I am sure this has been mentioned before but I was wondering.
Is It RAW to use a two handed weapon...make all your attacks with that weapon, then use an off hand attack with a spiked gauntlet?
I am under the impression letting go of a weapon in your hand is a free action....
I am sure this has been mentioned before but I was wondering.
Is It RAW to use a two handed weapon...make all your attacks with that weapon, then use an off hand attack with a spiked gauntlet?
I am under the impression letting go of a weapon in your hand is a free action....
I guess on the same topic can you use a two-handed with two weapon fighting with an unarmed strike (kick) or armor spikes?
Sure, you can do these things.
However, bear in mind that you don't get to break the rules when you do it. Fighting with two different weapons, no matter what they are, causes penalties. Specifically, you are -6 on your primary weapon and -10 on your secondary weapon (gauntlet, kick, whatever). Since both your examples use a light weapon for the secondary attack, then you're just -4/-8. If you take the Two-weapon Fighting feat, you can reduce this to just -2/-2.
But note that you have to decide you're doing this before you roll any attack rolls, and apply the penalty to every attack. You cannot simply make a bunch of normal attacks with your 2H weapon and then decide at the end that you want to punch or kick someone to get extra attacks.
You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword. When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only 1/2 of your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting. Your natural attacks are treated as light, off-hand weapons for determining the penalty to your other attacks. Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack can reduce these penalties.
Using a gauntlet modifies unarmed strike damage but is still an unarmed strike which provokes an AoO, and since gauntlets are worn on the hand you cant combine a gauntlet with a two hander.
Aside from that, TWF specifically refers to a full round attack made with one weapon in your primary hand and a second weapon in your off-hand. No material is present for the use of a two-hander which is wield by both hands regardless of how it is being held after the attack is made.
|
You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword. When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only 1/2 of your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting. Your natural attacks are treated as light, off-hand weapons for determining the penalty to your other attacks. Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack can reduce these penalties.Using a gauntlet modifies unarmed strike damage but is still an unarmed strike which provokes an AoO, and since gauntlets are worn on the hand you cant combine a gauntlet with a two hander.
Aside from that, TWF specifically refers to a full round attack made with one weapon in your primary hand and a second weapon in your off-hand. No material is present for the use of a two-hander which is wield by both hands regardless of how it is being held after the attack is made.
Sorry but you are incorrect on the gauntlet attack still being considered an unarmed strike.
Per the PRD: "Gauntlet, Spiked: The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. An attack with a spiked gauntlet is considered an armed attack. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of spiked gauntlets."Also of TWF it never says anything about the type of weapon in your primary hand as to whether it must be wielded one-handed or not. It only says "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon". If you wear a gauntlet on you off-hand and it is considered a free action to remove one hand from a 2-handed weapon I would have to say there is some possibility that you could wield a 2-handed weapon and get to use a gauntlet also to achieve TWFing.
Seems weird but I haven't seen any wording that excludes it.
Thats what I been thinking. That its RAW since the gauntlet is a light weapon and is considered armed.
My idea has been to play a Longspear fighter... I use my gauntlet to threaten within 5 feet and the spear to threaten out to 10 ft. If the enemy is within 5ft of me at the start of the round, I would take my off hand attack and then 5ft shift back and attack with the spear. yEs I understand all penalties would take effect, Im not worried about that. Its just the whole. Is it possible thing.
Sorry but you are incorrect on the gauntlet attack still being considered an unarmed strike.
Per the PRD: "Gauntlet, Spiked: The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. An attack with a spiked gauntlet is considered an armed attack. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of spiked gauntlets."
Ironically you are considered armed while making an unarmed strike in some cases, but you right in any case. I was looking at standard gauntlets earlier when I wrote that.
Also of TWF it never says anything about the type of weapon in your primary hand as to whether it must be wielded one-handed or not. It only says "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon". If you wear a gauntlet on you off-hand and it is considered a free action to remove one hand from a 2-handed weapon I would have to say there is some possibility that you could wield a 2-handed weapon and get to use a gauntlet also to achieve TWFing.
It is not the weight or handedness of the primary weapon that is in question, but that TWF specifically refers to two separate penalties being applied, one to the weapon wielded in your primary hand and one to the weapon wielded in you off-hand. A two-hander can not be wield by either alone and therefor does not fit.
It is not the weight or handedness of the primary weapon that is in question, but that TWF specifically refers to two separate penalties being applied, one to the weapon wielded in your primary hand and one to the weapon wielded in you off-hand. A two-hander can not be wield by either alone and therefor does not fit.
