G'day everyone. First post. DM here with a rules query.
As I understand it - using a longbow(for example) is a two-handed weapon. Using the weapon requires both hands - however the weapon can be held in one hand. As per the FAQ, it is a free-action to release or obtain control of the item with the second hand.
My question is thus, would the following sequence be legal as a player's action? This assumes the user has Quick-Draw as a feat.
Free Action - Stow a Quick-Draw shield.
Full-Round Action - Fire a longbow, full attack action.
Free Action - Draw a Quick-Draw shield again.
Net effect - use two-handed weapon, keep AC for all except readied/AoO's against the archer.or
Full-Round Action - Fire a full-attack action with longbow.
Free Action - Drop longbow.
Free Action - Draw long sword & shield.
Net effect - get ranged volley, possess full defensive AC and effectiveness against melee counter attacks. Longbow dropped.or
Full-Round Action - Dual-wield full attack action.
Free Action - Drop single weapon.
Free Action - Draw quickdraw shield.
Net effect - again, get shield AC.Are these legitimate by RAW? I am uncertain (I believe they are, but not 100%). Would DMs typically permit this?
Legitimate, yes. This is why a "quick-draw" shield boggles my mind, though. I'm also glad that they changed the way that weapon cords work. It's not that cheesy, but I'm sure somebody will be along soon with something far more mind blowing than this...
Welcome to the boards and happy gaming!
Hi all! Also a first time poster... Hypothetically, a fighter with TWF and a BAB of +7/+2, declares a full attack with two swords, one longsword and one shortsword, manages to kill his enemy with one blow, then as a free action, drops his two swords, uses quickdraw to get his bow out, and then shoots another enemy 40 feet away. Is this a legal move?
I'd allow it. However, I'd still apply the TWF penalties (since it was declared and the attack sequence was started) and the bow attack uses the second iterative for the attack bonus (as the first iterative with the longsword has already been used).
If so, how many shots would the fighter get without the Rapid Shot feat? And, how many sword attacks are possible before he can no longer take a shot? Just curious?
Just the one at the second iterative. As long as the second (or at least one, at higher BAB) iterative with the primary weapon is unused, then the drop, Quick Draw, attack with new weapon will work; this is essentially what happens with thrown weapons using Quick Draw.
Hi all! Also a first time poster... Hypothetically, a fighter with TWF and a BAB of +7/+2, declares a full attack with two swords, one longsword and one shortsword, manages to kill his enemy with one blow, then as a free action, drops his two swords, uses quickdraw to get his bow out, and then shoots another enemy 40 feet away. Is this a legal move?I'd allow it. However, I'd still apply the TWF penalties (since it was declared and the attack sequence was started) and the bow attack uses the second iterative for the attack bonus (as the first iterative with the longsword has already been used).
If so, how many shots would the fighter get without the Rapid Shot feat? And, how many sword attacks are possible before he can no longer take a shot? Just curious?Just the one at the second iterative. As long as the second (or at least one, at higher BAB) iterative with the primary weapon is unused, then the drop, Quick Draw, attack with new weapon will work; this is essentially what happens with thrown weapons using Quick Draw.
I STRONGLY disagree with your first part. There is an official FAQ that says you can do that and not have to deal with TWF penalties.
Also, here's the summary sentence, at the start of the FAQ entry:
Basically, you only incur TWF penalties if you are trying to get an extra attack per round.
It goes on to list examples as to how it can be done, including drawing a weapon mid-attack, and making your next attack with that newly-drawn weapon.
The only exception to whether TWF occurs or not, is if you attempt to get the extra attacks from TWF.
So, the FAQ would tell him that he would use his first attack with his Longsword at +7; drop his Sword, store his Shield, draw his Bow, fire at +2, drop his Bow, and redraw his Shield. This is all 100% legal, and by the FAQ, does not incur TWF penalties.
