As I understand it, enhancement bonuses can be added to Combat Maneuvers as long as the weapon used has that maneuver as a feature. So a +2 flail would add that enhancement to both trip and disarm attempts. What about unarmed strikes? You can disarm and trip with your body, so would the enhancement bonus from an Amulet of Mighty Fists apply to those?
If no, what about with the addition of feats that improve those maneuvers? An weapon that adds +2 to trip or disarm would clearly be a trip or disarm weapon, right?
I'm playing a Monk/Druid with Improved Grapple, Improved Trip and Improved Disarm. Would Greater Magic Fang enhance those maneuvers as well as his unarmed strikes and natural weapons?
Thanks in advance for any clarification.
As I understand it, enhancement bonuses can be added to Combat Maneuvers as long as the weapon used has that maneuver as a feature. So a +2 flail would add that enhancement to both trip and disarm attempts. What about unarmed strikes? You can disarm and trip with your body, so would the enhancement bonus from an Amulet of Mighty Fists apply to those?
If no, what about with the addition of feats that improve those maneuvers? An weapon that adds +2 to trip or disarm would clearly be a trip or disarm weapon, right?
I'm playing a Monk/Druid with Improved Grapple, Improved Trip and Improved Disarm. Would Greater Magic Fang enhance those maneuvers as well as his unarmed strikes and natural weapons?
Thanks in advance for any clarification.
unfortunately no the weapon has to have the "trip" property to apply the enhancement bonus
EDIT: http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Trip
Thanks Lobolusk,
I've read that post over and over, but it still is confusing to me. It just seems odd that you can't trip with a non trip weapon, except that you CAN trip unarmed. You can't trip with a longsword, can you?
You CAN disarm or sunder with a longsword though. Would the enhancement bonus apply to those maneuvers? (I've read quite a few posts that say it does apply). If so, what's the difference in that and being able to trip unarmed?
What about natural weapons such as a stegasaurus that has trip as part of it's attack? Or a dire tiger with the grab special ability, would GMF apply as an enhancement bonus to those maneuvers?
Thanks Lobolusk,
I've read that post over and over, but it still is confusing to me. It just seems odd that you can't trip with a non trip weapon, except that you CAN trip unarmed. You can't trip with a longsword, can you?
You CAN disarm or sunder with a longsword though. Would the enhancement bonus apply to those maneuvers? (I've read quite a few posts that say it does apply). If so, what's the difference in that and being able to trip unarmed?
What about natural weapons such as a stegasaurus that has trip as part of it's attack? Or a dire tiger with the grab special ability, would GMF apply as an enhancement bonus to those maneuvers?
Don't confuse 'doesn't get the bonuses....' with 'Can't do it'.
Flails are DESIGNED for the tripping and disarming. They get bonuses to it. If you are unarmed or carrying a longsword, you can STILL trip and disarm people (along with any OTHER CMB manuever). You just don't get the bonuses you would have if you were using a TRIP weapon.
|
You can't trip with a longsword, can you?
Yes, absolutely you can...
If you want to make a trip combat maneuver, do you have to use a weapon with the trip special feature?
No. Note that when making a trip combat maneuver, you don't need to use a weapon at all--for example, you can trip when you're unarmed, even though unarmed strike isn't listed as a trip weapon.
There are advantages to using a weapon with the trip special feature (a.k.a. a "trip weapon") when making a trip combat maneuver. One, if your trip attack fails by 10 or more, you can drop the trip weapon instead of being knocked prone. Two, you can apply the weapon's enhancement bonus, weapon-specific attack bonuses such as Weapon Focus, and so on to your trip combat maneuver roll.
For example, you'd add the enhancement bonus from a +5 whip to your trip combat maneuver roll because a whip is a trip weapon. You wouldn't add the enhancement bonus from a +5 longsword to your trip combat maneuver roll because a longsword is not a trip weapon. In effect, there's no difference between making an unarmed trip attempt and a trip attempt with a +5 longsword because the sword doesn't help you make the trip attempt.—Sean K Reynolds, 03/15/11
... you just don't get any of the related weapon bonuses for doing so.
