two weapon fighting without off hand?

hoduken

First Post
So quick question. Where exactly in the phb does it talk about wielding a weapon in your off hand without the "off hand" keyword? I have been looking through the thing for about a half hour with no luck......DAMN YOU INDEX!!!
 

log in or register to remove this ad


So quick question. Where exactly in the phb does it talk about wielding a weapon in your off hand without the "off hand" keyword? I have been looking through the thing for about a half hour with no luck......DAMN YOU INDEX!!!

They don't. As far as I can tell the only time it matter when your off-hand weapon actually has the off-hand keyword is:

A) For the Two-Weapon Flurry Epic feat.

or

B) You are using a Ranger Two-weapon attack without the Two-Blade fighting style class feature (either through multi-classing or picking the Archer path.)

Other than that the other two two-weapon feats work just fine with any two weapons in your hand and you can make attacks with either weapon as you please without penalty. So go ahead and dual wield Bastard Sword and Flail if you want.
 

Page 104, middle of the right-hand column. It's an exclusive feature for rangers who choose the two-blade fighting style.

That's not how exception based rules work. The ranger path does exactly what it says it does (allow you to ignore the Off-hand weapon keyword as a requirement for the Ranger powers, Two-weapon flurry feat and any future feat or power that mentions the off-hand keyword) and nothing more. It does not in any way, shape or form imply you cannot wield a spear in one hand and a katana in the other.
 


Yes, off-hand is another example of an "implied rule" in 4ed. Kind of strange, but we have to live with it. Nowhere does it explicitly state "You can not hold/wield two weapons." However, since the off-hand property breaks a rule, it implies that the rule exists.

Then again, nowhere does it specifically say you CAN hold/wield two weapons, except for in the off-hand property and Two-Blade Fighting Style.

...*shrug*
 

well i like to think that they would never say you cant duel wield scimitars and the like.....i mean how could they? i can do it in real life........why not in a game where im suppose to be better than real life? that would just be upsetting....
 

well i like to think that they would never say you cant duel wield scimitars and the like.....i mean how could they? i can do it in real life........why not in a game where im suppose to be better than real life? that would just be upsetting....

You can if you're a Ranger. Just not if you try to take the rules 100% literally. ;)
 

PJB said:
moz-screenshot-8.jpg
Some one-handed weapons are light enough for
you to use in your off hand while holding another
one-handed weapon in your other hand. Doing this
doesn’t let you make multiple attacks in a round
(unless you have powers that let you do so), but you
can attack with either weapon.

Here's your exception, that off-hand weapons are the weapons that can be held off-hand. If -any- weapon could be done so (barring Ranger shinanegans, of course), then what, prey tell, does the off-hand feature do for a weapon?
 

Here's your exception, that off-hand weapons are the weapons that can be held off-hand. If -any- weapon could be done so (barring Ranger shinanegans, of course), then what, prey tell, does the off-hand feature do for a weapon?
Theoretically, if we wish to completely go by RAW, it would let you use one handed weapons as if they had the Off-Hand designation. The only times this is actually mentioned in the rules is Ranger Powers which specify "Off hand" and the Two-Weapon Flurry feat. Without this class ability you could still use Two Weapon Fighting abilities which don't say anything about "off-hand" such as Two Weapon Fighting or Dire Wolverine Strike however.
 

Remove ads

Top