Qaianna |
Qaianna wrote:Wouldn't this all be moot if you just used an AoO at the intended 10' range? I understand wanting to cover as much territory as possible, but that's the point of a polearm, right? (Well, the point is the bit that does d8 damage if it's a longspear, but you know what I mean.) How often will you WANT to have someone within 5' when swinging that glaive around?Run up next to enemy magic user, since you threaten near and far they can't just 5' step to cast.
I can see that. Problem is, you're now using your close weapon to smush him, and not the long pointy thing. Is that tradeoff worth it?
Actually, I'm now imagining someone whose primary weapon would be a cestus or armour spikes, with a secondary weapon of a polearm, just for this kind of thing. Not sure if it's a GOOD one but it might at least be interesting.
Charon's Little Helper |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Actually, I'm now imagining someone whose primary weapon would be a cestus or armour spikes, with a secondary weapon of a polearm, just for this kind of thing. Not sure if it's a GOOD one but it might at least be interesting.
I've seen that done with a Brawler and a longspear. Basically your standard unarmed Brawler who carried around a longspear for AOOs & just such situations. The longspear wasn't amazing - but it was just the frosting on the build anyway.
Chess Pwn |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chess Pwn wrote:Qaianna wrote:Wouldn't this all be moot if you just used an AoO at the intended 10' range? I understand wanting to cover as much territory as possible, but that's the point of a polearm, right? (Well, the point is the bit that does d8 damage if it's a longspear, but you know what I mean.) How often will you WANT to have someone within 5' when swinging that glaive around?Run up next to enemy magic user, since you threaten near and far they can't just 5' step to cast.I can see that. Problem is, you're now using your close weapon to smush him, and not the long pointy thing. Is that tradeoff worth it?
Actually, I'm now imagining someone whose primary weapon would be a cestus or armour spikes, with a secondary weapon of a polearm, just for this kind of thing. Not sure if it's a GOOD one but it might at least be interesting.
I've designed a monk that fights with kicks and carries a reach weapon for the free AoO and to threaten those dang casters.
graystone |
Qaianna wrote:Actually, I'm now imagining someone whose primary weapon would be a cestus or armour spikes, with a secondary weapon of a polearm, just for this kind of thing. Not sure if it's a GOOD one but it might at least be interesting.I've seen that done with a Brawler and a longspear. Basically your standard unarmed Brawler who carried around a longspear for AOOs & just such situations. The longspear wasn't amazing - but it was just the frosting on the build anyway.
yep, I've done this. Pummeling charge with a kick. Then use my Boarding Pike of Repelling, at 10' or 20' depending on the situation. It worked well in skulls and shackles.
To CountofUndolpho: Think about TWF and thrown weapons. If I throw a dagger with both hands in TWF, does that mean I can't threaten or make an AoO with armor spikes or an unarmed attack? If not, how is it different that a polearm and armor spikes/unarmed attacks? In both cases, your hands of effort where used up during your round.
Serisan |
My 30' reach Bloodrager/Brawler/Cavalier and I will not be tempted into turning this into another "DC to jump a 10' pit" thread. The answer is that I tripped you and you're prone. If you were within 15', you've also been moved to exactly 15' with my feet, unless there's a cliff or other hazardous terrain for me to Ki Throw you at.
The rule is that:
You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack.
If you can individually make an attack with either weapon, you threaten with that weapon. As a side note, "expect table variation" is not intended to paper over a poor understanding of FAQs and the CRB.
Letric |
My 30' reach Bloodrager/Brawler/Cavalier and I will not be tempted into turning this into another "DC to jump a 10' pit" thread. The answer is that I tripped you and you're prone. If you were within 15', you've also been moved to exactly 15' with my feet, unless there's a cliff or other hazardous terrain for me to Ki Throw you at.
The rule is that:
CRB wrote:You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack.If you can individually make an attack with either weapon, you threaten with that weapon. As a side note, "expect table variation" is not intended to paper over a poor understanding of FAQs and the CRB.
Between you and everyone else my build idea is now possible. It's nothing out of this word, but I wanted to be able to threaten without having to switch weapons every single time.
I'm a cleric, I won't have prof for fancy 2h weapons and 1h weapons, so my damage will have to rely on bonuses and not weapon dmg
CountofUndolpho |
To CountofUndolpho: Think about TWF and thrown weapons. If I throw a dagger with both hands in TWF, does that mean I can't threaten or make an AoO with armor spikes or an unarmed attack? If not, how is it different that a polearm and armor spikes/unarmed attacks? In both cases, your hands of effort where used up during your round.
