Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Techsmithy 06-15-07, 10:02 AM	Can you Imp Trip a target with weapon A (say the spiked chain so you can trip an adjancent target) and then before doing the free follow up attack drop weapon A and Quick Draw weapon B for the attack? Imp Trip says- If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt. Could you use a free action before "immediately" attacking?
runestar 06-15-07, 10:07 AM	I think the word "immediately" does not make your tactic possible. Depending on how you interpret how immediate it must be, it would not leave you room for even free actions. Which brings to find a question of my own... Could a greatsword wielding fighter trip with an unarmed strike, then follow up the bonus attack with his greatsword.:)
Hsien 06-15-07, 10:23 AM	I would tend to argue towards no, imo. Visually I picture it as a follow through attack after a succesful trip. It also depends on how much you want to read into the word "immediately. Mechanically, I would argue against allowing it that to prevent characters trying to cascade affects...such as quick drawing a blade and getting a sneak attack; think theres a feat for that provides that...or at least something along those lines.
Knightblde 06-15-07, 10:42 AM	I think the word "immediately" does not make your tactic possible. Depending on how you interpret how immediate it must be, it would not leave you room for even free actions. Which brings to find a question of my own... Could a greatsword wielding fighter trip with an unarmed strike, then follow up the bonus attack with his greatsword.:) Yes. You can do this if you have Improved Trip.
Dheran 06-15-07, 11:21 AM	I agree with both runestar and Knightblde. "Immediately" implies that you don't get to take other actions -- even free actions -- between the trip and the follow-on attack. But if you're already threatening with another weapon you should be able to use it for the follow-on attack.
perdera 06-15-07, 11:56 AM	Which brings to find a question of my own... Could a greatsword wielding fighter trip with an unarmed strike, then follow up the bonus attack with his greatsword.:) I suppose I'd allow it, but there's gotta be some sort of penalty in there somewhere. Sounds an awful lot like TWF...melee touch attack with your off-hand then strike with your main-hand (which is even a two-hander in this example). I think the penalties I'd apply would make it not terribly worth it. Maybe with a one-handed or smaller weapon.
tui 06-15-07, 12:34 PM	Imp Trip says- If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt. Could you use a free action before "immediately" attacking? RAW, I'd say yes, you could use two free actions to drop your chain and Quick Draw a second weapon (scythe?). The reason I say that is I don't see any problem with shouting "Die!" as a free action before taking your extra attack. So I see no inherent problem with inserting a free action(s) in there. RAI, I'd say no; the DM is supposed to limit the number (and type) of free actions you can take in a round to something reasonable; from the SRD: "However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free." I'd personally say that you can't do the drop + Quick Draw before your "immediate" attack... or if for some reason I did allow it, I'd restrict it to Quick Drawing a light weapon.
jaelis 06-15-07, 12:37 PM	Personally, I see the follow up attack from Improved Trip as essentially part of the trip itself, so I would require it to be made with the same weapon. Most people don't see it that way though. Otherwise, it's up to the DM to interpret that "immediately."
goawayugh 06-15-07, 12:39 PM	Again, it all depends on how the DM wants to interpret "immediately".
Knightblde 06-15-07, 01:43 PM	Personally, I see the follow up attack from Improved Trip as essentially part of the trip itself, so I would require it to be made with the same weapon. Most people don't see it that way though. Otherwise, it's up to the DM to interpret that "immediately." What if you have a dagger in your hand and you trip as unarmed attack? Can you then make that immediate attack with the dagger? What if you trip with a whip then attack with another weapon? What if you trip with a whip then make an unarmed attack with or without Improved Unarmed Strike? I think it would state in the feat description that you would have to use the same weapon if that were the case. I do agree however that you should not be able to take any other actions, even free actions (except the afore mentioned "Die"), between the trip and the immediate attack.
Kouk 06-15-07, 01:47 PM	I would think you would have to do it with a weapon you were already holding. As to applying TWF penalties just if you use another weapon, I don't think that would be the case that it would actually count as TWF. If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt. So, I see this as you can trip with your unarmed strike, then swing with another weapon because it is "as if you hadn't used your (tripping) attack for the trip attempt". Attacks don't have to be with particular weapons, and it doesn't say it has to be with the same weapon. As to whether it should incur TWF penalties, in normal combat, you can attack with one weapon, drop it, then draw another (with quick draw) and attack with that one. As long as you are still using just "one hand" and not getting an extra attack that round from a weapon in your off hand you are not TWFing. I just think that the "immediateness" of the free attack granted by Improved Trip prevents actually drawing another weapon even with Quick Draw for the "free" attack, as drawing is a kind of action.
tarkin 06-15-07, 01:50 PM	RAW, I'd say yes, you could use two free actions to drop your chain and Quick Draw a second weapon (scythe?). The reason I say that is I don't see any problem with shouting "Die!" as a free action before taking your extra attack. So I see no inherent problem with inserting a free action(s) in there. RAI, I'd say no; the DM is supposed to limit the number (and type) of free actions you can take in a round to something reasonable; from the SRD: "However, there are reasonable limits on what you can really do for free." I'd personally say that you can't do the drop + Quick Draw before your "immediate" attack... or if for some reason I did allow it, I'd restrict it to Quick Drawing a light weapon. Hm. I use the same example to say NO. The concept of people yelling out "insults and epithets " in combat is foolish. It was put into movies because to interest the watchers, not for realism results. A real warrior is silent while he kills. Speaking slows you down more than enough for the enemey to escape. I read the word Immediately to mean "before any other action". that includes free actions. I would however allow anything that is "not an action" to work in between the trip and the follow up.
madbliza 06-15-07, 01:55 PM	I would say... yes. It is technically a free action to drop a weapon. It is a free action to draw a weapon (thanks to Quick Draw). However, the only stipulation that I would place on it is that you can only freely draw one weapon per round. Meaning, that if you used the Quick Draw to take out the chain then no, but if the chain was already out then yes.
Knightblde 06-15-07, 02:03 PM	I would say... yes. It is technically a free action to drop a weapon. It is a free action to draw a weapon (thanks to Quick Draw). However, the only stipulation that I would place on it is that you can only freely draw one weapon per round. Meaning, that if you used the Quick Draw to take out the chain then no, but if the chain was already out then yes. Quick Draw once per round is an absolute No No. You can use it as many times as you can attack, per the FAQ.
jaelis 06-15-07, 02:04 PM	What if you have a dagger in your hand and you trip as unarmed attack? Can you then make that immediate attack with the dagger? What if you trip with a whip then attack with another weapon? What if you trip with a whip then make an unarmed attack with or without Improved Unarmed Strike? IMO, no you can't do any of those things. I'm aware that this is my opinion only. I think it would state in the feat description that you would have to use the same weapon if that were the case. My opinion is that this is part of what the "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" line means.
Nom 06-15-07, 06:14 PM	Note that Improved Trip doesn't say "with the same weapon at the same bonus" (compare Cleave). It simply says that you get "an immediate extra attack as if you had not used your attack to trip". Similarly, the rules do not in any way require that you be empty-handed. Note that the rules do not prevent you from tripping while using any form of weapon; it's just that you gain no special benefit from doing so if it is not a trip weapon. It's an "unarmed melee touch attack", not an "unarmed strike". You're quite within your rights to describe the trip attempt as "as he shifts his weight, I flick his foot with my greatsword, then spin it around and follow through". The "unarmed" refers to "non-threatening", not "empty handed".
