| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clicked the button but as you already know I'm firmly in the rules language camp. One-handed weapon is a rules term it does not mean the same thing as a weapon wielded in one hand. So when you use a weapon as a one-handed weapon you use the rules for one handed weapons. When you are simply wielding it in one hand then use the rules appropriate to what type of weapon it is.
So, the FAQ is meaningless and the devs are wrong? Because that's how the Official Rules board works...
Edit: Think I'd best bow out of this thread. Getting way too frustrated.
No. The FAQ is the general rule where a two-handed weapon is being treated as two handed weapon with regard to the power attack rules.
When another rules says to treat it as a one handed weapon aka "not a two handed weapon" then common sense says it is not to be treated as two-handed weapon. This is not that hard.
Remember, Jotungrip had text specifically to counter the FAQ on Power Attack for Lance. If it didn't, then Titan Mailer would be decent.
It did not have to..Reminder text is placed for convenience at times, but it is not always used.
It is also often useful to avoid situations like this, and Jotungrip was written before the FAQ so that is not why it was there.
Nitpick:
Actually, thanks to the way the rest of Jotungrip is written, it had to (since it say "wield in one hand with a -2 penalty...").
But just changing that to "as a one-handed weapon by taking a -2 penalty..." would have been enough, too.
Jotungrip (Ex): At 2nd level, a titan mauler may choose to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand with a –2 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. The weapon must be appropriately sized for her, and it is treated as one-handed when determining the effect of Power Attack, Strength bonus to damage, and the like. This ability replaces uncanny dodge.Teller is absolutely right on this one. That's no "reminder text" in the ability, it's a specific exception because, whether your stance is "in one hand" and "as a 1-h weapon" are the same or different, both stances lead inexorably to "without the exception clause, Jotungrip would treat the weapon as still benefiting from 2-h power attack." Here's what it'd look like without the "reminder"
"Jotungrip (Ex): At 2nd level, a titan mauler may choose to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand with a –2 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. The weapon must be appropriately sized for her. This ability replaces uncanny dodge."
And if it was without the reminder, the FAQ shows that we treat the power attack/str bonus as 1.5 since it is still a 2 handed weapon even if it is in one hand.
With Jotungrip I would agree it gets treated as a two-handed weapon because it does not say to treat it as a one-handed weapon.
PS:I only assumed it there was reminder text because of an earlier statement.
Quarterstaff may have just become the best weapon in the game.
A quaterstaff is a double-weapon/two-handed weapon. Where does it say it can used in one hand only?
Did you even read my earlier posts wraithstrike? Or do you only read posts that disagree with you?^^
Quarterstaff Master lets you wield a quarterstaff one-handed.
ok..I did not know there was an archetype for it. I am assuming this is an archetype anyway.
Did you even read my earlier posts wraithstrike? Or do you only read posts that disagree with you?^^
I do have to admit I did skim a few posts..I will go back and check.. :)
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Its a feat, not an archetype. An singular archetype would be a far smaller problem (though the Staff Magus Archetype grants the feat for free).
The real problem is combining this feat with things like the Two handed Fighter Archetype.
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Quarterstaff Master lets you wield a quarterstaff one-handed.ok..I did not know there was an archetype for it. I am assuming this is an archetype anyway.
It's actually a feat, though the Staff Magus archetype gets it as a freebie sans prereqs. It's another "as a 1H weapon" function.
|
Its a feat, not an archetype. An singular archetype would be a far smaller problem (though the Staff Magus Archetype grants the feat for free).
The real problem is combining this feat with things like the Two handed Fighter Archetype.
Meh. I think the devs will clarify that if the feature says "as a one-handed weapon" then the two-handed benefits won't apply if wielded one-handed. Which, in the scenario you present would make it not a problem at all.
|
Here is the list of things that would be affected by the "2-h in 1-h":
- Titan Mauler's Jotungrip
- Dorn-Dergar Master Feat
- Quarterstaff Master Feat
- Thunder and Fang Feat
- Barbarian's Hurling Feat Tree
- Phalanx Soldier's Phalanx Fighting
- A Lance while Mounted
If there is any more that people say are affected, I would appreciate it.
|
|
Here is the list of things that would be affected by the "2-h in 1-h":
- Titan Mauler's Jotungrip
- Dorn-Dergar Master Feat
- Quarterstaff Master Feat
- Thunder and Fang Feat
- Barbarian's Hurling Feat Tree
- Phalanx Soldier's Phalanx Fighting
- A Lance while MountedIf there is any more that people say are affected, I would appreciate it.
