This will make Crane Wing Zen Archer unhappy if this doesn't work.
Drawing ammunition is a free action.
We actually don't know that it is a free action. It might be a non-action.
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action
They contridict. There may be clarification, but I haven't looked it up yet.
EDIT:
I think it just hit me PRD does not contradict:
PRD wrote:
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
PRD wrote:
Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action;
nocking an arrow is not the same as drawing an arrow. Nocking an arrow is putting an arrow on the string. The arrow is already in your hand and you nock the arrow. It still takes a free action to draw the arrow out of the quiver.
@Jodokai: no contradiction. You quoted it right there. When using a bow a character can draw ammunition as a free action.
Bullets, darts, bolts and shuriken are not entering the equation here, so whether they are a free action or non-action is not relevant to the discussion at hand.
@Krodjin - You're right. I was using the words nocking and drawing interchangably, and I shouldn't have been. That's why I saw a contradiction.
I don't think they are, even in game terms. Read the PRD quotes again:
Not an Action: Some activities are so minor that they are not even considered free actions. They literally don't take any time at all to do and are considered an inherent part of doing something else, such as nocking an arrow as part of an attack with a bow.
Ammunition: Projectile weapons use ammunition: arrows (for bows), bolts (for crossbows), darts (for blowguns), or sling bullets (for slings and halfling sling staves). When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action;
If they were the same, this would be a contradiction. They are two seperate actions.
RAW, you can't really utilize Snap Shot in combat since drawing Ammunition is a free action, something you can't do outside your turn (which is needed in order for Snap Shot to work).
The FAQ brings relevance to being able to make multiple AoO's via Combat Reflexes, but it forgets the key factor of having ammunition pre-drawn in order to knock and fire.
As far as allowing it, it'd work like this in any given game.
During Turn: Fire attacks (Full-Attack action), release grip on bow (Free Action).
Outside Turn: Deflect Arrows, Crane Wing and Riposte (Unarmed Strike only).
Here's why: Firing attacks during your turn with a bow and releasing the grip you have on your bow is legal during your turn, but outside your turn you aren't able to fire it because you cannot take the free action to re-grip your bow (two hands needed to make attacks) and use Snap Shot. Secondly, you can't draw ammunition from your quiver as that is the same action consumption as gripping your bow again, which also cannot be done outside your turn. Thirdly, if it was pre-drawn (that is, before you ended your turn), you would have no hands free to utilize Deflect Arrows or Crane Wing/Riposte.
So not only is it not Rules Legal, it's purposefully mutually exclusive.
On a Side Note, a Zen Archer might be able to make use of this "combo" transitioning from Ranged Combat to Melee Combat (having to deal with both), so it's not a complete waste of time. Simultaneously, investing in all of those feats as well as the bow feats needed may not be possible to pull off without sacrificing one or the other.
Seems pretty cut and dry to me.
*Edit* But I will humor your request and FAQ it to see if Paizo will either notice their crude wording and rules mention to change it to work with the intent they seem to want to imply, or if they will keep it the same and decide to crap on Monks some more.
Why do you think you ever have to re-grip a bow? There is no rule or FAQ that says you have to re-grip a bow
So a guy walking through a dungeon can't carry his bow around in one hand? Sure he can. And if a monster jumps out he can engage his shooting hand as a free action without having to re-grip.
We never said people can't walk around a dungeon casually carrying their gear. (It's kind of foolish, but never said it couldn't be done.) Simply that the rules for attacking with a bow don't work that way.
Let's change it from a bow to a two-handed weapon (which mechanically will serve the same purpose). By RAW, I must take a free action to grip my weapon with both hands in order to do the attack.
Most tables won't fuss with this because they (probably) are not playing with people who have feats/abilities requiring free hands to utilize.
In this case (and other cases requiring free hands), the rules were clarified to state that releasing a hand (and re-applying a hand) are free actions that can be taken during your turn (free actions, outside of speaking, cannot be done outside your turn by RAW). So for your example, let's do this:
1st Round: Archer has bow in single hand. He cannot currently fire the bow as the bow requires two hands in order to make attacks with it. Free Action to draw an arrow from his quiver, free action to apply both open hand and arrow to bow (no-action to knock the arrow), and standard action to fire the arrow at zombie (attack roll follows, hit/miss/damage occurs), with the optional move action to out-run the zombie.
By RAW, this is how it would occur. It seems quite lengthy and bogged down, doesn't it? Sure does. Let's clean it up!
1st Round: Archer shoots an arrow at Zombie. Zombie takes 6 points of damage from Archer.
Much more fluid, right? That's how 90% of tables run it so the game can progress and we're not so bogged down with the mechanics of the game.
But that's not how the RAW/RAI is supposed to function mechanically, which is the crux of which the issue with this topic (and many other bow/archer topics on this forum) discusses.
