Finessable reach-weapons that threaten?


Advice

Liberty's Edge

-- are there any?

Liberty's Edge

Whip, if you take Improved Whip Mastery. That's it.


Problem is finesse weapons have to be fairly light and rely on precision over power, and the longer you make a weapon, the heavier it gets. The elven curveblade is the only two-handed weapon that is finesseable, otherwise it's only a few one-handed (like the rapier) and all light weapons.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dabbler wrote:
Problem is finesse weapons have to be fairly light and rely on precision over power, and the longer you make a weapon, the heavier it gets. The elven curveblade is the only two-handed weapon that is finesseable, otherwise it's only a few one-handed (like the rapier) and all light weapons.

As a note, you can technicaly two hand a whip.

If it comes up.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mike Schneider wrote:
-- are there any?

The 3.5 Spiked Chain.

Dark Archive

Dabbler wrote:
Problem is finesse weapons have to be fairly light and rely on precision over power, and the longer you make a weapon, the heavier it gets. The elven curveblade is the only two-handed weapon that is finesseable, otherwise it's only a few one-handed (like the rapier) and all light weapons.

However, all flexible weapons require coordination to use in the real world over Strength so they should all be usable with Finesse. Perhaps, they should even require Finesse.


The Bladed Scarf used to be, before they nerfed it.


If you can use Psionics Unleashed, you can take Blade Skills alter your soul knife into a finesse weapon with reach that threatens.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Sigard Spleenbiter wrote:
However, all flexible weapons require coordination to use in the real world over Strength so they should all be usable with Finesse. Perhaps, they should even require Finesse.

In the real world, Strength aids your ability to finesse weapons as well. Stronger muscles make any object you hold easier to maneuver, quicker to move, and quicker to recover or ready.

However, most gamers seem to have some sort of aversion to acknowledging the role of strength and practiced skill with regards to graceful varieties of combat, and simply want to use inherent coordination alone.


Parka wrote:
Sigard Spleenbiter wrote:
However, all flexible weapons require coordination to use in the real world over Strength so they should all be usable with Finesse. Perhaps, they should even require Finesse.

In the real world, Strength aids your ability to finesse weapons as well. Stronger muscles make any object you hold easier to maneuver, quicker to move, and quicker to recover or ready.

However, most gamers seem to have some sort of aversion to acknowledging the role of strength and practiced skill with regards to graceful varieties of combat, and simply want to use inherent coordination alone.

This. As someone who participates in Period (historical) fencing, I can tell you that strength is quite relevant, even with something as light a Rapier.

The one I use is short (35 inches of blade) and light - partially because I like mine short, but also partially because longer rapiers are heavier, and I don't have the strength to wield them with the same quickness as I do my small one. Yes, part of that is the fact that longer weapons are more unwieldy, but Strength is involved as well.

I can also say that I can go well over 10 minutes of continual fighting with my short blade without concern, but even 5 minutes with some of the heavier ones wears my arm down considerably.

EDIT: Of course, co-ordination is extremely important, too. I've lost count of the number of times I had a clear, open shot at someone and missed about a half inch off to the side.


TheRedArmy wrote:
EDIT: Of course, co-ordination is extremely important, too. I've lost count of the number of times I had a clear, open shot at someone and missed about a half inch off to the side.

Thing is, I think inherent "coordination" (i.e. a Dex score) is actually a superstition. I'm just about certain that nearly every application of it is actually practiced skill and we are aggregating this into some level of "coordination" for simplicity. Taken in a vacuum, it suddenly becomes a situation where people new to the weapon are performing better than others with actual experience in a style by virtue of a monstrous Dex score.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Remember, real world physics and pathfinder do not mix.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Scorpion Whip, Flying Talon? I have to say, I can think of little to help you.


Natural attacks of Large creature, or Medium creature with greater than normal reach (for example Small Improved Familiar with reach evolution taken with Familiar Evolution feat).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

The lunge feat gives you 5' reach on your turn.
You don´t threaten more squares out of yout turn though and get -2 to AC, but you can take monkey lunge to compensate that.


