While true that Wotc set the bar pretty high at time. Mongoose took that bar, smelted it down and built an altar on the tallest peck they could find and frolicked naked around it with great gusto. So munchkins would have a new level to aspire to.

Glorious typos that reveal new meanings! :)

I make so many of them even with spell check on here. Funny one however

Wow. I can't believe I read the whole thing.

And whomever was saying that double weapons can be used one handed is seriously misinterpreting the rules.

Seriously.

Wow. I can't believe I read the whole thing.

And whomever was saying that double weapons can be used one handed is seriously misinterpreting the rules.

Seriously.

What´s to misinterpret...it´s rather clear that you can use a double weapon one handed...just not as a double weapon. Different from 3.x for sure, but the fact that you can do it in PF is quite clear.

I tell ya what..attack with a 5' staff one handed. Quarter staff is a two handed weapon, used double or not...but ya know it seems as long as ya just use one hand it's not a weapon.

The rule in question does not say you can wield double weapons with one hand. It says you can wield it "as a one handed weapon." Double weapons have two methods of use. One uses Two Weapon Fighting, the other uses normal, iterative attacks. Either way you are still using it with two hands. The first gives you an extra attack, the second gives 1.5 strength modifier to damage, just like you get when wielding a regular "one handed weapon" with both hands.

You can whack someone with both ends of your staff, or you can take a baseball grip and whack them really hard with only one end. You cannot wield a quarterstaff in one hand and a shield in the other.

I´m not saying the new rule is a GOOD one...but it is rather clearly stated that you can wield a double weapon in one hand. Although to allow arcane channeling with a staff that is also a weapon, it is good that this is allowed.

As for realism...I have a 6 1/2 foot long spear that I can swing one handed effectively. If I can swing that around in one hand, a quarterstaff is definitely do-able...but it should require a feat. I mean honestly, it´s harder to do that then fight with my bastard sword one handed.

If I recall most spears used one handed where about 4-5 feet and held closer to the middle . May not have been the most effective but doable as it's a stabbing weapon. A 5' staff would not be as effective as it would have to be held close to the end and swung.

It seems to me anyhow

I´m not saying the new rule is a GOOD one...but it is rather clearly stated that you can wield a double weapon in one hand. Although to allow arcane channeling with a staff that is also a weapon, it is good that this is allowed.

As for realism...I have a 6 1/2 foot long spear that I can swing one handed effectively. If I can swing that around in one hand, a quarterstaff is definitely do-able...but it should require a feat. I mean honestly, it´s harder to do that then fight with my bastard sword one handed.

Meh. I think the issue here is with the interpretation, not the rule. I'll start a thread on the rules forum and see if we get an answer.

Having just jumped back in, I see that I'm being insulted (as I was the first one that said that double weapons can be used as one-handed weapons by quoting the book). Can I ask you how you wield one-handed weapons? Because if one-handed weapons need two hands to use, then I have seriously misinterpreted the rules. Unless that is true, then "can be wielded as a one-handed weapon" seems to imply that it only needs one hand to use, otherwise they would have nixed that whole "one-handed" part. Also, being a person with actual martial training, I can tell you that it is entirely possible to use a quarterstaff with one hand. It is not generally done because you can make more attacks from more varying angles when you can strike with both ends and deflect more strikes (much like two-weapon fighting and two-weapon defense).

EDIT: Actually, just to clarify, here's the definition of one-handed weapons as stated in the Pathfinder Core Rulebook-

One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either

the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder’s Strength
bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed
weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength
bonus if it’s used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon
is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2
times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls.

I don't think anyone was insulting anybody here. Not now anyhow.

Wow. I can't believe I read the whole thing.

And whomever was saying that double weapons can be used one handed is seriously misinterpreting the rules.

Seriously.

I take that as a serious insult

If I recall most spears used one handed where about 4-5 feet and held closer to the middle . May not have been the most effective but doable as it's a stabbing weapon. A 5' staff would not be as effective as it would have to be held close to the end and swung.

It seems to me anyhow

Well stabbing with a spear one handed...even the longer spears isn´t that tricky...now swinging a 6 foot spear around one handed is another matter entirely. But then again I have a hewing spear so my spearhead is 22 inches long and it was designed to be swung around...one handed actually with a shield in the other hand. And NOT held in the middle...it is a REALLY difficult style of fighting to learn.

I don't think anyone was insulting anybody here. Not now anyhow.

You gotta admit that jake´s comment is a bit insulting to anyone who could possibly think a one handed weapon can be wielded in one hand.

I would say so, seems like it would be and your right that sounds like something to spend a feat on.

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

I don't think anyone was insulting anybody here. Not now anyhow.

