What sort of action does it take to begin or stop "two handing" a weapon?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.
I'm curious as to what you feel the difference between the two is. Why allow a kick/helmet/whatever to work, but not another weapon in their hand? It's achieving the same effect as far as I can see. So I'm curious what's the reasoning behind it is

If you use two hands to swing a sword, then you've used those two hands.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.
I'm curious as to what you feel the difference between the two is. Why allow a kick/helmet/whatever to work, but not another weapon in their hand? It's achieving the same effect as far as I can see. So I'm curious what's the reasoning behind it is
If you use two hands to swing a sword, then you've used those two hands.

So? I haven't used my "off-hand" yet.

I'm not trying to be adversarial, I'm really just trying to understand your reasoning.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Per the FAQ this is not allowed. I don't agree with it, since it is not broken, but that is their intent. I allow it at my tables, at least until someone gives me a reason not to.
Game balance

No, this is wrong.

Every single time.

This, is often perceived as a balance issue, but the numbers show otherwise.

BBT, care to share these numbers, plz?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.
I'm curious as to what you feel the difference between the two is. Why allow a kick/helmet/whatever to work, but not another weapon in their hand? It's achieving the same effect as far as I can see. So I'm curious what's the reasoning behind it is
If you use two hands to swing a sword, then you've used those two hands.

So? I haven't used my "off-hand" yet.

I'm not trying to be adversarial, I'm really just trying to understand your reasoning.

I honestly don't know how I can explain it simpler than that.


Kchaka wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Per the FAQ this is not allowed. I don't agree with it, since it is not broken, but that is their intent. I allow it at my tables, at least until someone gives me a reason not to.
Game balance

No, this is wrong.

Every single time.

This, is often perceived as a balance issue, but the numbers show otherwise.

BBT, care to share these numbers, plz?

If you are interested, there are several threads that go into the numbers in great detail.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.
I'm curious as to what you feel the difference between the two is. Why allow a kick/helmet/whatever to work, but not another weapon in their hand? It's achieving the same effect as far as I can see. So I'm curious what's the reasoning behind it is
If you use two hands to swing a sword, then you've used those two hands.

So? I haven't used my "off-hand" yet.

I'm not trying to be adversarial, I'm really just trying to understand your reasoning.

I honestly don't know how I can explain it simpler than that.

Why has the act of using a hand for an attack limited you from making another attack with a hand using it as your "off-hand"?


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.

So, what you are saying is you allow or disallow what weapons one can TWF or not based on what you think is balanced. So if tomorow JJ decides to release a book with a piece of magical armor with armor spikes that do 1d10 19-20/x2 of damage as a light weapon, then that could be allowed, depending if you find that balanced or not.

Forgive me if I think that definition is too vague, specially when it leaves alot of room for unbalanced builds, as oppposed to simply not allowing TWF with a 2h weapon as your main hand.

This is one thing that, even if they allowed it in the 3.5 FAQ, was always wrong, in my opinion.

The way you are doing it, you are allowing or disallowing it based on the others inability to combo. If someone makes a good combo, you disallow it. If it's a weak combo, you allow it. This balance sounds too subjective.


I forgive you. As this is not the forum to discuss my personal house rules, I think I'll bow out now.

Dark Archive

Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.
I'm curious as to what you feel the difference between the two is. Why allow a kick/helmet/whatever to work, but not another weapon in their hand? It's achieving the same effect as far as I can see. So I'm curious what's the reasoning behind it is
If you use two hands to swing a sword, then you've used those two hands.

So? I haven't used my "off-hand" yet.

I'm not trying to be adversarial, I'm really just trying to understand your reasoning.

Paizo has outright stated that if you use a 2H weapon to make an attack, you cannot take your hand off the weapon and then attack with a spiked gauntlet (or armor spikes or w/e) with TWF. The unwritten rule involving "metaphorical hands" says that if you used those two hands to whack somebody with a greatsword, you can't then proceed to punch somebody else with TWF, because you've already used up your two hands worth of effort.

There's a FAQ about it, iirc.


So.....How about this:

I use two hands on my longsword for my first attack to get Str x 1.5, then take one hand off for my second attack, dealing Str x .5.

Or how about:

I attack with my longsword in my right hand for Str x 1, then switch it to my left hand and attack again for Str x .5

As far as I know, both of these situations are COMPLETELY illegal. Don't get me wrong, TWF is generally seen as suboptimal in a DPR sense and is also prohibitively expensive. I'm all for making it easier/cheaper/better all around to use TWF, but the current RAW just does not support that.

