Min / Maxing with Barbarian and Teifling.

[BadAssNinjaDude]

So, here's a question about Min/Maxing, Barbarians, and Tieflings.

Looking at the Barbarian archetype Titan Mauler, the ability Jotungrip says that you can use 2handed weapons of an appropriate size in one hand (i.e., Medium 2Hander in one hand) this effectively lets a barbarian dual wield greatswords, albeit at a huge penalty.

Now, in the errata, is specifies:

Errata wrote:

"Jotungrip allows the titan mauler to use two-handed melee weapons in one hand, but only if the weapon is appropriately sized for the character. The massive weapon class feature allows her to use over-sized weapons with decreased penalty, but does not allow her to use two-handed weapons of that size in one hand."

TL;DR, You can dual wield medium greatswords as a medium creature, but not large greatswords.

Enter the tiefling. Using Feindish heritage, you can substitute an SLA for the ability to "use Large weapons without penalty."(number 16 in the d100 chart) Now, penalty is a vague term. Penalties can be detraction's in what you can do, or it can mean a cut and dry negative modifier. The Titan Mauler ability Massive Weapons states:

Massive Weapons wrote:

"At 3rd level, a titan mauler becomes skilled in the use of massive weapons looted from her titanic foes. The attack roll penalty for using weapons too large for her size is reduced by 1, and this reduction increases by 1 for every three levels beyond 3rd (to a minimum of 0)."

It specifies "Attack Roll Penalty".

So, here is my question. Can a tiefling, with feindish heritage, with the #16 d100 variant, as a barbarian Titan mauler, Dual wield Large Greatswords? (at a -8/-12(-6/-10 for two weapon fighting with 1handed weapons, then -2 for using 2handed weapons one handedly) penalty for two weapon fighting without the aid of feats, obviously)

[BadAssNinjaDude]

No one has commented, So I am bumping. mostly curious how people view the distinction of what a "Penalty" is.

[Dimminsy]

Using weapons that are not sized for you have a -2 for each size category of difference. A person cannot wield a weapon that would be equivalent to larger than a 2handed weapon for them.

Example: When a character wields a 1handed Large weapon they can use it as a 2handed weapon at a -2 penalty (assuming they're Medium). They can wield a light Huge weapon at a -4 penalty as a 2handed weapon. A character cannot wield a 1handed Huge weapon because it would require more than 2 hands to wield (1handed Huge -> 2handed Large -> invalid medium).

Jotungrip specifically calls out requiring "...but only if the weapon is appropriately sized for the character." for the ability to work. A Large weapon is not appropriately sized for a Medium creature regardless of whether they can wield the weapon without penalty.

With these interactions, and assuming the DM allowed you to take the variant Tiefling, you can either (as examples) wield a Large Longsword (1handed -> 2handed) at no penalty to attack or dual wield Medium greatswords at TWF penalties (-4/-4 if you took the TWF feat then another -2 for Jotungrip for a total of -6/-6).

[Peet]

It would not allow dual wielding large greatswords. In fact, you couldn't wield a single large greatsword. This is because the weapon goes up a category in terms of handedness. Light weapons become one-handed weapons and one-handed weapons become two-handed weapons. Two-handed weapons become too big to use at all (If your character has more than two arms talk to your GM about wielding a "three-handed weapon").

This is covered under the FAQ.

On TOP of that there is a penalty for wielding weapons that are the wrong size. So if you are using a Large longsword as a 2-handed weapon you also take a -2 penalty. It is this penalty that is being offset here. The ability would allow you to dual wield two large longswords but there is really no mechanical benefit there over using a pair of medium greatswords.

With the exotic weapon feat in Bastard Sword you could dual wield two large bastard swords for 2d8 damage each. That's about as good as you can get as far as I know.

[BadAssNinjaDude]

Quote:

This is covered under the FAQ.

