|
To the sword and board remark, assuming you are proficient with tower shields, bastard swords, full plate, and earthbreakers, could you TWF with an earthbreaker in two hands, a bastard sword in a third and still defend yourself with a tower shield?
Even better, take Thunder and Fang and Bastard Sword Proficiency and wield an Earth Breaker, a Klar, a Bastard Sword, and a Tower Shield.
You couldn't attack with all of them, unless you had enough iteratives, and you'd be taking -4 due to the shield and TWF, but it would be epic.
And probably not legal. I'm still waiting to hear something more concrete.
Is there anything in the rules that says you must have a 2hander in your primary hand, and braced/gripped with your off-hand?
If not, I'd say that the Multiweapon Fighting Monster Feat would qualify for being able to do all this via RAW.
|
Actually, sub out Bastard Sword for something piercing, so you have all three damage types.Dwarven Waraxe then
Not that I know of.Is the two handed weapon only restricted from primary use?
Could one still use a two handed weapon as an off-hand weapon?
Is there anything in the rules that says you must have a 2hander in your primary hand, and braced/gripped with your off-hand?
If not, I'd say that the Multiweapon Fighting Monster Feat would qualify for being able to do all this via RAW.
You know, now that I reread multiattack, it would make all of this legal RAW.
As far as I know, yes. Looking at UE, it simply says two hands are necessary to wield a two-handed weapon. It doesn't specify that it requires a primary and an off-hand. And I can find nothing that says a 2-handed weapon cannot be used as an off-hand weapon.
Reason I ask is that this is all well and good to theorycraft, but I think my issue is limb count and specific feat selection. Yes, you're only using 2 weapons, but you're using 4 limbs. That requires extra training and coordination that TWF isn't "designed" for. But MWF from the Monster Feats is. It's swapped 1-for-1 for TWF by RAW. So I could see having Imp and Greater MWF, since it uses the same diminishing penalties.
I'd argue that this would be all legal if the PC had a high enough strength score to carry this stuff, substituted in MWF for TWF, and took all appropriate penalties for weapons of disproportionate size.
Then we could have fun with our Klar/Earthbreaker cheese.
You know, now that I reread multiattack, it would make all of this legal RAW.
Multiattack for Natural Weapons, and Multiweapon Fighting for manufactured. Yep.
It would simply require a DM that allows use of those feats. And, if he lets you grow 2 extra arms and says you aren't a monster, well, then, he's just silly.
|
|
@Relixander:If we had a quote, we wouldn't be asking the questions.
@blackbloodtroll:Yes we are.
@everyone who made this concept:Would you allow this 4 armed tower shield multiweapon fighting Thunder and Fang Dwarven Waraxe Tank fly in your games? Also, do you mind if I try it in mine? (assuming DM allows it)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you grow an extra pair of arms, at my table, you're an exception to the rule. As such, I'd allow use of appropriate RAW abilities and feats such as Multiattack and/or Multiweapon Fighting, but not special abilities such as Multiweapon Mastery (Ex).
Need a quote establishing the terms Primary Hand and Off Hand, actually reference types of attacks or hands/limbs/etc. It is crucial to the faq and arguments.
I don't believe the current rule set or faq actually clarifies the term.
ATTACKS are defined as attack, full attack, attack of opportunity. Note: The unofficial term "iterative" is used to define attacks per round beyond the first, gained by level, feat, or ability. That word doesn't actually appear in any Paizo product, IIRC.
NATURAL ATTACKS are defined as primary or secondary, depending on limb placement, frequency of use, and strength multiplier.
WEAPONS are classified as light, 1h, 2h, sub-classified into melee, ranged, martial, exotic, and are based on size of weapon vs. relative size of creature, how many hands are needed to wield it, and it's availability and nature of manufacture.
FEATS utilize primary and off-hand in their descriptions.
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. 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 when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.
Table: Two-weapon Fighting Penalties summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
FAQ on the topic states you get to choose which hand is primary and which is secondary, and allows you to either alternate hands with iteratives, or use all primary then all secondary, your choice.
The only thing that isn't direct RAW is the FAQ (which is basically official gospel anyways).
|
First forget the rules lets look at the physics of using 2 handed weapons. what weapons do you plan on wielding 2 handed swords & greatswords?
get 2 studs(2x4x8') and hold by the end like they're swords, Now try swing them around Barbarian-esque. And if your thinking Greatswords try 2x6x8's
Come back and tell me how it worked out???
