spiked armor twf

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

So, I can make all my main-hand attacks with a short sword, then transfer it to my off-hand, and make all my off-hand attacks with it?

 

[kjenks]

So, I can make all my main-hand attacks with a short sword, then transfer it to my off-hand, and make all my off-hand attacks with it?

I haven't looked at the TWF rules with that in mind, but I suspect you can't do that. You can make all of your primary attacks with a two-handed weapon then use armor spikes as an off-hand attack, per the FAQ, but that doesn't require you to switch hands.

Switching a one-handed weapon from one hand to another appears to be a move action, per the FAQ. I don't like that rule, since the PH doesn't actually say it, but if you follow the FAQ in your game, there it is.

FAQ
===
The rules don’t
state what type of action is required to switch hands on a
weapon, but it seems reasonable to assume that it’s the
equivalent of drawing a weapon (a move action that doesn’t
provoke attacks of opportunity).
===

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I haven't looked at the TWF rules with that in mind, but I suspect you can't do that.

Why, then, can I do it with armor spikes? It is, as far as the rules are concerned, a single weapon (no matter how many spikey protrusions there are).

 

[kjenks]

Why, then, can I do it with armor spikes?

Because the rules say you can.

 

[werk]

Because the rules say you can.

I must have missed that...what rule says you can use armor spikes as both primary and off-hand weapon? I saw where it said it could be either/or, in my quote, but didn't see where it said it could be both. Can you help me out?

 

[kjenks]

I must have missed that...what rule says you can use armor spikes as both primary and off-hand weapon? I saw where it said it could be either/or, in my quote, but didn't see where it said it could be both. Can you help me out?

Check over the armor spike description again. You can attack with them as either a primary or an off-hand weapon. Unless you think the game designers meant that to be an "exclusive or" condition, you can make a primary attack, an off-hand attack or both.

SRD
===
Armor Spikes: You can have spikes added to your armor, which allow you to deal extra piercing damage (see Table: Weapons) on a successful grapple attack. The spikes count as a martial weapon. If you are not proficient with them, you take a –4 penalty on grapple checks when you try to use them. You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. (You can’t also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.)
===

See how it works?

You can make a regular meleee attack with the spikes.
Or you can make an off-hand attack with the spikes.

"Exclusive or" is the kind of logical operator a computer programmer would think of in a concept like, "You can be living or dead" -- with the implied words, "but not both at the same time."

The usual way we use the word "or" is more like, "Would you like fries or a shake with that?" -- with the implication that you can choose both, if you like.

So you and your DM need to determine which version of the word "or" is being used in the armor spike rule. There's logic in both choices.

On one hand, you could think that armor spikes are all over your armor, on knees, elbows, helmet, toes, shoulders, so it's perfectly reasonable to attack with them as either a primary weapon or an off-hand weapon or both.

On the other hand, you could think that armor spikes are only one weapon, so it's perfectly reasonable to attack with them as either a primary weapon or an off-hand weapon, but not both because you think that's somehow unbalanced or you think that the game designers meant that "or" as an exclusive-or.

The phrase "another weapon" in that rule seems to confirm that you can make an off-hand attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with the same weapon. Or maybe not. Talk to your DM about it.

 

[werk]

See how it works?

Not really...

You can make a regular meleee attack with the spikes.
Or you can make an off-hand attack with the spikes.

Right.

"Exclusive or" is the kind of logical operator a computer programmer would think of in a concept like, "You can be living or dead" -- with the implied words, "but not both at the same time."

Right...like in English.

The usual way we use the word "or" is more like, "Would you like fries or a shake with that?" -- with the implication that you can choose both, if you like.

So you and your DM need to determine which version of the word "or" is being used in the armor spike rule. There's logic in both choices.

O, RLY?

On one hand, you could think that armor spikes are all over your armor, on knees, elbows, helmet, toes, shoulders, so it's perfectly reasonable to attack with them as either a primary weapon or an off-hand weapon or both.

I don't see where you get both... Look at armor spikes like a gauntlet. You can use the gauntlet as your primary OR secondary weapon, but if you want to use it as both, you'd need to buy two. You can't buy two armor spikes because, as you've said, they are 'all over' rather than one hand or the other.

On the other hand, you could think that armor spikes are only one weapon, so it's perfectly reasonable to attack with them as either a primary weapon or an off-hand weapon, but not both because you think that's somehow unbalanced or you think that the game designers meant that "or" as an exclusive-or.

The phrase "another weapon" in that rule seems to confirm that you can make an off-hand attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with the same weapon. Or maybe not. Talk to your DM about it.

I read that as saying you can't make a second off-hand attack regardless of weapon availability...multiple off-hand weapons.

I don't mean to be confrontational, and that's usually the way direct questions come off on these boards. I just don't see how you can read those lines and come up with the interpretation that you have in the context of the rule set. In a vaccuum, sure, why not get 5 armor spikes and multiattack?

 

[HeapThaumaturgist]

As an "eh, maybe it could go either way" sort of situation ...

If somebody wanted to TWF with nothing but spikes ... well, I'd rather you do that than TWF with spikes and a greatsword.

--fje

 

[Mistwell]

I don't mean to be confrontational...

Right...like in English.

Are you sure you didn't mean to be confrontational, given that response?

 

[werk]

Are you sure you didn't mean to be confrontational, given that response?

So what's your take on the issue Mistwell? How do you see it?

Anything to contribute, or just couldn't resist?