| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
stuffLook at this way. The weapon on the crafter's bench is a Two Handed Weapon. When the character picks it up, he wields it as he can or wants to. (Two Handed, or One Handed with a feat) He sees a second weapon (the same as the one he is holding), and it is still a Two Handed weapon, even though he is wielding the first in One Hand.
Weapons in Pathfinder do not have a handedness rating on their own. An unattended/unwielded weapon has no handedness category. They absolutely require a character to wield them before you can tell what handedness rules to use. Your assertion that "it is still a two handed weapon no matter what" is utter nonsense given the set of rules that we have and the way they interact.
Your continued and willful ignorance on this is not only going to confuse people new to the issue, it is also incredibly annoying to the people who are already familiar with it.
I have said it before. It is more likely that the character has a Light Weapon in the off-hand (Even provided for in Thunder and Fang feat) to offset penalties for TWF then it would for him to try to wield two big, heavy weapons.
This is not a supporting point for your argument, it's an example of mechanical optimization. The rules do not concern themselves with what is the best way to do something, they are there to list the ways that it is possible to do something.
Your usage of optimization to try and support an interpretation of the rules is yet another example of the underlying flaw in your understanding of rules systems in general, and pathfinder's rule system in particular.
The only suggestion I have for you is to go find a online course on logic, preferably symbolic logic, and take it before you continue attempting to interpret the rules (here is a free one). It will save both you and anyone who has to argue with you a lot of headaches.
This very likely looks like bashing or flaming, but I am not trying to insult you with this suggestion. I am by no means a perfectly logical thinker, but even I can see a flaw in your basic ability to reason and this is one way you may be able to fix it if you have any interest in doing so.
|
Weapons in Pathfinder do not have a handedness rating on their own. An unattended/unwielded weapon has no handedness category. They absolutely require a character to wield them before you can tell what handedness rules to use. Your assertion that "it is still a two handed weapon no matter what" is utter nonsense given the set of rules that we have and the way they interact.
The weapons charts are wrong, then?
How did you come to that conclusion?
Here, look at the rules....
Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: 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.
This is what the weapon is. Nothing from the other two section below changes this.
Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder.
So each weapon is keyed for a medium creature, with light weapon being a tiny object(two sizes down), a One Handed weapon being a Small object (one size down) and a Two Handed weapon being a Meduim object (Same size as character) This section in the original Player's Handbook was added in the 3.5 rules. It was never in 3.0.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
So this goes by what the designation of the weapon is, not the character's skill with the weapon.
Where does it say that the designation of the weapon is the result of anything other than how the weapon was made? I do not see it.
Yes, it's always a two handed weapon.
Unless you're larger than it. Then it is suddenly a one-handed weapon while never changing and actually still being a two-handed weapon at all times. So now it's a one-handed and a two-handed weapon.
Unless you're two steps larger than it. Then it is suddenly a light weapon and never changes it's category, while never changing and actually still being a two-handed weapon at all times, and also being a one-handed weapon at all times that never changes.
So, A weapon is a never changing weapon, that is always classified as the specific handedness innate to the weapon, two-handed, one-handed, and light, depending on your relational size to it, but not the relational effort to wield it.
How does this not make sense to you Ridiculon? This is completely clear to thaX that it works this way ;)
Where does it say that the designation of the weapon is the result of anything other than how the weapon was made? I do not see it.Thats incredible to me since you quoted it:
Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object. Instead, a weapon's size category is keyed to the size of the intended wielder. In general, a light weapon is an object two size categories smaller than the wielder, a one-handed weapon is an object one size category smaller than the wielder, and a two-handed weapon is an object of the same size category as the wielder."
This is the rule that decides which handedness category you use. It is dependent on the size of the intended wielder vs the size of the actual wielder.
As a simple example: take an object that is of small size and then sharpen one of the ends. Give that object to a small sized creature trained in its use and it becomes a two-handed weapon, using the two-handed weapons rule. Give that same object to a medium sized creature, trained to use the same shape but at a different scale(thus the negative to hit), and now its a one-handed weapon! Magic!
To be doubly clear lets re-read the first part of this rule:
Weapon Size: Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.
A weapon's size category isn't the same as its size as an object.
I have just realized that this may be where your confusion is stemming from. The weapon size category here is not equivalent to the handedness of the weapon. It is representative of the size of creature the weapon was designed for, which can tell you what handedness category the weapon will be in once there is a creature size category to compare it to.
Yes, it's always a two handed weapon.
Unless you're larger than it. Then it is suddenly a one-handed weapon while never changing and actually still being a two-handed weapon at all times. So now it's a one-handed and a two-handed weapon.
Unless you're two steps larger than it. Then it is suddenly a light weapon and never changes it's category, while never changing and actually still being a two-handed weapon at all times, and also being a one-handed weapon at all times that never changes.So, A weapon is a never changing weapon, that is always classified as the specific handedness innate to the weapon, two-handed, one-handed, and light, depending on your relational size to it, but not the relational effort to wield it.
How does this not make sense to you Ridiculon? This is completely clear to thaX that it works this way ;)
My office is kinda cold today, my hands are a little numb so typing is weird. Between my hands being frozen and my brain feeling like its melting from trying (and failing i think) to be civil to thaX my body sort of feels like an icyhot patch
Where does it say that the designation of the weapon is the result of anything other than how the weapon was made? I do not see it.
Here is where I broke down quite clearly where it says that the designation of a weapon is the effort it takes to wield and has nothing to do with the size of the weapon, nor is it innate to a weapon.
"Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: 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."
So it's saying that a medium two-handed weapon takes two-hands of effort for a medium character normally and thus the weapon IS CONSIDERED A TWO-HANDED WEAPON WHEN WIELDED. So if the effort needed decreases then it's designation decreases as it now takes less effort so it is considered less when wielded.
But you decided to not address the linked post then, so you probably will pass now too. And until you can read that post and understand the reasoning used to come up with it you'll not "see where it says that". Now if you can go and accurately address that, showing you understand why we'd think this way, and then provide the rules/dev quotes/something to show why we're incorrect in coming to our conclusion, we'll stop saying the same thing over and over.
*Can't believe I got sucked back in to this.
|
|
The size differences between the character and the object makes so the character wields it in a different way (or not at all). This is where your confusion is. The weapon itself is still made the same way, it's own designation never changes, it is how the character can or no longer can wield it that changes, not the weapon.
Notice, I separated the sections. One is used as reference to the other, but does not change the particulars of the other sections.
|
|
Where does it say that the designation of the weapon is the result of anything other than how the weapon was made? I do not see it.Here is where I broke down quite clearly where it says that the designation of a weapon is the effort it takes to wield and has nothing to do with the size of the weapon, nor is it innate to a weapon.
"Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: 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."
"when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category"
It is up there, a post right before yours.
There is one of three subjects that changes or supersedes this. When the weapon is of an Inappropriate size, when a weapon specifically has particulars that make it more difficult or easier for the character (See Bastard Sword and Lance), and when a Feat allow the use of a weapon not normally allows (These two feats in question or more, Titan Fighter abilities and so on).
