Kasatha, TWF, and 2 handers


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

18 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite.

I did some preliminary googling to find any kind of answer and so far I've only found threads pertaining to the Alch's vestigial arm discovery and it's prohibition on gaining extra attacks.

Can a Kasatha wield a pair of greatswords two handed; one in each pair of hands?

How would the strength bonuses work for that? 1.5, 0.75 (1.5 x 0.5)? Would double slice bring that back to 1.5, 1.5?

Or would it be 1.5, 0.5 with double slice bringing it to 1.5, 1.0? Kind of defeats the idea of wielding a pair of two handers though.

I know there are going to be massive attack penalties for using two non-light weapons with two-weapon fighting.

I also found the feat 'multi-weapon fighting.' Is this legal for players to take? Can I take Improved Two-Weapon fighting and Greater Two-Weapon fighting to gain a 2nd and 3rd iterative attack on the other greatsword if I take this in replacement of the original TWF?

-Hydro

Grand Lodge

Nobody knows.

This is pretty much not covered, and even what is covered, is overwritten by unwritten rules.

You basically have to break down, and work with your DM, as to how he/she wants to run it.

Other than that, there is no real "right", or "wrong" answer.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Nobody knows.

This is pretty much not covered, and even what is covered, is overwritten by unwritten rules.

You basically have to break down, and work with your DM, as to how he/she wants to run it.

Other than that, there is no real "right", or "wrong" answer.

This. But i would say the odds are good if the GM allow the Kasatha in the first place.


Yeah I suppose this is so-far-gone into the wildlands it would have to be settled with my DM.

On that note, does 0.75 and 1.5x with double-slice sound reasonable? Considering the -4/-4 attack penalties to begin with (assuming MWF was ruled legal)

I know at this point none of this is RAW but it could be helpful to hear your opinions on what you think would be reasonable.


The way I understood it, Kasatha have one primary hand and 3 off-hands worth of attacks they can make.

That means you can't wield more than 1 two-handed weapon, as you don't have enough hands worth of effort to apply to do it it.

Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

Grand Lodge

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.


Claxon wrote:

The way I understood it, Kasatha have one primary hand and 3 off-hands worth of attacks they can make.

That means you can't wield more than 1 two-handed weapon, as you don't have enough hands worth of effort to apply to do it it.

Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

I don't think there's anything in the books regarding 'off hands' and the ability to actually wield weapons. It only mentions strength modifiers when dealing with off-hand weapon attacks.

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.

That's kind of badass fluff wise haha. Hilariously gimped mechanically though, from my initial reading. Would definitely be outclassed by any actual bow-wielding class using a single bow unless the AC of things you fought was subpar. The only reason I think dual greatsword is superior to dual longbow is because of the static bonuses and the 2d6 damage dice.


Hydromancer wrote:
Claxon wrote:

The way I understood it, Kasatha have one primary hand and 3 off-hands worth of attacks they can make.

That means you can't wield more than 1 two-handed weapon, as you don't have enough hands worth of effort to apply to do it it.

Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

I don't think there's anything in the books regarding 'off hands' and the ability to actually wield weapons. It only mentions strength modifiers when dealing with off-hand weapon attacks.

...

And here we are. There are no rules of getting extra attacks with extra two handed weapons either.:) you Can hold all the two handed weapons you want but by the rules you dont get any extra attacks from it:(

Grand Lodge

Ranged always wins.

Just popping a level, or two, into Bow Nomad, then going full Two Weapon Fighter, would be quite strong.

Nab Reckless Aim, if you feel your to-hit is not up to your standards.


Cap. Darling wrote:
Hydromancer wrote:
Claxon wrote:

The way I understood it, Kasatha have one primary hand and 3 off-hands worth of attacks they can make.

That means you can't wield more than 1 two-handed weapon, as you don't have enough hands worth of effort to apply to do it it.

Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

I don't think there's anything in the books regarding 'off hands' and the ability to actually wield weapons. It only mentions strength modifiers when dealing with off-hand weapon attacks.