Kalarus 06-15-07, 08:59 PM	Note that Improved Trip doesn't say "with the same weapon at the same bonus" (compare Cleave). It simply says that you get "an immediate extra attack as if you had not used your attack to trip". Similarly, the rules do not in any way require that you be empty-handed. Note that the rules do not prevent you from tripping while using any form of weapon; it's just that you gain no special benefit from doing so if it is not a trip weapon. It's an "unarmed melee touch attack", not an "unarmed strike". You're quite within your rights to describe the trip attempt as "as he shifts his weight, I flick his foot with my greatsword, then spin it around and follow through". The "unarmed" refers to "non-threatening", not "empty handed". While you are in fact right about what should happen in practice, you are off on one slight point: the attack is in fact an unarmed touch attack, however since an unarmed attack (wether touch or "strike") does not have to be with one's hands but can be made with feet etc., it indeed does not matter if you are holding weapons in your hands if you try to trip on your turn. Tripping in fact IS an unarmed melee attack. However, since the Improved Trip text reads that you "immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt" you can strike the tripped opponent with any weapon you are holding, you are not required to follow-up with an unarmed strike. Incidentally for the OP that means you cannot change your spiked chain for another weapon "in between" the trip. Using improved trip does not put you in some strange time-warp where you get extra actions. The followup melee attack is taken *as if you had not used the attack as a trip attempt*. It does not allow you to treat the combat round as if the attack had never taken place at all. You are still executing the same attack, not splitting it up into two different attacks. You can't hit something with weapon A, then drop it and quickdraw weapon B to take damage either, it is likewise one and the same attack that gets resolved fully before you get to change weapons. By the way, the difference between treating trip as an an unarmed melee attack and as a "nonthreatening attack" that you can do with any weapon does not do justice to the concept of trip weapons. So you are *not* within your rights to flip someone's foot with your greatsword, because a greatsword is not a trip weapon. On your own turn this doesn't matter much because the end result is the same anyway, but it *does* matter when looking at attacks of oppertunity. Unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you do not threaten squares with unarmed attacks. That means without that feat, you can't trip an opponent on an AoO, unless you are holding a trip weapon (since with the trip weapon, you do threaten squares). Not even Improved Trip allows you to do this (which I personally find something that really warrants a houserule). That means that if Joe Goblin charges past you at the party wizard and you are holding a greatsword, the only thing you can really do is just attack, disarm or sunder. Trips and grapples all require unarmed touch attacks, and you can't do those if you don't threaten the opponent since it would mean the AoO gets negated.
Kouk 06-16-07, 01:29 AM	A real warrior is silent while he kills. Speaking slows you down more than enough for the enemey to escape. I think most martial arts practitioners would disagree that you should fight silently. At least the ones from the far east ('cept ninjas maybe). Anyway, why would you argue the realism of talking during an action? Talking: Free action. D&D: Fantasy game. Makes total sense that you can shout all the epithets you want as you land the killing blow, in fact you could go on for quite a long time before the DM says "OK, you've used up all your talking time for this round". Try it :P
Nom 06-16-07, 06:21 AM	Unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you do not threaten squares with unarmed attacks. That means without that feat, you can't trip an opponent on an AoO, unless you are holding a trip weapon (since with the trip weapon, you do threaten squares). Not even Improved Trip allows you to do this (which I personally find something that really warrants a houserule). ... Trips and grapples all require unarmed touch attacks, and you can't do those if you don't threaten the opponent since it would mean the AoO gets negated.Can you find any justification for this interpretation in the PH? It seems to me to be an important enough distinction that if they meant to say it they would have said so explicitly. Especially considering note 7, table 8-2, which says you can make any of the listed special attacks on an AoO. If your interpretation was in force, this is actually false; you can't grapple or trip on an AoO unless you have IUS (or a trip weapon). But nowhere in the description of IUS, IG, IT, or the trip weapons does it say "and allows you to make grapple/trip attempts on an AoO", which strongly suggests that none of the above feats change "normal" in this regard.
runestar 06-16-07, 07:05 AM	Can you find any justification for this interpretation in the PH? It seems to me to be an important enough distinction that if they meant to say it they would have said so explicitly. Especially considering note 7, table 8-2, which says you can make any of the listed special attacks on an AoO. If your interpretation was in force, this is actually false; you can't grapple or trip on an AoO unless you have IUS (or a trip weapon). But nowhere in the description of IUS, IG, IT, or the trip weapons does it say "and allows you to make grapple/trip attempts on an AoO", which strongly suggests that none of the above feats change "normal" in this regard. It is mentioned in the FAQ. Can you make a trip attack (or other special attack) as an attack of opportunity? Yes, as long as you make the trip attack (or other special attack) with a weapon with which you threaten the target. For example, unless you wield a weapon that allows you to make a trip attack, trip attacks are unarmed attacks; a character who doesn’t threaten while unarmed couldn’t make an unarmed trip attack as an attack of opportunity. IUS lets you threaten with your unarmed strikes by making them armed, and thus would allow you to trip with them during AoOs. It is more of a general application of the rules governing AoOs (you must be armed to threaten, rather than a specific exception to the normal rules, so I guess they did not deem it necessary to include that particular clause in as well.:)
Kalarus 06-16-07, 08:26 AM	It is mentioned in the FAQ. IUS lets you threaten with your unarmed strikes by making them armed, and thus would allow you to trip with them during AoOs. It is more of a general application of the rules governing AoOs (you must be armed to threaten, rather than a specific exception to the normal rules, so I guess they did not deem it necessary to include that particular clause in as well.:) Correct, you can find it on page 137 of the PHB, Attacks of Oppertunity section, Threatened Squares paragraph. "If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of oppertunity." P139 gives more details about unarmed attacks, restates "An unarmed character can't make attacks of oppertunity", except for attacks that count as "Armed Unarmed Attacks", such as Monks or characters with IUS. Trip (PHB158) states it is an "unarmed melee attack". P139 details what that means. Trip is an unarmed melee attack, which means you do not threaten squares around you with trip attacks, which means you can't trip as an attack of oppertunity without having IUS or a trip weapon. I recommend Spiked Chains :P.
Doedipus 06-16-07, 11:57 AM	This seemed like a good place to ask my question instead of starting a new thread (similar situation). I actually plan on utilizing imp.trip my my character as well, but he'll be fighting with an off-hand whip and a main-hand shortsword. Do I get to choose which weapon I get my attack of opportunity with, or can I technically use both in an attack of opportunity? Or can I only use the shortsword because I already used the whip? As I'm sure you can tell, I don't have much combat experience with this.
Knightblde 06-16-07, 12:24 PM	This seemed like a good place to ask my question instead of starting a new thread (similar situation). I actually plan on utilizing imp.trip my my character as well, but he'll be fighting with an off-hand whip and a main-hand shortsword. Do I get to choose which weapon I get my attack of opportunity with, or can I technically use both in an attack of opportunity? Or can I only use the shortsword because I already used the whip? As I'm sure you can tell, I don't have much combat experience with this. I have a PC doing this now. You can only make attacks of oppotunity with the short sword. Under the description of whip it states that it does not threaten squares. It counts as a ranged attack in respect to AoO. This sucks for us, but it is the draw back of having a weapon that has a reach of 3. Happy Gaming!
Kalarus 06-16-07, 01:44 PM	I have a PC doing this now. You can only make attacks of oppotunity with the short sword. Under the description of whip it states that it does not threaten squares. It counts as a ranged attack in respect to AoO. This sucks for us, but it is the draw back of having a weapon that has a reach of 3. Happy Gaming! I just want to add that this is true because it is a property of the whip, that you cannot make trip attacks with it as AoOs, not a property of two weapon fighting. Were you, for example, wielding a flail (a trip weapon) in your off-hand, you threaten all squares 5 feet around you with the flail (since it is a wielded melee weapon), and thus anyone in those squares provoking an AoO from you could be tripped by using your flail. Doesn't matter if it is an off-hand weapon or primary weapon. Doesn't matter which weapon you attacked with this round. The requirement for threatening squares is that you are wielding the weapon, nothing more.
