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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kahuna Burger" data-source="post: 2742414" data-attributes="member: 8439">This convesation becomes a little less acedemic (and imho is complicated a bit) by the tw weapon defense feat. It says Now apparently you can be weilding two weapons without attacking or threatening with either of them (full defense), and you can have two potential weapons (of the natural variety) without gaining the benefits of twd. You get the benefit just for weilding a double weapon. Not attacking with both ends, not taking the penalties, just weilding a weapon which has the potential for striking with both ends. So why shouldn't the same be true for weilding two weapons, whether or not you are taking the extra attack and penalties?I read the twf section with an emphasis on can. "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon." I read the penalties and "fighting this way" as applying if you take advantage of that "can" clause*. Weilding two weapons, just like weilding a double weapon gives you the option of a second attack, but doesn't obligate you to take it. The mere fact of weilding either two weapons or one double weapon gives you the advantages of twd whether you attack once, twice or not at all. *they certainly had the option of saying "if you weild a second weapon in your off hand, you take the following penalties, and can make one extra attack per round" in which case there would be no argument at all. I respect the tight of a DM to read it the other way and even enforce that in his campaign, but given the sheer number of times per combat a PC is going to want to move and attack without sheathing one weapon first, I think he should clarify that well in advance.  :\</blockquote>

Verification