TWF without extra attacks

[mvincent]

The glossary, in its definition of "off-hand," states several rules regarding making single attacks with your off-hand.

To clarify; this is not a "new" rule. This is actually an old rule from 3.0 that has possibly fallen into disuse. However, it definitely was a rule in 3.0 (as indicated by the 3.0 ambidexterity feat). The glossary is not introducing anything new. Instead, the "new" rule here would be not using off-hand penalties.

 

[mvincent]

*IIRC, you stated in a previous thread that you have banned all reach weapons because of this problem.

I personally did not (and would not) ban them, however a fellow DM did, mainly due to my excessive use of them. Thanks to the right tactics, my reachaholism often hindered his ability to present challenging encounters*. In an earlier thread I presented passive use (by say, a monk) as one possible tactic, but that one wasn't a particular problem for him.

*while one could find ways around it, the point is that the reach tactics often overwhelmed standard encounters, and re-vamping all his encounters to avoid this would be neither realistic nor desireable, as he was using published adventures.

 

[Felnar]

dont monks, which Moon-Lancer brought up, answer this?

cant they attack with a punch, then a kick, then a knee without taking penalties? or is that only during a flurry?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

To clarify; this is not a "new" rule.

Er, yes, it is.

It is a rule that is not present in the 3.5 version of the rules except in the glossary.

Thus, the glossary is introducing a new rule.

It's presence in an earlier version of the rules is immaterial.

 

[irdeggman]

Er, yes, it is.

It is a rule that is not present in the 3.5 version of the rules except in the glossary.

Thus, the glossary is introducing a new rule.

It's presence in an earlier version of the rules is immaterial.

Hmmm technically that is not a "new" rule since it appears in the same book at the same publishing time as the "other" rules.


It is however, not mentioned (addressed) in other sections of the PHB, like the Combat sectoin or the equpiment section or the feat section.

 

[irdeggman]

But it is inferred in the monk class ability description.

Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

A monk also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown on Table: The Monk. The unarmed damage on Table: The Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage.

And this is for the unarmed strike not the flurry of blows ability.

 

[irdeggman]

Here is an interesting point.

Should you get the benefit from the Two-Weapon Defense Feat if yuo wane a weapon in each hand?

TWO-WEAPON DEFENSE [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 15, Two-Weapon Fighting.
Benefit: When wielding a double weapon or two weapons (not including natural weapons or unarmed strikes), you gain a +1 shield bonus to your AC.
When you are fighting defensively or using the total defense action, this shield bonus increases to +2.
Special: A fighter may select Two-Weapon Defense as one of his fighter bonus feats.

Note that this must apply to when yuo aren't making an attack (total defense action).

And the "wielding two weapons" text matches that of the Two Weapon Fighting section:

TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways:

•If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. (An unarmed strike is always considered light.)
•The Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.
Table: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties summarizes the interaction of all these factors.

Which ties us into the "off hand"
Glossary:

off hand: A character’s weaker or less dexterous hand (usually the left). An attack made with the off hand incurs a –4 penalty on the attack roll. In addition, only one-half of a character’s Strength bonus may be added to the damage dealt with a weapon held in the off hand.

And damage:

Minimum Damage: If penalties reduce the damage result to less than 1, a hit still deals 1 point of damage.

Strength Bonus: When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result. A Strength penalty, but not a bonus, applies on attacks made with a bow that is not a composite bow.

Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus.

Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed: When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus. However, you don’t get this higher Strength bonus when using a light weapon with two hands.

 

[Egres]

But, what's this "off-hand" anyway?

Another arm?

Another weapon?

If I attack with a longswod in my right hand, and then I drop the longsword and attack with a fist, would this fist be considered an off-hand attack?

 

[irdeggman]

But, what's this "off-hand" anyway?

Another arm?

Another weapon?

If I attack with a longswod in my right hand, and then I drop the longsword and attack with a fist, would this fist be considered an off-hand attack?

Check the quote above from the glossary.

It is pretty clear on what an off-hand is. "A character's weaker or less dexterous hand (usually the left)."

A character has a primary and an off-hand.

A monk has no off-hand when making unarmed attacks (per the monk description).

 

[Moon-Lancer]

Do you have a rules reference for this?

well now that i think about it, i cant find any. But I have a better example/way to switch weapons.

what action do you think catching something is? Is taking your hand off a two handed weapon a move action? is putting your hand on a two handed weapon a move action. so if these are free actions, passing a weapon from one hand to another is 2 free actions. sure the dm can say no more free actions, but some may not.

I think a character using two weapons without twf should not incur penalty, but should not be able to benefit in any way through feats and defending weapons. I am a firm believer that if a rule gets in the way of balance or roleplaying, then it doesen't need to exist. The rules don't state offhand very well, or why its important, aside from trying to get a second attack without taking twf.

What benefit does using two weapons have, aside from flavor, if your not getting an extra attack?

With glaive and armor spikes, their is a benefit, but then again, your not using a offhand or left hand to make an attack, so it just gets odd.

So it seems the debate of about the offhand only seems to give benefit side steps the issue becuse no off hand is used. I find that funny. anyone else see the irony?