Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

PaizoCon 2014!

Rules Question


Pathfinder Society® General Discussion


This is a question about the pathfinder rules that is a bit hazy and not addressed in game play. I am thinking about doing this with my society play so I thought an official ruling would be needed.

Say I am playing a with two light shields.
1. Could I use claw attacks with out removing a light shield?
2. What would be the minuses for doing such if any (such as TWF minuses sense you still have two shields strapped to your arms)?
3. What Weapon Training categories would claws and bits fall under, if any?
4. Can a GM make new weapon training categories in pathfinder society?

Thank you.

**

Where are you getting the claw and bite attacks from?


I am getting the claws from the sorcerer blood line effect, since the barbarain got that stripped from them, and the bit from the barbarian rage power.

Andoran *****

Paizo Charter Superscriber; Pathfinder Deluxe Comics Subscriber
Joshua J. Frost wrote:
Where are you getting the claw and bite attacks from?

A Barbarian Draconic Sorcerer?

Edit: Yup I was right

*

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Card Game Subscriber
Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

This is a question about the pathfinder rules that is a bit hazy and not addressed in game play. I am thinking about doing this with my society play so I thought an official ruling would be needed.

Say I am playing a with two light shields.
1. Could I use claw attacks with out removing a light shield?
2. What would be the minuses for doing such if any (such as TWF minuses sense you still have two shields strapped to your arms)?
3. What Weapon Training categories would claws and bits fall under, if any?
4. Can a GM make new weapon training categories in pathfinder society?

Thank you.

The description of a light shield says "you cannot use weapons with it". Unlike a buckler which protects part of the forearm (and allows attacks at a -1 penalty), my understanding of a light shield is that it provides cover around the entire forearm, so a weapon (or claw) would not be able to effectively make contact with an enemy. Inasmuch as a natural weapon is a weapon, I'd rule that you cannot make claw attacks without removing a light shield.

There is a weapon training category for natural weapons in the Fighter class description.


Derek Poppink wrote:
Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:

This is a question about the pathfinder rules that is a bit hazy and not addressed in game play. I am thinking about doing this with my society play so I thought an official ruling would be needed.

Say I am playing a with two light shields.
1. Could I use claw attacks with out removing a light shield?
2. What would be the minuses for doing such if any (such as TWF minuses sense you still have two shields strapped to your arms)?
3. What Weapon Training categories would claws and bits fall under, if any?
4. Can a GM make new weapon training categories in pathfinder society?

Thank you.

The description of a light shield says "you cannot use weapons with it". Unlike a buckler which protects part of the forearm (and allows attacks at a -1 penalty), my understanding of a light shield is that it provides cover around the entire forearm, so a weapon (or claw) would not be able to effectively make contact with an enemy. Inasmuch as a natural weapon is a weapon, I'd rule that you cannot make claw attacks without removing a light shield.

There is a weapon training category for natural weapons in the Fighter class description.

OK, that about answers all by #4. I can't believe I missed that weapon group for the fighter.

However while I will run with it, the logic of #1's answer seems odd, but it is a game.

It just seems like if you could hold a weapon in the hand a light shield is in, but not use it, why couldn't you (perhaps with a minus) use a claw attack. Any way, this does make it simple and that is how the game goes. Thanks

Qadira ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:


It just seems like if you could hold a weapon in the hand a light shield is in, but not use it, why couldn't you (perhaps with a minus) use a claw attack?

I guess it depends on what you think of by "claws". If you're imagining something like the 18"-long things that pop out of Wolverine (how do they fit in his forearm??) then it's reasonable to ask why you can't use them behind a shield.

But if you're imagining things like long fingernails, the answer is simple and based in the real world: you're holding the shield grip. Your hand is in a loose fist. The claws aren't available to slash at anybody, even if there weren't a hunk of wood attached to the back of your hand.


Chris Mortika wrote:
Sir Hexen Ineptus wrote:


It just seems like if you could hold a weapon in the hand a light shield is in, but not use it, why couldn't you (perhaps with a minus) use a claw attack?

I guess it depends on what you think of by "claws". If you're imagining something like the 18"-long things that pop out of Wolverine (how do they fit in his forearm??) then it's reasonable to ask why you can't use them behind a shield.

But if you're imagining things like long fingernails, the answer is simple and based in the real world: you're holding the shield grip. Your hand is in a loose fist. The claws aren't available to slash at anybody, even if there weren't a hunk of wood attached to the back of your hand.

Well obviously it would need to be natural, as I don't see any sort of mutant here.

Not that I really care, it just seems odd to me that if you have the mobility to grab a item, as you apparently don't have to hold the handle, why would you not have the mobility to scratch in a grabbing motion or poke with the same hand with long nails. The simplest answer is game balance and I am fine with that, because then you get into grapples and combat maneuvers with the same hand hat you have a shield on. Especially being a simple version game I understan.

