Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="drnuncheon" data-source="post: 263559" data-attributes="member: 96">See, here's where we differ. I see no difference between letting a person make two sword attacks at +6 and +1, and letting him make a sword attack at +6 and a crossbow attack at +1 (if that's what he chooses).  After all, he could drop the sword and draw a dagger and throw it right-handed without achieving a penalty - why not let him get the extra use out of the Ambidexterity feat?If he wants to make the other attack a his full BAB (- the 2-weapon penalties), then he's getting the benefit of the feat, and has to take the penalty, sure.  But to me the benefit of 2wf is an extra attack at your highest BAB (minus penalties), not the ability to switch hands while making your normal attacks.As for the usefulness of such a tactic - limited, sure, but sometimes handy. Like in the original example - the bow-weilding warrior who wants to be able to threaten an area and take AoOs.  Or in the case of someone with two weapons with different properties - hit the zombies with the more damaging bastard sword, and the skeletons with the blunt mace.According to the core rules, either or both can be ranged.  I believe the Sage decided to alter this in one of his rulings to say that the 2WF feat is only intended for melee use - possibly to forestall 2wf + Rapid Shot combos?J</blockquote>