You gotta admit that jake´s comment is a bit insulting to anyone who could possibly think a one handed weapon can be wielded in one hand.

I didn't take it as an insult no, we have had MUCH worse then that said about other posters in this thread alone.

Cold Napalm wrote:

seekerofshadowlight wrote:

I don't think anyone was insulting anybody here. Not now anyhow.

You gotta admit that jake´s comment is a bit insulting to anyone who could possibly think a one handed weapon can be wielded in one hand.

I didn't take it as an insult no, we have had MUCH worse then that said about other posters in this thread alone.

We´ve said much worse to each other in this thread...but an insult is an insult...even if it´s not the worst ;) .

I just didn't see it as one, eh to each there own I guess

Congrats on having such a popular (and heated) thread, btw. Most of my threads get answered in 3-4 posts and then fall into the archives. Maybe I'm just not controversial enough :P

heh, some go this route, F/M thread , AL threads, and the like. They may not stay on topic mind you but eh they tend to be lively

Radiant Servant of Pelor.

Loses 1 HP a level to get some super situational abilities, even under 3.5. It wasn't cleric+ because you had to pick a god with some of the worst domains in the game and give up an HP a level.

I wish people would stop trotting out Radiant Servant every time they complain about 3.5 PrCs; there are OP free-boost PrCs, but that isn't one of them.

heh, some go this route, F/M thread , AL threads, and the like. They may not stay on topic mind you but eh they tend to be lively

The real question is what kind of fighter mage batman would be if he was neutral good in a party with robin hood.

which batman? His AL switches by writer :)

As for realism...I have a 6 1/2 foot long spear that I can swing one handed effectively. If I can swing that around in one hand, a quarterstaff is definitely do-able...but it should require a feat. I mean honestly, it´s harder to do that then fight with my bastard sword one handed.

Ever seen a German spear being used? 8 feet long, one-handed (shield in other hand) and they grip it near the non-pointy end and don't just stab, they swing the thing around to deliver terrific blows with it, like whirling a great big stick around your head.

Conceivably you could do the same with a staff, but really I don't see a wizard's arcane bond being used that way - I see it as being pointed to deliver ray attacks, gestured with for somatic components, etc. That is my understand of 'wielded' within the context of a wizard's arcane bond. Ergo, I'd let a fighter/wizard have a greatsword as their arcane bond if they had a decent strength score.

Or you could just dual-wield your staff and longsword like Gandalf from the movies.

Or you could just dual-wield your staff and longsword like Gandalf from the movies.

Gandalf can't cast spells with somatic components, then.

If he's a D&D Wizard then what the hell is he doing in melee ? ;)

Loopy wrote:

Or you could just dual-wield your staff and longsword like Gandalf from the movies.

Gandalf can't cast spells with somatic components, then.

That's okay. He's an outsider using his spell-like abilities that have no somatic, verbal or material components.

Cold Napalm wrote:

As for realism...I have a 6 1/2 foot long spear that I can swing one handed effectively. If I can swing that around in one hand, a quarterstaff is definitely do-able...but it should require a feat. I mean honestly, it´s harder to do that then fight with my bastard sword one handed.

Ever seen a German spear being used? 8 feet long, one-handed (shield in other hand) and they grip it near the non-pointy end and don't just stab, they swing the thing around to deliver terrific blows with it, like whirling a great big stick around your head.

Conceivably you could do the same with a staff, but really I don't see a wizard's arcane bond being used that way - I see it as being pointed to deliver ray attacks, gestured with for somatic components, etc. That is my understand of 'wielded' within the context of a wizard's arcane bond. Ergo, I'd let a fighter/wizard have a greatsword as their arcane bond if they had a decent strength score.

Well the style I study is norse...but similar idea of long range whirling blade o DOOM. The spear is usually braced on the back to help generate power without the whirling motion by default though. It´s really fun.

Loopy wrote:

Or you could just dual-wield your staff and longsword like Gandalf from the movies.

Gandalf can't cast spells with somatic components, then.

He can hold the reins of a horse and raise the staff to cast Searing Light though.

Still Spell is so useful ...

Really?

We're going to bring up realism?

In the game with spiked chains and double axes we're going for realism?

Really?

We're going to bring up realism?

In the game with spiked chains and double axes we're going for realism?

Double axes are realistic. Like a noob with a staff, just punch" like this: Left, Right, Repeat.

He started another thread for that. But heh, like this thread stays on topic anyhow :)

He started another thread for that. But heh, like this thread stays on topic anyhow :)

"GISH R TEH BROKZORZ!!! 1 HAND WEPS TAKE 2 HANDS!!! EK SUX!! EK RULZ!!!"

...Do we even want to go back on topic at this point?

