| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
So I had an idea for a controller style bard, specifically using the Lotus Geisha wielding a fighting fan for the purpose of feinting and either a sai or finding some way of getting proficiency in nunchaku for use in disarm. I planned on taking the feats Combat Expertise, Improved Feint and Improved Disarm.
Now here is my question, If I use Improved Feint to feint as a move action with the fighting fan in my off hand, and then as my standard action that round use my other weapon in my primary hand to disarm my opponent in this instance would that impose two-weapon fighting penalties? My first guess is no since I am not using the fighting fan to gain an extra attack during a full attack. Any ideas? Thanks!
http://paizo.com/products/btpy88yj/faq?Pathfinder-Roleplaying-Game-Core-Rul ebook#v5748eaic9onf
This would appear to indicate that you don't have two take any penalties, as you are not gaining any extra attacks (simply switching weapons between the feint 'attack' and the disarm).
Thanks for your input and advice guys.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
This would appear to indicate that you don't have two take any penalties, as you are not gaining any extra attacks (simply switching weapons between the feint 'attack' and the disarm).
Indeed, you don't even have an "off-hand" until you employ the TWF mechanic to gain an extra attack.
So here is another question, If you use a fighting fan to feint in combat and did not have proficiency with it would you impose the normal penalty to attack to your bluff roll?
I don't think the rules allow this. FAQs have clarified that you don't gain the benefits of wielding a weapon unless you actually attack with it -- so I would say that you cannot gain the +2 bonus for feinting with a distracting weapon unless you then attack with that weapon.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
I don't think the rules allow this. FAQs have clarified that you don't gain the benefits of wielding a weapon unless you actually attack with it -- so I would say that you cannot gain the +2 bonus for feinting with a distracting weapon unless you then attack with that weapon.
What's that got to do with his question?
Silver Crescent Publishing
|
So here is another question, If you use a fighting fan to feint in combat and did not have proficiency with it would you impose the normal penalty to attack to your bluff roll?
Think of it outside of the straight mechanics. If you are using a weapon you aren't familiar with, it doesn't matter that the way that weapon is generally used would grant a bonus to feint, disarm or any other combat maneuver. You don't know how to use the weapon to that effect. As such I would rule that unless you are proficient, you gain no bonuses from using a particular weapon to perform a combat maneuver.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
So here is another question, If you use a fighting fan to feint in combat and did not have proficiency with it would you impose the normal penalty to attack to your bluff roll?Think of it outside of the straight mechanics. If you are using a weapon you aren't familiar with, it doesn't matter that the way that weapon is generally used would grant a bonus to feint, disarm or any other combat maneuver. You don't know how to use the weapon to that effect. As such I would rule that unless you are proficient, you gain no bonuses from using a particular weapon to perform a combat maneuver.
1. Feinting isn't a combat maneuver.
2. I can appreciate the merits of a more "free-form" GM (such as yourself, it seems), but keep in mind that this is the Rules Questions forum, not the Suggestions/House Rules/Homebrew forum. If someone's asking a question here, it's because they need to know how something works "by the book" - either because they're in PFS (no houserules allowed), or their GM has told them they're doing this particular thing by the book, or maybe just because they're a GM who wants to know the baseline rules before making modifications (which is just responsible GMing). Whatever the reason, answering a rules question with the method by which you prefer to alter things is as likely as not just to confuse people.
I don't think the rules allow this. FAQs have clarified that you don't gain the benefits of wielding a weapon unless you actually attack with it -- so I would say that you cannot gain the +2 bonus for feinting with a distracting weapon unless you then attack with that weapon.What's that got to do with his question?
His question was whether he can hold a fighting fan in one hand and another weapon in his other hand, then feint using the fighting fan to get the +2 bonus but attack with the other weapon.
I say no, because you don't get the benefit of the distracting weapon unless you attack with the distracting weapon.
I don't think the rules allow this. FAQs have clarified that you don't gain the benefits of wielding a weapon unless you actually attack with it -- so I would say that you cannot gain the +2 bonus for feinting with a distracting weapon unless you then attack with that weapon.What's that got to do with his question?
While his question was about TWF penalties, the OP was also talking about using a Distracting weapon without making an attack with that weapon. Since there's no reason to even mention the fan when it doesn't provide a bonus, it's likely that the OP doesn't know that it won't provide that bonus unless he attacks with it.
Feinting while holding a fighting fan is no different from feinting while holding a torch, or potion, or with an empty hand. (For both TWF penalties and the +2 to Bluff)
-edit- I am slow
HOW you feint is fluff. Its completely up to you. You can say "look a monkey" , "your shoes are untied", fake left and swing right, or flash a fan in someone's face.