The weapon itself is still made the same way, the weapon smith has no idea how the character is going to use the weapon he makes, it is the skill and art of how the character wields the weapon that changes how the weapon can be held, wielded or used.
I am not sure how else to explain this. Did you read the rules, or only a part of them?
Expect table variation, don't expect to be wielding two Two Handed Weapons in PFS, hope for a very lenient GM in a home game, as the rules are as they are, concentrating on one particular and ignoring the rest is not "R.A.W."
The weapon itself is still made the same way, the weapon smith has no idea how the character is going to use the weapon he makes, it is the skill and art of how the character wields the weapon that changes how the weapon can be held, wielded or used.
Where does it say that the designation of the weapon is the result of anything other than how the weapon was made? I do not see it.
"when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category"
It is up there, a post right before yours.
There is one of three subjects that changes or supersedes this. When the weapon is of an Inappropriate size, when a weapon specifically has particulars that make it more difficult or easier for the character (See Bastard Sword and Lance), and when a Feat allow the use of a weapon not normally allows (These two feats in question or more, Titan Fighter abilities and so on).
SEE RIGHT HERE YOU MAINTAIN THE PROPOSITION THAT IT NEVER CHANGES, YET YOU AGREE THAT IT CAN CHANGE AND SAY THAT THE FEATS IN QUESTION DO JUST THAT.
Like seriously. Stop accusing people of not reading the rule when you're ignoring the giant post I made to breakdown all the rules involved and explain how they are interacting. And stop accusing people of not reading the rules when you're seemingly contradicting yourself AND seeming to make up rules that you can use an Earthbreaker and a longsword but you can't use a longsword and an Earthbreaker because an earthbreaker must us a main hand when that is never specified anywhere in the rules to be true.
Like, I'm trying really hard to converse with you, but you seem to be being obtuse about it. You don't show that you're understanding our view, and we're being clear that we can't understand your reasoning. If you want to be clear you need to stop jumping around with all your posts, stop responding to just sections of people's posts. Like, make a post like the one I linked explaining your view and how and where all these differences are described. An alternative to that would be to see my post here that summarized my understanding of your view. If I'm incorrect in that summary, addressing the points I'm misunderstanding and clarifying what you mean would work too.
yes. 18 str is a +4 mod. times 1.5 for two handing = 6.The extra +2 comes from wielding it in two hands. Her base strength is 18, which gives her a damage modifier of +6 for using what is effectively a two-handed weapon. You got that for your attack bonus. Think you accidentally used the attack bonus for your damage calculation, instead of her STR bonus.I'm in a hurry, so I'll address just this point by asking if you can please show me the math. :-)
Okay, I see my mistake now. Thanks.
when a Feat allow the use of a weapon not normally allows (These two feats in question or more, Titan Fighter abilities and so on).
The weapon itself is still made the same way, the weapon smith has no idea how the character is going to use the weapon he makes, it is the skill and art of how the character wields the weapon that changes how the weapon can be held, wielded or used.
This is what I don't get. You agree that feats change how a character is allowed to wield a weapon. But you disagree that a character can wield the weapon differently in the specific context of TWF.
That's why I'm stumped here. That's literally contradictory. "Ordinarily you cannot wield this weapon in one hand because of the rules. But if you have this ability, you can." Followed immediately by, "You cannot wield that weapon in one hand like that because of the original rule that I just set was superseded by this ability."
Either the ability in question overrides that rule or it does not. Every aspect of what we're talking about here has to do with how one wields a weapon and only that. So why are you treating those abilities differently based on how a character tries to wield the weapon? That's expressly when the basic rule is not supposed to function because the ability overrides that.
|
|
It supersedes the limit of wielding the two handed weapon in Two Hands.
The size of the weapon didn't change, the skill of the character in wielding that weapon beyond a normal means is what changed.
I know, it seems like I am being somewhat of a monkey here, hands over the ears and eyes rolled up.
I did respond to the post you linked, and other posts. I am trying to clarify the specific mention to which the subject is based on, once that is clear then what can come after should be also. I am not picking and choosing so much as I am trying to explain why one would not simply call a weapon this or that on a whim.
As the weapon is being wielded, it is treated as One Handed or Two Handed, depending on how the character wields it. The weapon itself is still what it is, though, independent on skill, size or material.
When the weapon is wielded beyond it's normal means, either a feat, ability or spell is allowing for it or it has a magical property that allows for it. At no time does the weapon suddenly change it's own makeup and become something else.
The rules I quoted above comes in three parts. Each are independent of the other, adjustments made for the character skill or size.
Now, if you have a GM or home game that allows for this, by all means, go for it. I can not tell the person what to do in his own game. If you play the organized Society game, expect to be disappointed, as most competent GM's will tell you the same as I am, that a character can not wield two of them or an oversized Two Handed Weapon. (Titan Mauler and Titan Fighter aside) Not with these feats or those like them.
The feats allows the use of a Two Handed weapon in one hand, and allows for TWF with that single two handed weapon with a one handed or light weapon in the other hand. The weapon itself, while considered One Handed for effects from feats and abilities while being wielded in such a way, is still a Two Handed weapon.
The earlier links went to a weapon that is a bigger flail like thing, I am guessing that it was because of Copyright issues and the weapon is not in the PRD. Someone quoted the feat earlier, but I do not know if it was the whole feat that was quoted and, of course, the description was never proffered. Is there anything in the feat that says two of the weapons can be used when TWF? (Other than counting as a One Handed Weapon) Thunder and Fang does not, in either version.
Perhaps one thing is that the phrase used in that particular feat was one that should have been the same as Thunder and Fang rather then what it actually says, though it means the same thing. Wield this Two Handed weapon in one hand.
Are you referring to Chain Flail Master? It's the Dorn-Dergar version of "wield this weapon as a one-handed weapon". It's out of the Dwarves of Golarion or whatever where it's specifically referred to as Dorn-Dergar Master (as it is labeled in the URL of this link) - it's probably a copyright thing.
You can use a chain-flail [Dwarven Dorn-Dergar] as a one-handed weapon. When using it one-handed, changing whether it’s a normal or reach weapon is a full-round action.
Straight up, it says wield it as a one-handed weapon. One-handed weapons can be used in your off-hand. So can I not wield two Dorn-Dergars at once with this ability? Both are being wielded "as one-handed weapons" per the language of the feat.
Similarly, what limitations are there for Phalanx Soldiers?
At 3rd level, when a phalanx soldier wields a shield, he can use any polearm or spear of his size as a one-handed weapon.
Is a 3+ level Phalanx Soldier restricted to making only main hand attacks with their polearm? If I do a TWF Phalanx Soldier build, can I only shield slam as on off hand attack?
As it reads, I should be able to wield the polearm exactly the same as I can any other one-handed weapon. That's the language the ability uses.