Parka wrote:
TheRedArmy wrote:
EDIT: Of course, co-ordination is extremely important, too. I've lost count of the number of times I had a clear, open shot at someone and missed about a half inch off to the side.
Thing is, I think inherent "coordination" (i.e. a Dex score) is actually a superstition. I'm just about certain that nearly every application of it is actually practiced skill and we are aggregating this into some level of "coordination" for simplicity. Taken in a vacuum, it suddenly becomes a situation where people new to the weapon are performing better than others with actual experience in a style by virtue of a monstrous Dex score.

Perhaps. I think some natural skill applies, but no doubt skill is the most important thing. I've noticed myself get considerably more accurate when I do practice drills during the week as opposed when I haven't done any for about a month (like now - blows I would make had I practiced more miss).


Double chained kamas pretty clearly should be finessable, but it isn't. That, plus spiked chain not having reach anymore makes me assume for balance purposes they don't want finessable reach weapons other than the whip.


oneplus999 wrote:
Double chained kamas pretty clearly should be finessable, but it isn't. That, plus spiked chain not having reach anymore makes me assume for balance purposes they don't want finessable reach weapons other than the whip.

Nah its just that there is a 1-10 ratio on exotic weaons where one out of every ten gets to be worth taking the others become cool looking fluff with feat tax.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I believe the Scorpion whip threatens, depending on how you wield it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blackbloodtroll wrote:
I believe the Scorpion whip threatens, depending on how you wield it.

And depending on which Book you use and which member of the Paizo Staff you ask.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Talonhawke wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
I believe the Scorpion whip threatens, depending on how you wield it.
And depending on which Book you use and which member of the Paizo Staff you ask.

If the OP's dm rules it so as to work, then I suggest using it. It is quite unclear how it works though.

Dark Archive

Parka wrote:
Sigard Spleenbiter wrote:
However, all flexible weapons require coordination to use in the real world over Strength so they should all be usable with Finesse. Perhaps, they should even require Finesse.

In the real world, Strength aids your ability to finesse weapons as well. Stronger muscles make any object you hold easier to maneuver, quicker to move, and quicker to recover or ready.

However, most gamers seem to have some sort of aversion to acknowledging the role of strength and practiced skill with regards to graceful varieties of combat, and simply want to use inherent coordination alone.

That may be so, but that doesn't mean Srength ALONE should be the stat to be used. If one must be chosen, Dexterity should be the one because it's role is greater. At the very least, make them a Weapon with which Finesse is an option.

Dark Archive

oneplus999 wrote:
Double chained kamas pretty clearly should be finessable, but it isn't. That, plus spiked chain not having reach anymore makes me assume for balance purposes they don't want finessable reach weapons other than the whip.

That is also a conclusion I've drawn. However, it's a conclusion I've sarcastically. The whip weapons reach, though they have two hexes of reach and do 1d4 damage or less.

It more reasonably seems to me that the designers just don't like Weapon Finesse and don't want to support it (or it's just become an accidental oversight).


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Since you can wield a double chained kama like a normal kama, how it says in the description, it is finessable.


Sigard Spleenbiter wrote:
That may be so, but that doesn't mean Srength ALONE should be the stat to be used. If one must be chosen, Dexterity should be the one because it's role is greater. At the very least, make them a Weapon with which Finesse is an option.

Strength is the one stat that can actually be ascertained as having a measurable effect. Dexterity can't be measured or isolated in any real world sense- there is no Dexterity ability that can be judged independently of practiced skills of some sort (whether it be weapon skills, athletic skills, writing capability, etc).

Basically, I don't really think there is a "Dex" score, only skill and practice. I think people are constantly ignoring the role of skill in favor of some imaginary inborn talent, which devalues the role of weapons training or generally practicing long and hard to be able to even use a particular weapon without embarrassing one's self, let alone master it.

Liberty's Edge

Parka wrote:
Sigard Spleenbiter wrote:
That may be so, but that doesn't mean Srength ALONE should be the stat to be used. If one must be chosen, Dexterity should be the one because it's role is greater. At the very least, make them a Weapon with which Finesse is an option.