Just because it's called Two-Weapon Fighting doesn't mean that using two weapons automatically incurs Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties.
The intent behind this is that when you TWF, you get two sets of iteratives; you get your Primary hand, which has one set, and your Off-hand, which has another set. When you TWF, you designate which weapon is Primary and which is Off-Hand. You must resolve all of the attacks of One set of iteratives before you use the other. It is when you decide to use two sets of iteratives that TWF takes effect (and the FAQ then says you cannot TWF if you've already attacked in the round).
I STRONGLY disagree with your first part. There is an official FAQ that says you can do that and not have to deal with TWF penalties.
Also, here's the summary sentence, at the start of the FAQ entry:
Basically, you only incur TWF penalties if you are trying to get an extra attack per round.You're taking that quote out of context, and it's not really applicable to his question. However, I'd also like to quote something from that same FAQ to contrast with your statement:
In other words, once you decide you're using two-weapon fighting to get that extra attack on your turn (which you have to decide before you take any attacks on your turn), that decision locks you in to the format of "my primary weapon gets my main attack and my iterative attack, and my off hand weapon only gets the extra attack, and I apply two-weapon fighting penalties."Also:
The intent behind this is that when you TWF, you get two sets of iteratives; you get your Primary hand, which has one set, and your Off-hand, which has another set.This is incorrect. You only have one sequence of "iterative" attacks. While you can acquire more attacks with the TWF feat chain, these are not iterative attacks. You can also acquire more attacks with Rapid Shot. There are no rules for how to handle situations where both are trying to be used in the same round (or other abilities which similarly give extra attacks).
Btw, for reference:
Each creature has a base attack bonus and it represents its skill in combat. As a character gains levels or Hit Dice, his base attack bonus improves. When a creature's base attack bonus reaches +6, +11, or +16, he receives an additional attack in combat when he takes a full-attack action (which is one type of full-round action—see Combat).^ typically...
How is it not applicable to his question? He's using a full attack. He's not getting more attacks than his BAB allows. Therefore, TWF does not occur. It even specifically says exactly that in the FAQ.
If you want to argue otherwise, then by such logic, anyone who uses a Full Attack, or even receives the benefits of Haste during a Full Attack, incurs TWF penalties, and I can assure you none of that would be intended by the FAQ, as shown here:
The two-weapon fighting option in the Core Rulebook specifically refers to getting an extra attack for using a second weapon in your offhand.
Using more text from the FAQ, as slightly edited to answer the OP's question:
In the abovefourexamples, there is no extra attack, therefore you're not using two-weapon fighting.
There is no off-hand, because there is no second weapon, nor is he using that second weapon to gain attacks outside of his BAB. Insinuating that he's incurring TWF penalties from Rapid Shot is an absurd claim, especially when Rapid Shot and TWF are, for the most part, mutually exclusive. And is lastly disclosed because he can't use TWF when he's already committed to a single attack before attempting the Rapid Shot, as stated by the FAQ (which TWF must be declared before you make any attacks).
When you get Improved and Greater TWF, your Off-hand receives other attacks, at -5, and at -10, just like your standard attacks. You can sit there and argue "It's not iteratives," but by that point it's semantics. Quite frankly, it better demonstrates the point that they are separate sets of iteratives, especially when you cannot, by the FAQ, alternate the resolution of attacks between Primary and Off-hand; you resolve all of the Primary (or Off-Hand) first, and then you resolve the other ones.
The internet broke and I lost my post..... ughhhh
Rapid Shot precludes the possibility of starting with a non ranged weapon, you must make a full attack action using a ranged weapon(s).
Two Weapon Fighting requires you start with two weapons, with the same sort of restriction, you must be able to attack with both weapons.
Classes that focus on thrown weapons, dual wielding light crossbows, and/or Gunslingers can actually take both feats and benefit from both simultaneously, effectively gaining two additional attacks at their full attack bonus, albeit at a -4 penalty.
