| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, show us how TWF with a greatsowrd/armor spikes is OP, 10th level build, 20 PB, 2 traits, standard WBl.Again, don't insult either of our intelligence.
It is not advantageous mechanically
Oh snap!
Ciretose just got Ciretose'd.
|
You keep using this word. I do not think it means what you think it means.One of the synonyms for horrifying is "awful".
There is no issue with my use of the word in that context.
That some of you people act horrified at any option that is not the absolute mechanical best is exactly why we need more of these rulings, not less.Except the problem isn't that it's not "the absolute best option" it's that it is mechanically inferior to almost every other option in the game.
You shouldn't have to sacrifice all effectiveness for flavor.
I don't think you know what that word means either.
And the optimizers who look for loopholes are exactly why you have to make those sacrifices.
But continue with your hyperbolic first world problems about not always being able to play they bestest possible win option that you thought was in the rules.
Because god forbid the classic options actually be decent relative to weird crossbreeds of awkward readings of the rules...
So at higher level it is inferior to TWF... it is like BAning TWF with kukris at higher levels would be a good idea.Over time, sure. But at first level?it is not mechanically better, TWF with kukris is waaay better.
And don't pretend you don't want this because it is mechanically better.It insults both of our intelligence.
Nope not at all.
Using 2 kukri's at first level is legal, and a perfectly good character concept. The benefit is it works great and becomes more awesome as the character levels.The problem with TWF with a THW and armor spikes is, as soon as a better option comes along (like swinging the THW twice) that fully fun and flavorful option goes down the toilet.
He doesn't have to make a build to prove it. Sneaking in an extra 1d6+ 1/2 STR every round is against the intent of the rules, and now illegal.
He doesn't have to make a build to prove it. Sneaking in an extra 1d6+ 1/2 STR every round is against the intent of the rules, and now illegal.
Agreed, Kryzbyn.
I don't think you know what that word means either.
I'm not sure you do. In the colloquial, it means something bad. In the literal sense, it could mean something awe inspiring.
Plug that back into my sentence.
"Horriyingly bad"
"Awfully bad"
"Awe-inspiringly bad"
All of these work in context.
Now, if you'd like to stop (unsuccessfully) trying to argue semantics...
But continue with your hyperbolic first world problems about not always being able to play they bestest possible win option that you thought was in the rules.
Where in here is this "the bestest possible win option"?
Because god forbid the classic options actually be decent relative to weird crossbreeds of awkward readings of the rules...
Almost all of the "classic options" are superior to this. Ask Lemmy to copy-pasta his calculations if you'd like.
It runs at something like significantly superior to TWFing with two different weapons (the weakest fighting style), slightly under/tying with (fluctuates a bit with level) TWFing with two light weapons, and pretty far under fighting with a singular 2H weapon.
All of which pale in comparison to archery a lot of the time.
So none of the "classic options" besides the one that was already the weakest are threatened.
He doesn't have to make a build to prove it.
Unless he wants to prove himself a hypocrite, I think he does.
|
|
Ok, show us how TWF with a greatsowrd/armor spikes is OP, 10th level build, 20 PB, 2 traits, standard WBl.Again, don't insult either of our intelligence.
It is not advantageous mechanically
Sure, quick and dirty because it's 10 EST, you can fill in the gaps, and "overpowered" is relative. But he'll outshine a standard of either.
62K
22 Str (18 +2 4 and 8 + 2 Item)
15 Dex (13 +2 Dex item)
14 Con
10 Int
12 Wis
10 Cha
Feats needed: Power Attack, TWF.
Has a Falcion. Or whatever BBT gave his Dwarf.
Now do the same thing with a Warhammer.
You know the classic dwarven weapon.
Or a longsword, the just plain classic weapon.
Which is better?
Exactly.
You get an extra attack, and still get the benefits not only of THF, but of Two-weapon features such as reach.
It is not debatable that it is mechanically better, and I call BS on "flavor"
|
|
He doesn't have to make a build to prove it. Sneaking in an extra 1d6+ 1/2 STR every round is against the intent of the rules, and now illegal.Agreed, Kryzbyn.
Oh I totally did, I don't want this thrown back in my face in other threads :)
I am going to bed shortly it's after 10 eastern and I have to work.