Why do you think you ever have to re-grip a bow? There is no rule or FAQ that says you have to re-grip a bow
So a guy walking through a dungeon can't carry his bow around in one hand? Sure he can. And if a monster jumps out he can engage his shooting hand as a free action without having to re-grip.
Carrying a bow in one hands is possible. Wielding a bow in one hand is not possible. That is the way it works for melee weapons which require two hands to wield - I cannot see a reason it would be any different for a ranged weapon which "requires two hands to use". Using a weapon = wielding, not just carrying. Or at least that's the way I interpret it.
Question: Why is the Zen Archer in this instance giving up a full attack action to "fight defensively" which is expressedly a standard action? Is it because it's a round during which he moved? Just curious.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why do you think you ever have to re-grip a bow? There is no rule or FAQ that says you have to re-grip a bow
So a guy walking through a dungeon can't carry his bow around in one hand? Sure he can. And if a monster jumps out he can engage his shooting hand as a free action without having to re-grip.
Carrying a bow in one hands is possible. Wielding a bow in one hand is not possible. That is the way it works for melee weapons which require two hands to wield - I cannot see a reason it would be any different for a ranged weapon which "requires two hands to use". Using a weapon = wielding, not just carrying. Or at least that's the way I interpret it.
Question: Why is the Zen Archer in this instance giving up a full attack action to "fight defensively" which is expressedly a standard action? Is it because it's a round during which he moved? Just curious.
Fighting Defensively can be done with a standard or full attack, so it's not "giving up" anything, though the action consumption is still contradictory.
Is it possible to let a do Crane Wing while Using the Bow with both hands?
As a swift action the wearer can command the belt to animate, transforming it into a prehensile tail under the wearer’s control. The tail does not grant the wearer any additional attacks or actions per round, nor can it wield weapons, but it can make unarmed attacks and hold or manipulate objects about as well as the wearer’s normal limbs (though any activity requiring fingers is beyond the tail’s capabilities).
@ Driver: This is like saying an Apple is a Fruit but an Orange isn't. The two fruits have their differences (flavor, color, methods of extraction/eating), but it doesn't change the fact that they're fruit.
Same concept here. A melee weapon needing two hands to use has different flavor (melee), color (blood everywhere), and methods (up close and personal) from a ranged weapon that requires two hands to use. It doesn't change the fact that both weapons need two hands to use, and saying that it doesn't take a free action to move one hand not on a ranged weapon requiring two hands to applying it to said weapon which fundamentally has the same requirements of a melee weapon requiring two hands is silly, ridiculous, and something munchkins do to protect their "overpowered" builds.
Even if we take different objects of similar size that aren't the same thing, you would not rule that it would be a Free Action to add or remove hands from these items, that it would be a Move Action, Standard Action, Full Round, because the RAW doesn't say it?
That's the point where SKR would say the GM (or even the players) grow half a brain and apply some common sense to make their own best judgement on a circumstance of ruling, and he's right.
@ Kortzen: An interesting proposition. Since RAW it would function as an unarmed strike (made as if it were with any other limb, assuming an open palm or hand to counter/deflect a blow), I don't see why it wouldn't be allowed outside of "ZOMGOPBUILD" reasons. Good find.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The FAQ brings relevance to being able to make multiple AoO's via Combat Reflexes, but it forgets the key factor of having ammunition pre-drawn in order to knock and fire.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what your saying here, but the FAQ seems pretty clear, and it does address the free action part that is normally required to draw ammo.
Snap Shot: Can a character with Snap Shot (page 119) and Combat Reflexes make multiple attacks of opportunity with a ranged weapon, assuming that loading the ranged weapon is a free action?Yes. As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
Or another way of stating that is:
If you can normally reload your weapon as a free action, then when using the snap shot feat you can reload your weapon as part of making the AoO.Note that in this special instance it isn't a free action to reload, the reload is part and parcel of making the AoO.
I love how quickly people are always called munchkins. For what its worth I believe you could use crane wing with a bow. Also I think you can use deflect/snatch arrow it's even better if you give the arrow back...with your bow...it's only polite.
Is it cool to see the archer avoid the ogre's wild attack and then counter with an arrow to the face. Or to see him catch an enemies arrow only to send it back to him? If you answered yes I don't see the problem.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I knew I'd have to refer the RAW to get anywhere with this... Here goes.
From the Weapons section in the PFSRD:
Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon (see FAQ at right for more information.)
Most projectile weapons require two hands to use (see specific weapon descriptions). A character gets no Strength bonus on damage rolls with a projectile weapon unless it's a specially built composite shortbow or longbow, or a sling. If the character has a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.