Since using a bow requires two hands, that 'hand' is considered occupied for the round and thus cannot be otherwise used to wield the shield, even though you can still draw it and have it equipped.
If you forgo your last iterative attack to instead attempt to use another weapon (like a dagger or other weapon) or otherwise come up with a way to free up that hand, then you can by game mechanics legally draw and wield the shield.
There's plenty of abuses for this, a +5 Defending Gauntlet can legally be used as your last iterative attack every round and you can get the benefits of it. The main thing is you have to give up one of your attacks for it to be legal.
it's allowed, except for the iterative using rapid shot. The feat declares it must be a full attack action with a ranged weapon.
You may not be able to receive the shield bonus if you used that arm to attack with, even with a bow since it is technically a two handed ranged weapon.
Even by your explanation, it would still be allowed.
Is he making a full attack action? Yes.
Is this Full attack action with a ranged weapon? Yes, since he is using standard iteratives allowed from his BAB to attack with a bow.
Additionally, if he had a Light or Heavy shield equipped during this point, he would not be able to attack at all. Hence why he uses Quick Draw to be able to get it on in a moment's notice. Quite frankly, if he's willing to invest the feats and such for it, I don't see why he can't take advantage of it.
It's like saying the player can't use Greater Trip even though he's invested feats in Combat Expertise and Improved Trip, because he doesn't make every attack a Trip attempt.
@Byakko: Yes, it must be declared before any attacks are made that he is TWF. If he makes an attack, and then decides he wants to TWF, he can't do that, as he's already commmitted to a standard Full Attack. Clear and simple. This means he does not get any extra attacks from TWF.
That has nothing to do with Rapid Shot. He's not TWFing with the Bow, because he's not using that action to derive those extra attacks, he's using the Rapid Shot feat to generate the extra attack. So here's what the Rapid Shot feat states:
When making a full-attack action with a ranged weapon, you can fire one additional time this round at your highest bonus. All of your attack rolls take a –2 penalty when using Rapid Shot.
Quite frankly, it's not unreasonable to rule Rapid Shot to function similar to TWF; in that, if you are committing the action, it must be declared before you make any attacks. It's not RAW, but it would certainly be RAI, since by current RAW, you could use all of your standard iteratives, declare Rapid Shot, and then perform another at your highest BAB-2. It's obviously not intended to work that way, but by the RAW, it can.
However, I will concede, but not because the feat cannot be used in conjunction with an alternating iterative. I will concede, only because of this part in the Combat section:
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.
So, after the character's first Longsword attack, he would have to drop his sword, then draw his Composite Bow, perform his Rapid Shot, draw his sword again, make another attack, and then swap back onto his bow. Quite frankly, the action economy required to pull that off would be impossible.
Though, if there was a way to bypass that action economy complication, you would have to concede that by RAW, it would be possible for him to make all those attacks.
Couple of comments/corrections:
1) In the past, it has been questioned whether you can use TWF and Rapid Shot together due to certain aspects of the wording. (such as Rapid Shot allowing you to "fire" an additional time)
2) "When making a full-attack action with a ranged weapon..." Kinda depends on how you read that "with", doesn't it? It's not clear if only one ranged attack is needed or if all your attacks need to be ranged. Consider if the archer had a natural bite attack or something.
3) "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." This is saying you've got to make these BAB based attacks in order. Attacks from other sources aren't subject to this rule and can be made whenever desired. I've mentioned this in previous threads, but the TWF fighting chain's attacks actually have nothing to do with base attack bonus, although they (typically) coincidentally have the same modifiers.
If you want to be that finnicky, then we can argue fire doesn't equate to "Attack," a defined game term, which means Rapid Shot, as a feat, by RAW, does nothing. It's almost as bad as Prone Shooter if that's the case.
Of course, obvious RAI tells you that "fire" equates to "attack," except only with a Ranged Projectile weapon, and there's no clause for "Extra Attacks from Different Sources don't stack," so...
