Odd but legal?

[hong]

But as long as simultaneity is deprecated in both cases, what difference does that make? If one routine is temporally divorced from those preceding, how is it relevant whether the routine comprises a single 'strike' or several?

Because sometimes it's okay to have lost the weapon before making the second strike, and sometimes it's not.

I still see no alcohol here.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Because sometimes it's okay to have lost the weapon before making the second strike, and sometimes it's not.

Ahh.

-Hyp.

 

[hong]

And so did enlightenment brighten the benighted lives of those who live in the shadow of narrow interpretations of broad principles. (More specifically, it's okay to have lost the weapon before making the second strike in the situation where ITWF is combined with Rapid Strike, because that refers to the ranged attack paradigm; whereas no such reference is made when only melee attacks are involved.)

 

[Hypersmurf]

And so did enlightenment brighten the benighted lives of those who live in the shadow of narrow interpretations of broad principles.

It was more that it was the only answer I had to the "Just 'cos" argument.

(More specifically, it's okay to have lost the weapon before making the second strike in the situation where ITWF is combined with Rapid Strike, because that refers to the ranged attack paradigm; whereas no such reference is made when only melee attacks are involved.)

But you've already said you're fine with the mace example, wherein only melee attacks are involved...?

-Hyp.

 

[hong]

It was more that it was the only answer I had to the "Just 'cos" argument.

The just cos argument encapsulates a litany of reasons whose explication is left as an exercise for the reader.

But you've already said you're fine with the mace example, wherein only melee attacks are involved...?

Because I count a longsword, and a mace.

I still see no alcohol here.

 

[Veril]

Hypersmurf raises the question about IUWTF and throwing daggers.

ITWF says "In addition to the standard single extra attack you get with an off-hand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a -5 penalty. See the Two-Weapon Fighting special attack. "
this clearly extends TWF and so should be considered to be under the same restructions as it. i.e. the same weaon.

Daggers are a thrown weapon. So are nets, and spears. The rules that apply to daggers as a thrown weapon also apply to spears. Reread all the examples about but say spear or nets in place of daggers.

Looking at the rules:

With no feats, you can throw a weapon from your primary hand and one from your secondary hand, with the apropriate penalties as a full round action. Your base atk bonus is irrelevant. that's it. The only way to throw weapons faster than that, involves drawing them, and therefore you must have the quickkdraw feat. which states:

"A character who has selected this feat may throw weapons at his full normal rate of attacks (much like a character with a bow)."

It's clear from this when you read it, that the rate of attacks you get is as if you were using a bow.

It is the quickdraw feat that lets you do this, not ITWF. I would think it is permissable to throw a weapon from your off hand as well. But no more than that.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It is the quickdraw feat that lets you do this, not ITWF.

So let's say I have ITWF and a Glove of Storing containing a dagger - but not Quickdraw. I begin the round with shortsword and throwing axe.

I make my two iterative attacks with my shortsword against an adjacent opponent; I throw my axe as an off-hand attack, produce my dagger from the Glove of Storing as a free action, and... can or cannot throw it as a second off-hand attack?

-Hyp.

 

[Veril]

I don't think you can throw the 2nd item. To throw it you would have to be using ITWF and the item produced from the glove is not a valid target for yout TWF as it did not start in your hand. ITWF builds on TWO and I believe is under all the same restrictions.

Consider what if you produced a spear from the glove instead of a dagger - which is not a light weapon and thus would produce a different penalty on your previous attacks.

 

[James McMurray]

So let's say I have ITWF and a Glove of Storing containing a dagger - but not Quickdraw. I begin the round with shortsword and throwing axe.

I make my two iterative attacks with my shortsword against an adjacent opponent; I throw my axe as an off-hand attack, produce my dagger from the Glove of Storing as a free action, and... can or cannot throw it as a second off-hand attack?

-Hyp.

I'd allow it. In the terms used in this discussion, it "doesn't violate the paradigm." In my own terminology, it "makes sense to me."

 

[Kmart Kommando]

I had a monk character that started a flurry of blows, hit an adjacent opponent with my first 2 attacks, killing him, then drew a shuriken and threw it at another opponent at range for my third attack.

On the other hand, literally, manipulating an object is generally a move action, so unless you're a psionic class with Hustle, getting a move action in the middle of a full attack isn't easy.

Switching which hand is holding a weapon isn't Quickdrawing a weapon. Even more so after swinging said weapon in an attempt to strike someone with it.

Quickdraw lets you draw and throw a number of weapons equal to the number of attacks your BAB indicates. TWF and the rest of that chain lets you do the same with your offhand, but only because you also have Quickdraw. No Quickdraw, you're stuck throwing darts and shuriken.

You can start a turn with handaxe A and handaxe B, and take 2 melee hits on target C with handaxe A, throw handaxe A at target D, take 2 melee attacks on target E, and throw handaxe B at target D, provided you (1)have enough attacks allocated to you, (2)take all of the penalties associated with each situation that granted those attacks, (4)make all allocated attacks with the corresponding weapons, and (5)make all of your attacks in order, from highest bonus to lowest bonus.

From the Latest FAQ:

Can a character with Quick Draw and a base attack
bonus of +6 or better make a melee attack with one weapon
and a ranged attack with another weapon in the same
round? What if the melee weapon requires two hands to
wield?
Yes. There’s nothing inherent in the full attack action that
requires all the attacks to be made as the same kind of attack or
with the same kind of weapon.
A character with a base attack bonus of +6 or better holding
a longsword, for example, could make a melee attack with the
longsword (using his full base attack bonus), drop the
longsword (a free action), use Quick Draw to draw a dagger
(another free action), then throw the dagger (using his base
attack bonus –5). If the character had both hands free (for
instance, if he didn’t carry a light or heavy shield in his off
hand), he could even use Quick Draw to draw a bow (free
action), draw and nock an arrow (free action) and then shoot
the bow (using his base attack bonus –5).
This situation is actually improved if the melee weapon is a
two-handed weapon. A character can hold a two-handed
weapon in one hand; he just can’t attack with it while it’s held
like that. Thus, he wouldn’t even have to drop the weapon in
order to draw and throw the dagger. If Krusk the 6th-level
barbarian had Quick Draw, he could swing his greataxe (using
his full base attack bonus), then leave the axe in his off-hand
while drawing a javelin with his primary hand (free action), and
finally throw the javelin (using his base attack bonus –5). If
Krusk were drawing a ranged weapon that required two hands
to use (such as a bow), he’d have to drop his greataxe.

Note the part about having to drop the longsword for drawing a dagger to throw (as to not incur TWF penalties). When you're doing something that voluntarily affects your attack bonus, you need to declare it before you make an attack, otherwise, you're playing rock, paper, scissors, and switching when you see what the other guy's doing.