Then again, look at the super-duper-awesomesauce buff that the Monks got when they dropped the price on Amulets of Mighty Fists. Now they're crazy good ;)

Sovereign Court

galahad2112 wrote:
As far as I know, both of these situations are COMPLETELY illegal. Don't get me wrong, TWF is generally seen as suboptimal in a DPR sense

At high levels it actually wins in DPR... if you ignore the loss of damage vs two-handed when moving etc. Especially for classes with bunches of static damage per swing. (Fighter with weapon training, moreso Samurai with challenge etc) *shrug*


What Charon said. You need a lot of resources and a class with good static damage modifiers, but if you can get those together, TWF is actually often the strongest attack pattern. Big 'if' of course, but it can come together at high levels. Run a Daring Champion so you're Dex-built (dodging another irritation in the MAD issue of TWF) and settled in for the lower levels anyway, pick up a rapier, build it normally (I'd probably just go for a straight +5, honestly), then when you hit a high enough level that you can realistically afford a second rapier + Effortless Lace, do some retraining for TWF.

You can even steal some of Two-Handed's thunder that way, because when you do have to move, you still have the Daring Champion's Precise Strike.

Grand Lodge

I think I should address a few things:

1) You can already two-weapon fight with one weapon. Double Weapons, and the Unarmed Strike.

2) There are still legal combinations of two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon, and a non-handed off-hand weapon. These include the Sea-Knife, and Barbazu Beard, which explicitly allow this combination.
This has been Developer confirmed as well.

Silver Crusade

At first glance, it seems like using a 2HW in TWF is getting something for nothing: an extra x 0.5 Str bonus to damage.

When you look more closely, you realise that, in order to do so, your off hand weapon must be worse than normal, you have to waste twice as many feats/abilities that are weapon specific than you do when you use twin weapons, and TWF is feat intensive anyway.

This way of fighting results in less DPR than twin weapons, and twin weapons do less DPR than a single 2HW with Power Attack; one feat instead of the many(!) needed to try and make TWF cost effective.

Despite what it seems like at first glance, there is really no game balance issue.

Silver Crusade

It's never been part of the rules that there is a limit on the number of times you may use a particular hand in a full attack.

The number of attacks an armed creature makes is not based on the number of limbs it has, or the number of weapons it can get into its hands during its turn. The number of attacks it gets is based on BAB, feats and special abilities.

For 2H, 1H and light weapons, you must have at least the correct number of hands on the weapon you are using for that attack, at the moment you execute that attack. What those hands are holding before and/or after you execute the attack in question has no relevance according to the rules in the book.

Therefore, you need two hands to execute an attack with a greatsword, and the fact that you used a free action to go from holding it in one hand to holding it in two before the attack has no game effect, and letting go with one hand after the attack doesn't either.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

It's never been part of the rules that there is a limit on the number of times you may use a particular hand in a full attack.

The number of attacks an armed creature makes is not based on the number of limbs it has, or the number of weapons it can get into its hands during its turn. The number of attacks it gets is based on BAB, feats and special abilities.

For 2H, 1H and light weapons, you must have at least the correct number of hands on the weapon you are using for that attack, at the moment you execute that attack. What those hands are holding before and/or after you execute the attack in question has no relevance according to the rules in the book.

Therefore, you need two hands to execute an attack with a greatsword, and the fact that you used a free action to go from holding it in one hand to holding it in two before the attack has no game effect, and letting go with one hand after the attack doesn't either.

Nor does it even violate the rules of action movie physics. Plus, it's really cool to describe in character :)


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

At first glance, it seems like using a 2HW in TWF is getting something for nothing: an extra x 0.5 Str bonus to damage.

When you look more closely, you realise that, in order to do so, your off hand weapon must be worse than normal, you have to waste twice as many feats/abilities that are weapon specific than you do when you use twin weapons, and TWF is feat intensive anyway.

This way of fighting results in less DPR than twin weapons, and twin weapons do less DPR than a single 2HW with Power Attack; one feat instead of the many(!) needed to try and make TWF cost effective.

Despite what it seems like at first glance, there is really no game balance issue.

You could just use a double weapon and make all your main hand attacks holding it as a 2h weapon, then all the off-hands with the same weapon but switching grips to hold the other hand as a light weapon. This way you wouldn't have to spend any new feats you wouldn't have spent on a regular double weapon build, it would just be a better way of using them.

