Armor Spikes question

[Hypersmurf]

That's a pretty odd ruling, Tatsukun.

It's exactly the way I'd rule (assuming I'd allow armor spikes to be used as an off-hand attack while wielding a two-handed weapon... I'm still not convinced I agree with the FAQ as to its legitimacy).

As far as I'm concerned, you can either hold the longspear, or wield the longspear.

If you're holding it, but not wielding it, you don't threaten. However, neither are you 'wielding a second weapon in your off-hand', since the only weapon you are wielding is the armor spikes. Thus, no penalty.

If, on the other hand, you are wielding it, you threaten at 10 feet... but since it is a second weapon wielded 'in your off-hand' (as in, you are wielding it as an off-hand weapon, per the FAQ ruling), you are 'fighting this way', and incur TWF penalties. You have the option of making an extra off-hand attack, but you're not forced to use it.

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I'm holding a longsword. I have no shield or buckler in my other hand. My BAB is +1.

I quickdraw and then throw a knife.

Can I still gain an AoO on the caster standing 5' away?

And if I can, how is this any different from the longspear / armor spikes example?

 

[Liquidsabre]

Whether if it's a character with improved unarmed strike or a character with armor spikes, both threaten the 5ft area around them regardless of the weapons they hold, carry, or wield. This is due to the characters being able to strike with other parts of their body rather than their hands.

If such characters are making an AoO they do so at no penalty. If making attacks in addition to those with their 2-handed weapon, normal two-weapon fighting penalties apply. So in answer to your question:

Does he suffer two weapon fighting penalties if he is holding the reach weapon, even if he didn't attack with it in the round?

No penalties. At least, if I'm reading it correctly that is.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'm holding a longsword. I have no shield or buckler in my other hand. My BAB is +1.

I quickdraw and then throw a knife.

Can I still gain an AoO on the caster standing 5' away?

Well, for a start, your knife takes a -4 penalty for being an off-hand attack, per the PHB Glossary definition.

And since you're wielding a second weapon in your off-hand (the knife), there's an additional -6, commuted to -4 since it's light, for a total of -8.

Unless you're not, in fact, wielding the longsword, in which case you don't threaten with it... thus are not wielding a second weapon in your off-hand when you throw the knife, and don't take TWF penalties, only the -4 off-hand penalty. But in this case, you can't take the AoO on the caster, since you aren't wielding a weapon and thus don't threaten.

-Hyp.

 

[Legildur]

So, if a creature gets inside your reach, are the following options available:

1. Take a 5ft step and attack with reach weapon;

2. Attack with armor spikes as primary weapon and not threaten with reach weapon and thus not suffer TWF penalties;

3. Attack with armor spikes (as primary or secondary weapon) and continue to threaten with reach weapon and suffer appropriate TWF penalties;

4. Attack with armor spikes (as primary or secondary weapon), take a 5ft step and attack with reach weapon and suffer appropriate TWF penalties.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

So ...

How does that interpretation jibe with:

I figure you take the penalties "when you fight this way."

as regards two-weapon fighting penalties?

 

[Hypersmurf]

So ...

How does that interpretation jibe with 'when you fight this way' as regards two-weapon fighting penalties?

If he's wielding both longsword and knife, he's 'fighting this way', and incurs TWF penalties. If he's wielding the knife, but only holding (and not wielding) the longsword, he's not 'fighting this way', and does not.

-Hyp.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Even though he didn't, as I posited and you seemed to agree, "... make a Full Attack, and make use of the Two-Weapon Fighting rules to gain extra attacks"?

 

[Liquidsabre]

If he's wielding both longsword and knife, he's 'fighting this way', and incurs TWF penalties. If he's wielding the knife, but only holding (and not wielding) the longsword, he's not 'fighting this way', and does not.

As the text reads, you only apply the penalties for TWF when "you get one extra attack per round". TWF penalties will not apply unless a character makes an extra attack durign the round as a result of wielding both a weapon in their main hand and a weapon in their off-hand.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Even though he didn't, as I posited and you seemed to agree, "... make a Full Attack, and make use of the Two-Weapon Fighting rules to gain extra attacks"?

No, no, I never agreed with that at all.

As far as I'm concerned, "fight this way" means "wield a second weapon in your off-hand".

Which is the definition I've used in every post I've made to this thread.

If you're fighting this way, then you are allowed to make an extra off-hand attack with the full attack action. But you don't have to. Whether or not you take that extra attack, if you're wielding a second weapon in your off-hand, you're "fighting this way".

Supporting evidence, from the 3E Main FAQ:

Using a weapon of defending works just like the Expertise
feat. (You have to use an attack or full attack action.) You can’t
use the weapon like a shield; if you hold the weapon in your off
hand and claim an Armor Class bonus for it, you take all the
penalties for fighting with two weapons, even if you don’t
actually attack with the weapon.

The bonus for a defending weapon apples to "the wielder". If you're not wielding the weapon, you can't benefit from it. Thus, if you claim the AC bonus, you are wielding the weapon.

If you wish to benefit from it, the FAQ states that you take TWF penalties, whether or not you make that extra attack. Thus, TWF penalties are not related to whether the extra attack is made, but rather whether you are wielding two weapons or not.

-Hyp.