D&D 3E/3.5 Ambidexterity in 3.5

[RandomPrecision]

I'm not trying to impress anyone. I just don't think making up new words (ambistrength) addreses the issue at hand. All that I'm trying to show is that being equally talented with each hand is called ambidexterity. I admit, I got carried away, but you're telling me that ambidexterity is not ambidexterity, and over time, this sort of semantic debate grates on my nerves. I apologize for any harm that I have done, but it doesn't seem that I can make my points understood. For example,

Why will they be less dextrous with one hand, but equally strong? What you describe really isn't ambidexterity, it is the mentioned ambistrength.

An ambidexterous person would have equally strong hands, because they have no off-hand. This isn't "ambistrength", it's ambidexterity. My "fleeing into semantics" was an attempt to explain what ambidexterity is, and how it has no relation to D&D ability scores. I see that I could have tried to explain this in a less condescending way, but I didn't expect such semantic opposition, and my irritation obviously seeped into my post.

That being said, I have no desire to continue proposing how to implement ambidexterity in D&D. If people want to have partial ambidexterity, or state that ambidexterity relates only to certain things, and ambistrength must also be pursued to use both hands proficiently, or that ambidexterity is impossible, or any other variation, that is their business. I may object to some of them, but it would be as futile as to object to gestalt characters - it seems like an abomination, but eliminating it would be as difficult as drinking an ocean with one of the small straws that are attached to the back of Hi-C juice cartons (I don't think that many people play gestalt, so it might be like trying to drain a small lake with a straw, but it's still difficult). But since it's clear that my attempts to create a feat for actual ambidexterity are not wanted here, I won't share anything that I develop.

 

[glass]

You know, if you have to resort to being condescending and flee into semantics, trying to impress someone with your linguistic knowledge and insult others, you can take your argument somewhere else.

'Pot, this is kettle: you're black'

EDIT: Which is to say, you're the one who were using silly made up words in an apparent attempt to characterise the other side of the argumant as silly. You hardly have any cause to complain if you're called on it.


glass.

 

[Ranebowdragon]

Ambidexterity Does Show up in 3.5

Ambidexterity does show up in 3.5, but not as a Feat. It shows up as a class feature in the Tempest (Complete Adventurer page 81). Quoting from the book:

"Ambidexterity (Ex): For a tempest of 2nd level or highter, her attack penalties for fighting with two weapons are lessened by 1 (from -4 to -3, or from -2 to -1 if the off-hand weapon is a light weapon). at 4th level, the attack penalties are lessened by another 1 (from -3 to -2, or to +0 if the off-hand weapon is a light weapon). The character loses this ability when fighting in medium or heavy armor."

So you could offer up Ambidexterity as a feat to augment your two-weapon fighters. You could introduce a Abidexterity with a pre-rec. of Two-Weapon Fighting and a Greater Ambidexterity with appropriate pre-recs. and also a Perfect Ambidexterity (making it a zero penalty regarless of the weapon type - light, med, heavy)