Daggers thrown or otherwise and Armour Spikes(AS) can be used simultaneously, you can TWF with a combination of them so you can AoO with either a dagger(if still in hand) or AS if you like. You have to be able to make an attack with a weapon to take AoOs if you can't use both weapons simultaneously as when you are using a 2H and AS then how can you choose which one to take the AoO with? You are using one or the other.
CountofUndolpho |
CountofUndolpho wrote:Charon's Little Helper wrote:Show me the rule that says anyone other than a Monk can Unarmed Strike with their hands full and I'll happily say "Ok I thought it was about balance in the game to stop TWF with kick and 2H weapon but I'm obviously wrong sorry" and play it the way you do.Okay - but that's not actually a valid argument. Nowhere do the rules call out 'unarmed strikes' as being only a punch.
You need to actually have rules backing you up to make valid statements on a rules forum.
Anything else is just a house-rule. (Which is fine - do what you want - just don't pretend it's an actual rule.)
1. I don't actually need to. Basic logic dictates that you can do all sorts of unarmed strikes, and Pathfinder is a permissive system. But if you insist...
2.
SRD wrote:Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:Edit: Semi-ninja'd
Er...that doesn't say anyone can use unarmed strikes with their hands full soo...? It also implies that you need to unarmed to use such attacks I must admit I thought that was the point of the Monks Unarmed Strikes/Flurry that they can use them in any combination weapons(inc. 2H) or unarmed strikes. That's why the entries are different. Why would they include a reminder under a class that uses unarmed strikes differently from everyone else?
claudekennilol |
Charon's Little Helper wrote:Er...that doesn't say anyone can use unarmed strikes with their hands full soo...?
2.SRD wrote:Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
It doesn't? So I need empty hands to kick/head butt something? How about you come stand in front of me, give me something to hold in both my hands and we see if I can kick you?
Orfamay Quest |
CountofUndolpho wrote:It doesn't? So I need empty hands to kick/head butt something? How about you come stand in front of me, give me something to hold in both my hands and we see if I can kick you?Charon's Little Helper wrote:Er...that doesn't say anyone can use unarmed strikes with their hands full soo...?
2.SRD wrote:Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
Isn't there a quote somewhere in one of the books that says something like "except where noted otherwise, the fantasy world runs like the real world?" This is why they don't need to have rules about how humans have two eyes and no wings....
alexd1976 |
Charon's Little Helper wrote:Er...that doesn't say anyone can use unarmed strikes with their hands full soo...? It also implies that you need to unarmed to use such attacks I must admit I thought that was the point of the Monks Unarmed Strikes/Flurry that they can use them in any combination weapons(inc. 2H) or unarmed strikes. That's why the entries are different. Why would they include a reminder under a class that uses unarmed strikes differently from everyone else?CountofUndolpho wrote:Charon's Little Helper wrote:Show me the rule that says anyone other than a Monk can Unarmed Strike with their hands full and I'll happily say "Ok I thought it was about balance in the game to stop TWF with kick and 2H weapon but I'm obviously wrong sorry" and play it the way you do.Okay - but that's not actually a valid argument. Nowhere do the rules call out 'unarmed strikes' as being only a punch.
You need to actually have rules backing you up to make valid statements on a rules forum.
Anything else is just a house-rule. (Which is fine - do what you want - just don't pretend it's an actual rule.)
1. I don't actually need to. Basic logic dictates that you can do all sorts of unarmed strikes, and Pathfinder is a permissive system. But if you insist...
2.
SRD wrote:Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:Edit: Semi-ninja'd
It actually explicitly and clearly states that you can kick or headbutt, your hands are irrelevant. Empty, full, this doesn't affect the ability to perform the other attacks.
Unless YOU can find something saying that holding stuff in your hands PREVENTS you from kicking...
I used to have your point of view, but my player beat me over the head with his feet while holding rulebooks in his hands.
Armor spikes are annoying, but totally legal.
