So what would the penalties be??

[reveal]

Let's say that a character had the ability to use a Hand Crossbow proficiently. The character has a Hand Crossbow in one hand and a Longsword in the other.

In combat, the character fires at an enemy then moves up to the enemy. In the next round, the character slashes at the enemy with his Longsword and that's it.

The character does not have the Two Weapon Fighting feat.

So what penalties, if any, would the character incur, considering he's not, technically, attacking with both weapons in the same round?

To further this, what if the character had a torch in one hand, instead of the Longsword. If they incur a penalty in scenario 1, would they incur one in scenario 2?

 

[jerichothebard]

None. Nowhere in the game or character creation process is "handed-ness" defined for a character. Therefore, as long as you are not making use of two weapons at one time, and you are proficient in all the weapons you are using, you suffer no penalties. At least, that is how I rule it in my game.


jtb

 

[billd91]

Actually, if you take a look at the PHB glossary, there is an entry for "off hand". It's incorporated into the rules for 2 weapon fighting without any explicit mention, but it's still there if you choose to use it.
I would consider doing so unless he takes a draw weapon action as part of his move action (something he can do as long as he has a BAB of +1 or better) to transfer the weapons he's holding into the opposite hands to make use of his strong hand for each attack.

 

[Henry]

Moved to rules forum.

 

[argo]

No penalty. Handidness is not an issue in DnD, even less so in 3.5 now that Ambidexterity is no longer a feat.

There are some people who will argue that if you fire the crossbow without taking the TWF penalties that you then may not use the sword at all that round (say to make an AoO). I do not agree with them. The way I read the rules the only time you incurr TWF penalties is when you get the extra off hand attack in a full attack sequence. I would even allow you to divide your itterative attacks between the sword and crossbow with no penalty so long as you don't get an extra attack.

 

[MerakSpielman]

I'd think he'd get to pick which weapon got a -4 penalty.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

No penalty. Handidness is not an issue in DnD, even less so in 3.5 now that Ambidexterity is no longer a feat.

There are some people who will argue that if you fire the crossbow without taking the TWF penalties that you then may not use the sword at all that round (say to make an AoO). I do not agree with them. The way I read the rules the only time you incurr TWF penalties is when you get the extra off hand attack in a full attack sequence. I would even allow you to divide your itterative attacks between the sword and crossbow with no penalty so long as you don't get an extra attack.

AoO's are fine - they are a completely seperate issue

If you attack with 2 weapons in the same action, you gain a penalty (-10/-6) period. Note that the only way to do this is the full attack action.

If you attack with a single wpn, you don't.

Regardless of what's in your off hand... Them's the rules

AoO's are completely seperate for a very good reason - you attack with your long sword in your round. Then with your short swd on your AoO. You cannot retroactively apply a penalty to the long swd, and you only attacked with one weapon, not twf style.

 

[argo]

If you attack with 2 weapons in the same action, you gain a penalty (-10/-6) period. Note that the only way to do this is the full attack action.

Only if you also get an extra attack that round. If you have itterative attacks due to a high BAB you can divide them amongst any of your weapons as you see fit and only take a TWF penalty if you get more attacks than indicated due to your BAB. At least that is how I interpret the rules. I know that some people disagree with me but AFAIK there is no offical errata clarifying the issue.

If you attack with a single wpn, you don't.

Regardless of what's in your off hand... Them's the rules

Agreed.

AoO's are completely seperate for a very good reason - you attack with your long sword in your round. Then with your short swd on your AoO. You cannot retroactively apply a penalty to the long swd, and you only attacked with one weapon, not twf style.

While I agree with you there are, once again, there are some people who fall on the other side of the issue. They would deal with the "retroactive penalty" issue by saying that unless you took the TWF penalties durring your round you are limited to using the primary weapon that you did attack with durring your round. Usually this comes up in discussions about archers with IUS.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I know that some people disagree with me but AFAIK there is no offical errata clarifying the issue.

Right. It comes down to how you interpret "fight this way". Your reading is one of the two that makes sense ("gain an extra attack with the off-hand weapon"). The other is "wield a second weapon in your off-hand".

I favour that one because of the entry on Defending weapons in the 3E Main FAQ, which stated that you incur TWF penalties even if you don't make an attack with the off-hand weapon.

They would deal with the "retroactive penalty" issue by saying that unless you took the TWF penalties durring your round you are limited to using the primary weapon that you did attack with durring your round.

Absolutely. Because if you didn't take TWF penalties, you aren't 'wielding a second weapon in your off-hand', you're just holding one. And if you're not wielding it, you don't threaten with it.

Assuming the other interpretation of 'fight this way', that is.

-Hyp.

 

[Tilla the Hun (work)]

Huh. Never realized there was confusion about this ... oh the perils of an insulated gaming group

We've always referred to the 'full round action' description to resolve this question:

"If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. "

and the phrase: "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon." from Two-weapon fighting...

as well as the TWF fighting style feat phrase "You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make one extra attack each round with the second weapon"


To us, this was readily apparent - gaining an extra attack from a second weapon (or more) a) required the full attack action and b) incurred 2wf penalties.

If you just 'wield' it, you can 'choose' to take that extra attack or not (heck, even a full round attack action is a 'choice' you can make -after- the first swing). If not, you incur no penalties - but you'd still be wielding it and could indeed take AoO's with it - as an AoO is a single attack at your highest BaB, you aren't taking any extra attack, so no penalties...

That may seem to reverse what I said earlier, but it doesn't it accepts it.

heh, I'd never dream of debating it with the smurf, but I wanted to show the original author our groups simplistic stance.

Also never dreamed of the other interpretation of it