| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I have a small stable of bad guys who have a single melee touch attack. The touch attacks are delivered via normal limbs, and appear to be natural weapons (and thus light weapons as far as two-weapon fighting is concerned). Assuming the creature has the proper number of limbs, can it use two-weapon fighting? The penalties would be severe, but since it's a touch attack, it had an easier AC to hit anyway.
Example 1: The nereid has a melee touch attack that delivers contact poison. Nothing seems to limit the poison (no explicit action type is attached to it), so it appears that it should simply work. For example, if the nereid was hasted, I would certainly allow 2x attacks of that type. I don't see why I wouldn't. So I get the impression that two-weapon fighting should work too.
Example 2: A few undead (spectre, allip, others) deliver touch attacks that drain an ability score. If I put 2 of them into a flank around a PC, they could use the full attack action to get 2x attacks each as per two-weapon fighting. They'd have -4 and -8 to attack, but they'd also get +2 for flanking.
What do you guys think? Is there a ruling on this obscure edge case somewhere?
|
What do you guys think? Is there a ruling on this obscure edge case somewhere?
Yes, there is, it is the rules about two weapon fighting.
Two-Weapon FightingIf you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.[/quote+
There aren't rules about "two natural attacks fighting" and that is what those creature are using.
BTW: natural attacks aren't light weapon, unarmed strikes are light weapons, but those are the attack of people without natural attacks.
Natural attacks and armed/unarmed attacks are two different categories and not all the rules that apply to one category apply to the other.
Natural attacks ARE weapons and natural attacks ARE light weapons.
So I've got them as weapons, as light, deployed via limbs. I guess by your rules text they qualify and it works. Thanks!
Some times touch attacks actually require a standard action to use, which would preclude them from being used in TWF full attack actions.
As long as nothing in the creature's ability specifies that using it is a standard action or attack action, then you should be good to dual-wield them.
Not all attacks in a monster's stat block are considered "natural attacks" though. I ran a tzitzimitl using Vital Strike with its eye beams for a while before a game developer set me straight.
EDIT: Looks like I was misremembering the core of the argument, as a Jabberwock can still Vital Strike with its eye rays.
Perhaps the "Supernatural abilities require standard actions to activate" would stop this?
I don't want ghosts two-weapon fighting with touch of corruption, after all.
If it does, it would also stop all of that stuff when hasted, and that'll cut both ways. So I think I'll get a win out of this in either direction. All hasted creatures with similar touch attacks (on the player side or GM side) are about to get nerfed, or the creatures delivering touch attacks can two-weapon-fight. Win either way.
We're also talking about a -8 & -4 to hit on this stuff. It's not like more hits will land. More hits will be attempted. Whether they succeed or not really depends upon the AC vs. the attack penalty.
We're also talking about a -8 & -4 to hit on this stuff. It's not like more hits will land. More hits will be attempted. Whether they succeed or not really depends upon the AC vs. the attack penalty.
That's a slippery slope. One feat fixes almost all of that. And since these are touch attacks, the target's touch AC tends to be much easier to hit (ask your local gunslinger about this...).
I can't find it now, and I'm probably remembering this from before Pathfinder, but I'm pretty sure there's a ruling around somewhere that explains that special abilities riding on natural attacks like this can only be used the number of times per round as specified in the creature's stat block.
So shadows only drain STR once per round, even if you haste them or if they try TWF. Same for wraiths draining levels, etc. If anything can use its special rider ability more than once per round, the stat block will say so. For everything else, it's limited.
The ruling explained that it takes a lot of effort to activate these powers. Not so much effort that they require a standard action, but too much to do it more than the listed number of times. Or something like that.
Right now I can't back that up with Pathfinder rules, though.
Some fey, humanoids, monstrous humanoids, and outsiders do not possess natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes, but treat them as weapons for the purpose of determining attack bonuses, and they must use the two-weapon fighting rules when making attacks with both hands.
Universal monster rules clearly define Natural attacks as separate from unarmed attacks, which require TWF to attack with both hands. Seems at least RAI, you cannot TWF with a natural attack.
I... don't think that means what you think it means. It's saying if you are doing unarmed attacks, use the two-weapon-fighting rules. It doesn't say anything about natural attacks being barred from TWF. At least, not that I can tell. I'm kinda not entirely clear on the angle you had with that quote, so maybe I'm missing it.
Well, they are monsters and you are the GM, you can always say: It's their special ability, they can do it. I'd double the amount of attacks, without any attack penalty, but compensate by +1 CR and give the players a chance to realize that those are especially dangerous (Knowledge check, Intelligence check, hint by NPC etc.)...