That's incorrect. "Off-hand" refers to a secondary attack, no matter what the source, weapon, knee, armor spikes, etc.
That's incorrect. "Off-hand" refers to a secondary attack, no matter what the source, weapon, knee, armor spikes, etc.
Secondary attacks are use with nat attacks only. Where did you get this non-sense?
You wouldnt actually be able to attack with a Two handed weapon then make a TWF attack with a spiked gauntlet. the Reason Being that the hand witht he spiked gauntlet on it was used for the Two handed attack.
That said you should be able to apply the appropriate TWF penalties and just kick your oponent.
You wouldnt actually be able to attack with a Two handed weapon then make a TWF attack with a spiked gauntlet. the Reason Being that the hand witht he spiked gauntlet on it was used for the Two handed attack.
That said you should be able to apply the appropriate TWF penalties and just kick your oponent.
I'm not sure that is RAW. I don't recall a rule that supports your claim about using your second hand as part of a 2H attack invalidates it for subsequent off-hand attacks.
Since the attacks are not simultaneous, saying that you can't use your left hand to make your next attack with a gauntlet is identical to saying you can't use your right hand to make your next atttack with your sword.
And as for kicking, sure, why not? But if you can kick him for a puny off-hand TWF attack, what't the harm in punching him for a puny off-hand TWF attack?
I'm not sure any of this is supported by RAW, for or against it. But since I can't find anything RAW against it, I'm inclined to see no reason not to do it.
Before i respond i want to make it clear i am in no way insisting Spiked gauntlets are natural attacks. But that said some of the Rules on them to me implies intent.
Basically with natural attacks if the limb for the natural attack is being used for something (like you have claws and you are attacking with a Two handed sword) you cant use them for a natural attack.
the logic on the spiked gauntlet i would think holds true as well. If your using that hand to attack with the sword youc ant Just Punch them with the same hand also.
that said beyond the regerene to natural attacks i cant support this in RAW
That's incorrect. "Off-hand" refers to a secondary attack, no matter what the source, weapon, knee, armor spikes, etc.Secondary attacks are use with nat attacks only. Where did you get this non-sense?
Secondary merely refers to an attack other than the primary attack. I apologize if my use of a big word confused you.
Secondary attacks with natural weapons have one set of rules. Secondary (or "off-hand") attacks with weapons have a slightly different set of rules. It is unfortunate that the designers choose to keep the term "off-hand" to refer to secondary weapon attacks as doing so has caused no end of confusion among certain very literal minded people.
Contrary to what the use of the term "off-hand" may imply, you may use your "off-hand" attack in ways that do not, in fact, involve a hand at all. Armor spikes are the best example, but knees, elbows, kicks, head butts, trips, disarms, etc., can all be "off-hand" attacks, whether an actual "hand" is involved or not is irrelevant.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. |
That's incorrect. "Off-hand" refers to a secondary attack, no matter what the source, weapon, knee, armor spikes, etc.Secondary attacks are use with nat attacks only. Where did you get this non-sense?
Secondary merely refers to an attack other than the primary attack. I apologize if my use of a big word confused you.
Secondary attacks with natural weapons have one set of rules. Secondary (or "off-hand") attacks with weapons have a slightly different set of rules. It is unfortunate that the designers choose to keep the term "off-hand" to refer to secondary weapon attacks as doing so has caused no end of confusion among certain very literal minded people.
Contrary to what the use of the term "off-hand" may imply, you may use your "off-hand" attack in ways that do not, in fact, involve a hand at all. Armor spikes are the best example, but knees, elbows, kicks, head butts, trips, disarms, etc., can all be "off-hand" attacks, whether an actual "hand" is involved or not is irrelevant.
I apologize if my use of a big word confused you.
They are not big words, They are just the wrong words. Terminology is important when discussing a text based system, and all brazened and insult laden insistence aside you still have not answered as to were this comes from.
The first line under TWF reads "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. " How is overly literal to draw from that, "you need a weapon in your hand"? And in that light, isnt your 'hands are irrelevant' stance the obscure one here?
As for kick, punch, and elbows, those are all apart of unarmed strike. Unarmed strikes are distinguished from weapon attacks, and natural attacks by raw and viable as off-hand attacks according to the unarmed entry of the combat chapter. Likewise armorspikes and double weapons can be used to make off-hand attacks as note in their descriptors. IE these item dont fit the system by there own nature but are specific adapted to do so: being used as off-hand attack, as light weapon, with regard to certain conditions stated in the descriptor, without which the eligibility would not exist.
Or at least that is how I interpret it.
If you two don't stop bickering, I'll turn these boards around!