You need at least two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size. You can use a composite longbow while mounted. All composite bows are made with a particular strength rating (that is, each requires a minimum Strength modifier to use with proficiency). If your Strength bonus is less than the strength rating of the composite bow, you can't effectively use it, so you take a –2 penalty on attacks with it. The default composite longbow requires a Strength modifier of +0 or higher to use with proficiency. A composite longbow can be made with a high strength rating to take advantage of an above-average Strength score; this feature allows you to add your Strength bonus to damage, up to the maximum bonus indicated for the bow. Each point of Strength bonus granted by the bow adds 100 gp to its cost. If you have a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when you use a composite longbow.
With this cited, both a Greatsword and a Composite Longbow (or any form of bow via RAW) require two hands to use (effectively), making them fit the description of Two-Handed Weapons by RAW. Now then, let's see the FAQ again:
Two-Handed Weapons: What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?
Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair).
—Pathfinder Design Team, 03/01/13
The FAQ specifically mentions all two-handed weapons that the hand adjustment action consumption listed applies to. So let's review this again.
The definition of a Two-Handed Weapon as from the weapon description specifically states that the weapon requires two hands to use it effectively. The Composite Longbow description (a ranged weapon) says that it requires two hands to use. By correlation of definition, the Composite Longbow is a Two-Handed Weapon Ranged Weapon. The FAQ (which questions all forms of Two-Handed Weapons) says that removing hands and re-gripping hands from a Two-Handed Weapon are Free Actions (1 for each), all generally allowed in the same turn/round. Previous correlations prove that a Composite Longbow (or any form of Bow, by straight RAW) requires to hands to use [effectively], the definition of a Two-Handed Weapon. Thusly, it is a free action to add or remove hands from a Composite Longbow.
Any questions?
Boy archers....fingers must get cramped if they've got to keep their hand holding a nocked and ready arrow...
I wonder how archers grab their arrows with out dropping their bow....I mean its go to get hard to let to and grab those arrows....oh errr wait. ;)
The FAQ brings relevance to being able to make multiple AoO's via Combat Reflexes, but it forgets the key factor of having ammunition pre-drawn in order to knock and fire.
Maybe I'm misunderstanding what your saying here, but the FAQ seems pretty clear, and it does address the free action part that is normally required to draw ammo.
Snap Shot: Can a character with Snap Shot (page 119) and Combat Reflexes make multiple attacks of opportunity with a ranged weapon, assuming that loading the ranged weapon is a free action?Yes. As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
Or another way of stating that is:
If you can normally reload your weapon as a free action, then when using the snap shot feat you can reload your weapon as part of making the AoO.Note that in this special instance it isn't a free action to reload, the reload is part and parcel of making the AoO.
Drawing Ammunition is a Free Action. Free Actions (outside of speaking) cannot be taken outside your turn. Thusly, you must have the ammunition pre-drawn in order to take Attacks of Opportunity with Snap Shot.
The FAQ states that extra attacks of opportunities allotted from Combat Reflexes is allowed, yet is conditional in that if you are able reload your weapon with a free action (which must be taken during or outside of your turn in order to utilize it) as part of the attack of opportunity, it is possible, yet by RAW you cannot do so.
The intent of the feat itself is quite clear, this side of the battlefield I never argued with. The RAW, however, is quite contradictory to what the feat is supposed to provide in comparison to the previously listed rules of ranged combat, and the FAQ, according to its wording, does nothing to alleviate the issue of having ammo available to draw (or even better, the inability to draw ammunition outside your turn).
*Edit* Revisions and Grammar corrections.
I've read all the arguments from this thread and others, and I hit FAQ hoping to get a definitive answer.
After reading through both of these abilities:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/crane-wing-combat
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/crane-riposte-combat
And some of the descriptors of the abilities:
Crane Wing Combat: You move with the speed and finesse of an avian hunter, your sweeping blocks and graceful motions allowing you to deflect melee attacks with ease.
Crane Riposte: You use your defensive abilities to make overpowering counterattacks.
It seems to me that the intent for how this works is as follows.
A monk with a free hand is able to deflect a melee attack with ease, following up with that same hand to take an attack of opportunity on the attacker.
As it stands the rules don't specifically spell that out, but that is my opinion, especially when it states "You use your defensive abilities to make overpowering counterattacks." Your defensive ability being the deflection with the open hand.(I don't think anyone is arguing that you deflect the attack with the open hand.)
If I am right, the FAQ ruling will say something along the lines of "Monks using crane wing and crane riposte must take the granted AOO with the free hand used to deflect the attack." If I am wrong, we will see something else, it is just a waiting game now.
Using a weapon = wielding, not just carrying. Or at least that's the way I interpret it.
That is how you interpret it. Thus, your argument is circular. You are saying that you are right, thus you are right.