You can't trip with a longsword, can you?Yes, absolutely you can...
... you just don't get any of the related weapon bonuses for doing so.
Hmmm. That's not how I read that. To me it reads that, you don't NEED a trip weapon, you can use unarmed strikes as well. I interpret that as you can either use a weapon designed for tripping or an unarmed attack (which also sounds like it should be considered a trip weapon).
A flail doesn't give any more bonus to trip as a long sword according to what you say (until you start adding enhancement bonuses to it), that makes no sense to me. A flail is designed to trip and disarm. A trip weapon, unarmed or natural attack with the trip ability is needed to make a trip as I read it.
Disarm is different though. You can disarm with other weapons or unarmed, but the disarm feature adds a bonus of +2. Trip isn't specified that way.
... you just don't get any of the related weapon bonuses for doing so.
You also can't drop the weapon if you fail your trip attempt by 10 or more.
|
You can't trip with a longsword, can you?Yes, absolutely you can...
... you just don't get any of the related weapon bonuses for doing so.Hmmm. That's not how I read that. To me it reads that, you don't NEED a trip weapon, you can use unarmed strikes as well. I interpret that as you can either use a weapon designed for tripping or an unarmed attack (which also sounds like it should be considered a trip weapon).
A flail doesn't give any more bonus to trip as a long sword according to what you say (until you start adding enhancement bonuses to it), that makes no sense to me. A flail is designed to trip and disarm. A trip weapon, unarmed or natural attack with the trip ability is needed to make a trip as I read it.
Disarm is different though. You can disarm with other weapons or unarmed, but the disarm feature adds a bonus of +2. Trip isn't specified that way.
I've actually been debating with ProfPotts on this issue on another thread. His interpretation is... problematic. It allows things like tripping with a non-trip reach weapon at reach, but disallows dropping that weapon if you mess up (which makes no sense as dropping is almost a non-action, and is certainly no harder for a non-trip weapon than it is for a trip weapon). Not to mention allowing tripping with a gauntlet or spiked shield (which is just a silly image).
It also reads a lot into a single line that isn't needed to answer the question, and could just as easily be read as "you're effectively not using the weapon."
The unarmed strike issue is another funny one. By RAW, you don't get your unarmed strike related bonuses on anything but disarm or sunder. At my table I'll probably be changing that to make the bonuses apply to all maneuvers that you aren't using another weapon for (partly as a boost to unarmed strike, but also for world consistency/verisimilitude).
A flail doesn't give any more bonus to trip as a long sword according to what you say (until you start adding enhancement bonuses to it), that makes no sense to me. A flail is designed to trip and disarm. A trip weapon, unarmed or natural attack with the trip ability is needed to make a trip as I read it.
It does give you an advantage over the longsword, even if it's not enhanced. If you try to trip with a +5 longsword and you fail by more than 10 you are knocked prone. If you were using a basic flail and failed by the same amount, you could choose to drop the weapon instead of falling prone.
And really, how hard is it to find a masterwork flail for a +1?
Hmmm. That's not how I read that. To me it reads that, you don't NEED a trip weapon, you can use unarmed strikes as well. I interpret that as you can either use a weapon designed for tripping or an unarmed attack (which also sounds like it should be considered a trip weapon).
Unarmed attacks are not trip weapons either, nor should they be treated as such. You can't, for example, drop your arm or leg instead of falling prone due to a failed trip attempt.
Read the FAQ:
FAQIf you want to make a trip combat maneuver, do you have to use a weapon with the trip special feature?
No.
Note that when making a trip combat maneuver, you don't need to use a weapon at all--for example, you can trip when you're unarmed, even though unarmed strike isn't listed as a trip weapon.
We all agree this is poorly written. It doesn't say you have to use an unarmed strike if you have a non-trip weapon. It says that you don't even need a weapon. You can make a trip attempt with any weapon, you just won't get bonuses and you won't get the ability to drop the weapon to escape falling prone. The FAQ uses unarmed strike as an example of tripping with a non-trip weapon. They should have just used the +5 longsword throughout the example so that this confusion wouldn't exist.
