Two Weapon Attack

[argo]

Ok, I'll try explaining this one more time from a different angle. Maybe it will make more sense like if I phrase it like this.

The rules restrict your ability to use multiple weapons by the number of weapons you can use per round, not by the type of weapons you can use.

If the rules defined your ability to use extra weapons by the type of weapon used it would read something like: "if you wield a one handed wepon and a light weapon you may use the light weapon to make extra attacks each round". They don't say that. Nowhere in the Conan rules, SRD, or DnD core rulebooks will you find a passage that says "you may not use a two handed weapon and a light weapon both in the same round". This is because multiple weapons use is not defined by the type of weapon used.

Instead the rules restrict fighting with multiple weapons based on the number of weapons he can use each round. (If it helps think of this as "weapon slots".) That is the meaning of the passage on p 183

If a combatant wields a second weapon in the off hand, that combatant can get onne extra attack per round with that weapon when he takes a full attack action.

Specifically a character can wield only two weapons per round, one of which is designated as the primary and one of which is designated the "off hand". The character is free to designate whichever one he wants as the primary, he can even change his mind from round to round (this is because there is no game mechanic for "handidness" in d20). Normally in order to wield most weapons you must hold them in at least one hand, thus under most conditions you can not wield a two handed weapon and a second weapon because you don't have enough hands to go around! But an unarmed strike does not require you dedicate a free hand to using it and the rules specifically state that you can use an unarmed strike as a off-hand weapon so you can wield an unarmed strike as a second weapon, and make off-hand attacks with it, regardless of what you are doing with your hands (including weielding a two handed weapon as your primary).

This is really not that much of a "strech". It simply requires you to understand what the rules mean rather than what you think they mean.

Regarding the question about a sword, kick, kick attack routine. Remember what I just said, the limit is the number of weapons and that number is two. So although a martial artist could make TWF attacks with his fists by counting his body as two weapons (effectievly using it as double weapon) the greatsword weilder can not make his sword attack and then count his unarmed strikes as two weapon (a kick and a kick for example) because then he would be wielding three weapons (sword, unarmed, unarmed) and three is more than two. The only way to use more than two weapons per round is by taking the Multiweapon Fighting feat which iteslf has a prerequisite of having "three or more hands" something that usually isnt an issue.

See how even that makes sense within the contex of TWF limiting the number of weapons instead of the type of weapons? It makes sense because that is how the rules were written to be understood.

Anyway, hope thats more clear than my previous attempts. Later.

 

[Sutek]

No...not clear. This is the first time I've seen you muddle one, so I'll let you off. <ducks> :lol:

See, if I fight with a Great Sword in 2 hands, I still have my knees as a "second weapon." Likewise, if I have a Short Sword and a Dagger, I still have my knees. It's not about the number of weapons, it's about Standard Actions. Characters can make a standard action per round - one. An off-hand weapon adds to that number (as does leveling up, but let's stick with weaponry for the time being). The rules imply that Unarmed Attacks are blow delivered by the attacker's body, be that hands, feet, knees, shoulder...whatever...

...but...

...page 167 of the Conan original printing states that unarmed attacks are "like attacking with a melee weapon" but with various extra complications. Further, an Unarmed Attack is listed as one of the Standard Actions available each round, so unless you have a full round attack action and choose the Unarmed Strike as your additional attack due to TWF Feat or whatever, you are only allowed one Standard Action, and that would be with your primary weapon, a two-handed one in the situation we're discussing.

What this means is that with a 2HW and the 2 Wpn Fighting Feat, one can make a primary attack with the 2HW and an off-hand attack with an Unarmed Strike without penalty. That's because there's only one standard action (the 2HW) with a bonus off-hand strike (knee, shoulder, head butt, whatever) available to any character.

As you increase in levels you will eventually be able to make multiple attacks. These additional attacks per round are for any type of attcak you wish to use them for each round with any weapon (including unarmed strikes) every round. This is the only way one could affect the sword/dagger/kick type of attack, but it escapes me as to why. Perhaps it woul dbe to disable or render a foe unconcious rather than kill them.