I believe the correct interpretation could be what you say or, alternatively, to use could simply mean to fire the bow. That is a reasonable interpretation as well.
If use=fire, then you are wrong.
The common usage/definition of wielding is to hold AND use a tool or weapon. The idea that firing a bow is not the same as wielding it isn't tenable.
The common usage/definition of wielding is to hold AND use a tool or weapon. The idea that firing a bow is not the same as wielding it isn't tenable.Using a weapon = wielding, not just carrying. Or at least that's the way I interpret it.
That is how you interpret it. Thus, your argument is circular. You are saying that you are right, thus you are right.
I believe the correct interpretation could be what you say or, alternatively, to use could simply mean to fire the bow. That is a reasonable interpretation as well.
If use=fire, then you are wrong.
For further example with the bow, in a previous printing, the Defending Weapon Property stated that its benefits were gained when using the weapon.
Here's what using in this case meant; from the FAQ:
Merely holding a defending weapon is not sufficient. Unless otherwise specified, you have to use a magic item in the manner it is designed (use a weapon to make attacks, wear a shield on your arm so you can defend with it, and so on) to gain its benefits.
Therefore, if you don't make an attack roll with a defending weapon on your turn, you don't gain its defensive benefit.
Likewise, while you can give a shield the defending property (after you've given it a +1 enhancement bonus to attacks, of course), you wouldn't get the AC bonus from the defending property unless you used the shield to make a shield bash that round--unless you're using the shield as a weapon (to make a shield bash), the defending weapon property has no effect.
As you can see, it gives examples as to what constitutes "using" a item (in this case, weapons), in that you must make attacks with them.
So let's say we have a +1 Defending Bow. There are no enemies in range, so we are constantly "using" the bow for protection. Correct using? No. In this case, "using" would mean "make attacks with."
Also, the developers have differentiated from carrying items and wielding items, saying that wielding items means that the item is in proper place and ready to use for its intended purpose. The Bow's intented purpose is to fire projectiles (arrows) at enemies. If it's not in hand ready to fire projectiles at enemies, it's not being wielded. If it's in hand, yet not ready to fire projectiles at enemies, it's only being carried (not wielded).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing in the feat language suggests that the counterattack must be made with the blocking hand, so to speak, just that an open hand must be used to block.
The intent of the feat tree, to me, seems to be that you are required to fight with at least one hand free, which you use to augment your defensive capabilities. That free hand later allows you to deflect attacks, which creates an opening in your opponent's defense, which is then exploited with a counterattack coming in the form of an AoO.
You don't need the open hand to counter, you need the open hand to deflect. That's why it pairs so well with Duelists. And I know real world analogs don't always mesh well with these rules, but in this case it makes perfect sense to me. And actually things generally flow better if the counter comes from the other hand - it's often a more effective maneuver if the counterattack hits while the other hand is performing the block/counter (hell, that's a primary teaching point of Krav Maga).
My interpretation of the rules is that one hand is blocking, the other is countering. Meaning you can't use a bow to do it. Bows need two hands to use, so your hand isn't free to both block/deflect the attack and draw/nock an arrow and pull back the bowstring. Now, there's nothing in the rules that say the same hand that blocked cannot counter, so I think this is a fair question. But this is how I've always read this and visualized it.
You use a bow to FIRE!
Nothing in the definition of wield implies, hints at, or suggests swinging whatever it is you are 'wielding' like a sword. Wield is simply another way of saying 'use in the proper fashion'. I wouldn't call using the hilt of a sword to pound in a nail wielding a sword. I would call using a hammer to pound in a nail wielding a hammer though.
Wielding a bow means using a bow to fire arrows.
Wielding a sword means swinging it about with intent to cut something in half.
Wielding a gun moons carrying a gun around and shooting things with it. Note that in today's culture the phrase 'wielding a gun' might also be used to indicate a person brandishing a gun about them, even though they may never fire it. But if a person were walking around with a bow and an arrow knocked, and the string pulled back, that would also be wielding the bow, even if they never actually fire the arrow.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Let's say I'm a Qinggong Zen Archer at Level 8.
I am already in Crane Style.
-------------
Benefit: You take only a –2 penalty on attack rolls for fighting defensively. While using this style and fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you gain an additional +1dodge bonus to your Armor Class.
Benefit: Once per round while using Crane Style, when you have at least one hand free and are either fighting defensively or using the total defense action, you can deflect one melee weapon attack that would normally hit you. You expend no action to deflect the attack, but you must be aware of it and not flat-footed. An attack so deflected deals no damage to you.
Benefit: You take only a –1 penalty on attack rolls for fighting defensively. Whenever you use Crane Wing to deflect an opponent’s attack, you can make an attack of opportunity against that opponent after the attack is deflected.
-----------------------------
It's my turn officially and I already have my bow out.