Future Alien Overlord |
claudekennilol wrote:Isn't there a quote somewhere in one of the books that says something like "except where noted otherwise, the fantasy world runs like the real world?" This is why they don't need to have rules about how humans have two eyes and no wings....CountofUndolpho wrote:It doesn't? So I need empty hands to kick/head butt something? How about you come stand in front of me, give me something to hold in both my hands and we see if I can kick you?Charon's Little Helper wrote:Er...that doesn't say anyone can use unarmed strikes with their hands full soo...?
2.SRD wrote:Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
Really? That seems silly that you humans only have TWO eyes. Lol *makes notes*
alexd1976 |
Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Sure, if your BAB is high enough, nothing stopping you.
Or, if you have two natural attacks, and armored spikes, absolutely.
You take a penalty on it though, pretty severe one... natural attacks would be at -5, ouch.
Armored gauntlet, I don't think so, unless it was:
left claw, left claw, right hand gauntlet iterative attacks.
So simple answer: YEP! Usually ok.
Ravingdork |
Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.
BigNorseWolf |
No already.
Pathfinder has a fundamentally different view of how armor spikes works than 3.5 did. In 3.5 they didn't occupy your hands and you could hit with your shoulder. In pathfinder they require the use of your hands, so this doesn't work.
No, its not explicit in the rules in the core rulebook.
Yes, thats still how it works.
alexd1976 |
DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Now now, what if they wanted to do two weapon fighting with their natural weapon (claw) and the gauntlet, and had a BAB of +6?
:D
DM Livgin |
DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Thank you Ravingdork, that gauntlet interaction is how I understood the one attack per limb rule. (barring iterative attacks).
Now, the TWF FAQ compares armor spikes to armored gauntlets.
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.
Here the FAQ compares attacking with armor spikes to attacking with the armored gauntlet, suggesting but not explicitly saying that armor spikes are a limb'd attack instead of some kind of slam or pseudo-monk-unarmed-strike.
So given the limb scarcity, you can not wield armor spikes and a two-handed weapon at the same time. (Maintaining the distinction between held and wielded.)
Orfamay Quest |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Now, the TWF FAQ compares armor spikes to armored gauntlets.
FAQ wrote: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.
My understanding is the TWF FAQ applies only to using the two-weapon fighting feat, and not to attacks of opportunity, or even to iterative attacks.
Charon's Little Helper |
Ravingdork wrote:DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Now now, what if they wanted to do two weapon fighting with their natural weapon (claw) and the gauntlet, and had a BAB of +6?
:D
No - nat attacks are outside of any iterative combo.
CountofUndolpho |
It doesn't? So I need empty hands to kick/head butt something? How about you come stand in front of me, give me something to hold in both my hands and we see if I can kick you?
Of course you could but unless you can raise a zombie to attack me whilst fireballing my cats and kick me with your hands full I don't see what that has to do with it.
We aren't talking real life we're talking the game. Other weapons specifically state in their descriptions if they allow you to attack whilst your hands are full, unarmed strikes don't, unless you are a Monk.Unless I just can't find where it says it works that way for everone?
alexd1976 |
alexd1976 wrote:No - nat attacks are outside of any iterative combo.Ravingdork wrote:DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Now now, what if they wanted to do two weapon fighting with their natural weapon (claw) and the gauntlet, and had a BAB of +6?
:D
Wait... wut?
I don't get what you mean by 'outside', clarification please?
It was my understanding that something with natural attacks could grab a sword (lets use a human/half dragon for this) and do the normal attack/attack with the sword, but still get the other claw and bite...
Unless the rules have changed?
The link refers to a two handed sword, but for my example, imagine a one handed weapon, leaving the claw and bite available.
Seranov |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No already.
Pathfinder has a fundamentally different view of how armor spikes works than 3.5 did. In 3.5 they didn't occupy your hands and you could hit with your shoulder. In pathfinder they require the use of your hands, so this doesn't work.
No, its not explicit in the rules in the core rulebook.
Yes, thats still how it works.
No, it isn't.
Armor spikes do not require the use of your hands. They require the use of one of your 'metaphorical hands', and this is only in regards to Two Weapon Fighting. Any weapon you can make an attack with, you may take Attacks of Opportunity with.
Can you Armor Spikes/Claw/Claw? Yes. Armor Spikes would be at Full BAB, both claws would be at -5, as they'd become secondary natural attacks.
Can you Gauntlet/Claw/Claw? No. The gauntlet is on one of the hands that has the claw, which means one of the claws and the gauntlet share the same metaphorical hand of effort.
