Tripping and 2-Weapon Fighting

[Kel]

Ok, rules gurus, here's a couple of questions for you.

One of the characters in my campaign, a rogue-fighter, has improved trip and 2-weapon fighting. He typically wields two short swords. He is only third level, so he only has one attack per round based on his BAB, and two if he wields two weapons. My questions are:

(1) Can he make a trip attempt as an "unarmed attack" even with both hands full (with weapons)? (I am saying yes, since unarmed attack doesn't necessarily mean with your hands; it can also mean with your legs/body, so he can basically do a leg sweep and push with his body. This is probably the easier of the two questions)

(2) Can he make an extra trip attempt in place of one of his melee attacks simply because he has 2-weapon fighting? Does it matter whether he is wielding tripping weapons? What if he was wielding no weapons at all--could he make an extra trip attempt then?

As to the second question, I am saying that he can make one trip attempt at his normal BAB no matter what (but at a -2 if he plans on making another attack in the round based on TWF). After that, he can take an extra normal melee attack with the weapon that is wielded in his "off-hand." If this is a shortsword, it cannot be used to make a trip attempt. If it is a tripping weapon, it can. This is based on my interpretation of the "Two-Weapon Fighting" ability, which basically states: "If you wield a second weapon in your off-hand, you get an extra melee attack per round with that weapon."

Do my rulings make sense? Any thoughts?

Thanks!

 

[rowport]

Kel-

OK, I will give this a shot, but I am sure that Patryn will correct me where I mess up!

(1) Can he make a trip attempt as an "unarmed attack" even with both hands full (with weapons)? (I am saying yes, since unarmed attack doesn't necessarily mean with your hands; it can also mean with your legs/body, so he can basically do a leg sweep and push with his body. This is probably the easier of the two questions)

This ruling works if he has Improved Unarmed Strike or the Monk bonus feat; otherwise, he cannot do it.

(2) Can he make an extra trip attempt in place of one of his melee attacks simply because he has 2-weapon fighting? Does it matter whether he is wielding tripping weapons? What if he was wielding no weapons at all--could he make an extra trip attempt then?

In order:
a. Yes (as long as he has Improved Unarmed Strike or a Weapon that allows Trip Attacks).
b. Yes.
c. Yes, using Improved Unarmed Strike.

Assuming that he does not yet have Improved Unarmed Strike, I think his best bet is to use a Tripping Melee Weapon with which he is proficient as his primary weapon, then follow-up (ideally against a prone opponent) with his Short Sword. A Whip is OK for this, but better still with a Flail. As a rogue he will need a feat to use either of them anyway, so the Exotic versus Martial bit does not matter in his case.

 

[Kel]

I am confused. What is the relevance of Improved Unarmed Strike? Doesn't that simply allow you to make an unarmed strike without provoking an AOO? Improved trip, which the charater has, already allows you to make trip attempts w/o provoking an AOO.

I made the reference to "unarmed attack" because, under "Trip" in the PHB, the Trip action is specifically described as a special "unarmed attack," unless you're using a special tripping weapon. Shortswords are not tripping weapons. So, the question basically is: can you comply with the rule of making an "unarmed attack" that is necessary to make a trip attempt, even if you have a shortsword in both hands (and thus are not technically "unarmed.")

 

[baeleg]

rowport is simply mistaken, Kel, as you've pointed out. Improved Unarmed Strike is only relevant in that it allows you to trip without provoking an AoO. As for the "you're armed, you can't make an unarmed strike" argument, I think there is damage for a kick listed somewhere, and you obviously could kick with a weapon in both hands, so I don't see the problem. Particularly since the monk mentions unarmed strikes as being more than kicks under the text for flurry of blows.

As for the second part, since a trip is normally an unarmed attack, or can be done with a tripping weapon, your off-hand attack couldn't be used to trip unless your off-hand weapon is a tripping weapon, so you're correct there as well. Two weapon-fighting penalties would apply if the char is trying to trip, then striking the prone opponent with the off-hand weapon, as well, but you already stated that.

 

[Stalker0]

If one weapon is a trip weapon, you could trip with that weapon and then trip again with an unarmed attack as your offhand weapon. But you couldn't use TWF with 2 unarmed attacks, that's not allowed.

 

[Anax]

If one weapon is a trip weapon, you could trip with that weapon and then trip again with an unarmed attack as your offhand weapon. But you couldn't use TWF with 2 unarmed attacks, that's not allowed.

Er. Actually, I seem to recall that it *is* allowed. In fact, a monk can do TWF with unarmed attacks, and get further bonus attacks (although taking penalties to AB as normal.) The most major constraint for a monk (who can normally attack during a full attack routine with any weapon on any attack) is that the "off-hand" attacks must all come from the same weapon (or appendage), which cannot be used elsewhere in the routine.

At least, that's how I recall the situation.

(And yes, that means that a high level full monk with lots of TWF feats can get a *lot* of attacks per round by using greater flurry and TWF at the same time. However, the monk had to give up pretty much all of her feats to gain that ability, and certain feats (Two-Weapon Defense) don't work with off-hand unarmed attacks.)

 

[Infiniti2000]

1. Yes.
2. As Stalker0 said.

In fact, a monk can do TWF with unarmed attacks, and get further bonus attacks (although taking penalties to AB as normal.) ...
(And yes, that means that a high level full monk with lots of TWF feats can get a *lot* of attacks per round by using greater flurry and TWF at the same time. However, the monk had to give up pretty much all of her feats to gain that ability, and certain feats (Two-Weapon Defense) don't work with off-hand unarmed attacks.)

No, this is wrong. But, that's a topic for a different, highly debated thread.

 

[Anax]

No, this is wrong. But, that's a topic for a different, highly debated thread.

Ehh. This is one of the rulings of the FAQ that I actually agree with. But I'll agree, at least, that it's a highly debatable decision.