Search results

It would be if it were a stand alone statement. But you're taking it out of context, and that context, at least to me, adds some question as to whether or not it is refering just to to-attack, or to both to-attack and damage. (that and that its in the FAQ, not the sage, or does he write the...

Yes, I can see how that kind of intent can be read from the rules. Believe me, if I didn't see at least something along those lines, I wouldn't be asking :) However, since we seem to be touching on thinking through the phyics of the weapon as rationalization, it wouldn't be too hard to...

The problem here is that that entire page, 125 and those rules (and even that question) see to be VERY explicitly talking about to-attack bonus and not to damage. In fact, there is nothing surrounding the text of p125, or even that question, that goes into the damage associated with using a...

sorry, meant Caliban, not Calindar. My bad. :)

So I just re-checked the FAQ, as I was under the same kind of impression as you Calindar, however, there is no clarification on this topic in it. The one I checked was off the official wizards of the coast site at http://www.wizards.com/dnd/article1.asp?x=dnd/er/errata,3 The only topic that...

OK, so I've been reading a lot about how double weapons, as a rule are not 'worth it' when compared to using a single weapon with two hands. (yes, I imagine this topic has been gone over in detail before, please bear with me) However, in everything I've read I haven't seen anyone mention the...