Think of it another way. If you really were using your unarmed attack to trip an opponent while wielding a longsword, then shouldn't you be taking a -8 penalty for your off hand attack, and a -4 to your primary hand? The FAQ doesn't mention that at all, nor does it even suggest it.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Helpful Disarm/Trip summary for you, ironnic:
1. Every combat maneuver can be performed pretty much regardless of what weapon you've got.
2. For Disarming: you use your weapon for disarming by default (and gain all appropriate bonuses, such as enhancement and Weapon Focus). If you want to do it unarmed, you can, but per the description of disarm in the CRB combat chapter, you have to (a) take a -4 to the attempt, and (b) get to automatically grab whatever you disarmed if you succeed. Also remember that the disarm weapon quality, while not necessary, does give you a +2 to the attempt.
3. For Tripping: as per #1 above, you can attempt a trip regardless of what weapon you have out. However, you only get to employ your weapon in the attempt if said weapon has the "trip" weapon quality.* This means that weapon-specific bonuses (enhancement, Weapon Focus, etc) only apply to the trip attempt if the weapon used has the "trip" weapon quality. An additional function of said quality is also to let you drop the weapon instead of falling prone if you fail by 10 or more. Despite the fact that all trip attempts in which the tripper is not using a "trip weapon" are performed as unarmed leg sweeps or what have you, Unarmed Strike is still not a trip weapon and therefore does not confer special bonuses to the attempt and does not prevent you from falling prone if you fail miserably.**
And that's the long and short of it!
*There are some people who stubbornly choose to misinterpret the tripping FAQ referenced earlier, insisting that they still get to employ their non-trip weapons in their trip attempts. This view has been quite thoroughly discredited by James Jacobs, who kept repeating the correct view over and over and over in the face of a handful of vocal naysayers who kept telling him he was wrong and that they knew better. Yes, I really did devote my "favorites" tab exclusively to the trip issue.
**However, talk to your GM; they might be willing - as I would be - to let a character with both Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Trip to add bonuses to trip attempts (though there's not much way around the whole "falling prone if you fail by 10 or more" thing).
|
Wow, so my monk just got -7 to his future disarm attempts thanks to misread rules (-2 from Amulet of Mighty Fists, -1 from WF, and -4 from disarming without any weapon).
Flurry of fails FTW !
... no, seriously, shouldn't "unarmed" be considered as "armed" when you get Improved Unarmed Strike, even if you are actually, well, unarmed ? :/
The feat description, the maneuver description and the FAQ oppose themselves on this topic...
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Wow, so my monk just got -7 to his future disarm attempts thanks to misread rules (-2 from Amulet of Mighty Fists, -1 from WF,
Disarm is different from trip; you always get to apply your relevant bonuses to the disarm attempt, regardless of whether you're making use of a "disarm weapon" - the special weapon quality mostly just gives you a +2 to the attempt.
and -4 from disarming without any weapon).
Keep in mind that the disarm rules only impose that penalty if you make the maneuver "unarmed". IUS specifically says you're considered armed. Thus, no penalty.
Thanks Jiggy, very helpful. And I think my understanding is pretty much right-on with what you're saying, especially regarding tripping. My thought was that if you're capable of tripping unarmed, that it would be considered a trip weapon of sorts - especially with the addition of the Improved Trip feat. I guess it's not one by definition though, as you can't drop a body part and you can fail by 10 and be knocked prone. It's just something I'll have to discuss with my DM.
And, Holy Cow on that James Jacobs thread! I hadn't seen that before, I don't get on here much. I can't believe the nerve of some people. But that also clarified what I thought about trip weapons, you need an actual "trip weapon", not a long sword - which was where my thinking behind this thread came from.
I guess the above answer also applies to my Wildshaped question too. A stegosaurus can't drop it's tail that it's tripping with can it? So that would be a very similar circumstance to unarmed also being a trip weapon.
What about a creature with grab though? Would it's attack enhanced by GMF that initiates the grapple also give a bonus to that grapple check?
Thanks for all your help
A weapon can never gain the Trip/Disarm/Brace Properties (either with feats [Improved Trip] or gear [or Amulet of Mighty Fists]).