So no penalties for that.
He didn't ask that. He asked if the nonproficiency penalty applied to the feint.
That's true; he technically didn't ask that. He just assumed he could.
He can't, which still makes my response relevant to the thread. If you don't attack with the fan, you don't gain the distraction bonus for wielding the fan.
I'm with Jiggy and Big Norse Wolf.
Feint is tied to the bluff skill.
Bluff
(Cha)You know how to tell a lie.
Check: Bluff is an opposed skill check against your opponent's Sense Motive skill.
...
Feint: You can use Bluff to feint in combat, causing your opponent to be denied his Dexterity bonus to his AC against your next attack. The DC of this check is equal to 10 + your opponent's base attack bonus + your opponent's Wisdom modifier. If your opponent is trained in Sense Motive, the DC is instead equal to 10 + your opponent's Sense Motive bonus, if higher. For more information on feinting in combat, see Combat.
...
Feinting in combat is a standard action.
...
You can attempt to feint against someone again if you fail.
....
Not a word about what form the feint takes, or if you need a weapon at all.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
He didn't ask that. He asked if the nonproficiency penalty applied to the feint.That's true; he technically didn't ask that. He just assumed he could.
He can't, which still makes my response relevant to the thread. If you don't attack with the fan, you don't gain the distraction bonus for wielding the fan.
Hm. Okay, yeah, I guess it's more likely that his question was asked so he could feint with the fan and then attack with something else than so he could feint and then attack nonproficiently, so I guess perhaps your read on him was correct.
>.>
Maybe.
My original question was pretty much posed as follows; If I have a Lotus Geisha archetype bard holding a fighting fan in his/her off hand (lets say left hand) and a sai, nunchaku, or perhaps my personal favorite upon inspection a jutte in his/her primary hand (lets say right hand) and decided to use the fighting fan to feint as a move action using the Improved Feint feat and then attack or perform a disarm combat maneuver with the jutte would this impose the normal two weapon fighting penalties...the general ruling backed up with citation from PRD was as I had hoped and predicted was that this tactic did in fact not impose penalties for fighting with two weapons because the purpose of this combination was not to gain an extra attack.
My second question asked in a separate post after the initial question had been ruled on was that lets say if a completely different character that did not have weapon proficiency with the fighting fan (lets say an ordinary Bard) but with a similar feat load out tried this tactic using a fighting fan in his/her left hand and perhaps a sickle in his/her right hand would this person be penalized on his/her bluff check to feint as a move action in combat per the normal rules of nonproficiency? As some have pointed out, a bluff check to feint is not an attack roll, nor is the Feint combat action actually a combat maneuver so this is exactly why I posted the question.
As far as the argument of the distracting ability not kicking in because he/she did not immediately follow the feint with an attack with the same weapon doesn't seem right to me. You are using the distracting ability as it was intended: to receive the bonus to bluff for feint. I could agree with this argument if for instance one was holding a sundering weapon in one hand and trying to get the same bonus with an ordinary weapon in the other hand. I could be completely off course (which is why I am asking this in the first place.)
So I guess my third question would be, if you can in fact feint as a move action in combat with a weapon that you are not proficient in that has a special-purpose bonus (in this case, Distracting: You gain a +2 bonus on Bluff skill checks to feint in combat while wielding this weapon.) would you just not receive the +2 bonus from the weapon ability?
I'm with Jiggy and Big Norse Wolf.
Feint is tied to the bluff skill.
<rules quotes snipped>
Not a word about what form the feint takes, or if you need a weapon at all.
Correct, feinting does not require a weapon.
AcalonXQ brought up the issue because a Fighting Fan is a weapon with the distracting property from Ultimate Combat: "Distracting: You gain a +2 bonus on Bluff skill checks to feint in combat while wielding this weapon. "
The FAQ on weapon properties, such as distracting, is talking about the defending property, but it makes general comments about all weapon properties:
Defending Weapon Property: Do I have to make attack rolls with the weapon to gain its AC bonus?
Yes. Merely holding a defending weapon is not sufficient. Unless otherwise specified, you have to use a magic item in the manner it is designed (use a weapon to make attacks, wear a shield on your arm so you can defend with it, and so on) to gain its benefits.
Therefore, if you don't make an attack roll with a defending weapon on your turn, you don't gain its defensive benefit.