I... don't think that means what you think it means. It's saying if you are doing unarmed attacks, use the two-weapon-fighting rules. It doesn't say anything about natural attacks being barred from TWF. At least, not that I can tell. I'm kinda not entirely clear on the angle you had with that quote, so maybe I'm missing it.
Actually natural attacks have their own attack routines that are not dependant on BAB. The two attack routines are not capable of being mixed and matched normally (FCT is the only one that springs to mind as an exception immediately).
If you did a full attack action to TWF, and wanted to use your natural attack, RAW is they become secondary attacks tagged on after the full attack action with a -5 and any other additional penalties.
You are unable to just choose a natural attack and repeatedly use it barring something like Feral Combat Training and Flurry of Blows.
Using TWF takes and pulls you out of the natural attack routine and forces you into the BAB. This would apparently force you to only have the touch attack as a natural attack (secondary) and only allow you to attack with it as many times as the stat block allows with the additional restrictions of using natural attacks with BAB routine.
So I guess the answer ends up being no to the TWF with touch attacks, unless I'm missing something?
But if you're saying that they end up following BAB rules, and BAB rules allow TWF, then...?
Like, you used some logic to convert the actions to use the weapon BAB system, but I don't see how that logically follows that suddenly that means no TWF. Are you saying that my fighter who uses BAB cannot TWF?
Natural attacks aren't the same as manufactured weapons. Natural attacks have very specific rules, which you may not have read or be familiar with from the questions you are asking.
If you do a full attack option with a weapon of any sort for multiple attacks via BAB, natural weapons can be tacked on as secondary attacks to that if and only if the limb the natural attack is associated with isn't used in the full attack action.
That is the only possibility by the rules.
A natural attack is not an unarmed strike. It is a natural attack. It is an important distinction for rules queries.
And as I mentioned before, typical touch attacks from monsters require a standard action to use or have limits per round in their write up. About the only touch attacks that are "normally" trigger-able per attack are spells that grant multiple charges and can be delivered through normal attacks thus losing the benefit of "touch" attack.
I dont follow that logic at all, but I'm going to use it anyway, because it also means such attacks cannot be hasted. If the PCs summon or otherwise gain a critter with a single poison touch attack, it'll be stuck like that as a hard standard action, and no 2 standards in a single round. It'll also help in PFS to show GMs they cannot do a bunch of stuff. I won't be able to explain the logic, but I can point them to this thread. Thanks.
Dotting for later
I have a small stable of bad guys who have a single melee touch attack. The touch attacks are delivered via normal limbs, and appear to be natural weapons (and thus light weapons as far as two-weapon fighting is concerned). Assuming the creature has the proper number of limbs, can it use two-weapon fighting? The penalties would be severe, but since it's a touch attack, it had an easier AC to hit anyway.
Example 1: The nereid has a melee touch attack that delivers contact poison. Nothing seems to limit the poison (no explicit action type is attached to it), so it appears that it should simply work. For example, if the nereid was hasted, I would certainly allow 2x attacks of that type. I don't see why I wouldn't. So I get the impression that two-weapon fighting should work too.
Example 2: A few undead (spectre, allip, others) deliver touch attacks that drain an ability score. If I put 2 of them into a flank around a PC, they could use the full attack action to get 2x attacks each as per two-weapon fighting. They'd have -4 and -8 to attack, but they'd also get +2 for flanking.
What do you guys think? Is there a ruling on this obscure edge case somewhere?
1. No. TWF is for fighting with manufactured weapons. It does not work with special attacks or natural attacks.
If you were hasted it would work, but haste works with all full round attacks, not just manufactured weapons.
2. Same answer as number 1.
@DM Blake: There is no limit on special attacks unless it is strictly stated such as the limit on a vampire's energy drain. Many times the ablity will read something like "whenever ____ hits _____ happens".
As an example:
Vampires energy drain is limited to only 2 negative levels per round not matter how many times it hits.
Energy Drain (Su)
A creature hit by a vampire's slam (or other natural weapon) gains two negative levels. This ability only triggers once per round, regardless of the number of attacks a vampire makes.
On the other hand a wraith is not subject to this limitation.
Melee incorporeal touch +6 (1d6 negative energy plus 1d6 Con drain)
Constitution Drain (Su) Creatures hit by a wraith's touch attack must succeed on a DC 17 Fortitude save or take 1d6 points of Constitution drain. On each successful attack, the wraith gains 5 temporary hit points. The save DC is Charisma-based.
PS: With that aside I would not let energy drain work like that for the sake of player survival, and I would only use haste on a shadow or wraith if the party was very optimized.