Strength is the one stat that can actually be ascertained as having a measurable effect. Dexterity can't be measured or isolated in any real world sense- there is no Dexterity ability that can be judged independently of practiced skills of some sort (whether it be weapon skills, athletic skills, writing capability, etc).

Basically, I don't really think there is a "Dex" score, only skill and practice. I think people are constantly ignoring the role of skill in favor of some imaginary inborn talent, which devalues the role of weapons training or generally practicing long and hard to be able to even use a particular weapon without embarrassing one's self, let alone master it.

According to the PRD, dexterity represents agility, reflexes and balance. Coordination is not listed there. We know that, as a physical trait, some people's nervous systems are capable of reacting more quickly than others. If you want to get simulationist, this is most if not all of what dexterity represents.

The reason dexterity helps in tasks that require coordination is that those with high dexterity can react to and correct (minor) mistakes more quickly (reflexes allow quick determination that the mistake is happening and what to do, while agility allows you to execute that action more quickly). The higher the dexterity modifier, the more likely they are to correct the mistake before it causes their attempted action to fail.

Someone with a lot of skill will look dexterous because, to the untrained eye, they are identical. However, that skilled person would, when watching a dexterous person with the same net modifier, recognize the mistakes being made and corrected whereas others might not. To the unskilled observers, the two would look identical, leading most people to use "coordinated", "skilled" and "dexterous" interchangeably.

TL;DR - Dexterity doesn't say that it is coordination, but it would look like coordination as the dexterous person corrects minor mistakes that a more skilled person simply wouldn't make.

EDIT: I should note that the above is not to be taken as a devaluation of the role of skill. In nearly all cases, dexterity would provide less than half of your total bonus with even relatively basic training. It would be rare for someone to have more than +3 modifier from dexterity, but even a single rank in a class skill grants a +4. Those who use weapons must be proficient or take a -4, which already overshadows the dexterity modifier. Even discounting that, a mere level 3 NPC could, with weapon focus, overshadow their dexterity modifier by taking weapon focus (BAB +3, weapon focus +1 > dex +3). When you consider that few would have more than a +1 or +2, the role of training becomes even larger.


Hayato Ken wrote:

Since you can wield a double chained kama like a normal kama, how it says in the description, it is finessable.

That's only in "two kamas" mode, when its in "reach mode" its (presumably, like other double weapons) a two handed weapon, which means it's not a light weapon, which probably means it's not finessable.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

I would say its more like a whip in reach mode and you can´t use the second part.


StabbittyDoom wrote:

According to the PRD, dexterity represents agility, reflexes and balance. Coordination is not listed there. We know that, as a physical trait, some people's nervous systems are capable of reacting more quickly than others. If you want to get simulationist, this is most if not all of what dexterity represents.

The reason dexterity helps in tasks that require coordination is that those with high dexterity can react to and correct (minor) mistakes more quickly (reflexes allow quick determination that the mistake is happening and what to do, while agility allows you to execute that action more quickly). The higher the dexterity modifier, the more likely they are to correct the mistake before it causes their attempted action to fail.

The main problem with that explanation of Dexterity is that it then becomes a combination of a mental attribute (reflexes- situational awareness and fast information recall and processing) and a physical attribute (agility, which I am unclear on if it is not synonymous with "coordination" or completely covered by the "acrobatics" skill).

The "reflexes" aspect really doesn't make sense in a general context- assuming a similar level of practice and/or skill, the variations between human reaction times is miniscule (barring neurological disorders). The gulf between people with a 12 dexterity and 20 dexterity is not. The statistical bonus provided for that is the same as not being proficient in a weapon, or having a trained class skill vs not. That can't be the purview of minor corrections. On top of that, situational awareness (Perception) and common sense (the ability to reason the solution to a problem quickly) is governed by Wisdom, a mental attribute, already.

