Off Hand Longbows

[blackbloodtroll]

Does firing a Longbow, or Shortbow, make my off-hand unavailable?

[Cap. Darling]

I am not sure i undestand the question. Is it about the buckler? Or about using things like deflect arrows? Or somthing different.

[blackbloodtroll]

Buckler, two-weapon fighting, or anything that would require an off-hand.

[Cavall]

It's a weapon that uses two hands.

So if used your buckler isn't giving AC.

[Cap. Darling]

Cavall wrote:

It's a weapon that uses two hands.

So if used your buckler isn't giving AC.

that would also be my reasoning but i do allow deflect arrow to work.

[Cavall]

Yes. It's a free action to no longer two hand it. You can Deflect. Buckler specifically states attacks using that hand negate the ac bonus. But your hand would be free to Deflect.

[kinevon]

Cavall wrote:

Yes. It's a free action to no longer two hand it. You can Deflect. Buckler specifically states attacks using that hand negate the ac bonus. But your hand would be free to Deflect.

Although you would have to choose between that, and, say, using Snap Shot, since one use of your offhand precludes the other.

Either your hand is busy on the bow so you can take AoOs with it, or your offhand is empty and waiting to deflect/snatch an arrow.

[blackbloodtroll]

Well, other than the moment of firing it, you don't have two hands on a Bow.

That's not how Bows work.

Also, it categorized as a Ranged Weapon.

It is not categorized as a two-handed weapon.

It does, however, require two hands to use.

[Cavall]

You would still lose the buckler bonus. Because that's how they work.

[blackbloodtroll]

Cavall wrote:

You would still lose the buckler bonus. Because that's how they work.

I think they work like this:

Ultimate Equipment/Core Rulebook wrote:

Buckler

Statistics
Cost 5 gp Weight 5 lbs.
Armor Bonus +1; Max Dex Bonus —; Armor Check Penalty -1
Arcane Spell Failure Chance 5%; Speed —/—
Description
This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

[Cap. Darling]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Cavall wrote:

You would still lose the buckler bonus. Because that's how they work.

I think they work like this:

Ultimate Equipment/Core Rulebook wrote:

Buckler

Statistics
Cost 5 gp Weight 5 lbs.
Armor Bonus +1; Max Dex Bonus —; Armor Check Penalty -1
Arcane Spell Failure Chance 5%; Speed —/—
Description
This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

"You can use a bow or a crosbow without penalty while carrying it" that says what i need to know. Buckler and longbow work with no problem togeather in PF!

It makes no sense if you look at what a buckler really is but in no version of DaD have bucklers made sense in that way.
You are good with your buckler sir. Troll

[Kazaan]

A Bow isn't a 2-h weapon, but neither is a Longsword. But if you use your Longsword in two hands, it subsumes your offhand potential and so, too, does using a Bow; your off-hand is helping you wield the Bow. Now, regarding the Buckler, it explicitly states you can use a bow or crossbow without penalty. But that doesn't mean that using a Bow doesn't take up your off-hand attack economy. However, when you aren't firing the bow, the hand still counts as "free" for things like deflect/snatch arrows. There's even a bit in snatch arrows about catching and immediately firing the arrow back using your bow.

[blackbloodtroll]

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

[Kazaan]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

[Xethik]

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

Wield has a very particular definition in Pathfinder. Do you need two hands to wield the longbow or just fire it? That's the point of the question.

[graystone]

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

That hands of effort doesn't make a lot of sense in some situations? We know how they 'work', sort of, with two handed weapons but we don't with a weapon that needs two hands...

[Talonhawke]

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

A round about run back into another thread and metaphysical hands involved with using a shield after attacking with a 2-HW

[DM_Blake]

Buckler wrote:

This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

As to the OP's actual question, firing a bow requires two hands. Most normal characters only have two hands. This means that there is no normal way to fire a bow without using your primary and off hand to fire it.

So when you fire a bow, you are using it in your off hand.

Note the sentence in the above quote that I italicized, especially the bolded part: "USE a weapon in your off hand". It says "use".

Since there is normally no way to fire a bow without using your off hand, then you will lose your buckler's AC in any round in which you fire your bow.