1. No. TWF is for fighting with manufactured weapons.
Citation needed. I'm looking at the rules for TWF right now and it includes no text about manufactured weapons, and in fact explicitly calls out unarmed attacks and attacks with light weapons, which we have quotes in this thread from Paizo saying their official stance is that natural weapons are light weapons. Please, please provide text that says TWF is only for manufactured weapons. I need to see where it is in my actual books.
If you were hasted it would work, but haste works with all full round attacks, not just manufactured weapons.
Wait. The argument in this topic is that you cannot TWF with natural touch attacks because they must always be standard actions that cannot ever become iterative or what D&D used to call "attack actions" that could be increased per round. So, are you suggesting that somehow the rules are mandating that the attack is a special standard action with no other option so long as we're trying to do TWF, but that if it's hasted then it suddenly becomes a normal attack that you can do that 2x round?
I need rules citations. I need to see where in the rules text it says "only manufactured weapons, even though we said unarmed counts and even though naturals are ruled as light weapons." I need to see where it says "touch attacks to deliver poison or ability damage are absolutely only ever special standard action abilities if someone is TWFing and therefore cannot be used to get 2x standard actions, but if they haste then it becomes a normal attack action that can be done an extra time per round." I can't follow "I'm authoritative, trust me," assertions. I need to see this myself, rather than just take it on faith.
As others have pointed out, you cannot not use a natural weapon as a weapon for TWF.
I agree that others have asserted this is true. I do not agree that anyone has provided rules text to back up the assertion. If it IS here and I missed it, please excuse my failed brain and remind me. What was the quote from the rulebook that said "only manufactured weapons work with TWF"? What page is it on?
Edit: Nevermind. I suddenly realized I don't care anymore, and I don't want you guys to waste your time typing up explanations. I'm going to assume that I am simply too dim to interpret the rules as you all do, and find alternatives such as creating custom monsters that do what I need them to do in ways that I can understand. Thank you all for your valiant efforts.
|
|
1. No. TWF is for fighting with manufactured weapons.Citation needed. I'm looking at the rules for TWF right now and it includes no text about manufactured weapons, and in fact explicitly calls out unarmed attacks and attacks with light weapons, which we have quotes in this thread from Paizo saying their official stance is that natural weapons are light weapons. Please, please provide text that says TWF is only for manufactured weapons. I need to see where it is in my actual books.
Check the FAQ and you will see that that post for the PDT has never been put there.
Then you shuold consider how those replyes work. They are made in the contest of the question, and the question only.What was the question?
" He would like to use his character's bite attack with the Duelist class."
And the reply was that it count as a light weapon, but that is applied to that kind of question, not to a broad question "the natural weapons are light or one handed weapon for all uses?
And even with that in mind, it is a big thing to say in a post without further comment.
Saying that this piece of text "Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet)." is another big stretch of the rules.
If you play that kind of games with the rules again you can't use two weapon combat as you should apply the same logit to the ruels about two weapon combat.
Two-Weapon FightingIf you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
That piece of text require 2 things.
1) you must "wield" the weapon.Definition of wield: "to hold (something, such as a tool or weapon) in your hands so that you are ready to use it".
So you need to hold the appendage with which you make a natural attack in your hand, using it as a tool.
2) It require you to have an off hand in which you hold what you use to attack.
I thought it to be widely understood that natural weapons were considered light weapons. Is this not the case?
|
|
I thought it to be widely understood that natural weapons were considered light weapons. Is this not the case?
Unarmed attack are light weapon for all uses. Natural weapons (barring some specific class/archetype) are a separate category that don't impact at all on how you use manufactured weapons.
You can use weapon finesse with natural weapons as the special of the feat say that they are light weapons, but that is the special of the feat for that feat. You apply the special of a feat only to what it say it apply.You can put up an argument that if you have weapon finesse your natural weapon become a light weapon for all uses, as the feat text don't say it is applied only to the feat itself, but as it is a special, it clearly say that the normal is that they aren't light weapons.
|
|
Natural attacks are light weapons (though they are never expressly defined as such in the rules).
Already replied 3 post above yours. Until it get written in the FAQ it is worth very little, especially as a piece of text of the rules say that that is a Special of a feat.
BTW, returning to the OP question: to use two weapon combat with a natural attack you must first confirm that it is an attack made with an hand. Not a slam attack, bite, kiss or whatever.
to use Two weapon combat you need an off hand.
|
|
Nobody actually posted the quote here, so I thought I would. And an official ruling from the Pathfinder Design Team is worth quite a lot.
