Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jeff Wilder" data-source="post: 2463767" data-attributes="member: 5122">Yes.By either of our definitions?  Maybe.  (That's not ambivalence ... it's laziness.  I don't want to go check back to see what your definition is.)  By Hypersmurf's stated definition?  No.  Not when you attacked with the longsword.Okay, so we have an either/or.EITHER the penalties are not a consequence of wielding two weapons, but are, instead, payment for the benefit of a second attack,OR one cannot attack with a longsword and then quick-draw a shortsword with the off-hand and attack with it, because one has attacked with one weapon, with no consequence.Right?  But we agree, don't we, that nothing in the rules prohibits you from doing that quick-draw trick?  If so, we agree that the penalties are not a consequence, correct?Not exactly.  You don't get the attack because you haven't paid the penalties to allow it.  (In practice, this usually amounts to the same thing -- i.e., if you want the extra attack, you better pay the penalty in advance.)To carry the analogy further, you don't take -2 to your first shot because you're definitely firing two arrows and the -2 is a consequence of firing two arrows, you take -2 to the first shot to preserve the possibility of firing another arrow.  In TWF terms, you don't take TWF penalties because you're definitely attacking with a second weapon and the penalties are a consequence of attacking with a second weapon, you take TWF penalties to preserve the possibility of attacking with a second weapon.This is important because of the way Hypersmurf reads TWF penalties as a consequence of wielding two weapons.  In the Hypersmurf Model, if you're not wielding two weapons, you don't suffer the consequence, i.e., you don't suffer TWF penalties.  Note that he has specifically said the penalties are not there to allow for (or even as a consequence of) making a second attack with an off-hand weapon ... they're there solely as a consequence of wielding two weapons.So, again, if you start off wielding one weapon, you're not wielding two weapons, so you don't suffer the consequence of TWF penalties even if you later wield a second weapon.  You'll take the penalties when you produce the second weapon, because you're wielding two weapons and penalties are the consequence of wielding two weapons, but you don't take the penalties on that first attack.(And what happens if, before he quick-draws and attacks with the shortsword, the warrior uses a free action to drop the longsword with which he just attacked?  Note that at no time is he wielding two weapons, and thus under the Hypersmurf Model, he is not TWF, and doesn't take TWF penalties.)By contrast, my model says that TWF penalties aren't a consequence of anything.  They're not the consequence of wielding two weapons, for reasons already discussed.  They're not the consequence of actually attacking with two weapons, since you won't always do that.  They are, instead, the payment for preserving the possibility of wielding two weapons and attacking with both.Which fits perfectly with the way combat-mod trade-offs are handled throughout the rest of the game.</blockquote>

Verification