[Kazaan]

Xethik wrote:

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

Wield has a very particular definition in Pathfinder. Do you need two hands to wield the longbow or just fire it? That's the point of the question.

Wielding a longbow and firing a longbow are synonymous. Holding may be different from wielding, mind you. You can hold a longbow, longsword, or greatsword, equally, using just one hand. But if you are holding a Greatsword in one hand, you don't threaten with it while holding a Longsword in one hand, you do threaten with it. You need to be holding a Greatsword in both hands in order to be able to attack with it. In the case of a Bow, you only commit both hands during the actual attack, but you are still committing your hand (as well as attack economy). This isn't exactly a hard concept. I get the distinct impression that certain individuals are being willfully ignorant regarding the matter. The terms "metaphorical hands" and "metaphysical hands" have become pejorative towards the concept of having an attack economy that reflects your potential capacity to make attacks. It's no more complex that understanding that weapons have various interlocking categories; they can be light, 1-h, or 2-h; simple, martial, or exotic; melee or ranged; they have a size category of the intended wielder; etc. But people are having these knee-jerk reactions upon finding out there were some aspects of the rules that the dev team, in their rush to get the rules books out, didn't elucidate as clearly nor as consistently as they would have hoped. They clarify, and people, for lack of a better term, throw s##~-fits, purposefully throwing around fallacious arguments for no reason other than to stir up malcontent. Anyone should be able to understand the basics of action economy, including attack economy, even if they might get stuck on the finer details. And it certainly isn't an issue worth causing unnecessary trouble over.

So, to fully illustrate how it all works: Just as we use the term "action economy" to describe the amount and type of actions you get and can use in a turn, we can use the term "attack economy" to describe the amount and type of attacks within a round you can potentially make. Everyone starts with a single attack and can earn additional iterative attacks based on their BAB. At +6 BAB, and every 5 thereafter, you earn one additional potential iterative attack. These attacks can be made with any weapon you have to hand. If you have a longsword, a dagger, a boot blade, and a boulder helmet, and 4 iterative attacks, you could assign those attacks to any permutation of those weapons. You could make all four with the Longsword, for instance, or you could make one attack with each weapon, following your normal BAB sequence. What kind of weapon it is indicates how many hands, both actual physical hands as well as off-hand attack economy, it takes to be able to attack with it. It takes one hand to use a light weapon; that is, both a physical hand as well as a potential attack. An iterative attack is a potential attack. Your off-hand is a potential attack. Some light weapons exclude the need to commit a physical hand, but this doesn't invalidate the need to use your attack economy. Other weapons avert both; the Barbazu Beard and Sea Knife state you can use them for off-hand attacks even if you have already committed your off-hand attack economy to the use of a two-handed weapon; and both weapons come with steep circumstantial necessities for their use. A Bow requires the use of both hands to fire. Note that to "use" a weapon and to "wield" a weapon are both the same thing; there is no practical difference between the two terms when used in reference to weapons. We commonly think of wielding a 2-h weapon as involving both hands being "glued" to the weapon. But you only really need both hands firmly on the weapon when making an actual attack swing. But both hands need to be "committed" to the weapon in order to consider it being "ready for attack". In the case of a Bow, it is a "not an action" to nock the arrow to the bowstring; an inherent part of firing the bow. So putting your second hand on the bow is an integral part of making the attack; you don't need to even take a free action to "switch grip". And it's taken for granted where you are holding the bow. You know very well that just holding the stave of the bow in both hands doesn't count for wielding it; you use a bow by holding the stave in one hand and pulling the arrow back on the bowstring with the other. That should clear up most legitimate confusion regarding how attack economy works.

[RedDogMT]

BBT, lets say for arguments sake that after you fire the longbow, you can change your grip as a free action to 'free up' your off hand. What is it that you want to do with that? Give examples.

[DM_Blake]

Cap. Darling wrote:

Ultimate Equipment/Core Rulebook wrote:

This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

"You can use a bow or a crosbow without penalty while carrying it" that says what i need to know. Buckler and longbow work with no problem togeather in PF!

You seem to be reading that sentence exactly backward.

It does not say "use can use your buckler without penalty when using a bow". In fact, it says the exact opposite: "you can use your bow without penalty when using a buckler".

