| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Fighter, BAB 6, STR 4. Can I use my secondary attack fitst (+5 bonus) to trip an enemy, and than use my first attack (+10) to hit it with sword with +4 bo us?
Or I need to use attacks from greater bonus to lower?
And what about twf?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From the description of a full attack:
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.
But if it is +10/+5 & +10/+5, can I use +5 fitst, if I am using unarmed strikes with twf?
But if it is +10/+5 & +10/+5, can I use +5 fitst, if I am using unarmed strikes with twf?
No. You have to use the highest attacks first. So +10/+10/+5/+5 in this case.
It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
What about hasted attack, I have always played that one as last, same for extra attack with using ki?
|
It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
That's incorrect.
You must go +10/5 with first-choice weapon, and (not then) +10/+5 with second-choice weapon (assuming you have an iterative attack with the second weapon).
The rules do not say you must do all your attacks with the first weapon, followed by all your attacks with the second weapon; in fact the rule quoted above (attacks must be taken in order of decreasing bonus) would seem to prohibit that sequence.
|
|
It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
What about hasted attack, I have always played that one as last, same for extra attack with using ki?
That depends on how narrowly you read the rules.
Some people argue that because the extra attack from haste (or ki) doesn't fall under "multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough", and so can be taken any time. Other people feel that the rule should cover all multiple attacks, so the extra attack (at the highest attack bonus) should be taken before any sttacks with a lower bonus. Expect table variation (or just take it at the start of the attack sequence, which works for either reading).
It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
That's incorrect.
You must go +10/5 with first-choice weapon, and (not then) +10/+5 with second-choice weapon (assuming you have an iterative attack with the second weapon).
The rules do not say you must do all your attacks with the first weapon, followed by all your attacks with the second weapon; in fact the rule quoted above (attacks must be taken in order of decreasing bonus) would seem to prohibit that sequence.
The rules also don't say you can split up weapon attacks - you attack with a specific weapon first. Nothing to indicate that you can switch between weapons.
If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first
I can see the argument you make, I would not argue with a GM who wanted me to go +10/+10/+5/+5.
It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
That's incorrect.
You must go +10/5 with first-choice weapon, and (not then) +10/+5 with second-choice weapon (assuming you have an iterative attack with the second weapon).
The rules do not say you must do all your attacks with the first weapon, followed by all your attacks with the second weapon; in fact the rule quoted above (attacks must be taken in order of decreasing bonus) would seem to prohibit that sequence.
The rules also don't say you can split up weapon attacks - you attack with a specific weapon first. Nothing to indicate that you can switch between weapons.
If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon firstI can see the argument you make, I would not argue with a GM who wanted me to go +10/+10/+5/+5.
Based on this FAQ, I don't think you can switch hands between attacks when using two-weapon fighting. This FAQ says that you use all your primary hand attacks first (in order form highest to lowest) then use all your off hand attacks.
|
Paizo could make a feat like this:
Probe Defenses
You are skilled at finding the chink in a target's armor.
Prerequisites: BAB 6, Combat Expertise
Benefit: When making multiple attacks as a result of your high base attack bonus you may make the attacks in order from lowest bonus to highest. If you miss by less than 5, you learn the target's AC, as well as the target's DR against the weapon that made the attack, if applicable.
Iteratives must be used in descending order of attack bonus. There is no such language for bonus attacks. By RAW attacks with your off-hand are bonus attacks, not iteratives. There is nothing that limits when bonus attacks can be taken or the order in which they may be taken, so it is possible to lead off with your most penalized off-hand attack and then take your main hand attacks and then your high off-hand attack.
|
Kazaan, as written, the FAQ Gwen cited contradicts your position. It states that for TWF there are two options; hand one primary attacks then hand two secondary attack OR hand two primary attacks then hand one secondary attack.
It does not list 'hand one, then hand two, then hand one again' as a possibility. Given that it sets out to list all possible options, says "Your options are", and then does not list alternating hands I would argue that not only does it contradict your position under RAW, but also RAI.
|
|
Based on this FAQ, I don't think you can switch hands between attacks when using two-weapon fighting. This FAQ says that you use all your primary hand attacks first (in order form highest to lowest) then use all your off hand attacks.It doesn't matter whether you are using unarmed strikes or weapons. You must roll from highest to lowest, in weapon order.