Can you have a Longspear and Armor Spikes and threaten both 5 and 10 feet? Absolutely. You're not TWF'ing with them, you're simply wielding both.
Charon's Little Helper |
Charon's Little Helper wrote:alexd1976 wrote:No - nat attacks are outside of any iterative combo.Ravingdork wrote:DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Now now, what if they wanted to do two weapon fighting with their natural weapon (claw) and the gauntlet, and had a BAB of +6?
:D
Wait... wut?
I don't get what you mean by 'outside', clarification please?
Sorry - I suppose that I didn't explain that very well.
I just mean that - if you have BAB +11, you can't take 3 swings with a single claw, or use a sword for the 1st & last attack, and a claw on the same hand for the 2nd.
In the same way - TWF has no impact upon nat attacks - it's weapons only. In your previous post you seemed to be implying that TWF would have some impact upon using claw/armored gauntlet - it wouldn't.
CountofUndolpho |
For example a boot knife doesn't have the no hands rule attached e.g. "A barbazu beard can be used as an off-hand weapon that requires no hands to use; thus, a warrior could combine use of a barbazu beard with a two-handed weapon."
So after the Armour Spikes FAQ unless it says so it don't work so - to me - IMHO.
It's not about "reality" it's about the rules lots of things in PFRPG don't make sense/aren't real such as the Barbazu Beard, it's a game.
alexd1976 |
alexd1976 wrote:Charon's Little Helper wrote:alexd1976 wrote:No - nat attacks are outside of any iterative combo.Ravingdork wrote:DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Now now, what if they wanted to do two weapon fighting with their natural weapon (claw) and the gauntlet, and had a BAB of +6?
:D
Wait... wut?
I don't get what you mean by 'outside', clarification please?
Sorry - I suppose that I didn't explain that very well.
I just mean that - if you have BAB +11, you can't take 3 swings with a single claw, or use a sword for the 1st & last attack, and a claw on the same hand for the 2nd.
In the same way - TWF has no impact upon nat attacks - it's weapons only. In your previous post you seemed to be implying that TWF would have some impact upon using claw/armored gauntlet - it wouldn't.
Right-o. I'm still wrapping my head around the natural weapon stuff... thankfully I'm not GMing anymore, it's my GMs problem now. :D
alexd1976 |
For example a boot knife doesn't have the no hands rule attached e.g. "A barbazu beard can be used as an off-hand weapon that requires no hands to use; thus, a warrior could combine use of a barbazu beard with a two-handed weapon."
So after the Armour Spikes FAQ unless it says so it don't work so - to me - IMHO.
It's not about "reality" it's about the rules lots of things in PFRPG don't make sense/aren't real such as the Barbazu Beard, it's a game.
Did you just say that you have to use a boot knife in your hand?
CountofUndolpho |
CountofUndolpho wrote:Did you just say that you have to use a boot knife in your hand?For example a boot knife doesn't have the no hands rule attached e.g. "A barbazu beard can be used as an off-hand weapon that requires no hands to use; thus, a warrior could combine use of a barbazu beard with a two-handed weapon."
So after the Armour Spikes FAQ unless it says so it don't work so - to me - IMHO.
It's not about "reality" it's about the rules lots of things in PFRPG don't make sense/aren't real such as the Barbazu Beard, it's a game.
Only if you can see words that aren't actually there...
DM Livgin |
DM Livgin wrote:My understanding is the TWF FAQ applies only to using the two-weapon fighting feat, and not to attacks of opportunity, or even to iterative attacks.
Now, the TWF FAQ compares armor spikes to armored gauntlets.
FAQ wrote: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.
So the question is:
Does the FAQ only apply to the very narrow interaction between armor spikes, two handed weapons, and TWF?Or is it a more general clarification that armor spikes follow the rules of gauntlets?
alexd1976 |
alexd1976 wrote:Only if you can see words that aren't actually there...CountofUndolpho wrote:Did you just say that you have to use a boot knife in your hand?For example a boot knife doesn't have the no hands rule attached e.g. "A barbazu beard can be used as an off-hand weapon that requires no hands to use; thus, a warrior could combine use of a barbazu beard with a two-handed weapon."
So after the Armour Spikes FAQ unless it says so it don't work so - to me - IMHO.
It's not about "reality" it's about the rules lots of things in PFRPG don't make sense/aren't real such as the Barbazu Beard, it's a game.