Now, if you have a GM or home game that allows for this, by all means, go for it. I can not tell the person what to do in his own game. If you play the organized Society game, expect to be disappointed, as most competent GM's will tell you the same as I am, that a character can not wield two of them or an oversized Two Handed Weapon. (Titan Mauler and Titan Fighter aside) Not with these feats or those like them.
Well, you're mixing two different things here.
Yes, most competent GMs will tell you that you cannot wield oversized TWH, because we're explicitly told that in the rules (Titan Mauler et al. notwithstanding).
I absolutely disagree that most competent GMs would disallow you to wield, for instance, two Dorn-Dergars if you have the relevant abilities. I highly doubt most competent GMs would require that a Phalanx Soldier always make their polearm the main hand attack if they so choose to TWF with (most likely) a shield bash.
I legitimately think you are in the extreme minority on this. If you can wield something as a one-handed weapon, most people tend to understand that to mean that includes everything that wielding a one-handed weapon encompasses (which means you can TWF with them, just as you could with any other one-handed weapon).
First off thaX,
No need to dis so many people.
I play exclusively PFS and GM for it quite a bit. I've not talked with anyone in two different lodges that have thought your way thaX. So thank you for insulting me personally and everyone that GMs at either lodge. We all appreciate being told that we are not competent GMs. I'm surprised that none of us, nor our players, had noticed this on our own, but I'm glad that you could know that about my lodges just from having a view opposed to you. Which should have been apparent by what I feel is the majority of people posting in this thread being opposed to your view.
Okay, now that that's out of the way, the actual discussiong.
First,
The size of the weapon didn't change, the skill of the character in wielding that weapon beyond a normal means is what changed.
We both agree with this. Do you understand that we all agree on this? Can you stop saying it like it supports your view? because it supports neither view since both of use use that fact as true to prove our points.
Second,
As the weapon is being wielded, it is treated as One Handed or Two Handed, depending on how the character wields it. The weapon itself is still what it is, though, independent on skill, size or material.
When the weapon is wielded beyond it's normal means, either a feat, ability or spell is allowing for it or it has a magical property that allows for it. At no time does the weapon suddenly change it's own makeup and become something else.
Okay, we both agree on this. Do you understand that we all agree on this? Can you stop saying it like it supports your view? because it supports neither view since both of use use that fact as true to prove our points.
Anytime you bring up either of these two points you're spouting random facts that don't matter to the discussion. You might as well be saying that two-weapon fighting can't be done with a two-handed weapon. That you can't wield a weapon that's to big for you. That humans are humanoid(human). That half-elfs count as being human. That power attack is a feat. All these things are stuff we both agree on and shouldn't be included by either side, and definitely shouldn't be something that takes much focus in a post, and definitely don't prove anyone's point.
The feats allows the use of a Two Handed weapon in one hand, and allows for TWF with that single two handed weapon with a one handed or light weapon in the other hand. The weapon itself, while considered One Handed for effects from feats and abilities while being wielded in such a way, is still a Two Handed weapon.
Now, where is your rule support for this statement?
You say that the feat allows the earthbreaker to be TWF in one hand with a one handed or light weapon in the other hand. I'm not seeing that specified in the Thunder and Fang feat. Could you please provide the text I'm not seeing that allows you to do that.Also in this quote, what does the weapon being a two-handed weapon matter if we're treating it as a one-handed when we wield it. You spout off, "but it's still a two handed weapon" like it means something. So please, explain and show the rules where it "still being a two-handed weapon" matters at all.
So from this post. Can you see WHY we say you're spouting and replying to random stuff. You spend the bulk of your post "trying to prove stuff we both agree on" and then obviously that means you can't. Can you see why we'd feel you don't understand what we're saying since you seem to keep "trying to prove stuff we both agree on" like it means anything.
thaX, I just went and looked at some old threads on this topic. Did you know that you have been having this exact same argument for over 2 years now?
Did you know that not a single other person has ever agreed with your interpretation, and many of them have come to the same conclusions we have for the exact same reasons we have?
This is what comes of being able to logically interpret the rules we have been talking about.
I am completely serious when I say that you need to go take a course on logic. You have an actual deficiency in your ability to interpret the world around you and I am sure it has been a constant source of irritation for others in your life.
It is a coincidence when one or two people argue with you and cannot see your point of view. But when upwards of 10 or 15 people all come to the same conclusion independently when given the same evidence over several years, and they are all saying you are wrong you need to understand that you are probably wrong. Which is perfectly fine, everyone is wrong some of the time. However, being unable to admit that you're wrong is not a good thing, and at the risk of sounding like an Orwell character I think you need to correct that deficiency.
|
|
There was more posters that agreed with me than not in the previous thread, but they simply stopped posting when it became a circle.
It was told, in an question and answer thread or a blog or something, that the reason for the change in wording for the Thunder and Fang feat (From having the Earth Breaker and Klar be considered a Double Weapon when used together to the Earth Beaker being One Handed and the Klar considered light) was to clarify that the STR damage of the attacks (and other effects) was to be for a One Handed weapon instead of keeping the 1.5 str mod bonus when using the weapons as the feat dictated. It was never meant to allow double wielding of any Two Handed weapons (Even if the character had four arms) and certainly not for the oversized one either.
This issue came up and immediately everyone started to get oversized EB's for their characters.
I will say this, there is a little more leeway for the double wielding of the two weapons than there is for the use of the oversized one in Two Hands. But one begets the other, one would say allowing two of them would mean the allowance of the oversized one by default. I had agreed at some point that double wielding might be doable, but it would be a GM's call.
The support for the statement is based on several factors, as the rules for weapons and the wielding of such is in several different spots in the book. TWF needs a primary and Off hand, though through cut and paste from the 3.5 OGL, it seems it is only mentioned in the feat itself. It has been stated in a few FAQ's that a Two Handed weapon needs a primary/Main hand and an off hand to use. (Thus, my own understanding is for a Main hand to use for the One Handed use) The sections I quoted above concerns the weapons designations and what they would be considered as when not the same size as the character. (and what size they are as objects compared to the character size it was made for)
The main thing that I and others disagree with is whether or not the weapon would be One Handed for the character no matter if he is wielding it or not because of this feat's effects. I have maintained that it does not change and the weapon is wielded that way only for the purpose of determining damage and how to interact with the rules while wielding the weapon in that manner. As you look at the weapon, trying to consider if the character can wield a second one, it is still a Two Handed Weapon. It is obvious to me that one can not wield the second one, as TWF, the rules in Combat and with the feats, needs either a one handed or light weapon in the off hand. (whether this is described in the feat or in the combat section)
At this point, I am going to agree to disagree. I believe we all now know that we can not wield an oversized Two Handed weapon, this I think we are of accord. Whether or not the double wielding of the things is possible is up to a flip of a coin at this point, as our impasse seems to be on the one point of "handiness" that either doesn't exist or changes on a whim.
It's not a flip of the coin, you're just wrong.
You can wield two one handed weapons when two weapon fighting right? You agree this is how two weapon fighting works?
Then how could wielding two weapons that you treat as one handed weapons not be possible?
|
|
See, that is the other side of the coin. It depends on what you think of the weapon, being wielded or staying the same.