There was a topic? All I heard was a bunch of whining at each other. :)

I cleaned up some rather childish bickering. Please behave like civil adults.

Nonsense poopypants!

Anyway, has anyone used the Gestalt rules with PRPG? If so, how much more powerful are the PCs as compared to 3.5 Gestalt?

5) It can't wear armor and cast a spell and attack all in the same round.

a) Right, because that would be overpowered. The Havoc Mage was an insane class - free quickened spell of any level any time you make a full round attack? That's broken.

Not to split hairs, since this point is several days old, but this is incorrect. Havoc Mage can only cast a spell and make a single attack as a full round action. Thats one attack, and one spell. No iterative attacks, no twf. Havoc Mage was far from broken- it lacked full bab progression, and sacrificed a couple of caster levels to get the battlecast ability, which never worked with 8th or 9th level spells.

BobChuck wrote:

5) It can't wear armor and cast a spell and attack all in the same round.

a) Right, because that would be overpowered. The Havoc Mage was an insane class - free quickened spell of any level any time you make a full round attack? That's broken.

Not to split hairs, since this point is several days old, but this is incorrect. Havoc Mage can only cast a spell and make a single attack as a full round action. Thats one attack, and one spell. No iterative attacks, no twf. Havoc Mage was far from broken- it lacked full bab progression, and sacrificed a couple of caster levels to get the battlecast ability, which never worked with 8th or 9th level spells.

I don´t believe that is what bob believes...however there are people who DO think so. He just pointing out both sides.

BobChuck wrote:

5) It can't wear armor and cast a spell and attack all in the same round.

a) Right, because that would be overpowered. The Havoc Mage was an insane class - free quickened spell of any level any time you make a full round attack? That's broken.

Not to split hairs, since this point is several days old, but this is incorrect. Havoc Mage can only cast a spell and make a single attack as a full round action. Thats one attack, and one spell. No iterative attacks, no twf. Havoc Mage was far from broken- it lacked full bab progression, and sacrificed a couple of caster levels to get the battlecast ability, which never worked with 8th or 9th level spells.

It's one of those things that's just sorta eyeballed. People see an ability and declare it overpowered without actually thinking about how it would end up working in game. It sorta kinda looks overpowered, but in practice it really isn't.

To put it another way, before 3e actually came out, people thought 3e monks were going to be absurdedly powerful. When it actually came out and people actually used it, they found they were, ah, incorrect.

The bard actually already does this. Adding more spells to compliment melee fighting to the bard spell list (which, I believe, is something we're STRONGLY considering for the Advanced Player's Guide) would probably solve this problem...

is that in?

BobChuck wrote:

Why do you feel that High-Level Gish in pathfinder are so weak?

They are not weak. They make an excellent mage/fighter; however, they are also a very crappy fighter/mage.

Course there is the issue of if the mage/fighter vs the mage. The issue with the EK as a mage/fighter is that your basically playing a mage and the fighter part doesn't help any. If you are using the fighter part, your either super screwed and most likely gonna die...or your in clean up phase. The ONE aspect that combines the casting and the fighting only triggers on crits...and only if you have one of the three swift actions you need as an EK...and only at level 16+. That is why the EK hate. An ability to channel spells or even convert spells to just raw arcane damage like the old arcane strike feat would have gone a long way to make the class more of a fighter/mage class. Also giving an option of entry req so you can enter as fight focused or caster focused would have been nice.

JRR wrote:

BobChuck wrote:

Why do you feel that High-Level Gish in pathfinder are so weak?

They are not weak. They make an excellent mage/fighter; however, they are also a very crappy fighter/mage.

Course there is the issue of if the mage/fighter vs the mage. The issue with the EK as a mage/fighter is that your basically playing a mage and the fighter part doesn't help any. If you are using the fighter part, your either super screwed and most likely gonna die...or your in clean up phase. The ONE aspect that combines the casting and the fighting only triggers on crits...and only if you have one of the three swift actions you need as an EK...and only at level 16+. That is why the EK hate. An ability to channel spells or even convert spells to just raw arcane damage like the old arcane strike feat would have gone a long way to make the class more of a fighter/mage class. Also giving an option of entry req so you can enter as fight focused or caster focused would have been nice.

That is my biggest problem with PF version of the fighter-mage. I'd like a class that was more of a fighter that used SOME magic to increase damage or as a method of protection (Duskblade-esque). I'm not looking for full spell progression or complete spell lists, but a a toe-to-toe fighter that can punctuate his sword swings with lightning blasts :) Since PF has chosen not to make a dedicated fighter-mage class I hope the APG has some cool bard variants. And by variants I mean take away everything that makes a bard a bard and give it a lot more damage spells ;)