Druid Animal Form. Does weapon proficiency matter?

[PurpleTimb]

Does a druid in wolf or bear form suffer the negative consequences of using a weapon he's not proficient with?

I'm planning to make a Rad II for my next life as a wolf form druid. I can make it a scimitar, but thought a rapier might be better for use on a future rogue life. Will I suffer the -25% to-hit penalty for non-proficiency if I'm in animal form?

[Charononus]

yes you still get prof penalties and twf penalties if dual wielding.

you could go helf with fighter dil or splash a level of fighter ext for prof though.

[unbongwah]

Will I suffer the -25% to-hit penalty for non-proficiency if I'm in animal form?

Nope. Dunno what Char is talking about.

[Enoach]

I was sure that I you did based on my experiment with the Terror Great Sword. So I logged onto live.

Pulled out my Rahl's Might +5 Quarterstaff and Terror +5 Greatsword

Wolf Form

Attach Bonus
+25 Unarmed
+35 Rahl's
+31 Terror Greatsword

It appears to me that you do in fact lose attack bonus when using a weapon you are not proficient with. Thus the Non-Proficient Icon above your head appears to be correct.

As a note, you can also test this with Scimitar and Rapier by purchasing one of each with the same bonus, I recommend getting cheap ones from the Harbor Armory shop. Pull up your inventory and expand the Details at the bottom. Go from no weapon to scimitar to rapier. You will see the difference.

However, some races are proficient with different weapons. Such as Drow.

[unbongwah]

You can't trust the Inventory display; what are you seeing in actual combat as a wolf?

[Charononus]

You can't trust the Inventory display; what are you seeing in actual combat as a wolf?

Back when my tr toon was going thru a druid life I pulled out an old min1 longsword I had for a stoneskin clicky, when I checked to see what happened if I left it equiped I did lose to hit vs mobs not what the inventory panel said. Same with if I cast dual flameblades then shifted. This was shortly after druids release but I haven't seen anything about either in any patch notes since.

[PurpleTimb]

You can't trust the Inventory display; what are you seeing in actual combat as a wolf?

I verified in game with a freshly made level 4 druid today. Not being proficient with a specific weapon had no effect on my character's to-hit when in wolf form.

Tested in Havadasher with a 'short sword' and a 'dagger,' both purchased from the general vendor in the harbor. Both weapons had no bonus to hit. Power attack was active for all attacks and I did not move except to turn to face the next attacker.

In wolf form the combat log was identical for each weapon, my bonuses were +4, +4, +9, +14.
Out of form the dagger (with proficiency) stayed the same (4,4,9,14) but the short sword (not proficient) went to +0, +0, +5.

I believe this confirms unbongwah's claim. Does anyone happen to know if this is WAI or not?

[Pilgrim1]

I verified in game with a freshly made level 4 druid today. Not being proficient with a specific weapon had no effect on my character's to-hit when in wolf form.

Tested in Havadasher with a 'short sword' and a 'dagger,' both purchased from the general vendor in the harbor. Both weapons had no bonus to hit. Power attack was active for all attacks and I did not move except to turn to face the next attacker.

In wolf form the combat log was identical for each weapon, my bonuses were +4, +4, +9, +14.
Out of form the dagger (with proficiency) stayed the same (4,4,9,14) but the short sword (not proficient) went to +0, +0, +5.

I believe this confirms unbongwah's claim. Does anyone happen to know if this is WAI or not?

I tested this very question on a previous druid life. My results are counter to this claim and I found that proficiencies did matter. Like purpletimb i used vendor purchased weapons and got the same attack bonuses, however the difference was that the same attack roll would be glancing blows on the weapon without proficiency. I tested this in the kings forest on the same mob by switching between weapons.

So for example I would roll 5+39 on a dagger and get a hit but a 5+39 with a short sword would be a glancing blow (numbers pulled out of my ass since it was a long time ago). It is possible that this information is outdated but I would strongly encourage you to examine the numbers that glancing blows occur on rather than the roll bonus or attack mod.

[Charononus]

I verified in game with a freshly made level 4 druid today. Not being proficient with a specific weapon had no effect on my character's to-hit when in wolf form.

Tested in Havadasher with a 'short sword' and a 'dagger,' both purchased from the general vendor in the harbor. Both weapons had no bonus to hit. Power attack was active for all attacks and I did not move except to turn to face the next attacker.

In wolf form the combat log was identical for each weapon, my bonuses were +4, +4, +9, +14.
Out of form the dagger (with proficiency) stayed the same (4,4,9,14) but the short sword (not proficient) went to +0, +0, +5.

I believe this confirms unbongwah's claim. Does anyone happen to know if this is WAI or not?

my guess is wai, but not sure, I can tell you it was not that way on release.

[Charononus]

I tested this very question on a previous druid life. My results are counter to this claim and I found that proficiencies did matter. Like purpletimb i used vendor purchased weapons and got the same attack bonuses, however the difference was that the same attack roll would be glancing blows on the weapon without proficiency. I tested this in the kings forest on the same mob by switching between weapons.

So for example I would roll 5+39 on a dagger and get a hit but a 5+39 with a short sword would be a glancing blow (numbers pulled out of my ass since it was a long time ago). It is possible that this information is outdated but I would strongly encourage you to examine the numbers that glancing blows occur on rather than the roll bonus or attack mod.

ah good point, when I tested it was exactly the same as you, I was still hitting but it was glancing blows ext