Before you get me wrong, please read.
Let's say I have a BAB of +6/+1.
Can I use the +6 to hit with my sword, and do the +1 attack with my shield in the offhand for example?
It's obviously not TWF since I don't get an additional attack, but I'm not sure you can switch weapons like that.
Before you get me wrong, please read.
Let's say I have a BAB of +6/+1.
Can I use the +6 to hit with my sword, and do the +1 attack with my shield in the offhand for example?
It's obviously not TWF since I don't get an additional attack, but I'm not sure you can switch weapons like that.
Yes you can.
In the case of sword and shield, why would you want to? The sword will be more effective unless you have a very magical shield then just hit twice with the shield.
I understand if the second weapon is thrown, a whip, or something but no warrior would choose to make a less effective attack.
Because of Damage reduction identified with the first attack, a special ability associated with the shield?
In the case of sword and shield, why would you want to? The sword will be more effective unless you have a very magical shield then just hit twice with the shield.
I understand if the second weapon is thrown, a whip, or something but no warrior would choose to make a less effective attack.
There are some feats and abilities that function off a shield attack, so even though it has a lower hit, that activation would probably be worth it.
There are some feats and abilities that function off a shield attack, so even though it has a lower hit, that activation would probably be worth it.In the case of sword and shield, why would you want to? The sword will be more effective unless you have a very magical shield then just hit twice with the shield.
I understand if the second weapon is thrown, a whip, or something but no warrior would choose to make a less effective attack.
Exactly.
One example is the Defending Weapon quality you can enchant on the weapon-part of a shield. However to take advantage of the Defending mechanism you need to make an attack roll with it.
So... if you use your lowest attack for it, you still get the bonus, you don't lose much because the chance to hit even with the weapon wasn't very high to start with, and if you hit, well you do at least a bit of damage still.
Or if you have the Shield Slam feat. You might want to hit him twice with your sword and then Shield Slam + Bullrush the guy away from the squishy. (ok since TWF is a prereq for Shield Slam, you'd probably be TWF here, so not the best example)
From a DPR point of view it makes no sense, you're right about that, but if that was the only criterion you wouldn't fight with a shield in the first place.
I'm going to disagree with most and actually say no ... according to RAW:
Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a
light shield, using it as an off-hand weapon. See “shield,
light” on Table 6–4 for the damage dealt by a shield bash.
Used this way, a light shield is a martial bludgeoning
weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat
a light shield as a light weapon. If you use your shield
as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn.
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get
one extra attack per round with that weapon.
being that the shield is an off hand weapon, I would say that using it would be two-weapon fighting. Having a +6/+1 would only apply to the sword and the shield would be an off hand weapon bringing about whatever penalties are inquired.
I'm going to disagree with most and actually say no ... according to RAW:
Please check the FAQ.
-James
Checked the FAQ for the core rulebook but found nothing regarding a shield not being a off-hand weapon ... care to point he way.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Checked the FAQ for the core rulebook but found nothing regarding a shield not being a off-hand weapon ... care to point he way.I'm going to disagree with most and actually say no ... according to RAW:
Please check the FAQ.
-James
It's right here, in the FAQ for the CRB - the one you said you checked.
Also, to reinforce the "yes" answer:
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.
So obviously you can switch weapons.
As for reasons to do so, another possibility is if you replace the shield with (say) a sickle (a trip weapon). Use your highest BAB to trip the target, then swing your "real" weapon (with the bonus against a prone target nearly cancelling the reduced BAB) for damage - likely the same number of hits as if you'd just made two plain-jane attacks, except now the guy's prone.
Ok I will add shield for the defender enchantment trick to the list of viable reasons, but you can use any weapon to perform combat maneuvers like trip you just don't get the +2 from the weapon. So most of the time it is still better to just trip with your main weapon.
I mean if you are going to spend gold enchanting two weapons why on earth would you not take TWF feat line. Having a second weapon get's very expensive, well a third since you should always have some kind of ranged weapon for when it is needed.
Yes you can do it, in some corner cases I can see you wanting too but for most characters it just won't come up.
you can use any weapon to perform combat maneuvers like trip you just don't get the +2 from the weapon.
FAQ:
If you want to make a trip combat maneuver, do you have to use a weapon with the trip special feature?
"No. Note that when making a trip combat maneuver, you don't need to use a weapon at all--for example, you can trip when you're unarmed, even though unarmed strike isn't listed as a trip weapon.
There are advantages to using a weapon with the trip special feature (a.k.a. a "trip weapon") when making a trip combat maneuver. One, if your trip attack fails by 10 or more, you can drop the trip weapon instead of being knocked prone. Two, you can apply the weapon's enhancement bonus, weapon-specific attack bonuses such as Weapon Focus, and so on to your trip combat maneuver roll.
