|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
If your character's movement speed is 5', then it takes a move action to move that 5 feet. This may look like a 5' step, but it is not. This sets precedent that it isn't the movement type that determines the distance but, rather, the distance that determines what movement type is necessary. If you want to fly 5' up, that costs 10' of movement. A 5' step only works on distances that cost 5' of movement.
1) Shield Master is talking about the TWF penalties. There are no other penalties specifically associated with a Klar under consideration.
2) Yes. Normally, you'd need to enhance it separately with defensive and offensive bonuses. Shield Master lets the defensive bonus pull double-duty.
3) Yes. Lets say you've got a +1 Defiant Klar. Without Shield Master, you just get your +1 Shield bonus to AC and you suffer TWF penalties when you use TWF rules. Against the shield's designated opponent, the shield gets bumped up to a virtual +3 with DR 2/- vs the designated opponent. This normally applies just to defensive capacity; it went from bumping your AC by +1 to bumping it by +3. But since Shield Master is letting you apply your shield's enhancement bonus as if it were a weapon bonus and Defiant is raising your shield's enhancement bonus, it's working as a virtual +3 weapon against designated opponents.
Well, one benefit to Improved Crit is that, unlike Keen, it doesn't go away in an anti-magic field or when magic is otherwise "turned off". Also, it will apply to any appropriate weapon rather than just the single one. On the flip-side, feats are hard-capped while money is a much more fluid metric. Optimally, you'd want a +3 Adamantine weapon at the very least. +3 gets you past DR/Silver and DR/Cold Iron and the Adamantine, of course, gets you past DR/Adamantine. Keen on there is another +1 to the price. That's 35k on top of the base cost of the weapon right there. But to really answer, we need to knew how your paladin is currently built and what weapon he uses as well as what your team makeup looks like. Is your Paladin a hammer in your group or more then anvil?
The Fighter Bonus Feats FAQ is contradictory with the Magus, Myrmidarch FAQ. Which one is correct? Alternatively, what specific situations does the Magus FAQ break the assumption set by the Fighter FAQ?
Source, May 2013
Source, June 2013
These two FAQ responses seem to be at odds. The Myrmidarch FAQ states that "stacking" class abilities like Weapon Training cross class even without explicitly stating that they do so while the Fighter Bonus Feats ability posted a mere 1 month later sets the standard that your character is assumed single-classed and that class abilities do not cross the class boundary unless given explicit permission. These premises are contradictory as they cannot both be correct or incorrect; one and only one of these statements can be true. For reference, this is the same issue that arose with the Racial Heritage/Half-breeds FAQs. Can we get some consistency in these FAQ responses or, alternatively, an explanation of what situations other than being explicitly given permission do we drop the single-class assumption? FAQ it up.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
The developers of the game disagree with you. The Weapon Training granted by the Sohei Monk archetype is Sohei Weapon Training. It doesn't need to explicitly put "Sohei" in front of it because that's the default presumption of the system to cut down on word usage. Unless it explicitly states it works with another class/archetype's version of the skill, it does not. Period. End of story. That's all she wrote. So can someone lock this thread and kick Malachi's soapbox out from under him so he doesn't ruin the credibility of the community anymore?
I also remember someone mentioning a feat from somewhere; something called Love of Life (or something along those lines). It has a prereq that you must be in one of the older age categories and lets you use Cha for HP in place of Con. But I forget where they said it was from and I've never found it (probably because I got the name wrong).
The Acute Darkvision alternate trait increases the distance of your Darkvision racial trait but does not list it as a trait that is "replaced" (it instead replaces Orc Ferocity). So this sets the precedent that if one Racial trait affects a different Racial trait, the Racial trait that is being affected must be present. So, even though Dayborn only replaces the SLA (which all alternate heritages still have, just based on a different spell), the alternate heritages don't have the light sensitivity to be removed; thus the combo simply does not work.
I'll do you one better and give you a way to dump Dex, Wis, and Int.
- Paladin 2 gives Divine Grace which gives Cha to saves (but on top of normal stat penalty if you dump Dex and Wis.
What the author wants is inconsequential compared to how the rules read. If he wanted it to work that way, he could have easily included the clause, "A Sohei can use Flurry of Blows with any weapon category that he has chosen for Weapon Training including those from other classes." That's not what he wrote so that's not how it works. It works based on the default assumptions of the Pathfinder system; that characters are single-classed and a class ability, by default, means "this class/archetype's version of the ability" and any exceptions to the default must be stated explicitly.