This is why I brought up the smaller weapon. If it worked like that, then one could not wield the smaller Two Handed weapon Two Handed, as being able to one hand it would make that a light weapon. This is the same as wielding a larger one with two hands.
You can wield two One Handed Weapons (Or a One Handed and a Light weapon to lessen the penalties) to TWF with, or to use with your iteraves at higher level. One side of the coin is that the weapons change to One Handed, and everything goes off of that, double wielding the suckers, wielding the huge one, and unable to wield the smaller with two hands. The other is that the weapon is as it is, and wielding a second one is not possible, as a One Handed or light weapon is needed in the second hand.
Yes, this is where the issue is.
Ramblings about maybe RAI
Unless you can provide a source for this it doesn't mean much, since this is the first time I've heard of such thing in all the threads on this topic. I would assume it would have been mentioned more often if it was specifically addressing this feat. And would completely validate your view.
And even if true, that's providing RAI, which doesn't change the actual RAW of the ability.It has been stated in a few FAQ's that a Two Handed weapon needs a primary/Main hand and an off hand to use. (Thus, my own understanding is for a Main hand to use for the One Handed use)
I'm unaware of ANY faq that does this. Now would be a great time to link one to provide some support for your argument.
Now I'm aware of FAQs that say a two-handed require two hands to use and thus you can't use your off-hand. But never have I seen mention that a two-handed requires a "main or primary" hand and just uses your off-hand but doesn't require it.Also, are you saying that you couldn't wield two longswords since one handed use is for this "main hand"?
The sections I quoted above concerns the weapons designations and what they would be considered as when not the same size as the character. (and what size they are as objects compared to the character size it was made for)
Yes, which we all already agree on, so you didn't need to quote them.
The main thing that I and others disagree with is whether or not the weapon would be One Handed for the character no matter if he is wielding it or not because of this feat's effects.
I'm am curious as to who these others you disagree with are and where are they in the discussion? Because if you are referring to any of the three people conversing with you right now this further shows that you don't understand our viewpoint, because NONE of us are advocating this.
I have maintained that it does not change and the weapon is wielded that way only for the purpose of determining damage and how to interact with the rules while wielding the weapon in that manner.
THIS IS A LIE! I have to say it again, cause me and Ridiculon have already said it before. You might think this is what you mean, but this CAN'T be what you mean because it is the EXACT thing we are saying. Because the "how to interact with the rules while wielding the weapon in that manner" would be TWF and larger weapons. I'm 2wf with this and treating it as a one handed for how I can wield it. If it's a one handed for me to 2wf with it then it's a one handed for me to 2wf with two of them as it is the same rule you're referencing.
As you look at the weapon, trying to consider if the character can wield a second one, it is still a Two Handed Weapon. It is obvious to me that one can not wield the second one, as TWF, the rules in Combat and with the feats, needs either a one handed or light weapon in the off hand. (whether this is described in the feat or in the combat section)
See look, I can do it too
"As you look at the weapon, trying to consider if the character can 2wf with it, it is still a Two Handed Weapon. It is obvious to me that one can not wield the weapon, as TWF, the rules in Combat and with the feats, needs either a one handed or light weapon in either hand. (whether this is described in the feat or in the combat section)" But you say this is okay,"As you look at the weapon, trying to consider if the character can wield a second one, it is a one handed weapon since you're wielding it. It is obvious to me that one can wield the second one, as TWF, the rules in Combat and with the feats, needs either a one handed or light weapon in either hand. (whether this is described in the feat or in the combat section) and you're already considering it as a one handed weapon for this ability." and you say this one isn't okay.
At this point, I am going to agree to disagree. I believe we all now know that we can not wield an oversized Two Handed weapon, this I think we are of accord. Whether or not the double wielding of the things is possible is up to a flip of a coin at this point, as our impasse seems to be on the one point of "handiness" that either doesn't exist or changes on a whim.
I feel it's more of a "decide to not effectively communicate" since I've repeatedly tried to guide you into how to have this be anything than you saying the same thing over and over and banging your head against the wall while we get frustrated that you're "being somewhat of a monkey here, hands over the ears and eyes rolled up."
Because Wielding on oversized Two Handed weapon has never been anything we're advocating. We're advocating wielding on oversized one handed earthbreaker. And the main problem is your view of "handedness" having no support provided for it.
See, that is the other side of the coin. It depends on what you think of the weapon, being wielded or staying the same.
This is why I brought up the smaller weapon. If it worked like that, then one could not wield the smaller Two Handed weapon Two Handed, as being able to one hand it would make that a light weapon. This is the same as wielding a larger one with two hands.
Yes, one cannot wield a small longsword in two hands. If you're wielding a smaller one-handed weapon you can't use two hands. I don't see why this issue because if you're wielding it as a one-handed weapon of your size then of course if you use this to wield a smaller it's lighter. Fortunately it's a "can" so you can just not use the feat if you wanted to use two hands on a small earthbreaker.
You can wield two One Handed Weapons to TWF with. One side of the coin is that the weapons change to One Handed for wielding purposes. The other is that the weapon is as it is, and wielding one is not possible with TWF, as a One Handed or light weapon is needed in either hand.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
See, that is the other side of the coin. It depends on what you think of the weapon, being wielded or staying the same.
This is why I brought up the smaller weapon. If it worked like that, then one could not wield the smaller Two Handed weapon Two Handed, as being able to one hand it would make that a light weapon. This is the same as wielding a larger one with two hands.
You can wield two One Handed Weapons (Or a One Handed and a Light weapon to lessen the penalties) to TWF with, or to use with your iteraves at higher level. One side of the coin is that the weapons change to One Handed, and everything goes off of that, double wielding the suckers, wielding the huge one, and unable to wield the smaller with two hands. The other is that the weapon is as it is, and wielding a second one is not possible, as a One Handed or light weapon is needed in the second hand.
Yes, this is where the issue is.
There is no issue you are making up an issue, you are making up rules to back you up that don't exist.
While I'm not weighing in on the wielding a large one debate, the simple fact is that dorn dergar master allows dual wielding, its the point of the feat. That's why two weapon fighting is a prepreq.
Please explain this to me, if you can't use anything in the second hand what is the point of the feat dorn dergar master? Please explain this feat to me, what it does and why you would use it according to your rules. Because as far as I can tell all your idea of how it works would do is intentionally make you do less damage.
There was more posters that agreed with me than not in the previous thread, but they simply stopped posting when it became a circle.
No man, there weren't. I just looked at those threads, there really weren't any people who agreed with you just as there aren't any here and there won't be any in the next thread. I'm sorry but that is just a false belief.
It was told, in an question and answer thread or a blog or something, that the reason for the change in wording for the Thunder and Fang feat (From having the Earth Breaker and Klar be considered a Double Weapon when used together to the Earth Beaker being One Handed and the Klar considered light) was to clarify that the STR damage of the attacks (and other effects) was to be for a One Handed weapon instead of keeping the 1.5 str mod bonus when using the weapons as the feat dictated. It was never meant to allow double wielding of any Two Handed weapons (Even if the character had four arms) and certainly not for the oversized one either.
