ToB:Bo9S - Shield Counter is TWF?

[Particle_Man]

If you are fighting with a longsword and shield, and only use the longsword during your regular actions (say a move and a standard action, or a full attack), and then use Shield Counter (from the Tome of Battle: Book of 9 Swords) as an immediate action, does this count as two weapon fighting, with all of the penalties that apply?

 

[Kmart Kommando]

nope. just like tagging someone with a shieldbash instead of your longsword when they provoke an AoO isn't TWF either.

 

[Sejs]

Nope, it's not two-weapon fighting.

The easy ink test for that sort of thing is: Am I gaining the TWF benefits?

If you're not gaining the benefits of twf (that is, extra attacks) then you don't take the penalties for twf.

 

[interwyrm]

Does that mean I can wield a warhammer in one hand and a battleaxe in the other, and have no penalties as long as I don't take extra attacks?

Nope, it's not two-weapon fighting.

The easy ink test for that sort of thing is: Am I gaining the TWF benefits?

If you're not gaining the benefits of twf (that is, extra attacks) then you don't take the penalties for twf.

 

[Torx]

Does that mean I can wield a warhammer in one hand and a battleaxe in the other, and have no penalties as long as I don't take extra attacks?

If you attack with only one weapon, yes, you can have another weapon in the other hand for all the good it does you.

 

[Hypersmurf]

It all depends on how you read 'fight this way'.

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way.

or

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way.

Personally, I read it the first way... so if you want to threaten with both your hammer and your axe, you're taking penalties, whether or not you avail yourself of the extra attack to which fighting this way entitles you.

-Hyp.

 

[Sejs]

Personally, I read it the first way... so if you want to threaten with both your hammer and your axe, you're taking penalties, whether or not you avail yourself of the extra attack to which fighting this way entitles you.

-Hyp.

My own take falls more along the "no taxation without representation" side of things: no penalty without concurrent benefit. The benefit is you gain an extra attack (or more with later feats), the penalty is the reduction in attack accuracy.

Does that mean I can wield a warhammer in one hand and a battleaxe in the other, and have no penalties as long as I don't take extra attacks?

The way I see it, yep. If you want to give up the benefit of a free hand - casting somatic spells, using a shield, holding an object, using a weapon in both hands, etc - in exchange for some versatility or style, then by all means.

Heck, I'd even let a character intersperse what weapon is used in the course of a full attack without penalty as long as they don't exceed their normal number of swings. Designate which hand is your lead and which is your off for purposes of strength modifier and go nuts. The only spot where it gets zany is with defending weapons, but it's pretty easy to keep that on the level by applying the same thinking - no bonus without penalty (which means actually attacking with that defending weapon, not just holding it in your off hand).

 

[Hypersmurf]

My own take falls more along the "no taxation without representation" side of things: no penalty without concurrent benefit. The benefit is you gain an extra attack (or more with later feats), the penalty is the reduction in attack accuracy.

I see the benefit being versatility and extra attacks. The attacks are available as a benefit of fighting this way, but you're not required to take them. The penalty is the reduction, and you get that penalty in exchange for the option to use either or both weapon, and to make extra attacks.

Designate which hand is your lead and which is your off for purposes of strength modifier and go nuts.

According to the PHB Glossary, your off-hand is your weaker or less dextrous hand (usually the left).

The only spot where it gets zany is with defending weapons, but it's pretty easy to keep that on the level by applying the same thinking - no bonus without penalty (which means actually attacking with that defending weapon, not just holding it in your off hand).

The 3E FAQ stated that in order to benefit from the AC bonus of a Defending weapon in the off-hand, you incurred TWF penalties, whether or not you made an attack with it. Which suits me just fine, since the benefit applies to 'the wielder', which means that to gain the benefit, you must be wielding the second weapon in your off-hand, not just holding it... hence fighting this way (whether or not you make use of the extra attack this allows).

-Hyp.

 

[Kmart Kommando]

They covered this on the WoTC site, rule of the game, under 2 handed fighting. If you don't use the extra attacks, it doesn't matter which weapon you attack with using your normal BAB attacks, and there is no penatly for doing so. sword with +11, shield with +6 and sword again with +1, makes no difference. (assuming BAB of +11 and no modifiers.)
"Fighting in this way.." is "using a second weapon to gain extra attacks" nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Darklone]

Wouldn't be the first mistake in Rules of the Game. In this case I do agree with them (more from personal experience while fighting with two weapons), yet I wouldn't allow someone with a hammer and a sword who uses only one of the weapons to use his full str bonus on both weapons even if he uses only one.