The other aspect, "agility," is already largely reflected in the Skills section, broken up by task. I have a hard time seeing how these things have a different attribute score linked to them for any other reason than game simplicity or the evolution of mechanical artifacts.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well i have seen many very strong guys and bodybuilders that were totally slow and clumsy. Its definately opposite to a dancer or acrobat.
Of course fighting needs skill and training, but thats what BAB is for.

Liberty's Edge

Parka wrote:
StabbittyDoom wrote:

According to the PRD, dexterity represents agility, reflexes and balance. Coordination is not listed there. We know that, as a physical trait, some people's nervous systems are capable of reacting more quickly than others. If you want to get simulationist, this is most if not all of what dexterity represents.

The reason dexterity helps in tasks that require coordination is that those with high dexterity can react to and correct (minor) mistakes more quickly (reflexes allow quick determination that the mistake is happening and what to do, while agility allows you to execute that action more quickly). The higher the dexterity modifier, the more likely they are to correct the mistake before it causes their attempted action to fail.

The main problem with that explanation of Dexterity is that it then becomes a combination of a mental attribute (reflexes- situational awareness and fast information recall and processing) and a physical attribute (agility, which I am unclear on if it is not synonymous with "coordination" or completely covered by the "acrobatics" skill).

The "reflexes" aspect really doesn't make sense in a general context- assuming a similar level of practice and/or skill, the variations between human reaction times is miniscule (barring neurological disorders). The gulf between people with a 12 dexterity and 20 dexterity is not. The statistical bonus provided for that is the same as not being proficient in a weapon, or having a trained class skill vs not. That can't be the purview of minor corrections. On top of that, situational awareness (Perception) and common sense (the ability to reason the solution to a problem quickly) is governed by Wisdom, a mental attribute, already.

The other aspect, "agility," is already largely reflected in the Skills section, broken up by task. I have a hard time seeing how these things have a different attribute score linked to them for any other reason than game simplicity or the evolution of mechanical artifacts.

It's a fantasy world, not the real one. In a fantasy world the differences between the reflexes of person A and person B can be much more vast because we want it to be much more vast.

That said, I will continue that argument assuming more real-world realities. I agree that dexterity is more than just reflexes, and as it should. With only 6 statistics to describe the overarching body of "talent" your character possesses, there isn't a lot of room to get ultra specific without leaving a lot of things out entirely.

Dexterity represents reflexes, agility and balance, as the book describes. Let's use a 20 dex character attacking someone as an example. Reflexes can probably give a +1, +2 at most (as you note, but keep in mind that dex 20 is already probably in neurological-disorder range by modern standards). Agility is the ability to move quickly, which could provide bonuses to certain tasks by either giving you more attempts at the very fine grain tasks (sub-second) in the same time period (for things like lockpicking), or by giving the opponent less time to respond to your attack or other reasons. That probably would contribute a +2 to +3 for the case of attacking. The last is balance, which represents your naturally ability to right yourself and ensure your have solid footing, even when the footing doesn't help you with that. Some people will have better sensors in their inner ear than others. This is another difference that should, in almost all cases, be slight. This would grant a +0 to +1 for the attack. Adding the average of those ranges up gets us a +4.5, or about a +5. That last 0.5 can easily be explained via the slight exaggeration of each property via the fantasy scale, without that scale going so far as to be completely ludicrous.

Can a character improve these aspects through training? Certainly, yes. But you can't make your inner ear suddenly better through training (though you can do more with what you have, aka post-processing) and you can't increase the speed at which your nervous system transfers information through training (you can cut the number of nodes down, but not the speed at which it travels through them). Agility is definitely something you could explain as well through training as anything else, but certain body types would certainly be predisposed.

I feel your comment about dexterity mapping to awareness is a bit disingenuous. You imply that dexterity bonuses are always there, but they are not. They are lost in cases where you are not aware. Admittedly this only applies to AC, but losing it for skills wouldn't make sense as if you weren't aware then you weren't using the skill. It would make sense to ditch it for reflex saves when caught off guard, and that is a point many people have argued should be true, but the system leaves you with your dexterity bonus as a legacy thing as much as anything else.

Now that I've said all this, I have to say: Why do we have dexterity? Because we want to, and because it's cool. Is it 100% accurate? No. But is anything in this system 100% accurate?