And as you have been told before in those threads i mentioned: James Jacobs, the one who told you those things according to you, is not a rules guy. He writes the story and fluff for Golarion (in fact he has specifically asked that no one use his statements "as ammunition" in rules debates). He may have told you what his vision of the RAI was, but that is not RAW.
This is a rules forum for the Pathfinder ruleset. Attempting to bring in RAI and legacy rules from other systems to support your interpretations is not appropriate and will not convince anyone on this forum.
|
|
You can wield two One Handed Weapons to TWF with. One side of the coin is that the weapons change to One Handed for wielding purposes. The other is that the weapon is as it is, and wielding one is not possible with TWF, as a One Handed or light weapon is needed in either hand.
For the record, to confuse any new readers with a changed text of a previous post, it is polite to put () or italitize the changed sections.
This is an issue about the rules being spread out in three different sections of the rule book and not being complete in total from the OGL from which it came as well as a very liberal reading of the rules along the lines of "Well, it doesn't say that I can't." The feat tells you what you can do. Wield one (1) Two Handed Weapon, assumed to be sized to the character, in one hand. This will use one handed effects for damage and other considerations, but will not actually change the weapon itself. The weapon still has the hardness and HP of a Two Handed weapon, does the damage die of the Two Handed weapon (instead of going a step down for being a One Handed Weapon), and counts as such when trying to wield it in a different circumstance, such as wielding a second one or wielding one of a different size.
That this is an issue for others is something I will never understand. It is clear to me that someone, as a player, is trying to "fudge" the rules to do something more than what was intended. Any who are saying otherwise is either naive or simply do not want to admit it.
I am done trying to convince you, do as you will. Just expect that others out there will have issues with your character hauling around and trying to wield two (2) Two Handed Weapons. (Or an Oversized one without the proper abilities -Titan fighter and such-)
These feats, all of them, do not expressly tell you you can, only that one can be wielded in a particular way.
Thax.
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT YOU CAN WIELD ONE APPROPRIATE SIZED WEAPON IN ONE HAND. That's what the titan mauler does.
What this feat does is let you use it as though it were a one-handed weapon.
This is very different as they have very different meanings mechanically.
NO one is saying the weapon changes at all except you thinking we are saying that. The weapon damage doesn't change if it's a two-handed weapon or a one-handed weapon. The weapon doesn't change so hardness and HP doesn't change.
And if the weapon "counts as such when trying to wield it in a different circumstance" Then you can't wield one of them in one hand, nor could you wield one while 2WF.
So unless you can provide rules that support this statement that a weapon treated as a one-handed weapon can't be in your off-hand but can be in your other hand. It's just something you made up.
The biggest thing you have failed to do is show that
"This will use one handed effects for other considerations" and
"The weapon is wielded that way for the purpose of how to interact with the rules while wielding the weapon."
Doesn't touch
"counts as such when trying to wield it in a different circumstance"
Cause other considerations would be when you can wield it and the rules is letting you wield two of them as one-handed. But you say these aren't covered, yet have provided no support to uphold this view.
This is an issue about the rules being spread out in three different sections of the rule book and not being complete in total from the OGL from which it came as well as a very liberal reading of the rules along the lines of "Well, it doesn't say that I can't." The feat tells you what you can do. Wield one (1) Two Handed Weapon, assumed to be sized to the character, in one hand. This will use one handed effects for damage and other considerations, but will not actually change the weapon itself. The weapon still has the hardness and HP of a Two Handed weapon, does the damage die of the Two Handed weapon (instead of going a step down for being a One Handed Weapon), and counts as such when trying to wield it in a different circumstance, such as wielding a second one or wielding one of a different size.
What you're saying is
The feat tells you what you can do. Wield one (1) Two Handed Weapon, as though it were a one-handed weapon. (this part corrected to be accurate)
This will use one handed effects for damage and other considerations, but will not actually change it from counting as a two-handed weapon when trying to wield it.
Yet you haven't provided any support that it being a one-handed weapon stops it from being in the off-hand. Or wielding a large one in two hands. You just say it can't be done cause, "it's still a two-handed weapon"
|
|
First off, if you try to wield the larger one with two hands, you are no longer wielding it with one hand, making it a Large Two Handed weapon trying to be wielded by a Medium character, so we both have agreed that wielding the larger Two Handed weapon is not possible.
The overall issue is that when the weapon "counts" as a One Handed Weapon, the immediate want is to use the size rules to change the weapon. It doesn't work that way. It still does the same damage (2d6 for the Earth Breaker), has the hardness and HP of a Two Handed Weapon and so on. What changes is how the weapon effects it's environment and uses the character's statistics and abilities when wielded out of the normal means that the rules dictate.
I have tried to explain this, but there seems to be a want to quote rules that specify something that isn't there in the original feat to begin with.
But, if you have a lenient GM and agreeable group that lets you double wield the suckers, then by all means, do so.
Just not at my table.
First off, if you try to wield the larger one with two hands, you are no longer wielding it with one hand, making it a Large Two Handed weapon trying to be wielded by a Medium character, so we both have agreed that wielding the larger Two Handed weapon is not possible.
The overall issue is that when the weapon "counts" as a One Handed Weapon, the immediate want is to use the size rules to change the weapon. It doesn't work that way. It still does the same damage (2d6 for the Earth Breaker), has the hardness and HP of a Two Handed Weapon and so on. What changes is how the weapon effects it's environment and uses the character's statistics and abilities when wielded out of the normal means that the rules dictate.
I have tried to explain this, but there seems to be a want to quote rules that specify something that isn't there in the original feat to begin with.
But, if you have a lenient GM and agreeable group that lets you double wield the suckers, then by all means, do so.
Just not at my table.
That is not the immediate want, nor is it what people are saying to do in these situations. Size rules (i.e., the size of creature the weapon was designed to be used for) do not enter into it. Ever (at least for the standard situations we're talking about - like the Dorn-Dergar feat, etc.).
The only thing that changes is how you can wield the weapon. You're stating these things like there is disagreement about the weapon having different damage or different HP or whatever. Everybody is on the same page in those respects. We agree; none of those things change. All that changes is how the relevant character is allowed to wield the weapon.
It has nothing to do with a lenient GM; this is how the rules actually work. You can house rule it so it's not permissible at your tables, that's fine. I'd suggest you make sure your players know about this change beforehand, though.
First off,
IT DOES NOT SAY THAT YOU CAN WIELD ONE APPROPRIATE SIZED WEAPON IN ONE HAND. That's what the titan mauler does.
What this feat does is let you use it as though it were a one-handed weapon.
This is very different as they have very different meanings mechanically.
So since it's a one-handed weapon you CAN wield one a large one as you'd be using it as a large one-handed weapon.
So while yes, we both agree that normally you can't wield an oversized 2HW, this isn't broaching that issue since it's treated as a one-handed weapon, which you are allowed to use a large version of.
