Okay, let me ask the people that are for the penalty for using the off-hand during a Full Attack.
Why are we giving someone the same penalty when they are not using that action to it's full benefit?
Example:
6th lvl fighter. Longsword and shortsword.
If they just attack with one and than the other, and give them the penalty, they are +2 for the Longsword and -7 for the shortsword.
Or if they use their extra attack for TWF, they are +2 for Longsword, -3 for Longsword and -2 for shortsword.
Why the hell would anyone even attack that way? Using TWF as it is stated, not only do you get an extra attack, but the second Longsword attack and the Shorsword attack have a much higher chance to hit than the secondary shortsword attack.
Last time I checked we don't penalize people worse for not using an ability to it's full potential.
If you want to apply the easiest, most generally applicable rule, you cannot fight with two weapons in the same round unless you're TWF.
If you want a common sense, flavor-based adjustment, you can alternate iterative attacks between hands.
People choose to do sub-optimal things with their characters all the time.
|
Okay, let me ask the people that are for the penalty for using the off-hand during a Full Attack.
Why are we giving someone the same penalty when they are not using that action to it's full benefit?
Example:
6th lvl fighter. Longsword and shortsword.
If they just attack with one and than the other, and give them the penalty, they are +2 for the Longsword and -7 for the shortsword.
Or if they use their extra attack for TWF, they are +2 for Longsword, -3 for Longsword and -2 for shortsword.
Why the hell would anyone even attack that way? Using TWF as it is stated, not only do you get an extra attack, but the second Longsword attack and the Shorsword attack have a much higher chance to hit than the secondary shortsword attack.
Last time I checked we don't penalize people worse for not using an ability to it's full potential.
As far as the attack bonuses, I'm not exactly sure you calculated them correctly. The off hand attack uses the same BAB as the first primary attack. So if your first longsword attack is +2, the shortsword is +2 (assuming other variables don't interfere). After the shortword, you would have your second longsword attack at -3. Unless the numbers you gave are AFTER the TWF penalty has been applied. But either way, the shortsword attack would be between the longsword attacks.
If you want to apply the easiest, most generally applicable rule, you cannot fight with two weapons in the same round unless you're TWF.
There is no rule that restricts which weapons you may make normal attacks with. (unless you have something which says otherwise, AND I can point out a FAQ which indicates you may choose which weapon you make attacks with)
You may make a sequence of normal attacks in one turn by using a Full Attack action. (see Full Attack rules)
Therefore, you should be able to make a sequence of attacks with the Full Attack action using whichever weapons you like.
You are making this more complicated than it needs to be, and there is nothing incorrect about the preceeding statements as per the rules.
Therefore, you should be able to make a sequence of attacks with the Full Attack action using whichever weapons you like.You CAN, but then you incur TWF penalties.
What.
Why? Again, please indicate where it says that if I make normal attacks in sequence with different weapons, this is true.
It implies that if you 'fight with two weapons' you take penalties, but it never defines a time period in which this must occur to qualify. Ever.
On the other hand, as has been quoted, the Two Weapon Fighting rules explicitly tell you how to apply penalties when using them. But those dont apply to normal attacks during a normal full attack.
|
|
Since the extra TWF attack is not tied to your BAB, you can make that attack whenever you'd like. Your best option, however, is to make it right after your primary attack, as two attacks with a +4 will have a better chance of hitting a target and killing it in two hits. You don't HAVE to make them in order (+4 Prim/+4 Off/-1 whichever).
So if you drop the dude in two hits, you now have that -1 attack. This can be used to hit a different dude, an ally, a wall, yourself, or... nothing. End Turn.
The Off Hand penalties are added to the highest BAB. If you have the TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, the off hand attack bonuses end up matching with your iterative BAB. The primary hand is the first attack, and the off hand is the second attack in the series. Assuming you have a BAB of +13/+8/+3 and the TWF, ITWF, GTWF feats, your attack iteration is:
1st primary/1st off/2nd primary/2nd off/3rd primary/3rd off.
If instead you did not have ITWF or GTWF, your attack iteration would be:
1st primary/off hand/2nd primary/3rd primary
You can't choose when to make the off hand attack.