It does, indeed, alter how Flurry functions because it adds additional types of weapons with which the Sohei can Flurry; that's what the word 'alter' means. It's not an "archetype" alteration in the sense that you can still mesh Sohei with an archetype that changes Flurry, but that doesn't make it any less a bonus to how Flurry functions. The Weapon Training class feature provided by the Sohei archetype improves how Flurry of Blows functions, not the other way around. So you must still absolutely have 6 levels of Sohei Monk before gaining the benefit of Flurrying with any weapon for which you have Weapon Training (Weapon Training gained through the Sohei archetype only goes without saying). Gloves of Dueling will grant their bonus equally to Sohei's Weapon Training or Fighter's Weapon Training, but Sohei's Weapon Training only grants Flurry allowance for Weapon Training earned through the Sohei Monk class. There is nothing incredible about a rule that works one way in one instance but a different way in a similar but ultimately separate instance. Class abilities presume single-classed; feats, items, and non-class abilities do not. That's how the game works. Deal with it.
Ok, let me break it down completely here for the sake of Malachi.
First, the Equivalent Class Ability FAQ:
The FAQ here is talking about rules elements that would improve a class ability. Not rules elements that depend upon the class ability for improvement. Sohei's Weapon Training class feature improves Flurry. Weapon Training isn't improved by Flurry. If the clause were in Flurry of Blows, then you'd have a nearly valid point. It isn't, though. Furthermore...
So, your assertion that the clause in Sohei's Weapon Training doesn't specify you need Sohei Weapon Training is inconsequential because it doesn't need to; the default position is that it only applies to the class's own abilities and allowance to use versions of that ability from another class is what needs to be explicit. So it does say that you need Sohei's specific Weapon Training class ability by virtue of not explicitly stating that it works on Weapon Training features from other classes. A Cleric's, Paladin's, Oracles, and Necromancer's Channel Energy may all count for things such as the Extra Channel or Elemental Channel feats, but if a class ability for the Paladin gives extra effect to Channel Energy, unless it specifies "from other classes as well", that class bonus only applies to Channel Energy used from the Paladin class's pool of Channel Energy uses. So, just as a multi-classed Monk/Fighter can't retrain Monk bonus feats using the Fighter's Bonus Feats class ability, a multi-classed Paladin/Cleric can't use a Paladin class ability to alter his Cleric's Channel Energy class ability and a Sohei/Weapon Master can't use his Weapon Master's Weapon Training ability to benefit from his Sohei's Weapon Training ability. However, both Weapon Training's will benefit equally from Gloves of the Duelist because it isn't a class ability. The Paladin/Cleric could apply Extra Channel to either his Paladin channel or his Cleric channel at his discretion. So even if you had a nearly valid point regarding benefits to same-function class abilities (which you don't), you would then run into the second wall that even if the Sohei's "can use Flurry with any Weapon Training weapon" clause were moved to Flurry of Blows, it still is subject to the "single-class assumption" so it would still require an additional clause stating, "including Weapon Training gained from another class". So advancing Sohei's Weapon Training does not advance Weapon Training gained from any other class (nor vice versa) and Weapon Training from any other class cannot be used with the Sohei's class ability that allows them to Flurry with any weapon for which they have Weapon Training because it does not explicitly say that it does.
Disagree with the principal behind the FAQ all you want, Malachi, but don't go spewing this idea that the FAQ should just be disregarded because you don't agree with it. It doesn't create a rules paradox like what we had with the Racial Heritage/Halfbreeds FAQ issue so it should be presumed to be valid until such a time that further clarification is made available. Simple logic.
Touch spells are spells with a range of Touch. That is distinctly different from a spell which has an effect or benefit that allows for a touch attack; but is not, in itself, a Touch spell (a spell with a range of Touch).
I doubled checked the relevant rules text just to be certain:
“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks).
It does specify that delivering a touch attack spell is considered an "armed" unarmed attack and doesn't leave it open to just any source of a touch attack. This means that both Produce Flame and Elemental Touch are no-go because neither are a Touch spell; ET is a Personal spell while PF produces an Effect at 0ft (that effect being a flame in your hand). So Produce Flame doesn't count as an "Armed" Unarmed Attack. Based on that, I conclude that you do not threaten with Produce Flame.
