Improved Unarmed Strike and 2H weapons

[Klaus]

Don't the penalties apply until your next turn? This is the case with PA, charge, TWF, etc... right?

 

[NilesB]

Interesting. This can work even with just Armor Spikes. By just taking a feat (Two Weapon Fighting), a character in armor spikes can take -2 to his attacks and threaten 24 squares!

20 squares,(21 counting his own) and he doesn't need to take a feat or penalty to do it.

You only take 2 weapon penalties when you use them to take more attacks than you otherwise could on your turn. a sixth level fighter could slash a zombie with his sword and shield bash a skeleton with the iterative attack or a cleave and suffer no penalties except losing his shield bonus to AC.

 

[Artoomis]

Don't the penalties apply until your next turn? This is the case with PA, charge, TWF, etc... right?

Correct.

 

[NilesB]

Don't the penalties apply until your next turn? This is the case with PA, charge, TWF, etc... right?

Power Attack: Yes
Combat Expertise: Yes
In both of the above cases the benefits also last until your next turn.
Charge: Yes
In this case the penalty would be almost meaningless unless it lasted until your next turn.
Two weapon fighting: No

 

[Artoomis]

...
Charge: Yes
In this case the penalty would be almost meaningless unless it lasted until your next turn.

-2 to AC is signifcant and stays until your next turn.

Two weapon fighting: No

Huh? On what basis is it "No?"

 

[NilesB]

-2 to AC is signifcant and stays until your next turn.

But if it ended when your action did it would be almost meaningless. As I said.

Huh? On what basis is it "No?"

Power Attack [General]
Prerequisite

Str 13.
Benefit

On your action, before making attack rolls for a round, you may choose to subtract a number from all melee attack rolls and add the same number to all melee damage rolls. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The penalty on attacks and bonus on damage apply until your next turn.

Combat Expertise [General]
Prerequisite

Int 13.
Benefit

When you use the attack action or the full attack action in melee, you can take a penalty of as much as -5 on your attack roll and add the same number (+5 or less) as a dodge bonus to your Armor Class. This number may not exceed your base attack bonus. The changes to attack rolls and Armor Class last until your next action.

Attacking on a Charge

After moving, you may make a single melee attack. You get a +2 bonus on the attack roll and take a -2 penalty to your AC until the start of your next turn.

No similar clause exists for two weapon fighting.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No - I'd say he threatens only with whatever he is actually wielding. Having it just in your hand (with no intent to use it) is not threatening. Changing weapons to strike with something that did not threaten is just... wrong.

Do you mean, wielding last? So, if I don't have IUS/natural weapons and on my turn I attack with a longsword (SA), drop it (FE), then draw a dagger (MA), I can't make any attacks of opportunity?

Huh? On what basis is it "No?"

On the basis that after your full attack action, you're not "fighting this way."

 

[IcyCool]

Do you mean, wielding last? So, if I don't have IUS/natural weapons and on my turn I attack with a longsword (SA), drop it (FE), then draw a dagger (MA), I can't make any attacks of opportunity?

Did you make an off-hand attack with the dagger?

 

[Artoomis]

Clarification on how I see this:

1. You can make an AoO with any weapon with which you threaten.

2. You threaten by simply wielding a weapon - whether you've used it or not (though simply having it in your hand is not the same as "wielding.").

3. For two weapons, you get to threaten with whatever you "wielded" during you turn. If you "wielded" both weapons, you can use either for you AoO, with appropriate penalties, of course.

I am not really certain about how this works if you have two weapons and decide to use them both (on-hand and off-0hand), but take no extra attacks. I'm still thinking about that.

 

[Felix]

No - I'd say he threatens only with whatever he is actually wielding.

So, a longsword and a shield with spikes.

Only holding the longsword: he threatens with the longsword, and may take AoO's with it.
Only holding the shield: he threatens with the shield, and may take AoO's with it.

Option 1
Holding both: he threatens with the sword and the shield, and may take AoO's with either.

Option 2
Holding both: the threatens with only the sword, and may only take AoO's with the sword.

So you propose that because he is holding a sword, the character may not use his shield?

Having it just in your hand (with no intent to use it) is not threatening.

What criteria constitutes threatening? You must be holding it in your hand, check. What else?

3. For two weapons, you get to threaten with whatever you "wielded" during you turn.

So by wield, you mean, "make an attack with"?

So if wield, then threaten?
--> if make an attack with, then threaten

I understand the relationship to be reversed; threatening a square (and the ranged equivalent) is a prereq to being able to attack, and not vice-versa.

-----

Re: PC with Longspear and IUS

He is wielding two weapons: the longspear and his forehead. The longspear has a 10' reach, his forehead a 5' reach. During his turn, he may attack with either weapon as he threatens with both of them, but if he decides to use both of them in a full-attack action and benefits from an extra attack, he suffers TWF penalties.

When it is not his turn, he threatens with both weapons - there is no mechanic that states that weapons stop threatening simply because of the existance of other weapons. If an AoO is incurred 10' away, he make take that AoO with his longspear. If, during the same round, an AoO is incurred 5' away, and the PC may still take advantage of it, he may attack with his forehead. He does not incur the TWF penalties because he is not gaining an extra attack per round with that weapon; the opportunity to attack was provided by the AoO, not the ability to fight with two weapons.

-----

Re: PC holding two weapons

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.

A: Weapon in second hand.
B: One extra attack per round with that weapon.
C: Suffer penalties when you fight this way.

It is perfectly reasonable to reduce these sentences to:

If A, then B.
If A and B, then C.

Meaning that it is possible to wield a second weapon in your off hand, but by not taking an extra attack you do not suffer TWF penalties.

Example
A character with Quickdraw, a Bow and Arrow, and wielding a longsword has a BAB of +6. He attacks a goblin and kills it with the longsword. He drops the longsword [free action] and draws his bow [free action]. He then attacks at range another goblin.

This works within the rules, and it establishes that a PC may use multiple different weapons to attack using the iterative attacks gained from BAB.

Example
A +6 BAB character with Quickdraw, Power Attack, a Longsword (in hand) and a mace (not in hand) attacks a black pudding. He strikes with the longsword, Power Attacking for 2 and it dissolves. He quickdraws [free action] his mace with his other hand and attacks the black pudding. The mace is penalized -2 from Power Attack, but the damage is likewise increased by 2.

There is no handedness in 3.5, so a fighter may attack with either his right or left hand with equal effect as long as neither of them is considered his off-hand. Two-weapon fighting, however, makes it clear that holding two weapons makes it necessary for one of them to be the off-hand weapon.

Example
A +6 BAB charcter with both a longsword and a mace in his hands attacks a Black Pudding with the longsword (at +6 BAB), and the weapon does not dissolve. He decides he'd rather do bludgeoning damage and he attacks with his mace for the +1 BAB attack. Because he is holding two weapons, he must have chosen which of them was the off-hand weapon. That weapon, and not necessiarly the one he attacks with second, suffers the no-Power Attack, .5 STR damage, etc, penalties.

But because he does not benefit from an extra attack during the round, he does not suffer Two-Weapon Fighting penalties. (The rule was "If A and B, then C", and in this case we have "A, but not B", therefore not necessarily C.)

-----

Those three examples lead me to believe that the Longspear-and-forehead PC must choose which of those weapons is considered his "off-hand" weapon, which will affect the effects of feats and damage, but it will not affect his ability to threaten with both weapons, nor his ability to take AoO's with either weapon, nor his ability to use either weapon for any particular BAB attack (enemies in threatened squares permitting), nor will it incur TWF penalties unless he also gains an extra attack with the off-hand weapon.