Since the extra TWF attack is not tied to your BAB, you can make that attack whenever you'd like. Your best option, however, is to make it right after your primary attack, as two attacks with a +4 will have a better chance of hitting a target and killing it in two hits. You don't HAVE to make them in order (+4 Prim/+4 Off/-1 whichever).
So if you drop the dude in two hits, you now have that -1 attack. This can be used to hit a different dude, an ally, a wall, yourself, or... nothing. End Turn.
The Off Hand penalties are added to the highest BAB. If you have the TWF, ITWF, and GTWF, the off hand attack bonuses end up matching with your iterative BAB. The primary hand is the first attack, and the off hand is the second attack in the series. Assuming you have a BAB of +13/+8/+3 and the TWF, ITWF, GTWF feats, your attack iteration is:
1st primary/1st off/2nd primary/2nd off/3rd primary/3rd off.
If instead you did not have ITWF or GTWF, your attack iteration would be:
1st primary/off hand/2nd primary/3rd primary
You can't choose when to make the off hand attack.
Note that your progressions are not set in stone. If for some reason (due to weapon focus, weapon training, enhancement, etc.) your second iterative attack is at a higher bonus than your offhand, it comes before your offhand due to its bonus being higher. Or at least, thats how the Full Attack rules read.
|
|
There is no rule that restricts which weapons you may make normal attacks with. (unless you have something which says otherwise, AND I can point out a FAQ which indicates you may choose which weapon you make attacks with)You may make a sequence of normal attacks in one turn by using a Full Attack action. (see Full Attack rules)
Therefore, you should be able to make a sequence of attacks with the Full Attack action using whichever weapons you like.
You are making this more complicated than it needs to be, and there is nothing incorrect about the preceeding statements as per the rules.
No, the FAQ you always point out says that the shield may be used as a primary hand weapon if the player so decides. He may chose which is the primary hand or off hand. The FAQ does not say you may make iterative attacks with alternating weapons.
Secondly, just so I understand your position clearly: you are claiming that the TWF penalties only apply when the extra attack is made. Am I to understand that the TWF penalties only apply the moment you ROLL THE DIE for the extra attack? Am I reading your position clearly?
EDIT: grammar
Secondly, just so I understand your position clearly: you are claiming that the TWF penalties only apply when the extra attack is made. Am I to understand that the TWF penalties only apply the moment you ROLL THE DIE for the extra attack? Am I reading your position clearly?EDIT: grammar
Goodness no. The penalties apply when you choose to fight the way described under Two Weapon Fighting. If you dont decide to do so you can make a normal full attack, you're locked out of using those rules until the choice is relevant again (the next time you might want to use an extra attack in a round).
If you've rolled your first attack at a full bonus, since you can't apply retroactive penalties, you cannot gain the extra attack from Two Weapon Fighting that round.
|
|
Note that your progressions are not set in stone. If for some reason (due to weapon focus, weapon training, enhancement, etc.) your second iterative attack is at a higher bonus than your offhand, it comes before your offhand due to its bonus being higher. Or at least, thats how the Full Attack rules read.
I'm pretty sure that it goes in order of Base Attack Bonus, not modified bonus. Can you give me an example of what you mean so I understand?
Why? Again, please indicate where it says that if I make normal attacks in sequence with different weapons, this is true.TWF rules. 1st part of 1st sentence is the condition for TWF penalties incuring (the 2nd part is just a benefit).
You are always wielding two weapons. We've been over this. The idea that simply wielding two weapons causes penalties is ludicrous.
Unless you fight in the manner described by the entire first sentence, and not just the parts convenient to your argument, you do not suffer penalties.
EDIT: Hangar, attack order is based on bonus according to Full Attack rules, not necessarily BAB. However, Brennan Ashby looks to have made us both wrong on that regardless.
If you want to apply the easiest, most generally applicable rule, you cannot fight with two weapons in the same round unless you're TWF.There is no rule that restricts which weapons you may make normal attacks with. (unless you have something which says otherwise)
You may make a sequence of normal attacks in one turn by using a Full Attack action. (see Full Attack rules)
Therefore, you should be able to make a sequence of attacks with the Full Attack action using whichever weapons you like.