I'm sorry, are you implying that you can't use a boot knife without a free hand?
Chess Pwn |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seranov wrote:Can you have a Longspear and Armor Spikes and threaten both 5 and 10 feet? Absolutely. You're not TWF'ing with them, you're simply wielding both.Does that work for you with spiked Gauntlet and Long Spear?
No because if you're wielding the long spear your hands are used and can't use the spiked Gauntlet.
About the Monk, it's the use of the word "Thus" in the block that means it's not something special to the monk. 'A monk can attack with [list of body parts] for unarmed attacks, THUS they can attack with hands full.' But we know that that list isn't comprehensive, and there's overlap with the generic Unarmed attack list. THUS anyone that can kick can attack with hands full.
alexd1976 |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seranov wrote:Can you have a Longspear and Armor Spikes and threaten both 5 and 10 feet? Absolutely. You're not TWF'ing with them, you're simply wielding both.Does that work for you with spiked Gauntlet and Long Spear?
I'm not sure about THAT one... releasing/grabbing a weapon such as the long spear is a free action, which you can't do outside of your turn...
So if you attacked, then declared you were switching to holding the spear in one hand, then yes.
Otherwise no.
Armor spikes aren't held in your hand though, so not relevant to the discussion really.
Ravingdork |
Ravingdork wrote:DM Livgin wrote:Yes to the first, no to the second. You can generally only get one attack per limb tops. Thus, a claw and an armored gauntlet can't be used together if they are on the same limb.Can you make two claw attacks and an armor spike attack?
Can you make two claw attacks and an armored gauntlet attack?
Now now, what if they wanted to do two weapon fighting with their natural weapon (claw) and the gauntlet, and had a BAB of +6?
:D
If you had iterative attacks, you'd have to make them with the spiked gauntlet. You could also use the claw from a different limb, albeit as a secondary natural attack. Dual-wielding or the Two-Weapon Fighting feats don't even come into play here.
If you were to use a two-handed weapon, you could not use the spikes or the claw, while two-weapon fighting (that is, actively getting bonus attacks for having an off-hand weapon) since the sword uses up both of your "limbs" worth of effort. You could, however, add a bite attack to your two-handed weapon routine as a secondary attack (since it does not use a limb).
Yes, it's weird.
Seranov |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seranov wrote:Can you have a Longspear and Armor Spikes and threaten both 5 and 10 feet? Absolutely. You're not TWF'ing with them, you're simply wielding both.Does that work for you with spiked Gauntlet and Long Spear?
No. But the armor spikes aren't on your hands. They're on your chest, shoulders, arms, legs, etc. Unless you are implying that you need to unscrew the armor spikes and stab someone with them like a dagger (hint: you don't), in which case I don't have any reason to reply to you willfully misinterpreting the rules.
Jeff Merola |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Orfamay Quest wrote:DM Livgin wrote:My understanding is the TWF FAQ applies only to using the two-weapon fighting feat, and not to attacks of opportunity, or even to iterative attacks.
Now, the TWF FAQ compares armor spikes to armored gauntlets.
FAQ wrote: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.So the question is:
Does the FAQ only apply to the very narrow interaction between armor spikes, two handed weapons, and TWF?
Or is it a more general clarification that armor spikes follow the rules of gauntlets?
Oh, that's easy. It's the former. The design team has explicitly stated that FAQs aren't meant to be used to state anything more than they explicitly do.
DM Livgin |
DM Livgin wrote:Oh, that's easy. It's the former. The design team has explicitly stated that FAQs aren't meant to be used to state anything more than they explicitly do.Orfamay Quest wrote:DM Livgin wrote:My understanding is the TWF FAQ applies only to using the two-weapon fighting feat, and not to attacks of opportunity, or even to iterative attacks.
Now, the TWF FAQ compares armor spikes to armored gauntlets.
FAQ wrote: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.So the question is:
Does the FAQ only apply to the very narrow interaction between armor spikes, two handed weapons, and TWF?
Or is it a more general clarification that armor spikes follow the rules of gauntlets?
I didn't know that. Thank You.
blackbloodtroll |
2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The OP has asked nothing about two-weapon fighting.
All rules and FAQs regarding two-weapon fighting, are irrelevant.
If you are not using the full round action, to two-weapon fight, then none of it applies.
Also, everyone, including the lowly Commoner, can hold a biscuit in each hand, and kick or headbutt.