A non-trip weapon can be used in a trip attempt, but it adds nothing to the CMB roll - per SKR's FAQ entry on Trip.
Jiggy has done a lot of leg work on corraling quotes on the trip issue, but he did not note that these quotes are from over 1 year ago and were made before the Trip FAQ was even written. Obviously there is more designer discord on the issue than he is claiming.
A non-trip weapon can be used in a trip attempt, but it adds nothing to the CMB roll.
Where does it state this? And how is any weapon any different than a trip weapon then when it comes to adding to the CMB roll? (Not including enhancements - just base weapons). Trip weapons give no bonus to CMB. If that was the intent of the rules, trip weapons should have been designed like disarm weapons with a +2 inherent.
Clearly a weapon designed for tripping at it's base should be superior to a weapon that's not designed to trip. So my first level character with a dagger has just as much of a chance of tripping as the same guy with a sickle? And if he fails, he can drop the sickle, but couldn't do so with a dagger? None of that is rational.
I'd love to read the Trip FAQ's, can anyone point me to them?
A weapon can never gain the Trip/Disarm/Brace Properties (either with feats [Improved Trip] or gear [or Amulet of Mighty Fists]).
A non-trip weapon can be used in a trip attempt, but it adds nothing to the CMB roll - per SKR's FAQ entry on Trip.
If you attempt
Jiggy has done a lot of leg work on corraling quotes on the trip issue, but he did not note that these quotes are from over 1 year ago and were made before the Trip FAQ was even written. Obviously there is more designer discord on the issue than he is claiming.
Exactly. I think the Trip FAQ could pretty safely qualify as the "new official ruling" which Jacobs references in his posts.
As an absurd example, if we are saying that trip attempts while armed take the form of leg sweeps and such, then what happens to the legless, one-armed fighter? If he has a longsword in hand (his only remaining appendage) is he unable to make a trip attempt unless he first drops the sword? Can Daleks not trip?
Or for a slightly less absurd example, what about oozes? We know that they don't have legs and can't be tripped, but does that mean that since they don't have legs to sweep with that they also cannot trip in return?
Can Daleks not trip?
EXTERMINATE!
That implies no trippy trippy.
If a weapon doesn't have the trip special quality listed on the chart of weapons on pages 142-143, you can't use it to trip foes. Whether or not we should have given this quality to things like spears or quarterstaffs or nets is a different topic-in order to trip a foe with a weapon, the weapon HAS to have the trip special quality.
How could it be any more clear than that?
And yes, I realize my original post was flawed. It's much more of a question for my DM than it is for questions about rules.
@lillithsthrall
An excellent and concise summary of the current rules state of Pathfinder.
How could it be any more clear than that?
And yes, I realize my original post was flawed. It's much more of a question for my DM than it is for questions about rules.
I'm not sure why abraham has linked the unoffical FAQ to you... here check this from 2011: here
Cause I was lazy and remembered where it was without having to wade through several links, and because it offered some of the reasoning behind it too -- end of the day they both come out at the same place.
Cause I was lazy and remembered where it was without having to wade through several links, and because it offered some of the reasoning behind it too -- end of the day they both come out at the same place.Actually, no they don't. In the unofficial faq, James Jacobs says that you can't trip with a non-trip weapon. However, his statement wasn't carried over to the official faq which says that you can trip with a non-trip weapon.
Didn't need to:
Trip: You can use a trip weapon to make trip attacks. If you are tripped during your own trip attempt, you can drop the weapon to avoid being tripped
Unless you have something that actually says you can trip with a weapon that doesn't have the trip quality then you can't do it. Trip quality specifically states you can trip with that weapon. Unarmed strike gets a 'pass' on this as per the FAQ.
Performing a Combat ManeuverWhen performing a combat maneuver, you must use an action appropriate to the maneuver you are attempting to perform. While many combat maneuvers can be performed as part of an attack action, full-attack action, or attack of opportunity (in place of a melee attack), others require a specific action. Unless otherwise noted, performing a combat maneuver provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of the maneuver. If you are hit by the target, you take the damage normally and apply that amount as a penalty to the attack roll to perform the maneuver. If your target is immobilized, unconscious, or otherwise incapacitated, your maneuver automatically succeeds (treat as if you rolled a natural 20 on the attack roll). If your target is stunned, you receive a +4 bonus on your attack roll to perform a combat maneuver against it.
