PFS Ruling Required: Two-Weapon Fighting & Multiweapon Fighting


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 344 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

I have an ongoing discussion with a player who believes because the Multiweapon Fighting feat from the Monstrous Feats part of Bestiary 1 is not legal for play, Two-Weapon Fighting is used for his 4 armed character.

His argument is because it's not legal Two-Weapon Fighting is never subject to the special component of the Multiweapon Fighting feat. I have told him that just because it's not legal for play doesn't make it non existent. The feat is still there and still replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat it simply means that in Pathfinder Society nothing with more than 2 arms can use 2 weapons within PFS.

Two-Weapon Fighting:
You can fight with a weapon wielded in each of your hands. You can make one extra attack each round with the secondary weapon.
Prerequisite: Dex 15.
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 in Chapter 8.
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 offhand
weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each.
An unarmed strike is always considered light.

Multiweapon Fighting:
This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks
with multiple weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons
are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with
off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty
on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty
on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one
primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-
Weapon Fighting in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting
feat for creatures with more than two arms.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

As the player in question, I have stated that Two-Weapon Fighting dictates 2 weapons, flavour wise it has a very, very brief notion of 2 hands, but all it's rules state 2 weapons.

2 Weapons, be they in 1 hand each, one in 2 hands and 1 in another hand, or each weapon taking up 2 hands is still 2 weapons, which Two-Weapon Fighting is all about.

I know the Vestigial Arm Discovery is also mentioned here, but I believe that's been worked on to death about attacks in the past, I am only wanting to know about the Weapon Fighting.

My understanding is that Multi-Weapon Fighting does not even come into play, I am only using 2 weapons, sure on 4 hands, but I could easily use 2 weapons on 2 hands so why does the added help of 2 additional hands (to literally just add more 'oomph' to the attack) require an entirely different feat? I am not gaining more attacks, the discovery explicitly states it does gain additional attacks, it just allows it to help attacks (again, it's not about the discovery, there are probably other ways of gaining additional arms in Pathfinder).

I did state that if Multi-Weapon Fighting is required, it does not exist because it is unuseable by PFS character and thus does not replace Two-Weapon Fighting (which I only believe is the case here) so it is still takeable.

Grand Lodge

It's banned in PFS play, that does not mean that is ceases to exist.

It's Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.

Clearly states exactly what it does. Refer to the additional Resources page.

Sovereign Court

Andrew Nevin wrote:

It's banned in PFS play, that does not mean that is ceases to exist.

It's Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.

Clearly states exactly what it does. Refer to the additional Resources page.

No debate needed as Andrew wrote, the feat exists even if you can't have it (your enemies sure can) and the special is pretty clear! If you have more arms than two, then you need this feat to gain the bonuses for two-weapon (or more) fighting. Might not make sense, might be annoying, might ruin a good piece of cheese, but there is no way around it IMO


1 person marked this as a favorite.

e-Spaceshot, you asked about this 2 years ago before creating, and stated you knew it could get shot down by PFS GM's as it's skirting RAW (and RAI).

Andrew actually has a good point as to why TWF feat wouldn't work for you, and no, you can't take MWF in PFS as a player. Reiterating what Andrew and aslak stated, that does not mean it does not exist.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe I'm not understanding a couple of posters, but it sounds like some of you are saying that as soon as a PC has a third arm, suddenly he loses the use of the Core Rulebook's two-weapon fighting mechanic. Is that what I'm reading?

Grand Lodge

Yes that is exactly what you are reading. As the special of MWF states. Anything with more than 2 arms requires it rather than TWF.


I have no comment on legalities and effects of using 4 hands to wield two weapons, but I see absolutely no reason why the Two-Weapon Fighting feat would not cover this situation just as well as Multi-Weapon Fighting. The "Special" clause on that feat is to prevent it from stacking with TWF (since the benefit is described as a lessening of the penalties).


Aside from the dexterity requirement, they appear to be functionally identical. You have a primary hand, and anything that is not a primary hand is an off hand. I'm starting to think they should be rolled into one feat.


Yeah, I think you guys are reading too much into this. The player can still use the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, because he meets the prerequisites of it, and it's from a legal source. Why would he have to lose that feat because he gained a third arm?

Shadow Lodge

PRD wrote:
Vestigial Arm (Ex): The alchemist gains a new arm (left or right) on his torso. The arm is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing. The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though the arm can wield a weapon and make attacks as part of the alchemist's attack routine (using two-weapon fighting). The arm can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist's original arms (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, another hand to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). The arm has its own “hand” and “ring” magic item slots (though the alchemist can still only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time). An alchemist may take this discovery up to two times.

