Are these FAQ entries contradictory?


Rules Questions


3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

found here: http://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/29153/when-wielding-a-two-handed-wea pon-in-one-hand-how-much-benefit-does-power-attac

Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (such as a lance while mounted), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?

Yes.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 05/24/13

and that

Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?

If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 07/19/13

Are these two FAQ entries contradictory. If so, which one is correct?


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, they contradict.

But the most recent should be the correct one.


There is some arguable difference on one minor point. The newer FAQ says feat or special ability while the ability to wield a lance one handed stems from the weapon property.

I'm not really sure for the sake of consistency how it should all be applied.

I think as a blanket coverage the easiest thing to do is say a weapon wielded in 1 hand does strength damage and +2/-1 for power attack when used in the main hand, regardless of anything else. Any weapon (except light) wielded in two hands deals 1.5 strength and gets +3/-1 for power attack.


The weapon's property is a special ability. Of the weapon.


The FAQ only mentions the lance as an example; the question itself asks about the general case of wielding two-handed weapons in one hand. They contradict.

Sczarni

I wonder which one applies to an Earth Breaker for a character with the Thunder and Fang feat.


Nefreet wrote:
I wonder which one applies to an Earth Breaker for a character with the Thunder and Fang feat.

My main concern too since my character uses that.

"Benefit: You can use an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon."

I guess this means it only gets 1x strength bonus.

Sczarni

1x Strength bonus, but 1.5x Power Attack?


And they wonder why we get a lil pedantic sometimes...


The difference is that the Lance is wielded "in one hand" while other examples such as Quarterstaff Master, Phalanx Fighter, Thunder and Fang, etc. call out "wield as a one-handed weapon". When you wield it "as a one-handed weapon" that also involves adjudicating it as if it were a one-handed weapon; it gets str to damage and power attack bonus as a one-handed weapon and any abilities requiring the use of a two-handed weapon cannot be used while abilities requiring the use of a one-handed weapon can be used. By contrast, the Lance is still adjudicated as a two-handed weapon, but it only occupies one hand so the other is free to wear a shield or handle your horse. However, this means that, as a two-handed weapon, it still counts for two "hands" regarding two-weapon fighting so you cannot wield two lances and TWF with them. That's the difference.

Paizo Employee Design Manager

Rynjin wrote:

Yes, they contradict.

But the most recent should be the correct one.

Don't bank on this. SKR has jumped into numerous threads asking people making this claim where exactly that rule is printed. The answer of course being that it isn't printed anywhere. Similarly, I believe Ultimate Magic came out prior to Ultimate Combat, but the FAQs and clarifications in regards to the contradictions between the two books (things like who can take an Inquisition domain) favored the earlier rulings in pretty much every instance.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:

Power Attack: If I am using a two-handed weapon with one hand (such as a lance while mounted), do still I get the +50% damage for using a two-handed weapon?

Yes.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 05/24/13

Weapons, Two-Handed in One Hand: When a feat or other special ability says to treat a weapon that is normally wielded in two hands as a one handed weapon, does it get treated as one or two handed weapon for the purposes of how to apply the Strength modifier or the Power Attack feat?

If you're wielding it in one hand (even if it is normally a two-handed weapon), treat it as a one-handed weapon for the purpose of how much Strength to apply, the Power Attack damage bonus, and so on.

—Pathfinder Design Team, 07/19/13

Are these two FAQ entries contradictory. If so, which one is correct?

No, they are not contradictory (but they are a bit confusing). A mounted lance is the only two handed weapon that can be used in one hand, and still be treated as a two handed weapon: 'While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.' There is no text to tell you to treat it as a one handed weapon, hence the mounted lance is still a two handed weapon. To my knowledge, the mounted lance is the only weapon that is treated as a two handed weapon when used in one hand.

This is a 'special feature' of the lance, not a special ability.

In all other cases, the feat or special ability says to treat the two handed weapon as a one handed weapon. This means you are using a one handed weapon in one hand, not a two handed weapon in one hand.

For example:

Spoiler:
"Jotungrip (Ex): At 2nd level, a titan mauler may choose to wield a two-handed weapon in one hand with a –2 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. The weapon must be appropriately sized for her, and it is treated as one-handed when determining the effect of Power Attack, Strength bonus to damage, and the like. This ability replaces uncanny dodge."

"Phalanx Fighting (Ex): At 3rd level, when a phalanx soldier wields a shield, he can use any polearm or spear of his size as a one-handed weapon. This ability replaces armor training 1."

Thunder and Fang wrote "Benefit: You can use an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon."

Grand Lodge

Alarox wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
I wonder which one applies to an Earth Breaker for a character with the Thunder and Fang feat.