You are making this more complicated than it needs to be, and there is nothing incorrect about the preceeding statements as per the rules.
Uh, no. The statements I made were pretty much a summary of the arguments that have been presented. I just stated them from my perspective.
The easiest interpretation of the rule is that if you attack with two weapons, you're TWF. It's clear and concise. There aren't exceptions that abound based on circumstance or situation. The only exceptions that might apply are clearly stated in the rules, not by implication.
The rule restricting which weapons normal attacks may be made with exists by implication per the "fighting with two weapons = TWF" camp, which is what this entire argument is based around.
Note that your progressions are not set in stone. If for some reason (due to weapon focus, weapon training, enhancement, etc.) your second iterative attack is at a higher bonus than your offhand, it comes before your offhand due to its bonus being higher. Or at least, thats how the Full Attack rules read.
That is the first time I have ever heard this interpretation.
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.
It is referencing base attack bonus. The order seems to be set in stone.
The idea that simply wielding two weapons causes penalties is ludicrous.Ever wondered why it is ludicrous under YOUR interpretations, but not under MY?
Because you have invented the 'fact' that weapons are only weapons when you want them to be, instead of consulting the list the game provides. It is nearly impossible to not be wielding at least two weapons without being helpless.
Hangar, attack order is based on bonus according to Full Attack rules, not necessarily BAB.Lol no?
If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.
I went ahead and rebolded the relevant portion for order of resolving attacks, instead of the condition for multiple attacks.
It's clear and concise.
With a lot of exceptions.
less exceptions then... If you get your extra attack you get penalties.
It's clean and concise.
No exceptions.
|
|
Why? Again, please indicate where it says that if I make normal attacks in sequence with different weapons, this is true.TWF rules. 1st part of 1st sentence is the condition for TWF penalties incuring (the 2nd part is just a benefit).
And that is where you are wrong. The first sentence only states that if you have a weapon in your off-hand you CAN do an additional attack. Nothing in that statement says that you get a penalty at all.
The second statement can be interperted two ways. Either - anytime you have a second weapon in your hand you are -6 and -10 on your attacks. Or, the more logical interpetation, any time you make that extra attack you have those penalties.
Now where in those two sentences or anywhere else in the rules does it state that if you swap between your primary and secondary weapons during a Full Atackk do you get a penalty.
|
|
Goodness no. The penalties apply when you choose to fight the way described under Two Weapon Fighting. If you dont decide to do so you can make a normal full attack, you're locked out of using those rules until the choice is relevant again (the next time you might want to use an extra attack in a round).
If you've rolled your first attack at a full bonus, since you can't apply retroactive penalties, you cannot gain the extra attack from Two Weapon Fighting that round.
Ok, good. We agree on that. So the point of our debate is whether iterative attacks with different weapons is allowed, or if the very fact that you are wielding two weapons (one in each hand) in one round means you are Two-Weapon Fighting, and thus the extra attack is granted, and the penalties are assessed.
See, I am of the point of view that if I say I want to use both weapons in the round, by default, I would have the extra attack available with my off hand, and the TWF penalties would apply to my attacks.
You are of the point of view that if you don't declare the extra attack, you only get your BAB iterations, but you can still use both weapons in the round.
I don't understand how you can come to this conclusion. The rules state that if you use two weapons, you can choose which weapon to attack with first. By that statement, you are setting a primary hand and an off hand. The off hand allows one extra attack, while the other attacks are to be made with the primary hand. How does this line of thought allow you to switch weapons between iterative attacks? How are you not Two-Weapon Fighting?
It's clear and concise.With a lot of exceptions.
less exceptions then... If you get your extra attack you get penalties.
It's clean and concise.
No exceptions.
No, that's my point. There are fewer exceptions with my interpretation of the rule. If you use two weapons, you're TWF. Where are the multitudinous exceptions?
How are you not Two-Weapon Fighting?