If you are going to argue that there's no balance issue because the cost of some other feats would not make it worth it, that's like saying "roll a wizard, and anything else is irrelevant", everything else less powerfull than that would be balanced?

Btw, the way you guys are doing it, could I start TWFing with a 2h weapon for my main hand attacks, then drop it and draw another 2h weapon for my off-hand attacks? What if the other weapon was hovering and I was able to grip it as a free action, like an animated large heavy spiked shield with effortless lace? Could I do all my TWFing attacks with 2h weapons then?

Silver Crusade

kchaka wrote:
You could just use a double weapon and make all your main hand attacks holding it as a 2h weapon, then all the off-hands with the same weapon but switching grips to hold the other hand as a light weapon.

I'm afraid not. In order to utilise the Double quality of double weapons, you must take the full attack action and use one end as if it were a one handed weapon and the other end as if it were a light weapon. The weapon itself is neither light or 1H, and can't be used as anything other than a 2H weapon (from the weapons available in the CRB) unless using the Double quality, and if you do then it doesn't count as a 2H weapon for TWF purposes during that full attack.

The CRB wrote:
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
kchaka wrote:
You could just use a double weapon and make all your main hand attacks holding it as a 2h weapon, then all the off-hands with the same weapon but switching grips to hold the other hand as a light weapon.

I'm afraid not. In order to utilise the Double quality of double weapons, you must take the full attack action and use one end as if it were a one handed weapon and the other end as if it were a light weapon. The weapon itself is neither light or 1H, and can't be used as anything other than a 2H weapon (from the weapons available in the CRB) unless using the Double quality, and if you do then it doesn't count as a 2H weapon for TWF purposes during that full attack.

The CRB wrote:
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

You can wield most one-handed weapons with two hands to get the bonus to damage. I feel that is the intent of his post.


Actually, TWF states you must use a second weapon in your off hand. So doesn't that mean you can't use the same weapon, except in the cases of unarmed attacks or double weapons?

Silver Crusade

littlehewy wrote:
Actually, TWF states you must use a second weapon in your off hand. So doesn't that mean you can't use the same weapon, except in the cases of unarmed attacks or double weapons?

Yes.

Silver Crusade

Chess Pwn wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
kchaka wrote:
You could just use a double weapon and make all your main hand attacks holding it as a 2h weapon, then all the off-hands with the same weapon but switching grips to hold the other hand as a light weapon.

I'm afraid not. In order to utilise the Double quality of double weapons, you must take the full attack action and use one end as if it were a one handed weapon and the other end as if it were a light weapon. The weapon itself is neither light or 1H, and can't be used as anything other than a 2H weapon (from the weapons available in the CRB) unless using the Double quality, and if you do then it doesn't count as a 2H weapon for TWF purposes during that full attack.

The CRB wrote:
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.
You can wield most one-handed weapons with two hands to get the bonus to damage. I feel that is the intent of his post.

The double weapons in the CRB are all 2H weapons, not 1H.

You can certainly use them as normal 2H weapons with 1.5 x Str bonus...but not when using the Double quality (which is how you TWF a with it).


No the idea was when using it to TWF it counts as a one handed and a light weapon right? Well I'm going to two hand the one handed attack and then make the normal light weapon attack.

Silver Crusade

Chess Pwn wrote:
No the idea was when using it to TWF it counts as a one handed and a light weapon right? Well I'm going to two hand the one handed attack and then make the normal light weapon attack.

No can do.

Double Weapons wrote:
A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

It's actually a single 2H weapon, therefore you cannot use it to TWF all by itself, because (among other things) you need to have a second weapon.

The Double quality allows you to actually use it in two hands, but treat it as if you had a 1H weapon in one hand and a light weapon in the other. Each weapon is treated as if you were using one weapon in each hand, even though you are really using two ends of a single weapon in two hands.

Therefore, if you treat it as a weapon used in two hands, then you are not following the rules for the Double quality, and cannot use it to TWF because the only thing that lets you TWF with it is the Double quality.

You can either use it as what it is (a 2H weapon used in two hands), or you can use the Double quality, in which case you must treat it as if you had a 1H weapon in one hand and a light weapon in the other.

The two are mutually exclusive in any particular full attack.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

I think I should address a few things:

1) You can already two-weapon fight with one weapon. Double Weapons, and the Unarmed Strike.

Thrown weapons + blink back belt are a case where there is no logical reason why you SHOULDN'T be able to TWF with one weapon.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
No the idea was when using it to TWF it counts as a one handed and a light weapon right? Well I'm going to two hand the one handed attack and then make the normal light weapon attack.