Actually changing the game to account for my opinions would doubtless need to be in the Homebrew section. But the reasons for my problems-

StabbittyDoom wrote:
I feel your comment about dexterity mapping to awareness is a bit disingenuous. You imply that dexterity bonuses are always there, but they are not. They are lost in cases where you are not aware. Admittedly this only applies to AC, but losing it for skills wouldn't make sense as if you weren't aware then you weren't using the skill.

The reason I bring up the awareness issue is because you refer to "correcting errors" in the process of an action. You would need to perceive these errors, think about what the correct action is to remedy it, and then perform it. That does involve elements of situational awareness. It does not mean "oblivious or not" in the sense that I am using it, though I grant I didn't define it well.

StabbittyDoom wrote:
Agility is the ability to move quickly, which could provide bonuses to certain tasks by either giving you more attempts at the very fine grain tasks (sub-second) in the same time period (for things like lockpicking), or by giving the opponent less time to respond to your attack or other reasons.

I have a hard time letting an attribute determine overall speed, since pumping that attribute (either by points or by magic) would eventually result in extra actions per round, which would be absolutely silly. No matter how high any of your attributes go, none of your base speeds improve, nor do you get more actions a round. (In fact, the primary spell that does give you extra actions per round gives you only +1 to various items that Dexterity helps.)

StabbittyDoom wrote:
The last is balance, which represents your naturally ability to right yourself and ensure your have solid footing, even when the footing doesn't help you with that. Some people will have better sensors in their inner ear than others.

I really don't see how much of an effect that has beyond telling your body which way is up. I've not known gymnasts or doctors on a professional basis, but I don't know of any sliding scale of gyroscopic quality for people. True, you could be born with a damaged or defective set, but that would be painfully obvious in short order, and serves more to limit you below normal function, not act as proof that better-than-normal models exist and give a relative bonus.

StabbittyDoom wrote:
Can a character improve these aspects through training? Certainly, yes. But you can't make your inner ear suddenly better through training (though you can do more with what you have, aka post-processing) and you can't increase the speed at which your nervous system transfers information through training (you can cut the number of nodes down, but not the speed at which it travels through them). Agility is definitely something you could explain as well through training as anything else, but certain body types would certainly be predisposed.

The "training" I'm referring to happens your whole life. Toddlers practice balance when they walk. Children practice reflexes through play- chasing each other, play, recoiling from injuries. At some point, the "non-dextrous" characters decided not to pursue this any further, as they were already at an acceptable level, and the amount of training to improve would not be worth it. The "dextrous" types find it quite worth it, and keep pushing their limits.

Everyone is limited by the speed of nervous conduction, no matter how high your dexterity score- and it is so insanely high that it is essentially immaterial. Memory recall (thinking about what you are supposed to do) is the limiting factor at that point- "muscle memory" comes in handy, and is the driving principle of the martial drill. No longer having to think about a reaction cuts out the slowest part of the process, and is why soldiers (fighters?) practice so much and so hard.

Now that I've said my piece, I'll stop posting off-topic here.

Liberty's Edge

I fully admit that the system isn't a perfect model, but I'm just trying to offer an alternative viewpoint that's a little less extreme than "No-one has natural dexterity ever."

Parka wrote:
The "training" I'm referring to happens your whole life. Toddlers practice balance when they walk. Children practice reflexes through play- chasing each other, play, recoiling from injuries. At some point, the "non-dextrous" characters decided not to pursue this any further, as they were already at an acceptable level, and the amount of training to improve would not be worth it. The "dextrous" types find it quite worth it, and keep pushing their limits.

By this logic, EVERY attribute is just training (you practice wisdom with hide and seek and such, you practice strength with the monkey bars and wrestling, you practice intelligence with legos and such, etc). Maybe it is, maybe it isn't, but that would mean that by this logic you'd get maybe half of your attributes from genetics and the other half purely from training. Maybe this is more realistic, but definitely not worth modelling. And I REALLY don't want to get into a nature versus nurture argument here.