My main concern too since my character uses that.

"Benefit: You can use an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon."

I guess this means it only gets 1x strength bonus.

And 1x power attack bonus.


Kazaan wrote:
The difference is that the Lance is wielded "in one hand" while other examples such as Quarterstaff Master, Phalanx Fighter, Thunder and Fang, etc. call out "wield as a one-handed weapon". When you wield it "as a one-handed weapon" that also involves adjudicating it as if it were a one-handed weapon; it gets str to damage and power attack bonus as a one-handed weapon and any abilities requiring the use of a two-handed weapon cannot be used while abilities requiring the use of a one-handed weapon can be used. By contrast, the Lance is still adjudicated as a two-handed weapon, but it only occupies one hand so the other is free to wear a shield or handle your horse. However, this means that, as a two-handed weapon, it still counts for two "hands" regarding two-weapon fighting so you cannot wield two lances and TWF with them. That's the difference.

That does resolve the ambiguity, but UGH, it should not require such hairsplitting to interpret the rules.

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

I believe they are consistent, as one is referring to the Lance and the other is referring to weapons like Bastard Sword or the Titan Mauler wielding two handed in one hand.

Grand Lodge

The Bastard Sword has no relevance to this conversation whatsoever.


James Risner wrote:
I believe they are consistent, as one is referring to the Lance and the other is referring to weapons like Bastard Sword or the Titan Mauler wielding two handed in one hand.

The first refers to the lance only as an example. You could remove the parenthesized portion on the sentence without losing meaning, though with some loss of clarity. The lance may be the only two-handed weapon referred to as used in "one hand" without being treated as a "one-handed weapon", but the rule is general in nature. Fortunately, a couple of posters above already found the frayed thread that just barely holds these two rules up. It might have been better to just make the specific ruling for the lance alone and use the general rule for all other cases that don't have explicit exceptions instead of changing the rule based on whether the suffix "-ed" is appended.


That is interesting... if a lance is still considered two handed, these two somehow agreeing faq's makes all the builds on the boards (that have not been questioned on this rule ever before) that are mounted combatants who choose to wield their lance two handed while using spirited charge (3d8+triple str bonus) completely pointless (or am I missing something?)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can we just put it back to

"Count how many hands are on the weapon. Follow along with count von count

One hand ha ha ha.. its a 1 handed weapon.

One hand ha ha ha. Two hands ha ha ha. Its a two handed weapon"

Problem solved.


Agreed, it's sort of pointless how it is right now where a two handed weapon is discussed separately from using a one handed weapon two handed.


+1.5 str is for attack with weapon in two hands
+1.5 power attack is for attacking with Two-Handed Weapon

if you wield 2h weapon in 1 hand you should get +1 str and +1.5 power attack. if you two-hand attacking with longsword you should get +1.5 str and +1 power attack


DarkPhoenixx wrote:

+1.5 str is for attack with weapon in two hands

+1.5 power attack is for attacking with Two-Handed Weapon

if you wield 2h weapon in 1 hand you should get +1 str and +1.5 power attack. if you two-hand attacking with longsword you should get +1.5 str and +1 power attack

Nope.

"This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls."


BigNorseWolf wrote:

Can we just put it back to

"Count how many hands are on the weapon. Follow along with count von count

One hand ha ha ha.. its a 1 handed weapon.

One hand ha ha ha. Two hands ha ha ha. Its a two handed weapon"

Problem solved.

Aww, ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG!!!

How many hands are on the weapon isn't a measure of what size category it's in. For example, several of the Two-Handed Fighter archetype abilities require the use of a two-handed weapon. You could have a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands, but that doesn't satisfy the requirement because it's still a one-handed weapon being used with two hands to leverage extra strength into the attack. You can wield a light weapon using two hands, you just get no mechanical benefit from it; it doesn't make it a two-handed weapon. Likewise, wielding a Lance in one hand doesn't make it a one-handed weapon; it won't count as a one-handed weapon for TWF purposes, abilities requiring the use of a one-handed weapon (ie. Spell Combat), etc. It certainly doesn't affect the HP and Hardness of the weapon which is based on the size category. You can always two-hand a one-handed weapon for extra strength, but nearly all abilities allowing you to one-hand a two-handed weapon specify that you treat it as a one-handed weapon in the process with the singular exception of the Lance which doesn't include that clause and this is a mixed blessing as it frees up the other hand for certain things (shield, direct horse, etc) but not for others. Also, since you're gaining leverage from the horse (or other mount), you're able to put the full two-handed strength and power attack bonus behind the attack.

Silver Crusade

Right, the lance counts as a two-handed weapon.Using it from a mount just well...