-----------------------------
I quickly decide to fight defensively.(std or part of a full attack)
-----------------------------
Fighting Defensively as a Full-Round Action: You can choose to fight defensively when taking a full-attack action. If you do so, you take a –4 penalty on all attacks in a round to gain a +2 dodge bonus to AC for the same round.
-----------------------------
I draw an arrow as a free action, then fire off 4 shots. +6/+6/+1/+1. Yes I'm naked.
-----------------------------
I then take another free action to draw an arrow, (Drawing ammunition for use with a ranged weapon (such as arrows, bolts, sling bullets, or shuriken) is a free action.) and a no-action to notch it in my bow.(can't find this one but I've a good feeling it is true) I then remove one hand from my bow as another free action.
(Two-Handed Weapons: What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?
Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).
As with any free action, the GM may decide a reasonable limit to how many times per round you can release and re-grasp the weapon (one release and re-grasp per round is fair).
—Pathfinder Design Team, 03/01/13)
-----------------------------
I have officially fired off my attacks while still fighting defensively, notched an arrow in my bow, and take one hand off of the bow.
-----------------------------
Now it is the enemies turn, he moves in to the 5ft range and takes a swing with his greatsword.
-----------------------------
I deflect the attack with my free hand since it is a no-action to deflect, and no-actions can be taken outside of my turn.
You expend no action to deflect the attack, but you must be aware of it and not flat-footed. An attack so deflected deals no damage to you.
-----------------------------
Now I may either choose to IUS with Crane Riposte, or use my Bow. Let's choose IUS for now.
-----------------------------
I throw my fist at my enemy, successfully hitting him and dropping him to a staggered condition(0 hp). No AoO is taken against me for it due to IUS.
Benefit: You are considered to be armed even when unarmed—you do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attack foes while unarmed. Your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your choice.
-----------------------------
Instead of the above option, I choose to take an AoO with my bow. Thankfully due to Snap Shot I will provoke no AoO in return and I officially threaten within 5ft.
Benefit: While wielding a ranged weapon with which you have Weapon Focus, you threaten squares within 5 feet of you. You can make attacks of opportunity with that ranged weapon. You do not provoke attacks of opportunity when making a ranged attack as an attack of opportunity.
-----------------------------
I go to shoot my bow... Oh wait. I need to return the one hand back to it's place so that I have a hand to grip handle of the bow, and pull the string back so that it may fire at my opponent. I just realized, I cannot do this because it requires the free hand to put on my bow to EFFECTIVELY WIELD(meaning to actually use and fire) it. A free action requires it to be my turn in order to initiate. I guess I'll just use my IUS instead. Hey! That worked.
If this were a one handed ranged weapon of a sort, and I had a feat that upgraded my loading actions to a free or non action, this could have worked easily.
Someone please correct me on any of this if I'm incorrect. I seek the RAW fact of the ordeal. Also, if I left any feats that should be in play, please let me know.
@Driver,
Well I'm not sure if you agree given you made this statement here:
Using a weapon = wielding, not just carrying. Or at least that's the way I interpret it.
That is how you interpret it. Thus, your argument is circular. You are saying that you are right, thus you are right.
I believe the correct interpretation could be what you say or, alternatively, to use could simply mean to fire the bow. That is a reasonable interpretation as well.
If use=fire, then you are wrong.
Based on the above statement I'm not sure if you believe carrying an item is the same as wielding an item? It's not, granted in most cases it would be a non-action (or free action at worst) to go from carrying any kind of weapon to wielding it, but they are still separate things.
And I'm confused when you say "use could simply mean to fire the bow" in refutation of a statement about wielding bows, as though to imply that you can fire a bow without actually wielding the bow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
When I read the interpretation that said "If you're using a bow, you can't use Deflect Arrows" I actually laughed out loud. One side of this argument clearly doesn't understand how bows are actually used.
Most of the time the hand that isn't gripping the bow is actually empty. It's only full during the attack.
The default stance of the rules is that when an archer is not actively making an attack roll, that off hand has nothing in it and is not on the bow.
For further example with the bow, in a previous printing, the Defending Weapon Property stated that its benefits were gained when using the weapon.
Here's what using in this case meant; from the FAQ:
Merely holding a defending weapon is not sufficient. Unless otherwise specified, you have to use a magic item in the manner it is designed (use a weapon to make attacks, wear a shield on your arm so you can defend with it, and so on) to gain its benefits.
Therefore, if you don't make an attack roll with a defending weapon on your turn, you don't gain its defensive benefit.
Likewise, while you can give a shield the defending property (after you've given it a +1 enhancement bonus to attacks, of course), you wouldn't get the AC bonus from the defending property unless you used the shield to make a shield bash that round--unless you're using the shield as a weapon (to make a shield bash), the defending weapon property has no effect.As you can see, it gives examples as to what constitutes "using" a item (in this case, weapons), in that you must make attacks with them.
