Multi-armed


Rules Questions

201 to 211 of 211 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Sczarni

I wasn't asking due to flurry, I was asking due to two weapon fighting...

the gauntlets are not weapons exactly, they count as unarmed strikes...

Each are a light weapon, there are two, they are unarmed strikes...

Do they work with two weapon fighting now?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Note that unarmed strikes, and gauntlets have different entries in the Fighter Weapon Groups.

One could take Weapon Focus(Gauntlet), or Weapon Focus(Unarmed Strike), but one would not effect the other.

The only "unarmed strike", is the unarmed strike.

Sczarni

lantzkev wrote:

quote from Sean K Reynolds himself from a question I had asked him in regards to fighters TWF with unarmed.

Quote:
The rules say you can make one attack per round, or two with TWF, and iterative attacks according to your BAB. The rules don't care if your unarmed strike is a punch, kick, or headbutt, it just cares that you get only one additional attack if you're using TWF.

the link

Seems a strong case too that it doesn't really matter what you've got, if you're using TWF that's the only thing it does is let you use an extra attack with an offhand weapon. And that CAN be a unarmed strike even if your primary is unarmed as well.

I notice you're still dodging this one.

I'd also like to leave this bit here

Quote:
Gauntlet: This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of gauntlets.

The only thing a gauntlet does to a unarmed strike is change it from non-lethal to lethal at your whim.

So since it is considered an unarmed attack, are unarmed attacks still one weapon? Combined with the above "The rules don't care if your unarmed strike is a punch, kick, or headbutt, it just cares that you get only one additional attack if you're using TWF."

Do you still want to insist you cannot TWF with unarmed attacks?

For someone that had so staunchly defended that every arm gives you extra attacks earlier (and without any rule that even hints that this is the case) you seem very unwilling to take a relatively smaller leap of logic and inference.

Sczarni

Quote:
Note that unarmed strikes, and gauntlets have different entries in the Fighter Weapon Groups

I'm assuming you mean this?

Quote:
Close: gauntlet, heavy shield, light shield, punching dagger, sap, spiked armor, spiked gauntlet, spiked shield, and unarmed strike
Quote:
Natural: unarmed strike and all natural weapons, such as bite, claw, gore, tail, and wing

As we can see they are in the same category, and the unarmed is also overlapped into a second category. Much how daggers are in the light and also in the thrown category...


Check the rest of that post, yo:

Quote:

I wouldn't let a fighter make claw/claw/bite plus knees and kicks any more than I'd let a fighter make rapier/dagger plus knees and kicks, or punch/punch plus knees and kicks.

The rules don't let you keep on adding attacks as you think up appropriate body parts to attack with, and it doesn't let you use those extra attacks just because your hands are full. The rules say you can make one attack per round, or two with TWF, and iterative attacks according to your BAB. The rules don't care if your unarmed strike is a punch, kick, or headbutt, it just cares that you get only one additional attack if you're using TWF.

If the fighter can normally use lefthand/righthand, and is instead using leftclaw/rightclaw, he can't start making kicks, knees, and headbutts in addition to those claw attacks "just because he's not using unarmed strikes."

If I remember from somewhere there's a similar unofficial statemnet that Unarmed Strikes count sort of like a double weapon. They're still one weapon of course, but they're valid for TWF usage.

Lantzkev wrote:
The only thing a gauntlet does to a unarmed strike is change it from non-lethal to lethal at your whim.

Well that and it only covers one hand, kind of a flaw in your plan there.

Sczarni

No not really, the whole point is that either gauntlets are two distinct separate attacks or they are not. If they are not the question comes to why? They can be equipped separately, and enchanted separately. If they are, why are they when they are considered an unarmed attack.

Rynjin, the whole reason I quoted that was to emphasize that you can two weapon fight with unarmed as SKR actually said. Rather than Blackbloodtrolls constant attempt for some reason to campaign that unarmed strike is some how one weapon that can't be used in a two weapon fight. Which is absurd. It defies logic (which was the sole basis of his arguing for extra attack for limbs) and it defies the intent of the rules of flurry and other rules presented in the book.

Somehow he was willing to expend a large level of "guess work" but

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You know what, I am done. You are the rightest of right lantzkev.

I simply cannot help beating my head against the wall, hoping the stupidness in there will go away.

You’re the best!
Around!
Nothing’s gonna ever keep you down
You’re the Best!
Around!
Nothing’s gonna ever keep you down
You’re the Best!
Around!
Nothing’s gonna ever keep you dow-ow-ow-ow-own!!!!!!!!

Sczarni

I guess when your theory is shot down by a dev quote you don't bother arguing the point and just act offended and insult the person who has shown you an "official you can TWF with unarmed strikes"...

Bravo, class A material there.


Yeah, it's obvious that it can be used to TWF.

But is it more than one weapon? It seems like it's one weapon with 4-8 different parts, of which any combination of "parts" can be used to TWF, but doesn't grant any extra attacks (which is supported by that same quote). So you can give 'em the one-two punch, double kick, knee-elbow, whatever, and when your attacks go up you can get a nice combination of fist-knee-elbow-kick-fist-knee-headbutt going on, but you can't go fist-fist-kick-kick-knee-knee-elbow-elbow + Any combination thereof of extra attacks from TWF/ITWF/GTWF.

Verdict: Unarmed Strikes are weird.

Sczarni

oh I agree there, I was actually surprised when I was searching for dev answers in this regard at how prolific Blackbloodtroll was in promoting the "unarmed doesn't work with TWF" idea... It's like it's a personal crusade or something.

Assistant Software Developer

This thread is locked. More than two hundred posts in on a rules question, it's either answered and getting buried, or the discussion could go on forever.

201 to 211 of 211 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Multi-armed All Messageboards