RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Just came across a potential issue over in a Rules thread.
Have a look at this post from Mark Moreland regarding armor spikes:
Armor spikes are treated as light weapons for the purpose of threatening adjacent squares. Light weapons require the use of limbs, so you would only be able to make attacks with them if you have a free hand. Thus, wielding a two-handed reach weapon would negate your ability to "wield" (and thus threaten with) armor spikes. This isn't necessarily clear in the rules, but I just discussed it with Jason, and we're both on the same page about the intent.
As of Guide 4.2, we GMs must treat clarifications like this as binding once we're aware of them. Okay, so armor spikes require a free hand. Got it.
But what about this specific line from that post?
Light weapons require the use of limbs, so you would only be able to make attacks with them if you have a free hand.
This reads like a blanket statement that all light weapons require a free hand - meaning that you can't attack with a blade boot, barbazu beard, or unarmed strike unless you have a free hand. Which doesn't make much sense.
Mark, were you meaning to restrict all light weapons like that, or was "them" in that sentence supposed to refer only to the previous sentence's "armor spikes"?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
If people would stop trying to push the boundaries of the rules and common sense, these issues would never come up.
And yet, there are GMs out there who will look at Mark's statement and gleefully tell someone they can't attack with their boot blade because they don't have a free hand, so here we are. :/
|
This game is all about a very strict set of core rules.
Then they have abilities, feats, and spells that break those core rules.
If a specific weapon indicates its very specific use (like the beard and blade boots) then his statement above does not apply, because those very specific weapons break the strict core rule.
Armor Spikes fall somewhere in the middle, because you can have spikes on your shins and shoulders and chest and whatever. His clarification above is specifically for armor spikes in regards to using a two-handed weapon.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah....this issue was supposed to be settled by now. We were promised an FAQ over a year ago regarding armor spikes. Probably just one of those FAQs that time forgot. Maybe we can get it into the second edition of the FAQ blog regarding abandoned FAQs. I wouldn't take Mark's quote as law in this case (it's over a year old and grandfathered in as a non-law post) since even Jason went back (later in the same thread) and said that more thought was needed on the issue.
Contributor
|
I forget if it was SKR or James Jacobs, but one of them once posted something saying that it's a free action to "remove one hand" from a two-handed weapon, since just holding it (not swinging with it) doesn't require two hands, so a character who swings with a 2H then lets go with one hand then has that hand free, in theory.
...I know that's not exactly what this thread is about, but I thought that might be helpful (still looking for the post, will put the link up when I find it).
|
|
That would seem the equitable solution for armor spikes. You can switch from the 10' threaten to the 5' threaten as a free action, but only on your turn.
But that doesn't really address the issue with that last sentence. I assume he didn't mean it to be quite so broad? Common sense (I know, I know) would dictate that a boot blade doesn't need a free hand. But ...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I forget if it was SKR or James Jacobs, but one of them once posted something saying that it's a free action to "remove one hand" from a two-handed weapon, since just holding it (not swinging with it) doesn't require two hands, so a character who swings with a 2H then lets go with one hand then has that hand free, in theory.
It was James, here.
|
|
I forget if it was SKR or James Jacobs, but one of them once posted something saying that it's a free action to "remove one hand" from a two-handed weapon, since just holding it (not swinging with it) doesn't require two hands, so a character who swings with a 2H then lets go with one hand then has that hand free, in theory.
...I know that's not exactly what this thread is about, but I thought that might be helpful (still looking for the post, will put the link up when I find it).
This doesn’t solve the issue though, of those who want to threaten both at 10’ and 5’ when it isn’t their turn. And since you can’t take a free action to change your threatened area (basically an interrupt or readied action) just to be able to get an AoO (even though some free actions can be taken anytime).
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am sure this wouldn't be the only issue we could come across if we pulled quotes from Mike or Mark pre-4.2 era. Back then they were giving out opinions along with statements that it was how they THOUGHT it worked and that nothing was official until the put it in an FAQ or the guide. Edit: I just FAQ requested Jason's last post in that thread regarding him getting an FAQ through. Maybe we can necro this FAQ and settle the issue.
Developer
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Since we've instituted the change to what messageboard clarifications are and are not binding in the campaign, I'd prefer this rules issue be directed to the rules team, since any ruling on it in PFS would adhere to the interpretation they decide upon. So I'm not going to comment on it, as it will undoubtedly lead to more confusion. For questions of how the core rules work (and not just how they work in Pathfinder Society games), please request FAQs from Jason, Sean, and Stephen.
the post says it was answered in the FAQ. Huh.
I think the "In the FAQ" is referring to the second bullet point. I wonder how it works when it says it's answered, but people keep on FAQing it.