Second. NOBODY BUT YOU IS TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE SIZE!!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS??!?!!?! I DON'T THINK YOU DO SINCE YOU KEEP BRINGING IT UP.
We say that it still does the same damage (2d6), has the hardness and HP of a two-handed weapon and so on. What changes is how the weapon effects it's environment and uses the character's statistics and abilities when wielded out of the normal means that the rules dictate. So since we are changing how the weapon effects it's environment and how it is wielded it's a one-handed weapon that has all the stats as the normal version. We're just copying it from the two-handed weapon list and adding it to the one-handed weapon list. THAT'S IT.
**WE WANT YOU TO SPECIFY THE RULES THAT WOULD CAUSE YOU TO NOT USE IT AS A ONE-HANDED WEAPON.** since all the rules we've provided indicate that you consider it a one-handed weapon for all uses.
All you have said is that since it's still a two-handed weapon object, and since it's not changing size, you can't use it as a one-handed weapon sometimes. Yet you've never giving the rules to indicate when one would or wouldn't be able to use it one-handed.
You say you can use 1 when you 2wf as long as it's not in the off hand. So why can you not use one as a one-handed weapon when it's in your off hand? Why can you use it as a one-handed weapon when it's not the off hand? Because if you can't use it in your off-hand cause it's a two-handed weapon still then you couldn't use it in your non-off-hand as it'd still be a two-handed weapon. You say you can use one as a one-handed weapon for the only weapon, but if you go larger or smaller you suddenly can't use it as if it were a one-handed weapon. Not once have you used support to show why your view of this would be correct. All you say is that you're right while you spout off incorrect things like saying the feat only lets you use the weapon in one hand which is not what the feat says you can do.
If you prefer we could go about this where I only ask one little question per post and then you answer the one question and then we repeat till we've gone over everything. That could work so that we're actually communicating instead of you seeming to go off in random directions or argue about things we've never said.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
First off, if you try to wield the larger one with two hands, you are no longer wielding it with one hand, making it a Large Two Handed weapon trying to be wielded by a Medium character, so we both have agreed that wielding the larger Two Handed weapon is not possible.
So is the same thing true if I try to wield a large longsword with two hands? that since I am no longer wielding it with one hand it makes it a large two handed weapon?
|
|
Look at the Weapons Chart. What does it say the weapon is?
The only thing that would change the "Measure of Effort" is the scale introduced and used by the "inappropriately sized weapons" section in the Core Rulebook. It is when this interaction is considered that the weapon's designation changes for the character. These feats and abilities do not change this, even when they allow for the wielding of weapons differently than what is normal. What changes is how the character can use the weapon, not the actual weapon itself.
The confusion here isn't that the weapon is changing sizes, but that the rules for when the weapon is a different size are being used to effect other purposes for the weapon that is not within the confines of the feats/abilities in question.
As you are using the weapon one handed, it still has it's own designation of a Two Handed weapon. The feat/ability did not change this, only the effects of the weapon as it is being wielded One Handed.
To the points above...
You cease using it as a One Handed Weapon when it is sheathed or put away, or when it is on the ground or in a weapon rack and similar situation. The state of being a Two Handed weapon is "checked" each time the character attempts to wield it.
If you are wielding the oversized Two Handed weapon with two hands, then it is beyond the scope of the chart for Inappropriately sized weapons and the character can not use it.
...
When you try to use a second Two Handed weapon (for TWF), the character already has one wielded in his Primary hand. TWF needs a One Handed or Light weapon in the off hand, and a few FAQ's regarded particulars with wielding has denoted that a Two Handed weapon needs a Primary Hand and an Off Hand to wield. (Hence, a Four Armed Creature could not double wield Two Handed Weapons either, as there is ever only one Primary/Main hand) Notice that the light and One Handed entries in the first section quoted by me above have mentioned off hand use. The Two Handed Weapon does not.
...
A Longsword is a One Handed Weapon. An Earth Breaker is a Two Handed Weapon. That is the point.
So since it's a one-handed weapon you CAN wield one a large one as you'd be using it as a large one-handed weapon.
So while yes, we both agree that normally you can't wield an oversized 2HW, this isn't broaching that issue since it's treated as a one-handed weapon, which you are allowed to use a large version of.
Second. NOBODY BUT YOU IS TALKING ABOUT CHANGING THE SIZE!!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS??!?!!?! I DON'T THINK YOU DO SINCE YOU KEEP BRINGING IT UP.
We say that it still does the same damage (2d6), has the hardness and HP of a two-handed weapon and so on. What changes is how the weapon effects it's environment and uses the character's statistics and abilities when wielded out of the normal means that the rules dictate. So since we are changing how the weapon effects it's environment and how it is wielded it's a one-handed weapon that has all the stats as the normal version. We're just copying it from the two-handed weapon list and adding it to the one-handed weapon list. THAT'S IT.
Look at the Weapons Chart. What does it say the weapon is?
The only thing that would change the "Measure of Effort" is the scale introduced and used by the "inappropriately sized weapons" section in the Core Rulebook. It is when this interaction is considered that the weapon's designation changes for the character. These feats and abilities do not change this, even when they allow for the wielding of weapons differently than what is normal. What changes is how the character can use the weapon, not the actual weapon itself.
The confusion here isn't that the weapon is changing sizes, but that the rules for when the weapon is a different size are being used to effect other purposes for the weapon that is not within the confines of the feats/abilities in question.
As you are using the weapon one handed, it still has it's own designation of a Two Handed weapon. The feat/ability did not change this, only the effects of the weapon as it is being wielded One Handed.
Dissonance is felt when people are confronted with information that is inconsistent with their beliefs. If the dissonance is not reduced by changing one's belief, the dissonance can result in restoring consonance through misperception, rejection or refutation of the information, seeking support from others who share the beliefs, and attempting to persuade others.
thaX your reactions are a textbook case of cognitive dissonance. You are holding two logically inconsistent beliefs and it is obvious to anyone who talks to you about this issue (and has been for years). The best way to get rid of the discomfort you feel (the need to continue making an invalid point for weeks or months at a time) is to re-examine your beliefs internally, aka if you really take about ten minutes to think through the whole issue on your own without attempting to react to our posts.
As you are using the weapon one handed, it still has it's own designation of a Two Handed weapon. The feat/ability did not change this, only the effects of the weapon as it is being wielded One Handed.
Right now, I am specifically speaking to a medium creature wielding a medium two-handed weapon. So size rules never enter into the equation.
The feat/ability doesn't change that the weapon is a two-handed weapon.
But the feat/ability does change how you wield the weapon. You wield it as a one-handed weapon. The feat/ability does not say that you can now wield the weapon using only your primary hand; it says you now may wield it "as a one-handed weapon". So yes, for wielding purposes, pretend it is a one-handed weapon. That means you can wield one in your off hand because that is one of the benefits of wielding a one-handed weapon.
Your position on this makes absolutely no sense to me. I legitimately do not get how you came to the conclusion you did.
