10th level ranger TWO WEAPONS how does this work?

[paul regner]

i have seen all the other threads and all seem to only do up to +6/+1. at 10th level BAB is +10/+5 and with greater two weapon fighting you get a primary attack and 3 off hand attacks. if the +10 is a primary attack then with TWF+ITWF+GTWF its +8/+8/+5/+0 and if the +5 is a primary attack then with TWF+ITWF+GTWF its +3/+3/+0/-5 giving a total number of attacks at +8/+8/+5/+3/+3/+0/+0/-5 but this seems too many (even though the latter 3 most likely wont hit) am i wrong? right? help!!!

[Thomas Long 175]

Total BAB= 10

-2 for TW with light weapons

TWF the feat only reduces the penalties for the ONE extra attack you get for a second weapon.

Improved TWF gives you another attack at max BAB -5

Greater TWF gives you another attack at max BAB -10

Here you only have 2 main attacks.

so

+8 (main) / 8 (TWF) / 3 (main) / 3 (IMP TWF) / -2 (Great TWF)

[paul regner]

but if you are subtracting from BAB wouldnt it be +8/+8/+3/+5/+0 you wouldnt subtract from the allready modified main atack? or in your progression +8 main +8 TWF +3 main +0 ITWF -5 GTWF?

[Marthian]

Thomas has it right. The extra attack with ITWF and GTWF are at a -5 and -10 in addition to the penalty given for fighting with two weapons.

[Kazaan]

Here's the breakdown for ease of understanding.

By standard combat rules (ie. no feat required), you can make a single off-hand attack along with your normal iteratives. Even if you're at +11 Bab and doing 3 iterative attacks, you still only get one off-hand attack; not one per iterative, one total. The TWF feat simply reduces the penalties for doing so.

ITWF gives you a second off-hand in the same manner; you now have a total of 2 off-hand attacks. GTWF gives you a total of 3. Furthermore, your main-hand and off-hand attacks can be meshed however you please so long as you follow BAB order for each hand. Your main-hand have to deal the highest-bab->lowest-bab iterative attacks and your off-hand must deal the Normal Off-hand -> ITWF attack -> GTWF attack. So long as you follow that order, you can deal all your off-hand attacks first then use your main-hands, all main-hand first then off-hands, or alternate them in any sequence you deem tactically advantageous.

[Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan]

Errrr, can I ask for a reference that requires them to be done in descending order?

I can think of tactical situations where one might choose to take the -2 attack first, then the +3, and then the +8.

[Thomas Long 175]

The -5 and -10 are in addition to the penalties for TWF which is a -2 to all attacks.

Edit: Zahir I would make your own thread for that and make an FAQ

[Chemlak]

Quote:

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.

Please note that there is some interpretation, but the generally accepted solution is that attacks from the highest BAB (both main and secondary weapon) must be taken before the iterative attacks, which must also be taken in BAB order (both main and secondary weapon). Essentially, ITWF and GTWF are giving you iterative attacks with the secondary weapon, which must also obey the above rule.

[Zahir ibn Mahmoud ibn Jothan]

Chemlak wrote:

Quote:

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.

Please note that there is some interpretation, but the generally accepted solution is that attacks from the highest BAB (both main and secondary weapon) must be taken before the iterative attacks, which must also be taken in BAB order (both main and secondary weapon). Essentially, ITWF and GTWF are giving you iterative attacks with the secondary weapon, which must also obey the above rule.

Sure enough! You're the man! You know, you just miss some of those last paragraphs in sections where they say "oh, but in this case XXX"

[Kazaan]

Chemlak wrote:

Please note that there is some interpretation, but the generally accepted solution is that attacks from the highest BAB (both main and secondary weapon) must be taken before the iterative attacks, which must also be taken in BAB order (both main and secondary weapon). Essentially, ITWF and GTWF are giving you iterative attacks with the secondary weapon, which must also obey the above rule.

I'm not sure if I'm reading you correct here but it seems to me that you're implying that if one has iteratives at +11/+6/+1 and two off-hand attacks via ITWF, they must be done in the order of +9/+9/+4/+4/-1 and the only choice you get is which +9 is main-hand and which one is off-hand. If that's what you're saying, then SKR disagrees with you. Iterative order only applies to your main-hand attacks. The reason your ITWF off-hand comes after the first off-hand attack is because ITWF specifically states it gives you a second off-hand attack. It can't very well be a second attack if it occurs before the first one. Same line of reasoning goes for the third off-hand granted by GTWF. Aside from that, they can be interspersed throughout your iterative sequence however you choose.

[Chemlak]

Well, I did say there's some interpretation, and I will also point out that the FAQ does not, at any point, discuss the order of attacks. Sean uses an example of +6/+1 and +6, but does not at any point say "do all primary, then secondary" (which is the conclusion that can be reached from his examples, and the interpretation that the secondary attacks can be slotted in wherever you want them is not supported by the examples he gives).

To use your example of +9/4/-1 and +9/4, the FAQ suggests that they be taken in the order +9 (p)/4 (p)/-1 (p)/9 (s)/4 (s). The "secondary whenever" interpretation (which I do not find to be supported by the FAQ, but I'll grant that it is not denied by the rules) allows +9 (p)/+4 (p)/+9 (s)/-1 (p)/+4 (p) (or any other combination you'd care to think of as long as +9 (p) is the first attack made), and I personally have no issue with someone choosing to break up their attacks that way, but maintaining the "highest to lowest BAB, all in order" pattern across both primary and secondary attacks does 3 things (which is why it is my preferred interpretation for determining attack order):

1) It speeds up player decision making. Rather than every round picking and choosing which attacks go where, the attacks just happen in order of decreasing BAB across the board.

2) It makes the maths (marginally) easier. Most people who use TWF will use two identical weapons (to make feats like Weapon Focus do double duty), so the attack bonuses are highly likely to be identical or within a point or two of each other. If all you have to do is calculate the first attack bonus (due to other modifiers), and apply a -5 every second attack, it's a lot easier (for me, at least) than having to apply modifiers individually to each attack bonus.

3) It makes Two-weapon Rend easy to spot. Okay, this one might be a wash, all told, and of course only applies if you have the feat, and I can see this as a case where using the +9/4/-1/9/4 order might be even easier, but knowing if my rend has triggered after just two attacks is better than having to wait until attack 4.

[paul regner]

Marthian wrote:

Thomas has it right. The extra attack with ITWF and GTWF are at a -5 and -10 in addition to the penalty given for fighting with two weapons.

i guess im just wondering why the -5 and -10 are in addition to the -2 for two weapon fighting when it doesn't say so in the imp and greater feats the way its written i would assume its off an unmodified BAB or else the feats would say " this penalty is in addition to the -2 from two weapon fighting" or the feats would list as a -7 and -12 penalty

[Thomas Long 175]

This is because the penalty for TWF applies to all attacks you make. It shouldn't be stated because thats a part of TWF, the penalty for using two weapons is a -2 (after feats with light weapons) to every attack.

[Jason Wu]

Normally, if a new rule changes an existing rule, it will say so.

In this case, we already have a rule that is giving a -2 effect.

Unless the new rule actually changes the -2 effect, it stays.

-j

[Kazaan]

Not to mention the exact penalty varies depending on whether you're wielding a light weapon in your off-hand or not. It'd take up too much room to specify that ITWF gives you a second off-hand attack at -7 if you're wielding a light off-hand weapon or -9 otherwise.