I do not see any difference between making a series of normal attacks over three rounds, and making a series of attacks during a Full Attack Action with BAB 11 at +11/+6/+1 mechanically.
The first case CLEARLY allows you to attack with your right hand on the first attack, a different weapon on attack 2, and even a different one round 3.
The second is no different, other than the time it happens in.
And the rules NEVER tell us that using two weapons in a round is two weapon fighting. The 'in a round' portion there? Thats something people are assuming or have made up.
If off-hand attacks in TWF aren't dependent upon BAB, how does one determine what the attack bonuses for off-hand attacks are?
|
|
No. Because as the Full Attack texts also states in the next sentence,If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.So the -10 off-hand attack can come before the -6 primary attack. TWF is not tied to BAB order.
No way. All that states is that either weapon can be the primary weapon and then the second weapon is the off-hand weapon.
Since no where in the rules does it state that you have to designate before combat which is your primary hand and which is your off-hand, it can be assumed that this is a fluid concept that can change each round. Now you are going to have some problems if both your weapons are not light weapons, since if you attack with your non-light weapon as the off-hand you take higher penalties.
The example being the double weapon. The first attack has to be the primary because that is the highest attack, the other end would then qualify for the off-hand attack.
Also, no where does it state that THF bypasses BAB. Therefore you have to take into account the attack order for BAB.
|
|
I went ahead and rebolded the relevant portion for order of resolving attacks, instead of the condition for multiple attacks.
Ah, this explains everything. The reason why you don't get it is because you don't understand English Grammar.
AS far as this statement is concerned, the only bonus being referred to in this sentence is the Base Attack Bonus. It does not refer to the modified bonus you apply to your d20 roll.
If you use two weapons, you're TWF.
We can start by defining over what period of time. Note: the game doesnt.
I went ahead and rebolded the relevant portion for order of resolving attacks, instead of the condition for multiple attacks.
Ah, this explains everything. The reason why you don't get it is because you don't understand English Grammar.
AS far as this statement is concerned, the only bonus being referred to in this sentence is the Base Attack Bonus. It does not refer to the modified bonus you apply to your d20 roll.
I'll admit thats quite possible, and a reasonable assumption. I'd also like to say that if thats the case, it could be a lot more clear; there are a lot of potential bonuses to which this could apply, and its a seperate statement from the one that refers to determining whether or not you resolve your attacks in any order at all.
How are you not Two-Weapon Fighting?I do not see any difference between making a series of normal attacks over three rounds, and making a series of attacks during a Full Attack Action with BAB 11 at +11/+6/+1 mechanically.
The first case CLEARLY allows you to attack with your right hand on the first attack, a different weapon on attack 2, and even a different one round 3.
The second is no different, other than the time it happens in.
And the rules NEVER tell us that using two weapons in a round is two weapon fighting. The 'in a round' portion there? Thats something people are assuming or have made up.
Not really. It's a pretty strong implication from the rules themselves. If TWF is a full round action, and we're arguing that if you attack with two weapons within a round (meaning you're using a full round action because you're getting multiple attacks anyway), you're invoking the TWF mechanic. We're not saying if you ever attack with two weapons, you are necessarily TWF at all times. This is a strawman. There are numerous references to a "round" in the Full Attack section. There is no reason to believe that TWF extends beyond the round in which it occurs. Nobody has ever argued this.
|
|
How are you not Two-Weapon Fighting?I do not see any difference between making a series of normal attacks over three rounds, and making a series of attacks during a Full Attack Action with BAB 11 at +11/+6/+1 mechanically.
The first case CLEARLY allows you to attack with your right hand on the first attack, a different weapon on attack 2, and even a different one round 3.
The second is no different, other than the time it happens in.
And the rules NEVER tell us that using two weapons in a round is two weapon fighting. The 'in a round' portion there? Thats something people are assuming or have made up.
We arn't talking about three rounds, we are talking about one round. You have to maintain a point of reference in order to have a level playing field for discussion. As it relates to this thread, we are discussing the attack cycle for ONE round.