Also note that the four-armed creatures dual wielding THW issue actually hasn't ever been addressed.
When you try to use a second Two Handed weapon (for TWF), the character already has one wielded in his Primary hand. TWF needs a One Handed or Light weapon in the off hand, and a few FAQ's regarded particulars with wielding has denoted that a Two Handed weapon needs a Primary Hand and an Off Hand to wield. (Hence, a Four Armed Creature could not double wield Two Handed Weapons either, as there is ever only one Primary/Main hand) Notice that the light and One Handed entries in the first section quoted by me above have mentioned off hand use. The Two Handed Weapon does not.
TWF needs a One Handed or Light weapon in either hand, and a few FAQ's regarded particulars with wielding has denoted that a Two Handed weapon needs a Primary Hand and an Off Hand to wield. So when you try to use your first Two Handed weapon (for TWF), you cannot as it's using up both your primary hand and your off hand.
Yet you say you can wield one during 2WF, so why can you do it for part of 2wf but not the other part?
Look at the Weapons Chart. What does it say the weapon is?
Yes, it says it's a two-handed weapon. And the feat says you add it to the one-handed weapon chart when you go to use it. That's what using as a one handed weapon means.
The only thing that would change the "Measure of Effort" is the scale introduced and used by the "inappropriately sized weapons" section in the Core Rulebook. It is when this interaction is considered that the weapon's designation changes for the character. These feats and abilities do not change this, even when they allow for the wielding of weapons differently than what is normal. What changes is how the character can use the weapon, not the actual weapon itself.
I pointed out how in the designation of Light, One-Handed, Two-handed it says that it lists the effort needed to use AND CAUSES IT TO BE CONSIDERED A Light, One-Handed, or Two-handed weapon. So inappropriate or not, the base weapon is now on the one-handed charts as well as the two-handed charts for the user. NOBODY BUT YOU IS SAYING THE ACTUAL WEAPON ITSELF WOULD CHANGE!!!
The confusion here isn't that the weapon is changing sizes, but that the rules for when the weapon is a different size are being used to effect other purposes for the weapon that is not within the confines of the feats/abilities in question.
NOPE! Wrong again. AT LEAST I KNOW THAT WE AREN'T LOOKING AT DIFFERENT SIZED WEAPONS FOR THIS. THAT MEANS THAT ONLY YOU ARE.
Thax, seriously man, This would be so much more productive for both sides if you would actually make sure you understand what we are saying, and then actually address the points we're making and answer the questions we're asking about.
The state of being a Two Handed weapon is "checked" each time the character attempts to wield it.
Now why would this be true? Since I am going to use it it should be a one-handed weapon for me. Why would it check if I could use it as a two-handed when I use it as a one-handed?
This post has spiraled well beyond the scope of the actual question.
thaX, I'm sorry to say that you are just incorrect. I understand what you are trying to say, but when something allows you wield a weapon 1 handed, you can wield it 1 handed. Period. That's it.
And if Two Weapon Fighting allows you to wield 2, 1 handed weapons, then you can wield two weapons that you can use 1 handed. Period. This includes the weapon that is typically seen wielded 2 handed that you can wield in 1.
The Feats listed clearly say that the weapons specified can be wielded one handed. This means they can be wielded (by the user who has such feat) one handed for all intents and purposes. Want to wield two? Sure can. Want to use a shield and the weapon at the same time? Why not?
Handiness is based off of users individual ease of use. The weapon chart is there to show the "typical" ease of use it takes to wield such a weapon. And unless a player has a feat (such as ones mentioned before), or abilities (such as those mentioned before), then they have the same ease of use as anyone else.
Another way to view this is if you have the feat or ability, move that weapons position in that chart to the appropriate level for only yourself.
Example: The Earthbreaker is listed as a "2 handed weapon", but since you have "Thunder and Fang" it is now listed as a "1 handed weapon" for only yourself.
|
|
Another way to view this is if you have the feat or ability, move that weapons position in that chart to the appropriate level for only yourself.
Example: The Earthbreaker is listed as a "2 handed weapon", but since you have "Thunder and Fang" it is now listed as a "1 handed weapon" for only yourself.
This is where the confusion is.
It is wielded in one hand. Great, you have the weapon (and a shield in the other for Thunder and Fang) When you do so, you use the One Handed particulars for the weapon, this includes damage from Str, how to effect feats such as Power Attack and such.
But the scale you talk of does not apply here, it is skipped over completely. You wield the Two Handed Weapon in one hand, the Primary one.
I mentioned before upthread the history of Thunder and Fang, the earlier entry used the EB and Klar as a combined double weapon. Players were adding 1.5 str mod to the EB when doing this, so it was rephrased in the later source.
Nothing in that (or any other that I can see) feat allows for the double wielding of the particular Two Handed Weapon it denotes. It is a conclusion that is come to because the inappropriate sized weapons scale seems, to some, to add a box to the scale when it does not.
If it worked that way, then the character finds himself unable to two hand the smaller weapon as well (It being a Light weapon for him), which is simply not the case.
|
|
The state of being a Two Handed weapon is "checked" each time the character attempts to wield it.Now why would this be true? Since I am going to use it it should be a one-handed weapon for me. Why would it check if I could use it as a two-handed when I use it as a one-handed?
Because it is a Two Handed Weapon and the character is already wielding a Two Handed weapon, one handed or not?
The character tries to wield it first considering the Two Handed designation before going to one hand with the ability the feat confers. You not checking to see how to wield it, but if you could wield it at all. Having one already...
This also goes into the oversized one. You need two hands to wield it and being a Two Handed Weapon, it goes beyond the means for the character to do so. It matters not how an ability/feat allows for the character to wield a normal sized one in a single hand, the weapon is still what it is.
Another way to view this is if you have the feat or ability, move that weapons position in that chart to the appropriate level for only yourself.
Example: The Earthbreaker is listed as a "2 handed weapon", but since you have "Thunder and Fang" it is now listed as a "1 handed weapon" for only yourself.
This is where the confusion is.
It is wielded in one hand. Great, you have the weapon (and a shield in the other for Thunder and Fang) When you do so, you use the One Handed particulars for the weapon, this includes damage from Str, how to effect feats such as Power Attack and such.
But the scale you talk of does not apply here, it is skipped over completely. You wield the Two Handed Weapon in one hand, the Primary one.
I mentioned before upthread the history of Thunder and Fang, the earlier entry used the EB and Klar as a combined double weapon. Players were adding 1.5 str mod to the EB when doing this, so it was rephrased in the later source.
Nothing in that (or any other that I can see) feat allows for the double wielding of the particular Two Handed Weapon it denotes. It is a conclusion that is come to because the inappropriate sized weapons scale seems, to some, to add a box to the scale when it does not.
If it worked that way, then the character finds himself unable to two hand the smaller weapon as well (It being a Light weapon for him), which is simply not the case.
Why are you bringing in the size of a weapon? Size and handiness are two separate things.