Likewise, while you can give a shield the defending property (after you've given it a +1 enhancement bonus to attacks, of course), you wouldn't get the AC bonus from the defending property unless you used the shield to make a shield bash that round--unless you're using the shield as a weapon (to make a shield bash), the defending weapon property has no effect.—Sean K Reynolds, 06/06/11
Note, however, that the FAQ says that the general case is to use the item in the way that it is intend. And as Lord Worcestershire of Perrins said, "You are using the distracting ability as it was intended: to receive the bonus to bluff for feint." In real world terms, the geisha would be feinting with the fighting fan to distract the foe from the weapon in his or her other hand, a perfectly legitimate bluff. The fighting fan is wielded in a move action to aid a Bluff check; therefore, it is used. (Wield does not mean attack; for example, wands are also wielded.)
My original question was pretty much posed as follows; If I have a Lotus Geisha archetype bard holding a fighting fan in his/her off hand (lets say left hand) and a sai, nunchaku, or perhaps my personal favorite upon inspection a jutte in his/her primary hand (lets say right hand) and decided to use the fighting fan to feint as a move action using the Improved Feint feat and then attack or perform a disarm combat maneuver with the jutte would this impose the normal two weapon fighting penalties...the general ruling backed up with citation from PRD was as I had hoped and predicted was that this tactic did in fact not impose penalties for fighting with two weapons because the purpose of this combination was not to gain an extra attack.
For this question, the FAQ entry on Multiple Weapons comes to the rescue. It clearly states the the Two-Weapon Fighting rules apply only when making an extra attack with the off-hand wielding a second weapon. The feint is not an extra attack; therefore, no Two-Weapon Fighting rules or penalties are applied.
My second question asked in a separate post after the initial question had been ruled on was that lets say if a completely different character that did not have weapon proficiency with the fighting fan (lets say an ordinary Bard) but with a similar feat load out tried this tactic using a fighting fan in his/her left hand and perhaps a sickle in his/her right hand would this person be penalized on his/her bluff check to feint as a move action in combat per the normal rules of nonproficiency? As some have pointed out, a bluff check to feint is not an attack roll, nor is the Feint combat action actually a combat maneuver so this is exactly why I posted the question.
As far as the argument of the distracting ability not kicking in because he/she did not immediately follow the feint with an attack with the same weapon doesn't seem right to me. You are using the distracting ability as it was intended: to receive the bonus to bluff for feint. I could agree with this argument if for instance one was holding a sundering weapon in one hand and trying to get the same bonus with an ordinary weapon in the other hand. I could be completely off course (which is why I am asking this in the first place.)
So I guess my third question would be, if you can in fact feint as a move action in combat with a weapon that you are not proficient in that has a special-purpose bonus (in this case, Distracting: You gain a +2 bonus on Bluff skill checks to feint in combat while wielding this weapon.) would you just not receive the +2 bonus from the weapon ability?
I checked the Equipment chapter of the Core Rulebook and doublechecked the Eastern Weapons section of Ultimate Combat. There appears to be no rule that requires proficiency with a weapon in order to use its special properties. Thus, someone non-proficient with a glaive can use it as a reach weapon, someone non-proficient with a flail can use it to trip, and someone non-proficient with a sap deals nonlethal damage with it. The difference between those properties and the distracting property is that all those other uses require attack rolls. The proficieny rule is that "A character who uses a weapon with which he is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls."
It makes sense that distracting with a fighting fan should have a non-proficiency penalty, but no such penalty is written into the rules yet. Maybe someday Paizo will issue errata for the distracting property. Until then, enjoy having amateurs distract with the fighting fan.
Actually, the errata could be that distracting is an object property rather than a weapon property. Many non-weapon objects, such as a flashbang grenade or a matador's cape, are used for distraction.
Thanks again to everyone for your input.
How long would it take before the bad guys realize that you never actually do anything with the folding fan? I mean, isn't that kind of how a single weapon feint works? As you Move, you make your opponent think you're going to strike a certain area (represented by the Bluff roll)and then when you make your Single Attack, if your check succeeded, you strike a different area (thereby denying DEX AC bonus.)
If you never actually use the fan to attack, does the Feint really work?
A fight only last a few seconds in real time so they will probably be dead before they could figure it out. The fan is a weapon so it has to be respected which is why the bluff works.
A fight only last a few seconds in real time so they will probably be dead before they could figure it out. The fan is a weapon so it has to be respected which is why the bluff works.