This bit of using 2 2handed weapons has been going on for as long as I can remember (nearly 30 years now). It just doesn't work.
Explain two Bastard Swords then.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Umm, debate degenerated into real-world physics. Please explain to me the physics of Magic Missile.
It works if you're big enough, strong enough, and have enough limbs and martial training to support the swing. You forgot the physics of growing two extra arms. And, if you're taking this into real world physiology, the extra set of pecs and delts to support those arms. Think Goro from Mortal Kombat.
@Gurby:looking at things from a standpoint in reality, try poking yourself with a $750 piece of wood and see if you heal 1d8+1 HP. Reality doesn't apply to Pathfinder as much as everyone thinks.
Or, ummm, at all. Pathfinder Physics are found in Pathfinder Rules Books. Earth Physics are found in School Books (and most of them are theories, not hard rules).
One thing ive noticed is that theres an actual difference between 2 handed fighting feat and the multiattack weapon feat. The 2 handed fighting feat lessens the negatives for each swing IF u are taking a free attack. Multiattack weapon doesnt state anything about free attacks, it only lessens the negatives to be able to USE weapons in ur other appendages.
So from the wording, multiattacks weapon feat allows weapons to be use by more than 2 appendages, but if u do so, u get no free attacks and u suffer the negatives for all ur regualar attacks made with them. Which is very different than what the 2 weapon fighting feat and the vestiage appendages state, BC the character can actually have 4 arms and if they only get 2 attacks do not suffer the negatives for uaing the arms for regular attacks if they chose not to do thevfree attack whereas the multiattack weapon feat worsing states that they would receive negatives for their regular attacks.
so it seems using a 3rd or more appendage to attack with if all ur hands ur at least 3 or more holding a weapon with the intent to attack with it would mean that u get no free attacks and u suffer negatives for all ur attacks, even if u decide not to do a free one qhich u cant with multiattack weapon feat.
I maybe reading it wrong, but is anyone else seeing the same thing?
Normal: You may fight with a weapon in both your primary and off-hand at a -6 and a -10 penalty respectively. (baseline ability)
TWF: You may fight with a weapon in both your primary and off-hand at a -4 penalty to each respectively. (-2 and -6 reduction in each penalty)
MWF: You may fight with a weapon in your primary and off-hands at a -4 penalty to each respectively. (-2 to primary and -6 each offhand reduction)
I see direct correlation and balanced mechanics. Am I missing something?
The only thing that's "missing" really, is Imp & Greater MWF, but there's a caveat in the feat that allows you to sub it in 1-for-1 swap, so one could logically assume you could progress in the feat chain for the extra iterative attacks normally.
|
Normal: You may fight with a weapon in both your primary and off-hand at a -6 and a -10 penalty respectively. (baseline ability)
TWF: You may fight with a weapon in both your primary and off-hand at a -4 penalty to each respectively. (-2 and -6 reduction in each penalty)
MWF: You may fight with a weapon in your primary and off-hands at a -4 penalty to each respectively. (-2 to primary and -6 each offhand reduction)
I see direct correlation and balanced mechanics. Am I missing something?
The only thing that's "missing" really, is Imp & Greater MWF, but there's a caveat in the feat that allows you to sub it in 1-for-1 swap, so one could logically assume you could progress in the feat chain for the extra iterative attacks normally.
Well, I think the bigger reason for no Imp & Greater MWF is because if you have a 6-armed creature, you're already getting five off-hand attacks. Imp & Greater would give you 10 and 15 off-hand attacks respectively.
That would be a bit silly.
Good point. The specific wording of the feats effectively doubles the off-hand attacks, not just adding one extra iterative. I'd have to houserule it to read "one extra off-hand attack" for each feat.
|
|
You ignoring rules is not the same as me making them up. The fact that the devs agreed with the point I stated many times (while you were mocking HAAAANNNDDSSSS or the like) shows that the pieces I've stated are in fact the rules.
Yes, free hands are needed to kick unless you houserule it otherwise. Just not physical hands. Disagree still? Source please.
Completely supported by FAQ now. Thanks.
Nope.