Help with interpretation on some rules.

[Runestar]

So an OA made from a main-hand attack which was in turn derived from an off-hand OA is still considered as being from the off-hand, and not a main-hand attack?

My head is spinning, but it is a good kind of spin.

 

[Hypersmurf]

So an OA made from a main-hand attack which was in turn derived from an off-hand OA is still considered as being from the off-hand, and not a main-hand attack?

If it's not an OA with your off-hand weapon, then TWFl didn't let you do it in the first place.

-Hyp.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If Hyp is correct, it's a moot point.

I'm not even convinced (hence the conditional at the start of my post) that Twin Strike is a valid power to use for the TWFl OA.

Heavy Blade Opportunity says "When you make an OA with a Heavy Blade". If you use Twin Strike as your power, you're making an OA with two weapons. Let's say they're both longswords; it's an OA with two Heavy Blades, not an OA with a Heavy Blade.

TWFl lets you make an OA with your off-hand weapon, so the implication is that the power-with-the-Weapon-keyword HBO lets you choose needs your off-hand weapon to be what's filling the Weapon keyword requirement... and again, Twin Strike isn't using your off-hand weapon, it's using two weapons.

So personally, my ruling would be that Twin Strike is an invalid power for use with the HBO/TWFl combination, and you must use a power where your off-hand weapon is what's satisfying the Weapon keyword.

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm not even convinced (hence the conditional at the start of my post) that Twin Strike is a valid power to use for the TWFl OA.

Heavy Blade Opportunity says "When you make an OA with a Heavy Blade". If you use Twin Strike as your power, you're making an OA with two weapons. Let's say they're both longswords; it's an OA with two Heavy Blades, not an OA with a Heavy Blade.

It doesn't matter that one is using Twin Strikes. One of the attacks within Twin Strikes is still an OA with a Heavy Blade and because of that, feats trigger.


I think it is legal.

1) OA occurs.

2) Take first OA with main weapon and hit.

3) Two-Weapon Flurry kicks in: "While holding a melee weapon in each hand (check), if you make a successful opportunity attack with your primary weapon (check), you can also make an opportunity attack with your off-hand weapon (check) against that same target (at -5)"

4) Off hand attack is OA and at -5, so Heavy Blade Opportunity can be used: "When you make an opportunity attack with a heavy blade (check, it doesn't matter that it is the off hand, it is still an OA with a heavy blade), you can use an at-will attack that has the weapon keyword instead of a basic attack." Twin Weapon is selected.

5) HBO replaces a basic attack with a Twin Weapon attack, but it is still a OA. The fact that a basic attack gets replaced with an At-Will attack does not change the fact that it is still an OA and it is still at -5.

6) The first OA attack of Twin Weapon at -5 hits. Go to #3 and start cycle for it, but these attacks are still OAs, but at -10 now.

7) The second OA attack of Twin Weapon at -5 hits (or does not hit). This is an off-hand attack, so #3 does not apply. Note: can go to #4 here instead of swinging.


Or, the order can be changed. Instead of step #2, HBO can be used immediately to replace the OA with a Twin Strike OA, but that would do less damage on the first attack, but a better to hit on the first off hand attack.


I think it is legal. I think it is fine for level 21 and 3 feats. And, it is eventually self defeating.

The version I have here is different than what the OP posted and is a bit unusual in that the #7 attack is an extra attack each time (as opposed to using #7 with HBO, it replaces #6 with #3).


I'm not quite seeing your claims that the OAs are not OAs. Nothing in the feats indicate that the attacks are not still OAs. You have nothing explicit in your interpretation that illustrates that the property of OA is removed. #5 is the key here.


I do not see where this is illegal or where this is unbalanced. Sooner or later, the PC will miss with the primary hand because of the stacking penalties. #7 can be used to extend this a bit by replacing it with HBO, but even then, it will still eventually fail. Also, normal basic attacks will be replaced with Twin Strike attacks (i.e. no Str damage).

In fact, the PC will be lucky to get 5 attacks in, typically 7 at the very most. He could miss with attack #2.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I'm not quite seeing your claims that the OAs are not OAs. Nothing in the feats indicate that the attacks are not still OAs. You have nothing explicit in your interpretation that illustrates that the property of OA is removed. #5 is the key here.