So let's say we have a +1 Defending Bow. There are no enemies in range, so we are constantly "using" the bow for protection. Correct using? No. In this case,...
All you have done is show us that holding a defending weapon (a property that applies to melee weapons) does not allow you to gain the benefits of defending. Thanks (that makes sense for a melee weapon)
However, that is not the question. The question is if you are holding a bow in one hand can you at a moment notice grab an arrow and fire.
So while holding may not grant you the Defending Ability (WITH A MELEE WEAPON), holding may allow you in Pathfinder to grab an arrow and fire. Of course, in real life holding a bow in one hand would allow you to grab an arrow and fire, but I know how you guys hate real
...
It doesn't change the fact that a bow in one hand can't be fired, and drawing ammunition is a free action, something you can't do outside your turn. It also doesn't change my previous post (I only made that post in further reference and example to the factor that holding and using items have different definitions and conditions needed to be fulfilled in order to qualify as either or), in that a Bow is a Ranged Weapon that requires 2 hands to fire (the definition of a Two-Handed Ranged Weapon), and the FAQ talks about all ranged weapons.
Applying a hand to your currently "held" bow takes a free action. Drawing an arrow to use as ammunition to fire with the bow takes a free action. Both of these cannot be done outside your turn; thusly, you can't make use of Crane Wing/Riposte with your bow.
**Edit** I take that back; RAW, you actually can't even make use of Snatch Arrow because then your hand wouldn't be on the Bow and you can't make attacks of opportunity with it since you don't have both hands on the Bow to make the attack with
When I read the interpretation that said "If you're using a bow, you can't use Deflect Arrows" I actually laughed out loud. One side of this argument clearly doesn't understand how bows are actually used.
Most of the time the hand that isn't gripping the bow is actually empty. It's only full during the attack.
The default stance of the rules is that when an archer is not actively making an attack roll, that off hand has nothing in it and is not on the bow.
Not trying to be rude, but let's play your game, and go with the assumption that the player will always have his hand open when he is done firing his bow.
It doesn't change the mechanics that he must apply his open hand to his bow to fire (which by RAW and FAQ he can't do outside his turn to make AOOs), and must have arrows pre-drawn since they take the same action time as applying his open hand.
Now the smartest thing the archer could do is do his full attack, draw 1 arrow, and apply both the arrow and his hand to his bow. Legally, he can make an AoO with Snap Shot. But only one, since he has only one arrow out, you can only fire one arrow at a time (that is, for AOOs), and he can't draw anymore arrows outside his turn.
So even with this point that you make, the mechanics remain the same. Even if he uses Deflect/Snatch Arrows, he still doesn't threaten because he can't make attacks with his bow because RAW two hands aren't applying to the bow.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes already allow an archer to draw and notch more than one arrow as a non-action when it is not their turn.
Notching an arrow is already described as a non-action. Drawing an arrow from a quiver is ambiguous at best, with a lot of circumstantial and conflicting rules depending on what feats a character has. It's even arguable that drawing and notching are the same action with slightly different names (similar to "two-weapon fighting" and "fighting with two weapons").
The only thing you said that makes any sense is
the smartest thing the archer could do is do his full attack, draw 1 arrow, and apply both the arrow and his hand to his bow.
See, that's what archers actually do. It's not uncommon for archers to have a fist full of arrows in the hand that is holding the bow. There are even special quivers that attach to the bow itself so that archers can have even more arrows at hand.
Good job for pointing that out.
Here's what the real-world foundation of Zen Archery might look like. Notice that he doesn't even bother with a quiver.
Skip to the end for the section on reactionary shooting.
Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes already allow an archer to draw and notch more than one arrow as a non-action when it is not their turn.
Notching an arrow is already described as a non-action. Drawing an arrow from a quiver is ambiguous at best, with a lot of circumstantial and conflicting rules depending on what feats a character has. It's even arguable that drawing and notching are the same action with slightly different names (similar to "two-weapon fighting" and "fighting with two weapons").
The only thing you said that makes any sense is
the smartest thing the archer could do is do his full attack, draw 1 arrow, and apply both the arrow and his hand to his bow.See, that's what archers actually do. It's not uncommon for archers to have a fist full of arrows in the hand that is holding the bow. There are even special quivers that attach to the bow itself so that archers can have even more arrows at hand.
Good job for pointing that out.
At what point does Snap Shot + Combat Reflexes allow that? Yes, Notching an arrow is a non-action. However, Drawing ammunition (arrows are ammunition) is a Free Action. Free Actions (outside of speaking) cannot be done outside your turn. Thus, you cannot draw arrows from your quiver outside your turn to make the AOO with the Snap Shot feat. The only way to do so is if you already have an arrow drawn, and having multiple arrows in hand makes it very awkward (if not impossible) to shoot unless you can Manyshot or something (which cannot be done with Snap Shot or any other AOO).