"With," not properly defined in the game, means we use the dictionary-defined terminology; unfortunately, it has a lot of definitions. However, several of them refer to it as a usage of something. Since those outnumber the other definitions, it's safe to say that "using" would most likely be the case.
Using, in this case, can best be referenced to the Defending property FAQ, in that if you are using a weapon, you are attacking with it. If the PC is using at least 1 iterative to make a Bow attack, by rights he is using the Bow in a Full Attack.
The other key component then becomes "Making," as it's not clear if this requires an initiation of the Full Attack with a Bow or not. Referring to the dictionary-defined terminology again, the most common definitions involve acting with or building something. Since the second part makes no sense with the given example, the first part supersedes it, meaning it's safe to say that as long as you're making a Ranged Weapon attack in a given Full Attack Action, you can utilize Rapid Shot.
I'm not sure if that's really the case. The TWF FAQ gives pretty concise examples as to how you can attack via TWF:
Using the longsword/mace example, if you use two-weapon fighting you actually have fewer options than if you aren't. Your options are (ignoring the primary/off hand penalties):
(A') primary longsword at +6, primary longsword at +1, off hand mace at +6
(B') primary mace at +6, primary mace at +1, off hand longsword at +6
The other options should also include primary +6, off hand +6, primary +1, and the inverse. Or even off hand +6, then primary +6, and primary +1. And the inverse of that, too.
Of course, that's only via TWF. It's technically not applicable to Haste or Rapid Shot, but if the argument is that they're all extra attacks, and you stick with the clause of "Extra Attacks from Different Sources don't stack," then quite frankly it's not unreasonable to rule that the extra attacks from Haste and Rapid Shot function like ones from TWF (in that they are taken after your standard iteratives).
Since using a bow requires two hands, that 'hand' is considered occupied for the round and thus cannot be otherwise used to wield the shield, even though you can still draw it and have it equipped.
This is not correct.
Hands are only occupied for the duration of the action that requires them. Once your full attack with a bow is complete, your hands are free to do whatever they want.
The equivalent to disallowing this would be to suggest that if a player took some kind of full round action (requiring both hands) then drew a weapon with quick draw at the end of their turn, that they could not take AoO's with said weapon because both of their hands were 'used' during their turn.
@Darksol, the question you and Byakko are arguing about did include this
...a fighter with TWF and a BAB of +7/+2...
so I think you have been arguing from different perspectives. You are correct, without that contextual piece. Byakko is correct with it.
Since using a bow requires two hands, that 'hand' is considered occupied for the round and thus cannot be otherwise used to wield the shield, even though you can still draw it and have it equipped.This is not correct.
Hands are only occupied for the duration of the action that requires them. Once your full attack with a bow is complete, your hands are free to do whatever they want.
The equivalent to disallowing this would be to suggest that if a player took some kind of full round action (requiring both hands) then drew a weapon with quick draw at the end of their turn, that they could not take AoO's with said weapon because both of their hands were 'used' during their turn.
@Darksol, the question you and Byakko are arguing about did include this
so I think you have been arguing from different perspectives. You are correct, without that contextual piece. Byakko is correct with it.
...a fighter with TWF and a BAB of +7/+2...
Well, if he were going to declare TWF, then he would need to have his weapons drawn and ready to attack with them in order to TWF. If he's not using TWF, then he doesn't have to, meaning he can just draw them out on the fly. He can't TWF when he doesn't even have his weapons drawn out, so that instantly cuts out being able to use TWF with his bow. (And please don't bring up Armor Spikes or Unarmed Strikes as an alternative to make attacks; that's already a shaky subject as it is, and should be put in its respective thread, where it belongs.)
