which may suffer penalties via number of attacks you can make with it in that round, reduced strength damage, or even penalty to attack if it is a natural weapon).

~P

EDIT: expanded response.

[Dorje Sylas]

The problem is that shield bash attacks are always considered off-hand. Bites I know but that's how the rules are written.

But yes "handedness" went out with 3.5. Frankly it doesn't make a great deal of sense as training can help with a good deal of the issue. I know a number of lefties that are computer mouse right hand dominant because that's how they learned/trained/muscle-memoried it. Same goes of variations between sports handiness.

Then because this is fantasy you get past humanoids to things with 3 or more arms, tentacles, prehensile tails....

[Pirate]

Yar.

Dorje Sylas wrote:

The problem is that shield bash attacks are always considered off-hand. Bites I know but that's how the rules are written.

This is debatable, especially with THIS.

James Jacobs wrote:

Tracking right or left handedness isn't something we bother with in Pathfinder. 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.

Yesterday SKR was doing a massive bit up FAQ updates. I suggest going to the thread linked and clicking on the FAQ there to draw more attention to it, so that perhaps the "is a shield bash an off-hand attack even if it's the only attack you make in a round?" conundrum can get clarified.

~P

[pobbes]

Pirate wrote:

Yar.

James Jacobs wrote:

Tracking right or left handedness isn't something we bother with in Pathfinder. 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.

Yesterday SKR was doing a massive bit up FAQ updates. I suggest going to the thread linked and clicking on the FAQ there to draw more attention to it, so that perhaps the "is a shield bash an off-hand attack even if it's the only attack you make in a round?" conundrum can get clarified.

~P

I don't think it's much of a conundrum. The ruling is simple, if you don't use two weapons, then whatever you attack with is a primary attack (shields are no exception). If you are using two-weapons, you can choose which is the primary attack (shields are an exception). If you two-weapon fighting, and one of your weapons is a shield bash, then it is always the off-hand attack. Done.

Some have extrapolated this means you cannot dual wield shields (unless you primary attack with unarmed or armor spikes, in which case both shields can be used for offhand attacks). However, that is another can of worms.

So, primary attack is your choice with two weapon fighting unless you are using a shield. There is a fighter archetype, shielded fighter, which has an exception to even this ruling where you can mix attacks with a shield however you like. Reference below, emphasis mine.

PRD wrote:

Shield Fighter (Ex): At 5th level, a shielded fighter gains a +1 bonus on attack and damage rolls when making a shield bash. These bonuses increase by +1 every four levels beyond 5th. With a full attack action, a shielded fighter may alternate between using his weapon or his shield for each attack. This action does not grant additional attacks or incur penalties as two-weapon fighting does. This ability replaces weapon training 1

Yeah, that ability makes shielded fighters super nasty as a shielded fighter could two-weapon fight and make every attack a shield bash. Eat that monks!!

[Pirate]

Yar.

For you it may be clear, however, it is not so for everyone. For example:

Dorje Sylas wrote:

The problem is that shield bash attacks are always considered off-hand. Bites I know but that's how the rules are written.

To this person (apologies for speaking for you, this is being done as an example. If it is incorrect, please correct me), the rules are very clear. Shield Bash Attacks are always considered Off-Hand Attacks. Always. Even if it's the only attack you make in a round, it is still an Off-Hand Attack.

Your interpretation of "the rules are simple" goes in conflict with this other persons "the rules are simple". Thus: Conundrum.

If your "the rules are simple" interpretation are based off of JJ's quote, then that needs to be amended via a FAQ or errata, as this question HAS come up a few times in the past due to how the various sections of the Core Rules are written (that is, you can come to either conclusion by RAW, thus showing that this aspect of the rules are not as clear as it could/should be).

~P

[Pirate]

Yar.

Reading more carefully this time:

pobbes wrote:

... if you don't use two weapons, then whatever you attack with is a primary attack (shields are no exception). If you are using two-weapons, you can choose which is the primary attack (shields are an exception). If you two-weapon fighting, and one of your weapons is a shield bash, then it is always the off-hand attack. ...

JJ's quote is contrary to this. He says that if you are using two weapons, but only make a Shield Bash, it is considered Primary (full strength bonus to damage), thus the shield is not an exception. In this case, it is not an Off-Hand Attack, but a Primary Attack..

(Hence my call to have it FAQ'ed. This is not the first time it's been argued).