Even so, the FAQ says it takes a Free Action to apply and remove a hand from a Two-Handed Weapon, something that a bow is classified as, and also cannot be done outside your turn, meaning you can either have the bow ready for use in both hands for one AOO with Snap Shot (since they can't get any more than that), or hold the bow in one hand and an open hand in the other for defense. It's mutually exclusive by RAW, and the RAI can't be supported when the RAW strongly says otherwise.
But let's expand your examples some more. You say there are modern bows that have quivers as part of the bow (and provided visual proof). This doesn't mean there weren't such ideas or attempts back in these days, though it doesn't change that there are no items that I've ever heard of in this game (in both Hardcovers, Supplements, or even 3.X Material) that provides such a feature, and unless one does appear, your argument has no ground to stand on.
Also, show me the relevant text that either A. shows that Snap Shot and Combat Reflexes supersedes the Drawing Ammunition as a Free Action limitation, or B. reduces the time consumption of such action to make it usable outside of their turn. Until this is done, the RAW (as poorly written to explain the intent of the abilities as it is) says you're wrong (in which case, RAW is WAR).
**Edit** Please note that I simply am only arguing the RAW; the intent of what it's supposed to do is quite clear and concise and your real life examples do well to try and explain it, but since the RAW doesn't support it in any way, it's difficult to support something that can't even possibly be conceived by the rules the Devs wrote up, nor can the videos be used since the rules are abstract of such realism.
The problem is that you are all failing to note the ruling for snap shot. The question for snap shot was whether a person with combat reflexes could take multiple attacks of opportunity.
The answer was yes. So an archer with snap shot or reflexive shot can, as a free action not on thier turn, draw and notch an arrow.
That's RAW
Actually an archer with snap/reflexive shot AND combat reflexes can as a free action. Sure it's semantics but so is your argument about how many hands to use a bow.
So by RAW at a minimum you need snap shot, combat reflexes and the crane feats.
My biggest problem is that you are using a FAQ that applies to one specific instance with a specific set of feats and using it to justify it applying everywhere. You aren't looking at why he devs would rule that way in that instance which has to do with game balance. You completely ignore the general rule that unequivocally states drawing an arrow s a free action because of a FAQ on one specific instance. What really kills me is that the fa doesn't mean reloading is a non action it says if you can reload as a free, then you can make multiple AoO. That FAQ DOES NOT prove drawing is a non action..
@Darksol, do you believe that 'nocking an arrow' and 'placing a second hand on your bow' in a manner that allows you to fire the bow are separate things? These are one and the same thing. Given we have a specific rule about nocking arrows being a non-action then that is the rule we use - not the FAQ ruling on a general case of adding/removing hands from a weapon.
As to the snap shot feat and it requiring a free action to draw an arrow:
Yes. As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
There are at least two ways to read this:
1) As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as a free action as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.2) As long as you can normally reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
Words in bold were added by me to give certain emphasis to how one might read that sentence.
Note that 1 is also rather redundant. If you are capable or reloading your weapon you can reload your weapon.
GIVEN: We both agree that RAI is crystal clear that snap shot can be used in conjunction with combat reflexes.
GIVEN: RAW can be read in more than one way in many cases, and this is one of those cases.
THEN: The only logical reading is to take the reading that matches RAI. Doing so gives us RAI and eliminates conflict that the other RAW reading would give.
|
To me, it's pretty obvious that the Snap Shot feat provides an exception to the rule that the "drawing an arrow" free action must be done on your turn—hence being able to make one or more AoO.
The problem with this crane-wing-deflection-reposte thingy is that your free hand is occupied with deflecting an attack and isn't available to also manipulate the bow.
To look at it another way, I don't think anyone is arguing that you can do this crane thingy and then make the AoO with a greatsword (or whatever two-handed weapon). The bow is functionally no different.
@Darksol, do you believe that 'nocking an arrow' and 'placing a second hand on your bow' in a manner that allows you to fire the bow are separate things? These are one and the same thing. Given we have a specific rule about nocking arrows being a non-action then that is the rule we use - not the FAQ ruling on a general case of adding/removing hands from a weapon.
As to the snap shot feat and it requiring a free action to draw an arrow:
Yes. As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
There are at least two ways to read this:
1) As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as a free action as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.2) As long as you can normally reload your weapon with a free action you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making with the Snap Shot feat.
Words in bold were added by me to give certain emphasis to how one might read that sentence.
Note that 1 is also rather redundant. If you are capable or reloading your weapon you can reload your weapon.
