Ulimate Guide - Two Handed Weapon and Buckler

[Artoomis]

Here is the first rule for the Utimate Guide to Troublesome Rules. If you would please briefly post the issues, I'll compile them per the "Problem Rules" Thread into a new Ultimate Guide to Troiublesome Rules thread which I'll eventually find a way to publish and distribute. I'm looking for:

1. A brief statement of the issue.
2. Any Sage rulings and/or FAQ rulings.
3. Any comments from other game designers.
4. A list of all releveant rules with references.

The first one is:

Buckler w/two handed weapon. (What happens when you do this?)

If we do a good job, this will be the last time we address all these issues and then we can let it go and focus on other stuff on interest, while having a fixed reference point to go back and review a summary of both sides of the argument.

I'll do just one rule at a time to preserve focus. Just remember, we are NOT debating the rules. At most I'd like to see something like this for the rules portion:

1. For arguments sake, let's assume you can take 2 "5-foot steps" in one round with haste and follow the rules down the line to see what happens.
2. Per pg. 117 neither one avoids an AoO because you've moved more than 5 feet in a round.
3. Recall that the definition of a "5-foot move" is that it does not provoke an AoO from movement.
4. Whoops - that means those two "5-foot moves" could not be "5-foot moves" because they don't avoid an AoO from movement. Ttherefore they must be regular movement (or something other than 5-foot moves, anyway).
5. If you only moved one 5-foot move, though, the pg 117 rule would be satisfied, and you could avoid the AoO - thus meeting the definition of a 5-foot move.
6. The net result of all this is you can only way you can satisfy both the page 117 rule and still meet the definition of a 5-foot step is to take only one in a round.
7. If you can only take one 5-foot step in a round, there is no conflict with any other rule. The Partial Action rule (which the opposing argument seems to hang its hat on) only says you get one "typically." If I have the rule right, then it seems pretty clear that the effects of a haste spell are atypical - which makes sense. The rule do not seem to account for a haste exception.

OR

1) A full-round attack action grants a 5-foot step (given, p. 122).
2) A partial action used for an attack grants a 5-foot step (given, p. 127).
3) A 5-foot step does not provoke an AoO (given, glossary, definition of 5-foot step).
4) There is no rule that limits the number of 5-foot steps per round (p. 117, p. 121 excluding MEA since it is not being used, definition of 5-foot step).
5) Haste grants a character an extra partial action each round (p. 212).
6) A hasted character can use the full attack action and a partial action to attack in the same round (points 1, 2, and 5).
7) The hasted character can take a 5-foot step during his full-round attack (point 1).
8) The hasted character can take a 5-foot step during his partial action attack (point 2).
9) The hasted character can take a total of 2 5-foot steps (points 4, 5, 6, 7).
10) Therefore, since movement using 5-foot steps does not provoke an attack of opportunity, the hasted character can possibly take 2 5-foot steps without drawing an AoO (points 3, 9).

Those are on different issues from the one here, but you get the idea. They are pretty much complete look (from one point of view, I admit) at the rules. I'd like to get similar statement from "pro" and "con" for each rule as we go. After all, this guide is not to TELL DMs what to do, is to help them make informed decisions.

I await your replies.

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

WotC response to Haste and 5ft Step Question:

If I am hasted, can I take a 5ft step as part of my normal action and then another one as part of my hasted (partial) action?

No. You are only allowed one 5 ft-step per turn, and then only if you take no other movement actions.

If so, are both safe from attacks of opportunity like a single 5ft step would be?

See above.


(but the whole discussion of Haste and 5ft steps should be in it's own thread?)

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

Buckler and a 2 handed weapon

Buckler: This small metal shield is strapped to the forearm,
allowing it to be worn and still use the hand. A bow or crossbow
can be used without penalty. An off-hand weapon can be used, but
a -1 penalty on attack rolls is imposed because of the extra
weight on your arm. This penalty stacks with those for fighting
with the off hand and, if appropriate, for fighting with two
weapons. In any case, if a weapon is used in the off-hand, the
character doesn't get the buckler's AC bonus for the rest of the
round.

Argument 1:
If you are using a weapon two handed, then you are using it in both the primary and off hands. Since you are using the off hand, you incurr a -1 penalty if wearing a buckler.

Argument 2:
A two-handed weapon is not the same as an off-hand weapon. Since the buckler rule says nothing about using a two-handed weapon, there is no penalty.

Both side agree that the AC bonus for the buckler is lost when wielding a two-handed weapon.

 

[ruleslawyer]

Barbarian DR and energy attacks

Question: Does the damage reduction class feature of the barbarian protect against energy attacks and other attacks that normally ignore damage reduction?

From the Player's Handbook, p.277:

Barbarians have damage reduction as a class feature, but theirs is a special type that negates a set amount of damage from any source.

From the Dungeon Master's Guide, p.74:

If a dash follows the slash (as with the damage reduction that is a class feature of the barbarian), then the damage reduction is effective against any attack that does not ignore damage reduction.

Magical attacks and energy attacks (even mundane energy) ignore damage reduction.

So, according to the Player's Handbook it is clear and unambiguous that Barbarian Damage Reduction is effective against spells and fire. According to the DMG it is equally clear and unambiguous that it is not. No Sage rulings or other interpretations on this to date.

 

[gamecat]

As liberal a dm I may be, you CAN wear a buckler and wield a double-handed weapon with no attack penalties, but how could you gain a benefit if you can't move your forearm to intercept incoming blows? If you use a two-handed weapon, both your hands are just a little busy.

I rest my case.

 

[tarsque]

As liberal a dm I may be, you CAN wear a buckler and wield a double-handed weapon with no attack penalties, but how could you gain a benefit if you can't move your forearm to intercept incoming blows? If you use a two-handed weapon, both your hands are just a little busy.

I rest my case.

The benefit is that on any round that you don't attack you get the +1 AC (or better for magic bucklers).

 

[gamecat]

I'd let you have it, because you CAN carry a greatsword one-handed, but not swing it effectively...