Each round lasts 6 seconds and most combat encounters probably last 3-4 rounds minimum (much longer as levels are gained.) Seems like an intelligent opponent who was able to observe the Bard for a round or two would figure out that the fan was the bluff.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A fight only last a few seconds in real time so they will probably be dead before they could figure it out. The fan is a weapon so it has to be respected which is why the bluff works.Each round lasts 6 seconds and most combat encounters probably last 3-4 rounds minimum (much longer as levels are gained.) Seems like an intelligent opponent who was able to observe the Bard for a round or two would figure out that the fan was the bluff.
The problem is that for all they know is that the moment they actually attempt to call that bluff and ignore the fan, that's when they'll actually get struck with the fan. That's one of the things about feinting in combat. The objective is to get your foe to pay more attention to one weapon over the other, allowing you an opening. If your opponent gets nervous an begins ignoring the weapon you traditionally feint with, then then suddenly they are wide open against that weapon. In D&D terms, they'd just have been feinted yet again. :P
I will also add that professional fighters do it(use feints) all the time in real life, and they have been fighting for a longer than a few seconds.
Saying you know for sure that the other weapon won't be used is a bad idea.
The problem is that for all they know is that the moment they actually attempt to call that bluff and ignore the fan, that's when they'll actually get struck with the fan.
I get that and there is a Bluff check that does need to be made, so their is a chance that the ploy won't work (at least until the Bard starts gaining levels and pumps up Bluff.) As a DM, I would give an intelligent opponent a bonus to catch the ploy. If the player wanted to get rid of that bonus, they could do so via TWF.
I will also add that professional fighters do it(use feints) all the time in real life, and they have been fighting for a longer than a few seconds.
Saying you know for sure that the other weapon won't be used is a bad idea.
D&D combat bears absolutely ZERO resemblance to real-world fighting. Go ahead, just try and apply blunt-trauma damage with your European war sword in Pathfinder.
In terms of taking damage you are right, but I was talking about the actual fighting. Remember the game is an abstraction, and it is assumed that many attack attempts are made. There is no reason to assume that fights would look any different if we could put them on a projector and have them play out.
I am sure you knew I was not talking about what you mentioned either.
The main point was that even experienced fighters don't take the chance of hitting hit or stabbed because if you decide to totally ignore a weapon the other person might use it.
D&D combat bears absolutely ZERO resemblance to real-world fighting. Go ahead, just try and apply blunt-trauma damage with your European war sword in Pathfinder.I will also add that professional fighters do it(use feints) all the time in real life, and they have been fighting for a longer than a few seconds.
Saying you know for sure that the other weapon won't be used is a bad idea.
I get that and there is a Bluff check that does need to be made, so their is a chance that the ploy won't work (at least until the Bard starts gaining levels and pumps up Bluff.) As a DM, I would give an intelligent opponent a bonus to catch the ploy. If the player wanted to get rid of that bonus, they could do so via TWF.
Emphasis here. Why would you give an opponent a bonus, unless the player took an unrelated feat? That's an example of "martials can't have nice things". Here, you are yourself trying to apply some sort of real-world based limitation on the player, and insisting that they have TWF or else you are going to make their checks harder for no reason, even after noting they are already going to fail occasionally due to normal circumstances.
Why?
Even on a successful feint, it's only good vs 1 attack from you, drastically limiting its usefulness for most combat situations. In fact, the best use for feinting is probably not dealing damage, but for getting a high-Dex opponent to drop their guard long enough to preform a combat maneuver like a Trip, Disarm, etc.
I just don't see why you should have TWF to avoid your GM giving enemies random ad-hoc bonuses against you. If we go down that path, I'm sure I could invent 1,001 random reasons to give ad-hoc bonuses against the party, or ad-hoc penalties to the party, and it's just not cool. Two Weapon Fighting doesn't mean anything at all.
If I were to pick up a pair of lead pipes and hold them ominously, I might be doing all the business work with my right hand, but the sheer fact I have another weapon in my left hand means you can't divest your attention from it fully. If you can't divest your attention from it, a quick motion with my left hand is going to cause your attention to be drawn to the left, even if you know good and well I usually swing with my right.
So I had an idea for a controller style bard, specifically using the Lotus Geisha wielding a fighting fan for the purpose of feinting and either a sai or finding some way of getting proficiency in nunchaku for use in disarm. I planned on taking the feats Combat Expertise, Improved Feint and Improved Disarm.
Now here is my question, If I use Improved Feint to feint as a move action with the fighting fan in my off hand, and then as my standard action that round use my other weapon in my primary hand to disarm my opponent in this instance would that impose two-weapon fighting penalties? My first guess is no since I am not using the fighting fan to gain an extra attack during a full attack. Any ideas? Thanks!
