TWF penalties and AOOs

[Hypersmurf]

Double hit gives a character the option to use both attacks when making an AoO. If the penalties exist no matter if you make one or two attacks, they why offer the choice at all? Only when you make "both attacks" does it mention taking the penalties for two weapon fighting. If making a single attack without the penalty is a side benefit of the feat, it would be clearly mentioned as such. I just don't see where the ambiguity is in the feat description.

Let's take two situations.

In the first, I just charged this round, making a single attack, and then someone provoked an AoO.

In the second, I just made a full TWF attack this round, and then someone provoked an AoO.

So, in the first situation, without using Double Hit, I don't take TWF penalties; if I do use Double Hit, I do take the penalties.

In the second situation, because I am "fighting this way" this round, I might (depending on interpretation) suffer TWF penalties on my attacks even if I don't use Double Hit.

Double Hit states that I do take TWF penalties if I AoO with both weapons. It doesn't directly address the situation of a single AoO in a round that I've already incurred TWF penalties... which is the point of debate in the thread.

So, Double Hit doesn't help to resolve that question.

-Hyp.

 

[Johnny Angel]

"When making an attack of opportunity, you may make an attack with your off hand against the same target at the same time. You must decide before your first attack roll whether you want to use your off hand. If you do, both attacks take the standard penalties for fighting with two weapons"

This sounds like the good old fashioned "exception that proves the rule." The expression is often misunderstood, but what it means is that even if a rule is not specifically stated, but an exception to it is stated, it proves that the rule exists. This quotation states an exception to an unstated rule that normally AoO do not take penalties for Two-Weapon fighting, thus proving that there is such a rule.

 

[Hypersmurf]

This sounds like the good old fashioned "exception that proves the rule." The expression is often misunderstood, but what it means is that even if a rule is not specifically stated, but an exception to it is stated, it proves that the rule exists. This quotation states an exception to an unstated rule that normally AoO do not take penalties for Two-Weapon fighting, thus proving that there is such a rule.

Not necessarily.

The quotation proves that if you use Double Hit, you incur TWF penalties.

It says nothing about any other factors that might cause you to incur TWF penalties.

As an analogy: if you have the Blind condition, you lose your Dex bonus to AC. You might say this proves that a person who is not Blind does not lose their Dex bonus to AC. But this is only true if no other factor causes a loss of Dex bonus. A non-Blind person who is flat-footed, for example, still loses his Dex bonus.

So - if you are making a Double Hit on an AoO, you incur TWF penalties. You might say this proves that a person who is only making a single attack on an AoO does not incur TWF penalties. But this is only true if no other factor causes you to incur those penalties - for example, a factor such as (depending on interpretation) you had previously attacked in the same round and gained an extra attack with your off-hand weapon.

Since these factors would not appear in the description of the Double Hit feat (just as all the other factors that might deny someone his Dex bonus do not appear in the description of the blind condition), the text of Double Hit does nothing to resolve the issue of an AoO made in the same round as an extra TWF attack.

-Hyp.

 

[Ottergame]

I think after reading that feat, it is BRUTALLY CLEAR that TWF penalty durations only last during the attack you made a two weapon attack, then end right after the attack.

 

[RigaMortus]

Hyp... Are you considering a round to be, from the start of YOUR init to the next time your init comes up? Or, just the 6 seconds (turn) in which you act?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Hyp... Are you considering a round to be, from the start of YOUR init to the next time your init comes up? Or, just the 6 seconds (turn) in which you act?

Since 3.5 did away with Delay limits and the Refocus action, a round is pretty much always from your turn until just before your next turn.

-Hyp.

 

[Ranger REG]

Let's take two situations.

In the first, I just charged this round, making a single attack, and then someone provoked an AoO.

So, in the first situation, without using Double Hit, I don't take TWF penalties; if I do use Double Hit, I do take the penalties.

This is a moot point, since you're only allowed one attack in a charge attack.

In any case, it did specifically mentioned (in the PHB and in the SRD) that when you make a charge attack,you are penalized on your AC until your next turn. What's worse, if you make an AoO after making your charge attack, you do not benefit from the attack bonus.

In the second, I just made a full TWF attack this round, and then someone provoked an AoO.

In the second situation, because I am "fighting this way" this round, I might (depending on interpretation) suffer TWF penalties on my attacks even if I don't use Double Hit.

But there is no mention that the penalty last until your next turn, other than the ambiguous "fight this way" phrase you're so hung up on.

 

[Hypersmurf]

This is a moot point, since you're only allowed one attack in a charge attack.

That was why I picked it. It could have been an Attack action rather than a Charge action - the point was that only one weapon was used.

But there is no mention that the penalty last until your next turn, other than the ambiguous "fight this way" phrase you're so hung up on.

And that's why the answer to all of these questions is "It depends on your interpretation of 'fight this way'".

I'm hung up on it because it's the bit that matters!

-Hyp.

 

[Ranger REG]

Look, if that phrase matters to the Sage with regards to applying two-weapon fighting penalties to AoO outside of the character's turn, then I'll concede.

 

[doghead]

Interesting. I have a newish character with TWF, but he hasn't struck a blow in anger yet, so I haven't really go my head around TWF and AoO's. This has really helped.

Thanks.