It's a second extra attack during your full attack, in addition to the single extra attack you get for fighting with two weapons. You can call it an iterative attack if you want, but the rules don't really use that term much, so it doesn't hold a whole lot of rules meaning.
Fighting with one weapon:
Main hand at +6, +1
Fighting with two weapons:
Main hand at +6, +1 and off-hand at +6 (before penalties)
Fighting with Improved TWF:
Main hand at +6, +1 and off-hand at +6, +1 (before penalties)
This is your second thread asking the same question, clearly you really want an answer. Could you maybe explain why the distinction you see matters? Perhaps I am a bit slow on my rule-fu at the moment, but I don't see why this matters.
|
Here's my guess: He wants to find a way for it to be called an "iterative attack", so he can get multiple attacks off it.
As in, a character with BAB +11 would take ITWF and get
main hand: +11/+6/+1
off-hand: +11/+6/+1
I think the bolded part is what he's after. If he can get it called an "iterative attack", then he can argue that it can trigger additional iterations off the +6 off-hand.
That's my best guess, which is all I can do since he doesn't seem to be forthcoming regarding what he's after.
I don't understand the what's unclear. Improved twf just gives you your first iterative attack with your offhand-weapon. Otherwise you could only ever make one attack with your offhand weapon per twf rules. Improved gives a 2nd, and Greater gives a 3rd.
So at 6th level a full-BAB character with improved twf and light weapons would make attacks:
Main: +4/-1
Off: +4/-1
Without improved twf it would just be:
Main: +4/-1
Off: +4
At level 11 with light weapons and greater twf-
Main: +9/+4/-1
Off: +9/+4/-1
Without greater twf it would be:
Main: +9/+4/-1
Off: +9/+4
Without improved or greater twf it would be:
Main: +9/+4/-1
Off: +9
|
“a second attack” is pretty clear. One additional attack. Whether or not it’s an off-hand iterative, it’s a single additional attack. Dang, what you listed is what Greater Two Weapon Fighting grants. That feat states, “You get a third attack with your off-hand weapon, albeit at a –10 penalty.” if Improved already gave you three attacks, then Greater wouldn’t be necessary.
I though maybe it was an attempt to argue that the attack is at only -5, not -7 total (-2 For TWF, -5 from ITWF). I’ve seen that argument made before.
But I’ll give Seventhsun a chance to explain why the terminology matters.
To me, whether you call it an iterative or not, it’s the same end result. You get a second off-hand attack with an additional -5 penalty off your first off-hand attack.
I don't know that there needs to be a rules definition for "iterative" since "iteration" is just "the repetition of a process". So an "iterative" attack is simply an attack identical to an attack that precedes it (i.e. same hand, same weapon).
So I would say treat "iterative" as shorthand. All that you need from the CRB is:
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
I don't think "iterative" actually appears in the core rules anywhere. It's a term we invented, I believe.
|
|
There's more information in the other thread that to OP started, including a link to the actual question he's trying to get answered (has to do with a mythic ability).
The term "iterative" does appear in the rules, in several places. It is best defined in an FAQ on what order you make attacks.
an "iterative attack" is an informal term meaning "extra attacks you get from having a high BAB"
I would say the FAQ indicating "iterative" is an "informal term" means that there is, strictly speaking, no rules-relevant meaning for it except as shorthand.
|
|
Right, but then you need to replace the shorthand with the thing the shorthand stands for, which in this case is a definable thing in the rules.
At any rate, the actual ability at the heart of all of this, Precision Mythic Power, doesn't use the term "iterative." It uses the longer form, "Whenever you make a full attack, your attack bonus on the additional attacks you gain by having a high base attack bonus is 5 higher."
So the real question is whether or not that applies to the attacks granted by Improved Two Weapon Fighting and Greater Two Weapon Fighting.
But another way to phrase the question in this thread is "Are the attacks granted by Improved Two Weapon Fighting and Greater Two Weapon Fighting considered additional attacks you gain by having a high base attack bonus?"
