Kaffis said:
Furthermore, to those of you who are advocating ambidexterity as a full strength bonus for the off-hand feat (under the reasoning that you no longer have an off-hand): does this negate the need for a light weapon, as well? After all, you have no off-hand to require a light weapon in.
Not necessarily - two-weapon fighting is just plain difficult compared to normal fighting. Less weight makes it easily to do.
Kaffis said:
My answer to the second is, no, and this is why ambi-strength (to steal Ranger REG's terminology) is silly.
That doesn't make any sense. You're saying that fighting with two weapons gives characters an off-hand as a penalty. The penalty given by TWF is the -2 to attack rolls, not having an off-hand.
Kaffis said:
The light weapon, as well as the half-strength bonus, are not credited to it being a hand with which you are less proficient.
I don't have the rulebooks in front of me, but I think the table for using a two weapons specifically says "Off-hand weapon is light" for one of the categories. That seems to be rather strongly related to the off-hand. In fact, I think the category that gives -2/-2 is labeled "Two weapon fighting feat and off-hand weapon is light", at least in the 3.5 Player's Handbook.
Kaffis said:
3.5 rules don't even provide a mechanism for you to specify handedness, nor does anything require you to have, that I'm aware of (thus the lack of ambidexterity as a seperate feat).
I was under the assumption that since most people are right-handed, most characters are right-handed. If it's ever relevant to the game, we're played that characters have the same primary and off-hands of the characters playing them (which makes for a variety of interesting scenarios - we have one player whose characters often perish, and I always ask why the new person we hire happens to be another lefty, and I also frequently pester the DM by making written requests for free ambidexterity bonuses with both hands). Regardless, even if there isn't an explicit mechanism, players should be allowed to determine what hand their characters specialize in. Perfect ambidexterity is unusual enough that it should probably require a feat. To use another example, what if I want a character who can write with both hands? Should I take two-weapon fighting, since you claim that ambidexterity is part of that feat?
Kaffis said:
Rather, the non-light weapon penalty and the half-strength bonus for one hand (I'm refraining from calling it an off-hand, as they persist even with the TWF+Ambidexterity combo 3.5 feat just as they were present in 3.0 rules with TWF *and* Ambidexterity)
That's silly. It's still an off-hand, you're just not calling it one. Ambidexterity should affect more than what the off-hand is called, it should eliminate the presense of it. Both hands become primary hands.
Kaffis said:
...represent the difficulty in fighting in a TWF style with two full-sized one-handed weapons. It's just more than even a trained two weapon fighter can manage at full efficiency. Make one light, thus easing the balance and making it less prone to getting in the way as you focus on one hand (and yes, sacrificing some brute force in the hand you choose not to focus on) makes it far more manageable, yet still not penaltyless, as others have suggested.
I really don't agree. Ambidextrous characters shouldn't have off-hands, no matter what. Perhaps using light weapons can still give a +2 bonus, but there definitely shouldn't be an off-hand strength penalty to characters that don't have off-hands. I don't think it's unreasonable for a feat that requires 15 dexterity to make one's off-hand a primary hand. Someone who is ambidextrous but untrained in TWF will still be horrible at fighting with two weapons - they'll still have -6 to attacks from each hand, and all but one attack will be with a given weapon, due to the lack of experience with the fighting style. However, an ambidextrous character shouldn't be bound to one weapon over the other for this. An ambidextrous character wielding a dagger and a shortsword without improved TWF should be able to make a full attack with either weapon, and then one attack with the other (subtracting the applicable penalties for not having TWF if applicable, and the -2 that persists).