The design team is the final arbiter of how the core rules are supposed to work.I would be curious to hear your explanation for the line in Piranha Strike that reduces its bonus for secondary natural weapons. Piranha Strike only affects light weapons, so why would the writers even need to bother discussing natural weapons? Did they just feel in the mood to waste space?
Piranha Strike (Combat)You make a combination of quick strikes, sacrificing accuracy for multiple, minor wounds that prove exceptionally deadly.
Prerequisites: Weapon Finesse, base attack bonus +1.
Benefit: When wielding a light weapon, you can choose to take a -1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls. This bonus to damage is halved (-50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon. When your base attack bonus reaches +4, and for every 4 points thereafter, the penalty increases by -1 and the bonus on damage rolls increases by +2. You must choose to use this feat before the attack roll, and its effects last until your next turn. The bonus damage does not apply to touch attacks or effects that do not deal hit point damage. This feat cannot be used in conjunction with the Power Attack feat.
Where this is relevant?
Secondary natural weapon =/= off hand weaponSome natural attacks are denoted as secondary natural attacks, such as tails and wings. Attacks with secondary natural attacks are made using your base attack bonus minus 5. These attacks deal an amount of damage depending on their type, but you only add half your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
No. Natural weapons use completely different rules than manufactured weapons. They cannot two weapon fight with them, just as they cannot get a BAB of +6 and attack twice with them.
Or natural weapons are treated like light weapons for many effects, but two weapon fighting isn't one of them because you can't two weapon fight with natural weapons.
natural weapons already have rules for how they interact with other natural weapons: If they're the only primary they get strength and a half. if they're A primary they get strength. if they're a secondary they get 1/2 strength. They have rules for how they interact with manufactured weapons: they become secondary weapons. Neither of those rules allow it to two weapon fight.
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
I have a small stable of bad guys who have a single melee touch attack. The touch attacks are delivered via normal limbs, and appear to be natural weapons (and thus light weapons as far as two-weapon fighting is concerned). Assuming the creature has the proper number of limbs, can it use two-weapon fighting? The penalties would be severe, but since it's a touch attack, it had an easier AC to hit anyway.
Example 1: The nereid has a melee touch attack that delivers contact poison. Nothing seems to limit the poison (no explicit action type is attached to it), so it appears that it should simply work. For example, if the nereid was hasted, I would certainly allow 2x attacks of that type. I don't see why I wouldn't. So I get the impression that two-weapon fighting should work too.
Example 2: A few undead (spectre, allip, others) deliver touch attacks that drain an ability score. If I put 2 of them into a flank around a PC, they could use the full attack action to get 2x attacks each as per two-weapon fighting. They'd have -4 and -8 to attack, but they'd also get +2 for flanking.
What do you guys think? Is there a ruling on this obscure edge case somewhere?
1. No. TWF is for fighting with manufactured weapons. It does not work with special attacks or natural attacks.
If you were hasted it would work, but haste works with all full round attacks, not just manufactured weapons.
2. Same answer as number 1.
@DM Blake: There is no limit on special attacks unless it is strictly stated such as the limit on a vampire's energy drain. Many times the ablity will read something like "whenever ____ hits _____ happens".
As an example:
Vampires energy drain is limited to only 2 negative levels per round not matter how many...
Might be slightly OT but wraith is one of those attacks that is essentially a standard action to activate. Look at the Dread wraith, same touch attack, significantly higher BAB that allows for multiple attacks, but still limited to a single +20 touch attack.
Generally speaking, touch attacks are pretty standard with the once a round either through write up or actual mechanics (standard action to use). I'm sure someone can find a creature that has a nasty rider effect that has more than once per round, but I imagine it would also be explictly written out in the ability making it an "exception" to the rule most others follow.
|
|
Where this is relevant?
Secondary natural weapon =/= off hand weapon
Of course it's not an off-hand weapon. I'm definitely not arguing that you can use natural weapons for two-weapon fighting.
I'm just pointing out that Pirahna Strike only works with light weapons, and it states that its bonus decreases when using secondary natural weapons. This only makes sense at all if you acknowledge that natural weapons are light weapons, at least according to the designer who wrote the feat.
Some natural attacks are denoted as secondary natural attacks, such as tails and wings. Attacks with secondary natural attacks are made using your base attack bonus minus 5. These attacks deal an amount of damage depending on their type, but you only add half your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
That is why secondary natural attacks deal less damage when used with Pirahna Strike, not because they are light weapon.