To put this into context, read the sentence immediately following the one you quoted (I bolded it above) which makes it crystal clear that you take a penalty to your melee attack rolls when using a melee weapon with a buckler, which then makes your quoted sentence clear that you DO NOT take a similar ranged attack penalty when using a bow with a buckler.

Those two sentences apply to attack rolls while wearing a buckler but they say nothing about keeping or losing your AC bonus - that part of the buckler's rules comes later.

[Dave Justus]

If, when trying to parse RAW, you reach a conclusion that is clearly nonsensical, like the idea that it doesn't take two hands to use a Bow, you have done it wrong.

[DM_Blake]

Dave Justus wrote:

If, when trying to parse RAW, you reach a conclusion that is clearly nonsensical, like the idea that it doesn't take two hands to use a Bow, you have done it wrong.

True, especially since the first RAW that should be parsed is this one:

SRD, Equipment, Weapons, Longbow wrote:

You need two hands to use a bow, regardless of its size.

(Same wording on other bows, too)

[Ziere Tole]

Let's say I have a vestigial arm, giving me three limbs. Can I TWF with a longbow and a longsword? I think this might be another example of what BBT is asking.

The armor spikes FAQ shows that Two-handed weapons use the offhand attack, preventing TWF. Vestigial arms also do not give any more attcks than your usual main-hand/off-hand. Bows, however, are not Two-handed weapons as a rules construct, but simply require two physical hands to use. Therefore it is somewhat unclear whether they also use two of the metaphysical 'hands of effort'.

I do hope that when the handedness blog post actually comes out it clears up more things than it breaks.

[graystone]

Dave Justus wrote:

If, when trying to parse RAW, you reach a conclusion that is clearly nonsensical, like the idea that it doesn't take two hands to use a Bow, you have done it wrong.

There is a difference in using and taking up. For instance using a bow doesn't stop you from using the 'off hand' for other things. If it did, you couldn't use said 'off hand' to draw new ammo for example. So use and wield don't end up being the same thing as a wielded two handed weapons would prevent your 'off hand' for other things.

So my conclusion is that is that you have parsed RAW in a clearly nonsensical way if your answer to BBT's question is the above reply. (or ignoring his actual question)

RedDogMT wrote:

BBT, lets say for arguments sake that after you fire the longbow, you can change your grip as a free action to 'free up' your off hand. What is it that you want to do with that? Give examples.

Your 'off hand' is only used at the moment of firing, so it isn't wielded in two hands. That'd mean it would require no grip change. If there was, you'd need that grip change free action every time you wanted to draw a new arrow, doubling the amount of free actions an archer would need.

This is what brings up the issue. Using and wielding are different in the case of a bow so normal wielding answers don't/shouldn't automatically apply. The bow MAY take up your 'offhand' but we have no way of knowing that since the entire 'hands of effort' written rules are limited to a single FAQ on two handed weapons and two weapon fighting.

[BigDTBone]

DM_Blake wrote:

Buckler wrote:

This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

As to the OP's actual question, firing a bow requires two hands. Most normal characters only have two hands. This means that there is no normal way to fire a bow without using your primary and off hand to fire it.

So when you fire a bow, you are using it in your off hand.

Note the sentence in the above quote that I italicized, especially the bolded part: "USE a weapon in your off hand". It says "use".

Since there is normally no way to fire a bow without using your off hand, then you will lose your buckler's AC in any round in which you fire your bow.

But with a bow you aren't using your "off-hand" but rather your second hand. You know that you aren't using your "off-hand" because you aren't getting the 2-handed STR bonus to damage.

[BigDTBone]

Xethik wrote:

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

Wield has a very particular definition in Pathfinder. Do you need two hands to wield the longbow or just fire it? That's the point of the question.

Care to quote or link that particular definition?

[graystone]

BigDTBone wrote:

Xethik wrote:

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

Wield has a very particular definition in Pathfinder. Do you need two hands to wield the longbow or just fire it? That's the point of the question.

Care to quote or link that particular definition?

LOL It can mean everything from holding to actively using right NOW.

Quarterstaff Defense = holding
Defending enchant = attacking with.

So unless someone SERIOUSLY thinks that Staff Magus only gets his bonus AC during his attacks, it's clear the defending enchant FAQ is limited to that enchant.

EDIT: I'm assuming Xethik is talking about the defending FAQ. If he isn't, I too am curious as to what he's referring.

[BigDTBone]

graystone wrote:

Dave Justus wrote:

If, when trying to parse RAW, you reach a conclusion that is clearly nonsensical, like the idea that it doesn't take two hands to use a Bow, you have done it wrong.

There is a difference in using and taking up. For instance using a bow doesn't stop you from using the 'off hand' for other things. If it did, you couldn't use said 'off hand' to draw new ammo for example. So use and wield don't end up being the same thing as a wielded two handed weapons would prevent your 'off hand' for other things.

So my conclusion is that is that you have parsed RAW in a clearly nonsensical way if your answer to BBT's question is the above reply. (or ignoring his actual question)

RedDogMT wrote:

BBT, lets say for arguments sake that after you fire the longbow, you can change your grip as a free action to 'free up' your off hand. What is it that you want to do with that? Give examples.

Your 'off hand' is only used at the moment of firing, so it isn't wielded in two hands. That'd mean it would require no grip change. If there was, you'd need that grip change free action every time you wanted to draw a new arrow, doubling the amount of free actions an archer would need.

This is what brings up the issue. Using and wielding are different in the case of a bow so normal wielding answers don't/shouldn't automatically apply. The bow MAY take up your 'offhand' but we have no way of knowing that since the entire 'hands of effort' written rules are limited to a single FAQ on two handed weapons and two weapon fighting.

Not an official rule, but I find that if you define "wield" as "use + hold" it makes these things a bunch easier to parse. Particularly, if you keep in mind that "use" and "hold" are descrete parts of "wield" even when referenced independently.

EDIT: I'm also completely willing to change any of those 3 terms to either of the others if it makes more sense. This edit is based on your mention of the staff magus.

[Charon's Little Helper]

graystone wrote:

So unless someone SERIOUSLY thinks that Staff Magus only gets his bonus AC during an attack, it's clear the defending enchant FAQ is limited to that enchant.

And maybe (not officially) in reference to the Allying enchantment. (Mark Seifter made mention of that being at least what his ruling would be on the unchained monk thread.)

[graystone]

BigDTBone wrote:

graystone wrote:

Dave Justus wrote:

If, when trying to parse RAW, you reach a conclusion that is clearly nonsensical, like the idea that it doesn't take two hands to use a Bow, you have done it wrong.

There is a difference in using and taking up. For instance using a bow doesn't stop you from using the 'off hand' for other things. If it did, you couldn't use said 'off hand' to draw new ammo for example. So use and wield don't end up being the same thing as a wielded two handed weapons would prevent your 'off hand' for other things.

So my conclusion is that is that you have parsed RAW in a clearly nonsensical way if your answer to BBT's question is the above reply. (or ignoring his actual question)

RedDogMT wrote:

BBT, lets say for arguments sake that after you fire the longbow, you can change your grip as a free action to 'free up' your off hand. What is it that you want to do with that? Give examples.

Your 'off hand' is only used at the moment of firing, so it isn't wielded in two hands. That'd mean it would require no grip change. If there was, you'd need that grip change free action every time you wanted to draw a new arrow, doubling the amount of free actions an archer would need.

This is what brings up the issue. Using and wielding are different in the case of a bow so normal wielding answers don't/shouldn't automatically apply. The bow MAY take up your 'offhand' but we have no way of knowing that since the entire 'hands of effort' written rules are limited to a single FAQ on two handed weapons and two weapon fighting.

Not an official rule, but I find that if you define "wield" as "use + hold" it makes these things a bunch easier to parse. Particularly, if you keep in mind that "use" and "hold" are descrete parts of "wield" even when referenced independently.

"use + hold" doesn't hold up for defensive abilities though. Does two weapon defense only work while you are attacking with two weapons? Hold (ready to use/attack) seems like the most reasonable as a default wield. Attacking/using makes sense with an attack or timed type ability. So it's a solid OR, not an AND for me.

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

graystone wrote:

So unless someone SERIOUSLY thinks that Staff Magus only gets his bonus AC during an attack, it's clear the defending enchant FAQ is limited to that enchant.

And maybe (not officially) in reference to the Allying enchantment. (Mark Seifter made mention of that being at least what his ruling would be on the unchained monk thread.)

IMO, it's an unneeded restriction. It's nice to know how Mark would rule it but he didn't seem to take into account abilities that aren't timed like 2 weapon defense that don't work with that definition. It sounded like he was taking the defense FAQ as a default and that IMO doesn't take everything into account. (it was an off the cuff remark after all)

[Xethik]

graystone wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

Xethik wrote:

Kazaan wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Are you using two hands to wield a Longbow, or to use a Longbow?

I know very well that you know very well that it takes two hands to use a bow (short or long). So what was the point of asking that question?

Wield has a very particular definition in Pathfinder. Do you need two hands to wield the longbow or just fire it? That's the point of the question.

Care to quote or link that particular definition?

LOL It can mean everything from holding to actively using right NOW.

Quarterstaff Defense = holding
Defending enchant = attacking with.

So unless someone SERIOUSLY thinks that Staff Magus only gets his bonus AC during his attacks, it's clear the defending enchant FAQ is limited to that enchant.

EDIT: I'm assuming Xethik is talking about the defending FAQ. If he isn't, I too am curious as to what he's referring.

I was. I for some reason thought they specifically used the term wield there, but appears they do not (at least not in the FAQ). But there is also the recent reach weapon 'wielded' as an improvised weapon. You are clearly holding a Quarterstaff even if you are using it as an improvised spear (or something along those lines), but you would not be wielding a quarterstaff in that case. Right?

And when I said wield has a particular definition, I mean el-oh-el it isn't defined but has a lot of baggage. Which makes me :(

[Charon's Little Helper]

graystone wrote:

IMO, it's an unneeded restriction. It's nice to know how Mark would rule it but he didn't seem to take into account abilities that aren't timed like 2 weapon defense that don't work with that definition. It sounded like he was taking the defense FAQ as a default and that IMO doesn't take everything into account. (it was an off the cuff remark after all)

I'm actually with you - but it's nice to know the potential table variation.

For context - it was made in reference to my monk combo - where I have an AoMF for effects (Agile/Flaming etc) and wield an allying weapon to enhance my own fist. This keeps unarmed enchants from being much more expensive - and at high levels it's actually somewhat cheaper than a normal weapon for the same enchantment.

Worst case - make sure the allying weapon is a cestus or brass knuckles and use it for your worst iterative of the flurry each round.

[graystone]

Charon's Little Helper wrote:

graystone wrote:

IMO, it's an unneeded restriction. It's nice to know how Mark would rule it but he didn't seem to take into account abilities that aren't timed like 2 weapon defense that don't work with that definition. It sounded like he was taking the defense FAQ as a default and that IMO doesn't take everything into account. (it was an off the cuff remark after all)

I'm actually with you - but it's nice to know the potential table variation.

For context - it was made in reference to my monk combo - where I have an AoMF for effects (Agile/Flaming etc) and wield an allying weapon to enhance my own fist. This keeps unarmed enchants from being much more expensive - and at high levels it's actually somewhat cheaper than a normal weapon for the same enchantment.

Worst case - make sure the allying weapon is a cestus or brass knuckles and use it for your worst iterative of the flurry each round.

Yeah, I was following that thread so I knew the comment you where referencing. It good to put up the reference though for those that didn't.

On the rest, I agree. Even with a 'defending' type wield, the allying weapon is workable, it's just annoying. IMO it working the 'holding' way works great and you sidestep the necklace method that gets it's price bumped up for people with multiple natural attacks. I'd be one thing if it was OP, but IMO it fills a needed niche.

[Byakko]

Instead of focusing on the physical hands, keep track of how many "metaphysical" hands worth of effort you have used. While you are required to wield a weapon to attack with it, this does not affect your action economy.

Using a bow requires one primary hand attack and consumes one offhand attack. A player cannot normally combine a bow and an offhand attack, regardless of how things are wielded during the turn.
(there are a few exceptions to this, such as players with multiple offhand attacks and special races with multiple arms)

Thus, while using a bow doesn't make your offhand unavailable, it DOES make your offhand attack unavailable.

[DM_Blake]

BigDTBone wrote:

DM_Blake wrote:

Buckler wrote:

This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

As to the OP's actual question, firing a bow requires two hands. Most normal characters only have two hands. This means that there is no normal way to fire a bow without using your primary and off hand to fire it.

So when you fire a bow, you are using it in your off hand.

Note the sentence in the above quote that I italicized, especially the bolded part: "USE a weapon in your off hand". It says "use".

Since there is normally no way to fire a bow without using your off hand, then you will lose your buckler's AC in any round in which you fire your bow.

But with a bow you aren't using your "off-hand" but rather your second hand. You know that you aren't using your "off-hand" because you aren't getting the 2-handed STR bonus to damage.

The rule says:

SRD, Combat, Damage wrote:

When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus

Bows never say wield them with two hands; only that you use two hands. Since you're not wielding the bow with two hands, the 1.5 STR multiplier is never applicable anyway. Different word. Not applicable.

But bucklers clearly state the word "use" and so do bows. You use two hands when you use a bow and if you use a weapon in your off-hand you don't get the AC bonus from the buckler. Same word. No problem.

[Saldiven]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Well, other than the moment of firing it, you don't have two hands on a Bow.

That's not how Bows work.

Except for the part where you're reaching for an arrow, grabbing said arrow, and knocking said arrow....

Considering a combat round is 6 seconds, a not insignificant portion of that time is taken up with the other aspects of using a bow, especially if you have iterative attacks.

[Ziere Tole]

Byakko wrote:

Using a bow requires one primary hand attack and consumes one offhand attack.

Other than the Armor Spikes FAQ which only calls out Two-handed weapons (which bows are not), is there any proof of this? Sure, its a logical connection to make, but its still an "extrapolation" as far as I can tell.

[BigDTBone]

DM_Blake wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

DM_Blake wrote:

Buckler wrote:

This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

As to the OP's actual question, firing a bow requires two hands. Most normal characters only have two hands. This means that there is no normal way to fire a bow without using your primary and off hand to fire it.

So when you fire a bow, you are using it in your off hand.

Note the sentence in the above quote that I italicized, especially the bolded part: "USE a weapon in your off hand". It says "use".

Since there is normally no way to fire a bow without using your off hand, then you will lose your buckler's AC in any round in which you fire your bow.

But with a bow you aren't using your "off-hand" but rather your second hand. You know that you aren't using your "off-hand" because you aren't getting the 2-handed STR bonus to damage.

The rule says:

SRD, Combat, Damage wrote:

When you deal damage with a weapon that you are wielding two-handed, you add 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus

Bows never say wield them with two hands; only that you use two hands. Since you're not wielding the bow with two hands, the 1.5 STR multiplier is never applicable anyway. Different word. Not applicable.

But bucklers clearly state the word "use" and so do bows. You...

Except that in the rules text those words get used interchangeably by the designers.

[BigDTBone]

Ziere Tole wrote:

Byakko wrote:

Using a bow requires one primary hand attack and consumes one offhand attack.

Other than the Armor Spikes FAQ which only calls out Two-handed weapons (which bows are not), is there any proof of this? Sure, its a logical connection to make, but its still an "extrapolation" as far as I can tell.

It's actually not logical. It's the exact opposite of logical. The logical interpretation would be that both of your physical hands are required to use a bow, but that your metaphysical "off-hand of effort" is still available.

[Ziere Tole]

BigDTBone wrote:

The logical interpretation would be that both of your physical hands are required to use a bow, but that your metaphysical "off-hand of effort" is still available.

So TWF with a bow and a one-handed or light weapon works, as long as you have a third physical arm. Or if you only have two arms, start your TWF attack with your bow, then quickdraw a dagger to attack with, that would still work. As I understand it, you don't have to actually be holding both weapons when you start TWF, so there shouldn't be a problem.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Cavall wrote:

You would still lose the buckler bonus. Because that's how they work.

I think they work like this:

Ultimate Equipment/Core Rulebook wrote:

Buckler

Statistics
Cost 5 gp Weight 5 lbs.
Armor Bonus +1; Max Dex Bonus —; Armor Check Penalty -1
Arcane Spell Failure Chance 5%; Speed —/—
Description
This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

You do see the problem here, don't you?

The first bolded part says that you can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying a buckler. (This penalty would technically actually apply if you were actually donning a buckler, but that goes against RAI.) The sentence following gives an example of a penalty, saying that using a two-handed weapon takes a -1 penalty on the attack roll. The second bolded part says that regardless of whatever case is involved (including the first bolded part, if you constitute that as a case), if a weapon is used in your off-hand (or requires your off-hand), the Buckler's AC bonus is lost.

By your logic, characters who are denied their Dexterity Bonus are the same thing as a character who received a debilitation to equal a 0 Dexterity Modifier; mathematically speaking, they are, but intentionally speaking, they're not. The latter is a penalty, which the first bolded part negates if you're using a bow or crossbow to make attacks. The former is a condition or result of an action taken that removes the concept of bonuses and penalties entirely out of the equation in question, which is what the second bolded part is doing, and it applies to whatever scenario, including the first bolded part.

Firing a Bow with a Buckler equipped, regardless if it's inside or outside your turn, in the same round means that you aren't affected by the AC Bonus the Buckler grants; but you also don't suffer the penalties associated with using a weapon in your off-hand (or more RAI accurately, in the same hand that your buckler applies). That's it.

[DM_Blake]

Darksol the Painbringer wrote:

Ultimate Equipment/Core Rulebook wrote:

Buckler

Statistics
Cost 5 gp Weight 5 lbs.
Armor Bonus +1; Max Dex Bonus —; Armor Check Penalty -1
Arcane Spell Failure Chance 5%; Speed —/—
Description
This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler’s AC bonus until your next turn. You can’t make a shield bash with a buckler.

You do see the problem here, don't you?

The first bolded part says that you can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying a buckler. (This penalty would technically actually apply if you were actually donning a buckler, but that goes against RAI.) The sentence following gives an example of a penalty, saying that using a two-handed weapon takes a -1 penalty on the attack roll. The second bolded part says that regardless of whatever case is involved (including the first bolded part, if you constitute that as a case), if a weapon is used in your off-hand (or requires your off-hand), the Buckler's AC bonus is lost.

By your logic, characters who are denied their Dexterity Bonus are the same thing as a character who received a debilitation to equal a 0 Dexterity Modifier; mathematically speaking, they are, but intentionally speaking, they're not. The latter is a penalty, which the first bolded part negates if you're using a bow or crossbow to make attacks. The former is a condition or result of an action taken that removes the concept of bonuses and penalties entirely out of the equation in question, which is what the second bolded part is doing, and it applies to whatever scenario, including the first bolded part.

Firing a Bow with a Buckler equipped, regardless if it's inside or outside your turn, in the same round means that you aren't affected by the AC Bonus the Buckler grants; but you also don't suffer the penalties associated with using a weapon in your off-hand (or more RAI accurately, in the same hand that your buckler applies). That's it.

I think you're reading that backward too.

The first part you bolded is NOT talking about "suffer the penalties associated with using a weapon in your off-hand" - that quote from you implies "suffer the penalties to the buckler associated with using a weapon in your off-hand".

But that's backward.

The first bolded sentence really says "You can use a bow or crossbow without suffering an attack penalty while carrying a buckler". It is directly referencing the sentence immediately after it that describes a melee attack penalty caused by wearing a buckler.

[Darksol the Painbringer]

DM_Blake wrote:

I think you're reading that backward too.

The first part you bolded is NOT talking about "suffer the penalties associated with using a weapon in your off-hand" - that quote from you implies "suffer the penalties to the buckler associated with using a weapon in your off-hand".

But that's backward.

The first bolded sentence really says "You can use a bow or crossbow without suffering an attack penalty while carrying a buckler". It is directly referencing the sentence immediately after it that describes a melee attack penalty caused by wearing a buckler.

The italicized part is what I meant; apparently it didn't click because I decided to use the Buckler penalty as a general example of it applying to all penalties, the same train of thought behind Shield Master removing penalties to attacks with Shields, when I meant to say that the following sentence is the penalty the first bolded part is referencing.

[Dexion1619]

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Well, other than the moment of firing it, you don't have two hands on a Bow.

That's not how Bows work.

Not to be nit-picky but my experience with bows (read: lots) say's differently. While you might only be shooting the bow for a moment, A combat round (6 seconds) is not a lot of time. I would hazard to guess that the rest of the time you will be doing things like drawing arrow's for you're next shot and aiming.

Yes, yes, I know Pathfinder and the real world don't line up very well.

[BigDTBone]

Ziere Tole wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

The logical interpretation would be that both of your physical hands are required to use a bow, but that your metaphysical "off-hand of effort" is still available.

So TWF with a bow and a one-handed or light weapon works, as long as you have a third physical arm. Or if you only have two arms, start your TWF attack with your bow, then quickdraw a dagger to attack with, that would still work. As I understand it, you don't have to actually be holding both weapons when you start TWF, so there shouldn't be a problem.

Yes, or less corner case-y, TWF with a bow attack and an IUS kick.

[graystone]

Saldiven wrote:

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Well, other than the moment of firing it, you don't have two hands on a Bow.

That's not how Bows work.

Except for the part where you're reaching for an arrow, grabbing said arrow, and knocking said arrow....

Considering a combat round is 6 seconds, a not insignificant portion of that time is taken up with the other aspects of using a bow, especially if you have iterative attacks.

That's a different action that requires a free hand and a free action, something that's very hard to do if that hand is occupied with wielding the bow...

[Canthin]

BigDTBone wrote:

Ziere Tole wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

The logical interpretation would be that both of your physical hands are required to use a bow, but that your metaphysical "off-hand of effort" is still available.

So TWF with a bow and a one-handed or light weapon works, as long as you have a third physical arm. Or if you only have two arms, start your TWF attack with your bow, then quickdraw a dagger to attack with, that would still work. As I understand it, you don't have to actually be holding both weapons when you start TWF, so there shouldn't be a problem.

Yes, or less corner case-y, TWF with a bow attack and an IUS kick.

Are you suggesting that you can full attack with a bow (even adding Rapid Shot) AND also use TWF to deliver an "offhand" (metaphysical hand) unarmed strike for a potential total of 2 EXTRA attacks in a round for -4 to all attacks?

Or without Rapid Shot, just -2 for TWF with a bow and offhand kick?

That seems very against the intent of TWF, let alone using a weapon that requires two hands.

[graystone]

Canthin wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

Ziere Tole wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

The logical interpretation would be that both of your physical hands are required to use a bow, but that your metaphysical "off-hand of effort" is still available.

So TWF with a bow and a one-handed or light weapon works, as long as you have a third physical arm. Or if you only have two arms, start your TWF attack with your bow, then quickdraw a dagger to attack with, that would still work. As I understand it, you don't have to actually be holding both weapons when you start TWF, so there shouldn't be a problem.

Yes, or less corner case-y, TWF with a bow attack and an IUS kick.

Are you suggesting that you can full attack with a bow (even adding Rapid Shot) AND also use TWF to deliver an "offhand" (metaphysical hand) unarmed strike for a potential total of 2 EXTRA attacks in a round for -4 to all attacks?

Or without Rapid Shot, just -2 for TWF with a bow and offhand kick?

That seems very against the intent of TWF, let alone using a weapon that requires two hands.

Is there anything stopping someone that is using thrown weapons from doing TWF and rapid shot? [hint: the answer is no]

[BigDTBone]

Canthin wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

Ziere Tole wrote:

BigDTBone wrote:

The logical interpretation would be that both of your physical hands are required to use a bow, but that your metaphysical "off-hand of effort" is still available.

So TWF with a bow and a one-handed or light weapon works, as long as you have a third physical arm. Or if you only have two arms, start your TWF attack with your bow, then quickdraw a dagger to attack with, that would still work. As I understand it, you don't have to actually be holding both weapons when you start TWF, so there shouldn't be a problem.

Yes, or less corner case-y, TWF with a bow attack and an IUS kick.

Are you suggesting that you can full attack with a bow (even adding Rapid Shot) AND also use TWF to deliver an "offhand" (metaphysical hand) unarmed strike for a potential total of 2 EXTRA attacks in a round for -4 to all attacks?

Or without Rapid Shot, just -2 for TWF with a bow and offhand kick?

That seems very against the intent of TWF, let alone using a weapon that requires two hands.

I'm saying that the current rules support that reading. I'm absolutely not making a prediction about future stealth errata "clarifications."