What's the capital D supposed to stand for?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What I want to know is, with this new ruling, how the heck is the Thunderstriker supposed to work at all?
Are you not aware of how bucklers work, relative to other shields?
That may be part of the problem.
Ciretose, you've been casually condescending throughout this entire thread, and have turned a conversation about how rules interact into a divisive mudfight. It would be really nice if you would knock it off. The Devs don't need you to defend them.
Yes, there has been a Dev ruling on the issue, but that answer raised a lot of questions about things that had never been questionable before (like using armor spikes with reach weapons). What's happening now is that people, who are rightfully confused and somewhat upset, are asking for clarification. Nobody is whining about losing the argument. You're just being a sore winner.
As for the Thunderstriker, I'm completely aware of how the buckler rules work. I'm also aware of how that particular archetype changes them. It is clearly stated in the first sentence of the archetype description that the intent is to use a two-handed weapon as a primary attack and a Shield Bash from the Buckler as an Off-Hand attack with Two-Weapon fighting.
The archetype first grants the ability to bash with the buckler. Then it reduces the usual two-weapon fighting penalties while doing it.
Do you really think that in order to employ their special ability to Two-Weapon fight with a Buckler, the Thunderstriker first puts their two-handed weapon away?
If making an attack with a two handed weapon uses up an "off-hand" attack as well, then the Thunderstriker is an Archetype that doesn't actually get to use about half of it's abilities.
So my question still stands. With the new ruling, how does it work?
I think a large problem is that at some point hand stopped meaning an actual hand and some of us didn't get the message, which brings up some questions for me, such as what becomes of Free Hands.
1)Are Free Hands now a Free Primary or Off Hand or are they literal hands?
2)Does a person need two actual hands to shoot a bow?
3)How about holding an item?
4)Does using a two handed double weapon also eat up your offhand even if you only use one end? The Re-Gripping FAQ and this FAQ about THW and Armor Spikes would seem like it does, even if you don't get both attacks with it.
5) If I TWF with say a dagger and a blade boot can I also cast a quickened spell that requires Somatic Components?I would like to know, as I would like to get a better knowledge of how this ruling works in case I ever get into Organized Play or something like that.
Could someone help out with these questions? Maybe Ciretose or someone? Please?
|
|
So my question still stands. With the new ruling, how does it work?What I want to know is, with this new ruling, how the heck is the Thunderstriker supposed to work at all?
Are you not aware of how bucklers work, relative to other shields?
That may be part of the problem.
Seriously. Look at how bucklers work. Not joking.
Sure, quick and dirty because it's 10 EST, you can fill in the gaps, and "overpowered" is relative. But he'll outshine a standard of either.62K
22 Str (18 +2 4 and 8 + 2 Item)
15 Dex (13 +2 Dex item)
14 Con
10 Int
12 Wis
10 ChaFeats needed: Power Attack, TWF.
Has a Falcion. Or whatever BBT gave his Dwarf.
Now do the same thing with a Warhammer.
You know the classic dwarven weapon.
Or a longsword, the just plain classic weapon.
Which is better?
Exactly.
You get an extra attack, and still get the benefits not only of THF, but of Two-weapon features such as reach.
It is not debatable that it is mechanically better, and I call BS on "flavor"
Quick and dirty comparison:
24 Str (+2 racial, +2 leveling, +4 Belt)
14 Dex
14 Con
10 Int
10 Wis
10 Cha
Feats needed: Power Attack
I usually dump Cha because I like having 12 Int and Wis, but a no dump for a no dump.
Assuming a Fighter, he has 2 attacks at +14 (with Power Attack), for 2d6+19 each, average damage of 52.
Same AC as your guy, -1 Will save/Perception, etc.
Your guy hits for an average of 3 attacks (2 main hand, 1 off-hand unless I misunderstand TWF-ing), at +14 each, dealing 2d6+9 plus 1d6+3, for a total of 38 damage. With Power Attack this jumps to 50, but drops your to-hit to +11 on each.
If I go with the exact same stats as you (22, 15, 14, 10, 12, 10) my damage drops to 50 at +13, still strictly better than TWFing with a Greatsword and Armor Spikes.
See what I mean? You are right that "It is not debatable that it is mechanically better", just in the wrong direction.