For example, you'd add the enhancement bonus from a +5 whip to your trip combat maneuver roll because a whip is a trip weapon. You wouldn't add the enhancement bonus from a +5 longsword to your trip combat maneuver roll because a longsword is not a trip weapon. In effect, there's no difference between making an unarmed trip attempt and a trip attempt with a +5 longsword because the sword doesn't help you make the trip attempt."
—Sean K Reynolds, 03/15/11
Checked the FAQ for the core rulebook but found nothing regarding a shield not being a off-hand weapon ... care to point he way.I'm going to disagree with most and actually say no ... according to RAW:
Please check the FAQ.
-James
It's right here, in the FAQ for the CRB - the one you said you checked.
Also, to reinforce the "yes" answer:
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.So obviously you can switch weapons.
As for reasons to do so, another possibility is if you replace the shield with (say) a sickle (a trip weapon). Use your highest BAB to trip the target, then swing your "real" weapon (with the bonus against a prone target nearly cancelling the reduced BAB) for damage - likely the same number of hits as if you'd just made two plain-jane attacks, except now the guy's prone.
If I make a shield bash (page 152), does it always have to be an off-hand attack?
The text for a shield bash assumes you're making a bash as an off-hand attack, but you don't have to. You can, for example, just make a shield bash attack (at your normal, main-hand attack bonus) or shield bash with your main hand and attack with a sword in your off-hand.
So either you use the shield as an off hand weapon or the sword ... its still two-handed fighting.
As far as I understand the OP wants to use his sword with the +6 and the shield (off-hand) with a +1 (or vise versa) saying that its not two-handed fighting. He is fighting with a weapon in each hand. Fighting with two weapons is two weapon fighting. He even says the shield is off-hand.|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Ok I will add shield for the defender enchantment trick to the list of viable reasons, but you can use any weapon to perform combat maneuvers like trip you just don't get the +2 from the weapon. So most of the time it is still better to just trip with your main weapon.
You're thinking of disarm. The "trip" weapon quality doesn't grant a +2 to the attempt - it allows you to use a weapon in the first place (as opposed to a leg sweep or however you want to flavor it) and allows you to drop the weapon instead of falling prone if you fail by 10 or more.
EDIT: Multi-ninja'd.
Did not know about non trip weapons not adding magic bonus to the attempt thanks for the info.
Fighting with two weapons is two weapon fighting.
Two-Weapon Fighting is making an extra attack per round with a weapon in your off hand. You take significant penalties when you fight this way.
If you do not make an extra attack that round, you are not fighting that way, and the penalties do not apply.
Checked the FAQ for the core rulebook but found nothing regarding a shield not being a off-hand weapon ... care to point he way.This is all I was responding to by linking that FAQ, gourry.
I appreciate the link, I was looking in the combat section and not the gear so I missed it.
My disagreement is that a character with an exra attack via high BAB (+6/+1) can use his off hand weapon whether it be a shield or some other weapon) without incuring the two-weapon fighting penalties and instead using the extra BAB attack modifier.
If you are attacking with a weapon in each hand (regardless of the type of weapon), you are using two-weapon fighting and incure whatever penaltied (and bonus ie and extra attack) that apply.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Checked the FAQ for the core rulebook but found nothing regarding a shield not being a off-hand weapon ... care to point he way.This is all I was responding to by linking that FAQ, gourry.I appreciate the link, I was looking in the combat section and not the gear so I missed it.
My disagreement is that a character with an exra attack via high BAB (+6/+1) can use his off hand weapon whether it be a shield or some other weapon) without incuring the two-weapon fighting penalties and instead using the extra BAB attack modifier.
If you are attacking with a weapon in each hand (regardless of the type of weapon), you are using two-weapon fighting and incure whatever penaltied (and bonus ie and extra attack) that apply.
See the post just above yours (from Grick). The wording of the TWF rules is pretty clear - the penalties apply when you fight "this way", which (by the basic rules of grammar) refers to the gaining of an extra attack as described in that paragraph.
Its a quality of D&D that they choose poor names for game terms, and this is an example. If they had called it 'florentine' or some such it would not cause nearly as much confusion.
A handy link to the Florentine Style post.
See the post just above yours (from Grick). The wording of the TWF rules is pretty clear - the penalties apply when you fight "this way", which (by the basic rules of grammar) refers to the gaining of an extra attack as described in that paragraph.Checked the FAQ for the core rulebook but found nothing regarding a shield not being a off-hand weapon ... care to point he way.This is all I was responding to by linking that FAQ, gourry.I appreciate the link, I was looking in the combat section and not the gear so I missed it.
My disagreement is that a character with an exra attack via high BAB (+6/+1) can use his off hand weapon whether it be a shield or some other weapon) without incuring the two-weapon fighting penalties and instead using the extra BAB attack modifier.