No can do.

Double Weapons wrote:
A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

It's actually a single 2H weapon, therefore you cannot use it to TWF all by itself, because (among other things) you need to have a second weapon.

The Double quality allows you to actually use it in two hands, but treat it as if you had a 1H weapon in one hand and a light weapon in the other. Each weapon is treated as if you were using one weapon in each hand, even though you are really using two ends of a single weapon in two hands.

Therefore, if you treat it as a weapon used in two hands, then you are not following the rules for the Double quality, and cannot use it to TWF because the only thing that lets you TWF with it is the Double quality.

You can either use it as what it is (a 2H weapon used in two hands), or you can use the Double quality, in which case you must treat it as if you had a 1H weapon in one hand and a light weapon in the other.

The two are mutually exclusive in any particular full attack.

So don't believe you can do this but I also don't support any 2handing and 2WF. So if your argument is to make sure I know what is allowed then you don't need to continue. this idea was brought up to the people who say they allow 2HF with 2WF.

But nothing says that you have to treat the one handed weapon as if it was only wielded in one hand, just that you treat it as a one-handed weapon if you are 2WF. So what would stop them from treating as a one-handed weapon which they then wielded in two hands and then attacking with the other end which is treated as a light weapon.


To explain part of Chess Pwn's point that I think is being missed:

A two-handed weapon and a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands are not the same thing, from a rules standpoint. So, "treat it as a one-handed weapon" in no way inhibits you from using it in two hands, because if it's treated like a one-handed weapon, I can do anything with it that I can do with a longsword... and that includes two-handing it.


kestral287 wrote:

To explain part of Chess Pwn's point that I think is being missed:

A two-handed weapon and a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands are not the same thing, from a rules standpoint. So, "treat it as a one-handed weapon" in no way inhibits you from using it in two hands, because if it's treated like a one-handed weapon, I can do anything with it that I can do with a longsword... and that includes two-handing it.

If you're talking about double weapons yes it does inhibit you from using two hands since the important part being left out is and a light weapon you can't two-hand since one hand is wielding a one handed weapon and the other is wielding a light weapon.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
kchaka wrote:
You could just use a double weapon and make all your main hand attacks holding it as a 2h weapon, then all the off-hands with the same weapon but switching grips to hold the other hand as a light weapon.
I'm afraid not. In order to utilise the Double quality of double weapons, you must take the full attack action and use one end as if it were a one handed weapon and the other end as if it were a light weapon. The weapon itself is neither light or 1H, and can't be used as anything other than a 2H weapon (from the weapons available in the CRB) unless using the Double quality, and if you do then it doesn't count as a 2H weapon for TWF purposes during that full attack.

You are saying we can't switch grips during our turn in a full attack, but if that's true what would happen if you were TWFing with a weapon on each hand and got disarmed by an AoO during your first attack of a full attack? If you can't swtich grips or draw another weapon, then you would have to lose all your off-hand attacks since you no longer have 2 weapons to TWF with. If that were true, you would not be able to draw and throw several weapons with TWFing at all, and I think the rules say we can, right? So can we stablish that we can draw other weapons and switch grips and continue to deliver all our attacks during a full attack while TWFing?

Silver Crusade

kestral287 wrote:

To explain part of Chess Pwn's point that I think is being missed:

A two-handed weapon and a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands are not the same thing, from a rules standpoint. So, "treat it as a one-handed weapon" in no way inhibits you from using it in two hands, because if it's treated like a one-handed weapon, I can do anything with it that I can do with a longsword... and that includes two-handing it.

You can certainly use a 1H weapon in two hands, but not at the same time as one hand is holding a light weapon!

Double Weapons wrote:
...as if fighting with two weapons...

Not fighting with one weapon in two hands, but fighting with two weapons.

Quote:
...just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

You can't TWF with a single weapon, unless it has the Double quality, AND you are using the Double quality!

In order to use that quality, you have to declare it before you make the first attack in a full attack (per the normal TWF rules). When you do, for the entire duration of that full attack, you are treated as if you were not using a 2H weapon in two hands, but were instead using BOTH a 1H weapon AND a light weapon. Therefore, your off hand is not free to help you two hand the (virtual) 1H weapon, because that other hand is treated as if that hand were holding a light weapon for the entire duration of the full attack.

So, no can do with Double weapons.

