D&D 3E/3.5 (3.5) Improved trip, two weapons

[Jimlock]

So if you trip with the 0ff-hand, must the Improved Trip bonus attack be with the off hand (or whatever weapon is in it)? I think so...

yes

 

[Dandu]

I can't miss the opp to correct Dandu, altho there is probably some errata somewhere that will make me look like a fool.

PH: "Because of a sickle's shape, you can also use it to make trip attacks. If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop the sickle to avoid being tripped."

My apologies, I think I got it confused with a kama.

 

[Flarlarlar]

I thought when fighting with two weapons, penalties always applied even if you only attack with your main hand, just as Jimlock says. But then Jimlock posted those three links which... uh... seem to undermine his own point

Rules of the Game: Two-Handed Fighting (Part One)

Rules of the Game: Two-Handed Fighting (Part Two)

Rules of the Game: Two-Handed Fighting (Part Three)

Some attack penalties you voluntarily assume, such as the penalty for defensive fighting, apply until your next turn, but two weapon penalties are not one of them.

If, after you made two-weapon attacks with your sword and torch, a foe later provokes an attack of opportunity from you that same round, you can strike that foe with your longsword with no two-weapon penalty at all.

Here I understand that you have to declare attacking with both hands during your full attack for there to be two-weapon penalties. It probably makes sense when considering that, technically, either a torch or a shield are considered light weapons (?). If such penalties weren't voluntarily assumed ("I want to attack with my sword and then bash with my shield"), then everybody would suffer them just by having a shield on their off hand.
Previous paragraphs seem to support the same idea, although...

You can make your attack roll with your longsword and observe the result before deciding between an attack or a full attack, but you must take a -4 attack penalty on that primary hand attack to preserve your option to attack with the torch. In this situation it would be entirely reasonable for the DM to make you take the -4 attack penalty before you see your first attack's result (because it speeds play); however that's not strictly necessary. The DM might allow you to see the result before deciding to attack with the torch. If that is so and you decide to try an attack with the torch, your DM must recalculate the result of your sword attack, taking the primary weapon penalty into account. (I don't recommend this option, but it fits the letter of the rules.)

Whoa whoa what? I assumed you'd have to declare the intention of using either one or two hands before the attack. Retroactively changing the result this way seems weird

If, after you made two-weapon attacks with your sword and torch, a foe later provokes an attack of opportunity from you that same round, you can strike that foe with your longsword with no two-weapon penalty at all. (You also can use just the torch, also with no two-weapon penalty, though you still take the -4 penalty for an off-hand attack;[...])

Whoat
Okay, now. Where did this come from? ;_; Attacking with ONLY the weapon in off hand also grants a penalty? If so, I'm not sure how normal iterative attacks would be done using the weapon in off hand...

 

[Jimlock]

I thought when fighting with two weapons, penalties always applied even if you only attack with your main hand, just as Jimlock says. But then Jimlock posted those three links which... uh... seem to undermine his own point

you are obviously confused...let me attempt to clear this up for you


PART 1:
When using a weapon in each hand, you usually can't use a shield, which hurts your Armor Class. In addition, you take an attack penalty on attacks you make with your primary hand and (generally) a bigger attack penalty for your off hand. The exact penalties depend on what feats you have and which two weapons you're using; see page 160 in the Player's Handbook. Parts Two and Three also examine two-weapon fighting in detail.

Here I understand that you have to declare attacking with both hands during your full attack for there to be two-weapon penalties. It probably makes sense when considering that, technically, either a torch or a shield are considered light weapons (?). If such penalties weren't voluntarily assumed ("I want to attack with my sword and then bash with my shield"), then everybody would suffer them just by having a shield on their off hand.
Previous paragraphs seem to support the same idea, although...

It is not a matter of declaring your TW attack. Its a matter of using both hands during your attack. During your attack of opportunity you are only using one hand therefore no penalty.