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.
The bonuses aren't applied because the weapon without the trip property isn't applicable to the maneuver and therefore can't be used to trip.
When in doubt, defer to reality.
If you had the weapon in your hand, could you come up with a way to trip your buddy? My guess is probably.
There are trip maneuvers in every single armed and unarmed school of combat on the planet. (barring a few sport styles)
Hell, a few days ago I tripped a buddy of mine with a sweatshirt.
Just because the rules don't give bonuses to Trip with a quarterstaff doesn't mean that you can't do it. That should be obvious. The same holds true to just about every other weapon. Let your players say what they want to try and then make the mechanics work around it. As a GM, I think it's pretty bad for to ever say "no, you just can't do that".
As I looked into this further, Sean's "clarification" only muddied the waters even more. I've read that response many times over the past few weeks, but hadn't looked at the order of when it appeared. Seems like it was pretty set in stone before he brought up the +5 longsword thing.
The key statement for me is bolded below:
For example, you'd add the enhancement bonus from a +5 whip to your trip combat maneuver roll because a whip is a trip weapon. You wouldn't add the enhancement bonus from a +5 longsword to your trip combat maneuver roll because a longsword is not a trip weapon. In effect, there's no difference between making an unarmed trip attempt and a trip attempt with a +5 longsword because the sword doesn't help you make the trip attempt.
To me, that's clearly another way of saying that you can either use a trip weapon OR you can attempt it unarmed. It doesn't say that you can use that sword to trip, just that it doesn't aid you if you attempt that trip. This doesn't overrule anything in my opinion. I respect your opinions, but I'm sticking with James' ruling on the matter.
I've seen the recent polearm tripping thread as well, and that just further reinforces this logic. If a sword doesn't aid in tripping, then a longspear shouldn't either, but if you can trip with a longspear with reach then that weapon is certainly "helping you make the trip attempt". The fact that there is a power gained by that class that gives the polearm expert the ability to trip (at -4) with any spear or polearm only reinforces this as the rule. It's a decent power, but is beyond meaningless if one interprets the rules wrong.
Just my 2¢. I already know what my decision is on the matter and I'm sure my opinion isn't going to change the minds of those arguing against this.
To me, that's clearly another way of saying that you can either use a trip weapon OR you can attempt it unarmed.
I'm of the opinion that the only reason that was listed at all was because Sean was saying this weapon can be used to trip but does not help in the attempt as a weapon with the Trip property would. Read closely about the comparison to the Whip and the Longsword. The Whip adds bonuses to the trip attempt since it is a trip weapon. The longsword does not add bonuses but is still used in the attempt.
What you're missing in your emphasis is this part of the FAQ:
In effect, there's no difference between making an unarmed trip attempt and a trip attempt with a +5 longsword because the sword doesn't help you make the trip attempt.
The in effect means essentially the same, but still *not* the same. The key difference here is the longsword is a different type of weapon than unarmed.
FAQ isn't Errata either though -- unless the weapon has the trip quality which allows you to make a trip attack with it as per the trip quality you can't make a trip attack with it.
FAQ isn't Errata either though -- unless the weapon has the trip quality which allows you to make a trip attack with it as per the trip quality you can't make a trip attack with it.
So you're going to disregard the FAQ until the next official errata? While I can understand that hard-line approach, we should assume that this FAQ will be influencing the errata going forward.
|
|
FAQ isn't Errata either though -- unless the weapon has the trip quality which allows you to make a trip attack with it as per the trip quality you can't make a trip attack with it.So you're going to disregard the FAQ until the next official errata? While I can understand that hard-line approach, we should assume that this FAQ will be influencing the errata going forward.
No, they're disregarding a badly worded off-hand sentence that wasn't directly in answer to the stated question. If the FAQ's question was "can I trip with a longsword?" then it would hold a little more weight.