This idea of treating it as if you were using two weapons throughout the full attack is part of the rules for Double weapons, but is not the case during normal combat or even normal TWF. In those cases, you just have to have the correct number of hands holding the weapon you are using to execute an attack at the moment you execute it; not before and not after.

That's why you can TWF with a 2HW normally, but not when you are using the Double quality.

Silver Crusade

Kchaka wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
kchaka wrote:
You could just use a double weapon and make all your main hand attacks holding it as a 2h weapon, then all the off-hands with the same weapon but switching grips to hold the other hand as a light weapon.
I'm afraid not. In order to utilise the Double quality of double weapons, you must take the full attack action and use one end as if it were a one handed weapon and the other end as if it were a light weapon. The weapon itself is neither light or 1H, and can't be used as anything other than a 2H weapon (from the weapons available in the CRB) unless using the Double quality, and if you do then it doesn't count as a 2H weapon for TWF purposes during that full attack.
You are saying we can't switch grips during our turn in a full attack

No! Because you can!

But not while using the Double quality, and it is the fact that you are using that quality that prevents you from switching grips, because it is written into that quality that you are treated as if you are using two weapons (specifically, each end of the double weapon), throughout the entire full attack.

This is a consequence of the Double quality, not the TWF rules nor the normal combat rules.


Ok, forget double weapons, can you swtich grips/draw throwing weapons or other one handed weapons while you are TWFing?

If you can switch grips/draw other weapos while TWFing, why can't you switch grips or draw other 2h weapons while TWFing with 2h weapons?


<@><@>


Kchaka wrote:

Ok, forget double weapons, can you swtich grips/draw throwing weapons or other one handed weapons while you are TWFing?

If you can switch grips/draw other weapos while TWFing, why can't you switch grips or draw other 2h weapons while TWFing with 2h weapons?

Because you need to use two hands to use a two handed weapon.

Silver Crusade

Kchaka wrote:

Ok, forget double weapons, can you swtich grips/draw throwing weapons or other one handed weapons while you are TWFing?

If you can switch grips/draw other weapos while TWFing, why can't you switch grips or draw other 2h weapons while TWFing with 2h weapons?

Okay, forget Double weapons for a moment. I'll go through the rules for (normal) TWF, and the consequences of those rules for the things you can and cannot do whist TWF.

First, TWF is about getting an extra attack, over and above the attacks to which you would otherwise be entitled, usually (but not limited to) the iterative attacks from having a high BAB. If you are just taking your usual attacks without that extra attack from the TWF rules, then you are not considered TWF as far as the rules are concerned, no matter how many weapons you actually use to execute those (normal) attacks.

In order to actually use the TWF rules, you must do several things before you execute your first attack in that turn.

First, you must declare a full attack action, which is (usually) a full round action. Any penalties or conditions that apply as a consequence of using the TWF rules, apply for the entire full attack and to every attack in it, whether or not those attacks are from BAB, TWF, or any other source whatsoever.

Second, you must designate an off hand attack, and that attack will be the off hand attack for the entire duration of that full attack. 'Attack' here refers to a type of weapon, so 'dagger', 'greatsword', 'one specified end of a two-bladed sword', etc. Only that attack may be used for the extra attacks granted by TWF and that line of feats, but may not be used for any other attack during that full attack. Assuming you have the TWF feat, then your TWF attack penalty is -4, unless your designated off hand attack counts as 'light' for you, in which case the penalty is -2 instead of -4. Any off hand attacks which hit add 0.5 x Str bonus instead of whatever Str bonus would apply if it wasn't an off hand attack.

You do not have to designate your 'main' attack, and can use any weapon at all to execute any attack apart from your off hand attack. You still have to be holding that weapon with the required number of hands in order to execute an attack with it. Any 'main' attack will add the usual amount of Str bonus to damage.

If you are using the same weapon type (like, two daggers, for example), then no dagger which makes any off hand attack can make any main attack, and no dagger which makes any main attack can make an off hand attack. During a single full attack in TWF.

All of your iterative attacks (including the main attack) must be taken in order of highest attack bonus to lowest. Your extra attacks from TWF and that line of feats must be taken in the order of: extra attack from TWF, extra from Improved TWF, then extra attack from Greater TWF. Beyond that, you can take your attacks in any order you like, one at a time. You could make all of your main attacks, then all of your extra TWF attacks. Or you could interlace them.

