D&D 4E 4e offhand rules

[thepunisher17397]

Could someone explain to me the offhand rules for 4e? I'm still trying to work my way through them (being a vet from the original dnd basic rules (the red books), the massive changes are taking me a bit to get used to).

AKA, if a fighter decides to use two weapons (sword/dagger) at once without any specific 'power' to allow him to do so, what are the penalties?

I tried looking it up in the books, and other than Rangers having the option to use two weaps instead of archery as a specialization, I see only:
A) they can have a light weapon in the offhand and
B) they can attack only with one weapon (unless said otherwise by power)...no mention of to hit penalties/or damage penalties.

Thanks folks...

-Tar

 

[Mort_Q]

With sword/dagger and no feats... there are no penalties... and no benefits... save the fighter can attack with either.

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

Could someone explain to me the offhand rules for 4e? AKA, if a fighter decides to use two weapons (sword/dagger) at once without any specific 'power' to allow him to do so, what are the penalties?

I tried looking it up in the books, and other than Rangers having the option to use two weaps instead of archery as a specialization, I see only:
A) they can have a light weapon in the offhand and
B) they can attack only with one weapon (unless said otherwise by power)...no mention of to hit penalties/or damage penalties.

Nothing else.

If your fighter has one weapon in each hand (a one-handed weapon and an off-hand weapon), you can make a basic melee attack or use any of your melee weapon attack powers using either of your weapons.

No penalties, but no extra attacks either, unless the power specifies it.

 

[Skallgrim]

Correctly stated. The reasons to carry a second weapon would include:

Access to feats and powers which require the use of same.
Access to two different types of attacks (perhaps two different magic weapons)
Worry about being disarmed by specific attacks (paranoid, perhaps?)

There's no automatic reason to carry two weapons anymore. It is all contingent on your build and equipment.

 

[peach]

reason to carry 2 weapons - 1 is melee, 1 is ranged. e.g. sickle, hand crossbow or short sword, dagger. if the target is not adjacent throw the dagger then draw another one (you do have more than 1 dagger right?).

 

[Amphimir Míriel]

reason to carry 2 weapons - 1 is melee, 1 is ranged. e.g. sickle, hand crossbow or short sword, dagger. if the target is not adjacent throw the dagger then draw another one (you do have more than 1 dagger right?).

That's how my current Rogue is operating at the time... Rapier + dagger

So the two-weapon fighting rogue is alive in 4E, with more realism than its 3E predecessor

 

[JiffyPopTart]

Strangely, our party rogue carries his Dagger of Distance in his primary hand and his poisoned short sword in his off hand because he only uses it once per encounter.

DS

 

[Baumi]

The main advantage is versatility (ranged weapon, two weapon types,...), two-weapon feat advantages (damage and defense), ranger multiclass powers and the new new powers from the martial power book.

If you don't invest in specific powers and/or feats then it adds only versatility to the character but at the cost of either defense (no shield) or damage (no 2-handed weapon).