Doedipus 06-16-07, 05:25 PM	You can't do AoO with a whip? Crap! I thought you could! Is there any feat that lets you do an AoO with a ranged weapon?
Knightblde 06-17-07, 03:19 PM	You can't do AoO with a whip? Crap! I thought you could! Is there any feat that lets you do an AoO with a ranged weapon? That is a really good question, I had not thought about going that route. I will have to do some research. PS Kalarus is 100% correct. I have thought about switching to a spiked chain becuase it would threaten attacks.
Pentar 06-17-07, 05:25 PM	That is a really good question, I had not thought about going that route. I will have to do some research. PS Kalarus is 100% correct. I have thought about switching to a spiked chain becuase it would threaten attacks. There are numerous feats that allow you to use ranged weapons to perform moves that can automatically be done with a melee one - I think they are in Complete Warrior and/or Complete Adventurer. I'm thinking things like Ranged Disarm, or Ranged Pin, or something like that. I don't think there is anything that lets you make AoO's with Ranged weapons... although I believe there might be a feat that lets you give allies an AoO against a target you hit with a ranged attack.
Twylyght 06-17-07, 07:04 PM	Can you Imp Trip a target with weapon A (say the spiked chain so you can trip an adjancent target) and then before doing the free follow up attack drop weapon A and Quick Draw weapon B for the attack? Imp Trip says- If you trip an opponent in melee combat, you immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt. Could you use a free action before "immediately" attacking? My ruling would be no this does not work, in my opinion, the key text is "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" this to me is cycling back to reuse the same attack action again. Before and during the trip attempt you were using weapon A, there fore if you gain an attack "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" you would have to use weapon A to qualify, since you were not using weapon B before the attempt.
jaelis 06-17-07, 11:30 PM	My ruling would be no this does not work, in my opinion, the key text is "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" this to me is cycling back to reuse the same attack action again. Before and during the trip attempt you were using weapon A, there fore if you gain an attack "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" you would have to use weapon A to qualify, since you were not using weapon B before the attempt. Cool, there is someone else in the world that reads it that way! :pint:
Twilyte 06-18-07, 03:09 PM	...the attack is in fact an unarmed touch attack, however since an unarmed attack (whether touch or "strike") does not have to be with one's hands but can be made with feet etc., it indeed does not matter if you are holding weapons in your hands if you try to trip on your turn. Tripping in fact IS an unarmed melee attack. However, since the Improved Trip text reads that you "immediately get a melee attack against that opponent as if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt" you can strike the tripped opponent with any weapon you are holding, you are not required to follow-up with an unarmed strike. By the way, the difference between treating trip as an an unarmed melee attack and as a "nonthreatening attack" that you can do with any weapon does not do justice to the concept of trip weapons. So you are *not* within your rights to flip someone's foot with your greatsword, because a greatsword is not a trip weapon. On your own turn this doesn't matter much because the end result is the same anyway, but it *does* matter when looking at attacks of opportunity. So then, if I read you correctly, I could do the following: 1) Use my Falchion to deal at least 10 damage to my opponent and utilize the Knockdown feat from Sword & Fist (Whenever you deal 10 or more points of damage to your opponent in melee, you make a trip attack as a free action against the same target.) to try and trip my opponent with my foot (note: a Falchion is not a trip weapon) 2) And thus on a successful trip (with a +4 bonus from improved trip) follow-up with an attack?
Kouk 06-18-07, 03:58 PM	So then, if I read you correctly, I could do the following: 1) Use my Falchion to deal at least 10 damage to my opponent and utilize the Knockdown feat from Sword & Fist (Whenever you deal 10 or more points of damage to your opponent in melee, you make a trip attack as a free action against the same target.) to try and trip my opponent with my foot (note: a Falchion is not a trip weapon) 2) And thus on a successful trip (with a +4 bonus from improved trip) follow-up with an attack? Sure, if for some reason you were allowed to take that feat (Sword and Fist is version 3.0).
Twilyte 06-18-07, 04:02 PM	Sure, if for some reason you were allowed to take that feat (Sword and Fist is version 3.0). Let's just say that my DM is not 3.5 compliant, and I am now a happy rogue.:D
Pentar 06-18-07, 04:06 PM	My ruling would be no this does not work, in my opinion, the key text is "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" this to me is cycling back to reuse the same attack action again. Before and during the trip attempt you were using weapon A, there fore if you gain an attack "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" you would have to use weapon A to qualify, since you were not using weapon B before the attempt. /agree The very image of a character swapping weapons like an FPS seems thematically silly to me :)
Knightblde 06-18-07, 04:12 PM	My ruling would be no this does not work, in my opinion, the key text is "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" this to me is cycling back to reuse the same attack action again. Before and during the trip attempt you were using weapon A, there fore if you gain an attack "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" you would have to use weapon A to qualify, since you were not using weapon B before the attempt. Why would you rule this way? Based on this you are cycling back to the part where you chose what weapon to use, but not what to do. Why would you force that upon your players? We all seem to agree that immediatly limits the ability to quick draw or do ANY other action rather than attack, but why would you limit it to the same weapon if another is already available? It does not appear to make sense to me. I can imagine tripping someone with no weapon, as Improved Trip allows me to do without provoking an AoO, then stabbing them with a dagger as the follow through. If I were to use an Unarmed Strike, I would then suffer an AoO upon ME! I would almost never use an unarmed attack for just this reason. This does not seem to be the idea of the designers. Just my thoughts, you do you.
Twylyght 06-18-07, 04:54 PM	Yes I can see that point, and agree thinking about it. I revise my statement as Improved trip grants a immediate attack "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" this is recycling to use the same attack action again, thus only options you had for the original attack can apply. You need not make the follow up attack with the same weapon as used for the trip attempt, however you must use a weapon you were already wielding at the time you made the trip attempt. That would open it up for options and still maintain the focus that its should all be happening in the span of a single action.
stoicfaux 06-18-07, 07:02 PM	Yes I can see that point, and agree thinking about it. I revise my statement as Improved trip grants a immediate attack "as if you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt" this is recycling to use the same attack action again, thus only options you had for the original attack can apply. You need not make the follow up attack with the same weapon as used for the trip attempt, however you must use a weapon you were already wielding at the time you made the trip attempt. That would open it up for options and still maintain the focus that its should all be happening in the span of a single action. However comma, pg 158 of PHB: A regular trip attack is an unarmed melee touch attack. Tripping with a Weapon: It's a melee touch attack with the weapon instead of an unarmed melee touch attack. So you could read it as: A successful Improved Trip while wielding a greatsword gives you an unarmed attack as the followup. Which kinda makes sense. You didn't use the sword to knock the guy down, you used arms/legs/body to do so. If you have any attacks remaining, you can still hit the guy with your greatsword when he's down. It would also make trip weapons more desirable (especially for BAB+5 and lower) plus it would make the greatsword less uber.