GIVEN: We both agree that RAI is crystal clear that snap shot can be used in conjunction with combat reflexes.
GIVEN: RAW can be read in more than one way in many cases, and this is one of those cases.
THEN: The only logical reading is to take the reading that matches RAI. Doing so gives us RAI and eliminates conflict that the other RAW reading would give.
Yet the Two-Handed Weapons FAQ (which a Bow requires two hands to use) says applying and removing hands from such weapons is a Free Action, and in turn it distinguishes itself an action type all on its own. If a FAQ comes in which they clarify it to mean the same as nocking an arrow for ranged two-handed weapons, then by all means you would be correct, but they haven't, and probably won't for a while to say the least. In terms of intent, that's reasonable and fair enough to allow. RAW and PFS play would say otherwise.
There is only one way to read the FAQ, and that's how it's currently typed, because reading it any other way means you're not reading it the way the FAQ is supposed to be read, and may I suggest you read that FAQ more closely. It says that Combat Reflexes can be utilized in conjunction with Snap Shot, provided you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack of opportunity as a Free Action. Do you see the problem?
No text in Snap Shot, its Improved form or Combat Reflexes supports being able to do what is required in the FAQ (reloading a weapon as part of the ranged attack of opportunity as a free action), and outside that, taking the action consumption required to reload ammunition to make the attack (drawing ammunition, then nocking it to the weapon) makes it physically impossible due to action capabilities.
The problem is that it addressed the issue poorly, and the way it's written in comparison to the rules it's supposed to address has the FAQ function at a level even lower than useless; it's actually a waste of text and effort to fix a problem that it didn't even really fix to begin with. If the Snap Shot feat says "You can reload ammunition outside your turn," then this would be a completely different argument (actually, non-existent to be exact), but it doesn't, and it isn't.
If anything, my complaint with your stuff is Paizo tries to alleviate an issue with a FAQ that, while on the surface "solves everything," their other publications say "LOLno."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yet the Two-Handed Weapons FAQ (which a Bow requires two hands to use) says applying and removing hands from such weapons is a Free Action, and in turn it distinguishes itself an action type all on its own. If a FAQ comes in which they clarify it to mean the same as nocking an arrow for ranged two-handed weapons, then by...
And the FAQ which talks about that is a general rule on removing/re-gripping. It is not a specific rule. Nocking an arrow is a specific rule for bows. Specific > general. Appeals to the FAQ on regripping have no bearing here.
Among two handed ranged weapons are also blowguns and slings. Neither would require a second hand to ever physically be on the weapon to reload them - it would be tricky to reload a sling that way, but not required - with a little practice you could drop the bullet into the pouch. With a blow gun the second hand is on the ammo pushing it into the end. Both of these are more akin to nocking an arrow than is placing a second hand on the weapon. All these weapons require two hands to use. Nothing specifies they require two hands physically touching the weapon. Common sense tells us the bow requires a hand on the string, and the sling requires a hand stuffing the bullet into the pouch (after which it is a one handed weapon as far as attacking with it). And a blow gun, depending on its length, might require a second hand to steady it for better aim - but not required for a short blow gun. But in general principle the second hand here in all three cases is needed for the reloading of the weapon - not for gripping the weapon.
...provided you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack of opportunity as a Free Action.
It doesn't actually say that though.
It says "you can reload your weapon as part of the ranged attack attack of opportunity you are making". Normally a weapon like a crossbow takes a move action or more to reload. A gun, depending on type and lack of class features or feats and ammo type can take more than a free action. These types of ranged weapons cannot be used with snap shot and combat reflexes to make multiple AoO's because of the "As long as you can reload your weapon with a free action" clause rules them out. I very well understand you could read the snap shot FAQ to actually make the FAQ on it a meaningless bunch of words that doesn't actually change anything. All I'm trying to point out is that that reading is not the only one possible - and given another way of looking at what they mean by those words that actually matches the known RAI, there is no reason to use the strict narrow reading you are trying to claim as the only way to read it.
Go reread the two possible interpretations I provided. You'll note in case 1 that the words "as a free action" I added aren't part of the actual FAQ text. "you can reload your weapon as part of the attack" is a single clause. "reload your weapon with a free action" is a qualifier on it. It is not a statement that reloading your weapon in this case takes a free action. It is a statement that taking an AoO with snap shot allows you to reload your weapon when normally doing so would take a free action. Or put another way if reloading would take more than a free action than you cannot use snap shot to AoO.
If anything, my complaint with your stuff is Paizo tries to alleviate an issue with a FAQ that, while on the surface "solves everything," their other publications say "LOLno."
I have no idea what you mean by this? I'm guessing you are again referring to the regripping FAQ? If so see above for specific > general. The general rule that does not override the specific rule does not create a conflict here.