I mentioned this in my original post. Jotun grip specifically states this, yes, but I'm talking about the interaction with the tiefling variant that lets you use Large sized weapons "At no penalty". I read this as, "You can use a large weapon just as you could a medium weapon."

Then, the jotungrip would allow you to us the effective medium 2hander, in one hand, at a -2 penalty.

[Arctic Sphinx]

I think the tiefling variant ability just allows you to wield large-sized weapons that you could already wield, such as a large-sized longsword, but without taking a penalty to use it in the first place. This essentially makes the Titan Mauler's Massive Weapons ability obsolete, as there is no penalty to reduce.

[BadAssNinjaDude]

Arctic Sphinx wrote:

I think the tiefling variant ability just allows you to wield large-sized weapons that you could already wield, such as a large-sized longsword, but without taking a penalty to use it in the first place. This essentially makes the Titan Mauler's Massive Weapons ability obsolete, as there is no penalty to reduce.

This is what I was thinking, as far as RAW is concerned. I was mostly looking for more input, because massive weapons specifies "Attack roll penalty", whereas the tiefling ability states "Without penalty". the difference is specificity is what gave me pause. and also hope. :P

[blackbloodtroll]

Also, you do not need the Fiendish Heritage for alternate racial traits.

That feat is no longer required.

[Numalar Auritonius]

"Penalty" generally refers to a numerical disadvantage on a die roll. Unless you have some grounds for believing otherwise (and I don't see any here), you should assume this is the case when you see the word.

The writers of the racial trait may have left out the words "attack roll" but remember that writers of Paizo products are always under pressure to keep word count down. So I wouldn't read much into the fact that the words "attack roll" are not included.

[blackbloodtroll]

Currently, there is no way to bypass the hands required for larger weapons.

Well, without being a monster, like the Redcap.

[Pendagast]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Currently, there is no way to bypass the hands required for larger weapons.

Well, without being a monster, like the Redcap.

Wait, isn't that the point of the Titan mauler archetype?

[blackbloodtroll]

Pendagast wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Currently, there is no way to bypass the hands required for larger weapons.

Well, without being a monster, like the Redcap.

Wait, isn't that the point of the Titan mauler archetype?

It was, and the writer of the archetype noted that.

Paizo errata'd it to not do that.

[Pendagast]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Pendagast wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Currently, there is no way to bypass the hands required for larger weapons.

Well, without being a monster, like the Redcap.

Wait, isn't that the point of the Titan mauler archetype?

It was, and the writer of the archetype noted that.

Paizo errata'd it to not do that.

erm, I dont believe I have see that errata… so why be a titan mauler now?

[Dread Knight]

I'd actually have to say no since Jotungrip says appropriately sized for them and while yes you could use a large greatsword do to the Teifling's oversized limbs it still wouldn't be considered appropriately sized(at least to me).

[blackbloodtroll]

See this, and this FAQ.

[Pendagast]

yea…no point to the theme of the class really….

basically a class invented so they could explain amiri.

[blackbloodtroll]

Pendagast wrote:

yea…no point to the theme of the class really….

basically a class invented so they could explain amiri.

No, the archetype was created/invented to wield larger, and larger weapons.

As noted by the writer of said archetype.

Then, the errata changed all that.

Amiri never needed explanation. She wields a large one-handed weapon, and let's the bonuses from rage off-set the size penalties.

Any Barbarian can do that.

[Pendagast]

well…. the archetype doesn't do that anymore… so its kinda moot

[Tom Sampson]

It is, and I heard that the designer is on the record somewhere as stating the Titan Mauler archetype is supposed to allow you to wield oversized weapons, but he's not the one who pushes the FAQ and errata that "clarify" you still can't use larger than normal weapons.

It's rather like how Roped Gauntlets, etc. were errata'd/FAQ'd to "explain" that despite their text they actually don't let Monks use their unarmed damage.

But, those are the rules now. You're free to houserule otherwise if you don't like it.