Keep in mind that if you rule you can trip with any weapon than the entire first sentence of the trip property becomes pointless (and was NOT noted as being removed by SKR), and players could trip with reach without needing a reach trip weapon (which seems like an unintended effect). In effect, until an errata (or updated FAQ) comes out saying otherwise, that first sentence in the trip property combined with the FAQ indicates you must either trip with a trip weapon, or without using a weapon. No in between.
When in doubt, defer to reality.
If you had the weapon in your hand, could you come up with a way to trip your buddy? My guess is probably.
There are trip maneuvers in every single armed and unarmed school of combat on the planet. (barring a few sport styles)
Hell, a few days ago I tripped a buddy of mine with a sweatshirt.
Just because the rules don't give bonuses to Trip with a quarterstaff doesn't mean that you can't do it. That should be obvious. The same holds true to just about every other weapon. Let your players say what they want to try and then make the mechanics work around it. As a GM, I think it's pretty bad for to ever say "no, you just can't do that".
I hear you Doomed Hero, and i agree that situations arise that will allow rules to be stretched. I could absolutely see a sweatshirt being used in a trip in the right circumstance. But let me ask, was your buddy standing squared off, ready to defend himself? I'm sure he was running and you tossed it at his legs. Makes total sense. i could see how a stick could do the same thing with someone running past you with a readied action. But that doesn't mean I could pick up a stick and trip someone in combat. Same with a longsword. But grabbing an opponent's leg with a kama and pulling him off balance makes sense. I can also see how most weapons could aid in tripping with proper training, but I'd think they'd be sub-par to a trip weapon in effectiveness. So a homebrew feat (there's the training) that lets you trip with a certain weapon or group of weapons at a -4 would make sense to me. Similar mechanics to the Polearm Expert.
I'm all for winging it if the situation arises when I GM, but as far as the rules on trip weapons goes, it seems pretty clear.
[Edit] But for my original question, I shouldn't have asked that one here on the rules board. It's really something I should bring up with my group and see if they'll let me wing it.
This thought just occurred to me. You could treat it as an improvised trip weapon, thus the -4 on the check again. The thought of a feat for this seemed a little much, but letting someone improvise with a rope, a belt, a quarterstaff or a longsword to trip someone could have merit.
And yes. You could drop the item if you failed the check.
|
|
This thought just occurred to me. You could treat it as an improvised trip weapon, thus the -4 on the check again. The thought of a feat for this seemed a little much, but letting someone improvise with a rope, a belt, a quarterstaff or a longsword to trip someone could have merit.
And yes. You could drop the item if you failed the check.
I like this idea. Even though at medium-high levels this will even out with the weapon-specific bonuses, someone with a trip weapon will still be those 4 points ahead of you (unless they also have catch-off guard, I suppose?) Since the disarm property gives you +2, this seems decently fair.
I like this idea. Even though at medium-high levels this will even out with the weapon-specific bonuses, someone with a trip weapon will still be those 4 points ahead of you (unless they also have catch-off guard, I suppose?) Since the disarm property gives you +2, this seems decently fair.
Or you could treat it like an unarmed trip (also at -4 on the attempt) and not allow enhancement bonuses to stack with it. Improved Unarmed Strike fixes that negative, which brings me right back around to my original question. Could an unarmed strike (with IUS and Improved Trip) be considered a trip weapon? Mechanically, it makes sense. I think I'm going to push for it in our campaign.
There's a documentary out there... 'By the sword' or something similiar.. that showed some 'old style' combat training. One of the main things was, that knights could rarely 'CUT' each other with those swords through the plate mail. The key to that combat was to knock them down and then Coup de grace.
Y'know... IF they were fighting to the death... knights were often ransomed back.
But the combat that was common included grabbing the sword by the blade, and using the hilt to hook their enemy around the shoulders and helmet and throw them to the ground. Blades werent' sharp that far down... and they were wearing gauntlets anyway. But 'trip' was a legitimate combat maneuver for longswords.
Honestly, the FAQ is poorly worded, but here's the way "I" read it.
No. Note that when making a trip combat maneuver, you don't need to use a weapon at all--for example, you can trip when you're unarmed, even though unarmed strike isn't listed as a trip weapon.