Kalarus 06-18-07, 08:39 PM	However comma, pg 158 of PHB: A regular trip attack is an unarmed melee touch attack. Tripping with a Weapon: It's a melee touch attack with the weapon instead of an unarmed melee touch attack. So you could read it as: A successful Improved Trip while wielding a greatsword gives you an unarmed attack as the followup. Which kinda makes sense. You didn't use the sword to knock the guy down, you used arms/legs/body to do so. If you have any attacks remaining, you can still hit the guy with your greatsword when he's down. It would also make trip weapons more desirable (especially for BAB+5 and lower) plus it would make the greatsword less uber. It kinda does not make sense :P You make a melee attack as if you hadn't used that attack to trip. While it is the same action, you make a melee attack "as if" the trip attempt never took place, that means that unless you would normally be attacking unarmed there's no reason to now make an unarmed melee attack. Nothing in the text for the Trip description nor the Improved Trip feat description states you have to follow-up with the same kind of attack as you used to trip with. In fact if I tackled a person, I'd be much more likely in a good balanced position to swing my sword at him than I would be to kick him with that same foot. If you wanted to, you could even use the melee attack for a disarm attempt, as a disarm can be used whenever you make a melee attack. and by the way, greatswords aren't uber, spiked chains are uber ;)
stoicfaux 06-19-07, 01:46 AM	It kinda does not make sense :P You make a melee attack as if you hadn't used that attack to trip. While it is the same action, you make a melee attack "as if" the trip attempt never took place, that means that unless you would normally be attacking unarmed there's no reason to now make an unarmed melee attack. Nothing in the text for the Trip description nor the Improved Trip feat description states you have to follow-up with the same kind of attack as you used to trip with. As with most people, my impression is that Improved Trip allows you to use your weapon for the follow up melee attack. However, the more I read and re-read the trip and Improved Feat trip rules in the PHB, the less inclined I am to believe that. Bear with me. The hair I'm trying to split is: Improved Trip states that: - an unarmed Improved Trip attack doesn't provoke an AOO - you can follow up with your melee attack if the trip was successful. Firstly, people seem to assume that Improved Trip's reference to "melee attack" specifically means a weapon melee attack. "Melee attack" is generic. "Unarmed melee attack" and "weapon melee attack" are specific. Secondly. The Improved Trip attack does not state that you can trip with a non-trip weapon. Improved Trip only benefits unarmed attacks. If you have a trip weapon then you would use the superior Tripping with a Weapon rules on pg 159.) Which leads to: Scenario Alpha: 1. A Greatsword cannot be used to make a trip attack. 1. Instead of swinging your Greatsword, you make an unarmed melee attack. 2. You use the unarmed attack to Improved Trip. 3. Because of Improved Trip, you get to re-do the unarmed melee attack. So you stop swinging your Greatsword and and hold your Greatword in your offhand so that you can make an unarmed attack with your primary hand (to avoid off-hand or TWF penalties.) Which implies that a Longsword + Large Shield user would have to drop the Longsword (as a free action) to make an unarmed attack. Scenario B 1. Improved Trip "converts" your Greatsword attack into a trip attack. 2. The trip attack just happens to use the unarmed melee attack rules. 3. Because of improved trip, you get to re-do the Greatsword melee attack. This means that Improved Trip allows you to effectively make trip attacks with non-trip weapons. But despite having a weapon, you use the unarmed attack rules to trip instead of the Tripping with a Weapon rules on page 159. This appears nonsensical. Wouldn't it have made more sense for Improved Trip to state that you can use a non-trip weapon to trip? Instead of forcing you to make an unarmed melee attack? I'm really beginning to think that Improved Trip requires you to switch to unarmed combat mode to trip with a non-trip weapon. To reiterate: 1) Improved Trip cannot be used with non-trip weapons. 2) You must switch to using unarmed melee attacks. (Hold your Greatsword in your offhand.) 3) You make the trip attack with your unarmed melee attack. 4) You make the follow up attack with your unarmed melee attack. 5) You switch your Greatsword back to your primary hand (free action I think) and attack some more. Whereas a Halbred user (a trip weapon) 1. Uses the Halbred's hook to trip (regular trip, not Improved Trip.) 2. Uses the Halbred for the follow up attack. (As per regular trip rules.) 3. Makes rest of attacks with Halbred. If you wanted to, you could even use the melee attack for a disarm attempt, as a disarm can be used whenever you make a melee attack. A disarm can be done unarmed or with a weapon, and again, a "melee attack" can be an "unarmed melee attack" or a "weapon melee attack". If your hands are empty and you successfully disarm, you get the weapon. So being able to disarm doesn't prove or disprove anything. =(
Kalarus 06-19-07, 07:05 AM	As with most people, my impression is that Improved Trip allows you to use your weapon for the follow up melee attack. However, the more I read and re-read the trip and Improved Feat trip rules in the PHB, the less inclined I am to believe that. Bear with me. The hair I'm trying to split is: Improved Trip states that: - an unarmed Improved Trip attack doesn't provoke an AOO - you can follow up with your melee attack if the trip was successful. Firstly, people seem to assume that Improved Trip's reference to "melee attack" specifically means a weapon melee attack. "Melee attack" is generic. "Unarmed melee attack" and "weapon melee attack" are specific. Secondly. The Improved Trip attack does not state that you can trip with a non-trip weapon. Improved Trip only benefits unarmed attacks. If you have a trip weapon then you would use the superior Tripping with a Weapon rules on pg 159.) Which leads to: Scenario Alpha: 1. A Greatsword cannot be used to make a trip attack. 1. Instead of swinging your Greatsword, you make an unarmed melee attack. 2. You use the unarmed attack to Improved Trip. 3. Because of Improved Trip, you get to re-do the unarmed melee attack. So you stop swinging your Greatsword and and hold your Greatword in your offhand so that you can make an unarmed attack with your primary hand (to avoid off-hand or TWF penalties.) Which implies that a Longsword + Large Shield user would have to drop the Longsword (as a free action) to make an unarmed attack. Scenario B 1. Improved Trip "converts" your Greatsword attack into a trip attack. 2. The trip attack just happens to use the unarmed melee attack rules. 3. Because of improved trip, you get to re-do the Greatsword melee attack. This means that Improved Trip allows you to effectively make trip attacks with non-trip weapons. But despite having a weapon, you use the unarmed attack rules to trip instead of the Tripping with a Weapon rules on page 159. This appears nonsensical. Wouldn't it have made more sense for Improved Trip to state that you can use a non-trip weapon to trip? Instead of forcing you to make an unarmed melee attack? I'm really beginning to think that Improved Trip requires you to switch to unarmed combat mode to trip with a non-trip weapon. To reiterate: 1) Improved Trip cannot be used with non-trip weapons. 2) You must switch to using unarmed melee attacks. (Hold your Greatsword in your offhand.) 3) You make the trip attack with your unarmed melee attack. 4) You make the follow up attack with your unarmed melee attack. 5) You switch your Greatsword back to your primary hand (free action I think) and attack some more. Whereas a Halbred user (a trip weapon) 1. Uses the Halbred's hook to trip (regular trip, not Improved Trip.) 2. Uses the Halbred for the follow up attack. (As per regular trip rules.) 3. Makes rest of attacks with Halbred. A disarm can be done unarmed or with a weapon, and again, a "melee attack" can be an "unarmed melee attack" or a "weapon melee attack". If your hands are empty and you successfully disarm, you get the weapon. So being able to disarm doesn't prove or disprove anything. =( The biggest mistake you made is assuming that in order to make an unarmed attack someone needs to hold his greatsword in one hand to free up a hand. Unarmed attacks are not by definition fist attacks, they are elbows, kicks, knees, headbutts, or any other bodypart you can strike with. The glossary in the back of the PHB does state that an "unarmed attack" is made with no weapon in hand, and an unarmed strike is something reserved for Monks. I believe this to be wrong, because the actual Unarmed Attack description on page 139 states "Unarmed attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks and head butts..." So you don't need to stop holding your greatsword. You trip with your leg, then follow-up with a melee attack. You are right in saying a melee attack is not by definition with a weapon, but it can be. If you have a ready weapon at that time, you make a melee attack, nothing specifies it cannot be with that weapon. In fact it better be with that weapon, since if you make an unarmed melee attack instead, you provoke an AoO for attacking unarmed. Being prone does not stop someone from threatening squares. "As if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt" in the Improved Trip description can be replaced by "As if you hadn't used your attack for an unarmed melee trip attack" or "As if you h adn't used your attack for an armed melee trip attack". It's generic as well. It can mean either. In scenario B, the scenario does not imply you trip with a non-trip weapon. Tripping with a weapon for example allows you to drop the weapon in order to avoid being tripped in return. Your greatsword does not become a trip attack, you first get a touch attack (with no bonuses from a magic greatsword or weapon focus feats) and then make an opposed trip check. No greatsword is involved, until you get to strike with the melee attack from Improved Trip.