Parka wrote:
I really don't see how much of an effect that has beyond telling your body which way is up.

It means you always are putting your weight in the right spots to ensure you have leverage. If you think the ground is 1% off of what it actually is, that will have some (in this case small) effect on how much leverage you can get. A bit nitpicky, but worth mentioning. I did note that even a dex 20 character might only get a +1 from that, and those with a 20 are truly rare.

Parka wrote:
I have a hard time letting an attribute determine overall speed, since pumping that attribute (either by points or by magic) would eventually result in extra actions per round

Your ability to perform an action quickly has improved, but your ability to think about those situation, contemplate what to do and contemplate the results has not. These, arguably, take up far more time than the action itself in many cases (note that there is no mental attribute for *speed* of thought; this is assumed to be governed by training). It's why characters, initially, only get one attack in 6 seconds, and cap out at 4 (normally). It's not that they can't swing faster, it's that any faster and their strikes wouldn't have much meaning.

Note how nearly all speed-increasing and action/attack-granting feats and abilities are tied to dexterity to some extent or another (fleet, whirlwind attack, combat reflexes, rapid shot, improved/greater two-weapon fighting, etc). This implies that while dexterity enables faster action, it still requires training so that your mind can handle performing more actions.

Parka wrote:
The reason I bring up the awareness issue is because you refer to "correcting errors" in the process of an action. You would need to perceive these errors, think about what the correct action is to remedy it, and then perform it. That does involve elements of situational awareness. It does not mean "oblivious or not" in the sense that I am using it, though I grant I didn't define it well.

Sorry, seems we had a misunderstanding here. I was under the impression you were talking about awareness of a stimuli to which you would react.

In my opinion, feeling yourself (your momentum, position, etc) doesn't really require any check, you just do. Hence leaving your ability to react to it as the only real factor. I'm too lazy to debate this point much.

In summary: I'm not saying your "this is training" argument is entirely without merit, but it is definitely an argument that boils down to "nature versus nurture" and one that's probably not worth debating for too long as removing/redefining stats would garner no appreciable benefit (IMO). Whether you feel the ability scores represent your formative training, your genetics, or somewhere in between does not affect how they govern your life (at least, not appreciably enough to track any more-so than the system already does).

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

How did this thread become a discussion on defining dexterity?


blackbloodtroll wrote:
How did this thread become a discussion on defining dexterity?

Failed Sense Motive check: Too much dex, not enough wis.


Talonhawke wrote:
oneplus999 wrote:
Double chained kamas pretty clearly should be finessable, but it isn't. That, plus spiked chain not having reach anymore makes me assume for balance purposes they don't want finessable reach weapons other than the whip.
Nah its just that there is a 1-10 ratio on exotic weaons where one out of every ten gets to be worth taking the others become cool looking fluff with feat tax.

This is why I don't force people to both with the exotic weapon proficiency feat. Actually, I don't make players bother with any weapon proficiency feats. I just don't think it's that big of a deal. Especially with regard to exotics, which in their current form don't usually justify burning a feat for use.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
How did this thread become a discussion on defining dexterity?

This is the internet. Every discussion eventually devolves into pedantry or semantics. ;)


oneplus999 wrote:
Hayato Ken wrote:

Since you can wield a double chained kama like a normal kama, how it says in the description, it is finessable.

That's only in "two kamas" mode, when its in "reach mode" its (presumably, like other double weapons) a two handed weapon, which means it's not a light weapon, which probably means it's not finessable.

The only reason it's in two handed section is because it's a double weapon. The text specifically says you handle them as a kama, meaning Two-Weapon-Fighting light weapons.

Quote:
The wielder can attack as if armed with a single kama in each hand or extend the chain to make a single reach attack.

You use them as two light weapons and can make reach as if using a whip or polearm. Bolded mine for emphasis. You throw one kama for puny damage it normally deals, and you hold the other one, being able to fight enemies in adjecent.


