TWF penalties and AOOs

[Crothian]

To be consistant I just have them all work the same way, as power attack does. It works well and hasn't casused any problems.

 

[silentspace]

Somehow it just doesn't seem fair to apply the -2 penalty to AoOs, since AoOs are not TWF attacks.

On the other hand, the penalty applies to Flurry of Blows...

"This penalty applies for 1 round, so it also affects
attacks of opportunity the monk might make before her
next action."

...but that's not really the same as TWF.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Somehow it just doesn't seem fair to apply the -2 penalty to AoOs, since AoOs are not TWF attacks.

But you're wielding two weapons.

After all, unless you're using some weird "dual strike" feat, any attack is only using one weapon. The TWF penalties are incurred when you "fight this way". What, exactly, that means is not entirely clear, but "wielding a second weapon in your off hand" is one possibility.

-Hyp.

 

[Ranger REG]

But are you attacking with two weapons during an AoO?

There is a difference between "wielding" and simply "holding" a weapon in your off hand.

 

[Hypersmurf]

But are you attacking with two weapons during an AoO?

There is a difference between "wielding" and simply "holding" a weapon in your off hand.

Yup.

Which is why I rule that if you don't incur TWF penalties on your attacks in a round (you only use your primary weapon, and don't subtract anything from the rolls), then you cannot use your off-hand weapon for an AoO.

And if you do incur TWF penalties on your attacks (even if you only actually swing one weapon), then both are 'available' for an AoO (since you're wielding both, not just wielding one and holding one), but you take TWF penalties on any AoOs you make.

I'm basically using Gruntharg's Law from the 3E Main FAQ as precedent: you can hold a longspear in one hand, but you cannot wield it, and thus if you are holding it in one hand, you cannot make AoOs with it.

So extrapolating from that, if you are holding a weapon but not wielding it, you may not make an AoO with it. And conversely, if you can make an AoO with it, you are wielding it.

So if you want both weapons to be available for AoOs (or if you've attacked with both weapons earlier in the same round), you must be wielding two weapons, which possibly qualifies as "fight this way".

-Hyp.

 

[Ottergame]

But you're wielding two weapons.

After all, unless you're using some weird "dual strike" feat, any attack is only using one weapon. The TWF penalties are incurred when you "fight this way". What, exactly, that means is not entirely clear, but "wielding a second weapon in your off hand" is one possibility.

-Hyp.

Unless someone can point some rule out to me, "fight this way" to means fighting with both weapons, not just holding them.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Unless someone can point some rule out to me, "fight this way" to means fighting with both weapons, not just holding them.

So when do you consider someone is fighting with both weapons?

If someone with a BAB of +6/+1 attacks only once with his longsword and only once with his shortsword, does he take TWF penalties? Or can he make his +6 attack with his longsword at no penalty, and his +1 attack with his shortsword at no penalty? He's "fighting with both weapons", right?

-Hyp.

 

[Ottergame]

So when do you consider someone is fighting with both weapons?

If someone with a BAB of +6/+1 attacks only once with his longsword and only once with his shortsword, does he take TWF penalties? Or can he make his +6 attack with his longsword at no penalty, and his +1 attack with his shortsword at no penalty? He's "fighting with both weapons", right?

-Hyp.

I would say anytime that a person takes the extra attack offered by the offhand weapon in addition to the BAB number of attacks.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I would say anytime that a person takes the extra attack offered by the offhand weapon in addition to the BAB number of attacks.

Well, that's one of the possible interpretations of "fight this way" - it refers to the "get an extra attack" clause of the sentence.

But what you just described is different to the "fighting with both weapons" you proposed a moment ago... surely the example I gave is someone "fighting with both weapons", even if they're don't necessarily (depending on interpretation) "fight this way".

It's... not at all clear.

-Hyp.

 

[Ottergame]

Well, that's one of the possible interpretations of "fight this way" - it refers to the "get an extra attack" clause of the sentence.

But what you just described is different to the "fighting with both weapons" you proposed a moment ago... surely the example I gave is someone "fighting with both weapons", even if they're don't necessarily (depending on interpretation) "fight this way".

It's... not at all clear.

-Hyp.

I aggree, they could stand to add this, and the whole monk flurry/TWF thing, to the FAQ or errata.