Certainly they seem to function that way, but ultimately it's the feats granting the attacks as toatedamphibian points out. I'm not sure either of those things is really enough to provide a definitive answer to how Precision is supposed to work. Strict RAW, I think it's closer to no, it doesn't remove those penalties. I think an FAQ on that ability, while unlikely to be answered quickly, has a better chance of being answered than this thread.
|
|
Nothing in the RAW text does. It's the general perception of the attacks granted by the ITWF and GTWF feats as being granted by BAB (or, offhand iteratives as the feats have a +6 and +11 BAB requirement) that even makes it something to consider. It's worth asking if the designers meant it to (because it doesn't appear it currently does), and it was just an oversight, or if it was really meant to exclude them (entirely possible, and even likely). But that is a question about the intent of that particular ability, so trying to get the attacks from ITWF and GTWF defined as "iteratives" here is an indirect way of trying to answer the real question. But in this case, I think it's more likely the direct question about the intent of the ability will get answered. Though I also feel it's unlikely to be addressed at all, and the OP's group should just decide how they want it to work and run with it.
|
|
Agreed, we're not likely to get an official response and a group should just decide among themselves.
Purely RAW, I would say Precision only applies to the attacks gained from BAB, and *not* the ones gained from feats.
However, I certainly agree that the feat-provided attacks function similarly enough to BAB-provided attacks that there's definitely a RAI case to be argued here.
For what it's worth, as a DM, if a player felt strongly about wanting those 1-2 +5s, I would probably let them have it.
I think the most important thing I'd look at in making my judgment would be how the character has performed compared to the rest of the party. If he's been consistently overshadowing the rest of the party already even before Precision, I'd probably say no to the +5s, so he wouldn't pull even further ahead of the others. If the character's been less effective than other party members, I'd absolutely say yes to buffing him up with those. If the character's been about the same as others, I'd be iffy.
|
|
With Ferious Thune clarifications the question become more clear, but I think that the approach is wrong. You can't ask the question without the background as the replies would be very inaccurate.
Precision (Ex): Your deadly attacks are far more likely to hit their target than those of others. Whenever you make a full attack, your attack bonus on the additional attacks you gain by having a high base attack bonus is 5 higher. This ability can't give any of these attacks a higher attack bonus than your base attack bonus. For example, a 12th-level fighter normally has a base attack bonus of +12/+7/+2; with this ability, his base attack bonus is +12/+12/+7. This ability doesn't reduce the penalties from two-weapon fighting or other situational penalties on attack rolls (such as Combat Expertise, Power Attack, fighting defensively, or harmful conditions). You can select this ability more than once. Each time you select it, the attack bonus on additional attacks increases by another 5.
Reading the ability, I think it applies to all attacks beside the first.
The real question is what attack benefit from it.So, the -5 penalty for the second of hand attack is a "situational" modifier and not affected or not?
I am uncertain about the reply, with a slight preference for "No, the -5 is not a situational modifier, it is a modifier for iterative attacks. You get the +5".
But the modifier for a iterative attack is dependent on a specific situation, so the term "situational modifier" is really unclear.
|
|
Is the attack granted by this feat at +6 Base Attack an iterative attack or is it an added attack with a -5 penalty?
An iterative attack is an added attack with a -5 penalty compared to the preceding attack.
Ergo, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting grants 'both'... because they are the same thing.
Precision adds 5 to each iterative attack you make, with a maximum of your BAB. It provides an example of exactly how this works. It specifically ONLY applies to "additional attacks you gain by having a high base attack bonus"... additional attacks from other sources are thus irrelevant to that ability.
There really is nothing to be confused about here.
An iterative attack is an added attack with a -5 penalty compared to the preceding attack.
The ability under discussion refers to "attacks you gain by having a high base attack bonus", not to iterative attacks or -5 penalties. Attacks from Improved Two-Weapon Fighting are not gained by having a high base attack bonus; they are gained by having a feat.
(The feat has a high base attack bonus as a prerequisite, but so does Vital Strike. Is a Vital Strike an attack that you gain by having a high base attack bonus?)
It probably works by RAI, but I think the technical RAW answer is no.