2-handed weapon and bucklers

[Staldin*Freefall]

I don't think anyone's contesting that you lose your AC bonus while using a two-handed weapon. I had a Paladin once with a bastard sword and a buckler. He'd use it one-handed when he wanted more AC, two-handed when he wasn't more damage.

 

[Bastoche]

To Xahn'Tyr:

You presume that the function that describe penality for using a buckler with a weapon is a linear relation, without offering a convincing argument . Maybe it's quadratic or quartic, in which case the mid point between 0 weapon and one weapon held in the buckler hand may be above 0.5 (and BTW, 0.5 rounds up normally. I'm not aware of a rule that says that we always have to round down in the PHB. In 2nd, it was always "against the player" in this case rounded up, but if it was XP awards rounded down).

Anyway, the rule doesn't say anything, and in my campaign I rule "-1 with two-handed weapon". And I think it makes sense. Strap a round plank as large as a medium-large pizza and try to move a 2-HD weapon... I think the wrist will be hindered with a 2-hd weapon as much as with an off-hand weapon. Therefore, I think -1 with 2-HD is reasonnable.

 

[IceBear]

Hehehe - but with 3E *ALL* fractions round down - PHB, page 275.

I'd probably also give them the -1 on the attack, but if they argued like above, I'd probably allow that too.

IceBear

 

[Bastoche]

Hehehe - but with 3E *ALL* fractions round down - PHB, page 275.

I'd probably also give them the -1 on the attack, but if they argued like above, I'd probably allow that too.

IceBear

Thanks !!! I seemed to recall that but wasn't sure. Now no matter what f(x) looks like, if f(x) is monotone, we may argue that the penality for using a 2-HD weapon is over zero and below 1 (rounded down). But we still don't know if there is any singularities where x=2HD weapon .

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

Ok, let's try this:

The rules do not say that a buckler applies a -1 penalty when using a two-handed weapon. What they do say is "An off-hand weapon can be used, but a -1 penalty on attack rolls is imposed".

The only way this would apply to a two-handed weapon would be if a two-handed weapon were also an "off-hand weapon" in the technical sense of the rules.

But if a two-handed weapon is also an off-hand weapon, then we have the following (from the SRD):
the character can ... get a single extra attack with an off-hand weapon.

Therefore, if you impose a -1 to hit penalty on a person using a buckler with a two-handed weapon, then you must also allow a person with a two-handed weapon to make a single extra attack each round.

If you say that a two-handed weapon counts as off-hand for buckler penalties, but not for extra attacks, then you are very much into the realm of house rules.

 

[Bastoche]

WHAT ?!?! I never said I considered a 2HD weapon as an off-hand weapon.

Fact:

- there is a -1 penality to hit with an off-hand attack if you also have a buckler on your forearm. From a realistic point of view, it's probably because using a weapon with a buckler strapped on is awkward, which makes sense to me. From a balance point of view, the advantage of always having a shield ready is balanced out with a -1 to hit, which is fine to me.

- using a 2-hd weapon with a shield is awkward.

- there is no official ruling on buckler with 2HD weapon.

- the DM is tyrant supreme and may rule what he believes being fair for his campaign.

Opinons:

- Using a 2-HD weapon with a shield is awkward, therefore it should be penalized. Plus, from a balance point of view, you get the opportunity to switch from two-handed to one handed without having to ready a shield; it's already there. It deserves a penality which would be balanced. Two weapon gains an extra attack, two-handed gets extra damage.

Conclusion:

When I DM, there will be a penality to two-handed weapon with a buckler. When you DM, do what you will. Since this area is not covered by the rules, no twisted interpretation will settle the problem. It is DM's choice. This is not covered by the rules.

endnote: I would rather be going along these lines: The conceptor deemed it reasonnable from a balance point of view to penalize two weapon fighting with a buckler strapped. I'm pretty sure the same argument will hold with 2HD weapon, especially since 2-HD weapon is more efficient than TWF !!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Tony Vargas]

endnote: I would rather be going along these lines: The conceptor deemed it reasonnable from a balance point of view to penalize two weapon fighting with a buckler strapped. I'm pretty sure the same argument will hold with 2HD weapon, especially since 2-HD weapon is more efficient than TWF !!!!!!!!!!!

Well, you're going on the assumption that TWF is supposed to be balanced. It's not, it's supposed to be weak - every rule covering TWF basicly comes down against TWF. It's been nerfed with extreme prejudice.

 

[iamrpgdm]

Great comments all.

I have decided IMC that there will be no benefit to AC and also no penalty to attack for having bucklers strapped on when using a 2-handed weapon. I thought about it this way:

If you have bracers on you don't receive a penalty. If you add spikes to those bracers, you still don't receive a penalty. I know that a buckler wouldn't be as balanced, etc. on your arm as bracers would, but I figure when you swing a big 'ol sword in two hands with a buckler on each arm, that they balance out. If it's just one buckler, it's only five pounds and I don't see that little extra weight offsetting the balance of someone using a 2-handed sword. I do think that making use of the bucklers wouldn't be possible when you're using a 2-handed weapon and therefore no bonus to AC. If the PC were to stop attacking and just defend themselves, then the AC bonus would apply. I clearly see using a buckler being a penalty with a separate weapon in each hand though.

 

[Boone]

Sorry to resurrect this topic but...


In looking at this whole issue there are a few things that seem to be left out of the arguements put forth.

I can't recall the refferance but certain size shields provide protection from a certain number of combatants. Also depending on the side that the attack comes from.. (buckler side or non-buckler side). So the AC bonus shouldn't be across the board.

The other thing is .. How is that character decked out in full plate would have no negative attack modifiers (lots of bulky weight) and yet a non-armoured or lightly armoured character using a buckler would take a negative modifier on his attack roll?

I personally would play the rule as it stands with TWF but ignore all penalties associated with figthing with a two handed weapon.

 

[Caliban]

Sorry to resurrect this topic but...


In looking at this whole issue there are a few things that seem to be left out of the arguements put forth.

I can't recall the refferance but certain size shields provide protection from a certain number of combatants. Also depending on the side that the attack comes from.. (buckler side or non-buckler side). So the AC bonus shouldn't be across the board.

Those were rules in second edition. They are not rules in 3rd edition.

The other thing is .. How is that character decked out in full plate would have no negative attack modifiers (lots of bulky weight) and yet a non-armoured or lightly armoured character using a buckler would take a negative modifier on his attack roll?

Both of them would have a negative attack modifier if they used a buckler while wielding a weapon with their off-hand. The amount of additional armor they may or may not have is irrelevant.

Whether or not wielding a two-handed weapon also counts as wielding a weapon in your off-hand for the purposes of the -1 penalty is debatable. I can see it being reasonably ruled either way.