Whoa whoa what? I assumed you'd have to declare the intention of using either one or two hands before the attack. Retroactively changing the result this way seems weird

He clearly says: I don't recommend this option

Whoat
Okay, now. Where did this come from? ;_; Attacking with ONLY the weapon in off hand also grants a penalty? If so, I'm not sure how normal iterative attacks would be done using the weapon in off hand...

PART 1:
When fighting with two weapons, you gain one extra attack with your off-hand weapon when you use the full attack action. If you have a high base attack bonus, you gain iterative attacks only with your primary weapon.

So to make it all simple...

You apply TWF penalties whenever you use/attack with BOTH hands during your full attack.

 

[Flarlarlar]

PART 1:
When fighting with two weapons, you gain one extra attack with your off-hand weapon when you use the full attack action. If you have a high base attack bonus, you gain iterative attacks only with your primary weapon.

So to make it all simple...

You apply TWF penalties whenever you use/attack with BOTH hands during your full attack.

Well, thanks; seems like these couple simple axioms cover all situations that may arise

And looking back:

I thought when fighting with two weapons, penalties always applied even if you only attack with your main hand, just as Jimlock says.

Sorry for that attribution, you didn't actually say that. I probably got confused with the discussion I just read on some other thread about when to apply twf penalties.

 

[Visigani]

So to sum up:


A character with the improved trip feat, a longsword in one hand and a sickle in the other, could trip with their sickle with no penalty and, assuming the trip was successful, then attack with their longsword, also with no penalty.


Because the trip effectively "resets" the attack you just made you have not attacked with your offhand weapon, allowing you to attack with your primary weapon without penalty (unless you elect to also use your off hand weapon again).

 

[Jimlock]

So to sum up:


A character with the improved trip feat, a longsword in one hand and a sickle in the other, could trip with their sickle with no penalty and, assuming the trip was successful, then attack with their longsword, also with no penalty.


Because the trip effectively "resets" the attack you just made you have not attacked with your offhand weapon, allowing you to attack with your primary weapon without penalty (unless you elect to also use your off hand weapon again).

I'm afraid not.

Perhaps i should rephrase my:

You apply TWF penalties whenever you use/attack with BOTH hands during your full attack.

into:

You apply TWF penalties whenever you use/attack with BOTH hands during your round/action. ( but NOT until your next turn, see example with AoO)

You see in the official archive its says:

PART 1:
When using a weapon in each hand, you usually can't use a shield, which hurts your Armor Class. In addition, you take an attack penalty on attacks you make with your primary hand and (generally) a bigger attack penalty for your off hand. The exact penalties depend on what feats you have and which two weapons you're using; see page 160 in the Player's Handbook. Parts Two and Three also examine two-weapon fighting in detail.


By SRD:

If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.

This doesn't actually means that the trip "resets" the attack you just made, nor does it "reset" the fact that you used your hand with the sickle to trip the opponent. So if you later attack with the longshord (other hand) its normal to assume that you used both hands during your action. Therefore TWF penalties apply normally.

 

[Visigani]

"As if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt".

i.e. as if the attack hadn't happened.

 

[Flarlarlar]

I have to agree with Jimlock

If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.

You do get the option to make the resetted attack again with the sickle as if you hadn't made it; any way you want as long as it's against the same guy. However, I wouldn't say this means "that one attack is treated as if it hadn't existed at all, for all effects". And I prefer it that way, otherwise by the same historical revisionism, the guy who got sickled would un-bite the dust and remain standing lol

 

[Visigani]

I have to agree with Jimlock

You do get the option to make the resetted attack again with the sickle as if you hadn't made it; any way you want as long as it's against the same guy. However, I wouldn't say this means "that one attack is treated as if it hadn't existed at all, for all effects". And I prefer it that way, otherwise by the same historical revisionism, the guy who got sickled would un-bite the dust and remain standing lol

It's pretty clear... you get to make a melee attack as though you hadn't used your attack for a trip attempt. It doesn't reverse time for the universe at large, it simply resets the attack you just made in relation to you.