 

[argo]

What this means is that with a 2HW and the 2 Wpn Fighting Feat, one can make a primary attack with the 2HW and an off-hand attack with an Unarmed Strike without penalty. That's because there's only one standard action (the 2HW) with a bonus off-hand strike (knee, shoulder, head butt, whatever) available to any character.

Well, thats esentially right. To be totally correct I should point out that you dont' take a standard action as "part" of a full round action with a bonus action, rather you either take a full round action or else take a standard and move action in any combination (with the stipulation that a standard action can be traded for a move action but not vice versa).

As you increase in levels you will eventually be able to make multiple attacks. These additional attacks per round are for any type of attcak you wish to use them for each round with any weapon (including unarmed strikes) every round. This is the only way one could affect the sword/dagger/kick type of attack, but it escapes me as to why. Perhaps it woul dbe to disable or render a foe unconcious rather than kill them.

Though I personally support your conclusion here you ought to know that this is an issue that is not only up for debate but actually unsolvable within the RAW because the key point depends entierly on how you interpret the emphasis in the phrase "fight this way". One of the few rules quandries in d20 that actually has two completly legetimate and mitually exclusive intrepretations.

 

[Sutek]

What this means is that with a 2HW and the 2 Wpn Fighting Feat, one can make a primary attack with the 2HW and an off-hand attack with an Unarmed Strike without penalty. That's because there's only one standard action (the 2HW) with a bonus off-hand strike (knee, shoulder, head butt, whatever) available to any character.

Well, thats esentially right. To be totally correct I should point out that you dont' take a standard action as "part" of a full round action with a bonus action, rather you either take a full round action or else take a standard and move action in any combination (with the stipulation that a standard action can be traded for a move action but not vice versa).

Well, now we know what happens when two utterly pedantic people are locked in a room with a Conan RPG book...lol

As you increase in levels you will eventually be able to make multiple attacks. These additional attacks per round are for any type of attcak you wish to use them for each round with any weapon (including unarmed strikes) every round. This is the only way one could affect the sword/dagger/kick type of attack, but it escapes me as to why. Perhaps it woul dbe to disable or render a foe unconcious rather than kill them.

Though I personally support your conclusion here you ought to know that this is an issue that is not only up for debate but actually unsolvable within the RAW because the key point depends entierly on how you interpret the emphasis in the phrase "fight this way". One of the few rules quandries in d20 that actually has two completly legetimate and mitually exclusive intrepretations.

How so? It's just one extra attack alloted as a bonus attack. I'd always interpreted it as if the character suddently sprouted a third arm - an extra off-hand attack. The reduction in bonus (+6/+1) reflected this, but was only 5 less rather thqan 6 less (meaning the normal off-hand penalty is -6, but because the bonus attack is innate, it seemed logical to me that it was only at an effective -5). I don't know the "debate" or "quandry" to which you are referring.

Splain dis to me...

 

[argo]

Splain dis to me...

Ok, lets say that you have a BAB of +6 (thus you make itterative attacks at 6/1) and you are holding a broadsword (one handed weapon) and a club (one handed weapon) in your off hand (thus your TWF penalties are -4 even with the TWF feat). There is an opponent standing next to you and one 20ft away. You decide not to TWF this round, so you don't take the penalties, and take your first attack against the opponent next to you with the broadsword. You score a crit and kill him with one hit. Now you still have an itterative attack left (at +1) but your only opponent is 20ft away and you cannot both move and attack this turn because you already used your standard action. If you throw the club though (range increment 10ft) you could still use your itterative attack.

Can you throw the club? :? The answer isn't as simple as you might think.

If a combatant wields a second weapon in the off hand, that combatant can get one extra attack per round with that weapon when he takes a full attack action.

Fighting in this way is very hard, however, and a combatant suffers a -6 penalty to both his main weapon and his off-hand weapon attack rolls.