But that doesn't mean he can't alternate melee attacks with ranged attacks and utilize Rapid Shot, especially when by RAW, it's allowable (though the extra attack generated from Rapid Shot must be with a ranged projectile weapon). There's no clause that says all attacks must be ranged, merely that he makes a Full Attack action with a Ranged (Projectile) Weapon. If he's spending a basic iterative to fire with a Bow, then I don't see why he can't get his Rapid Shot attack, though this falls into similar fashion like TWF, in that it must be declared before you make your attacks, and that's regardless of if he was making melee attacks in conjunction.
bbangerter: Note that he put the word hand in quotes. He's almost assuredly referring to hands of effort in this case, not physical hands. This consumes your ability to attack with weapons on your turn, but still allows you to do other things with those hands (including making AoOs).
Doesn't make a difference either way, whether physical or metaphysical hands, once you are done taking whatever action required both hands (in this case full attack) your hands or 'hands' are then free for whatever other actions or activities you want to do - whether that be AoO's or blocking with a shield outside of your turn. The rules don't care what you did during your turn, only what state you are in when your turn ended (in regards to what you can do outside of your turn).
bbangerter: Note that he put the word hand in quotes. He's almost assuredly referring to hands of effort in this case, not physical hands. This consumes your ability to attack with weapons on your turn, but still allows you to do other things with those hands (including making AoOs).
"Hands" make no relevance when we're referring to standard iterative attacks. "Hands" only has relevance in regards to TWF. And he can't TWF with a Bow unless he has 3 or more hands to do so, for starters, as he lacks Hands to properly use both his Bow and his Sword. He can have them drawn, but he can't make attacks with his Bow since his hand he would use to fire with the Bow is occupied by his Sword, meaning he can't TWF with them, especially if we subscribe to the "Hand is occupied throughout entire action" rule.
I could make a standard Full Attack at BAB 11 with a Greatsword, Unarmed Strike, and Armor Spikes all in the same round, without incurring TWF penalties or drawing weapons out. But I can't combine them for TWF because it exceeds the "Hands" clause from the FAQ, and that's the only reason why those combinations cannot work for TWF.
If he had 3 hands, he could certainly TWF with a Bow and a Sword; and he could use Rapid Shot, since TWF is a Full Attack Action, and a Ranged Projectile Weapon is being used in that Full Attack Action.
bbangerter: Note that he put the word hand in quotes. He's almost assuredly referring to hands of effort in this case, not physical hands. This consumes your ability to attack with weapons on your turn, but still allows you to do other things with those hands (including making AoOs)."Hands" make no relevance when we're referring to standard iterative attacks. "Hands" only has relevance in regards to TWF. And he can't TWF with a Bow unless he has 3 or more hands to do so, for starters, as he lacks Hands to properly use both his Bow and his Sword. He can have them drawn, but he can't make attacks with his Bow since his hand he would use to fire with the Bow is occupied by his Sword, meaning he can't TWF with them, especially if we subscribe to the "Hand is occupied throughout entire action" rule.
I could make a standard Full Attack at BAB 11 with a Greatsword, Unarmed Strike, and Armor Spikes all in the same round, without incurring TWF penalties or drawing weapons out. But I can't combine them for TWF because it exceeds the "Hands" clause from the FAQ, and that's the only reason why those combinations cannot work for TWF.
If he had 3 hands, he could certainly TWF with a Bow and a Sword; and he could use Rapid Shot, since TWF is a Full Attack Action, and a Ranged Projectile Weapon is being used in that Full Attack Action.
I think we'd need some more clarification on that one, because Rapid Shot specifically says the full attack has to be made with the ranged weapon, and you only get the bonus attack on your highest attack roll.