**

To answer #4: nope.

Hopefully the other posters have addressed the other points. Let me know if they haven't.


Joshua J. Frost wrote:

To answer #4: nope.

Hopefully the other posters have addressed the other points. Let me know if they haven't.

OK thank you.


In some of the games i have played in the past ( not just DnD ) there have been claw weapons available that had a migshift buckler attached to be part that is attached to either your forearm or to the back of your hand, mind you these are only about 8in in diameter and only offer a +1 deflection bonus for the both of them ( if you are dual wielding them.

Silver Crusade **

Bad necromancer....

Lantern Lodge ***

Chris Mortika wrote:
If you're imagining something like the 18"-long things that pop out of Wolverine (how do they fit in his forearm??) ...

The claws are actually his bones coated in the adamantium, so they are simply an extension of his knucklebones that grow and extend when he chooses.

And yes, I'm stalking you.

And yes, I'm a comic book geek as well though I own none.

Qadira ***** RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16

Robert,

Spoiler:
By comic myth and legend, Logan's claws are housed in his forearms when he doesn't have them extended. They don't "grow", they move. (John Byrne has described one scene when Wolverine has to pop his claws while his wrist is bent backwards, palm pressed up against a bad guy. They come out through his palms.) This places a maximum on their length.

Take one hand and spread your fingers as wide as they can go, like you're trying to play two notes on a piano as far apart as possible. Use that hand to measure your other arm, from elbow to wrist. That's the longest Wolverine's claws can be, unless they bend around his elbow or something.

Then move your measuring hand so that the thumb is just inside your knuckles. That's how far Wolverine's claws can extend when he pops them. It looks pretty good when you're making a fist, but when you open your hand, you realize that Wolverine's claws only extend about three or four inches past his fingertips.

By comicbook artistic license, artists keep drawing these things longer and longer, until they're half a yard long. These are also the people who draw Batman's cowl with ears that could never fit inside the Batmobile.

Incidentally, I'd like to nominate this thread for "least useful title."

Lantern Lodge ***

See, I knew I liked you for a good reason. I was just being sort of vague, but answering something I had a little bit of knowledge on.

I second the motion, though, I am in support of players who aren't sure of asking either their GMs, VOs, or the community. I will admit that I'm not keen on a lot of things rules-wise (though I'm a lot better than I used to be).

I will admit that I sometimes find it embarassing now to ask certain rules questions now that I'm a Venture-Lieutenant because I feel as if its expected of me to 'know everything'.

This is why I am an advocate for 'ATYDK' which is an acronym that I just made up which stands Asking Things You Don't Know. In fact, I may start a non-profit for it.


The OP is probably long gone, but I'd like to point out that dual-wielding shields does nothing since shield bonuses don't stack.

*

Chris Mortika wrote:
Incidentally, I'd like to nominate this thread for "least useful title."

Third! Motion passes!

Bearded Ben wrote:
The OP is probably long gone, but I'd like to point out that dual-wielding shields does nothing since shield bonuses don't stack.

Well, technically you could have two different enchantments on the shields, say, Ghost Touch (+3!) on one so it counts against incorporeals and the other might be a +1 Light Fortification (total +2) or something... but if you're going to be in melee where those shields are useful you probably want a weapon or attack of some sort, and Synthesists are gone now so no 4-armed, 2-sheilded, 2-weapon bearing creatures are around...

And I'm pretty sure that the dual-shield ranger is frowned upon as stupid/badwrongfun even if legal by raw, so there you go.

(Yes, I've read the forum debates with JJ regarding dual-shields and real-world examples, but I don't recall any PFS officials (i.e. Joshua Frost previously or Mark Moreland/Mike Brock currently) calling out the dual-shield ranger as not legal by RAW/RAI in PFS. Please feel free to PM me a link if that is the case just so I'll know.)

Shadow Lodge ***

Odea wrote:
Chris Mortika wrote:
Incidentally, I'd like to nominate this thread for "least useful title."
Third! Motion passes!

Not to be a Robert's Rules-Lawyer, but that doesn't even make sense. :P

Qadira ****

I want to make a thread simply named "thread" and link chris's quote.

Lantern Lodge ***

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mystic Lemur wrote:
Not to be a Robert's Rules-Lawyer, but that doesn't even make sense. :P

Why's it got to be MY Rules-Lawyer? I am against this motion! I vote we make it Chris' Rules-Lawyer.

Benrislove wrote:
I want to make a thread simply named "thread" and link chris's quote.

If it didn't take up space and/or annoy me, I would second this motion. I may second it anyways as long as it annoys Chris.

Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder Society® / General Discussion / Rules Question All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.