Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 2740832" data-attributes="member: 1656">What is &quot;the TWF-style&quot;?&nbsp; I'd say that the TWF-style is &quot;fighting this way&quot; as defined by the section &quot;Two Weapon Fighting&quot;.&nbsp; Unfortunately, just what &quot;fighting this way&quot; means is exactly the point under debate.You said earlier: Hm. I'd say &quot;wielding&quot; a weapon is different from &quot;carrying&quot; it. If you choose to attack with just one weapon, you're only &quot;carrying&quot; the second weapon, therefore you don't take the penalties.Now, in this case, you've agreed that the character is &quot;wielding&quot; both weapons.&nbsp; He's chosen to attack with both.&nbsp; He is, therefore, 'wielding a second weapon in his off-hand', which satisfies one of the possible definitions of 'fighting this way'.&nbsp; He is not making an extra attack with his off-hand, which means he fails to satisfy the other possible definition of 'fighting this way'.Now, my opinion was weighted towards the first back in 3E by an answer in the Main FAQ, which stated that a character who wished to benefit from a Defending weapon held in his off hand must incur the TWF penalties, whether or not he attacks with that weapon.&nbsp; The benefit of a Defending weapon applies to 'the wielder', therefore one must wield the weapon to benefit, therefore in the example, to benefit, the character is 'wielding a second weapon in his off-hand', but he is not making an extra attack (or, indeed, any attack) with that off-hand.&nbsp; He satisfies the first definition; he fails to satisfy the second definition; according to the 3E Main FAQ, he incurs the penalty.Hence, according to the 3E Main FAQ, the first definition must be correct.A character wielding a second weapon in his off-hand is 'fighting this way', and incurs penalties.&nbsp; He also has the option of making an extra attack with that weapon.-Hyp.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hypersmurf, post: 2740832, member: 1656"] What is "the TWF-style"? I'd say that the TWF-style is "fighting this way" as defined by the section "Two Weapon Fighting". Unfortunately, just what "fighting this way" means is exactly the point under debate. You said earlier: [i]Hm. I'd say "wielding" a weapon is different from "carrying" it. If you choose to attack with just one weapon, you're only "carrying" the second weapon, therefore you don't take the penalties.[/i] Now, in this case, you've agreed that the character [i]is[/i] "wielding" both weapons. He's chosen to attack with both. He is, therefore, 'wielding a second weapon in his off-hand', which satisfies one of the possible definitions of 'fighting this way'. He is not making an extra attack with his off-hand, which means he fails to satisfy the other possible definition of 'fighting this way'. Now, my opinion was weighted towards the first back in 3E by an answer in the Main FAQ, which stated that a character who wished to benefit from a Defending weapon held in his off hand must incur the TWF penalties, [i]whether or not he attacks with that weapon[/i]. The benefit of a Defending weapon applies to 'the wielder', therefore one must wield the weapon to benefit, therefore in the example, to benefit, the character is 'wielding a second weapon in his off-hand', but he is not making an extra attack (or, indeed, any attack) with that off-hand. He satisfies the first definition; he fails to satisfy the second definition; according to the 3E Main FAQ, he incurs the penalty. Hence, according to the 3E Main FAQ, the first definition must be correct. A character wielding a second weapon in his off-hand is 'fighting this way', and incurs penalties. He also has the option of making an extra attack with that weapon. -Hyp. [/QUOTE]

Verification