Knightblde 06-19-07, 09:25 AM	As with most people, my impression is that Improved Trip allows you to use your weapon for the follow up melee attack. However, the more I read and re-read the trip and Improved Feat trip rules in the PHB, the less inclined I am to believe that. Bear with me. Even with all the things that Wizards misses, I am sure that if you were not able to use a weapon, they would have pointed that out. I really don't think that they would then make weapons with a trip bonus, if you could not use them for Improved Trip. I believe the general consensus on the forums is that you cannot use a two handed weapon and use either hand for a strike in the same round. While, as stated above, a hand is not required to make an unarmed attack, your example hinges upon it. I find it strange that you agree Melee Attack does not have to be with a weapon, but you do not think a weapon can be used in this case as a Melee Attack. Do you not agree that if the designers meant for it to be an unarmed attack only, that they would have just called for a free unarmed attack? Do you believe, and this is the most important question, that this feat is designed for a monk and basically no one else? Happy Gaming!
Pentar 06-19-07, 12:09 PM	Stoicfaux, Hmm - I don't think I can agree with your assessment. Let's break it down. I'm really beginning to think that Improved Trip requires you to switch to unarmed combat mode to trip with a non-trip weapon. To reiterate: 1) Improved Trip cannot be used with non-trip weapons. This is a given. Nothing in the text says it grants "Trip attacks" with a non-trip weapon. I don't believe this was ever in dispute. 2) You must switch to using unarmed melee attacks. (Hold your Greatsword in your offhand.) What happens if this feat is used with a creature with more than 2 arms? What about a creature that has Girallion's Blessing cast upon it? Does the mechanic of the feat and the trip attack change if they can give themselves a free hand? What happens, in your example, if the person isn't even using a greatsword? They're using a one-handed shortsword and no shield. Your example falls apart. 3) You make the trip attack with your unarmed melee attack. Unless your weapon is capable of tripping... but generally agreed. 4) You make the follow up attack with your unarmed melee attack. Disagree. Nothing in the text of Improved Trip states of the nature of the melee attack. You said so yourself, it just says "melee attack". It does not specify what sort of melee attack. As others have pointed out before me, an unarmed strike does not necessitate the use of a fist. I see no reason why you could not trip someone using a sweep-kick and then follow-up with a face-stab - so long as the weapon you're attacking with was readied at the time you performed your Trip attack. The contention of the original argument was not if you could attack with a weapon in hand after a successful trip, but rather if you could switch weapons between the trip attempt and the free attack. Most of us agree you cannot switch weapons (due to the word "immediately"), but I think we're all also agreed that you can attack with whatever weapon you already have readied at the time. Whereas a Halbred user (a trip weapon) 1. Uses the Halbred's hook to trip (regular trip, not Improved Trip.) 2. Uses the Halbred for the follow up attack. (As per regular trip rules.) 3. Makes rest of attacks with Halbred. I don't believe they have created a separate set of rules for those who have weapons that can trip and those who do not. The only benefit of a trip-attacking weapon is that it either has reach, or it gives you a bonus to your opposed roll to attempt to trip. It also allows you to drop the weapon in favour of being tripped in return if you fail your attempt. That is it. You're attempting to add a benefit to a trip-weapon that does not exist.
Kouk 06-19-07, 01:38 PM	I see no reason why you could not trip someone using a sweep-kick and then follow-up with a face-stab - so long as the weapon you're attacking with was readied at the time you performed your Trip attack. That's how I see it. Or, you stick your foot behind theirs and body-check them while they are off balance. It doesn't really matter. If the attack had to be made with certain weapons it would say things like: "Special: You must perform this ability with a special Trip weapon," or, "You must perform this ability with an unarmed attack Note: If you do not have Improved Unarmed Strike, your follow-up attack provokes an attack of opportunity as normal." If it required a special trip weapon, it would likely say so in the text or the errata. If it required an unarmed strike, that you then had to use as your follow-up, it would always provoke unless you had Improved Unarmed Strike, which really limits the usefulness of the feat. Guy being tripped: "Oh no, you are going to trip me and then try to smack me with your 1d3 non-lethal hand, while I can take a swing at you with MY greatsword, great tactic you got there..." So, if it had to be with an unarmed strike it would probably have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite. Unless it was supposed to be only for Monks... Because the feat mentions nothing of special trip weapons, or unarmed strikes, I would take that to mean you don't have to hit with just special trip weapons or unarmed strikes.
stoicfaux 06-19-07, 02:20 PM	The biggest mistake you made is assuming that in order to make an unarmed attack someone needs to hold his greatsword in one hand to free up a hand. Unarmed attacks are not by definition fist attacks, they are elbows, kicks, knees, headbutts, or any other bodypart you can strike with. The glossary in the back of the PHB does state that an "unarmed attack" is made with no weapon in hand, and an unarmed strike is something reserved for Monks. I believe this to be wrong, because the actual Unarmed Attack description on page 139 states "Unarmed attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks and head butts..." I think the question here is whether an unarmed melee attack requires your hands (or a hand) to be free. Unarmed melee attacks are pretty vaguely defined. By comparison, the armed strike rules are pretty specific about needing a hand free. (Monks don't need any hands free. Monk strikes are always primary. Etc.. Non-monks follow TWF and primary & off-hand rules.) So you don't need to stop holding your greatsword. You trip with your leg, then follow-up with a melee attack. You are right in saying a melee attack is not by definition with a weapon, but it can be. If you have a ready weapon at that time, you make a melee attack, nothing specifies it cannot be with that weapon. In fact it better be with that weapon, since if you make an unarmed melee attack instead, you provoke an AoO for attacking unarmed. Being prone does not stop someone from threatening squares. The trip attack description says you can pull a rider from his mount. You would need your hands (or a hand) free in that case. Good point about the AOO on the follow up. It would make an 'unarmed only' interpretation of Improved Trip much less appealing unless you had Improved Unarmed Strike. "As if you hadn't used your attack for the trip attempt" in the Improved Trip description can be replaced by "As if you hadn't used your attack for an unarmed melee trip attack" or "As if you h adn't used your attack for an armed melee trip attack". It's generic as well. It can mean either. It's assuming too much to allow a Greatsword to replace an unarmed attack. As for why it's generic, Trip Weapon users can benefit from Improved Trip. See my comments about the +4 Strength bonus below. In scenario B, the scenario does not imply you trip with a non-trip weapon. Tripping with a weapon for example allows you to drop the weapon in order to avoid being tripped in return. Your greatsword does not become a trip attack, you first get a touch attack (with no bonuses from a magic greatsword or weapon focus feats) and then make an opposed trip check. No greatsword is involved, until you get to strike with the melee attack from Improved Trip. Improved Trip: "You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed." Making a Trip Attack: "Make an unarmed melee touch attack against your target." If you are not using a trip weapon, you must be unarmed to trip. That is the problem. Trip attacks are performed using unarmed attacks, not using weapon melee attacks. Since you're unarmed, there is no Greatsword. The Greatsword wasn't there at the beginning of the trip, so it's not there for the follow up attack. Therefore, the Improved Trip example should look like: Tordek makes an unarmed attack at +11 to trip and fails. Tordek makes an unarmed attack at +6 to trip and succeeds. Tordek makes an unarmed attack at +6. Tordek provokes an AOO unless he has Improved Unarmed Strike. Tordek makes a melee attack at +1. He can swing his Greatsword or make another unarmed attack or make an Improved Unarmed Strike (if he has it.) If Tordek had a Halbred: Tordek makes a weapon attack at +11 to trip and fails. Tordek makes a weapon attack at +6 to trip and succeeds. Tordek makes a weapon attack at +6. Tordek makes a melee attack at +1. He can swing his Halbred or make an unarmed attack or make an Improved Unarmed Strike (if he has it.) I find it strange that you agree Melee Attack does not have to be with a weapon, but you do not think a weapon can be used in this case as a Melee Attack. Do you not agree that if the designers meant for it to be an unarmed attack only, that they would have just called for a free unarmed attack? Improved Trip provides a +4 bonus to the Strength check. Thus trip-weapons can benefit from Improved Trip, thus the need for the generic term of 'melee attack.' Plus, monsters can make trip attacks with natural weaponry. Do you believe, and this is the most important question, that this feat is designed for a monk and basically no one else? The feat isn't for monks only. The feat is listed as being available as a Fighter's bonus feat. The +4 Strength bonus makes it useful for Halbred, Flail, etc. users.