Okay, let's take an unusual example: imagine you have the Quick Draw, TWF, ImpTWF and GrtTWF feats, an efficient quiver which holds six greatswords and are holding another Greatsword at the start of your turn. You choose to TWF, and therefore are taking the full attack action. You must nominate an attack as your off hand attack (you don't have to nominate main attacks at this time). You nominate 'greatsword', and this means that, because your off hand weapon is not light, you take a -4 TWF attack penalty on every single attack you make in this full attack, no matter the source of the attack.

The most efficient way to do this is to take all of your iterative attacks first. If any hit, you will add 1.5 x your Str bonus to damage because 2H weapon.

Then you drop your greatsword and Quick Draw another. You can't use the same sword for your off hand attacks that you used for your main attacks.

If any of these off hand attacks hits, you add only 0.5 x Str bonus to damage, because that's the rule for off hand attacks.

An interesting combat style, but expensive in dropped magical swords and you better hope combat doesn't last too long.

You'll also find that using a single greatsword with Power Attack will end up doing more damage and you've got three extra feats.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

The most efficient way to do this is to take all of your iterative attacks first. If any hit, you will add 1.5 x your Str bonus to damage because 2H weapon.

Then you drop your greatsword and Quick Draw another. You can't use the same sword for your off hand attacks that you used for your main attacks.

If any of these off hand attacks hits, you add only 0.5 x Str bonus to damage, because that's the rule for off hand attacks.

An interesting combat style, but expensive in dropped magical swords and you better hope combat doesn't last too long.

You'll also find that using a single greatsword with Power Attack will end up doing more damage and you've got three extra feats.

You were good, right up until here.

Based on the 'unwritten rules', if any of your attacks are getting 1.5x str, then you do not get any off hand attacks.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:

Okay, let's take an unusual example: imagine you have the Quick Draw, TWF, ImpTWF and GrtTWF feats, an efficient quiver which holds six greatswords and are holding another Greatsword at the start of your turn. You choose to TWF, and therefore are taking the full attack action. You must nominate an attack as your off hand attack (you don't have to nominate main attacks at this time). You nominate 'greatsword', and this means that, because your off hand weapon is not light, you take a -4 TWF attack penalty on every single attack you make in this full attack, no matter the source of the attack.

The most efficient way to do this is to take all of your iterative attacks first. If any hit, you will add 1.5 x your Str bonus to damage because 2H weapon.

Then you drop your greatsword and Quick Draw another. You can't use the same sword for your off hand attacks that you used for your main attacks.

Thanks, that's what I wanted to know about your house rule of TWFing with a 2h weapons, that you would allow the grip switchig, weapon dropping and drawing other ones during your full attack.

As we can see, if we were allowed to TWF with 2h weapons, there would be nothing preventing us from dropping weapons and drawing other ones during our full attack, which would allow us to make all our attacks, main hand and off-hand, with 2h weapons, but as you said with only x0.5 STR bonus damage on the off-hands, since the official rules have never considered the possibility of TWF with 2h weapons to begin with.

If we can make all our TWF attacks with 2h weapons, say greatswords, that would make the builds easier to focus on only one weapon to spend the feats.

To me, if you open this possibility, eventually better feats for 2H TWF builds would come up and would most likelly make these builds stronger then most other regular TWF builds.

This potential improvement would eventually overpower any regular TWF build, and instead of having to update every single NPC out there that was designed with regular TWF, I think it's best to just not allow TWF with 2h weapons, or maybe at least you would need to spend an extra feat for it "Two-Weapon Fighting with Both Hands", or something like that.

Silver Crusade

bbangerter wrote:

You were good, right up until here.

Based on the 'unwritten rules', if any of your attacks are getting 1.5x str, then you do not get any off hand attacks.

Yep, I'm basing all this on the actual, written rules. Guilty as charged.

Silver Crusade

kchaka wrote:
Thanks, that's what I wanted to know about your house rule of TWFing with a 2h weapons, that you would allow the grip switchig, weapon dropping and drawing other ones during your full attack.

Trouble is, it's not 'house rules' if you follow the actual written rules in the book.

Nowhere in the actual rules does it forbid using a 2H weapon in TWF, either for your main attacks or your off hand attacks.

Quote:
To me, if you open this possibility, eventually better feats for 2H TWF builds would come up and would most likelly make these builds stronger then most other regular TWF builds.

I dont share your pessimism.

It also has to be said that there are builds out there which allow twin muzzle-loading double-barrelled pistol users to muzzle-load and fire sixteen shots every six seconds!

Also, Pun-Pun.

The existence of such builds doesn't mean that they are based on incorrect rules, although that is common.