~P

[pobbes]

Pirate wrote:

Yar.

Reading more carefully this time:

pobbes wrote:

... if you don't use two weapons, then whatever you attack with is a primary attack (shields are no exception). If you are using two-weapons, you can choose which is the primary attack (shields are an exception). If you two-weapon fighting, and one of your weapons is a shield bash, then it is always the off-hand attack. ...

JJ's quote is contrary to this. He says that if you are using two weapons, but only make a Shield Bash, it is considered Primary (full strength bonus to damage), thus the shield is not an exception. In this case, it is not an Off-Hand Attack, but a Primary Attack..

(Hence my call to have it FAQ'ed. This is not the first time it's been argued).

~P

Hmm... let me try to be clearer. How I see it, there are a few separate ideas at play. One is equipment and the other is attack routine. In terms of primary attack designation, this only applies to a specific attack routine, and that is the full attack routine.

During the full attack routine, you can have three types or attack - primary, off-hand, and secondary. Primary, we already understand. Off-hand, we understand and shields have special rules for it. Secondary, this is for natural attacks and i don't want to talk about this.

Only a few pieces of equipment mention that they must be off-hand attacks. Shields are the most visible members of this group.

JJ's post means (to me) that if equipment states that it can only be used for off-hand attacks, then that restriction only applies to the full attack routine.

Therefore, shields are only restricted to being offhand attacks when a player has to specify offhand attacks. This is during the full attack routine while choosing to two weapon fight.

The gray area is whether a shield could be used for a full attack routine without two-weapon fighting, and (by my strictest interpretation) no a shield cannot do this. If you are using a full attack routine then a shield must be used as an offhand attack.

So, when can a shield not be an offhand attack? During a single attack routine. Single attack routines have no offhand attacks. JJ's post exists to show shields can be used in a single attack routine, and that, when doing so, do not suffer offhand penalties. There actually is no "primary" attack in a single attack routine. It's just that when making a single attack the rules are the same as the first attack with your primary weapon in your full attack routine.

Does that help explain my logic. I have always thought in terms of attack routines. I do not think in terms of equipment.

[Pirate]

Yar.

pobbes wrote:

Does that help explain my logic.

It sure does.

However, it doesn't change the fact that the question of "what is what and when" is not as clear as it could/should be, has been asked several times, and has had different conclusions drawn from different people, all claiming that their version is clear by RAW.

I am holding only a shield and I attack once with it. What happens?

I am holding only a shield and I full attack with only it. What happens?

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, but I attack only once with the shield and not with the sword. What happens?

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I full attack with only the shield and not with the sword. What happens?

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield via TWF to gain an extra attack, and I swing the sword first. What happens?

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield via TWF to gain an extra attack, and I swing the shield first. What happens?

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield, but this is due to high BaB. I am not TWF and I do not gain an etra attack. I swing the sword first. What happens?

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield, but this is due to high BaB. I am not TWF and I do not gain an etra attack. I swing the shield first. What happens?

The answers to some of these questions are clear by the RAW. The answers to some of these questions are NOT clear by RAW.

(I am posting this under the impression that you do not feel this is FAQ worthy. That even without JJ's post, you know clearly what happens in each scenario. Based on the fact that this questions regarding these scenarios have come up a number of times, and people have come to opposing conclusions/answers for these scenarios based upon their interpretation of the RAW, I feel that this IS FAQ worthy. Group 1 comes to conclusion A, while group 2 comes to conclusion B, and both feel that their own conclusion is clear and true, yet conclusion A and B are both different and cannot coexist with each other... this is when a FAQ or errata is needed. A dev posting a clarification on the forums is great, but it doesn't solve the issue of the RAW being interpreted in multiple ways. Thus I still call for the FAQ (going to the thread where JJ posted his clarification, and tagging that post (or the OP) as a FAQ candidate), so that these questions can be clearly answered by the RAW for everyone reading them, not only for those people who read the forums).

~P

[Shtudd-Leee]

Two weapon fighting? I would like to once again reference the "Halflings dadgum rock" rule. Which basically states that Halflings rock with both hands....(get your mind out of the gutter).

[Pirate]

Yar.

Shtudd-Leee wrote:

Two weapon fighting? I would like to once again reference the "Halflings dadgum rock" rule. Which basically states that Halflings rock with both hands....(get your mind out of the gutter).