If you are attacking with a weapon in each hand (regardless of the type of weapon), you are using two-weapon fighting and incure whatever penaltied (and bonus ie and extra attack) that apply.
I shall conceed to that then. Weilding a weapon in each hand is not two-weapon fighing unless you take the "extra attack". However you will still suffer the off hand strength damage adjustment ... right?
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
However you will still suffer the off hand strength damage adjustment ... right?Nope.
Which would be the 'off hand'?
A PC can attack equally well with weapons in their left and their right hands.
It was in leaving 3.0 that they did away with this bit,
James
See the Equipment chapter, discussing light/1H/2H weapons. On light and one-handed weapons, it states that you only get half your STRmod added to the damage if it's in your off hand.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
See the Equipment chapter, discussing light/1H/2H weapons. On light and one-handed weapons, it states that you only get half your STRmod added to the damage if it's in your off hand.Right.. but 'off hand' isn't your left or right hand as a fixed quantity (unless I'm wrong, please give me a reference if you have one).
A PC draws a longsword into their hand and attack with it. It doesn't matter if this is their left hand or their right hand, does it?
-James
Correct, as far as I know. But you said there was no such thing as the half-damage thing, so I felt compelled to point out that there was.
And I would think that although you can use either hand as your main hand, if you use a weapon in each hand, then surely one of them has to be the off-hand (so that you can't get full STR damage on both hands in the same round). Otherwise it would effectively negate that rule.
In short: draw a weapon in either hand, attack for 1xSTRmod damage. Attack with two weapons (one in each hand), and one of them has to be the off-hand for .5xSTRmod damage.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
@James:
Well, here's what I'm thinking:
• The half-damage rule is presented generally in the Equipment chapter, with no reference to TWF. This seems to imply that "off-handedness" has to do with how you wield the weapon in general, rather than being merely an element of TWF.
• The TWF rules (in the Combat chapter, not the feat) are phrased such that having a weapon in your off hand is something that can already be the case, and when it is, you can employ the extra attack. If this were not the case, I would expect the TWF rules to introduce the concept of "off-handedness" and define it in context of TWF, rather than referring to it as a separate state that enables TWF.
Between the two of these points, it seems to me that you always have a main hand and an off hand (though it doesn't matter which is which) and attacks with the off hand deal less damage.
|
@James:
Well, here's what I'm thinking:
• The half-damage rule is presented generally in the Equipment chapter, with no reference to TWF. This seems to imply that "off-handedness" has to do with how you wield the weapon in general, rather than being merely an element of TWF.
• The TWF rules (in the Combat chapter, not the feat) are phrased such that having a weapon in your off hand is something that can already be the case, and when it is, you can employ the extra attack. If this were not the case, I would expect the TWF rules to introduce the concept of "off-handedness" and define it in context of TWF, rather than referring to it as a separate state that enables TWF.
Between the two of these points, it seems to me that you always have a main hand and an off hand (though it doesn't matter which is which) and attacks with the off hand deal less damage.
I can't remember which one, but IIRC in one of the FAQs it is stated that "off-hand" is whichever hand you say it is when two-weapon fighting. Characters are not left or right handed. If they are not two-weapon fighting then they have no off-hand.
It's not unheard of for the same rule to be mentioned in more than once place.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I believe the full STR bonus interpretation is correct.
Look at it in terms of game impact:
A) Sword strike at +6 (full STR) and shield strike at +1 (full STR)
B) Sword strike at +6 (full STR) and sword strike at +1 (full STR)
It's a wash.
Impact =/= rules.
And besides, just because it's only a couple of points of damage difference when you're looking at a shield bash versus a second sword strike doesn't mean there wouldn't be other situations where it would be a bigger deal. But again, impact =/= rules.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I can't remember which one, but IIRC in one of the FAQs it is stated that "off-hand" is whichever hand you say it is when two-weapon fighting. Characters are not left or right handed. If they are not two-weapon fighting then they have no off-hand.
It's not unheard of for the same rule to be mentioned in more than once place.
If you can find and link that FAQ, then obviously that would be very helpful. :)
And you're right that it's not unheard of for a rule to be referenced in more than one place. But usually when a rule is referencing another rule it will, you know, mention it. The Equipment chapter talking about off-hand damage doesn't say "when fighting with two weapons" or anything like that. It makes a blanket statement.
And again, the TWF rules don't introduce or define offhandedness; there's no "when fighting this way, pick one weapon to be your main hand and one to be your off hand" or any such language. It references your off hand as though it already existed as such.
Once I post this, though, I'll go FAQ-digging to look for what you were referencing.
EDIT: The only reference to "off-hand" in the CRB FAQ (I searched the page for all instances of "off") was the recent statement that a shield isn't automatically an off-hand weapon.
|
Yeah, Jiggy, this looks like a 'rules artifact' to me. There used to be rules for handedness, and TWF played into that, but now there aren't. Today's TWF still says off-hand-light is '-2/-2' when '-2' is sufficient.