Check oriental weapons. If doesn't work try bow with improved snap shot.
You can range attack, use a buckler, make 2 more attack at higher attack bonus and threat 10 ft. You can also apply the dmg of all attacks before DR. Bow's feats are broken... ;)


HawaiianWarrior wrote:
Talonhawke wrote:
oneplus999 wrote:
Double chained kamas pretty clearly should be finessable, but it isn't. That, plus spiked chain not having reach anymore makes me assume for balance purposes they don't want finessable reach weapons other than the whip.
Nah its just that there is a 1-10 ratio on exotic weaons where one out of every ten gets to be worth taking the others become cool looking fluff with feat tax.
This is why I don't force people to both with the exotic weapon proficiency feat. Actually, I don't make players bother with any weapon proficiency feats. I just don't think it's that big of a deal. Especially with regard to exotics, which in their current form don't usually justify burning a feat for use.

I agree. I give all the exotic weapons of a weapon group with one feat (for example, all the exotic weapons under the heavy blade group).

Dark Archive

Parka wrote:


Basically, I don't really think there is a "Dex" score, only skill and practice. I think people are constantly ignoring the role of skill in favor of some imaginary inborn talent, which devalues the role of weapons training or generally practicing long and hard to be able to even use a particular weapon without embarrassing one's self, let alone master it.

Many world-class athletes (gymnasts, some martial artists, skiers, basketball players, etc, etc) have a natural reflexes and coordination that are obviously very different from other, "normal" people. They also tend to pick up other sports and skills much faster than you or I could -- and it isn't because they are smarter, it is because they are in better control of their bodies - and their bodies do what their mind directs them to do with a higher level of precision than you or I.

That's Dexterity.


Ramza Wyvernjack wrote:
oneplus999 wrote:
Hayato Ken wrote:

Since you can wield a double chained kama like a normal kama, how it says in the description, it is finessable.

That's only in "two kamas" mode, when its in "reach mode" its (presumably, like other double weapons) a two handed weapon, which means it's not a light weapon, which probably means it's not finessable.

The only reason it's in two handed section is because it's a double weapon. The text specifically says you handle them as a kama, meaning Two-Weapon-Fighting light weapons.

Quote:
The wielder can attack as if armed with a single kama in each hand or extend the chain to make a single reach attack.
You use them as two light weapons and can make reach as if using a whip or polearm. Bolded mine for emphasis. You throw one kama for puny damage it normally deals, and you hold the other one, being able to fight enemies in adjecent.

Of course this is exactly why I avoid the weapon... it's worded poorly and your interpretation is understandable.

However, it looks to me like they aren't actually having this work that different than a normal double weapon, except for the following: 1) it behaves like normal kamas when wielded as a double weapon (though again it's not clear what comes with this... finesse? maybe... what about weapon focus (kama)/weapon spec (kama)? who knows... decide for yourselves). 2) When wielded for a single attack, as any double weapon can be, it happens to gain the reach feature.

Of course it could be that this is meant to be completely different from any other weapon and it's two handed finessable and you are making reach and 5' attacks at the same time etc... but my interpretation accounts for the weapon description while keeping this from being wildly different from a "normal" 10' reach, which makes it seem more likely to me.

My interpretation also prevents this from being "spiked chain+", which I think is important for any interpretation of this weapon. It may be "spiked chain 2.0", but it's much more restricted if you can't make 5' and 10' attacks in the same round.

Quote:
The wielder can attack as if armed with a single kama in each hand or extend the chain to make a single reach attack.

This in particular makes it sound like it's working like any other double weapon... if the chain is extended you can't make any "twf kama" attacks that round, because without it explicitly saying otherwise, we should assume it works like any other double weapon. As far as I can tell, these rules aren't replacing double weapon rules, it's just elaborating on them. Two handed mode OR twf mode each round, not freely swapping between the two. And when it's in reach mode, its two handed mode, since the double chained kamas section doesn't say, but the double weapons section clearly says it would be wielded two handed.

While I think, based on its style, it totally should be finessable, RAW I don't think it would be. The bit about being two kamas only applies to the TWF mode.

Of course, feel free to interpret it differently :)

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Finessable reach-weapons that threaten? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.