Pentar 06-19-07, 03:06 PM	I think the question here is whether an unarmed melee attack requires your hands (or a hand) to be free. Unarmed melee attacks are pretty vaguely defined. By comparison, the armed strike rules are pretty specific about needing a hand free. (Monks don't need any hands free. Monk strikes are always primary. Etc.. Non-monks follow TWF and primary & off-hand rules.) Vaguely defined is easier to adjudicate than strictly defined. I think an unarmed attack is anything that doesn't use a manufactured weapon - this is especially true if you have no natural weapons. What happens in the case of a creature that has natural weapons and therefore can never really make "an unarmed attack", since they are always armed? Would they be unable to perform a Trip? Improved Trip: "You do not provoke an attack of opportunity when you attempt to trip an opponent while you are unarmed." Making a Trip Attack: "Make an unarmed melee touch attack against your target." If you are not using a trip weapon, you must be unarmed to trip. That is the problem. Trip attacks are performed using unarmed attacks, not using weapon melee attacks. Since you're unarmed, there is no Greatsword. The Greatsword wasn't there at the beginning of the trip, so it's not there for the follow up attack. The problem is you're assuming the Greatsword can't be readied while making the trip attack. Readied means the weapon is available to threaten. Part of what your suggestion implies is that while making a trip attack you no longer threaten adjacent squares, therefore, you don't provide flanking bonuses either... So if you attack an opponent with an unarmed trip attack, you're saying he has to make an unarmed attack which means if he is wielding a weapon, he has to "unready" his weapon and therefore forfeit a flanking bonus if he was flanking. That clearly makes no sense. You're reading into the feat more than it actually says and it's complicating the situation unnecessarily.
stoicfaux 06-19-07, 03:34 PM	That's how I see it. Or, you stick your foot behind theirs and body-check them while they are off balance. It doesn't really matter. If the attack had to be made with certain weapons it would say things like: "Special: You must perform this ability with a special Trip weapon," or, "You must perform this ability with an unarmed attack The rules do say that. Specifically the trip rules and the descriptions for trip weapons. Either make an unarmed attack to trip, or use a trip weapon. Note: If you do not have Improved Unarmed Strike, your follow-up attack provokes an attack of opportunity as normal." There's no need to state that because the rules for unarmed combat already cover AOOs. If it required an unarmed strike, that you then had to use as your follow-up, it would always provoke unless you had Improved Unarmed Strike, which really limits the usefulness of the feat. Not true. It is still very useful: - Standing up from prone invokes an AOO. - You don't have to make the follow up unarmed attack. You can skip it. - You trip so that your comrades have an easier time attacking. - Standing up burns a move action. Which means your opponent cannot perform a Full Attack... - You could use a Flail to: trip, flail followup at +11, drop or put it in your off hand (free action), Quick Draw your longsword (free action) and attack with longsword at +6 and again at +1. Your opponent gets up (you get AOO) and then attacks once. Rinse and Repeat. It would give you a reason to use trip weapons and to use Quick Draw. So, if it had to be with an unarmed strike it would probably have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite. Unless it was supposed to be only for Monks... Improved Trip does benefit trip weapons, so it would be an unnecessary burden to make Improved Unarmed as a prerequisite. A better way to think about is that that Improved Trip means you just know a specialized set of moves to get close enough to an opponent without invoking AOO. Once you're close enough you can perform a trip attack, and you know enough moves to get a +4 to your Strength check. The followup attack is very likely an attempt to damage your opponent as part of the trip move. Because the feat mentions nothing of special trip weapons, or unarmed strikes, I would take that to mean you don't have to hit with just special trip weapons or unarmed strikes. Incorrect. The trip rules state that you have to either use a trip weapon or make an unarmed attack. The feat just makes it easier to perform the trip. The Improved Trip feat isn't a way to replace an unarmed melee attack with a weapon melee attack. The Improved Trip feat benefits are simply: a) Unarmed trip attacks do not provoke AOO. Remember, you can make trip attacks either unarmed or with a trip weapon. This makes it easier to perform them as an unarmed attack. b) You get a +4 to your Strength check. This applies to unarmed trip attacks and trip attacks using a trip weapon. c) That if your trip attack succeeds you may make a follow up attack. Meaning you re-attack to do damage instead of a trip. If you trip attacked unarmed, you attack as unarmed. If you tripped with a trip weapon, your followup attack is with the trip weapon. Nowhere does it state that Improved Trip lets you involve or use a non-trip weapon (such as a Greatsword) as part of the trip attack. There's no converting an unarmed attack into a Greatsword attack.
jaelis 06-19-07, 03:58 PM	The Improved Trip feat benefits are simply: a) Unarmed trip attacks do not provoke AOO. Remember, you can make trip attacks either unarmed or with a trip weapon. This makes it easier to perform them as an unarmed attack. b) You get a +4 to your Strength check. This applies to unarmed trip attacks and trip attacks using a trip weapon. c) That if your trip attack succeeds you may make a follow up attack. Meaning you re-attack to do damage instead of a trip. If you trip attacked unarmed, you attack as unarmed. If you tripped with a trip weapon, your followup attack is with the trip weapon. That is how I read it as well. Some more food for thought: Let's suppose a fighter has a longsword in one hand and a sickle in the other. He has a BAB of +4 and the TWF feat. He attacks once with the longsword, and then trips with the sickle as an off-hand attack. By the majority interpretation, could he then make the follow up attack with his longsword, getting the better damage and his full Str bonus? I would think so, since you say that you can use any weapon you have in hand for the extra attack. But that seems quite unreasonable to me... there is no possible way that the fighter could have make the off-hand attack with his longsword to begin with, so how can that satisfy the "as if you hadn't used the attack to trip" line?