Technically, only the lance would be on the "use a two-handed weapon in one hand" list. The rest would be on the "use a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon" list.
Though, I'm not too familiar with the "Barbarian's Hurling Feat Tree". I did see the hurling rage powers, and don't see anything in those descriptions that put them on level with this discussion. Is there something else that I'm overlooking?
|
|
For the lesser hurler rage, you can throw a weapon two size category smaller than yourself, applying power attack to the damage as well. By reducing a medium Greatsword to a tiny Greatsword (equivalent to a light weapon now), you can throw it in one hand. But now the question is: because it is still technically a two-handed weapon, just tiny, does it give the extra damage via Power Attack?
|
|
For the lesser hurler rage, you can throw a weapon two size category smaller than yourself, applying power attack to the damage as well. By reducing a medium Greatsword to a tiny Greatsword (equivalent to a light weapon now), you can throw it in one hand. But now the question is: because it is still technically a two-handed weapon, just tiny, does it give the extra damage via Power Attack?
All else being equal, since it would be two sizes smaller than you, you would apply a one-handed power attack.
But since the obvious intent of this is to throw boulders, torn-up trees, cats, etc., I don't know if other rules would take precedence because you are throwing an actual weapon—I'm not too familiar, and I'm in a time crunch, so I can't look it all up.
|
|
Quite honestly, the way the wording of the FAQ is, it does make things a bit confusing. In 3.5, everything that used one hand, was treated as one-handed, even the lance.
I'm officially reversing my previous position that posited that the Phalanx Soldier archetype benefited from the FAQ clarification, and instead stating that it works as it has always worked: one hand on the weapon gives you one-handed benefits.
In summation, I would request that the PDT use the K.I.S.S principle and reverse their position on the FAQ.
When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the strength modifier, and the power attack feat.The question is wrong. There are no such feats or special abilities that work that way.
So Quarterstaff Master, Thunder and Fang, Phalanx Soldier etc all don't exist?^^
|
|
Quite honestly, the way the wording of the FAQ is, it does make things a bit confusing. In 3.5, everything that used one hand, was treated as one-handed, even the lance.
Not true. First of all, the camp that is tying number of hands on a weapon to categorizing the weapon is constantly forgetting light weapons. These are in one hand, and most certainly are not considered one-handed.
So there is a disconnect that is crystal clear in the rules.
Likewise there is a disconnect between Power attack and STR bonus to damage. A rapier wielded in two hands, for example will not gain increased STR bonus, but it is still a one-handed weapon and not a light weapon so it benefits from Power Attack.
I don't recall a ruling on the lance in 3.5 that made this distinction. There was table variation which lead many lance users to two-hand the lance while mounted (something I found very strange to picture). But was there ever a FAQ ruling saying such, or is this a case where the variation around where you were was predominately one way?
Lastly, the game is not simple and there is a difference between wielding something as a one-handed weapon, as a light weapon, or as a two-handed weapon. This difference does not depend on the number of hands wielding the weapon. This distinction is already in the game, so this ruling is not adding further complexities to the game, merely recognizing them.
What this ruling is doing is preventing the world from having the best way to use a lance while mounted is somehow in two hands. I can't disagree with that.
-James
Yes, I realize there is a light category. I omitted it because that category isn't in question. The point that I was making was that in 3.5, if you use one hand on a two-handed weapon, you don't get any two-handed benefits. That presumption carried over until the PDT made their recent FAQ ruling (although, at the moment, the only thing that seems to be affected is the lance).
|
|
The point that I was making was that in 3.5, if you use one hand on a two-handed weapon, you don't get any two-handed benefits. That presumption carried over until the PDT made their recent FAQ ruling (although, at the moment, the only thing that seems to be affected is the lance).Ah I found it the 3.5 FAQ..A Medium character using a Medium longsword in two hands is using a “two-handed” weapon.A strange FAQ ruling, and one I'm glad isn't being followed here in Pathfinder. It goes against the wording of many 3.5 feats by destroying the distinction between a two-handed weapon and a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands... a distinction that the rules repeatedly make.