You do not need to use a weapon at all to initiate a feint... the fan gives you a bonus because you can make sweet flourishes with it.
You're not actually fighting with the fan (per the mechanical definition of attacking with), you're just holding it - no TWF.
Emphasis here. Why would you give an opponent a bonus, unless the player took an unrelated feat?
In this example, irrespective of the real-world, the character is holding two weapons in his hands and moving to attack. But he's A.) not proficient with one of them and B.) he doesn't know how fight with two weapons either. An intelligent opponent should have a better chance to see through the sham. In essence, I'm saying he's actually better off dropping the fan then attempting to clumsily use it as a decoy. If the player were using a weapon for which he was proficient or had TWF, then I could probably let things go from there.
Another thought - as a DM, you could just ignore the player fluff and focus on the Feint mechanics (which don't address the complexity of one or two-handed combos.)
Emphasis here. Why would you give an opponent a bonus, unless the player took an unrelated feat?In this example, irrespective of the real-world, the character is holding two weapons in his hands and moving to attack. But he's A.) not proficient with one of them and B.) he doesn't know how fight with two weapons either. An intelligent opponent should have a better chance to see through the sham. In essence, I'm saying he's actually better off dropping the fan then attempting to clumsily use it as a decoy. If the player were using a weapon for which he was proficient or had TWF, then I could probably let things go from there.
A) Irrelevant.
B) Also irrelevant?:P
EDIT: Gonna snag a post by Kirth Girsen 'cause he sums it up pretty well.
Everyone draws that line for "realism" in a different place. To me, it's totally realistic that a seasoned soldier, one who has survived ambushes for years, would be able to anticipate likely locations for invisible enemies, automatically detect illusions for what they are based on situational and tactical clues, and deduce which of the set of mirror images is really the caster. I'd call it "tactical awareness," or "pierce the fog of war" or something suitably martial and give it an (Ex) tag. You might look at the same thing and say, "That sounds like what the true seeing spell does! That's magic! Ooooooh! Badbadbadbadbadbadbad!" And then a lot of people start yelling about Warblades or 4e or something.
Statements like "I'm OK with ability X as long as it makes sense" are actually nonsensical, because what makes no sense to you might make an awful lot of sense to me, and vice versa.
AND... anyone can fight with two weapons. The TWF Feat means you're better at it than most- thus your penalty is lessened.
Just to clarify.
I would also assume anyone wielding two weapons is dangerous, sham or not.
There are some really great points made here about how all of this would work in game and in real life. I always find these sort of talks very entertaining. I have a feeling the way that I would want to play this guy in game is the way it would probably pan out in a real life fight and I will get to that in a moment.
After thinking about it I figured I would go for improved trip with a kama over improved disarm with the other weapons because not all things fight with hand held weapons and putting something on its back is always a good policy during a good dust up. Improved disarm is nice and might be something I would grab a few levels later. I was also thinking of multi-classing in ninja or rogue to get the sneak attack in on feinted flat footed opponents and after I get the AoO on someone with Greater Trip and the AoO on the same bad guy standing back up that extra few damage dice is just gravy. Add a dose of large scorpion venom or purple worm poison to the tips of the fan blades for the occasional stick to drop the badguy's CMD even more if needed and this just makes for more fun...even sets up that feint with the fan for the bad guy who suddenly realizes it to be a legitimate concern.
So as far as real world aspects this guy is not a beast and is well aware of it, and is also smart enough to not employ this tactic too often especially on brighter foes. He rarely would stand alone in a fight and he is probably moving in on the enemy along side the ally holding the big weapon and is the guy moving around unpredictably fluttering the fan in a distracting manner until he can hook that kama or sickle behind the badguy's knee and get a couple of good hits in while the dude with the katana or greatsword makes a huge mess. Wash, rinse, repeat.
Distracting: "You gain a +2 bonus on Bluff skill checks to feint in combat while wielding this weapon."
Wielding means "actively trying to use the item," and is normally only used in the context of weapons or weapon-like objects such as rods, wands, and so on.
Otherwise, it's just an item you're holding/carrying.
FAQ: "Unless otherwise specified, you have to use a magic item in the manner it is designed (use a weapon to make attacks, wear a shield on your arm so you can defend with it, and so on) to gain its benefits."
I think it's perfectly reasonable that using the fan to feint is "actively trying to use" it and doing so "in the manner it is designed" so counts for both wielding and gaining its benefits. (So long as the fan is drawn, in hand, and threatens)
No TWF either way, and proficiency penalty only applies if you make an actual attack roll with it.