Just to chime in a bit, this was something (like all FAQ questions) that the entire Design Team has input on, deliberates on, and then makes a ruling on.
Some days I think we should make podcasts of FAQ and rules discussions. I think you would all be entertained. We argue, we laugh, we cry, we rant, we rage, we swear (okay...usually it is me swearing) and by the end we make decisions that we feel are best for the game as a whole.
We are all in total agreement when it comes this ruling.
A pod cast, or at least a paragraph or two of design notes, would help a lot. Right now, the FAQ entry isn't very helpful with downstream implications of the ruling.
In fact, I'd love to see a lot more behind the curtain style sidebars and other design notes. When modules had them back in Paizo's earlier days, I thought they were really interesting - offering insights into good encounter design and so on.
When a PC attacks with a double weapon, his off hand attack now must be the other end.
This was not true before.
Is it even true now?
Doesn't this FAQ just mean that using a 2H weapon "uses" your off-hand, because it has 1.5x Str? NOT because it is wielded in 2 hands?
That's what I gathered from all of this.
As I've said before, the FAQ makes perfect sense wording wise and it's intuitive. I just don't think it needed to happen.
|
|
Ok, show us how TWF with a greatsowrd/armor spikes is OP, 10th level build, 20 PB, 2 traits, standard WBl.Again, don't insult either of our intelligence.
It is not advantageous mechanicallySure, quick and dirty because it's 10 EST, you can fill in the gaps, and "overpowered" is relative. But he'll outshine a standard of either.
...
That is not a build, this is a build
Ok crocodile dundee. :)
I think if I did the swap with kukri to falcion I would average about 8.5 more damage with the falcion per attack (off the top of my head). I might go with Guisarme so I can have reach (which is an advantage) or something else, but in a full round attack situation I think you out damage me.
Either way I out damage you if I move. And with the guisarme I have reach.
A longsword and/or hammer user doesn't out damage you, or have reach.
And those are the real comparisons, because that is what is being made obsolete.
A TWF build with a single weapon, particularly a high crit weapon, on a fighter, should outdamage a class that doesn't get weapon specialization and weapon focus.
Now instead of putting that on a fighter, who has the ability to master a specific weapon...a scenario that clearly favors the high feat intensive build you created...pretty clever of you.
But there is also Barbarian.
Your specializations go away. So does your weapon training. And you probably don't have enough feats for your crit stuff...
And I get a bonus to strength, which goes toward my two handed attack bonus.
My 22 becomes a 26. That is +12 per attack when raging, with another +9 from Power attack, and I still get to add +4 to my Armor spikes. I only need Power attack, TWF and ITWF.
Your kukri in a Barbarian build...not so good.
Paladin...similar issues.
So yes, using a class that can make using a single weapon have huge bonuses, you can be better using a single weapon...which is kind of the major class feature of the class...
And of course, again the comparison is to standard. It is clearly, unquestionably better than just a falcion, and laughably superior to a one handed weapon.
It is, undeniably, mechanically superior. Or it would be, if it were allowed.
It, of course, isn't.
So at higher level it is inferior to TWF... it is like BAning TWF with kukris at higher levels would be a good idea.Over time, sure. But at first level?it is not mechanically better, TWF with kukris is waaay better.
And don't pretend you don't want this because it is mechanically better.It insults both of our intelligence.
Nope not at all.
Using 2 kukri's at first level is legal, and a perfectly good character concept. The benefit is it works great and becomes more awesome as the character levels.
The problem with TWF with a THW and armor spikes is, as soon as a better option comes along (like swinging the THW twice) that fully fun and flavorful option goes down the toilet.Wait, wait.
So it had to be banned cause it becomes unerpowered at higher leveles?
NO I'm saying that the only reason you take this option until 6th level is because it sneaks in an extra 1d6+.5 STR, and no other, because at 6th level there are better options, and suddenly that 'flavorful' option gets discarded for MOAR DAMAGE.
But thanks for playing.
And of course, again the comparison is to standard. It is clearly, unquestionably better than just a falcion, and laughably superior to a one handed weapon.
I just showed you where it wasn't Ciretose.
It's like, 6 posts up.
No Weapon Training or anything to get in the way. Same stats, same items in one case. Same damage, 2 more to-hit.
That is literally, undeniably, mechanically superior.
