(Not) Fighting with Two Weapons

[InVinoVeritas]

Let's say you have a weapon in either hand. Are there penalties associated with attacking with one weapon only in a round as a standard action?

How about if you attack with one weapon on your round, but use the other weapon for Attacks of Opportunity?

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

As long as you're just attacking with the one weapon- IOW, not taking the benefits of attacking with both of the 2 weapons you have in hand- you don't take the penalties, either.

The second example is a little grey: you haven't really gained the benefits of fighting with 2 weapons style, but you have attacked with 2 weapons.

Personally, I'd allow it to happen without penalty- the AoO ruies don't specify which weapon you must use to take an AoO, so attacking with your primary or off-hand shouldn't matter. If you hadn't attacked that round at all until the AoO was triggered, that you took your AoO with your off-hand weapon should have no effect on whether you're considered to be fighting 2WS, so I don't see that it should otherwise.

 

[PolterGhost]

When it comes to Two Weapon Fighting, most examples that are brought up state that using just one weapon when it comes to your attacks makes it your primary weapon. Since you're not benefiting from (or in some scenarios, being penalized from) attacking with two weapons in one attack, I would certainly allow it.

I think Skip wrote an article about this, actually. As it stands, you're attacking with only one weapon for the AoO, so I assume it to be your primary weapon at full bonus.

 

[Vegepygmy]

No and no, but note that just holding a weapon in your off-hand (or using it for AoOs) doesn't count as "using" it for purposes such as a defending weapon.

 

[Andion Isurand]

That's what I don't get as far as defending weapons (and combat expertise) go... I mean, as long as you are weilding/using the weapon as a means of defending yourself, shouldn't it still be used to actively defend you even if it itsn't used to make an attack roll?

Edit: moreso using a standard action to represent an active defense for that round, but not making an attack roll during it

 

[radmod]

Perhaps one way to think about your second question is this:
Some guys jumps out at you going "boogity-boogity". You hit him with your sword. As he dances around you giving you an AoO you realize he's annoying harmless fool, so you punch him in the face as your AoO. Do you think you should take a penalty?

 

[radmod]

That's what I don't get as far as defending weapons (and combat expertise)go... I mean, as long as you are weilding/using the weapon as a means of defending yourself, shouldn't it still be used to actively defend you even if it itsn't used to make an attack roll?

While I'm pretty sure it's not in the rules as you've described, talk to your DM about it. Some will buy the argument and give you a +1 to AC as a light shield. (Several I know do that and for qstaves as well)

 

[Andion Isurand]

I mean moreso using a standard action to represent performing an active defense for the round using Combat Expertise or a Defending Weapon...

but then not making make the attack roll...

either because you are simply holding back and don't want take a hostile action... or there are no enemies in melee reach and you are getting attacked form afar.

 

[Jhaelen]

I mean moreso using a standard action to represent performing an active defense for the round using Combat Expertise or a Defending Weapon...

but then not making make the attack roll...

either because you are simply holding back and don't want take a hostile action... or there are no enemies in melee reach and you are getting attacked form afar.

Ah, no, that's what the total defense action is for, imho.

 

[Andion Isurand]

I just feel a disconnect between

making an attack roll with penalty = gain the benefits

and

defending yourself using the same amount of action economy + not making an attack roll at all = not gaining the benefits