Natural Weapons and Reach Weapons

[glass]

The problem is that you can also make an extra attack with a double weapon, or by using your shield as an off hand weapon. But you do not take two weapon fighting penalties unless you choose to take that extra attack, not merely for being equipped to do so.

No problem.

You can decide (or not) to wield your double weapon as two weapons. If you decide to do so, you take TWF penalties.

You can decide (or not) to wield your weapon and shield as two weapons. If you decide to do so, you take TWF penalties.

Your argument begs the question: you were assuming your own conclusion. My position is that you take TWF penalties for fighting with two weapons (or anything that is treated as two weapons). This allows you to take an extra attack, it is not contingent on it.

How do you rule the TWD feat? Does it apply when simply holding two weapons? What about when holding a double weapon?


glass.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

Your argument begs the question: you were assuming your own conclusion.

while I admire your ability to actually use "begs the question" corectly, no, not any more than you are.

How do you rule the TWD feat? Does it apply when simply holding two weapons? What about when holding a double weapon?

I rule that a feat with heavy prereqs is more than sufficient to get a +1 to AC, without charging -2 to attacks on even stardard action single attacks. The feat essentially turns your offhand weapon into a very pointy and wimpy shield for which you have the improved shield bash feat.

But then, I don't subscribe to the idea that one is ever "simply holding" two weapons in the way you have proposed here. I simply rule that you have two weapons, both or neither of which you may choose to attack with in any given round depending on your needs, but if you choose to take an extra attack with one, you are penalized -2 on all your attack rolls for that round. If you do not have the twf feat, you take penalties with the off hand weapon and are charged even greater penalties for taking the extra attack.

I understand that you are choosing to see it differently, and I will not be accusing you of logical falacies for disagreeing with me, but I think it is nerfing an already unpowered fighting style to no purpose I understand.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I understand that you are choosing to see it differently, and I will not be accusing you of logical falacies for disagreeing with me, but I think it is nerfing an already unpowered fighting style to no purpose I understand.

I disagree with the use of the word 'nerf' in this context. To nerf is to change the rules in such a way as to have a negative effect.

We're not proposing any change to the rules; we're proposing that the rules were this way all along...

-Hyp.

 

[Deset Gled]

But then, I don't subscribe to the idea that one is ever "simply holding" two weapons in the way you have proposed here.

How do you deal with Defending weapons? Do I get an AC bonus from a defending dagger just by holding it in my off hand? Do I need to make an attack with the dagger to get the bonus? Do I need to take TWF penalties to get the bonus? For bonus cheese, make the weapon in questions a set of defending armor spikes.

Note that the 3.0 FAQ answer to this question is the first place (I know of) that the difference between simply holding a weapon and wielding a weapon is called out by WotC.

 

[mvincent]

I disagree with the use of the word 'nerf' in this context. To nerf is to change the rules in such a way as to have a negative effect.

We're not proposing any change to the rules; we're proposing that the rules were this way all along

This is semantic (of course) but I don't believe the use of the term "nerf" makes a statement on 'changing' the rules here. Since the matter is subject to interpretation, by choosing a less powerful interpretation of TWF'ing, you are effectively making the style less powerful than it need be (i.e. 'nerfing' it).

 

[mvincent]

Note that the 3.0 FAQ answer to this question is the first place (I know of) that the difference between simply holding a weapon and wielding a weapon is called out by WotC.

The 3.0 FAQ said:
"Using a weapon of defending works just like the Expertise
feat. (You have to use an attack or full attack action.) You can’t
use the weapon like a shield; if you hold the weapon in your off
hand and claim an Armor Class bonus for it, you take all the
penalties for fighting with two weapons, even if you don’t
actually attack with the weapon."

However, the same author later wrote this in the (3.5) Rules of the Game:
"If, after you made two-weapon attacks with your sword and torch, a foe later provokes an attack of opportunity from you that same round, you can strike that foe with your longsword with no two-weapon penalty at all."

 

[Kahuna Burger]

How do you deal with Defending weapons? Do I get an AC bonus from a defending dagger just by holding it in my off hand? Do I need to make an attack with the dagger to get the bonus? Do I need to take TWF penalties to get the bonus? For bonus cheese, make the weapon in questions a set of defending armor spikes.

Well, you aren't in my game, so obviously neither. Its hard to judge tone over a messageboard, obviously, but you seem to be expecting me to justify my ruling in any and all situations, which I'm not going to be spending my time on. For this specific question, yes, I would grant the defending bonus for weilding the dagger in your off hand without attacking, just as I would give it to someone who held it in their main hand and didn't attack at all. The increased cost of a weapon enhancement over a shield one and the extra +1 cost of defending itself make the flexibility afforded by this fully paid for, imo. I don't see the question as having much to do with twf, just whether you can allocate the bonus defensively and not attack, which I don't see a reason not to.

I've never actually dealt with armor spikes in game, and I'm not going to look them up and decide for a hypothetical. I'll be skipping any other "then how do you handle" type questions, so no one take it personally. I handle things that come up in game by reading the rules and making a judgement.