Full attack with more weapons

[Li Shenron]

Sorry for asking such a basic question after 3 years of gaming... but recently some doubts started haunting me.

Let's say you hold 2 weapons, one in each hand, for example a sword and a mace. You are NOT going to exploit the benefits of two-weapon fighting, in other words I am NOT asking what happens when you take the EXTRA attack with the off-hand weapon.

You have BAB +6/+1 so you can use a full-attack action to get 2 attacks in a round.

Do you have to make both attacks with the same weapon, or can you for example attack with the sword at +6 and with the mace at +1?

Please, let's not care about the penalties for doing so, I just want to know if you can.

Because I have always allowed players to do so, and after all if you use throwing weapons with Quick Draw that's what you are doing all the time: attacking with different weapons in the same full-attack.

But here and there in the 3.5 SRD there are words that seem to go in the other direction, such as here:

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.

...

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. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

I think you can, but I also think that when speaking of 2 weapons or double weapons, the SRD always have in mind the scenario when you get the extra attack.

But what if you have BAB +6 AND also want the extra attack. The extra attack is with the off-hand weapon isn't it? What about the 2 regulars attack, can they be one + one or must they be both with the primary weapon?

 

[Caliban]

Sorry for asking such a basic question after 3 years of gaming... but recently some doubts started haunting me.

Let's say you hold 2 weapons, one in each hand, for example a sword and a mace. You are NOT going to exploit the benefits of two-weapon fighting, in other words I am NOT asking what happens when you take the EXTRA attack with the off-hand weapon.

You have BAB +6/+1 so you can use a full-attack action to get 2 attacks in a round.

Do you have to make both attacks with the same weapon, or can you for example attack with the sword at +6 and with the mace at +1?

Please, let's not care about the penalties for doing so, I just want to know if you can.

Because I have always allowed players to do so, and after all if you use throwing weapons with Quick Draw that's what you are doing all the time: attacking with different weapons in the same full-attack.

But here and there in the 3.5 SRD there are words that seem to go in the other direction, such as here:



I think you can, but I also think that when speaking of 2 weapons or double weapons, the SRD always have in mind the scenario when you get the extra attack.

But what if you have BAB +6 AND also want the extra attack. The extra attack is with the off-hand weapon isn't it? What about the 2 regulars attack, can they be one + one or must they be both with the primary weapon?

The rules don't clearly address this situation. A lot of people assume you can switch between weapons without penalty (other than the penalty for using an off-hand).

Others assume you can't switch between different weapons in different hands without incurring TWF penalties, even if don't take the extra attack.

Use whatever makes the most sense to you.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

(other than the penalty for using an off-hand).

What would be that penalty? In 3.5, they got rid of handedness, and the only time they mention the off hand is in the context of TWF.

AR

 

[Caliban]

What would be that penalty? In 3.5, they got rid of handedness, and the only time they mention the off hand is in the context of TWF.

AR

I don't have my books with me, but I really don't think they got rid of the penalty, they just folded Ambidexterity into TWF.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Well, it depends on whether you consider switching back and forth between two weapons "fight[ing] in this way," according to the rules.

Going with Caliban on this (which seems to always be the wise course!), I'd say that it's a matter of opinion, and as such, I'd allow switching freely between weapons, as it's not particularly game-breaking. However, I would apply the penalties for TWF any time that both weapons are used to attack in a round.

 

[Li Shenron]

I also have allowed to use either weapon with the 2 regular attacks, but it complicates thing once you mix up the high BAB regular attack with the extra attack by 2WFing.

From my example above:

BAB +6/+1
Longsword in the right hand
Light Mace in the left hand
Two-Weapon Fighting feat (just to get rid of greater penalties, but not necessary)

Now, fighting with 2 weapons give you the chance to perform an extra attack as below:

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.

I think I can allow at least all the following:

2 attacks:
sword +6, sword +1
sword +6, mace +1
mace +6, sword +1
mace +6, mace +1

3 attacks:
sword +4, mace +4, sword -1
sword +4, mace +4, mace -1

I suppose I CANNOT do both the +4 attacks with the same weapon, is it right?
My opinion is that the iterative attacks can be done with any weapon, while the first attack in the routine (at higher BAB) is either ONE (if you don't want to exploit the extra attack) or ONE WITH EACH but you take -2 with every single attack this round.
Obviously if you don't have the feat, every attack with the mace has a further -6 so it's better to take all interative attacks with the sword which has only a further -2.

Do you think it's quite correct? I had this problem when a player wanted to use a double weapon in this way, but I think it's the same as 2 weapons.

 

[Darklone]

Hope you take a light mace.... yeah, you cannot do both +4 attacks with the same weapon.

I wouldn't have a problem with players using a sword and a dagger and attacking iteratively with different ones (counting off hand penalties if needed), but I do have a problem with someone using a polearm (with two hands) and spiked gauntlets without incurring TWF penalties. But well...

 

[melkoriii]

Hope you take a light mace.... yeah, you cannot do both +4 attacks with the same weapon.

I wouldn't have a problem with players using a sword and a dagger and attacking iteratively with different ones (counting off hand penalties if needed), but I do have a problem with someone using a polearm (with two hands) and spiked gauntlets without incurring TWF penalties. But well...

You couldnt do

Sword +4, Sword +4, Mace -1
As the second +4 has to be from your off hand.

You could do
Mace+4, Mace+4, Sword-1
Or
Mace+4, Mace+4, Mace-1
as the second +4 attack is coming from your off hand weapon as the feat says it must.

You do incurs the of hand damage (ie half str) any time you attack with that weapon.

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

You could do
Mace+4, Mace+4, Sword-1
Or
Mace+4, Mace+4, Mace-1
as the second +4 attack is coming from your off hand weapon as the feat says it must.

You do incurs the of hand damage (ie half str) any time you attack with that weapon.

at +6/+1 BAB and with TWF, your attack routine consists in:

- First iterative hit from main weapon
- Second iterative hit from main weapon
- Extra hit from off-hand weapon

IMO, when you TWF, you need to declare which weapon is your main weapon, and which weapon is your off-hand weapon. if you don't, then you'll encounter some silliness:

Attacker declares First iterative attack with Sword
Attacker declares Second iterative attack with Sword
Attacker declares that the mace is now his main weapon and his Sword is his off-hand weapon. Takes extra TWF attack with Sword.

This isn't a good example, since the penalties would change since the off-hand weapon isn't light anymore, but change Sword with "Short sword of ultimate death" and Mace with "rusty short sword of poking yourself in the junk and dying of tetanos".

AR

 

[silentspace]

I think most people play you can switch off at any time. So you can make a shield bash as a normal attack. I don't know if the rules support this explicitly, but they seem to lean towards that interpretation anyway. In 3.0 there was the Ambidexterity feat, which common sense would say has something to do with this issue, although the rules don't say anything about it, least as far as I know.