We are losing ambidexterity?
- Thread starter JacktheRabbit
- Start date
drnuncheon
Explorer
kreynolds, one further hypothetical:
Swashbuckler attacks with rapier
Switch to left hand (free action)
Draw dagger with right hand (free action)
Throw dagger with right hand
No penalties, right?
What advantage does the guy who draws and throws with his left hand have?
Why should he be taking penalties when Righty above isn't?
J
Swashbuckler attacks with rapier
Switch to left hand (free action)
Draw dagger with right hand (free action)
Throw dagger with right hand
No penalties, right?
What advantage does the guy who draws and throws with his left hand have?
Why should he be taking penalties when Righty above isn't?
J
Mal Malenkirk
First Post
kreynolds said:
Just pointing out that there is a penalty for using two weapons even if you're not using TWF to get an extra attack since you'll get penalized on the off-hand if you don't have ambidexterity.
You said he was trying to get a lesser benefit without penalty.
Beside, what kind of penalty would you apply to a guy who do what I described? Beside a -4 on the off-hand if he doesn't have Ambidexterity?
Destil
Explorer
What I'd like to see
I really hope 3.5 cleans this up and limits Rapid Shot to projectile weapons and allows thrown weapons to gain the bonus from two-weapon, since it (to me) makes a lot more sense that way. So you could use Rapid with bows and slings, while to get an extra thrown dagger you'd want two-weapon.
I really hope 3.5 cleans this up and limits Rapid Shot to projectile weapons and allows thrown weapons to gain the bonus from two-weapon, since it (to me) makes a lot more sense that way. So you could use Rapid with bows and slings, while to get an extra thrown dagger you'd want two-weapon.
Last edited:
Thimble the Squit
First Post
A halfling machine-gun (3e)
I'll begin with an apology: I can't find the page in the PH where this applies, sorry -- but I know I did find it before, since I recall changing the way one of my players' characters worked.
He has a halfling dagger-thrower, with huge Dex and lots of nifty feats (he's reasonably high level). After originally giving him Two-Weapon Fighting, we concluded that this feat was melee only (source unknown, sorry again, maybe the one others have mentioned) and that a bandolier would not grant the same benefit as a quiver for "reloading" daggers, so we swapped out Two-Weapon Fighting for Quick Draw.
So, we're now talking:
Does anyone disagree with my interpretation here?
I'll begin with an apology: I can't find the page in the PH where this applies, sorry -- but I know I did find it before, since I recall changing the way one of my players' characters worked.
He has a halfling dagger-thrower, with huge Dex and lots of nifty feats (he's reasonably high level). After originally giving him Two-Weapon Fighting, we concluded that this feat was melee only (source unknown, sorry again, maybe the one others have mentioned) and that a bandolier would not grant the same benefit as a quiver for "reloading" daggers, so we swapped out Two-Weapon Fighting for Quick Draw.
So, we're now talking:
- Dex 22, BAB +8, Weapon Focus: Dagger, Quick Draw, Point Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, Ambidexterity, Expert Tactician (Sword and Fist) and lots of masterwork daggers -- that's:-
- +16 / +11 for standard #AT
- +16 / +16 / +11 with ExT (when it qualifies)
- +14 / +14 / +14 / +9 with RS,ExT
- +10 / +10 / +10 / +10 / +5 with Amb,RS,ExT
Does anyone disagree with my interpretation here?
Hypersmurf
Moderatarrrrh...
Re: A halfling machine-gun (3e)
Yeah - the errata'd Expert Tactitian grants an extra melee attack, not an extra partial action, so you can't throw a dagger with it.
-Hyp.
Yeah - the errata'd Expert Tactitian grants an extra melee attack, not an extra partial action, so you can't throw a dagger with it.
-Hyp.
Ranger REG
Explorer
Re: What I'd like to see
I won't agree to that clarification. Unless it takes a full action to throw a weapon, like a shortstpear, one should throw with Rapid Shot.Destil said:
Reading the text on "Fighting with two weapons" I find no explicit rule banning an extra thrown attack using the off-hand. However, I am rather confident that the intention is not to allow it. Circumstantial evidence:
- The text talks of "when wielding a weapon in the off-hand"... it doesn't sound like throwing to me. But this is better:
- It is explicitly and unconditionally stated that the TWF feat reduces attack penalties by 2. The text on using two crossbows (under equipment) contradicts this. Therefore, the general rules (p124-5) cannot consistently apply to ranged weapons and the only answer is that they do not apply to ranged weapons at all.
To me, an extra off-hand thrown attack 'smells' like a monk claiming an off-hand attack while flurrying.
... Or what?
- The text talks of "when wielding a weapon in the off-hand"... it doesn't sound like throwing to me. But this is better:
- It is explicitly and unconditionally stated that the TWF feat reduces attack penalties by 2. The text on using two crossbows (under equipment) contradicts this. Therefore, the general rules (p124-5) cannot consistently apply to ranged weapons and the only answer is that they do not apply to ranged weapons at all.
To me, an extra off-hand thrown attack 'smells' like a monk claiming an off-hand attack while flurrying.
... Or what?
Last edited:
Destil
Explorer
Re: Re: What I'd like to see
Thrown - Quickdraw (to draw and still full attack) & Two-Weapon
Projectile - Point Blank Shot & Rapid Shot.
It prevents the (IMHO) silly combination of the two, and with ambidextarity and two weapon fighting becoming one feat, I think it makes more sense to make it more general, as well.
One might also make the point that it makes more sense when point blank and rapid shot apply to weapong you shoot, not ones you throw throw.
Given the state of drawing a thrown weapon (move equivelent) vs. drawing ammunition (free) I think it makes perfect sense. Projectile weapons & ammo have their own rules, which do not really mesh well with thrown weapons. Like this either way you'll need two feats:Ranger REG said:
Thrown - Quickdraw (to draw and still full attack) & Two-Weapon
Projectile - Point Blank Shot & Rapid Shot.
It prevents the (IMHO) silly combination of the two, and with ambidextarity and two weapon fighting becoming one feat, I think it makes more sense to make it more general, as well.
One might also make the point that it makes more sense when point blank and rapid shot apply to weapong you shoot, not ones you throw throw.
Last edited:
drnuncheon
Explorer
Re: Re: Re: What I'd like to see
The name of a feat is not evidence to make a ruling on.
If you do that, you get into arguments like "Well, it says 'Whirlwind Attack', and an arrow/thrown dagger/disintegrate is an attack...I'm making an attack roll and everything!"
You also might wind up with (using 3rd party supplements) two equivalent feats with different names suddenly having different effects because you interpret the names differently.
Only the feat description is considered.
J
Destil said:
The name of a feat is not evidence to make a ruling on.
If you do that, you get into arguments like "Well, it says 'Whirlwind Attack', and an arrow/thrown dagger/disintegrate is an attack...I'm making an attack roll and everything!"
You also might wind up with (using 3rd party supplements) two equivalent feats with different names suddenly having different effects because you interpret the names differently.
Only the feat description is considered.
J