No feats, or exotic training required.
CountofUndolpho |
The OP has asked nothing about two-weapon fighting.
All rules and FAQs regarding two-weapon fighting, are irrelevant.
If you are not using the full round action, to two-weapon fight, then none of it applies.
Also, everyone, including the lowly Commoner, can hold a biscuit in each hand, and kick or headbutt.
No feats, or exotic training required.
In regards to the OP and the discussion on Unarmed Attacks seeing as they don't threaten - whether or not you are holding biscuits - said Kung-Fu peasant has no relevance.
BUT whilst I appreciate that in real life I can hold a Long spear in my hands and try to kick someone:
A: I know for certain I wouldn't be able to kick as hard with the full range of motion as when I had my hands free. Feel free to experiment if you have a 9lb 8' long spear available (I suppose an 8' stick with a 1+ lb weight at one end and an 1/2lb weight at the other would do. Remember to try and hit a moving target.
B: This isn't real life it's a game and the only place it says within the PFRPG rules that you can unarmed strike whilst your hands are holding another item is under Monk and specifies "the Monk can".
C: The only place where which limb you are using to make one of your attacks is relevant in PFRPG is for Natural Attacks - that I know of; Though I am aware I am not as familiar with the rules as BBT and others on this forum and will happily stand corrected. Unarmed attacks are not natural attacks and are counted as a Light Weapon.
CountofUndolpho |
No. But the armor spikes aren't on your hands. They're on your chest, shoulders, arms, legs, etc. Unless you are implying that you need to unscrew the armor spikes and stab someone with them like a dagger (hint: you don't), in which case I don't have any reason to reply to you willfully misinterpreting the rules.
I was unaware that the position of armour spikes was specified anywhere can you quote the reference? I wonder why they don't give automatic damage when you Bull Rush? Also if that were the case why wouldn't you be able to TWF with them?
Perhaps, also, you could point out which rule I am wilfully misinterpreting?blackbloodtroll |
3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No.
You need no special training to kick, or to kick whilst holding something in your hands.
The Monk reminder is meaningless, to non-Monk characters, who fall under the default unarmed strike rules, which explicitly allow one to kick or headbutt enemies.
Don't fly back and forth between how it's a game, and it "doesn't makes sense in the real world", then use real world examples to protect your stance.
That completely devalues any sort of argument you may have, towards the subject of discussion.
Also, don't use "it hasn't been decided", or "expect table variance", when you are an obvious minority.
That gives a false sense of favor to your position, that does not exist.
Seranov |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seranov wrote:No. But the armor spikes aren't on your hands. They're on your chest, shoulders, arms, legs, etc. Unless you are implying that you need to unscrew the armor spikes and stab someone with them like a dagger (hint: you don't), in which case I don't have any reason to reply to you willfully misinterpreting the rules.I was unaware that the position of armour spikes was specified anywhere can you quote the reference? I wonder why they don't give automatic damage when you Bull Rush? Also if that were the case why wouldn't you be able to TWF with them?
Perhaps, also, you could point out which rule I am wilfully misinterpreting?
Armor spikes are not on your hands. Thus, you don't need a physical hand to use them. You need a metaphorical hand to use them for Two Weapon Fighting (in which case you need a 1H weapon to pair with them) but Attacks of Opportunity share exactly zero rules overlap with Two Weapon Fighting.
Archaeik |
CountofUndolpho wrote:Armor spikes are not on your hands. Thus, you don't need a physical hand to use them. You need a metaphorical hand to use them for Two Weapon Fighting (in which case you need a 1H weapon to pair with them) but Attacks of Opportunity share exactly zero rules overlap with Two Weapon Fighting.Seranov wrote:No. But the armor spikes aren't on your hands. They're on your chest, shoulders, arms, legs, etc. Unless you are implying that you need to unscrew the armor spikes and stab someone with them like a dagger (hint: you don't), in which case I don't have any reason to reply to you willfully misinterpreting the rules.I was unaware that the position of armour spikes was specified anywhere can you quote the reference? I wonder why they don't give automatic damage when you Bull Rush? Also if that were the case why wouldn't you be able to TWF with them?
Perhaps, also, you could point out which rule I am wilfully misinterpreting?
To illustrate this more fully, you only the penalty for fighting with two weapons during the action in which you do so...
Any AoO's, even if they interrupt your full attack action are not part of that action and do not take the penalty.