So +10/+5 with first choice of weapon then +10/+5 with the other weapon.
That's incorrect.
You must go +10/5 with first-choice weapon, and (not then) +10/+5 with second-choice weapon (assuming you have an iterative attack with the second weapon).
The rules do not say you must do all your attacks with the first weapon, followed by all your attacks with the second weapon; in fact the rule quoted above (attacks must be taken in order of decreasing bonus) would seem to prohibit that sequence.
The rules also don't say you can split up weapon attacks - you attack with a specific weapon first. Nothing to indicate that you can switch between weapons.
If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon firstI can see the argument you make, I would not argue with a GM who wanted me to go +10/+10/+5/+5.
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
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."
Read it carefully, it don't speak of the attack sequence, it speak of the options you have.
What it say is that you have the option Primary mace with iterative/Secondary longsword or Primary longsword with iterative/Secondary mace, nothing about the order in which they should be resolved.|
|
There are actually no limits on the order you take attacks, apart from your primary BAB-based ones.
This means you CAN technically take your offhand attacks in any order. To be clear, there is nothing that says you must take your ITWF attack before your GTWF attack - they are simply two different additional attacks you make which happen to have different attack roll modifiers.
That being said, most GMs are going to want you to roll from highest to lowest modifier, even for offhands and other additional attacks, so just go with that instead of causing a debate at the table. (imho) It's probably RAI that way too.
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.
All in one block of text.
1) you must attack in order from highest bonus to lowest bonus;2) if you are using 2 weapons you can chose what weapon should eb used first.
You must satisfy both set of instructions, so
- Highest attack bonus, chose 1 hand, attack
- attack with highest remaining attack bonus, i.e. your other hand.
- move to the nextr set of attack bonuses.
There are actually no limits on the order you take attacks, apart from your primary BAB-based ones.
This means you CAN technically take your offhand attacks in any order. To be clear, there is nothing that says you must take your ITWF attack before your GTWF attack - they are simply two different additional attacks you make which happen to have different attack roll modifiers.
That being said, most GMs are going to want you to roll from highest to lowest modifier, even for offhands and other additional attacks, so just go with that instead of causing a debate at the table. (imho) It's probably RAI that way too.
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.All in one block of text.
1) you must attack in order from highest bonus to lowest bonus;
2) if you are using 2 weapons you can chose what weapon should eb used first.You must satisfy both set of instructions, so
- Highest attack bonus, chose 1 hand, attack
- attack with highest remaining attack bonus, i.e. your other hand.
- move to the nextr set of attack bonuses.
This would also mean Haste attacks that are at your highest BAB need to be done at the "start" not any time you want to make them.
(Quoting you just because you have the appropriate rules and summary)
Actually if you are going to be a stickler about TWF/ITWF/GTWF, all attacks are made at some sort of BAB.
TWF would initially be at your highest BAB and all following attacks from the chain at that same BAB with increasing penalty.
That means all TWF attacks need to be taken at the same time (highest BAB).
Broken down further, off hand attacks are stated to be first, second and third (per the feats). This would mean once you start the off hand attacks you need to use them all. The first attack at lowest penalty, second attack at next penalty and final attack at the highest penalty.
While all attacks (generally) are BAB based, this doesn't mean you have gained them "because your base attack bonus is high enough". Only the attacks at +6, +11, and +16 BAB are due to having a high enough base attack bonus.
Just because they label them with an ordinal, doesn't mean they necessarily have to be used in that order. This is for the "get" (acquisition) not the "use" (actually attacking). The text is also assuming that the player already has the earlier feats, but as I've shown earlier, it's actually possible to acquire GTWF without ITWF using just the CRB Ranger.
Actually again, if you are being strict. If you have GTWF without ITWF you are locked out of taking a third attack as you haven't made a second. You haven't made the prerequisite 2nd attack, so the benefit would probably be lost. Strictly speaking. What that means is irrelevant to this discussion and probably best taken up with the GM overall.