Improved Quick Draw
That's covered under ignorance. The root word is 'ignore'; you must be aware of something in order to ignore it. To be 'ignorant' of a fact is to be aware of it, but to ignore that knowledge. If one weren't aware in the first place, they would be 'innocent' of the knowledge and then, it's a matter of laziness as it's just a matter that they didn't do the brain-work to comprehend it.
In the case of normal Spellstrike, the free touch/weapon attack is delivered as a Free action so you can cast as standard, move, deliver as free action. This would allow you leeway to cast, draw a melee weapon as a free action, and deliver. However, with ranged touch spells, it works differently:
Ranged Touch Spells in Combat: Some spells allow you to make a ranged touch attack as part of the casting of the spell. These attacks are made as part of the spell and do not require a separate action. Ranged touch attacks provoke an attack of opportunity, even if the spell that causes the attacks was cast defensively. Unless otherwise noted, ranged touch attacks cannot be held until a later turn.
The attack portion of a ranged touch spell is not a separate action as it is with the melee touch spell; it's part of the casting so there's no room between casting and attacking in which to draw your deck. This means you need to already have the deck or an appropriate thrown weapon in hand because, according to the Deadly Dealer feat, the deck itself is the ranged weapon with the individual cards counting as ammo so it's kind of a cross between a normal individual thrown dart and a set of shuriken. Now, speaking of shuriken, they are thrown weapons so they count for Harrowed Spellstrike, but they count as ammo for drawing (no action to draw) so you could have the shuriken handy to draw and throw them as part of the casting because they have no hand-held component like the deck. So, in a way, Harrowed Spellstrike works best with shuriken if you want to wield a melee weapon in your other hand. Alternatively, wield a Dagger or other throwable melee weapon, and make your melee attacks first then just chuck it for your harrowed spellstrike and quick draw a replacement (or use a returning dagger/blinkback belt).
No, it means that Armor Spikes need an available off-hand attack (in terms of attack economy) to use. You can attack with Armor Spikes if both hands are carrying something or otherwise unavailable (ie. you can attack with armor spikes while holding a crate with both hands). But you still need an available off-hand attack with which to use them. Think of it this way; you have a Longsword and a Dagger and, of course, Unarmed Strike. You have 2 iterative attacks and 2 off-hand attacks via ITWF. You can make up to 2 attacks at BAB/BAB-5 with any combination of these three weapons; the Unarmed Strikes can be abstracted so they don't require free hands (since both your hands are holding other weapons). However, once you start two-weapon fighting, despite being able to make an Unarmed Strike with your hands full, you can't make an extra Unarmed Strike or two on account of having two off-hand attacks if you've already spent those attacks using your dagger. Arguably, though, you could still mix-match your main-hand with any non-off-hand weapon so you could do Longsword/Longsword, Longsword/US, or US/US in addition to your two Dagger off-hand attacks. The Unarmed Strikes don't require a free hand just as Armor spikes don't require a free hand; but they still require an available off-hand attack in order to budget them into your attack economy. Exceptions to this are one thing (ie. Sea Knife, Beard) but this is what the FAQ clarifies it to be as default. It's a sensible clarification and I'm not confused by it in the slightest bit because I took the time and effort to work it out and comprehend it and fit it into my frame of understanding of the game. The only excuse for finding it confusing is laziness or ignorance.
If you have more than 2 arms naturally, you get additional potential off-hand attacks. But if you have only 2 arms naturally and you "sprout" additional arms by some rules element (ie. Alchemist vestigial arms), you don't gain the additional budget of off-hand attacks.
Basically, yes. For the Card Caster, you effectively need two free hands if you're going to use Ranged Spellstrike along with Spell Combat; one hand to cast, and the other hand to throw your ranged weapon.
Lets say you're wielding a Scimitar in your right hand. We all know that you can't cast Shocking Grasp with your right hand because it is occupied holding the Scimitar so you must use your left hand to do the casting. This applies whether or not you're using Spell Combat. So you cast Shocking Grasp using your left hand and then deliver it using your right hand via Scimitar. Now, if you're using Spell Combat, it requires you to be wielding a melee weapon in one hand and leave the other hand free the whole duration of the action to cast the spell. So, again, you can Spell Combat and cast Shocking Grasp, deliver as a free action with your Scimitar, and continue with your iterative attacks. However, if you want to draw and throw a ranged weapon to use ranged spellstrike, that occupies your casting hand which, as stated, you must leave free for the duration of the Spell Combat action. Your other hand is occupied wielding your Scimitar so it's not that Spellstrike requires a free hand, it's that throwing a ranged weapon requires a free hand and both your hands are occupied.