If you are a werewolf in hybrid and use a weapon, your damage is:
"Melee longsword +6 (1d8+6/19–20), bite +1 (1d6+1 plus trip and curse of lycanthropy)" as the bite is a secondary weapon.
if you drop the sword and oly use your bite it become a primary weapon, and applies 1.5 x you strength bonus in damage, the new damage is "bite +6 (1d6+6 plus trip and curse of lycanthropy)".
His secondary weapon hasn't suddenly become a 2 handed weapon, simply it has become a primary on on a creature with only 1 natural attack.
|
|
Or natural weapons are treated like light weapons for many effects, but two weapon fighting isn't one of them because you can't two weapon fight with natural weapons.
natural weapons already have rules for how they interact with other natural weapons: If they're the only primary they get strength and a half. if they're A primary they get strength. if they're a secondary they get 1/2 strength. They have rules for how they interact with manufactured weapons: they become secondary weapons. Neither of those rules allow it to two weapon fight.
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
While I think that the rule intent is clear we should admit that if we read them without preconceptions and without prior experience there is nothing explicitly stating that you can't do that. It is implicit, but never explicit.
On the other hand two weapon combat is a rule written for humanoid creatures with two arms and using weapons, not for beasts.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Where this is relevant?
Secondary natural weapon =/= off hand weapon
Of course it's not an off-hand weapon. I'm definitely not arguing that you can use natural weapons for two-weapon fighting.
I'm just pointing out that Pirahna Strike only works with light weapons, and it states that its bonus decreases when using secondary natural weapons. This only makes sense at all if you acknowledge that natural weapons are light weapons, at least according to the designer who wrote the feat.
Some natural attacks are denoted as secondary natural attacks, such as tails and wings. Attacks with secondary natural attacks are made using your base attack bonus minus 5. These attacks deal an amount of damage depending on their type, but you only add half your Strength modifier on damage rolls.That is why secondary natural attacks deal less damage when used with Pirahna Strike, not because they are light weapon.
If you are a werewolf in hybrid and use a weapon, your damage is:
"Melee longsword +6 (1d8+6/19–20), bite +1 (1d6+1 plus trip and curse of lycanthropy)" as the bite is a secondary weapon.if you drop the sword and oly use your bite it become a primary weapon, and applies 1.5 x you strength bonus in damage, the new damage is "bite +6 (1d6+6 plus trip and curse of lycanthropy)".
His secondary weapon hasn't suddenly become a 2 handed weapon, simply it has become a primary on on a creature with only 1 natural attack.I don't understand what you're trying to say.
My point is that Piranha Strike only works with light weapons. And we know that it works with natural weapons, because it talks about the bonus being lowered for secondary natural weapons. So we know that the designer(s) who wrote that feat, at least, did so under the knowledge that natural weapons are light weapons. Otherwise, a line about what happens with natural weapons would serve no purpose at all, because the...
You are ignoring that things can be subsets or "act" like something without being completely and totally the same. It happens constantly in the books, reference to something that is preexisting to save word count. That doesn't mean they are interchangeable.
|
|
Actually he reference this:
Benefit: When wielding a light weapon, you can choose to take a -1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls.
The absurd part of that is that it require you to wield one light weapon to get the benefit for all attacks you make.
So RAW if you have a dagger in your off hand and a bastard sword in your main hand it work for both weapons.
@Avoron, sadly that text don't say that it "only works with light weapons". It say that it you need to "wield a light weapon". What you have in your other hand and if your claw or bite is a light weapon don't matter.
Probably the RAI is that it work only with light weapons (and so not with a rapier, as an example), but it don't say that.
BTW: yes, I hadn't overlook that part of the text. But seeing that it don't require you to use a light weapon with all your attacks, it don't make a difference.
Actually he reference this:
Benefit: When wielding a light weapon, you can choose to take a -1 penalty on all melee attack rolls and combat maneuver checks to gain a +2 bonus on all melee damage rolls.The absurd part of that is that it require you to wield one light weapon to get the benefit for all attacks you make.
So RAW if you have a dagger in your off hand and a bastard sword in your main hand it work for both weapons.
@Avoron, sadly that text don't say that it "only works with light weapons". It say that it you need to "wield a light weapon". What you have in your other hand and if your claw or bite is a light weapon don't matter.
Probably the RAI is that it work only with light weapons (and so not with a rapier, as an example), but it don't say that.
BTW: yes, I hadn't overlook that part of the text. But seeing that it don't require you to use a light weapon with all your attacks, it don't make a difference.
The implication being you get the damage with the light weapon you are gaining the bonus damage with.
Feel free to write in at the end of " melee damage rolls.(with that light weapon)" because anyone not trying to be a jerk knows it belongs there.