The fact that you think that 1 attack in three rounds is to a full attack of three iterations in one round is ludicrous and doesn't take into account other activity occurring in the round. And by other activity, I am referring to other players, creatures, monsters, etc.
|
|
Just because your off-hand shortsword has a +8 total bonus (+5 enchantment, +1 Weapon Focus, +1 Weapon Training, +1 second iterative attack), and your primary hand axe has a +6 total bonus (+6 first iterative attack). Does not mean that you MUST make the off-hand attack first. You can freely choose (at the start of your turn, before your attack) which weapon is to be the primary and which is to be the off-hand. So therefore the iterative attack bonus is mute in your calculations.
Come on....let's try and just use the core bonuses. Otherwise I have to call you out for handing a lvl 6 fighter a +5 shortsword. And for having a player in your campaign that is too stupid to not use it as their primary weapon since it will do more damage then the hand axe.
|
|
I'll admit thats quite possible, and a reasonable assumption. I'd also like to say that if thats the case, it could be a lot more clear; there are a lot of potential bonuses to which this could apply, and its a seperate statement from the one that refers to determining whether or not you resolve your attacks in any order at all.
Are you a politician? Holy cow can you put a spin on a story. It's not a reasonable assumption, it's a grammatical fact.
I still can't get anyone from the side of "You have to be penalized".
If you have a Longsword in one hand and a Shortword in your other hand, are you penalized for only attacking with the Longsword?
I.E. -6 to hit with all attacks with the Longsword
No. You only invoke TWF rules if you attack with two weapons. Just like you don't suffer penalties if you never use your shield to shield bash or your open hand/foot/knee whatever to make an unarmed strike. If you are only going to use one weapon, you're not TWF.
Because you have invented the 'fact' that weapons are only weapons when you want them to be, instead of consulting the list the game provides. It is nearly impossible to not be wielding at least two weapons without being helpless.
Are you still hung up on that, even after this many posts? A sword does always remain a sword, however it only becomes a weapon with intent to use it as such. A hand is not automatically a weapon, you have to choose to use it as one at a particular time. A dagger can be a weapon or a paper weight. Do you not understand this?
It is possible to wield two weapons quite well with twf feat an a light weapon in your off hand.
Why? Again, please indicate where it says that if I make normal attacks in sequence with different weapons, this is true.TWF rules. 1st part of 1st sentence is the condition for TWF penalties incuring (the 2nd part is just a benefit).You are always wielding two weapons. We've been over this. The idea that simply wielding two weapons causes penalties is ludicrous.
Unless you fight in the manner described by the entire first sentence, and not just the parts convenient to your argument, you do not suffer penalties.
EDIT: Hangar, attack order is based on bonus according to Full Attack rules, not necessarily BAB. However, Brennan Ashby looks to have made us both wrong on that regardless.
I agree, ludicrous! So are you telling me that a duelist, that wields ONE weapon in ONE hand, constantly takes the TWF penalties because he CAPABLE of making an unarmed off-hand attack? Does a sword/shield warrior constantly take the TWF penalties because he is CAPABLE of shield bashing?
I think not.
Correct. The duelist is never taking TWF penalties, because he is likely never Two Weapon Fighting.
However, as he is wielding his limbs (as in, actively employing or directing them, as per the definition of the term), he is sadly wielding an unarmed strike which is a weapon. Even if we argue this, you can't argue that a shield is being wielded if it provides AC, and it is always a weapon as its listed as one.
So if we assume the ludicrous position that simply wielding two weapons causes you to be Two Weapon Fighting... yeah its effectivey inescapable.
I believe this to be untrue, as you have to intentionally decide to use Two Weapon Fighting.
Because you have invented the 'fact' that weapons are only weapons when you want them to be, instead of consulting the list the game provides. It is nearly impossible to not be wielding at least two weapons without being helpless.
Are you still hung up on that, even after this many posts? A sword does always remain a sword, however it only becomes a weapon with intent to use it as such. A hand is not automatically a weapon, you have to choose to use it as one at a particular time. A dagger can be a weapon or a paper weight. Do you not understand this?
It is possible to wield two weapons quite well with twf feat an a light weapon in your off hand.
