Double weapon question

[Pielorinho]

I'm a ranger, fighting with a quarterstaff. I'd like to disarm my opponent. If I wield the quarterstaff 2-handed, I get a +4 on my disarm attempt. I would also like to attack with the other end of the quarterstaff this round. Is it possible? That is, can a character shift between using a double weapon two-handed and as a double weapon within the same round? What sort of action would it be to make this shift?

I'm inclined to say no--to say that you have to choose at the beginning of your turn whether to use the double weapon as a double weapon or a two-handed weapon, and that you can't change your choice until the beginning of your next turn. BUt I don't know if that's how the rules actually work.

Daniel

 

[Infiniti2000]

That is, can a character shift between using a double weapon two-handed and as a double weapon within the same round? What sort of action would it be to make this shift?

No. You are either two-weapon fighting as a full round action, or not.

 

[Pielorinho]

No. You are either two-weapon fighting as a full round action, or not.

That makes sense; is there a rules reference for that?

Daniel

 

[Pielorinho]

The closest I can come to a reference is from the Two-weapon fighting special attacks stuff:

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way.

So it looks as though if you ever attack with a weapon in your off hand, all your attacks during that round suffer the penalties. Since you can't suffer penalties retroactively, you must decide before you make your first attack whether you want to keep open the possibility of attacking with the off-hand weapon during that round.

Daniel

 

[Deset Gled]

So it looks as though if you ever attack with a weapon in your off hand, all your attacks during that round suffer the penalties.

Enter the debate of what "in this way" means...

For consistency, if you rule that the quarterstaff must be treated as a two-handed weapon the entire round, you should not allow AoOs with an off-hand weapon. If you rule that you can take an AoO with an off-hand weapon without penalty, you should also rule that you can disarm with a quarterstaff as a two-handed weapon and attack with either end in the same round.

Personally, I go with I2K's option. The RotG articles disagree.

 

[Pielorinho]

Enter the debate of what "in this way" means...

For consistency, if you rule that the quarterstaff must be treated as a two-handed weapon the entire round, you should not allow AoOs with an off-hand weapon. If you rule that you can take an AoO with an off-hand weapon without penalty, you should also rule that you can disarm with a quarterstaff as a two-handed weapon and attack with either end in the same round.

Can you elaborate on this? I may not be understanding what you're saying.

It seems to me that you must choose at the beginning of each round whether you're "wielding" an off-handed weapon, or just letting it hang loose there in your other hand. If you're wielding it, then you can benefit from Improved Two Weapon Defense, and you can make AoOs with it, and you can attack with it. If you're not wielding it, then you don't get ITWD benefits, you can't make AoOs or regular attacks with it. However, if you're not wielding a double weapon as a double weapon, you get 1.5xstr bonus on your attacks.

Does that sound right?

Daniel

 

[Infiniti2000]

That makes sense; is there a rules reference for that?

The alternative is that you can make a full attack action two-handed, then make another full attack action with both ends of the double weapon (two-weapon fighting). Is that what you're suggesting?

 

[Infiniti2000]

Since you can't suffer penalties retroactively, you must decide before you make your first attack whether you want to keep open the possibility of attacking with the off-hand weapon during that round.

Yes, absolutely. It's not just keeping the possibility open, it's actually doing it. Whether you make the subsequent attacks is irrelevant: once you take the penalty you are 'fighting this way'. I doubt there's disagreement on that.

 

[SlagMortar]

Under double weapons:

A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he or she incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
The character can also choose to use a double weapon two handed, attacking with only one end of it.

That says to me that using both ends of a double weapon in a particular round is treated the same as wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. So no +4 on the disarm check if you are also making (or leaving the option open to make) an attack with the other end.