| 18 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Question unclear. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't want to argue about the new FAQ on TWF/THF. What I want to do is get some clarification on how it affects other parts of the game. Before the ruling, I felt comfortable on how the rest of the system works, but the new FAQ pulls a lot of what I thought was established RAW/RAI into doubt. So, I'll start off with my understanding of how the system works AFTER the new FAQ, and then ask my questions. Please add questions if you see anything I missed. Please don't start the arguments or insults again, this is intended to be a request for clarification not a place for people to show how immature they are.
RADI (Rules As Developers Intend) Post FAQ :
Each creature has one attack per round per manipulative limb capable of wielding a manufactured weapon. For the core races, this is two (one for each arm). Certain other creatures which are non standard may have more. For example, a 1st level Eidelon with 4 arms would have four manipulative limbs capable of wielding a manufactured weapon and thus have four available attacks per round. A manipulative limb that is not capable of weilding a manufactured weapon (for example, the prehensile tail of a Vanara) does not grant another secondary attack.
These attacks only apply to Manufactured or Unarmed attacks. The creature may make one additional attack for each natural weapon it possesses (for example, bite or claw), provided those natural attacks are not on a manipulative limb it uses for a Manufactured/Unarmed attack. For example, if a creature has two manipulative limbs with claws, it may make one Manufactured or Unarmed attack with each limb, or it may make one claw attack with each limb, or it may make one manufactured attack and one claw attack. Any time a natural attack is combined with a Manufactured/Unarmed attack, the natural attack is treated as a secondary natural attack, and takes a -5 BAB penalty from the creatures maximum BAB.
These attacks are divided up into Primary attacks, and Secondary Attacks. The creature may have only one Primary attack (which gains a x1 str mod), and all other attacks are considered Secondary (and gain a x0.5 str mod). Making a two-handed attack requires a Primary and Secondary attack. This can be with a one-handed weapon wielded as a two-handed weapon (such as a longsword) or with a two-handed weapon (such as a greatsword). In such attacks, the STR modifiers are added together (to form 1.5 for the attack). Any additional Secondary Attacks (if any exist) may be taken normally. For example, an Eidelon with four arms may make one 2-handed attack with a great sword, and then two secondary attacks with short swords, and would take the normal penalties for multi-weapon fighting on all attacks (-2 with the multi-weapon feat, -4/-6 without).
A double weapon is treated as either a one-handed and light weapon (if using two/multi-weapon fighting) or as a 2-handed weapon. If using it as a 2-handed weapon, it takes up both a Primary and Secondary Manufactured/Unarmed attack. If using it as a double weapon, one end counts as a one-handed primary, and the other end counts as a light secondary attack.
The number of attacks made per round can be modified by BAB. For every additional 5 points of BAB beyond the first, the creature may make one additional Primary Manufactured/Unarmed attack.
----------------
So that is the rules as I understand them from the FAQ. That gives rise to the following questions to me.
1) If I have a creature with four arms, can it, at first level, use multi-weapon fighting to fight with a pair of 2-handed weapons, or must it wait until it has +6/+1 BAB in order to use the second Primary attack along with a secondary in order to multi-weapon fight with two 2-handed weapons? If this is the case, it would have a single secondary left over, which could theoretically be used to make a head butt or boot knife kick, yes?
2) If I have gained one or more vestigal arms (Alchemist), do I automatically switch to multi-weapon feat if I have two-weapon fighting? If so, how does 1 above come into play?
3) If I am a caster, and I have a long sword in one hand, and a boot blade, and I two-weapon fight (and I have nothing in my other hand), do I still qualify as having a 'free hand' for somatic gestures on swift cast spells, or does my 'off-hand' use of the boot blade count as my 'free hand' and thus keep me from casting spells? (Yes, this showed up on the boards).
4) If I am wearing a shield on one arm, and I only have two, and I two-weapon fight with a kick and a punch using Improved Unarm Strike or by making a Longsword/Boot Blade attack, do I lose my shield AC because I have used my primary and off-hand attacks? (Yes, this is being argued on the boards as the case).
------------------
My own feelings :
1) Not sure how to answer this anymore. Need an FAQ response from Devs on what their intent was, it is no longer clear.
2) I feel that it should be automatic to a multi-weapon feat, and that it should work just like 1, but again, need feedback.
3) I feel that the casting requirement of needing a 'free hand' has nothing to do with primary/offhand arguments, and thus a free hand is a free hand, regardless of what you did that round.
4) Same as 3, a shield on the arm is a shield on the arm, and as long as you didn't use the shield arm in attacks, you should retain AC. But what do I know, I don't know what the unwritten rules are on AC.
|
These are decent questions. I hit the FAQ.