Regarding Skirnir, before level 8, they do have to put away their Longsword, if wielding one, to cast because they need a hand with which to cast. Except for a buckler, all shields occupy your hands in such a way that you can't use it to cast a spell so a Skirnir, before level 8, is expected to only be wearing the shield and not wielding an additional weapon. At level 8, they get Shielded Spell Combat which allows them to use their Shield hand as their casting hand, essentially overriding the requirement from Spell Combat to have a free hand for casting so now, they can both wear their shield and wield a more standard weapon and still be able to cast spells.
You have hands to wield and you have attack economy. Attack economy involves your iterative attacks, off-hand attacks, and bonus attacks from sources like Haste. Hands to wield concerns itself with the actual hands or alternative limbs used to manipulate the weapon. All two-handed weapons, by default, require two hands in the literal sense. All one-handed weapons require one hand and, optionally, can benefit from applying a second hand; again, hands in the literal sense. Most light weapons need to be wielded in one hand but some leave the hand free for other tasks (ie. Gauntlet, Cestus), others utilize alternate limbs (ie. Boulder Helmet, Boot Blade), and others still are abstracted in that they don't use a particular limb at all (ie. Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes). Making an off-hand attack requires both the attack economy as well as the proper ability to manipulate the weapon. It's not that hard of a concept to grasp; the game is all about action economy so it's not that much of a stretch that individual attacks are also budgeted.
Presuming you have not only enough hands to wield the weapons but also enough attack economy to provide for the off-hand attacks, we can go to Pathfinder Math to get our answer. Making an attack with an off-hand weapon is 0.5x Str and making an attack with a 2-h weapon is 1.5x. Since, using Pathfinder Math, you don't straight up multiply factors like this (ie. 2x + 2x = 3x), 0.5x + 1.5x = 1x. Or, to look at it another way, you combine the 0.5x Str from both hands to give you 1x Str. So, with a race like Kathasa which gets 3 off-hand attacks in addition to their iterative attacks on account of having 4 arms, you could wield, for the sake of illustration, a Greatsword as your main-hand weapon and a Greataxe as your off-hand. You'd get as many swings with your Greatsword as your iterative allowance would allow plus a single swing with your Greataxe which subsumes two off-hand attacks and gets 1x Str to damage. You'd take -4 to attack since your off-hand weapon isn't light.
I see it as more of a round-about method of getting the same benefit as Inquisitor's Solo Tactics for a very specific circumstance. I'd say it's valid for character to use DS to benefit from Outflank once they've established flanking, even with themselves, but only for the +4 flanking bonus.
You could still Spell Combat/Spellstrike with cardcaster if you use a weapon that leaves your hand free. Spiked Gauntlet or Unarmed Strike would suffice. You'd be able to wield it as your "melee weapon in one hand" and also use that same hand to throw a card when you cast your spell and use ranged spellstrike, all while leaving your "other hand" free the whole time for casting.
If you're using the normal TWF chain (not FoB), then this is a no-go. It was ruled that making an attack with a 2-h weapon (or a 1-h weapon in 2 hands), it subsumes your next off-hand attack as well as an iterative attack. In other words, attacks with weapons wielded in two hands eat off-hand attacks if you have them so you won't have the attack economy available to make off-hand attacks, regardless of whether or not they require a hand to wield the weapon. Only Flurry of Blows effectively gets around this as you can use any weapon you're wielding to make any of the attacks.
Mind you, you can, very well, use any combination of weapons for normal, non-TWF fighting so if you're wielding a 2-h weapon and have your unarmed strikes and 3 iterative attacks, you can make your 3 attacks with any combination of 2-h weapon and unarmed strike, 3 of either weapon or 2 of one and 1 of the other at the normal BAB/BAB-5/BAB-10 sequence, and it doesn't count as two-weapon fighting so you suffer no attack penalty and get your normal Str to damage for each weapon (1.5x for the 2-h, 1x for the unarmed strike).