It still doesn't change the fact that the rule states very specifically that attacks must be made in order of BAB and the only thing you have is the option of which weapon goes first.
You choose which item is primary and secondary. After that BAB is definitely a score every attack is based off of (with appropriate bonuses and penalties). What those bonuses and penalties result in is not the BAB but the modifier to the roll.
The second attack of TWF is absolutely made at your BAB, with penalties. Each attack from the chain is based off that additional attack, with increasing penalty.
You get a primary attack at your highest BAB, you get a second attack at that same BAB, with accrued penalties for TWF. Two attacks, same BAB. Each additional TWF attack actually is at the highest BAB with a different penalty unlike, just like additional attacks gained from high enough BAB. We write them out 11/6/1, but rules wise they are stated to be first, second and third attacks due to the BAB being high enough to gain them.
As for the real question, people keep referencing how the attack modifiers for TWF are based on BAB. THIS DOESN'T MATTER. Pretty much all attacks are based on BAB. Only additional attacks granted from high BAB are forced to be taken in order. All other attacks are not subject to this rule.
But that is ENTIRE point. Read Base Attack Bonus. It uses the same wording as TWF/ITWF/GTWF, as in you get a second attack, third attack, etc. When your BAB is high enough.
You keep positing TWF+ are somehow different, yet they use the same language as the BAB rules. How does that even make sense?
Thus, technically, they are not subject to that particular rule.
And being "technically" correct is the best kind of correct there is!
Seriously, this line of reasoning, that feat-derived off-hand attacks can come in any order regardless of their relative bonuses/penalties, should be a non-starter. If they are explicit about multiple attacks based on the BAB coming in descending order, there's clearly a reason for it. Why wouldn't that reason also apply to the off-hand attacks? Why would they intend for the multiple off-hand attacks to be usable in any order while primary hand attacks can't? Simply put, they wouldn't and I think people have put forth plenty of examples that imply designer intent. Gyrating through the rules with a carefully spun parsing is a waste of time.
|
|
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You are skilled at fighting with two weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
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.
You can make the extra attack only if you BAB is high enough. You have a extra condition as it require a feat, but it require a specific BAB too, so it fulfill the condition "if your base attack bonus is high enough".
Yes, Bill, I do agree with that. I only brought it up in the first place since people seemed to be confused (and continue to be, apparently!) about the "forced order of attacks" rule, and how it is erroneous to apply it to other extra attacks. While the TWF chain attack order may have clear RAI, there is no actual rules support for it, thus making it a poor reference to base further claims on.
You keep positing TWF+ are somehow different, yet they use the same language as the BAB rules. How does that even make sense?They are different - the rules for attack ordering applies to one but not the other because it specifically says it applies to one but not the other. The rules state that attacks granted from high BAB must be taken in order from high to low. The rules do NOT state that attacks granted from other sources (such as feats, in this case) must be taken in order from high to low. This is really straight-froward logic...
Ordinal numbers refer to Degree, Quality, or Position in a series. Second level spells are ordinal in Degree. Your second off-hand attack is ordinal in Position.This is completely your opinion. If you were as knowledgeable about the English language as you seem to believe, then you would not make such an absolute claim.
"In addition to the standard single extra attack you get with an off-hand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a –5 penalty."
No where does it state this second attack you have acquired must be taken after the standard extra attack you receive. If I gave you a ten dollar bill and then gave you a second ten dollar bill, it is perfectly fine for you to spend the second before the first if you wish. This contrasts with high-BAB based extra attacks, where it DOES state you must spend them in a specific order.
So to summarize, YOU have decided to arbitrarily divorce anything regarded as "additional" attacks from BAB?
Despite them using the same wording as used in the Base Attack Bonus section of the rule book. Despite BAB being a REQUIREMENT for the feat (and yes exceptions occur, but they are not the norm and are typically gated to be available at the same time you could gain it BAB wise). And most of all, that any and all attacks have a BAB associated with them as part of the equation to make the roll.
