Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- Pocket Sized Adventures! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed for 1-2 game sessions.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ARandomGod" data-source="post: 1564318" data-attributes="member: 17296">Yes...BUT, there is still no handedness. That's simply the definition of what an off hand attack is.And off hand attacks are only in TWF.For actual handedness, I'd have to see where it states penalties for attacking just with this "weaker" hand.As it stands, as far as I can read. A character can pick up a sword with the right hand one day, fight with no penalty, then switch to the left hand the next day, and fight with no penalty.And so it follows that you can switch with each encounter...or even each hit.And where are the rules for what happens if you get you're non- off hand chopped off?At the moment, as far as I can tell, there is no off hand with the exception of someone making an attack using two weapon fighting... whether with the feat or not. But, off hand does exist in that circumstance, hence the defintion.However, if you're not making an extra attack, I see no rule that makes one hand or the other an "off hand".Does this make sense, really? No. I fully admit that it's a result of poor wording. On the off hand, if you want to start citing things that do not make sense, you'll soon find that there are a LOT of them in this rules set.Now, aside from the fact that THIS rule states that if you want to make an extra, off hand attack you take these penalties, there are indeed other ways to make extra attacks in different ways (rapid attack, flurry, etc) which also have used the -2 precedent... BUT, I didn't find any other rules to support a precedent of an "off hand" existing anywhere other than during the TWF action.If you find where this is stated, or even a precedent to suggest such a thing, do please post. ^_^</blockquote>

Verification