Keep in mind you still can't use a ranged weapon with Spell Combat. If one hand is doing the casting and must remain free for the entire duration of the action, the other hand is holding the scarf; where's your third hand to throw a card? If you free up your scarf hand and use a weapon that leaves your hand free to throw a card (ie. Unarmed Strike, Spiked Gauntlet, etc), well, not much point to the dancer archetype now is there? While they technically don't conflict as far as archetype mixing goes, that doesn't necessarily mean they work well together. Or, in other words, just because you can mix the archetypes doesn't mean you should mix them.
If you're asking if you can replace the normal attacks in your FoM sequence with maneuvers, that follows the standard rules for everyone. So a FoM with two iterative attacks and one maneuver can use any maneuver for his 'one maneuver', even if that maneuver normally requires a standard action; but he could replace either or both of his iterative attacks with a trip, disarm, or sunder because anyone can do that. Mind you that only your 'one bonus maneuver' gets full-BAB from FoM until you hit lvl 3 for Maneuver Training that lets you use full-BAB for all maneuvers.
By strict RAW, no. Weapon Expertise, among other things, mimics the Quick Draw feat which only makes drawing your weapon a free action. Sheathing remains a move action so it'd be by GM fiat that you can sheathe as a free action. You only get to draw as part of moving; nothing indicates you can sheathe as part of moving.
+1 to hit+1 AC
Base move is still 30' and all attribute modifiers are the same as for a standard Human version of the outsider. Your weapons would be smaller (smaller damage dice). Scion of Humanity would, arguably, make you count as Halfling (or other small race) rather than as Human.
PFS doesn't use the alternate race thing and presumes that all Tieflings, Aasimar, etc. are Human stock.
It's both. Small Size is one of the options to replace their SLA so a Tiefling born of even a Human could be small (Humans aren't normally small). But if born of a small race, that's something completely different; it doesn't use your optional trait that replaces SLA. Furthermore, I'd say if you had a Halfling-born Tiefling who also had the Small Size option, he'd be Tiny. A Giant-born Tiefling who also had the Small Size option would, logically, be Medium. But even the Small Size option doesn't have an associate Str penalty nor Dex bonus because those aren't inherent to small size.
The line in Agile stating that you don't get 1.5x Dex from two-handing the weapon is the exception that proves the rule. Since there is a need to state this, it stands as an exception to the default so, by default, anything that applies to the original stat also applies to the replacement stat. Ergo, since Double Slice states you add your full Str to off-hand attacks and Agile says you use your Dex modifier in place of Str modifier, that's not only changing the value for your calculations but also the target value for feats like Double Slice.
Standard: Damage = dice + 1/2 Str bonus; Double Slice lets you use 1x Str bonus.
Keep in mind you must spend a move action to re-sheathe your weapon if you want to perform repeated Iaijutsu Strikes. See if your GM would be willing to grant that the Quickdraw feat lets you sheathe as a free action as well as draw. Also, possibly look into pursuing the Cleaving Finish feat line. Since you'll be focusing on crowd control, it will allow you to soften up enemies around you while working on your primary target.
If you're playing a homegame and have a GM who is a little short of "rules savvy", you can probably roll bluff to get him to let you do it anyway. Failing that, try sweet-talking him with pizza.
The thing is that it isn't a "change" in size. The Halfling-born Tiefling wasn't originally a medium creature who "shrunk". Applying Str penalty and Dex bonus to a creature who's size has actually changed is one thing. A creature who was small to begin with is a completely different thing.
Strictly speaking, all AoOs happen outside the normal framework of the turn order. So even those you take "on your turn" aren't really on your turn.
FCT specifically calls out natural weapons so, even though you could technically expand that via Martial Versatility to the Close and Natural weapon groups, it would only function with Natural Weapons in those groups. So you couldn't, say, apply the FCT benefits to a Cestus and get Dragon Style bonus damage on your Cestus attack because the Cestus isn't a Natural Weapon. However, if you had multiple natural weapons, you could use Martial Versatility to slather your FCT all over your natural weapons so they all benefit.