The answer then depends on what "Fighting in this way" means. Does it mean "wields a second weapon in the off hand" or does it mean "get one extra attack per round with that weapon". Which of those two clauses does the clause "Fighting in this way" refer to?

If it refers to the clause "wields a second weapon in the off hand" then you can't throw the club because doing so would mean you are weilding a second weapon and have to take the TWF penalties but you didn't take the penalties to your main hand attack earlier in this round and since you cannot retroactiavely apply the penalties you can't TWF (same way you can't decide to use PA or expertise half way through your round). Similairly you can't threaten with the club because you arn't weilding it thus should you loose your sword for some reason between this turn and your next turn you would be considered unarmed and couldn't make AoO's etc with your club. Because you aren't wielding it, you are just holding it.

If OTOH "Fighting in this way" refers to "get one extra attack per round with this weapon" then you can throw the club for your itterative attack. Fruthermore you can also use it to make AoO's in between turns without penalty. You do still only apply .5 Str to it becaus it is still an off hand weapon but as long as you don't take the benefit of an extra attack (or attacks if you have ITWF) then you can use it interchangebly with your primary weapon without penalty (and if you want you can re-designate it as yoru primary on your next turn).

Honestly there is no way to determine which is the correct intrepretation. The presence of that damn comma between the two clauses leaves the question eternally vague. :roll:

Personally I choose to intrepret the clause as meaning "get one extra attack per round with this weapon". YMMV

Later.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm letting my players use the unarmed strike and two handed weapon combo but I'm dreading what might happen in a few levels. Imagine a strong character using this combo with power attack. Effectively 2.5 times strength and 3 times :shock: Power attack amount.
Now in standard D20 that is offset by the -2 penalty to hit with both attacks but with no penalty......I'm thinking of trying to limit the the STR and Power Attack amounts somehow. Conan did introduce an interesting variant on Power Attack where the bonus damage(correct me if I'm wrong but I did get an official response when I asked about this with relation to Monster Killer(?), the other powerattack feat) where the total damage can't exceed attackers BA. That would mean a character with BA of 4 would get he most benefit out of Power Attack with a 2H weapon if he only used 2 points. Do you guys think if I limit the total amount of damage a character can get in one full action, probably not a whole round as it would effect attacks of Op, to a limit of his Base Attack that might resolve this? Im thinking that it might be worth doing something similar with STR bonus as well. Otherwise using two actual weapons really isn't going to be worth it. Or am I worrying for nothing
Aaron

 

[SableWyvern]

Since an unarmed attack is a light weapon, you cannot use Power Attack with it. I'm not sure whether this means you would apply the penalty to all your unarmed attacks, but gain no bonus damage, or if your unarmed attacks would be at their full attack bonus. If you rule the former, you've probably solved your problem.

The BAB limit to damage simply means that the maximum damage bonus with 2-handers is the same as for one-handed weapons. This was always true in 3.0 -- since all weapons only gave 1 for 1, the BAB limit to Power Attack was also a BAB limit to damage bonus. Under 3.5 and Conan, one simply gets to that maximum limit with few penalties when using a two-hander.

 

[Trodax]

Since an unarmed attack is a light weapon, you cannot use Power Attack with it.

I'm pretty sure it says somewhere that unarmed strikes are an exception to this rule. Probably under the description of Power Attack itself (don't have the book in front of me though).

 

[SableWyvern]

You are correct.

Despite that, I would be tempted to dissallow power attack with off-hand unarmed attacks made in conjunction with two handed or sword and board combos.

As an aside, I also note that the penalty does apply to light weapons wielded with another weapon that is using power attack.

 

[AZZA]

The BAB limit to damage simply means that the maximum damage bonus with 2-handers is the same as for one-handed weapons. This was always true in 3.0 -- since all weapons only gave 1 for 1, the BAB limit to Power Attack was also a BAB limit to damage bonus. Under 3.5 and Conan, one simply gets to that maximum limit with few penalties when using a two-hander.