Personally, I couldn't care less about RAW in these instances. If anyone comes to me with RAW, I tell them that raw is only for people with disgusting eating habits. :P Or point them towards Evonik or some other computer game that is not adjudicated by an A.I. (Actual Intelligence)
The way I see it, if you use a hand with one weapon, you don't get to get extra attacks with the same hand using a different weapon. When attacking two-handed, you spent your time this round using both hands with the big hunk of a weapon you swing around wildly. Both hands have gone through all those 6 seconds the round represents.
However you want to interpret the rules, an off-hand attack is made using you non-dominant hand. If you are right-handed, then your left hand is your off-hand, and the reverse for left-handed people. Even if you only do one attack in the round, if it is not done with your dominant hand, then it is still an off-hand attack and gets the appropriate penalties. This is why the ability to make your character ambidextrous is always so popular in any game system that allows it.
As for TWF, my ruling would be that the only way you could use the feat in the example in this thread would be if you were holding the two-handed weapon in one hand when attacking with it, thus freeing up your other hand to make the extra attack that the feat grants. Now, if you want to get picky about the type of two-handed weapon, then sure, with something that uses a piercing attack like a spear, you could maybe make the attack and then swipe with the spiked gauntlet as well. But something like a two-handed sword, where you have to swing it around and cut with the edge is a no because more often than not where your swing finishes would put your hands in a position to make it impossible to swipe with the gauntlet in the same round.
However you want to interpret the rules, an off-hand attack is made using you non-dominant hand. If you are right-handed, then your left hand is your off-hand, and the reverse for left-handed people.
Actually, there doesn't exist handedness in D&D 3.x and Pathfinder. There's not a single word on handedness in the whole book. The only place where off-hand is even refered to is in the context of two-weapon fighting. If you have a mace in one hand and a sword in the other, you can attack with whichever one without penalties - as long as you don't do it in the same round. You can safely assume all people in Golarion use their hands equally well, unless ripped of by a hungry ogre (and he can rip it of with whatever hand he wishes!).
I don't even think in 3.0 where there was an "ambidextrous" feat, that there was any handedness. The feat made you able to use both hand equally well simultaneously.
And there's many off-hand attacks that don't use an off-hand or even a hand at all in PFRPG. Monks get a whole bunch of off-hand attacks to choose from, then there's spiked armor, shield bashing and so on.
The way I see it, if you use a hand with one weapon, you don't get to get extra attacks with the same hand using a different weapon. When attacking two-handed, you spent your time this round using both hands with the big hunk of a weapon you swing around wildly. Both hands have gone through all those 6 seconds the round represents.
I feel the same way. TWF is TWF, two weapon in two hands, not attack with whatever and follow up with a lesser whatever. That is will be more important to me when I sit down at my own table then RAW, but this rules forum so getting technical goes with the territory.
While we're on a light note I had some hilarious about using the proposed 'it doesnt matter if your hand was occuppied a second ago' logic. Anybody else see ridiculousness in like this
* Multi-armed Marilith wielding one Uber sword by juggling and using the multi-attack feat
* A bastard sword in two hands is now a bastard sword in off-hand.
* Monk can dual wield two weapons and then throw a unarmed strike in on top, and with multi-fighting every nameable part of his body is effectively an off-hand right?
The way I see it, if you use a hand with one weapon, you don't get to get extra attacks with the same hand using a different weapon.While we're on a light note I had some hilarious about using the proposed 'it doesnt matter if your hand was occuppied a second ago' logic. Anybody else see ridiculousness in like this
For an even more ridiculous idea that this would allow:
Make a full-attack (at -2) with a Greatsword, then Quickdraw (a free action) a short sword in your off hand and attack with that.Given the Two-weapon Fighting feat text, this armor spikes text is interesting:
Armor spikes deal extra piercing damage (see “spiked armor” on Table: Weapons) on a successful grapple attack. The spikes count as a martial weapon. If you are not proficient with them, you take a –4 penalty on grapple checks when you try to use them. You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. (You can't also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.)
Now, attacking with a two-handed weapon prevents making attacks with a second in your off-hand, so you probably shouldn't be able to use armor spikes either.
* Multi-armed Marilith wielding one Uber sword by juggling and using the multi-attack feat
* A bastard sword in two hands is now a bastard sword in off-hand.
* Monk can dual wield two weapons and then throw a unarmed strike in on top, and with multi-fighting every nameable part of his body is effectively an off-hand right?