I'm not saying "the property of OA is removed".

I'm saying Twin Strike doesn't grant two OAs, it grants two attacks.

Twin Strike in this circumstance is an OA, but it grants two attacks which are not in and of themselves OAs; they are part of the Twin Strike OA.

And the Twin Strike OA, since it was granted by Two-Weapon Flurry, is explicitly an [OA with your off-hand weapon].

So if the attack with your primary weapon hits, is it an [OA with your primary weapon]? No, there is no OA with your primary weapon. To find the OA, we have to go one step up the chain, to Twin Strike itself.

So while the attack with your primary weapon is not by itself an OA, it is part of an OA, and so a hit with your primary weapon is a hit with an OA. But the OA that it is a hit with is Twin Strike, and Twin Strike is an [OA with your off-hand weapon]... so a hit with your primary weapon is, in this case, a hit with an [OA with your off-hand weapon]. Not a hit with an [OA with your primary weapon].

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

I'm not saying "the property of OA is removed".

I'm saying Twin Strike doesn't grant two OAs, it grants two attacks.

But no matter how you slice it, you are removing OA from those two attacks where the rules do not explicitly indicate that you should.

"you can use an at-will attack that has the weapon keyword instead of a basic attack"

The fact that one is using an at-will attack does not mean that the at-will attack is not an OA. Specific overrides General, but nothing in the specific indicates that the attacks are suddenly no longer OA attacks.

You are adding that criteria out of the blue and stating that the two attacks are not OA attacks.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The fact that one is using an at-will attack does not mean that the at-will attack is not an OA.

The at-will attack is an OA... specifically, an OA with your off-hand weapon. But the at-will attack is Twin Strike. The attack with your primary weapon and the attack with your off-hand weapon are things Twin Strike lets you do.

Twin Strike is the OA with your off-hand weapon. The attack with your primary weapon is part of Twin Strike; thus, the attack with your primary weapon is part of the [OA with your off-hand weapon]. The attack with your off-hand weapon is part of Twin Strike; thus, the attack with your off-hand weapon is part of the [OA with your off-hand weapon].

Specific overrides General, but nothing in the specific indicates that the attacks are suddenly no longer OA attacks.

Let's say we have a Fighter with Heavy Blade Opportunity and Tide of Iron.

Someone provokes an OA, and he replaces the basic attack with Tide of Iron. He deals damage and pushes the opponent.

Is the push an OA? No, Tide of Iron is the OA. The push is something that resulted from the OA.

Twin Strike is the OA, in our example, and more specifically it is an OA with your off-hand weapon. The attack with your primary weapon is something that results from your OA with your off-hand weapon. Twin Strike doesn't grant an OA, it grants an attack; in this case Twin Strike is an OA. That doesn't make the attack it grants an OA.

Let's say we have a Rogue with the Heavy Blade Opportunity feat, a rapier in one hand, and a hand crossbow in the other. An OA is provoked. He is making an OA with his rapier - a heavy blade - and the feat lets him replace the basic attack with an at-will attack with the Weapon keyword. Deft Strike is an at-will attack with the Weapon keyword, and he is wielding a crossbow, light blade, or sling; can he then replace the basic attack with Deft Strike, and back up two squares and shoot the provoker with his crossbow? Or does the "making an OA with a Heavy Blade" still restrict the at-will attack with the Weapon keyword to being made with the Heavy Blade that triggered the HBO feat in the first place?

-Hyp.

 

[KarinsDad]

The attack with your primary weapon and the attack with your off-hand weapon are things Twin Strike lets you do.

Specifically, these "things" you mention are listed as Attacks within the Twin Strike description.

Let's say we have a Fighter with Heavy Blade Opportunity and Tide of Iron.

Someone provokes an OA, and he replaces the basic attack with Tide of Iron. He deals damage and pushes the opponent.

Is the push an OA? No, Tide of Iron is the OA. The push is something that resulted from the OA.

Is the attack within Tide of Iron an OA?