Planetouched (Aasimar, Tieflings, etc) used to be "human-stock only" but Paizo opened them up to other races as well. So you could have a Dwarven Aasimar, a Halfling Aasimar, an Orcish Tiefling, etc. They only thing that carries over from the parent race, however, is racial size (except, arguably, that Scion of Humanity would change to "Scion of <parent race>-kind"). So, for example, a Halfling-stock Aasimar, Tiefling, etc. would still get whatever racial bonus is applicable for the Aasimar, Tiefling, etc. So a standard Aasimar of Halfling parentage would get +2 Cha, +2 Wis just the same as one of Human parentage. An Asura-blooded Tiefling has +2 Dex, +2 Wis, -2 Int regardless of whether it is Halfling-born, Human-born, or Giant-born. All that matters is that if your parent-race is small, you get +1 attack and AC (-1 for maneuvers) and if your parent-race is large, you get -1 attack and AC (+1 for maneuvers).
Strictly speaking, having a small-sized planetouched outsider gives nothing more than the normal size effects for being small (+1 to hit and AC, -1 CMB and CMD). There is no inherent Str penalty just for being small.
Think of it this way:
It takes two things to make an attack; action economy and wielding. Action economy comes from "spending" your allowance of attacks for the round (iterative, off-hand, and bonus attacks from sources like Haste). Wielding involves handling the weapon in a manner required for use. Two-handed weapons require two hands, one-handed weapons require one hand and may use two, light weapons usually require one hand but sometimes require none at all (ie. Boot Blade, Armor Spikes, etc).
So when you make an attack with your Longsword in one hand, you spend 1 iterative attack worth of action economy and also you occupy one hand with holding the weapon. If you apply two hands to the weapon, you spend both 1 iterative attack and subsume 1 off-hand attack as well as occupy both hands. Even if you let go with one hand, you've already "eaten" that off-hand attack for the round. In the case of a non-hand weapon like Armor Spikes, even though you need not occupy a hand wielding them, you still eat action economy in using them. Now, you could wear, say, a buckler and TWF with a Longsword in one hand and armor spikes, but you can't TWF with a Longsword in two hands and armor spikes, nor can you TWF with a Longsword in two hands and a Spiked Gauntlet because, even though you can free up a hand as a free action, you can't recover those subsumed off-hand attacks with a free action.
The retaliatory strikes granted by Panther Style are not AoOs so they don't count against your AoO limit. They are 'retaliatory strikes' and, once you get the 2nd feat that shifts it from an immediate action to a free action, it is limited only by your Wis.
100 gold is a bit of a heafty sum for the majority of commoners. Sure, it's pocket change for an adventurer or possibly even a wealthy merchant, but a Pig Farmer earns only 7-26 gold per week and, from that, must pay his expenses (poor would be 3 gp/mo). Presuming said Pig Farmer takes 10 on his roll for an average weekly income of 16 gp/week, he earns 832 gross/yr, less 36 for living expenses, giving him less than 800 gold per year. If he ups his standard of living to Average (10 gp/mo), his net yearly income is about 712/year. So 100 gold for a single Continual Flame light source is, literally, 12-14% of a pig farmer's yearly net income. Sure, it lasts forever, but would you invest 12-14% of your yearly income for a single light source? An electric bulb is cheaper and, though it has a finite life, the "break-even" point is probably farther off than the life expectancy of said pig farmer. Forever is a long time. Maybe an Elf would find the expenditure worth-while, but Elves are magically affine in the first place (and probably for exactly this reason... they outlive mundane technology).
Turns happen in parallel over the same 6-second interval round. If you have 5 combatants, 1 initiative round (the time for the first player's turn to come around again) is the same 6-second interval as if you had 100 combatants. So if Human A gets his turn first and makes a full-attack against Orc B wielding his Longsword in two hands, he's spending his full-attack with both hands on the weapon. Then, you "rewind" to the beginning of that 6s interval to resolve what Orc B was doing that whole time that Human A was taking his turn. Then, after Orc B is finished, you rewind again and resolve what Goblin C was doing. So you have a bit of a Schrodinger's Combat situation where Human A is making a full-attack with a Longsword against Orc B two-handed, then lets go at the end so he can deflect arrows but, during that same interval, he has a free hand to deflect arrows and also has only one hand on his longsword for AoOs. Combat is not a situation where Orc B is waiting 6 seconds, sucking on his asthma inhaler while Human A is making his attacks and then Goblin C patiently waits 12 seconds for both Human A and Orc B to finish what they were doing to get his turn to act. However, in the abstracted system used to illustrate this, you can and will encounter "paradox" such as Human A having the time to finish his full-attack despite having been killed in one shot due to Orc B's critical hit.