stoicfaux 06-19-07, 04:23 PM	Heh, WoTC has detailed info on trip attacks in the Rules of the Game Archive. I really wish I'd seen this earlier. Trip One: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060307a Trip Two: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060321a Rules Archive at: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/arch/rg Some key things: A trip isn't a simple leg sweep. A trip attack starts like a grapple attack -- you attempt to physically attack your foe with an unarmed melee touch attack. Instead of trying to hold on, however, you try to push or pull your foe off his feet and make him fall down. You also can use a trip attack to pull a foe off a mount. In older versions of the game, what we call a trip attack now was called an overbearing attack. The term "overbear," however, implies that you tackle your foe and fall to the ground with him, and that's not the case with a trip attack. You remain upright even if your trip attack succeeds in forcing your foe prone. An unarmed trip does invoke an AOO. The rules don't come right out and say it, but you use your melee touch attack to get a purchase on your foe (so you can throw, push, or pull him down). The melee touch attack provokes an attack of opportunity from your foe. You don't need free hands to make an unarmed attack (say for a trip) and swing a Greatsword in the same round (which kinda contradicts the trip/overbear fluff.) From the first Unarmed Combat rules article: * You usually make an unarmed attack with a free hand. As far as the rules are concerned, you can use just about any part of your body in an unarmed attack: a head butt, kick, elbow, knee, or forearm. This means you don't need a free hand to make an unarmed attack. If you're making any unarmed attacks in addition to an attack with your primary hand (for instance, a sword slash and a kick or head butt), consider the unarmed attacks as off-hand attacks even if you aren't making them with a hand. See Part Two for notes about using unarmed strikes as primary and secondary weapons. The article describes the follow up attack as a "free" melee attack so it looks like you can swing your greatsword after performing an unarmed trip. If you have the Improved Trip feat, you can immediately make a free melee attack against a foe you have tripped. On a side note, it looks like the OP could Quick Draw and use a different weapon for the follow up attack. OTOH, the FAQ, keeps the issue fuzzy: The Improved Trip feat description says that you get an extra attack after a successful trip attempt “as though you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.” That, however, is just a shorthand way of explaining what part of your normal attack routine you use for the extra attack; it’s not meant to imply that you enter some kind of strange time warp when you make trip attacks. Which implies, that since you used an unarmed attack as part of your normal attack routine, you follow up with the unarmed attack instead of a Greatsword. :P
Kouk 06-19-07, 04:34 PM	I feel my last post was misunderstood. I was not trying to say you can initiate a trip with any weapon you were holding, I was talking about the follow-up "free" attack.
Pentar 06-19-07, 05:07 PM	OTOH, the FAQ, keeps the issue fuzzy: The Improved Trip feat description says that you get an extra attack after a successful trip attempt “as though you hadn’t used your attack for the trip attempt.” That, however, is just a shorthand way of explaining what part of your normal attack routine you use for the extra attack; it’s not meant to imply that you enter some kind of strange time warp when you make trip attacks. Which implies, that since you used an unarmed attack as part of your normal attack routine, you follow up with the unarmed attack instead of a Greatsword. :P I don't see that implication at all from the above text. All that is saying is that if you made a Trip attack on your 2nd of 3 iterative attacks, you use the same 2nd iterative attack bonus when resolving your free attack after a successful trip. I don't see how it implies, in anyway, that you're forced to use the same style of attack that you use on your trip attempt. You keep going back to the Greatsword example but are unable to address when an attacker may have a one-handed weapon. By your own logic, if you require a "free hand" to make a trip attempt, someone with a one-handed weapon would break this rule. Ergo, you are creating a series of rulings based ONLY on having a two-handed non-trip weapon... Seems a little silly to me when you can just apply one rule universally to all trip attempts with Improved Trip.
Elemmakil 06-19-07, 05:50 PM	Let's suppose a fighter has a longsword in one hand and a sickle in the other. He has a BAB of +4 and the TWF feat. He attacks once with the longsword, and then trips with the sickle as an off-hand attack. By the majority interpretation, could he then make the follow up attack with his longsword, getting the better damage and his full Str bonus? I would think so, since you say that you can use any weapon you have in hand for the extra attack. But that seems quite unreasonable to me... there is no possible way that the fighter could have make the off-hand attack with his longsword to begin with, so how can that satisfy the "as if you hadn't used the attack to trip" line? I think that our hypothetical fighter would have to follow up with his sickle. The "as if you hadn't used the attack to trip" line implies that the follow-up would have to be legal at the same time and under the same circumstances that the trip was. So, the following sequence would not work: 1. Main Attack: attack with longsword 2. Offhand: trip with sickle 3. Follow-up: attack with longsword (must be legal as a substitute for line 2) because this would also not work: Main Attack: attack with longsword Offhand: attack again with longsword However, the following would work: Main attack: trip with unarmed strike, greatsword held Follow-up: attack with greatsword Because you could have attacked with the greatsword in the first place. This is too simple. Lets make it more complex by adding in natural attacks; they make everything more complex. Say that I have a claw attack and the Improved Trip feat. So, can I follow up a trip attempt with my claw attack? With a standard attack action, yes: both would be legal (same goes for AoO's). But, I can't make a claw attack as part of a full attack action, except with the bizarre secondary attack rules. So, a trip attack can be followed up with a natural weapon only when using a standard attack or AoO, but not part of a full attack. Hope that that sufficiently obfuscates matters :D -Elemmakil
stoicfaux 06-19-07, 06:45 PM	However, the following would work: Main attack: trip with unarmed strike, greatsword held Follow-up: attack with greatsword Because you could have attacked with the greatsword in the first place. Could you have attacked with the greatsword in this case? Main attack: unarmed melee attack, greatsword held Follow-up: attack with greatsword If the follow-up is a "free attack," then yes. If the follow-up is a do-over of an unarmed melee attack, then no. You forgot a case: Weapon in each hand, not TWF Main attack: trip with sickle, dagger held in offhand Follow-up: attack with dagger Yes, with offhand rules (-4 to hit, 1/2 strength bonus,) or no, sickle only?
Kalarus 06-19-07, 07:16 PM	Could you have attacked with the greatsword in this case? Main attack: unarmed melee attack, greatsword held Follow-up: attack with greatsword If the follow-up is a "free attack," then yes. If the follow-up is a do-over of an unarmed melee attack, then no. If the follow-up is a free attack, then no as well. Since you go from not wielding a greatsword to wielding a greatsword, you need to use a move action to ready your greatsword again. The greatsword held in one hand is just not ready for use. This isn't a situation in which your weapon quickly changes hands, you go from being unarmed to being armed. If you have a problem seeing this as the equivalent of drawing a weapon, see it as the equivalent of Manipulating an Item (PHB 142 and 143 respectively). Both are move-equivalent actions. Quickdraw would solve this problem for additional attacks in the round due to base attack bonus but not for the follow-up melee attack. You forgot a case: Weapon in each hand, not TWF Main attack: trip with sickle, dagger held in offhand Follow-up: attack with dagger Yes, with offhand rules (-4 to hit, 1/2 strength bonus,) or no, sickle only? How is holding a weapon in each hand not TWF? You need to decide beforehand if you want to use two weapons this round, to apply all the appropriate penalties from the start. You can't after your first attack at full attack bonus decide to TWF after all, so for all purposes during such a round, you are effectively wielding one weapon until your next turn.