It is a medium sized weapon being wielded in one hand because a feat says you can.
That's it.
|
|
Yes, they are separate things. It is a Two Handed weapon and never changes size to make it a One Handed weapon. Being Wielded in one hand is not the same as being a One Handed Weapon. It still does the damage (2d6) of a Two Handed weapon, that is the advantage of the feat, it still has all the particulars about being a Two Handed weapon, including weight and and size.
What the character does is wield that Two Handed weapon in One Hand, doing the overall particulars of a One Handed weapon, as mentioned before, with Power Attack and Str mod damage and other things that could change between being wielded in One Hand instead of Two.
It is One (1) Two handed weapon (sized for the character) that the feat allows to be wielded in One Hand. The two feats in question has TWF as a prerequisite, so it likely that the character will be TWF with it and a One Handed/Light weapon in the other hand.
The confusion here is phrasing and not putting two and two together. Coming up with five then telling me that four is not the answer is not going to further this conversation, for any posters that have this overwhelming desire to double wield Two Handed Weapons...
How are you coming to the conclusion that the weapon is suddenly a One Handed Weapon? Did you adjust the damage for it, making it do 1d8 damage instead when it changes like this? Did you adjust the weight of the weapon, making it lighter? Hardness and HP of the weapon?
When it is said that the Size rules are not being used, then where is the scale that put the weapon in a different category? If you are not using that scale, where else does the weapon designation change for the character? It isn't the feat that changes it, but if it is maintained that it is, where are the rules for that change outside of the size rules? (Inappropriately sized weapons) What is the penalty for wielding two Two Handed Swords and TWF with them? (another -4/-4?)
The feats never say that two of them can be wielded at the same time. Thunder and Fang, specifically, has the character wielding the weapon and a modified shield at the same time, and getting the shield bonus from the Klar as he is attacking with it.
My overall reaction when this was first mentioned to me was "wait, two of them... what, how?" I still have that reaction now, as I don't see how the feats would magically make the weapon into something it is not.
The oversized one is a mute point at this juncture, as there is already two Archtypes that allow for it for with less Feat tax and within the scope of what was or is intended. It is a better option than a questionable reading of the feat that may or may not allow for it.
But if you think double wielding them is feasible with these feats, would you also disallow the smaller version to be used Two Handed (being, for the character, a "light" weapon) or allow for a larger one to be wielded in Two Hands? This is going way beyond the scope of the feat and the purpose it is trying to effect.
The state of being a Two Handed weapon is "checked" each time the character attempts to wield it.Now why would this be true? Since I am going to use it it should be a one-handed weapon for me. Why would it check if I could use it as a two-handed when I use it as a one-handed?Because it is a Two Handed Weapon and the character is already wielding a Two Handed weapon, one handed or not?
The character tries to wield it first considering the Two Handed designation before going to one hand with the ability the feat confers. You not checking to see how to wield it, but if you could wield it at all. Having one already...
This also goes into the oversized one. You need two hands to wield it and being a Two Handed Weapon, it goes beyond the means for the character to do so. It matters not how an ability/feat allows for the character to wield a normal sized one in a single hand, the weapon is still what it is.
So if I'm wielding something in one hand when I go to wield an earthbreaker I try to wield it first considering the Two Handed designation before going to one hand with the ability the feat confers. I'm not checking to see how to wield it, but if you could wield it at all. Having one hand already full it goes into the oversized one. I'd need two hands to wield it and being a Two Handed Weapon, it goes beyond the means for me to do so. It matters not how an ability/feat allows for me to wield a normal sized one in a single hand, the weapon is still what it is.
So if I was already wielding a klar in one of my hands, I can't wield the earthbreaker, because I don't have 2 hands to wield the earthbreaker so it fail the check if I can wield one at all.
But if I have nothing wielded I can then wield the earthbreaker and then use it one-handed and then I can pick up the klar and wield it too. Is this correct?
Something else to consider.
The Dorn Derger takes a move action to adjust from reach to adjacent, and vice verca. If you wield two of them, that is two move actions to use to change that particular. There just isn't that much of an advantage here.
Not relevant to whether a person can wield two of them at the same time.
Perhaps they want to wield one at range and one adjacent. It does not matter. The fact is, they can do so with the appropriate feats.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, they are separate things. It is a Two Handed weapon and never changes size to make it a One Handed weapon. Being Wielded in one hand is not the same as being a One Handed Weapon. It still does the damage (2d6) of a Two Handed weapon, that is the advantage of the feat, it still has all the particulars about being a Two Handed weapon, including weight and and size.
THANK YOU THAX!!! You've finally admitted that being able to be wielded in one hand is different then the weapon being a one-handed weapon.
Now which does the feat do?
1) Let you wield an earthbreaker (a two-handed weapon) in one hand
or
2) Let you use the earthbreaker as a one-handed weapon
What the character does is wield that Two Handed weapon in One Hand, doing the overall particulars of a One Handed weapon, as mentioned before, with Power Attack and Str mod damage and other things that could change between being wielded in One Hand instead of Two.
No thaX, this is not what the character does. What the character does is wield it as a one-handed weapon. As you just said, wielding in one hand is different from being treated as a one-handed weapon.
It is One (1) Two handed weapon (sized for the character) that the feat allows to be wielded in One Hand. The two feats in question has TWF as a prerequisite, so it likely that the character will be TWF with it and a One Handed/Light weapon in the other hand.
Again no. the feat is "When you use an earthbreaker, use it as a one-handed weapon." So it has nothing to do with "sized for the character" at all.
But if you think double wielding them is feasible with these feats, would you also disallow the smaller version to be used Two Handed (being, for the character, a "light" weapon) or allow for a larger one to be wielded in Two Hands? This is going way beyond the scope of the feat and the purpose it is trying to effect.
That's the thing, these feats do not say "This weapon is now a one-handed weapon" meaning you must treat it one rung down on the handedness scale. These feats say that you may do so. So it depends on how advantageous it is for you. If you want to wield a smaller version in your off hand, you may treat it as a light weapon (because it is ordinarily one-handed). Or, you may treat it normally as a one-handed weapon and two-hand it, just like anybody else (unless the feat/ability specifically mentions that it only works for weapons designed for your size).
And yes, if you can treat a normal-sized two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon, you may treat a larger version as a one-handed weapon that you can now two-hand unless the feat/ability specifically mentions that it only works for weapons designed for your size.
By claiming this goes beyond the purpose of the feat, you are begging the question. This is precisely the situation Amiri is in, by the way. If you don't have EWP, you treat a large BS as a large THW. If you have the EWP, you get to treat it (for purposes of wielding) as a large one-handed weapon. Thus, Amiri can two-hand wield a large BS. Yes, I understand that BS are categorized already as one-handed weapons. However, their special rules say to treat them for wielding purposes as effectively two-handed weapons unless you have the EWP feat. So it really is this exact situation you're referring to already in action.
We know how this works. This is exactly how we've been told these abilities are supposed to work.
Not related and not trying to be critical, but it is moot point, not mute point. :)