Is it possible to use TWF with a 2 handed weapon and unarmed strikes? If those unarmed strikes come from a monk (not flurry!) would they retain full str damage?
Thanks in advance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You can't use TWF with a 2 handed weapon, as it specifies "primary hand" and "off-hand". Hands are neither of those.Wrong.
You do not even need hands at all.
A legless, armless PC could two weapon fight with Armor Spikes and the Unarmed Strike.
Or just play second base...
Normally yes, you can do it.
RAW, the monk becomes a bit quirky, as the wording suggest it is not possible. The text states "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed."
Given that two-weapon fighting requires an off-hand weapon, the monk cannot do so outside a flurry of blows.
It is probably unintentional, but then again, very specific monk-combination build to disregard one of their primary class abilities has probably not been the consideration of the developers.
So what about a case where you don't get flurry? Like the MoMS... Would you still get the increased dmg dice, or is it impossible to TWF with a monk?
TWF:
Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6. See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Normal: If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. When fighting in this way you suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light.
Monks UAS:
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.
Is it possible to use TWF with a 2 handed weapon and unarmed strikes?
Yes. You can TWF with a 2 handed weapon and Armor Spikes as well, probably saving you MAD stats and a level of monk, too.
If those unarmed strikes come from a monk (not flurry!) would they retain full str damage?
No. They only deal full Strength damage when flurrying, which was confusingly described as similar to TWF, so they had to specify that it wouldn't reduce during a flurry.
It's awkward. But when you ignore Flurry rules, your Unarmed Strikes deal half-strength when they're used as the off-hand for two weapon fighting. Just get Double Slice if you're that concerned.
This has come up several times, but no official answer on intent has been given that I know of. RAI I don't think it was ever intended.
You can't use TWF with a 2 handed weapon, as it specifies "primary hand" and "off-hand". Hands are neither of those.
Very common misunderstanding.
This FAQ point here is somewhat related.
Q: Can a monk do a Flurry of Blows during a grapple as it requires a full attack action?
A: (Jason Bulmahn 12/11/09) The RAW do allow the grappled to make a full attack action, assuming they can do so with only one hand. Since flurry does not require two hands to perform, a monk could flurry. Grappling is not always the best idea. Grappling a monk is one such example. I think folks need to remember that the grappled condition is not as severe as it once was. You are no longer draped all over the target. It is more like you got a hold on them, typically an arm (hence the restriction). The pinned condition is more of your greco-roman wrestling hold.
|
You are one of those who will take that "hand" part much to literal.
There a numerous examples, that show neither the Primary or off-hand, need be within an actual hand.
I have been here before.
Usually, it involves someone yelling "HAAANDSSSS!!!! HAAAAAAAAAANDS!!!!" and ignoring all the evidence.
I said you have my attention, you don't have to be condescending. It's a legitimate question. That's one thing I love about coming to these forums: learning something new.
|
|
As I'm looking more into it, would this also mean that a character could take Multiweapon Fighting without requiring the prerequisite "three or more hands", and simply attack with Weapon/Weapon/Spikes instead?
As I'm looking more into it, would this also mean that a character could take Multiweapon Fighting without requiring the prerequisite "three or more hands", and simply attack with Weapon/Weapon/Spikes instead?
No quite wile anyone with enough weapons can technically ( I say this because there is no listed requirements) fight with 3 or more weapons. How ever the -4 penalty to main hand and -8 to off hands can't be over come with out three hands to qualify for the feat.
As I'm looking more into it, would this also mean that a character could take Multiweapon Fighting without requiring the prerequisite "three or more hands", and simply attack with Weapon/Weapon/Spikes instead?
My understanding is that the devs ruled that you can only take Multiweapon Fighting if you have more than two hands or more than two natural weapons. If you only have two hands, you can only take Two Weapon Fighting.
So yes, a person as more than two attacks (2 punches, 2 kicks, 1 headbutt, 2 elbow strikes, etc.), but it doesn't matter. One, because they are all just Unarmed Strike, and two, because the rules say so... somewhere (can't find it right now).
As to the original question. By the letter it looks like you can't use a Monk Unarmed Strike as an offhand weapon because it is not an off hand weapon by definition. I guess you could use it as the primary attack (with full Str bonus) and declare your great sword the off hand attack, but then it would only get half Str bonus, which would defeat the purpose of trying to cheese your way into getting 1 1/2 Str with your primary (two-handed attack) and full Str with your off hand.
Regarding Monks, having "no such thing as an off-hand" doesn't mean you can't make off-hand attacks with it. You don't lose the ability to make an off-hand attack normally just because you're a Monk. What it's referring to is that it's considered a main-hand attack for purpose of applying Strength bonus.
Good point. So probably you could use it as an off-hand attack. But I would rule that you would only get 1/2 your Strength bonus.
Think of it this way. If a Monk had a long sword in his main hand and attacked with it he gets full Strength. But if he uses Two Weapon Fighting (for some reason) and attacks with his Unarmed Strike as his primary and his long sword as his off-hand, the long sword would only get 1/2 Str even though it is in his main hand.
In this case I think the rules for Two Weapon Fighting would trump the Monk's Unarmed Strike rule.
Of course he would be better off just getting a temple sword, use flurry and just not worry about what was primary or off-hand.
There is no "handedness" in pathfinder. It's not a matter of "my longsword is in my right hand so it's my main-hand weapon". You can have a longsword in each hand and 2 iteratives and use one longsword for the first iterative and the second longsword for the second iterative and it's neither subject to two-weapon fighting rules nor does either longsword get half-strength bonus. Specific trumps general so Monk's unarmed strike being main-hand even when making off-hand strike supersedes general TWF rules. Otherwise, that clause has absolutely zero purpose. In fact, you could two-hand a longsword getting 1.5x strength and make off-hand attacks using unarmed strike at full-strength as a Monk. Given all their other limitations and shortcomings, taking away valid abilities from them is kind of rubbing salt in the wound. And lemon juice... and maybe some habanero pepper too, for good measure.
This is what I'm going for. An elven curved blade for 1.5 str, and unarmed strike with dragon style for a TWF style that gives 1.5 str for both attacks.