It seems to me as another case of changing it in one place, but not the other. (E.g. infinite cantrips...)
My interpretation is that they intended the change to be lateral. TWF has a penalty, due to the extra attack, and nothing else relating to hands does. The fact that the wording still appears in odd places appears to be a limitation of the designer's diligence to make their change complete, rather than an intentional limit of the change.
As an aside, it might make sense to strip the entire ruleset down to bear metal and rephrase it to be consistent with the current version. A team of mechanics experts should go into a 'clean room' and start writing down the rules. Codify and catalog them, crosschecking the result. I'm just not sure what that does to the OGL aspect...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Yeah, Jiggy, this looks like a 'rules artifact' to me. There used to be rules for handedness, and TWF played into that, but now there aren't. Today's TWF still says off-hand-light is '-2/-2' when '-2' is sufficient.
It seems to me as another case of changing it in one place, but not the other. (E.g. infinite cantrips...)
My interpretation is that they intended the change to be lateral. TWF has a penalty, due to the extra attack, and nothing else relating to hands does. The fact that the wording still appears in odd places appears to be a limitation of the designer's diligence to make their change complete, rather than an intentional limit of the change.
As an aside, it might make sense to strip the entire ruleset down to bear metal and rephrase it to be consistent with the current version. A team of mechanics experts should go into a 'clean room' and start writing down the rules. Codify and catalog them, crosschecking the result. I'm just not sure what that does to the OGL aspect...
Hey, know what I just found? Not only does the Equipment chapter say that off-hand attacks deal half-STR damage with no reference to TWF, but so does the damage section of the Combat chapter. The "they just forgot to take that reference out" argument is getting weaker by the second.
EDIT: As a matter of fact, in my initial perusal of the 3.5 SRD, I'm having trouble finding any off-hand rules that are different from PF.
|
|
Hey, know what I just found? Not only does the Equipment chapter say that off-hand attacks deal half-STR damage with no reference to TWF, but so does the damage section of the Combat chapter. The "they just forgot to take that reference out" argument is getting weaker by the second.EDIT: As a matter of fact, in my initial perusal of the 3.5 SRD, I'm having trouble finding any off-hand rules that are different from PF.
Yes sir, you're right. I just quoted the rules for an answer to a two-handed shield question, and found the same:
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.
So it's definitely still in there. Not sure it should be, but there it is, in the text.
|
|
It seems to me as another case of changing it in one place, but not the other. (E.g. infinite cantrips...)What are you talking about in regard to cantrips? Did they forget to write the change somewhere?
It's a derail-in-the-making, but...
...I'm referring to this ongoing discussion where I'm torturing myself trying to argue that this one simple change has ramifications that aren't carried over throughout the setting, the other spells, etc.
|
|
That does leave me pretty curious about StabbityDoom's phantom FAQ, though. Maybe he's thinking of monks? They get 1xSTRmod damage regardless of handedness.I'm probably thinking of a forum post by a paizo guy or something. I often forget where I read things 0.2 seconds after I read them.
I've done some digging, and I came up with this.
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.
It's a relatively easy bit of house rules to institute handedness, though, if you're looking for that level of additional detail... but that's not a level of detail we want to assume for the core game.
A light reading of it implies TWF, but that's not the only case where 'make a second attack' would apply.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
A light reading of it implies TWF, but that's not the only case where 'make a second attack' would apply.
Less like it implies it, and more like it's easy to assume.
Then you pause a moment and remember iteratives, haste, speed weapons, etc.
So, do we all feel like that's cleared up now?
|
|
Ah yes, I remember that. The conclusion we came to at the end was that it could ONLY refer to extra attacks from TWFing or every throwing character with quick draw and knives would get screwed for seemingly no reason (every attack after the first would automatically be off-hand by the "any extra attack" ruling).
To be fair, I asked for clarification in that thread if he was referring to any extra attack or just TWFing and got no response.
Its a quality of D&D that they choose poor names for game terms, and this is an example. If they had called it 'florentine' or some such it would not cause nearly as much confusion.
-James
If they had called if 'Florentine' I'd be looking for Spinach and Pasta :)
They should've called it something like 'Pressing the Attack' and made it applicable to any weapon and changed up how it work just a bit (Still get the Extra Attack, but offset it differently) to represent the 57 or so 'scholastically recognized' methods of sneaking an extra strike into an attack sequence.
But, hey, they gave us TWF instead.
To the OP: Yes, you can make an attack with any weapon in your hands, in any order, so long as you take your attacks in descending BAB order.
If that's not 'official,' well, it's how my gaming group has been playing since the inception of 3rd Edition.