can you weapon finesse a two handed double weapon?

[Nonlethal Force]

Yes, they do. Otherwise you incur the TWF penalties.

A fighter with +6/+1 gets +6/+1 with their main hand. In the case of the double weapon, either hand can be the main hand, but it must be a consistent choice through the round. As soon as they use the other end (or second hand) they now incur the penalties and attack at +4/-1 for the primary hand and +4 for the off hand.

Of course, this doesn't take into account weapon finesse (which would increase the off-hand attack) and it assumes they have the TWF feat.

As per your analysis above, it simply proves my point. You cannot get more than one attack with the off hand without using itteratives, improved (or greater) two weapon fighting, or some sort of magic. (Haste, speed enhancement, etc).

 

[DogBackward]

No, no, no!

Ok, big thing here. You cannot Finesse the off-hand side of a double weapon, ever, unless specifically stated, such as a double-spiked chain someone mentioned. Double weapons have the following description:

"You can fight with it as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."

Note that this only applies to using the weapon to fight with Two Weapon Fighting. You do not get to treat the off-hand side as light for any other purpose. Sorry, but no.

 

[nute]

Ok, big thing here. You cannot Finesse the off-hand side of a double weapon, ever, unless specifically stated, such as a double-spiked chain someone mentioned. Double weapons have the following description:

"You can fight with it as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."

Note that this only applies to using the weapon to fight with Two Weapon Fighting. You do not get to treat the off-hand side as light for any other purpose. Sorry, but no.

Mmm... disagree. If you are treating a weapon as a light weapon, why wouldn't it be finesseable? All light weapons are finesseable. Is there any wording that specifically states Weapon Finesse does not apply?

 

[billd91]

Ok, big thing here. You cannot Finesse the off-hand side of a double weapon, ever, unless specifically stated, such as a double-spiked chain someone mentioned. Double weapons have the following description:

"You can fight with it as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."

Note that this only applies to using the weapon to fight with Two Weapon Fighting. You do not get to treat the off-hand side as light for any other purpose. Sorry, but no.

The one problem with this interpretation (which I agree with, by the way) is the FAQ. The Sage ruled that you can use weapon finesse in conjuction with TWF on the secondary end of the double-weapon.
So, for anyone playing Living Greyhawk, that's the rule. But I'm not sure I'll follow that interpretation at my table. The rest of the rules in the PH, whenever they are mentioning the secondary attack from the double weapon, always put in context of the penalties to use in TWF (at least as far as I can find references).

 

[Hypersmurf]

Ok, big thing here. You cannot Finesse the off-hand side of a double weapon, ever, unless specifically stated, such as a double-spiked chain someone mentioned. Double weapons have the following description:

"You can fight with it as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon."

Note that this only applies to using the weapon to fight with Two Weapon Fighting. You do not get to treat the off-hand side as light for any other purpose. Sorry, but no.

Don't forget the Power Attack feat text:
"(Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon.)"

Now, either there's an implicit "for the purpose of Power Attack" in there, or it's globally applicable.

If it's restricted to Power Attack, then we treat a double weapon as a one-handed and light weapon for two purposes: Attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, and Power Attack. For all other purposes, it is a two handed weapon.

What other purposes are there? +4 bonus to disarm. +4 bonus to sunder. 1.5x Str bonus to damage with the primary end. (The off end is still a two-handed weapon, which means 1.5x, but it's also an attack with your off-hand, which means .5x. The DM will have to decide which takes priority.)

If, on the other hand, it's globally applicable, then the primary end gets no bonus to sunder or disarm, and the normal Str bonus to damage; the off end takes a -4 penalty to sunder and disarm, unambiguously adds .5x Str bonus to damage, and can be used with finesse.

(Ordinarily a light weapon could be used in a grapple or while swallowed, but since it the off-end is only considered light when you're using both ends, and you can't use two weapons in a grapple, this won't work.)

I don't think it's possible to read it so that the primary end only adds 1x Str bonus to damage and also the off-end cannot be used with finesse. If you rule against finesse, it's a ruling for 1.5x Str bonus to damage. If you rule against 1.5x Str bonus to damage, it's a ruling for finesse.

Now, given that the Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting feat is essentially superior to a double weapon Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat in almost every way if one doesn't allow 1.5x Str bonus to damage (etc), it may be that ruling against Finesse is a more balanced way to go. If a two-bladed sword adds 1.5x/.5x, while two longswords add 1x/.5x, there's still a reason to take the EWP feat...

-Hyp.

 

[DogBackward]

For one, I don't think there's anyone out there that really trusts the sage for advice. And if you do... well, I feel sorry for you, because he's shown himself to be outright wrong over and over again.

Second, let's try applying a little bit of the dreaded "Logic" to the problem. Try explaining to me why, logically, wielding a double weapon would be easier/lighter than wielding a light weapon?

 

[starwed]

The point of the FAQ/sage isn't to be "right" or "wrong" any more than the RAW can be inherently "right" or "wrong." The point is to provide an authoritative voice so the DM and players don't spend time arguing over the rules.

Since the entire point of this message board is to argue over the rules, obviously there's not much use for the Sage here. ^_^

 

[phindar]

Now, given that the Oversized Two-Weapon Fighting feat is essentially superior to a double weapon Exotic Weapon Proficiency feat in almost every way if one doesn't allow 1.5x Str bonus to damage (etc), it may be that ruling against Finesse is a more balanced way to go. If a two-bladed sword adds 1.5x/.5x, while two longswords add 1x/.5x, there's still a reason to take the EWP feat...

My group treats the double weapon as a 1-hand and a Light, or as a 2-hand, but not a 2-hand and a Light. My half-orc Fighter/Barbarian is based around that.

For me, the benefit to a double weapon is in Power Attack. I can either attack with it as a two hand weapon, getting the x1.5 Str and x2 Power Attack, or I can attack TWF and get more attacks with x1 Str with one end and x.5 Str with the other. And I can switch pretty freely back and forth throughout the combat, without having to put a sword down or pick one up. (Considering my half orc can do d8+29 points of damage on a full PA, I don't think my GM would be particularly receptive to me doing that in conjunction with TWF, even with the lower chances to hit.)

For a +2 PA, my character has a +13/+7 with a damage of d8+14. TWF, it's +13/+7/+13 with the first two attacks at d8+8 and the off-hand at d8+5. Damage-wise, PA is better, but against higher AC foes I'd rather have the extra chance to hit.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Double weapons, which each cost a feat to be proficient in, are not really worth it IMHO. At least, when compared to Two-Weapon Fighting with 2 different weapons (say a Longsword and a Short Sword). It costs you a feat for EWP and I don't think you get much benefit from it personally...

So I've been toying w/ the idea of allowing double weapons to apply x1 Str modifier from both ends, just as a small incentive to take them over standard TWF weapons.

 

[Hypersmurf]

My group treats the double weapon as a 1-hand and a Light, or as a 2-hand, but not a 2-hand and a Light.

Right. So you're basically reading the line in Power Attack: (Normally, you treat a double weapon as a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. If you choose to use a double weapon like a two-handed weapon, attacking with only one end of it in a round, you treat it as a two-handed weapon.) - to be a general rule that covers all situations, rather than a specific rule only applicable to Power Attack.

I do the same, personally.

(Note, though, the distinction isn't between 1-hand and Light, and 2-hand and Light; it's between 1-hand and Light, and 2-hand on both ends, except for attack penalties associated with TWF, and Power Attack. If you don't allow finesse with the off-end, it must be considered a two-handed weapon for all other purposes... including the +4 bonus to Sunder and Disarm.)

-Hyp.