Nom 06-19-07, 07:54 PM	Note that the language from Cleave - "with the same weapon" - is conspicuously missing from Improved Trip. Similarly, the example (PH pg 96) doesn't bother to specify that Tordek's follow up melee attack is with an unarmed strike or a special trip weapon, which would naturally lead to the conclusion that this is not an important consideration.
stoicfaux 06-19-07, 08:47 PM	How is holding a weapon in each hand not TWF? You need to decide beforehand if you want to use two weapons this round, to apply all the appropriate penalties from the start. You can't after your first attack at full attack bonus decide to TWF after all, so for all purposes during such a round, you are effectively wielding one weapon until your next turn. If you weren't able to do that, then making a trip with a non-trip weapon would invoke the TWF rules since you're mixing a weapon attack (follow up attack using the primary hand) with an unarmed attack (you trip attack with the off-hand.) If you use TWF you get an extra attack. If you simply hold two weapons and don't take the extra attack, you don't use TWF rules. If you have BAB+6, you can use TWF to make 3 attacks (two primary, one off-hand) with penalites to both hands. If you don't TWF, you can attack twice, one at BAB+6, the other at BAB+1. The offhand suffers a -4 to hit and only gets 1/2 strength bonus. Heck you could make two attacks with the off hand weapon. Next round you can declare which hand you want to be primary. :D If the follow-up is a free attack, then no as well. Since you go from not wielding a greatsword to wielding a greatsword, you need to use a move action to ready your greatsword again. The greatsword held in one hand is just not ready for use. You can hold the greatword in both hands and still make an unarmed attack (barring circumstances.) So the greatsword is ready. Would your answer be the same if it involved a longsword instead? I think my problem is that I consider an unarmed trip attack to be a "subset" of an unarmed attack. Thus I don't consider a weapon attack to be "interchangable" with the unarmed attack used to perform a trip. It just seems correct that if you trip with a sickle, the follow up should be with the sickle. If you trip with your fist, the follow up should be with your fist. That view also has the benefit in making trip weapons more useful/desirable and dilutes min-maxing to a degree (since tripping with a sword would be noticeably less effective.) I will concede that it's better and easier to consider the follow up attack as a "free attack" (as mentioned in the Rules Articles for Tripping.) However, that means I can Improved Trip with holding a crossbow and fire the crossbow (at the opponent or someone else) for the follow-up attack. :) (Never mind that firing the crossbow would generate an AOO.)
Elemmakil 06-19-07, 11:07 PM	You forgot a case: Weapon in each hand, not TWF Main attack: trip with sickle, dagger held in offhand Follow-up: attack with dagger Yes, with offhand rules (-4 to hit, 1/2 strength bonus,) or no, sickle only? Good point. The penalties for 2WF only apply if you actually use the 2WF rules (i.e. you take the -2/-2 penalty and get extra attacks): you are allowed to hold a weapon in your offhand if you want, even without normal 2WF. I think that an example is in order. Grog is a 2WF barbarian with a BAB of +6 (he has 2WF, but not Improved 2WF). He has a battleaxe and a handaxe. He may do any of the following: Normal Full Attack: Attack with either weapon at +6 (but with a -4 penalty if he choses the offhand one) Attack with either weapon at +1 (again possibly with a -4 penalty) Full Attack using the 2WF special attack option: Attack with both weapons at +4 (including the -2/-2 penalty) Attack with just the battleaxe at -1 (including the penalty) The glossary implies that you get a -4 penalty to hit and only get 1/2 str bonus on offhand attacks, even when you chose to use only one weapon. The weird (or weirder) thing is that 2WF (the feat) only helps offhand attacks while fighting with both weapons, so it wouldn't mitigate or remove the -4 offhand penalty when you only use the offhand weapon. So, I think that the case above would work. You could have attacked first with either weapon, so when you can do so on the follow-up. -Elemmakil
Kalarus 06-20-07, 08:35 AM	If you weren't able to do that, then making a trip with a non-trip weapon would invoke the TWF rules since you're mixing a weapon attack (follow up attack using the primary hand) with an unarmed attack (you trip attack with the off-hand.) If you use TWF you get an extra attack. If you simply hold two weapons and don't take the extra attack, you don't use TWF rules. If you have BAB+6, you can use TWF to make 3 attacks (two primary, one off-hand) with penalites to both hands. If you don't TWF, you can attack twice, one at BAB+6, the other at BAB+1. The offhand suffers a -4 to hit and only gets 1/2 strength bonus. Heck you could make two attacks with the off hand weapon. Next round you can declare which hand you want to be primary. :D You can hold the greatword in both hands and still make an unarmed attack (barring circumstances.) So the greatsword is ready. Would your answer be the same if it involved a longsword instead? I think my problem is that I consider an unarmed trip attack to be a "subset" of an unarmed attack. Thus I don't consider a weapon attack to be "interchangable" with the unarmed attack used to perform a trip. It just seems correct that if you trip with a sickle, the follow up should be with the sickle. If you trip with your fist, the follow up should be with your fist. That view also has the benefit in making trip weapons more useful/desirable and dilutes min-maxing to a degree (since tripping with a sword would be noticeably less effective.) I will concede that it's better and easier to consider the follow up attack as a "free attack" (as mentioned in the Rules Articles for Tripping.) However, that means I can Improved Trip with holding a crossbow and fire the crossbow (at the opponent or someone else) for the follow-up attack. :) (Never mind that firing the crossbow would generate an AOO.) You make a trip attempt in lieu of a melee attack, not in lieu of a ranged attack. You do not threaten any squares with a ranged weapon and thus cannot use trip in lieu of any melee attack, other than TWF unarmed attacks, which you mention. In addition the Improved Trip feat specifically states you get a free melee attack against the opponent you tripped, not against anyone else. Given that you make the trip attempt in lieu of a melee attack, which is a given (since it is in the special attack section and is not explictly another kind of attack like charge being a full-round action) even if it wasn't explicitly stated in the Rules of the Game clarification, there are no TWF penalties involved when holding a greatsword and tripping unarmed. You get the free melee attack, as if you had not used the attack, the attack is in every sense of the word, "free". If you get TWF penalties for this kind of trip, you obviously don't get a free attack as if you had not used the attack, you get an extra attack from the use of TWF with all the appropriate penalties. You're not TWFing, you're tripping, which means you are using one and the same attack. Same reason why you can't suddenly switch weapons. Improved trip modifies your existent attack action, you don't suddenly get extra actions. Likely this means that you can attack with a different weapon after using a trip weapon. Why's that so hard to fathom? Yank someone down with your flail, stick your rapier in their throat. God forbid melee characters got some versatility. Really, I think we're done here :P PS on that bit you quoted from me, I was using your described situation and nitpicked at an error in its reasoning. You can use an unarmed attack with your hands full, but you described a situation in which you didn't but freed up a hand first. Given that situation, the greatsword would be unusable, unlike a longsword which is ready when held in one hand.
stoicfaux 06-20-07, 01:02 PM	You make a trip attempt in lieu of a melee attack, not in lieu of a ranged attack. You do not threaten any squares with a ranged weapon and thus cannot use trip in lieu of any melee attack, other than TWF unarmed attacks, which you mention. In addition the Improved Trip feat specifically states you get a free melee attack against the opponent you tripped, not against anyone else. Yup. My bad, ranged != melee. However, you can trip while holding a crossbow, since the trip is an unarmed melee touch attack. Trips aren't performed in lieu of a melee attack, they are melee attacks. I think you mean that you cannot perform AOOs if you do not threaten a square. Likely this means that you can attack with a different weapon after using a trip weapon. Why's that so hard to fathom? Yank someone down with your flail, stick your rapier in their throat. God forbid melee characters got some versatility. My initial thinking was that unarmed attacks are described as putting you very close to your opponent (inside weapon range,) so after the trip, you would be totally off-balance/out-of-position in regard to your weapon. If you push someone down, you can follow through with a punch/kick to the face/groin. If you trip someone with a halbred's hook, it's no big deal to flip the weapon and slash/pierce them with it. If you push someone down while holding a non-light weapon (such as a two handed weapon,) it didn't seem "logical" to allow a follow up attack with a weapon that needs space and leverage to use. Really, I think we're done here :P Agreed.
Kalarus 06-20-07, 04:42 PM	Yup. My bad, ranged != melee. However, you can trip while holding a crossbow, since the trip is an unarmed melee touch attack. Trips aren't performed in lieu of a melee attack, they are melee attacks. I think you mean that you cannot perform AOOs if you do not threaten a square. Yeah, sorry, I worded that wrong. You can of course trip unarmed while holding the crossbow by using an unarmed melee attack. I also should've said trips are performed in lieu of a normal melee attack (meaning just making a hitroll and dealing damage if you hit).