...
And here we are. There are no rules of getting extra attacks with extra two handed weapons either.:) you Can hold all the two handed weapons you want but by the rules you dont get any extra attacks from it:(

I'm not getting extra attacks from extra hands though? I'm getting them from twf's extra attacks granted to off hand weapons.

By BAB 6/1 I'd swing at 2/2 and at -3/-3 as per standard itwf

Grand Lodge

The reason I suggest something like Bow Nomad, is that there will be less rules debates, and you will still remain strong.

If you must go melee, then Sawtooth Sabres is what you want.


Hydromancer wrote:
Cap. Darling wrote:
Hydromancer wrote:
Claxon wrote:

The way I understood it, Kasatha have one primary hand and 3 off-hands worth of attacks they can make.

That means you can't wield more than 1 two-handed weapon, as you don't have enough hands worth of effort to apply to do it it.

Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

I don't think there's anything in the books regarding 'off hands' and the ability to actually wield weapons. It only mentions strength modifiers when dealing with off-hand weapon attacks.

...
And here we are. There are no rules of getting extra attacks with extra two handed weapons either.:) you Can hold all the two handed weapons you want but by the rules you dont get any extra attacks from it:(

I'm not getting extra attacks from extra hands though? I'm getting them from twf's extra attacks granted to off hand weapons.

By BAB 6/1 I'd swing at 2/2 and at -3/-3 as per standard itwf

But the two weapon figthing rules is about Holding a weapon in your off-hand not off hands.

Here is the rules as they appear in my book:
"Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6."
This is why you are totally in GM Fiat land.

Grand Lodge

Indeed.

The murky waters you are traveling into, is why I keep suggesting things that will work with less rules mess.

Even a build throwing Greatswords will be easier.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.

Sure, because it's granted a special ability by the archetype to do so.

Without the archetype, it can't wield two bows.

Grand Lodge

Claxon wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.

Sure, because it's granted a special ability by the archetype to do so.

Without the archetype, it can't wield two bows.

I think I know where you are going with this.

Please don't.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Claxon wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.

Sure, because it's granted a special ability by the archetype to do so.

Without the archetype, it can't wield two bows.

I think I know where you are going with this.

Please don't.

I wasn't going anywhere else with that. I'm really not sure what you're talking about.

Grand Lodge

Claxon wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Claxon wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.

Sure, because it's granted a special ability by the archetype to do so.

Without the archetype, it can't wield two bows.

I think I know where you are going with this.

Please don't.

I wasn't going anywhere else with that. I'm really not sure what you're talking about.

Here, which is also where you can discuss, what I suspect you were about discuss.

Sovereign Court

I'm having some difficulty visualizing wielding two greatswords simultaneously. You can't really make the kind of sweeping motions you'd like that way.

Anyway, wouldn't it be more effective to wield a greatsword, protect yourself with a shield, and have one hand left over to have your cake and eat it too?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Society Subscriber

Or be a titan mauler and wield an appropriate sized greatsword in each hand.

You'll only be getting a -8/-12/-12/-12 attack penalty.
Taking the multi weapon fighting feat turns it into: -6/-6/-6/-6

You'll probably not hit much, but who cares, you're wielding 4 greatswords.


Claxon wrote:
Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

Yes, yes it is. I mean, it's just silly! We have hands that are-[REDACTED FOR ACTUALLY USEFUL COMMENTS' SAKE]

Cap. Darling wrote:
And here we are. There are no rules of getting extra attacks with extra two handed weapons either.:) you Can hold all the two handed weapons you want but by the rules you dont get any extra attacks from it:(
Cap. Darling wrote:

But the two weapon figthing rules is about Holding a weapon in your off-hand not off hands.

Here is the rules as they appear in my book:
"Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6."
This is why you are totally in GM Fiat land.

However though, that restriction in terms of extra hands =/= extra hands of effort is mostly something surrounding vestigial arms. More yet, as is commonly pointed out in this context; the rules mostly talk about two-handed races.