For one, I never liked the idea that a mounted character should look to wield a lance in two hands for added benefits. Do you?
-James
I don't understand why you think two-handing a lance is odd. Sure it goes against what we think of regarding knights at the tourney, but two-handing a lance while mounted is no different than two-handing a long spear while mounted (which is how you'd have to wield the long spear anyways). The lance being used in one hand is an exception that allows you to recreate the image of the knight with his shield and lance.
The 3.5 FAQ isn't worded oddly at all. It is merely stating that if there is a scenario in which you are using a two-handed weapon in one hand (such as the lance or if any Pathfinder archetype that allows one-handing a two-handed weapon had existed), you don't get any 1.5 STR bonuses, or +50% Power Attack bonus...just as it should be if you're wielding something with only one hand.
I think you're looking into it too deeply if you think the ruling is destroying a bunch of 3.5 feats. If you wield the weapon in two hands, you get the STR and PA bonus. If you wield the weapon in one hand, you don't. Perhaps there are feats that provide an exception to this, but that's cool too, because they're an exception.
|
|
PS: And yeah I do dislike the idea of the better way to use a lance is in both hands rather than the picture of a knight on horseback charging with one... kind of attacks the genre to me is all.
I agree with you, visually/thematically. Though, as far as the actual rules are concerned, I don't have a problem with two-handing a lance while mounted.
Although, with the way the current FAQ is worded, I can see the dual-wielding lancers racing around on their horse with their +1 flaming lance in one hand and their +1 throwing returning lance in the other...you know, not to two-weapon fight because there wouldn't be any benefit, but to alternate the iterative attacks...or something...but they can still get that power attack bonus because they're two-handed weapons! I mean, before, they could still do it, but they wouldn't get the power attack bonus...which would mean it was silly to do...but it's ok now...umm...yeah...
I feel gross.
Official Rules Response
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
FAQ: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9quw
Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?
If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Doesn't this ruling directly contradict a previous ruling? Which ruling is correct?
Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (such as a lance while mounted), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?
Yes.—Pathfinder Design Team, 05/24/13
- Gauss
Kazaan, really? Could you point out the verbage that supports that?
In the old ruling it basically states that a two-handed weapon in one hand gets the +50% bonus damage from power attack.
In the new ruling it basically states that a two-handed weapon in one hand does not get the 50% bonus damage from power attack.
The two rulings appear to be in direct opposition. They cannot both be true.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To elaborate on my belief that these are in contradiction lets look at the new FAQ all alone for a moment.
If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.
Lance: A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.
So, it would appear that the new FAQ applies to the Lance. Yes?
Now lets look at the old FAQ.
It specifically cites the Lance while mounted as an example of getting the +50% (bonus 2 handed damage) while using a 2-handed weapon 1-handed.
They cannot both be true.
Personally, I prefer the new FAQ, using a 2handed weapon in one hand should not grant 2handed power attack damage.
- Gauss
|
|
They're codifying a difference between "wielded in one hand" and "wielded as a one-handed weapon" because that difference didn't exist in RAW alone, nor was it clear in the Power Attack FAQ.
The difference isn't clear in today's FAQ. I would say instead they have ignored and obscured it.
"wielding it in one hand" should read "wielding it as a one-handed weapon" to make it clear.
KainPen, the verbage for a lance is not 'one hand while mounted'. It is "While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand."
Regardless of the intent, a direct contradiction has been created.
My preferred resolution is that they remove the old FAQ in its entirety and the new FAQ is the (much simpler) standard. If you use a weapon in 2 hands you get two handed bonuses. If you use it in one hand you get one handed bonuses. EASY.
- Gauss
|
|
To elaborate on my belief that these are in contradiction lets look at the new FAQ all alone for a moment.
If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.Lance: A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.So, it would appear that the new FAQ applies to the Lance. Yes?
Now lets look at the old FAQ.