If someone made an effective warrior who uses two greatswords in TWF, this doesn't mean that the rules silently forbid 2HW in TWF.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

One thing that a number of people seem to miss when talking about the "unwritten rules" (or, as I like to call them "internal design guidelines that Paizo try to follow") is that the whole point of the design guideline in question is to prevent more than 1.5 times Str bonus to damage at 1st level. So that there's THF and TWF and the most Str to damage you can get is 1.5x Str. At 1st level.

If you can come up with a combination of feats, traits, class abilities, racial abilities, gear, and whatever that let you do 2x Str at 2nd level, more power to you. Well done at optimising your character and burning your resources to be able to do it. You specialised, and are henceforth rewarded for it. But not at 1st level.

Whether you agree with the design guideline or not (and, for the record "no Str to damage above 1.5x at 1st level" is as completely valid a design guideline as "no wishes as SLAs at 1st level" and isn't written in the books for exactly the same reason), that's what every designer comment I've seen on this issue says.

The FAQ and the rules follow from that guideline. If that means that 20th level characters also can't get more than 1.5x Str to damage, so be it. They also can't get wish as an SLA.

Silver Crusade

Monks get more than 1.5 x Str bonus to damage at first level.

They get it as a class ability. Spending a feat on TWF is just as valid as a choice of how to spend resources, the choice to use a weapon in two hands as one weapon has the drawback of limiting you to poor off hand weapons and denying you the advantage of using twin weapons, etc.

When making all these choices, you look at the rules, to see what you can and cannot do. Y'know, the actual rules written down in the book!

It's not okay to criticise someone for not following rules that are not available to them, not actually written, when it is expected that they obey the written rules!


Chemlak wrote:

Whether you agree with the design guideline or not (and, for the record "no Str to damage above 1.5x at 1st level" is as completely valid a design guideline as "no wishes as SLAs at 1st level" and isn't written in the books for exactly the same reason), that's what every designer comment I've seen on this issue says.

The FAQ and the rules follow from that guideline. If that means that 20th level characters also can't get more than 1.5x Str to damage, so be it. They also can't get wish as an SLA.

Someone forgot to tell monks about the 1.5x at 1st level limit...

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

See, but you are not following the written rules. You are extending the rules using the "but the rules don't say that I can't" fallacy.

It is a free action to "hold" the weapon in one hand and another to bring it back to fighting stance (with two hands). If you attack with it, you must first use two hands (for a Two Handed Weapon) to attack. After that, you don't have any off hands. If a Spiked Gauntlet or an attached blade on the hand (that allows for THW use?) is worn, perhaps a kind GM will let you swing with it afterward, but the penalties will be huge (For both attacks) as TWF assumes the use of one handed/light weapon combos.

It was said on another thread that I was in involving Earth Breakers. Ya can't wield two of them, they are still considered two handed weapons. Neither can you TWF with them. Why would you want to?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
thaX wrote:
See, but you are not following the written rules. You are extending the rules using the "but the rules don't say that I can't" fallacy.

The 3.5 rules in fact allowed it (and clairified it with FAQ/errata) and pathfinder copied their TWF rules word for word. It's understandable when people read the words the exact same way they did before, as it's only the "unwritten rules" preventing it and not "but the rules don't say that I can't". No where outside that FAQ do we see "hands of effort", just rules on how many weapons you can wield at once as the limit for TWF. Before the pathfinder FAQ, all you needed was an available weapon that you could wield at the same time as your main weapon. It's written that wielding that second weapon is what nets you the extra attack, not a "hand of effort".

3.5 FAQ wrote:

Just how and when can you use armor spikes? If you’re

using two weapons already, can you use armor spikes to
make a second off-hand attack? What if you’re using a
weapon and a shield? Can you use the armor spikes for an
off-hand attack and still get a shield bonus to Armor Class
from the shield? What if you use a two-handed weapon?
Can you wield the weapon in two hands and still make an
off-hand attack with the spikes? What are your options for
using armor spikes in a grapple? Can you use them when
pinned? If you have another light weapon, can you use that
and your armor spikes when grappling?
3.5 FAQ answer wrote:

When you fight with more than one weapon, you gain an

extra attack. (Improved Two-Weapon Fighting and greater
Two-Weapon Fighting give you more attacks with the extra
weapon.) Armor spikes are a light weapon that can be used as
the extra weapon.
If you attack only with your armor spikes during your turn
(or use the armor spikes to make an attack of opportunity), you
use them just like a regular weapon. If you use the full attack
action, you can use armor spikes as either a primary light
weapon or as an off-hand light weapon, even if you’re using a
shield or using a two-handed weapon. In these latter two cases,
you’re assumed to be kicking or kneeing your foe with your
armor spikes.
Whenever you use armor spikes as an off-hand weapon,
you suffer all the penalties for attacking with two weapons (see
Table 8–10 in the PH). When using armor spikes along with a
two-handed weapon, it is usually best to use the two-handed
weapon as your primary attack and the armor spikes as the offhand
weapon. You can use the armor spikes as the primary
weapon and the two-handed weapon as the off-hand attack, but
when you do so, you don’t get the benefit of using a light
weapon in your off hand.
You cannot, however, use your armor spikes to make a
second off-hand attack when you’re already fighting with two
weapons. If you have a weapon in both hands and armor spikes,
you can attack with the weapons in your hands (and not with
the armor spikes) or with one of the weapons in your hands and
the armor spikes (see the description of spiked armor in
Chapter 7 of the PH).
When grappling, you can damage your foe with your spikes
by making a regular grapple check (opposed by your foe’s
check). If you succeed, you deal piercing damage to your foe
(see Table 7–5 in the PH) rather than the unarmed strike
damage you’d normally deal when damaging your foe with a
grapple check. Since you can use armor spikes as a light
weapon, you can simply use them to attack your foe. You
suffer a –4 penalty on your attack roll when attacking with a
light weapon in a grapple (see page 156 in the PH), but if your
foe is bigger or stronger than you, this might prove a better
tactic than trying to deal damage through a grapple check
because there is no opposed roll to make—you just have to hit
your opponent’s Armor Class. You can’t attack with two
weapons when grappling, even when one of those weapons is
armor spikes (see the section on grappling in Chapter 8 of the
PH).
You can’t attack and damage your foe if he has you pinned.
If you break the pin and avoid being pinned again, you can go
back to attacking your foe. If your attack bonus is high enough
to allow multiple attacks, you might break the pin and then use
your remaining attack to damage your foe. To accomplish this,
you must first use an attack to break the pin. You can break a
pin using the Escape Artist skill, but trying to do so is a
standard action for you; once you use the standard action to
attempt escape, you can’t make any more attacks during your
turn.


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Monks get more than 1.5 x Str bonus to damage at first level.

You don't need to be a Monk. Any Human, or any Fighter, can do it by taking Two-Weapon Fighting and Double Slice at level one.


Perhaps the unwritten rule is no more than 2x strength at first level?

I'd look it up but...

Hey! at least there is a FAQ that clears it up instead.


The idea is that by the norm, you get 1.5x Str from your two hands-- be that two-handing or TWFing. And to me, that's enough to say that no, you can't TWF two greatswords in my games by exploiting Quick Draw. How other GMs rule it is up to them, of course.

But the theory that the 1.5x Str idea only applies at first level because nobody can break it there and after that it's anyone's game is... wrong. Any Human, any Fighter, any Monk, any Kasatha... all of 'em break it. Though Kasathas break everything related to hands so you're free to discount them. Heck, they probably break the 'no more than 2x' theory too (one main hand at 1x, three off hands at .5x, total 2.5x. 4x with Double Slice. Unless a GM rules them really weird, 2.5x is probably their minimum here).


So I want to get this right, my lvl 3 Kensai magus can

-As a standard action cast daze and deliver it two-handed with her katana
-As a full round action make a one-handed attack at -2 to hit and cast daze and deliver it with an additional one-handed attack at -2 to hit.

But she can not as a full round action make a two-handed attack with her katana at -2 and cast daze and deliver it with another two-handed attack.

Is that right?

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber

Just to clarify something, a kasattha (who has four arms) only has one primory hand. TWF with two THW is still a no. Weilding a THW needs a primary hand that the second weapon would not have access to.

There is a kasatha fighter archetype the allows for the duel wielding of bows.


thaX wrote:

Just to clarify something, a kasattha (who has four arms) only has one primory hand. TWF with two THW is still a no. Weilding a THW needs a primary hand that the second weapon would not have access to.

There is a kasatha fighter archetype the allows for the duel wielding of bows.

Nothing states that a two handed weapon needs a primary hand. "Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively." It'd be pure conjecture to assume that there is an unwritten limitation other than the written two hands. This is not usually an issue as most weapon using creatures only have two hands but it's a total gray area for multihanded creatures.

51 to 100 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / What sort of action does it take to begin or stop "two handing" a weapon? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.