Is the attack within a Basic Attack an OA?

So far, this "things" concept of yours does not change the fact that the Attack within an At-Will Attack (or within a basic attack) is still an OA attack. Dice are rolled. Result is determined. Powers that affect AC for OAs are still taken into account, etc. The Push within an At-Will Attack is not an Attack, it's an additional effect (as per "some other effect" page 276, not Effect with a capital E).

You are claiming that the Attack within the power description is not really an Attack. It's a "thing" that the Attack Power allows the PC to do.

You are attempting to add new meaning to the term Attack where the rules do not explicitly call that meaning out.

The rules have no explicit differentiation between Opportunity Attack and the Attack used by Opportunity Attack. You are adding one where none exists.

Unless you have some rule that backs this interpretation up. I really think that most people would not get this from the rules (at all).

Or does the "making an OA with a Heavy Blade" still restrict the at-will attack with the Weapon keyword to being made with the Heavy Blade that triggered the HBO feat in the first place?

Does it state that it restricts it? No. So, I guess it does not. That would be an inference on your part to assume so.

It's a reasonable restriction by the DM, but it is not a restriction via RAW. It might be via RAI. But, you are arguing that this is not allowed which is a RAW argument.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Is the attack within Tide of Iron an OA?

It's made as part of an OA.

Is the attack within a Basic Attack an OA?

It's made as part of an OA.

So far, this "things" concept of yours does not change the fact that the Attack within an At-Will Attack (or within a basic attack) is still an OA attack.

It's part of an OA. But if it's the OA granted by Two Weapon Flurry, it's an OA with the off-hand weapon.

You are claiming that the Attack within the power description is not really an Attack. It's a "thing" that the Attack Power allows the PC to do.

It's certainly an attack. And it's an attack that you're making as part of a power that is an OA.

Does it state that it restricts it? No. So, I guess it does not. That would be an inference on your part to assume so.

It lets you replace a basic attack with an at-will power when you're making an OA with a heavy blade. If you change it for a power that is using something other than a heavy blade, you're no longer making an OA with a heavy blade, and thus there's nothing allowing you to replace the basic attack with an at-will power.

Two-Weapon Flurry lets you make an OA, with the restriction that it is with your off-hand weapon.

Heavy Blade Opportunity lets you replace the basic attack of an OA with an at-will power, as long as you are making the OA with a heavy blade.

The combination of the two means that you can replace a basic attack with an at-will power, with the restriction that you must be making the OA with your off-hand weapon, which is a heavy blade.

If your at-will power uses a weapon which is not a heavy blade, it's violating the restrictions on the OA whose basic attack you're replacing. If your at-will power uses a weapon which is not your off-hand weapon, it's violating the restrictions on the OA whose basic attack you're replacing.

-Hyp.

 

[DracoSuave]

Holy crap, Hyp, you dropped a logic bomb on this parade. YOU BLEW IT ALL UP! YOU MANIAC!


And I completely agree.

More importantly, I think it goes like this.

Twin Weapon Flurry lets you make an OA with your off-hand weapon. Okay.
Heavy Blade Opportunity lets you make an at-will power attack with said weapon. Okay.
Then Twin Strike lets you make an attack with your main weapon and....

HOLD IT!

Where, in any of this, were you permitted to make any sort of Opportunity Action involving your main weapon? No where. At no point has an exception popped up stating your main weapon can be used to make an OA, at all.

The Weapon keyword requires an accessory to function. Heavy Blade Opportunity says that you can replace an Opportunity Attack with a power with the weapon keyword, using the heavy blade as an accessory. I mean, after all, if you had, say, a battleaxe in one hand, and a longsword in the other, could you use Heavy Blade Opportunity to make an at-will with the battleaxe?

OF COURSE NOT.

That's silly. Because the battleaxe isn't the right sort of weapon to be used with the feat, obviously.

Ergo, weapons can be restricted from using certain feats, even if you have the right weapon in your other hand.

Ergo, Twin Weapon Flurry does not explicitly permit you to use the main-weapon as accessory for any OAs. Ergo it does not, ergo no exception exists saying you can. Ergo Twin Strike cannot be used.