And your three weapon fighting argument you seems to be ignoring?
|
|
No. You only invoke TWF rules if you attack with two weapons. Just like you don't suffer penalties if you never use your shield to shield bash or your open hand/foot/knee whatever to make an unarmed strike. If you are only going to use one weapon, you're not TWF.I still can't get anyone from the side of "You have to be penalized".
If you have a Longsword in one hand and a Shortword in your other hand, are you penalized for only attacking with the Longsword?
I.E. -6 to hit with all attacks with the Longsword
But is totally contrary to the arguement that the second line of TWF refers to having a weapon in your other hand.
The fact that you think that 1 attack in three rounds is to a full attack of three iterations in one round is ludicrous and doesn't take into account other activity occurring in the round. And by other activity, I am referring to other players, creatures, monsters, etc.
Other activity in a round is irrelevant here; it does not influence if you are two weapon fighting or not. You're trying to muddy the waters and confuse the issue.
I still can't get anyone from the side of "You have to be penalized".
If you have a Longsword in one hand and a Shortword in your other hand, are you penalized for only attacking with the Longsword?
I.E. -6 to hit with all attacks with the Longsword
You are not penalised for having it (the short sword) in your off hand hand if you only attack with the long sword.
Honest question -
If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.
If you are allowed to alternate iterative attacks, why doesn't that say, "You can strike with your weapons in any order"? That it says you may strike with either weapon first, I think pretty strongly implies you can't just strike with them willy-nilly, especially since it's following the restriction that attacks must be in BAB order.
Honest question -If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first.If you are allowed to alternate iterative attacks, why doesn't that say, "You can strike with your weapons in any order"? That it says you may strike with either weapon first, I think pretty strongly implies you can't just strike with them willy-nilly, especially since it's following the restriction that attacks must be in BAB order.
Honest answer: I dont think any of this was realistically considered relevant, and as such was not really considered.
|
|
You are not penalised for having it (the short sword) in your off hand hand if you only attack with the long sword.I still can't get anyone from the side of "You have to be penalized".
If you have a Longsword in one hand and a Shortword in your other hand, are you penalized for only attacking with the Longsword?
I.E. -6 to hit with all attacks with the Longsword
Then define for me what you think "...when you attack this way." in the second sentence of TWF
But is totally contrary to the arguement that the second line of TWF refers to having a weapon in your other hand.No. You only invoke TWF rules if you attack with two weapons. Just like you don't suffer penalties if you never use your shield to shield bash or your open hand/foot/knee whatever to make an unarmed strike. If you are only going to use one weapon, you're not TWF.I still can't get anyone from the side of "You have to be penalized".
If you have a Longsword in one hand and a Shortword in your other hand, are you penalized for only attacking with the Longsword?
I.E. -6 to hit with all attacks with the Longsword
No, the second line of TWF refers to making attacks with your off hand.
But is totally contrary to the arguement that the second line of TWF refers to having a weapon in your other hand.
Two weapon fighting is wielding two weapons, not holding two weapons. Weilding = to hold and use.
|
|
No, the second line of TWF refers to making attacks with your off hand.But is totally contrary to the arguement that the second line of TWF refers to having a weapon in your other hand.No. You only invoke TWF rules if you attack with two weapons. Just like you don't suffer penalties if you never use your shield to shield bash or your open hand/foot/knee whatever to make an unarmed strike. If you are only going to use one weapon, you're not TWF.I still can't get anyone from the side of "You have to be penalized".
If you have a Longsword in one hand and a Shortword in your other hand, are you penalized for only attacking with the Longsword?
I.E. -6 to hit with all attacks with the Longsword
No...no it does not. It refers to taking the extra attack related to TWF. The off-hand reference is only to say where the penalty goes and how much it is. No where does it say that if you use your off-hand that you get a penalty for just using it.
Again, you only get the penalty if you do the extra attack.
|
|
But is totally contrary to the arguement that the second line of TWF refers to having a weapon in your other hand.Two weapon fighting is wielding two weapons, not holding two weapons. Weilding = to hold and use.
Oh now we are going to have a semantics arguement over the differences to weilding and just holding? Seriously?