You can't wield a large Greatsword, but you could wield a large Bastard Sword if you have EWP for it. Go a step further, you could wield a Huge Sunblade because a Sunblade counts for wielding as a shortsword, which is a light weapon. A Huge light weapon is counted as a 2-h in the hands of a Medium character so a Human could wield a Huge Sunblade at 3d8 damage for -4 attack penalty as if it were a 2-h weapon. For reference, it would be about the length of the wing of a Cesna. Alternatively, if you're willing to settle for Tiefling and you got the Oversized Arms alternate feature (either by luck of the roll or because your GM lets you choose), you are able to wield Large weapons as if they were Medium so you'd be able to wield a Large Greatsword still as a 2-h weapon and with no -2 attack penalty. Mind you, this has zero effect on weapons bigger than Large so, while a Large Shortsword would still be counted as a light weapon with no attack penalty, a Huge Shortsword would jump straight to 2-h and -4 penalty.
It would be ideal for a Gestalt build, but for just normal multi-classing, you'd be better off just going for a TWF build and not bothering with Monk at all. Going Monk, you'd be 19 by the time you get your next Flurry attack. By contrast, if you continued with Fighter, you'd get your last attack at lvl 16; and honestly, no one bothers with GTWF because a feat for one attack at -10 to hit is hardly worth it with so many other options to pick. So at lvl 16, the straight Fighter is sitting on 6 attacks (5 if using Rapid) while the Fighter/Monk doesn't get his 6 until lvl 19. Moreover, at lvl 20, a full Mobile Fighter would get Whirlwind Blitz and be able to make a Full-Attack as a Standard action. Not only does this mean they can move into position and make all 6 of their attacks (if TWF w/out GTWF), but they can also combine Rapid Attack with it and either make a full Move first, followed by a move "woven" into their full-attack (less the one attack), or flip it and weave one move action's worth of distance first, followed by another full move action after their full-attack is complete.
However, presuming you're going to go ahead and do a Monk/Fighter...
Mobile Fighter/Martial Artist
Aasimar (Lawbringer - Archon blooded); Scion of Humanity
1) Martial Artist 1: BAB +0, Combat Reflexes (monk), Power Attack (lvl 1), [flurry @ -1/-1
By using Martial Artist, you can take Greater Weapon Focus and Specialization even after entering Monk levels. Eclectic lets you count both classes as favored (you need Scion to get this). Martial Versatility at lvl 7 lets you apply your Weapon focus benefit for Temple Sword not only to other Monk weapons (ie. Unarmed Strike) but also to Heavy Blades since the Temple Sword is in both weapon categories. This means that, if you ever need to use a non-Monk heavy blade in a pinch, you're not completely up pooper creek without a paddle. Later, Martial Versatility additionally qualifies all your "weapon-specific feats" like Spec, Crit, etc. for all applicable weapons. Angelic Wings, of course, lets you add a third dimension to your combat maneuverability. By lvl 20, your Flurry+Rapid Attack will be sitting at +18/+13/+13/+8/+3 with 60' of movement.
In order to fight defensively as a standard action, it must fulfill both requirements; as a standard action and also an attack. So an action that is a standard action, but not an attack, does not qualify (ie. casting Align Weapon). Likewise, if it's an attack, but not a standard action, it also doesn't qualify. The touch attack granted by casting a touch spell is a Free action, not a standard. Now, if it had been casting, say, Scorching Ray, that'd be different. Otherwise, you'd just be able to cast a touch spell like Shocking Grasp and hold the charge, gaining a free bonus to AC for no actual cost of attack penalty. The presumption is a give-and-take; you make an attack at reduced attack bonus in exchange for increased defensive capacity. The same logic was applied when it was ruled that you can't use a Defending weapon just to hold and automatically gain an AC bonus because it's more of an accessory than an actual weapon.
Same goes for fighting defensively as a full-round action. It must be both a full-round action and the full-attack action. So if you had a ray that took a full-round to cast, it isn't the Full-Attack action so you could not get the Fight Defensively bonus for it. Likewise, if you had the ability to make a full-attack as a swift or free action, you'd also not be able to do it defensively. If you had the ability to make a full-attack as a standard action, then that would fall under fighting defensively as a standard so that'd still be good.