Everything else being equal, 2H > 2H + TWF.
|
|
And of course, again the comparison is to standard. It is clearly, unquestionably better than just a falcion, and laughably superior to a one handed weapon.I just showed you where it wasn't Ciretose.
It's like, 6 posts up.
No Weapon Training or anything to get in the way. Same stats, same items in one case. Same damage, 2 more to-hit.
That is literally, undeniably, mechanically superior.
Everything else being equal, 2H > 2H + TWF.
First, you ignored the Barb rage bonus to Str I mentions, which is an advantage to the class that gets the bonus strength damage, but let us put that to the side as it is the same as the fighter advantage with a specific weapon. Class specific.
Again, it isn't just a comparison of 2H +TWF, it is also comparison of 1H + TWF.
This takes makes the One-Handed weapon out. Why go with a one handed option when you can get all the pluses of two-handed without the minus of losing any option to TWF.
It negates the downside of a reach weapon, while still giving all of the advantages.
And it gives the constant additional option of just two handing when it is mechanically better, and then also going with TWF and THF when you have multiple enemies with low AC.
As Lemmy loves to say, more options is better. And more to the point, more options without losing any options is definitively better.
And now it is 11 EST, I really am going to bed.
Besides, what kukris do later is irrelevant. Stop moving the goal posts.
It's taking this option at 1st level that's OP. You are (apparently)only intended to do 2d6+1.5x STR MAX. More than that is beyond what the Devs intended, according to this ruling.
So, level 10 builds are irrelevant. It doesn't change the fact that this option at level one is OP, continued use is willfully exploiting a misinterpretation of RAW, and is now illegal due to clarification by the PDT. It now belongs in the realm of the house rule.
Done arguing for today...
|
|
And the build? you walwyas ask about the build but in this case you are refusing to give any. if you think this is so strong in a barbarian prove it. the numbers do not lie, I would not argue if your build outdamage mine.Ok, show us how TWF with a greatsowrd/armor spikes is OP, 10th level build, 20 PB, 2 traits, standard WBl.Again, don't insult either of our intelligence.
It is not advantageous mechanicallySure, quick and dirty because it's 10 EST, you can fill in the gaps, and "overpowered" is relative. But he'll outshine a standard of either.
...
That is not a build, this is a build
Ok crocodile dundee. :)
Dude it is 11 eastern. I'll give you something in the AM, but again Fighters are literally designed to be optimized when you specialize in a single weapon.
Of course the fighter with a single weapon, getting the presumption of a full round attack, is better.
You can not say why I (or anyone) take this option.NO I'm saying that the only reason you take this option until 6th level is because it sneaks in an extra 1d6+.5 STR, and no other, because at 6th level there are better options, and suddenly that 'flavorful' option gets discarded for MOAR DAMAGE.
But thanks for playing.
Anecdote:
My little sister used to say "You don't know!!" when I caught her in a fib. She was 8 at the time.
Monks have nothing to do with this FAQ.
It was about armor spikes. And TWF with a THW.
And how it's not legal anymore.
Don't be obtuse.
I was addressing the "of course you could wield a THW in your offhand, if it was appropriately sized for your character to do so.
That part of the rules has not changed, or come into question.
But like Ciretose, I really need to head to sleep.
Peace all, till tomorrow.
|
|
I have no problem waiting.
As I was falling asleep it occured to me.
Your attacks are
+1 Silversheen Kukri: +19/+14 (1d4+19 15-20/x2)
+1 Cold Iron Kukri: +19/+16* (1d4+16 15-20/x2)
Or 21.5 and 17.5
The Falcion does 2d4 damage, or +2.5. Two-handed gives me a +3, power attack two handed another +3 meaning at total of 8.5 damage.
So my first attack is 29 vs your 21.5
My second attack is 1d6 (3.5) + 6 + 1 or 11.5
So your attacks are 39
My attacks are 40.5
You of course have the crit range on your 2nd attack that I don't have, but I have furious focus on my first attack.
I am far too tired to do the math...but I think I may actually have you on damage, with the advantage of significantly more single attack damage.
Correct me if I'm wrong, now I really am going to sleep.
EDIT: Actually, I get another +1 to damage, but I'm lagging on your second attack because you have weapon focus over me.
It will still be close. I'll figure it out in the AM.