It specifically cites the Lance while mounted as an example of getting the +50% (bonus 2 handed damage) while using a 2-handed weapon 1-handed.They cannot both be true.
Personally, I prefer the new FAQ, using a 2handed weapon in one hand should not grant 2handed power attack damage.
- Gauss
There does appear to be a disparity, but I think it is important to note that it does call it out as "two-handed weapon being used as a one-handed weapon". Even though the answer says "use a two-handed weapon in one hand", it is still directly referring to this question and not addressing the lance FAQ.
Though, I do agree with you that it would be nice if they did away with the lance FAQ.
HangarFlying, the new FAQ answer specifically states "wielding it in one hand". Although the new FAQ question comes close the new FAQ answer does not state anywhere "use a two-handed weapon in one hand".
If it is not addressing the lance FAQ then the wording regarding wielding should not have been used because the Lance DOES use that wording. It is what makes the two FAQs incompatible. Without that wording the two FAQs would merely be confusing rather than incompatible.
This is not a disparity, it is a direct contradiction.
- Gauss
HangarFlying, the new FAQ answer specifically states "wielding it in one hand". Although the new FAQ question comes close the new FAQ answer does not state anywhere "use a two-handed weapon in one hand".
If it is not addressing the lance FAQ then the wording regarding wielding should not have been used because the Lance DOES use that wording. It is what makes the two FAQs incompatible. Without that wording the two FAQs would merely be confusing rather than incompatible.
This is not a disparity, it is a direct contradiction.
- Gauss
It definitely strikes me as a direct throwing out of the old lance FAQ. Which is probably for the best, given that that the new FAQ makes things much clearer and more consistent.
If you ignore the RAI, and look at the RAW of the FAQ they do conflict, and I can see how it can confuse others.
I would prefer Gauss's solution, but if not then a just write the lance up as a rules exception and if any other weapon comes along that works like the lance then say it works like the lance.
HangarFlying, the new FAQ answer specifically states "wielding it in one hand". Although the new FAQ question comes close the new FAQ answer does not state anywhere "use a two-handed weapon in one hand".
If it is not addressing the lance FAQ then the wording regarding wielding should not have been used because the Lance DOES use that wording. It is what makes the two FAQs incompatible. Without that wording the two FAQs would merely be confusing rather than incompatible.
This is not a disparity, it is a direct contradiction.
- Gauss
It depends on if you use the actual wording of the question to give it context. The Lance FAQ asks about using a two-handed weapon in one hand, such as a lance. The most recent FAQ asks about using a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. Undoubtedly less clear than it could be and definitely open to a very easy reading which creates a contradiction. But, it needn't necessarily be contradictory.
Lances wielded from horseback are not wielded as a one-handed weapon. Phalanx Fighters one-handing a pole arm are wielding said weapons as one-handed weapons.
Subtle, nuanced, and some may feel a bit silly, but it's a legitimate distinction.
Obviously, I wouldn't complain if they did clarify it further, though.
No, the bastard sword is a one-handed exotic weapon that can be wielded with 2 hands if you only posses Martial Weapon Proficiency, not a 2-handed weapon.
Sword, Bastard
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
straight from the pfsrd. You're putting the cart before the horse. It is a two handed weapon that can only be wielded one handed if you possess the exotic weapon proficiency. The way you word it, it is considered a one-hander only, special to use two handed, when it is, in fact, the opposite.
No, the bastard sword is a one-handed exotic weapon that can be wielded with 2 hands if you only posses Martial Weapon Proficiency, not a 2-handed weapon.
Sword, Bastard
A bastard sword is about 4 feet in length, making it too large to use in one hand without special training; thus, it is an exotic weapon. A character can use a bastard sword two-handed as a martial weapon.
straight from the pfsrd. You're putting the cart before the horse. It is a two handed weapon that can only be wielded one handed if you possess the exotic weapon proficiency. The way you word it, it is considered a one-hander only, special to use two handed, when it is, in fact, the opposite.
A bastard sword is a one-handed exotic melee weapon, just like it's listed on the table.
It is a one-handed exotic weapon. It is treated as such for every purpose save one, that being to determine who may wield it and how without the EWP feat.