The 'for example' doesn't have any point there if you can't trip with non-trip weapons.
The phrase SHOULD have been. 'No. Note that when making a trip combat maneuver, you don't need to use a weapon at all. You can trip when your unarmed.'
the 'For example' by it's nature... indicates that 'unarmed' is... an EXAMPLE of tripping without a trip weapon. That means there must be MORE examples...
Later we get
You wouldn't add the enhancement bonus from a +5 longsword to your trip combat maneuver roll because a longsword is not a trip weapon. In effect, there's no difference between making an unarmed trip attempt and a trip attempt with a +5 longsword because the sword doesn't help you make the trip attempt.
Why mention longswords as an example?? If you can't use them... then this whole paragraph is pointless.
As an added bonus, you get 'There's no difference between making an unarmed trip attempt and a trip attempt with a +5 longsword.'
Which since he JUST said you CAN make an a trip while unarmed... then there's no difference between unarmed and longsword.
Why would he say 'the sword doesn't help'... when he should have said 'you can't DO that with a non-trip weapon...'
The dialoge isn't the greatest... but the intent is fairly obvious. Anything can be torn apart looking for loopholes and hidden meanings... but the very basic 'Do I need a trip weapon to trip' answered with 'No.' Basically sums it up for me.
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have to agree with those that feel the FAQ response doesn't really answer the question. Instead it walks around it, without actually addressing the core issue; it states you don't have to use a trip weapon to make a trip attack, but that can simply mean you either have to use a trip weapon or make an unarmed trip attempt.
The section that uses the whip and longsword as an example would appear to be an attempt to resolve this issue, but because it gets too complicated, and as a result of poor wording, it too ends up avoiding the question. As a result, the only clear and definite answers we've gotten thus far are the quotes from James Jacobs, that Jiggy brought up earlier in the discussion.
If the FAQ is saying that a character can use a non-trip weapon to make a trip attempt, then it needs to be rewritten as simply as possible. I recommend something that can be answered with a one-word response:
Can a weapon lacking the trip special feature be used to make a trip combat maneuver?
As a result, the only clear and definite answers we've gotten thus far are the quotes from James Jacobs, that Jiggy brought up earlier in the discussion.
... again, the James Jacobs quotes are from 18 MONTHS ago, before the FAQ was issued.
As I understand it, enhancement bonuses can be added to Combat Maneuvers as long as the weapon used has that maneuver as a feature. So a +2 flail would add that enhancement to both trip and disarm attempts. What about unarmed strikes? You can disarm and trip with your body, so would the enhancement bonus from an Amulet of Mighty Fists apply to those?
If no, what about with the addition of feats that improve those maneuvers? An weapon that adds +2 to trip or disarm would clearly be a trip or disarm weapon, right?
I'm playing a Monk/Druid with Improved Grapple, Improved Trip and Improved Disarm. Would Greater Magic Fang enhance those maneuvers as well as his unarmed strikes and natural weapons?
Thanks in advance for any clarification.
The trip ability permits you to use a weapon to trip your target.
Then, if you attempt a combat manouver with a weapon, you can add the bonus. But it' not mandatory to have the trip ability.So, if you trip without a weapon you are using your unarmed strike / natural weapon. There's no other way to trip someone :)
So, even if you hands, bite, etc, don't have the trip ability you are using it to trip the target so you add all the effect that would appy to a normal attack.
So, you add the bonus. An exception, if you'r using the bite to trip and you got bonus only to claws you got no ench bonus, but if you got bonus to all attack but mainly the attack you'r using to trip then you will add it.
Oh, this problem is different for disarm attempt. The disarm ability gives you a +2 bonus. You don't earn it, but you can use the other bonuses in the same way I described before.
In fact, you don't need the disarm ability to disarm with a weapon, you just get a bonus.
As I stated, the ability of the weapon and adding the bonus to CMB are two different rules, that sometimes work togheter but it's not required.
