Odd but legal?

[Veril]

What definition of 'drawing' includes shifting an item from one hand to another?

It is your intention to attack with it. It was not in a state where you could attack, to being in a state where you can attack with it. The action the causes an object to move from one of those states to the other is defined in RAW as drawing a weapon and is a move action. let me quote it from RAW "Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat"

a two handed weapon (a staff) being held in one hand only may not be used in combat.
a two handed weapon held in both hands may be used in combat.
It mas moved between those states. There is a defined action for this. you used the defined action.
The rules do not state where you draw the weapon from

If I'm carrying a longsword and a torch, and I drop the torch as a free action, can I make a full attack with the longsword wielded in two hands (for 1.5x Str bonus to damage and 2-for-1 Power Attack)? Or do I need to spend a move action to change from wielding with one hand to wielding with two hands first?
-Hyp.

You have changed the state of the weapon.
Was the weapon initially wielded in 2 hands doing 1.5* str damage? No.
So it moved into that state.
It's a move action as defined by the rules under draw a weapon.


My general look on this keeps the rules simple, consistant and avoids all the silly rules lawyering. It looks at "what you are doing" not "how you are doing it". I believe that fits best with the D&D rules abstraction (your attack roll with a melee weapon is the result of several swings not a single swing).

 

[Veril]

There is, of course, another avenue of argument for making primary and off-hand attacks with the same weapon. Let's say I have the TWF but not the ITWF feat, and a BAB of +6. I have a scimitar in my right hand, and a whip in my left. Can I take a full attack action to make two iterative attacks with the whip?

-Hyp.

Yes.

Although you could have 3 not 2 attacks. One at BAB 6 (normal iterative), one at bab 1 (normal iterative), and one at bab 6 (TWF)

You obviously take the penalties for fighting with the off hand weapon on all of the attack rolls made with that weapon (-2 in this instancefor light+twf), even if no attacks are made with the weapon in your primary hand. And obviously you only get str*.5 on the offhanded weapon attacks.

 

[hong]

My general look on this keeps the rules simple, consistant and avoids all the silly rules lawyering.

In HyperWorld, rules lawyer you.

 

[cwhs01]

And I still see no alcohol here.

hmm. I must admit that i skimmed through most of the last 100 posts, so could someone explain how alcohol affects twf skills? Does it allow for the switcheroo trick?

Or did i miss some subtle insinuations as to the relevance of the discussion? If the last is correct, then why the heck has the thread continued for so long... Lets just skip the rest and get back to the innuendo and double entendres of the first couple posts.

 

[hong]

hmm. I must admit that i skimmed through most of the last 100 posts, so could someone explain how alcohol affects twf skills? Does it allow for the switcheroo trick?

The abstraction underlying the ruleset is immune to being given the runaround, except if alcohol is provided. So far, no alcohol has been provided.

 

[cwhs01]

The abstraction underlying the ruleset is immune to being given the runaround, except if alcohol is provided. So far, no alcohol has been provided.

Fair enough... Then i say back to the innuendoing people.

 

[James McMurray]

We're in HyperWorld now, the land of spherical cows.

Are they orbital?

 

[werk]

The abstraction underlying the ruleset is immune to being given the runaround, except if alcohol is provided. So far, no alcohol has been provided.

Thanks for that, I had no idea to what you were referring.

:cheers:

 

[Hypersmurf]

It is your intention to attack with it. It was not in a state where you could attack, to being in a state where you can attack with it. The action the causes an object to move from one of those states to the other is defined in RAW as drawing a weapon and is a move action. let me quote it from RAW "Drawing a weapon so that you can use it in combat"

a two handed weapon (a staff) being held in one hand only may not be used in combat.
a two handed weapon held in both hands may be used in combat.
It mas moved between those states. There is a defined action for this. you used the defined action.
The rules do not state where you draw the weapon from

If the sword is on the floor, do I use the 'Pick up an item' action, or the 'Draw a weapon' action?

If I use the 'Pick up an item' action, do I then need to take the 'Draw a weapon' action in addition so I can use it in combat?

You have changed the state of the weapon.
Was the weapon initially wielded in 2 hands doing 1.5* str damage? No.
So it moved into that state.
It's a move action as defined by the rules under draw a weapon.

And if I wish to take a hand off a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, the same? It's going from a state wielded in two hands dealing 1.5x damage, and moving to a state wielded in one hand dealing 1x damage.

If it's a two-handed weapon, going from a state wielded in two hands dealing 1.5x damage, and moving to a state held (but unwieldable) in one hand?

Although you could have 3 not 2 attacks. One at BAB 6 (normal iterative), one at bab 1 (normal iterative), and one at bab 6 (TWF)

You obviously take the penalties for fighting with the off hand weapon on all of the attack rolls made with that weapon (-2 in this instancefor light+twf), even if no attacks are made with the weapon in your primary hand. And obviously you only get str*.5 on the offhanded weapon attacks.

So your objection is not to do with making both normal and extra off-hand attacks with the same weapon, just with the mechanics of shifting hands?

-Hyp.

 

[James McMurray]

If the sword is on the floor, do I use the 'Pick up an item' action, or the 'Draw a weapon' action?

Which one do you feel best describes the action you're taking?