1) A creature that has four arms has four attacks (one primary and three off-hand). I don't think it is outside the realm of reason to be able to pair up the hands to wield two 2HW. Granted, there are going to be the penalties for the off-hand weapon not being light. I think the next question is whether or not the off-hand 2HW gets 1.0 STR (from two .5 STR) or just .5 STR (because it is off-hand).
2) Multiweapon Attack does not apply in this case. While vestigial arms does allow the alchemist to make an attack with that arm, he does not gain any extra attacks from that arm. Whereas the creature in #1 had four arms, it had four attacks, the alchemist still only has two attacks. So, assuming the vestigial arm can assist in wielding a 2HW, the alchemist's primary and off-hand attack are wielding the 2HW. The remaining two arms may not participate because there are no more extra attacks available for them to use.
3) I hadn't seen this argument, but my gut tells me that because the spell is being cast as a swift action, there shouldn't be a problem with this scenario.
4) I see both sides of the argument, and I think each side has a valid point. My feelings won't be hurt with either decision.
These are decent questions. I hit the FAQ.
I can't take credit for any of them. Some of them I had on reading the FAQ, and the rest I found on the forums (but also the ones I thought of as well), so they're pretty much a group effort.
Based on the shield thing I would say a "free hand" has nothing to do with the primary/off hand thing...I see it meaning the physical free hand so should be fine
As for 1 and 2
1. If its a race that naturally has more than 2 arms then yea more attacks...need to take MWF to help
2. Unlike a LOT of people I talk to/with about PF I see the vestigial arms as just extra arms for holding things...by that I mean since it says you get no extra actions then you cannot use it to gain attacks...and I see using then to help wield 2 THWs as the arms giving you extra attacks...since without them you couldn't even wield 2 THWs
However you could use then to make normal BAB attacks just not anything "extra"
Based on the shield thing I would say a "free hand" has nothing to do with the primary/off hand thing...I see it meaning the physical free hand so should be fine
As for 1 and 2
1. If its a race that naturally has more than 2 arms then yea more attacks...need to take MWF to help
2. Unlike a LOT of people I talk to/with about PF I see the vestigial arms as just extra arms for holding things...by that I mean since it says you get no extra actions then you cannot use it to gain attacks...and I see using then to help wield 2 THWs as the arms giving you extra attacks...since without them you couldn't even wield 2 THWs
However you could use then to make normal BAB attacks just not anything "extra"
Well, it says you get no extra attacks for them, but by the same token, it says you can do anything you can with your normal arms. I can normally 2HF with 2 arms. So since they equal normal arms but not extra attacks, that sounds like it should (again should being rather slippery lately) allow TWF with 2 THW. Or at the very least, have one hand free for cast (elixers or spells if you multiclass), wear a shield for AC, and TWF or THF.
Fwiw, JB responded about the shield.
yep, I saw that.
I also saw that the inconsistency caused by this ruling is giving him a major headache. It's like a thread on a sweater, it's sticking out and niggling and annoying, but when you jerk on it to get rid of it, you suddenly have an unraveling sweater.
Now the dev team has a ton of other FAQ stuff to clear up (per Jason himself).
Hopefully they notice this thread and pick up the other questions.
I understand that...and I agree with them being able to hold a shield and benefit from the AC bonus...and I agree with one being able to be a "free hand" for spellcasting or feats...and I also know that to some that sounds illogical...but I never said my thoughts were based on logic lol
I mean if someone really had their heart set on doing it in a home game I would prolly actually let it be...but I would have them follow the normal TWF rules regardless of the fact that they are using THWs...as in 1xSTR for the primary and .5xSTR for the off
I mean if someone really had their heart set on doing it in a home game I would prolly actually let it be...but I would have them follow the normal TWF rules regardless of the fact that they are using THWs...as in 1xSTR for the primary and .5xSTR for the off
You could do it that way, or frankly you could let them have the 1.5xSTR and .5xSTR, which isn't so different from a character taking double slice and dealing 1xSTR and 1xSTR AND benefiting from a shield.
Lots of different ways to go with a home campaign,
James
Home games, I'll just ignore the FAQ. Honestly, it's not so overpowered that it's worth the headache of all the stuff you have to keep track of and all the fiddly bits we need further FAQs on now (see Jason's headache comment on how many threads this one decision jerked on in the rules).
Simple Solution : Ignore the 'cap' and just use the following logic :
You get one primary and one off-hand attack at level 1 with TWF. Any weapon you can wield is valid for whatever attack. Done. Simple, easy, no other ramifications. Oh well,someone can end up getting a x2 at 1st level instead, they won't hit due to penalties, so who cares.