I think we'd need some more clarification on that one, because Rapid Shot specifically says the full attack has to be made with the ranged weapon, and you only get the bonus attack on your highest attack roll.bbangerter: Note that he put the word hand in quotes. He's almost assuredly referring to hands of effort in this case, not physical hands. This consumes your ability to attack with weapons on your turn, but still allows you to do other things with those hands (including making AoOs)."Hands" make no relevance when we're referring to standard iterative attacks. "Hands" only has relevance in regards to TWF. And he can't TWF with a Bow unless he has 3 or more hands to do so, for starters, as he lacks Hands to properly use both his Bow and his Sword. He can have them drawn, but he can't make attacks with his Bow since his hand he would use to fire with the Bow is occupied by his Sword, meaning he can't TWF with them, especially if we subscribe to the "Hand is occupied throughout entire action" rule.
I could make a standard Full Attack at BAB 11 with a Greatsword, Unarmed Strike, and Armor Spikes all in the same round, without incurring TWF penalties or drawing weapons out. But I can't combine them for TWF because it exceeds the "Hands" clause from the FAQ, and that's the only reason why those combinations cannot work for TWF.
If he had 3 hands, he could certainly TWF with a Bow and a Sword; and he could use Rapid Shot, since TWF is a Full Attack Action, and a Ranged Projectile Weapon is being used in that Full Attack Action.
As long as one of the attacks is with a Ranged Projectile Weapon, by RAW, I don't see why you can't throw some melee attacks into the mix. Is there a Full Attack? Yes. Is this Full Attack being made with a Ranged Weapon? Yes. Does Rapid Shot preclude any melee attacks being made with this Full Attack? No. So, by RAW, you can.
The penalty from Rapid Shot applies to "all Attack Rolls," unless you argue that melee attacks don't use Attack Rolls. I will say that the bonus attack from Rapid Shot has to be with a Ranged Projectile Weapon (and only the Ranged Projectile Part of a weapon), but it's unclear if this bonus attack is done with the other standard iteratives in terms of order, if it's something that can be done after the fact. (By RAW, it's with standard iteratives.)
I think we'd need some more clarification on that one, because Rapid Shot specifically says the full attack has to be made with the ranged weapon, and you only get the bonus attack on your highest attack roll.bbangerter: Note that he put the word hand in quotes. He's almost assuredly referring to hands of effort in this case, not physical hands. This consumes your ability to attack with weapons on your turn, but still allows you to do other things with those hands (including making AoOs)."Hands" make no relevance when we're referring to standard iterative attacks. "Hands" only has relevance in regards to TWF. And he can't TWF with a Bow unless he has 3 or more hands to do so, for starters, as he lacks Hands to properly use both his Bow and his Sword. He can have them drawn, but he can't make attacks with his Bow since his hand he would use to fire with the Bow is occupied by his Sword, meaning he can't TWF with them, especially if we subscribe to the "Hand is occupied throughout entire action" rule.
I could make a standard Full Attack at BAB 11 with a Greatsword, Unarmed Strike, and Armor Spikes all in the same round, without incurring TWF penalties or drawing weapons out. But I can't combine them for TWF because it exceeds the "Hands" clause from the FAQ, and that's the only reason why those combinations cannot work for TWF.
If he had 3 hands, he could certainly TWF with a Bow and a Sword; and he could use Rapid Shot, since TWF is a Full Attack Action, and a Ranged Projectile Weapon is being used in that Full Attack Action.
As long as one of the attacks is with a Ranged Projectile Weapon, by RAW, I don't see why you can't throw some melee attacks into the mix. Is there a Full Attack? Yes. Is this Full Attack being made with a Ranged Weapon? Yes. Does Rapid Shot preclude any melee attacks being made with this Full Attack? No. So, by RAW, you can.
The penalty from Rapid Shot...
All the attacks must be made in order of highest BAB to lowest. Which attack results from Rapid Shot is irrelevant because you're still making an attack. It has to be at your highest bonus, meaning it has to be the first attack in the round.
The language doesn't say whether or not you can use a non ranged weapon during the full round attack, only that you must make the full round attack with a ranged weapon. Since DnD is mostly inclusive in nature, that would imply that if it doesn't allow you to do it, it means you cannot do it. Typically, like I said, we probably need more clarification.