...

....

.....

*tosses you at an orc!*

~P

[Dorje Sylas]

Pirate wrote:

Yar.

For you it may be clear, however, it is not so for everyone. For example:

Dorje Sylas wrote:

The problem is that shield bash attacks are always considered off-hand. Bites I know but that's how the rules are written.

To this person (apologies for speaking for you, this is being done as an example. If it is incorrect, please correct me), the rules are very clear. Shield Bash Attacks are always considered Off-Hand Attacks. Always. Even if it's the only attack you make in a round, it is still an Off-Hand Attack.

Your interpretation of "the rules are simple" goes in conflict with this other persons "the rules are simple". Thus: Conundrum.

If your "the rules are simple" interpretation are based off of JJ's quote, then that needs to be amended via a FAQ or errata, as this question HAS come up a few times in the past due to how the various sections of the Core Rules are written (that is, you can come to either conclusion by RAW, thus showing that this aspect of the rules are not as clear as it could/should be).

~P

More or less correct. I would prefer it to not be stated so in the core rule book but it's fairly blunt in each shield entry.

Heavy Shield & Light Shield:

Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy[light] shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. See “shield, heavy[light]” on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a heavy[light] shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a heavy[light] shield as a one-handed[light] weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

Compare to Armor Spikes:

"You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. "

Personally I'm all for house ruling it a regular melee attack (or off-hand), I will check out the FAQ thread don't forget to mark relevant posts for FAQ.

[pobbes]

Pirate wrote:

Yar.

Yo ho ho and a bottle of RAW

Pirate wrote:

I am holding only a shield and I attack once with it. What happens?

Single attack routine identical to first "primary" attack in full attack routine. No off-hand penalties.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding only a shield and I full attack with only it. What happens?

Your unarmed attack becomes your primary and your shield the off-hand. You can only attack with the shield as often as you would be allowed off-hand attacks as granted by the TWF feats. Off-hand penalties would apply to the shield bash. Therefore, if you attack with only your shield and lack TWF, then you are better served taking a single attack action. Otherwise you are, technically, automatically aborting your primary unarmed attacks.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, but I attack only once with the shield and not with the sword. What happens?

Single attack routine identical to first "primary" attack in full attack routine. No off-hand penalties.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I full attack with only the shield and not with the sword. What happens?

Your sword attack becomes your primary and your shield the off-hand. You can only attack with the shield as often as you would be allowed off-hand attacks as granted by the TWF feats. Off-hand penalties would apply to the shield bash. Therefore, if you attack with only your shield and lack TWF, then you are better served taking a single attack action. Otherwise you are, technically, automatically aborting your primary attacks.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield via TWF to gain an extra attack, and I swing the sword first. What happens?

Normal Two-weapon fighting attack routine as described in the player's handbook. Sword is always the primary attack, and shield can only be used as often off-hand attacks are granted by TWF. Off-hand penalties apply to the shield.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield via TWF to gain an extra attack, and I swing the shield first. What happens?

Normal Two-weapon fighting attack routine as described in the player's handbook. Sword is always the primary attack, and shield can only be used as often off-hand attacks are granted by TWF. Roll for the shield first, but Off-hand penalties still apply to the shield.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield, but this is due to high BaB. I am not TWF and I do not gain an etra attack. I swing the sword first. What happens?

This is impossible. You cannot alternate weapons during a full attack routine, shield or not. A player attempting this would be informed the only way to attack with more than one weapon is through the use of TWF or MWF.

Pirate wrote:

I am holding a sword in one hand and a shield in the other, and I attack with both the sword and the shield, but this is due to high BaB. I am not TWF and I do not gain an extra attack. I swing the shield first. What happens?

This is impossible. You cannot alternate weapons during a full attack routine, shield or not. A player attempting this would be informed the only way to attack with more than one weapon is through the use of TWF or MWF.

Pirate wrote:

The answers to some of these questions are clear by the RAW. The answers to some of these questions are NOT clear by RAW.

You are right, this may be FAQ worthy, but I will try to answer each one as I see them. This would be my ruling as per RAW and as a DM, but I do think this is how the developers intended it.

Note: All of these answers are different if you take the shielded fighter archetype which affects all of these rules. Also, only when you equip a weapon which restricts itself to the off-hand (such as shields) are some of these rulings appropriate.