PRD wrote:

A lance deals double damage when used from the back of a charging mount. While mounted, you can wield a lance with one hand.

The lance still is a two-handed weapon. It just has a special rule that lets you get away with using it one handed when mounted, but nothing says its no longer treated as a two handed weapon (nothing says it is either admittedly.)

Digital Products Assistant

Removed a post. Please refrain from using excessive profanity.


This also comes up with a monk flurrying with a weapon. I'm on my iPad, so I can't easily double check, but I believe that if the monk is wielding his weapon with both hands (quarterstaff or temple sword, for instance), he gets only +STR, because flurry says so, but still gets the 50% increase to power attack from weilding with two hands.


Bobson wrote:
This also comes up with a monk flurrying with a weapon. I'm on my iPad, so I can't easily double check, but I believe that if the monk is wielding his weapon with both hands (quarterstaff or temple sword, for instance), he gets only +STR, because flurry says so, but still gets the 50% increase to power attack from weilding with two hands.

That's correct. All Flurry attacks deal 1x Str damage whether they are 2-h or not, off-hand or not. However, no such limitation on Power Attack exists so 2-h Flurry attacks get the extra 50% PA bonus merely because the weapon being used is a 2-h weapon (it's bigger/more massive so it naturally deals greater damage).


Kazaan wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Can we just put it back to

"Count how many hands are on the weapon. Follow along with count von count

One hand ha ha ha.. its a 1 handed weapon.

One hand ha ha ha. Two hands ha ha ha. Its a two handed weapon"

Problem solved.

Aww, ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG!!!

Don't be condescending about this. You are technically correct, but the RAW state of these rules is a counterintuitive mess that even professional Paizo writers can't parse, and BigNorseWolf is probably closer to the RAI than you are.


Pupsocket wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Can we just put it back to

"Count how many hands are on the weapon. Follow along with count von count

One hand ha ha ha.. its a 1 handed weapon.

One hand ha ha ha. Two hands ha ha ha. Its a two handed weapon"

Problem solved.

Aww, ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG!!!

Don't be condescending about this. You are technically correct, but the RAW state of these rules is a counterintuitive mess that even professional Paizo writers can't parse, and BigNorseWolf is probably closer to the RAI than you are.

He may be correct, but it requires some significant extra assumptions, namely that one of the FAQs is inherently wrong (the Lance FAQ). My explanation fully and unambiguously covers the combination of RAW and both FAQs, leaving nothing unaccounted for. Hence, by the principal of Occam's Razor, the working solution with the fewest unnecessary assumptions should be taken as correct until further data presents an inconsistency. Even if he is correct that the FAQ is wrong and RAI is that the weapon is one-handed if used in one hand and two-handed when used in two, that requires a change to the FAQ and clarification, meaning to presume that right off the bat is logically improper; being accidentally correct is still being wrong because it wasn't the logical process that arrived at the correct answer but mere happenstance.

Furthermore, merely being counter-intuitive doesn't mean it doesn't work or that it's wrong. Long ago, it was counter-intuitive to think that the Earth and other planets went around the Sun because the Sun appeared to be in motion while we felt no inertia from the rotation of the Earth; it was clearly obvious that we were stationary and the Sun was moving. Later observations brought the relationship between the Earth and the Sun to light (pun very much intended). I, for one, intend to stand as Galileo on this matter and say that the less intuitive but fully explainable method is correct and that the "more intuitive" method hinging on the supposed existence of an error on the part of the Paizo development team should not be merely accepted at face value. So don't you be condescending by dismissing logical and scientific analysis in favor of a mere preconceived notion, Pope Urban VIII.


Pupsocket wrote:
Kazaan wrote:
BigNorseWolf wrote:

Can we just put it back to

"Count how many hands are on the weapon. Follow along with count von count

One hand ha ha ha.. its a 1 handed weapon.

One hand ha ha ha. Two hands ha ha ha. Its a two handed weapon"

Problem solved.

Aww, ain't that cute... BUT IT'S WRONG!!!

Don't be condescending about this. You are technically correct, but the RAW state of these rules is a counterintuitive mess that even professional Paizo writers can't parse, and BigNorseWolf is probably closer to the RAI than you are.

Eh, I suspect the RAW is functionally equivalent to the RAI at the moment, but it's worded in a . . . less than optimal fashion. Living rulesets end up like that eventually.

Project Manager

The tone of this thread is veering pretty close to sniping. Please revisit the messageboard rules.


Rynjin wrote:

Nope.

"This bonus to damage is increased by half (+50%) if you are making an attack with a two-handed weapon, a one handed weapon using two hands, or a primary natural weapon that adds 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier on damage rolls."

Thanks, missed that one.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Are these FAQ entries contradictory? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.