You're entitled to your opinion, but at this point I can only say no useful discussion can be had with you on this subject. Cheers.
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You are skilled at fighting with two weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
You can make the extra attack only if you BAB is high enough. You have a extra condition as it require a feat, but it require a specific BAB too, so it fulfill the condition "if your base attack bonus is high enough".
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.The +6 BAB requirement is only for qualifying for the feat. Some classes, such as the Ranger, can even ignore this requirement. You're getting the extra attack due to having the feat, not because your BAB is +6.
That would possibly make it an exception for that particular case. That doesn't prove your opinion as a rule however.
Also the Ranger HAS the BAB to fulfill the requirement, so technically they are only ignoring the other requirements, strictly speaking.
|
|
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You are skilled at fighting with two weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
You can make the extra attack only if you BAB is high enough. You have a extra condition as it require a feat, but it require a specific BAB too, so it fulfill the condition "if your base attack bonus is high enough".
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.The +6 BAB requirement is only for qualifying for the feat. Some classes, such as the Ranger, can even ignore this requirement. You're getting the extra attack due to having the feat, not because your BAB is +6.
+6 BAB enable you to take Improved 2 weapon combat? Then you get a extra attack only because you have a high enough BAB.
If you are playing "strict reading of RAW" yous should accept it in every form, not only when it is convenient for your position.
Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)
You are skilled at fighting with two weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
You can make the extra attack only if you BAB is high enough. You have a extra condition as it require a feat, but it require a specific BAB too, so it fulfill the condition "if your base attack bonus is high enough".
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.The +6 BAB requirement is only for qualifying for the feat. Some classes, such as the Ranger, can even ignore this requirement. You're getting the extra attack due to having the feat, not because your BAB is +6.
+6 BAB enable you to take Improved 2 weapon combat? Then you get a extra attack only because you have a high enough BAB.
If you are playing "strict reading of RAW" yous should accept it in every form, not only when it is convenient for your position.
What about the extra attack from Haste?
What about the Monk's extra attack from spending Ki?|
|
What about the extra attack from Haste?
What about the Monk's extra attack from spending Ki?
Those aren't granted by a high BAB and don't require it to buy the ability, so they could be added at the start or end of the sequence. Not in the middle of it, as there is very few and specific thing that you can do in the middle of an attack.
Wen making a full attack I would put the attack from haste at the end as you can "abort" a full attack after making the first attack and instead take a move action. If you make the haste attack as your first attack you will lock yourself in a full attack.
I would apply the same logic to a flurry of blow, but I am not 100% sure that you can abort a flurry to move (I think you can, but I would have to check the rules of FoB to be sure).
Edit:
the monk ability is activated as a swift action, you can make swift actions during an attack, so I suppose you can use it even in the middle of an attack.
What about the extra attack from Haste?
What about the Monk's extra attack from spending Ki?Those aren't granted by a high BAB and don't require it to buy the ability, so they could be added at the start or end of the sequence. Not in the middle of it, as there is very few and specific thing that you can do in the middle of an attack.
Wen making a full attack I would put the attack from haste at the end as you can "abort" a full attack after making the first attack and instead take a move action. If you make the haste attack as your first attack you will lock yourself in a full attack.
I would apply the same logic to a flurry of blow, but I am not 100% sure that you can abort a flurry to move (I think you can, but I would have to check the rules of FoB to be sure).
Edit:
the monk ability is activated as a swift action, you can make swift actions during an attack, so I suppose you can use it even in the middle of an attack.
Then you agree that bonus attacks are not subject to the BAB order restriction.
|
|
Guys, in the end there is only one rule in the book which dictates a specific order which attacks must be taken in. It's been quoted before, but here it is:
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."multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough"
Now, it seems the simplest way to read that is that it's only referring to the attacks you receive at a BAB of +6, +11, and +16. That's it.
Now, you could argue that X is dependent on Y which is dependent on Z, etc, etc, ad nauseum, and thus anything in that chain is included. But that's generally not how the rules work in this game. When something refers to X, it's only talking about X.
You are cutting the citation short.
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.
