Full attack with more weapons

[Darklone]

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.

No offence, but any player who would try to argue his way into your proposal and might perchance wield a bastard sword in his off hand would receive a royal rulesbook smackdown.

 

[Steverooo]

If you fight with a weapon in each hand (and use it), then you are fighting with two weapons, and use the TWF penalties (and get three attacks/round, in your example). Thus, for a character without TWF, there is NO good reason to use sword and knife; he is better off attacking twice at +6/+1 with the sword. Same for the mace & sword example.

As already stated, however, the rules don't really cover it. The TWF rules seem to rule against it, IMHO.

 

[drnuncheon]

The ruling hinges on how you interpret the phrase "fighting in this way" in the 2WF rules. Does it mean 'fighting with one weapon in each hand' or does it mean 'fighting with one weapon in each hand and getting an extra attack from it'?

I ruled the former, since there are absolutely no balance problems with it that I can see. It may be slightly more versatile but 2WF frankly needs all the help it can get.

More than that, I allow players to mix up their iterative attacks freely, as long as they don't make more than one attack at the same bonus with the same weapon. (So if you had 2WF and a BAB of +20, you'd make one attack with each weapon at +18 (counting the penalty) and can then distribute the rest of the attacks as you see fit.) But that's edging towards house rules.

J

 

[youspoonybard]

What about Sword and Board, then?

A Light or Heavy Shield is a weapon...

After discussing this with my players, I ruled that so long as you aren't getting any extra attacks, no penalties. It was the only way I could figure out how to do this.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

How utterly fascinating. I started out thinking I knew what was what, proved myself wrong, then discovered details I never Knew as regarding 2wF...

So, get this:

STANDARD ACTIONS
Attack
Making an attack is a standard action.
Melee Attacks: With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can’t strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet).

Multiple Attacks: A character who can make more than one attack per round must use the full attack action (see Full-Round Actions, below) in order to get more than one attack.


Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.

[snip] (movement 5’ comment) [/snip]

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.


Special Attacks:
Two-weapon fighting Fight with a weapon in each hand

TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING
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.

1) To make more than attack requires the Full Attack Action (full round).
1a) Even if armed with 2 weapons, to hit with the second requires the full attack action... huh.
2) To Wield a weapon in your off hand, is to 'fight with two weapons'.
2a) To 'fight this way', i.e. to 'fight with two weapons' means you 'can' get an extra attack, but regardless of the extra attack, you take penalties.

This answers a previous question someone had regarding holding a dagger in their off hand, but not attacking with it... Just the longsword in their primary. It doesn't matter - you still take the penalties.

I think it's a fairly clear implication that the phrase 'to fight this way' refers to 'fight with two weapons'. While I can see the arguement that it refers to taking that extra attack, I'd have to disagree. It doesn't say 'when taking this extra attack', it says 'fighting this way' and the full attack option references it as 2 weapon fighting.

However, like I said, I can see the counter-arguement, I just don't agree, believing that the rules are actually 'clear' - or at least as clear as they can get for 3/3.5 dnd

That said, given my intrepretation there, how would a fighter swing at +5 and at +6/+1? Because I've managed to utterly confuse myself regarding the nature, order, and penalties to the attacks. Assume no TWF profs, and show the calculations behind the numbers, please???

 

[Altamont Ravenard]

This answers a previous question someone had regarding holding a dagger in their off hand, but not attacking with it... Just the longsword in their primary. It doesn't matter - you still take the penalties.

Do you take penalties when carrying a torch? It could be used as a weapon.
Do you take penalties when wearing a spiked shield? It could be used as a weapon.

AR

 

[Hypersmurf]

This answers a previous question someone had regarding holding a dagger in their off hand, but not attacking with it... Just the longsword in their primary. It doesn't matter - you still take the penalties.

Ah, but is there a difference between wielding and holding a weapon?

If you're not using it as a weapon, are you in fact wielding it?

I'd rule no. If you use it to make an attack, or utilise a weapon Special Ability that affects "the wielder" (for example, Defending), you are "wielding" the weapon. If you don't, you're just holding it.

See the 3E Main FAQ for the ruling on using a Defending weapon in your off-hand. If you make use of the AC bonus, you incur TWF penalties (even if you don't attack with that weapon). But the implication is certainly that if you neither attack nor make use of the AC bonus, you don't... which suggests that the weapon in this case is not being "wielded".

-Hyp.

 

[Li Shenron]

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.

Any sane person would disagree with this.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

Ah, but is there a difference between wielding and holding a weapon?

If you're not using it as a weapon, are you in fact wielding it?

I'd rule no. If you use it to make an attack, or utilise a weapon Special Ability that affects "the wielder" (for example, Defending), you are "wielding" the weapon. If you don't, you're just holding it.

See the 3E Main FAQ for the ruling on using a Defending weapon in your off-hand. If you make use of the AC bonus, you incur TWF penalties (even if you don't attack with that weapon). But the implication is certainly that if you neither attack nor make use of the AC bonus, you don't... which suggests that the weapon in this case is not being "wielded".

-Hyp.

Now that makes sense... But your cited rule instance -also- implies that you incur twf penalties when wielding 2 weapons - regardless of whether or not you take your extra attack... Which is something rather new to my thinking

 

[Darklone]

As soon as you use the second weapon, you'll get the penalty. Simple matter of coordination. Same for me in case you try to use a Spiked gauntlet with a polearm.