More yet, as armor spikes and vestigial arms shows us, the concept "hands" in rules text is divorced from hands, the appendage common to primates on Earth (and PF races).
Given the race in question qualifies for multi-weapon fighting, some different things are established - namely that in this situation, we're capable of attacking with four hands/"hands".
I can only think if that's the rules as it stands, then the fact we're able to use four "hands" to attack means we're able to use two two-handed weapons, using two "hands" each.

Ascalaphus wrote:
I'm having some difficulty visualizing wielding two greatswords simultaneously. You can't really make the kind of sweeping motions you'd like that way.

One held up by/above the head and another across the body, maybe carry one execution-style? There are various ways to hold a blade designed for two handed use. Though the latter of those above may be a bit unfeasible in combat for humans because of not defending yourself - it doesn't seem impossible on a four-armed race handling that with another sword.

Though the second of those always irks me since greatswords in PF are just S, no P or B. Despite both being historically extand uses.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Claxon wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Claxon wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Have you seen the Bow Nomad Ranger archetype for the Kasatha?

It allows you to dual wield Longbows.

Sure, because it's granted a special ability by the archetype to do so.

Without the archetype, it can't wield two bows.

I think I know where you are going with this.

Please don't.

I wasn't going anywhere else with that. I'm really not sure what you're talking about.
Here, which is also where you can discuss, what I suspect you were about discuss.

If you look through that thread (or rather just search) you'll see I've had no involvement with it. I hadn't even read through it at all. So no, I really wasn't.


Physically Unfeasible wrote:
Claxon wrote:
Of course, this post is probably about to send people into fits about imaginary hands.

Yes, yes it is. I mean, it's just silly! We have hands that are-[REDACTED FOR ACTUALLY USEFUL COMMENTS' SAKE]

Cap. Darling wrote:
And here we are. There are no rules of getting extra attacks with extra two handed weapons either.:) you Can hold all the two handed weapons you want but by the rules you dont get any extra attacks from it:(
Cap. Darling wrote:

But the two weapon figthing rules is about Holding a weapon in your off-hand not off hands.

Here is the rules as they appear in my book:
"Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6."
This is why you are totally in GM Fiat land.

However though, that restriction in terms of extra hands =/= extra hands of effort is mostly something surrounding vestigial arms. More yet, as is commonly pointed out in this context; the rules mostly talk about two-handed races.

More yet, as armor spikes and vestigial arms shows us, the concept "hands" in rules text is divorced from hands, the appendage common to primates on Earth (and PF races).
Given the race in question qualifies for multi-weapon fighting, some different things are established - namely that in this situation, we're capable of attacking with four hands/"hands".
I can only think if that's the rules as it stands, then the fact we're able to use four "hands" to attack means we're able to use two two-handed weapons, using two "hands" each....

How can a quote from the core rule book have anything to do with the vestigal arm Discovery? The rules talk about using a weapon in the off hand. If you want somthing else it is fine and May even be both fun and balanced but it is not included in the rules yet. At least i havent seen it.


Cap. Darling wrote:
How can a quote from the core rule book have anything to do with the vestigal arm Discovery? The rules talk about using a weapon in the off hand. If you want somthing else it is fine and May even be both fun and balanced but it is not included in the rules yet. At least i havent seen it.

Because in context you were discussing twf for using two hands;

Quote:
But the two weapon figthing rules is about Holding a weapon in your off-hand not off hands.

In the middle of a discussion on attempting to use twf for the purpose of attacking with a pair of greatswords, by use of four arms.

The only context that I know of with a four armed character that has been discussed, for comparison, is the vestigial arm discovery.
The point that I was trying to make subsequently is that the outlining of attacking with an off-hand didn't seem a wholly apt comparative.
My point was that two weapon fighting, looking at the context of that ability and further, for use of armour spikes with a two-handed weapon, the number of physical hands used doesn't seem to be what the rules actually directly refer to.

On the other hand (ugh, unavoidable pun), as I type this attempt to clarify - I do realize that those faqs are relatively resolved by reference of the semantic that hand=/=hands.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Nobody knows.

This is pretty much not covered, and even what is covered, is overwritten by unwritten rules.

You basically have to break down, and work with your DM, as to how he/she wants to run it.

Other than that, there is no real "right", or "wrong" answer.

+1 Ask your GM.

It is likely the unwritten rules would say that your max STR damage is 1.5 + 0.5 for each additional offhand. That is a total of 2.5 STR damage. So at my table I'd say you can do one two handed for 1.5 STR and the other two handed for 1.0 STR.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Hydromancer wrote:

I did some preliminary googling to find any kind of answer and so far I've only found threads pertaining to the Alch's vestigial arm discovery and it's prohibition on gaining extra attacks.

Can a Kasatha wield a pair of greatswords two handed; one in each pair of hands?

How would the strength bonuses work for that? 1.5, 0.75 (1.5 x 0.5)? Would double slice bring that back to 1.5, 1.5?

Or would it be 1.5, 0.5 with double slice bringing it to 1.5, 1.0? Kind of defeats the idea of wielding a pair of two handers though.

I know there are going to be massive attack penalties for using two non-light weapons with two-weapon fighting.

I also found the feat 'multi-weapon fighting.' Is this legal for players to take? Can I take Improved Two-Weapon fighting and Greater Two-Weapon fighting to gain a 2nd and 3rd iterative attack on the other greatsword if I take this in replacement of the original TWF?

-Hydro

The real question is what happens if you do wield these weapons in this manner?

Two Weapon Fighting specifies wielding One handed and Light weapons, but does not mention Two Handed weapons at all, for or against. You would also only get 1.0 and .5 str bonus for the weapons (Main and Off, in that order) no matter their size or how they are wielded. (again, TWF)

Even Mulit Weapon Fighting (Monster feat) uses only one handed (or less) weapons.

My stance? Nope, not going to happen without a feat/archtype.

And the bow thing? Yeah, look on the other thread. I don't think we need to say all that again.


Kasatha get 4 attacks at level 1 and and additional at 6BAB. You csn't duel wield teo handers. But there is a race in 3.5 from dragon compendium that can.


I know it is a bit off topic but: Optimally a spear/haliberd/glaive/reach two hand weapon in main and secondary plus two offhand weapons or one offhand and a shield would make a powerful combatant. Gives a lot of options in mixed range combat.

Grand Lodge

Musketeer Gunslinger is a good choice.

With a bonus to Dex and Wisdom, it's practically built it.

Since it's hitting touch, you won't have to worry about not having a Light weapon in your off-hand.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
The Storm of Swords wrote:
Kasatha get 4 attacks at level 1 and and additional at 6BAB. You csn't duel wield teo handers. But there is a race in 3.5 from dragon compendium that can.

3.5?

You do know that the 3.5 tail end brought out a lot of broken "goodness" at the tail end of it's lifespan before 4dventer was thrust upon the world.

I would hope that some of that warped *cough*nineswords*coughs* crunchy, and game busting releases is not considered to make the way to our beloved Pathfinder game.

BTW, the default Kasatha is a Monk.

Grand Lodge

thaX wrote:


I would hope that some of that warped *cough*nineswords*coughs* crunchy, and game busting releases is not considered to make the way to our beloved Pathfinder game.

Barring a few outliers, Tome of Battle was one of the most well balanced pieces of 3.5 material, so...

Also, Dragon Compendium was a Paizo product, fyi.


This one has no answer in the rules, but it deserves one. I would suggest everyone press the FAQ button.


wraithstrike wrote:
This one has no answer in the rules, but it deserves one. I would suggest everyone press the FAQ button.

I actually hadn't thought of pressing that. Thanks for the heads up.

A FAQ on this would be amazing.

Pressed.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Here's what I see when looking at the pieces of this puzzle:

Two-Weapon Fighting: "Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting."

There is no restriction on what types of weapons you use listed in the feat.

The normal listing for using two weapons without the feat says: "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light."

Again, no restriction on what types of weapons are allowed. This does bring up a point for GM rule though, in that it specifies different penalties for off-hand and primary hand attacks, either of which could apply to the weapon in your primary and one off-hand.

Two Handed Weapons says: "Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon (see FAQ at right for more information.)"

Which doesn't say you can't have just one. In fact, per RAW, you'd be able to do this and you'd get 1-1/2 STR to both weapons' damages.

I do think it'd be nice for Paizo to clarify. As this is the only race where this situation can even come up, it's likely they simply didn't consider this option for the Kasatha.


Thedukk wrote:

Here's what I see when looking at the pieces of this puzzle:

Two-Weapon Fighting: "Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting."

There is no restriction on what types of weapons you use listed in the feat.

The normal listing for using two weapons without the feat says: "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light."

Again, no restriction on what types of weapons are allowed. This does bring up a point for GM rule though, in that it specifies different penalties for off-hand and primary hand attacks, either of which could apply to the weapon in your primary and one off-hand.

Two Handed Weapons says: "Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon (see FAQ at right for more information.)"

Which doesn't say you can't have just one. In fact, per RAW, you'd be able to do this and you'd get 1-1/2 STR to both weapons' damages.

I do think it'd be nice for Paizo to clarify. As this is the only race where this situation can even come up, it's likely they simply didn't consider this option for the Kasatha.

The only reason 2 handed people can't do it because Paizo's FAQ said it can't happen anymore. Before that FAQ nothing was stopping it. It is just an example of the players coming up with unintended results.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
wraithstrike wrote:
Thedukk wrote:

Here's what I see when looking at the pieces of this puzzle:

Two-Weapon Fighting: "Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting."

There is no restriction on what types of weapons you use listed in the feat.

The normal listing for using two weapons without the feat says: "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light."

Again, no restriction on what types of weapons are allowed. This does bring up a point for GM rule though, in that it specifies different penalties for off-hand and primary hand attacks, either of which could apply to the weapon in your primary and one off-hand.

Two Handed Weapons says: "Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon (see FAQ at right for more information.)"

Which doesn't say you can't have just one. In fact, per RAW, you'd be able to do this and you'd get 1-1/2 STR to both weapons' damages.

I do think it'd be nice for Paizo to clarify. As this is the only race where this situation can even come up, it's likely they simply didn't consider this option for the Kasatha.

The only reason 2 handed people can't do it because Paizo's FAQ said it can't happen anymore. Before that FAQ nothing was stopping it. It is just an example of the players coming up with unintended results.

Can you link to that FAQ? I can't find it. I did find something interesting, though: "Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon?

No.
Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

This pretty blatantly states that it only applies because using two hands is considered all your hands (normally). This suggests that if you have more than two hands, you could get away with it.

EDIT: There's a good chance that's the one you meant... o_O


2 people marked this as a favorite.

There is precedent for Kasatha using two two-handed weapons, see

:
The Divinity Drive


That is the one I meant, I say that because in 3.5 it was allowed, but PF using the same words with a different meaning. I am sure they knew how it worked, but until the FAQ came up no change was offered. If that was always the intent it would have been stated when the game was created. Basically what happens is sometimes the FAQ is used to make what we call "stealth errata". Ability modifiers not being added twice despite not stacking by the rules in the book is an example of this.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
captain yesterday wrote:
There is precedent for Kasatha using two two-handed weapons, see ** spoiler omitted **

For those of us without the book, could you spoil it? :P


Sure :-)

Iron Gods spoilers ahead!!

:
there is a Kasatha fighter rocking two Chainsaws, even has a picture, pretty bad ass :-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
captain yesterday wrote:

Sure :-)

Iron Gods spoilers ahead!!
** spoiler omitted **

TheDukk actually found that for me and we took a look at it. THAT'S AWESOME and does indeed set a precedent.

Thanks for the find!

Still keeping the FAQ pressed in hopes of a more official answer, but that sounds like enough to convince most gm's i'd be likely to encounter.

Divinity Drive spoilers:

Spoiler:
The picture in case anyone else is curious. They do indeed wield 2x chainsaws (2 handed weapons) and they are indeed medium.

She is also using TWF and ITWF.


Until there's a official FAQ on the subject (and it may never will), I suggest writting a few options and asking other to click "Favorite" on the one they think is best.

I think it should work like this:

BAB +11, 4 arms, 2 2HW (Ex: Greatsword & Greataxe), Greater Multiweapon Fighting

Main Hand + 1 Off-Hand (STR 1.0 + 0.5 = 1.5)

1 Off-Hand + 1 Off-Hand (STR 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.0)

-2 Penalty for Multiweapon Fighting

Main Hand: 3 attacks (BAB +11/+6/+1) 2d6 + STR x1.5

Off-Hand: 3 atttacks (BAB +11/+6/+1) 1d12 + STR x1.0

*There is no obligation to use either the Greatsword of the Greataxe as always the Main Hand, you can choose which you'll use as the Main Hand every round, but once you chose one and made your first attack as Main Hand, the other weapon must be used as Off-Hand in this round.


Kchaka wrote:

Until there's a official FAQ on the subject (and it may never will), I suggest writting a few options and asking other to click "Favorite" on the one they think is best.

I think it should work like this:

BAB +11, 4 arms, 2 2HW (Ex: Greatsword & Greataxe), Greater Multiweapon Fighting

Greatsword = Main Hand + 1 Off-Hand (STR 1.0 + 0.5 = 1.5)

Greataxe = 1 Off-Hand + 1 Off-Hand (STR 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.0)

-2 Penalty for Multiweapon Fighting

Greatsword: 3 attacks (BAB +11/+6/+1) 2d6 + STR x1.5

Greataxe: 3 atttacks (BAB +11/+6/+1) 1d12 + STR x1.0

is there a greater version of multiweapon figthing?


Also, I think it may be possible for a 4 armed creature to hold 3 2HWs and choose which one they'll use to make their attacks in the round by switching the 4th hand grip as a free action.


Cap. Darling wrote:
is there a greater version of multiweapon figthing?

Pathfinder cut those feats.

There is much disagreement, but ITWF/GTWF should still be available with MWF as the prereq.


thaX wrote:
The Storm of Swords wrote:
Kasatha get 4 attacks at level 1 and and additional at 6BAB. You csn't duel wield teo handers. But there is a race in 3.5 from dragon compendium that can.

3.5?

You do know that the 3.5 tail end brought out a lot of balanced goodness at the tail end of it's lifespan.

I would hope that some of that awesome *cough*nineswords*coughs* crunchy,

Just thought I'd fix that for you. The further back into 3E you go- in general- the less balanced the material gets, until make it all the way back to the PHB where you have Fighters and Monks and Rogues [and 3E Paladins and Rangers] expected to be in the same campaign as Druids, Clerics and Wizards.

Early material maintained that dichotomy, releasing mostly crap with a couple gems here and there, whereas WotC sort of seemed to figure it out as 3.5 wore on, until they flew the coop with the creation of 4E.


Cap. Darling wrote:
is there a greater version of multiweapon figthing?

No, not RAW, but I think it doesn't really matter, it's not like the Kasatha or anything with 4 arms is a balanced RAW race either, so what matters is you'll are going to make a 4 armed char or not, and there would be no point in doing so without Greater Multiweapon Fighting.

It's all unofficial, so I just wanted so share an opinion on how I would do it, and thought others should do the same, until we get an official FAQ.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

Kchaka wrote:
Also, I think it may be possible for a 4 armed creature to hold 3 2HWs and choose which one they'll use to make their attacks in the round by switching the 4th hand grip as a free action.

I don't. So until there is an FAQ, there will be disagreement on what the rules say.


Kchaka wrote:

Until there's a official FAQ on the subject (and it may never will), I suggest writting a few options and asking other to click "Favorite" on the one they think is best.

I think it should work like this:

BAB +11, 4 arms, 2 2HW (Ex: Greatsword & Greataxe), Greater Multiweapon Fighting

Main Hand + 1 Off-Hand (STR 1.0 + 0.5 = 1.5)

1 Off-Hand + 1 Off-Hand (STR 0.5 + 0.5 = 1.0)

-2 Penalty for Multiweapon Fighting

Main Hand: 3 attacks (BAB +11/+6/+1) 2d6 + STR x1.5

Off-Hand: 3 atttacks (BAB +11/+6/+1) 1d12 + STR x1.0

*There is no obligation to use either the Greatsword of the Greataxe as always the Main Hand, you can choose which you'll use as the Main Hand every round, but once you chose one and made your first attack as Main Hand, the other weapon must be used as Off-Hand in this round.

The best we have is a precedent in The Divinity Drive (part 6 of the iron gods adventure path.)

RAW, the off-hand greatsword would receive full 1.5x str because the rules for 'half damage' are strictly tied to one-handed and light weapons.

What you've listed about off hands being only worth 0.5 str and mainhands being worth 1.0 str is nowhere near what the book has stated or implied written or otherwise.

Damage modifiers are tied to the type of weapon being used, hence the rules for damage modifiers being listed only in the equipment section.

I would think if it were any different they'd be listed with the TWF rules or in the combat section of the CRB.

Equipment: Weapons: Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons wrote:

This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.

Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only. An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.

One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.

Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon

Take special note that nowhere does it specify main or off hands regarding 2 handed weapons, just that a 2 handed weapon will require 2 hands to wield effectively.

Spoilers for the iron gods:

Spoiler:

The creature in question has:

15 BAB, Weapon Focus (+1), Greater Weapon Focus (+1), weapon training III (+3) for a total of +20 to their attack.

The listed attacks go:
+16/+11/+6 +16/+11
As per TWF and ITWF using two non-light weapons. (-4/-4, -9/-9, -14/x)

The creature itself has NOT taken MWF and honestly I don't think any gm's I know of allow the use of monster feats anyways.


Hydromancer wrote:
The creature itself has NOT taken MWF and honestly I don't think any gm's I know of allow the use of monster feats anyways.

This varies wildly as I don't know a dm that wouldn't allow them.

PC's can get winged flight (flyby, hover, wingover and druids can get huge enough for snatch), get multiple natural attacks (Improved Natural Attack, multiattack), natural armor (Improved Natural Armor), SLA (Ability Focus, Empower Spell-Like Ability, Quicken Spell-Like Ability) and awesome blow is already built into the brawler. Even looking at core races/classes, you can get all the abilities to qualify for every one except multiweapon fighting.


graystone wrote:
Hydromancer wrote:
The creature itself has NOT taken MWF and honestly I don't think any gm's I know of allow the use of monster feats anyways.

This varies wildly as I don't know a dm that wouldn't allow them.

PC's can get winged flight (flyby, hover, wingover and druids can get huge enough for snatch), get multiple natural attacks (Improved Natural Attack, multiattack), natural armor (Improved Natural Armor), SLA (Ability Focus, Empower Spell-Like Ability, Quicken Spell-Like Ability) and awesome blow is already built into the brawler. Even looking at core races/classes, you can get all the abilities to qualify for every one except multiweapon fighting.

Perhaps this is just coming from the DM's I've played with.

I'd still be allowed to take TWF I think unless the DM forced the text of the "MWF replaces TWF" on my character, but at that point I'd withdraw from the campaign if he further disallowed ITWF and GTWF because MWF is not TWF.

Looking at that exact text of MWF, if an alchemist has 2 arms and takes TWF, then gains an extra arm through vestigial arm, he would auto-replace TWF with MWF at that point (even though Vestigial Arms do not allow extra attacks, he still meets the requirements for MWF replacing TWF.)

1 to 50 of 105 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Kasatha, TWF, and 2 handers All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.