
zza ni |

hard one . rule wise it is not writen.
edit: about it being in the heavy blade category, it seems chakram is also in the light blade category. and if you check it out it is (of course) also in the thrown weapon group ,and there almost 90% of the weapons are light.
but we can take a few things into acount:
it whieght is 1 Lb, it deals 1d8 damage and it has a range of 30 ft.
now while very few light weapons deal 1d8 damage(which would sugjest it is one handed) the only one\2 handed weapons(looking at simple and martial, i have no interst to delve into exotic weapons who tend to "break" the normal weapons "rule" and as resolt need a feat to use) that wiegh only 1 LB are mostly made of wood or put on 2 handed weapons(scabards \beyonet) all the rest wigh more, and sometimes a lot more. while most of the ligth weapons that wigh over 1 lb are bludgening weapons who need the mass to actuly deal damage. that with the fact it has a range of 30 ft which implay that its not only light but very airodanamic (as a dager has only 10 ft of range) would sugjest it is a light weapon. (im taking into acount in light also how fast you can manuver it, having an airodinamic form should improve that ;).
1 more point in putting it in the light weapon category. i would assume using it two handed in melee is close to impossible(hand hold wise, beside your hands will get in each other's way.try it) which would point it out as light as you can use one handed melee weapons with 2 hands. but not light weapons.(imagine attacking holding a knife with two hands. then think of holding a chakram 2 handed. seems about the same problems in manuvering and striking with both,youl basicly have to wrap one hand with the other to have the greatest effect of momentum and striking power)

Kazaan |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Strictly speaking, it's "neither". It's not a light weapon so you can't get reduced TWF penalties or use it with finesse, but it also isn't a one-handed weapon so you can't two-hand it for extra Str or Power Attack to damage. It's a Ranged Weapon which can be used as melee, but not in any particular "handedness" category.

chbgraphicarts |

Good q. Only thing I can come up with is that it is in heavy blade catagory. I would say 1 handed melee based on that.
Blades, Heavy: Ankus, dueling sword, bastard sword, chakram, double chicken saber, double walking stick katana, elven curve blade, estoc, falcata, falchion, flambard, greatsword, great terbutje , katana, khopesh, klar, longsword, nine-ring broadsword, nodachi, scimitar, scythe, seven-branched sword, shotel, temple sword, terbutje, and two-bladed sword.
Blades, Light: bayonet, butterfly knife, butterfly sword, chakram, dagger, Deer horn knife, gladius, hunga munga, kama, katar, kerambit, kukri, machete, madu, manople, pata, quadrens, rapier, sawtooth sabre, scizore, shortsword, sica, sickle, starknife, swordbreaker dagger, sword cane, wakizashi, and war razor.
It's in Light Blades as well.
Chakram are also only 1lb. in weight and about 1 to 1.5 feet in diameter, meaning they're about as small as a buckler.

zza ni |

Strictly speaking, it's "neither". It's not a light weapon so you can't get reduced TWF penalties or use it with finesse, but it also isn't a one-handed weapon so you can't two-hand it for extra Str or Power Attack to damage. It's a Ranged Weapon which can be used as melee, but not in any particular "handedness" category.
i saw it that way, until iv seen it in both the light blade and heavy blade weapon group. that more inclined me to go with "ether" rather then "neither", but again, this is very much up to the gm to decide.

Kazaan |
If it were "either", then it would say so, such as with the Bastard Sword or other such weapons. The Fighter weapon category that it happens to be in doesn't indicate other properties of the weapon. Unarmed Strikes aren't natural weapons despite being in the Natural Weapons category and Temple Swords aren't in the Monk category despite being weapons with the Monk property. Heavy Blades mean they can be used in such a way that you're using the perpendicular impact of the blade to cut while Light blades use a parallel or angled slashing motion to cut. The Chakram, being round, can be used adequately in either way so weapon training for either purpose can be put to use, but it isn't listed as either a light weapon nor as a one-handed weapon; only as "can be used as a melee weapon".
Light weapons are all about ease of use. They don't weigh a lot and are well balanced. Though, keep in mind that certain light weapons weigh the same or more than certain higher-category weapons so absolute weight isn't the only factor. The Chakram is, by definition, not designed for melee combat and you even suffer a -1 penalty automatically for using it as such. They are supposed to be easier to use in the off-hand than a one-handed weapon. I assert that the Chakram doesn't qualify. It isn't well balanced as a melee weapon, it's harder to hit compared to, essentially, any other proper melee weapon with which you are equally proficient, and you threaten to cut yourself each time you attack with it. But, at the same time, it couldn't reasonably be wielded two-handed like a one-handed weapon could be. That's why I've concluded that it satisfies neither category and doesn't gain any benefits associated with those categories.

David Thomassen |

Sorry, but according to the PRD (vs D20 website) the Chakram is only in the "Blades, Heavy" group:
Blades, Heavy Bastard sword, chakram, double chicken saber, double walking stick katana, elven curve blade, falcata, falchion, great terbutje, greatsword, katana, khopesh, longsword, nine-ring broadsword, nodachi, rhoka sword, sawtooth sabre, scimitar, scythe, seven-branched sword, shotel, temple sword, terbutje, and two-bladed sword
Blades, Light Bayonet, butterfly sword, dagger, dogslicer, gladius, hunga munga, kama, kerambit, kukri, pata, quadrens, rapier, short sword, sica, sickle, starknife, sword cane, swordbreaker dagger, and wakizashi
This leads me to believe that the Chakram is not a light weapon, but is one handed, probably due to its unwieldy nature ('You can wield the chakram as a melee weapon, but it is not designed for such use')

David Thomassen |

Good find Graystone, but given that Ultimate Equipment came out after Humans of Golarion it has precedence for organised play. For a home game it now looks like a typo and should be removed from 'Blades, Heavy' and only be in 'Blades, Light'. As the role of errata has been taken over by the FAQ, I have marked your post to hopefully get this changed.

![]() |

Also relevant if you want to use this feat:
You hurl weapons with both hands and with great force, sometimes using a whirling technique to send your weapon flying through the air at tremendous speeds.Prerequisites: Str 15.
Benefit: Whenever you use two hands to throw a one-handed or two-handed weapon, you gain a bonus on damage rolls equal to 1-1/2 times your Strength bonus. Using two hands to throw any weapon requires only a standard action for you. If you also have the Quick Draw feat, you can throw two-handed weapons at your full normal rate of attacks.
Normal: You add your Strength bonus on thrown weapon damage, regardless of available hands. Throwing a two-handed weapon is a full-round action.
I've been wanting to build a throwing weapon specialist based on strength for a while. Between full BAB, Rapid shot and haste you're looking at substantial DPR if you can throw Chakrams with two hands. As a slayer or ranger you can even circumvent the need for DEX with ranger combat style:Archery and a Belt of Mighty Hurling. Chakrams also have more range than comparable weapons (Spear for example) and are a lot cheaper.

graystone |

Yes, all the additions in the Humans of Golarion lack the PFS seal of approval. As far as typo, that's hard to say. Humans added quite a few weapons that didn't have one before. As such, it's hard to say it's not an addition as the listing in UE says the lists need not be exclusive and tell you GM's may add to lists or create new ones. A listing from another official product seems like a reasonable place to find such an addition even if you don't find it automatically incorporated into group.