Or you could treat it like an unarmed trip (also at -4 on the attempt) and not allow enhancement bonuses to stack with it. Improved Unarmed Strike fixes that negative, which brings me right back around to my original question. Could an unarmed strike (with IUS and Improved Trip) be considered a trip weapon? Mechanically, it makes sense. I think I'm going to push for it in our campaign.
Oh man. It was late when I wrote this.
I got my maneuvers mixed up! Heh, got trip confused with unarmed DISARM (at –4). Oh well. Thanks for the help everyone.
So, even if you hands, bite, etc, don't have the trip ability you are using it to trip the target so you add all the effect that would appy to a normal attack.
So, you add the bonus. An exception, if you'r using the bite to trip and you got bonus only to claws you got no ench bonus, but if you got bonus to all attack but mainly the attack you'r using to trip then you will add it.
According to the rest of this thread, you wouldn't get the bonus since unarmed and a bite aren't specifically defined as "trip weapons". I knew this already, but was looking for some way around this originally. I'll just solve it in our game.
I don't want to sound arrogant, but they were wrong.
You can make an attack or manouver with weapon or your body (natural weapon or improved attack).
You can make some manouver with weapons, like disarm. It's not mandatory that the weapon has the disarm ability. You use all the bonuses and maluses that apply to the weapon you'r doing the manouver.
Trip attempt are made with your body. To use a weapon to trip you must have the trip ability.
So, 2 different rules.
A) you use all your modifiers that apply with the thing with wich you are attempting the manouver
B) a trip weapon ability let you use the weapon to make trip attack
SO
if you use a weapon to make trip attack you apply the appropriate modifiers.
BUT if you use a natural weapon or unarmed strike you apply the appropriate bonus as well,
for example, a monk with a +3 enanchment bonus to unarmed strikes apply it to the trip manouver,
the same happens to your druid. Remember that the spells may require that you specify what's the natural weapon that benefit from the bonus, so not all your natural attack may have the same modifiers.
You don't need the trip ability, because you would use your natural attacks in any case.
|
|
If you can't use any weapon to attempt a trip, then wouldn't the help/FAQ answer simply have been something like:
'You can attempt a trip with a trip weapon, or unarmed.'
... Instead of wasting a couple of paragraphs of text clarifying which bonuses you get (or rather don't get) when using a non-trip weapon to try a trip?
As far as I know SKR isn't prone to excessive rules wordage for no reason, is he?
... again, the James Jacobs quotes are from 18 MONTHS ago, before the FAQ was issued.
I never claimed otherwise. However, Jacob's posts were clear and definite, while the FAQ entry is not. It's not even clear if the FAQ contradicts those earlier posts.
If you can't use any weapon to attempt a trip, then wouldn't the help/FAQ answer simply have been something like:
'You can attempt a trip with a trip weapon, or unarmed.'
... Instead of wasting a couple of paragraphs of text clarifying which bonuses you get (or rather don't get) when using a non-trip weapon to try a trip?
As far as I know SKR isn't prone to excessive rules wordage for no reason, is he?
Take a look at the rest of the FAQ responses, and I believe you'll answer your own question.
I agree with Heaven's Agent and others. Nothing that Sean says trumps the clearly laid out rules that James put down or the RAW. Sean was likely just going through a stack of FAQ updates and thought he was clear, when he truly was not. Nothing is definitive in what was stated.
It really kills me when people grab the original question and the word "No." as a definitive answer, without keeping in the context of what follows - that you can also trip unarmed. Let the man finish his thought if you're going to quote him.
Granting a simple weapon the ability to trip at a reach totally diminishes the intent of the rules. A sorcerer can now make a trip attempt with a longspear according to some rules lawyering?? That couldn't possibly be the intent of the designers. And he can't drop it if he fails because you're following the unarmed trip rules? Also makes no sense.
It's funny to me how adamant some people are about language that's so fuzzy. And how many times have I read "What Sean meant was..." Only Sean knows what he meant by what he wrote. We can make assumptions, but they're just that, assumptions. Not rules.
Assuming that Sean is trumping James just because he answered a question a different (and more vague) way is again just that, an assumption.
None of that entry warrants a rules change. Let's wait for solid rules clarification before we go jumping at assumptions.