I thought the limit to damage was Conancentric. We had been playing 3.5 that the limit you could deduct was up to your BAB but if your weapon was 2 handed you added double that to your damage. I didn;t like that way, much prefer this way.

You are correct.

Despite that, I would be tempted to dissallow power attack with off-hand unarmed attacks made in conjunction with two handed or sword and board combos.

Don't really want to disallow, would prefer to find a compromise.

As an aside, I also note that the penalty does apply to light weapons wielded with another weapon that is using power attack.

Which is what causes the problem. Armour penetration aside, and with only 1/2 STR bonus it would only be 3 whith a light weapon and 18 STR, a fighter is better off dumping his ponieard and punching people!

 

[SableWyvern]

My bad. You're probably right. I assumed the Conan Power Attack was standard 3.5, but since I don't actually have 3.5, there's every chance I am wrong.

 

[Sutek]

Can you throw the club?

If a combatant wields a second weapon in the off hand, that combatant can get one extra attack per round with that weapon when he takes a full attack action.

Fighting in this way is very hard, however, and a combatant suffers a -6 penalty to both his main weapon and his off-hand weapon attack rolls.

The answer then depends on what "Fighting in this way" means. Does it mean "wields a second weapon in the off hand" or does it mean "get one extra attack per round with that weapon". Which of those two clauses does the clause "Fighting in this way" refer to?

Answer: no, you can't throw the club.

Why?

Above, a full attack option was chosen against an adjacent opponent but the opponent was taken out with the broadsword so extra iterative attacks are simply lost. It was forfeited by player choice to attack an adjacent target with (even stated in your example) with just the broadsword to avoid TWF penalties.

If a player tried this argument, I'd say bluntly that he just elected to only use the sword and to use the club in any way along with the sword constitutes TWF. Since he chose not to do that, he can't then choose to TWF even though he has more iterative attacks "waiting in the wings".

If the -4 penalty you sated in your example was invoked and applied so that the character was fighting with TWF, etc, then he could swing at the adjacent baddie with the broadsword, kill him as in your example and then still have his iterative attack (at -4) to throw his club.

You are eithe TWFing or not, in other words, and can't reconsider mid-stream.

 

[SableWyvern]

A fair ruling, Sutek, but one that leaves the crux of Argo's conundrum unanswered. You have assumed fighting with two two different weapons is what makes up Two Weapon Combat. The alternate explanation, that gaining extra attacks with off-hand weapons is in fact the defining factor, remains a legititmate interpretation, however.

I do take issue with your reference to the matter of "attacking an adjacent opponent". A full attack action allows full use of all iterative attacks - the target(s) of which can vary at the player's whim. Should the character have had other adjacent opponents nearby, there is no question that he could at least have used his broadsword against them.

 

[Sutek]

Okay, don't say "full attack action."

I say I have two weapons, but I dont' want to have to deal with a -4 penalty if I use them both to attack. They're both medium sized weapons so by just using the broadsword I have, I stand a much better chance of swiping thebad dude right next to me. So I swipe away, sword only at no -4 penalty. The subsequent good news is that, because I'm an emense powerhouse of a character, I take him down in that single shot. Now, it doesn't matter if I have extra attacks due to anopther weapon or level because I didn't choose to 2 Wpn Fight. I chose 1 Wpn Fighting. (lol)

Your issue with "adjacent" makes no sense by argo's example of two bad guys, one in close combat range and the other in club tossing range.

:lol:

 

[Sutek]

As an aside, I also note that the penalty does apply to light weapons wielded with another weapon that is using power attack.

Which is what causes the problem. Armour penetration aside, and with only 1/2 STR bonus it would only be 3 whith a light weapon and 18 STR, a fighter is better off dumping his ponieard and punching people!

Except unarmed strikes only do non-lethal damage usually. You need Improved Unarmed Strike to deal lethal damage unarmed. That, combined with Brawl can, indeed, be a nasty combo with TWF as well because them 1d6 can be dealt with addition to power attack bonuses and Finesse capabilities because unarmed strikes are always made with a "light weapon".

Gouged eye syndrome... :wink: