TWF with two handed weapons, what's my damage modifier?


Rules Questions


2 people marked this as FAQ candidate.

let's say I have four arms (Which I do)

So upon reading weapon descriptions and feats

d20pfsrd combat page wrote:

Strength Bonus

When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result. A Strength penalty, but not a bonus, applies on damage rolls made with a bow that is not a composite bow.

Off-Hand Weapon

When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.

Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed

When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus (Strength penalties are not multiplied). You don't get this higher Strength bonus, however, when using a light weapons with two hands.

So would a 2h weapon deal 1-1/2 even if it is in my off hand?


I would say Off-hand weapon rule is more precise therefore trumps the general rule of Two-Handed weapons.

Also, the Double Slice feat would be useless in your example. Which I don't think should be the case.


I would say the TWF rules would supersede the Two-Handed weapon rule; however, RAW there is no definitive answer as this is a very strange occurrence. RAI, I would say you'd get the normal 1-1/2 strength bonus to your "main hand" attack and then regular strength bonus on the "off hand" attacks. That way you've got a nice balance in between the two normal rules. Just a thought.

The rules start to get very vague when you start throwing wonky things such as a PC with four arms at them lol.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

You only get the 1.5x Strength bonus if you're actually wielding a 2H weapon with 2 hands. If you have some ability that allows you to use a 2H weapon with only one hand, you only apply your strength bonus. If you're using a 2H weapon in each hand, you'd only add 1/2 your strength bonus to damage with that weapon. Not to mention all the crazy penalties for using a 2H weapon in your off hand. I can't think of any situation where this would gain you anything.


darth_gator wrote:
You only get the 1.5x Strength bonus if you're actually wielding a 2H weapon with 2 hands. If you have some ability that allows you to use a 2H weapon with only one hand, you only apply your strength bonus. If you're using a 2H weapon in each hand, you'd only add 1/2 your strength bonus to damage with that weapon. Not to mention all the crazy penalties for using a 2H weapon in your off hand. I can't think of any situation where this would gain you anything.

The character *is* wielding each two-handed weapon with two hands. The Bestiary 4 added a playable race that possesses four arms. Which allows for these kind of shenanigans.


As you are not allowed to use TWF with one two-handed weapon and armor spikes I can only assume that you can't use TWF with two two-handed weapons.

Sure it SHOULD be possible to use two two-handed weapons at the same time if you have four arms. But RAW that is at least problematic.

Liberty's Edge

Umbranus wrote:

As you are not allowed to use TWF with one two-handed weapon and armor spikes I can only assume that you can't use TWF with two two-handed weapons.

Sure it SHOULD be possible to use two two-handed weapons at the same time if you have four arms. But RAW that is at least problematic.

At the time the rules were written, four-armed PC characters were not available. You can't pedantically apply the rules to situations for which they weren't written and then say NOT RAW! Using common sense and deductive reasoning, 1.5 STR on the "main attack" and 1.0 STR on the "off attack" is a fair adjudication of the rules.


The reason a two-armed character can't use a two-handed weapon with a non-hand-associated weapon is because the off-hand attack is subsumed in making an attack with two hands. To illustrate, if you had 3 iterative attacks and 2 off-hand attacks, you could swing a longsword with 2 hands which subsumes 1 iterative and 1 off-hand, leaving you with 2 iteratives and 1 off-hand. This means you could change grip and make one-handed attacks with the longsword and make your remaining off-hand attack with a non-handed weapon (ie. Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes, etc). It would be your BAB-5 off-hand because your first off-hand at highest BAB was already subsumed in the 2-h longsword attack.

To expand to a four-armed race, you have 3 off-hand attacks; one attached to each hand. Even if you subsume 1 iterative and one off-hand with a 2-h attack, you still have 2 remaining off-hand attacks.

Lastly, to address the original question, a two-handed attack gets 1.5x Str while an off-hand attack gets 0.5x and, by Pathfinder addition of factors, 1.5 + (0.5 - 1) = 1.0x Str. Or, in other words, just as an attack using your main-hand (1.0x) and off-hand (0.5x) combines the two into 1.5x Str so using two off-hands for a two-handed attack adds the 0.5x from both hands to net you 1.0x Str to damage.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Dustyboy wrote:
So would a 2h weapon deal 1-1/2 even if it is in my off hand?

Not sure what you are saying.

You use a 2 Handed Weapon you get a total of 1.5

You use two 1 Handed Weapons you get a total of 1.5

You use a 1 Handed Weapon and a Light Weapon and you get a total of 1.5


You CAN TWF with 2 handed weapons , provided you have abilities saying you can. A Titan mauler can wield 2 handed weapons in each hand, the main hand +str mod, offhand +.5 str mod, exactly as stated in TWF rules. The fact that you are wielding a two handed weapon, does not give you the bonus. Swinging the weapon WITH 2 hands makes it 1.5str mod. As you are NOT swinging with both hands, follow the normal guidelines for TWF.


Evilserran wrote:
You CAN TWF with 2 handed weapons , provided you have abilities saying you can. A Titan mauler can wield 2 handed weapons in each hand, the main hand +str mod, offhand +.5 str mod, exactly as stated in TWF rules. The fact that you are wielding a two handed weapon, does not give you the bonus. Swinging the weapon WITH 2 hands makes it 1.5str mod. As you are NOT swinging with both hands, follow the normal guidelines for TWF.

2 vestigial arms, I AM swinging with two hands, two two handed weapons.

now Even as so

the off hand weapon rules say 1/2 str damage, but that simply reiterates the rules in the weapon descriptions, even if, if i'm applying 1.5 my str mon to all two handed weapons when weilding them with two hands, if i apply half my strength mod, would that not also be construable as half of 1.5 strength mod? IE .75 strength mod to the weapon?


Dustyboy wrote:
2 vestigial arms, I AM swinging with two hands, two two handed weapons.

Oh lord. Here we go again.

When you wield a two-handed weapon, you are entitled to one attack per BAB iteration. You don't get more attacks with Vestigial Arms. So you do not get to attack twice with two-handers using Vestigial Arms. The only way this would come close to flying is if you got 1x STR with the first one and 0.5x with the second, but in which case you've spent a lot of build effort for nothing.


Ah, you're talking about Vestigial Arm... that's a whole other animal. Vestigial arms don't give you extra off-hand attacks like a naturally four-armed creature would have. You still only have one off-hand attack by default, a second from ITWF, and a third from GTWF. So, if you wanted to use, say, Unarmed Strike as your main-hand attack and make off-hand attacks with a 2-h weapon (ie. Greatsword), you'd spend two off-hand attacks to make it. And, as I previously stated, Pathfinder math is different from normal math. You don't take 1.5x * 0.5x = 0.75x Str bonus by the same reasoning that two effects that double your damage only nets you 3x damage rather than 4x damage. A 2-h attack gives +50% str bonus while an off-hand gives -50% str bonus and, if combined, the two cancel each other out.


You cannot attack with two two-handed weapons in a round, with the exception of an ability that lets you wield two-handed weapons as one handed weapons.

If you have vestigial arms you cannot make any attacks that you couldn't do if you only had two-arms. You could hold two two-handed weapons, but you cannot attack with them.

A Kasatha character has 1 main hand and 3 off hand attacks. Wielding a two-handed weapon requires the use of a main hand and off hand.


Kazaan wrote:
Ah, you're talking about Vestigial Arm... that's a whole other animal. Vestigial arms don't give you extra off-hand attacks like a naturally four-armed creature would have. You still only have one off-hand attack by default, a second from ITWF, and a third from GTWF. So, if you wanted to use, say, Unarmed Strike as your main-hand attack and make off-hand attacks with a 2-h weapon (ie. Greatsword), you'd spend two off-hand attacks to make it. And, as I previously stated, Pathfinder math is different from normal math. You don't take 1.5x * 0.5x = 0.75x Str bonus by the same reasoning that two effects that double your damage only nets you 3x damage rather than 4x damage. A 2-h attack gives +50% str bonus while an off-hand gives -50% str bonus and, if combined, the two cancel each other out.

I was under the impression that the second attack wasn't limited as it is already provided. I am merely allowing myself to hold the larger weapon with the second hand. The attack (As I understood it) comes from holding two weapons and therefore is valid by both RAW and RAI. What I am restricted from doing is having additional attacks from a third and fourth weapon, as the normal rules state that you make an attack with each weapon you are holding.

IE i'm gaining the normal TWF progression, but i am able to wield the sword via holding it in two hands.


Claxon is pointing out an overly misquoted part of the alchemist section in the APG. He's diehard in his convictions and beliefs about vestigial arms, but he's wrong on this one. Vestigial arms do not grant extra attacks per round, but they can be used as part of an attack with another hand's attack - such as wielding a weapon with two hands.

In regards to OP, I make the secondary attack do 50% strength damage of whatever the primary attack does. I add the 50% increases together rather than multiply.
If the primary attack does 100% strength, the the offhand does 50% strength.
If the primary attack does 150% strength, the the offhand does 75% strength.
If the primary attack does 200% strength, the the offhand does 100% strength.
If the primary attack does 250% strength, the the offhand does 125% strength.
I do not know of a way to get more than 3, 50% increases to strength damage at once.


Mapleswitch wrote:

Claxon is pointing out an overly misquoted part of the alchemist section in the APG. He's diehard in his convictions and beliefs about vestigial arms, but he's wrong on this one. Vestigial arms do not grant extra attacks per round, but they can be used as part of an attack with another hand's attack - such as wielding a weapon with two hands.

In regards to OP, I make the secondary attack do 50% strength damage of whatever the primary attack does. I add the 50% increases together rather than multiply.
If the primary attack does 100% strength, the the offhand does 50% strength.
If the primary attack does 150% strength, the the offhand does 75% strength.
If the primary attack does 200% strength, the the offhand does 100% strength.
If the primary attack does 250% strength, the the offhand does 125% strength.
I do not know of a way to get more than 3, 50% increases to strength damage at once.

The way In my mind that it works is flatly

paizo wrote:

Strength Bonus: When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result. A Strength penalty, but not a bonus, applies on damage rolls made with a bow that is not a composite bow.

Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.

Wielding a Weapon Two-Handed: When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus (Strength penalties are not multiplied). You don't get this higher Strength bonus, however, when using a light weapon with two hands.

If you're adding half of your strength bonus, which is one and a half your strength bonus, you would get three fourths of your strength bonus correct?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Dustyboy wrote:
If you're adding half of your strength bonus, which is one and a half your strength bonus, you would get three fourths of your strength bonus correct?

I'm not sure I'm understanding you, so lets use some numbers.

STR 18 = +4

When using a Greatsword (2H) you add +6.

When using a Longsword in one hand and a Short Sword in another you add +4 on the LS and +2 on the SS.


James Risner wrote:
Dustyboy wrote:
If you're adding half of your strength bonus, which is one and a half your strength bonus, you would get three fourths of your strength bonus correct?

I'm not sure I'm understanding you, so lets use some numbers.

STR 18 = +4

When using a Greatsword (2H) you add +6.

When using a Longsword in one hand and a Short Sword in another you add +4 on the LS and +2 on the SS.

What about weilding two greatswords?

My theory is it's +6 and +3

some say it'd be +6 and +2

Others still would say +4 and +2.

I'm still using two hands to attack with each of the weapons


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Personally I would rule that your secondary two handed weapon would gain 1.0x Str. The reasoning being that you are using two secondary hands on the weapon.

Basically:
Primary hand (1.0) + Secondary hand (0.5) = 1.5x Str
Secondary hand (0.5) + Secondary hand (0.5) = 1.0x Str

There is absolutely no precedent anywhere for a 0.75x Str modifier or a tertiary hand for 0.25x for that matter and things would just be complicated

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Dustyboy wrote:

My theory is it's +6 and +3

some say it'd be +6 and +2

Others still would say +4 and +2.

I'm still using two hands to attack with each of the weapons

There is simply no way it is +6 and +3, period. That is reading the rules way wrong.

If you have the hands (like Kastasha but not like Vestigial) then it would be +6 (Primary and 1st off) and +4 (2nd off +2 and 3rd off +2.)

With vestigial, you can't make more attacks than normal and you can't use those arms to make attacks.


Mapleswitch wrote:
Claxon is pointing out an overly misquoted part of the alchemist section in the APG. He's diehard in his convictions and beliefs about vestigial arms, but he's wrong on this one. Vestigial arms do not grant extra attacks per round, but they can be used as part of an attack with another hand's attack - such as wielding a weapon with two hands.

They can, but there's also developer comments that say the intent was not to create dual two-hand weapon wielding alchemists. So, if that is correct, Claxon is not wrong.

We could have an argument about whether the Vestigial Arm FAQ actually changed that statement of intent, but the FAQ and subsequent responses were kind of convoluted. The way the FAQ was made and initially supported, dual two-hand weapon wielding was not allowed. The way is was subsequently discussed (all you're attacking is the number of attacks) made it less clear and it's arguable that dual two-hand weapon wielding could be allowed.


HangarFlying wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

As you are not allowed to use TWF with one two-handed weapon and armor spikes I can only assume that you can't use TWF with two two-handed weapons.

Sure it SHOULD be possible to use two two-handed weapons at the same time if you have four arms. But RAW that is at least problematic.

At the time the rules were written, four-armed PC characters were not available. You can't pedantically apply the rules to situations for which they weren't written and then say NOT RAW! Using common sense and deductive reasoning, 1.5 STR on the "main attack" and 1.0 STR on the "off attack" is a fair adjudication of the rules.

This is precisely how I would do it.

One weapon does 1.5 STR (1 from main hand and .5 from off-hand). The other does 1.0 STR (.5 from off-hand 2 and .5 from off-hand 3).


Here, let me break it down a different way:

Lets say you have 2 vestigial arms (4 arms total) and you're wielding a Longsword in each one. Each longsword has different properties for different enemies (ie. one is Flaming Burst, one is Bane(whatever), one is Holy, etc). You've got 4 iterative attacks (for the sake of example). You have different enemies around you, each one weak to one of your Longsword's properties. You can use each Longsword once against 4 different enemies using your 4 iterative attacks and that's fine because you're not using the extra arms to get extra attacks; you're still within your 4 iterative allowance. If you were to do Two-Weapon Fighting, you'd designate something as your off-hand attack (say, Unarmed Strike for example) and you still get your 4 iteratives, with the addition of one off-hand attack.

By contrast, a naturally multi-armed race like Kathasa normally gets 3 off-hand attacks as standard (presumably because they have trained their nervous system from birth to multi-task so many different appendages).


fretgod99 wrote:
We could have an argument about whether the Vestigial Arm FAQ actually changed that statement of intent, but the FAQ and subsequent responses were kind of convoluted. The way the FAQ was made and initially supported, dual two-hand weapon wielding was not allowed. The way is was subsequently discussed (all you're attacking is the number of attacks) made it less clear and it's arguable that dual two-hand weapon wielding could be allowed.

Can you cite the location of this FAQ? People have been using this as the fallback argument, but for months, no one has bothered citing it. I doubt it really exists.


Mapleswitch wrote:
fretgod99 wrote:
We could have an argument about whether the Vestigial Arm FAQ actually changed that statement of intent, but the FAQ and subsequent responses were kind of convoluted. The way the FAQ was made and initially supported, dual two-hand weapon wielding was not allowed. The way is was subsequently discussed (all you're attacking is the number of attacks) made it less clear and it's arguable that dual two-hand weapon wielding could be allowed.
Can you cite the location of this FAQ? People have been using this as the fallback argument, but for months, no one has bothered citing it. I doubt it really exists.

Vestigial Arm FAQ. It's in the Ultimate Magic FAQ section. Came out on November 6.


Thank you for quoting the source.


Multiweapon Fighting feat clearly indicates that there is only one main hand and all the rest are off hands. There is no RAW for damage bonus from two off-hands, but standard d20 math indicates that the answer is 0.5+0.5 = 1 STR.

curious: could he wield a weapon 4-armed and get 2.5 STR bnous?


Thanks FretGod for backing me up.


...What does the source say?

Side A: Vestigial Arm does not grant an additional attack and is not able to help wield a sword/bow 2-handed.

Side B: Vestigial Arm does not grant an additional attack and is able to help wield a sword/bow 2-handed.


Whether the OP is getting additional arms from vestigial arm, synthesist summoner, the 4 armed race, polymorph, playing a monster race, Titan Mauler (Barbarian Archetype) - wield 2 handers in 1 hand, or some other weird combination; the rules on whether multiple arms can wield multiple, two handed weapons will be universal for player characters.


It's been clarified by the devs that using an off-hand to "help" swing a weapon two-handed subsumes a potential off-hand attack. So whether you grow two vestigial arms or two thousand, they don't grant additional off-hand attacks because the ability says it doesn't grant additional attacks; including both iterative and off-hand attacks.

Grand Lodge

We are trying to handle too much at once.

Let's forget about the special case of Vestigial Arms, and the like, and just focus on two weapon fighting, with two handed weapons.

If it makes some more comfortable, let's imagine a DM wants a Marilith to fight with greatswords.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

We are trying to handle too much at once.

Let's forget about the special case of Vestigial Arms, and the like, and just focus on two weapon fighting, with two handed weapons.

If it makes some more comfortable, let's imagine a DM wants a Marilith to fight with greatswords.

AS the faq does not address two handed weapons (Yet again) I'd say that the rules of two handed weapons are not restricted by the off hand property.


Dustyboy wrote:

let's say I have four arms (Which I do)

Both rules should apply. The character is two-weapon fighting and takes all penalties accrued thereby and offset by whatever feats apply. One of the weapons is a primary weapon and the other a secondary weapon.

Each of the two attacks is a two-handed attack and accrues whatever bonuses apply thereto. Thus, 1.5 STR modifier damage applies to each of the two attacks.

To me the brokenness is permitting four arms in the first place.

Grand Lodge

Dustyboy wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

We are trying to handle too much at once.

Let's forget about the special case of Vestigial Arms, and the like, and just focus on two weapon fighting, with two handed weapons.

If it makes some more comfortable, let's imagine a DM wants a Marilith to fight with greatswords.

AS the faq does not address two handed weapons (Yet again) I'd say that the rules of two handed weapons are not restricted by the off hand property.

Your response is to comment on the one thing I suggested we forget about.

You want answers, then you need to take it, one step at a time.

First step: Forget about Vestigial Arms for a moment.


For a four-armed creature, I would grant a 1.5*STR bonus to the main hand plus off hand primary attack, and 1*STR on the two-handed off hand secondary attack.

Doesn't really seem all that confusing to me: Off hand attacks get .5*STR, so even if you wield a weapon two-handed in two off hands, you're still only getting 1*STR.


HangarFlying wrote:
Umbranus wrote:

As you are not allowed to use TWF with one two-handed weapon and armor spikes I can only assume that you can't use TWF with two two-handed weapons.

Sure it SHOULD be possible to use two two-handed weapons at the same time if you have four arms. But RAW that is at least problematic.

At the time the rules were written, four-armed PC characters were not available. You can't pedantically apply the rules to situations for which they weren't written and then say NOT RAW! Using common sense and deductive reasoning, 1.5 STR on the "main attack" and 1.0 STR on the "off attack" is a fair adjudication of the rules.

Off-hand attacks has nothing to do with actual "hands". The armor spike is not taking up and "hands" as an example. With that aside I dont like the FAQ ruling.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Dustyboy wrote:
AS the faq does not address two handed weapons (Yet again) I'd say that the rules of two handed weapons are not restricted by the off hand property.

You are going to run into lots of situations where the rules/FAQ don't directly address the issue at hand. If your go to response is "It doesn't say I can't" then you can expect table variance and frustration.

In this case you have indirect guidance that the most STR bonus to damage you can gain in 4 arms is 2.5 times. This assumes 4 actual arms but if you have some vestigial arms you will be limited to what a 2 armed person can do.

Liberty's Edge

wraithstrike wrote:


Off-hand attacks has nothing to do with actual "hands". The armor spike is not taking up and "hands" as an example. With that aside I dont like the FAQ ruling.

Certainly "off-hand" attacks don't need to be literally made with hands, but there is precedence that indicates that the number of "off-hand" attacks available is predicated upon the number of hands the creature actually has.

Liberty's Edge

blackbloodtroll wrote:

We are trying to handle too much at once.

Let's forget about the special case of Vestigial Arms, and the like, and just focus on two weapon fighting, with two handed weapons.

If it makes some more comfortable, let's imagine a DM wants a Marilith to fight with greatswords.

I agree with your intent of this argument. You can't compare a humanoid with vestigial arm discoveries to a normally 3+ armed creature and assume that what works for the latter automatically works for the former.

In the event of a Marilith using three greatswords instead of six longswords, I would treat it as I explained above: one "primary" greatsword at 1.5 STR, and two "off-hand" greatswords at 1.0 STR.

If it were a Gug, instead, there would be one "primary" greatsword, and one "off-hand" (four arms instead of six).


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I think when you try to wield with more than two hands the world explodes.

More seriously I always thought it was monster rules/house rules territory because the rules don't seem to be very clear on it.


can we just mark this as an FAQ as the wording is not officially there, nor is it directly implied

It seems to be that it is intended for a weapon wielded in two hands is supposed to do more damage, though it is also intended that a non-primary weapon is not... even without vestigial arms.

Grand Lodge

Now, my suggestion, is that once you start two-weapon fighting, you can only get x1 strength to your primary attack.

This is not covered anywhere, but it balances everything out, nice and clean.


HangarFlying wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

We are trying to handle too much at once.

Let's forget about the special case of Vestigial Arms, and the like, and just focus on two weapon fighting, with two handed weapons.

If it makes some more comfortable, let's imagine a DM wants a Marilith to fight with greatswords.

I agree with your intent of this argument. You can't compare a humanoid with vestigial arm discoveries to a normally 3+ armed creature and assume that what works for the latter automatically works for the former.

In the event of a Marilith using three greatswords instead of six longswords, I would treat it as I explained above: one "primary" greatsword at 1.5 STR, and two "off-hand" greatswords at 1.0 STR.

If it were a Gug, instead, there would be one "primary" greatsword, and one "off-hand" (four arms instead of six).

I'd agree with this. If the creature has four/six arms, they can get 1.0 STR with offhand two-handers.

I'd be stricter about the OP's VA build due to its specific rules and mechanics, though.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Now, my suggestion, is that once you start two-weapon fighting, you can only get x1 strength to your primary attack.

This is not covered anywhere, but it balances everything out, nice and clean.

Would that also be in addition to 1x damage for the offhand(s)?

IE if both hit a target with no DR it'd be 2w+2str?

Dark Archive

This is not even a hard question the rules are very simple

1. you would get 1.5x damage on your primary greatsword and 1.0x damage on your secondary greatsword, you would require double slice to fix this to be 1.5x for both greatswords

Due to having 1 main hand at 1.0 and 3 off hands at 0.5 simply add the number of hands used and their ST mod together to find the damage amounts. Remember the inherent cap of 1.5x ST for 2 handed weapons as well when applying double slice

2. you cannot TWF with two handed weapons with vestigial arms

It clearly says in the FAQ that was linked that you may make an attack with any combination of arms as long as you use no more than 2, attacking with a 2 handed weapon uses two arms (even if one is vestigial) and thus prevents you from taking an attack with any remaining arms.

The primary benefit of Vestigial arm is to allow you to use a shield (for defence only) and a two handed weapon (for attacking) and nothing more


@Caderyn:

1. I'm on the fence about whether Double Slice would be intended to do anything in this scenario.

Double Slice is intended to grant you full STR on a light- or one-handed off hand attack. If it affected two-handed weapons at all, then rationally it should state that it increases the STR bonus on two-handed attacks to 2x (1x for the main hand and 1x for the off hand now bolstered by DS) - and it doesn't.

I guess it could be that because of the method of wielding the weapon, you can't get full force behind the attack from your off hand no matter what, but I think that might be an unintended consequence of a feat being applied in a situation for which it wasn't designed.

Other than that, I agree with the rest of #1.

2. I think most everyone is clear on vestigial arms, so at least from my perspective I'm assuming a multi-armed race that has Multiattack.


Caderyn wrote:

This is not even a hard question the rules are very simple

1. you would get 1.5x damage on your primary greatsword and 1.0x damage on your secondary greatsword, you would require double slice to fix this to be 1.5x for both greatswords

Due to having 1 main hand at 1.0 and 3 off hands at 0.5 simply add the number of hands used and their ST mod together to find the damage amounts. Remember the inherent cap of 1.5x ST for 2 handed weapons as well when applying double slice

2. you cannot TWF with two handed weapons with vestigial arms

It clearly says in the FAQ that was linked that you may make an attack with any combination of arms as long as you use no more than 2, attacking with a 2 handed weapon uses two arms (even if one is vestigial) and thus prevents you from taking an attack with any remaining arms.

The primary benefit of Vestigial arm is to allow you to use a shield (for defence only) and a two handed weapon (for attacking) and nothing more

I've read that faq like five times, sorry if i missed something but I don't see anything that states you can't use them for a single attack in conjunction with eachother. please quote and put into perspective i'm just not understanding this but i am not refuting you.

as for the other point,
While i agree with the premise, i still want to know the rules associated with the ruling so that it can be shown at the table

the faq wrote:
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial hand weapon attack on the same turn because the vestigial arm discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round."

This is the only construable line for your second ruling, which honestly sounds like it is leaning towards the actions. IE the wording implies that you don't get a third attack but it doesn't actually make any mention or restrictions outside of number of attacks and attack actions granted by the discovery.

RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 16

A primary hand has a Strength equal to your full Strength.

An off hand has a Strength equal to half your Strength.

Using two hands allows you to combine their Strength for damage rolls.

One could reasonably say that the attack from the primary+off hand would have 1.5 Strength and the other would have 1.0 Strength.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / TWF with two handed weapons, what's my damage modifier? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.