1. Won't work, since she only has one weapon. One weapon is one weapon.
2. Don't get what you mean at all with this. Do you mean that if you have EWP: Bastard Sword, you can use it in an off-hand? Or that you can use it first as a two-hander and then for the off-hand attacks? In that case, won't work. It's a single weapon.3. Don't completely understand this, but Flurry doesn't stack with TWF, and multi-weapon fighting specifically calls out that it's for creatures with more than two arms. Also, multifighting doesn't allow you to do more attacks per round - it reduces the penalty.
Now, attacking with a two-handed weapon prevents making attacks with a second in your off-hand, so you probably shouldn't be able to use armor spikes either.
Does it? I can see no rules that support that, but I could have missed something. I know in 3.5, it wasn't only not forbidden, but AFAIK it was in a 3.5 FAQ and there they were positive you could attack with a twohander and spiked armor.
And if the RAW is unclear, is there any reason to ban it? It's not overpowered (or optimal), as has been shown.
|
The use of the word "hand" is meant to imply the normal case, not the restricted one. A "primary" or "off-hand" doesn't have to be a hand, hence why unarmed strikes can be kicks and elbows, etc. Armor spikes is another case of this.
Two-weapon fighting only requires that you be capable of attacking with two separate weapons in the round without using the same limbs. If it's primary it has normal strength to damage (which, for a two-hander is 1.5x). If it's off- it gets lesser strength to damage (which, for a monk, natural attack or character with double slice is 1x, but for most people is 0.5x). Two-hander and unarmed strikes? Good. Two-hander and armor spikes? Fine. Two-hander and spikes gauntlets? No good unless you have more than 2 arms, since you'd be using the same hands. Two claws? You can either use natural attack progression, or treat them as manufactured and use TWF rules.
Two-hander and unarmed strikes? Good. Two-hander and armor spikes? Fine. Two-hander and spikes gauntlets? No good unless you have more than 2 arms, since you'd be using the same hands.
On that, I'm looking forward to a "spiked helmet" or "blade boots" weapon that allows you to deal lethal damage without AoO and without using a hand. 1d3 piercing or slashing would be about right.
I know in 3.5, it wasn't only not forbidden, but AFAIK it was in a 3.5 FAQ and there they were positive you could attack with a twohander and spiked armor.
And if the RAW is unclear, is there any reason to ban it? It's not overpowered (or optimal), as has been shown.
The 3.5 FAQ also has the example of using a bow then quick drawing a dagger and throwing it. And you're correct, it isn't overpowered or even optimal. In fact, it's suboptimal. The whole controversy about these combinations is much ado about nothing.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I am sure this has been mentioned before but I was wondering.
Is It RAW to use a two handed weapon...make all your attacks with that weapon, then use an off hand attack with a spiked gauntlet?
I am under the impression letting go of a weapon in your hand is a free action....
In other words can you combine Two handed weapons with TWF, and still get the bonus damage from the Two-handed weapon, while getting the extra attack from TWF.
FAQ time.
To solve this:
You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case.
You can use the armor spikes to make an off hand attack -- since armor spikes aren't wielded in a hand you have both hands to use a two handed weapon. Armor spikes still allow you to specifically make an off-hand attack with them so you can two weapon fight with them with a two handed weapon. Doing so treats the armor spikes as a light weapon so you only take a -4/-8 penalty while doing so or a -2/-2 penalty while doing so with the two weapon fighting feat. The armor spikes as an off hand attack will do the listed damage +1/2 your strength +1 per point of penalty you take on power attack (if you power attack) + any specific weapon enhancement bonus they have on them.
The two handed weapon will still get 1.5 your strength mod bonus on damage and will still get a +3 per point of penalty you take with power attack (if you use it).
|
at the very least, you would need quick draw feat to put your hand back on the 2 hander to wield it and continue making your strikes. letting go with one hand makes the weapon state go from wielding to holding, which means the weapons is not in a state where it can be attacked with. just like picking it up from the ground, or drawing it from a sheath, I'd insist a move action be taken to re-arm the fighter unless he has quick draw.
beyond that, I think it conflicts with the RAW to use a 2 handed weapon for one strike, and then try to hit with one of those same hands. I'd allow an elbow strike, or a knee, kick, armor spike...etc.. Any strike that did not use the hands.
I don't even think TWF with 2-handers makes much sense unless you are titan mauler.
It's TWF (two-weapon fighting), not THF (two-handed fighting).
Take armor spikes to avoid the spiked gauntlet discussion.
Since they can be used as off-hand attacks, you can attack with your two-handed weapon and with the spikes (as per TWF).
And since they don't specify where exactly on your armor they are mounted, you can have them anywhere you'd like, say, on your forearms.
How you fluff that attack, now, is entirely up to you.