Vestigial Arm explicitly says that the character still uses Two Weapon Fighting. So it doesn't matter what Multi-Weapon Fighting says because it is explicitly excepted for this discovery.


TWF gives you one offhand attack.
MWF gives you two or more offhand attacks.

Every creature with 3 or more arms should take MWF because it is a special version of TWF for multi armed creatures. TWF isnt a prerequiste for MWF.

PFS forbids MWF so a creature with 3+ arms can take TWF to get one offhand attack but not more.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I'm curious what other feats' text applies to PCs who don't possess that feat. Or are we deciding that only this feat gets to apply its text to characters that don't have it?

Remember, the PFS Guide to Organized Play mandates that GMs are to use common sense in their adjudication of the rules. (Not a bad idea for home game GMs, either.)

Shadow Lodge

Jiggy wrote:

I'm curious what other feats' text applies to PCs who don't possess that feat. Or are we deciding that only this feat gets to apply its text to characters that don't have it?

Remember, the PFS Guide to Organized Play mandates that GMs are to use common sense in their adjudication of the rules. (Not a bad idea for home game GMs, either.)

I agree. Considering that the feat was written for creatures in the Beastiary I believe it is being grossly misinterpreted. Not that it really matters given the actual text of the vestigial arm discovery anyway.


Eridan wrote:

TWF gives you one offhand attack.

MWF gives you two or more offhand attacks.

To be clear, this is not true at all.

TWF does not give you an offhand attack, it reduces the penalties on your primary and offhand when you make an offhand attack. Read the "Normal:" section of the feat for clarity.

MWF does not give offhand attacks either, they come with the limbs. However Vestigial Limb (from what I understand) has been clarified not to grant any additional offhand attacks either. This makes MWF unnecessary/useless for/to someone with Vestigial Limb.

Grand Lodge

PatientWolf what you don't understand is in the vestigial arm text when is says using two weapon fighting it refers to the rules for two weapon fighting in chapter 8 of the core rule book not the feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Its not my day. I will go to bed and stop posting for today.

Majuba wrote:
TWF does not give you an offhand attack, it reduces the penalties on your primary and offhand when you make an offhand attack... MWF does not give offhand attacks either, they come with the limbs...

This is correct.

So a multi-armed PC in PFS can attack with all his arms but he will get very high penalties (-6 with the main and -10 with the off-hands) or he uses the TWF feat and fights only with two arms (with lowered TWF penalties and fewer attacks).

Grand Lodge

MWF still replaces the TWF regardless of the text in the Vestigial Arms description because of that.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Nevin wrote:
MWF still replaces the TWF regardless of the text in the Vestigial Arms description because of that.

Why are we holding characters to the text of feats they don't have? When did that become a thing?

Grand Lodge

Because they have taken the wrong feat, if they have 3 arms and are taking TWF that's an illegal feat choice, the character has to take MWF instead as per the special ruling part of MWF. If they already have TWF and gain a third arm like all other feats that you violate the prerequisites for by losing them or falling under a different ruling the feat becomes suppressed until the condition causing it to become illegal is removed.

Shadow Lodge

Andrew Nevin wrote:
PatientWolf what you don't understand is in the vestigial arm text when is says using two weapon fighting it refers to the rules for two weapon fighting in chapter 8 of the core rule book not the feat.

You are right. Vestigal Arm says it uses the rules in Chapter 8 of the core-book which do not mention the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat at all but do mention the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. The Vestigal Arm could have said that it used the replacement rules in the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat in the bestiary but it didn't. It explicitly points to the regular ol' two weapon fighting rules.

Furthermore, as Jiggy pointed out using a monster feat from the Bestiary in this way requires a total abandonment of common sense. The feat, and its text, was clearly intended for the monsters in the Bestiary and not player characters.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Eridan wrote:
So a multi-armed PC in PFS can attack with all his arms but he will get very high penalties (-6 with the main and -10 with the off-hands) or he uses the TWF feat and fights only with two arms (with lowered TWF penalties and fewer attacks).

This is incorrect. The Vestigial Arm Discovery specifically states you may not make extra attacks with the arms.

Likewise, replying back to the 2nd poster, you may not wield two two-handed weapons. That argument has been done to death. It's the added "oomph" you want that is specifically not allowed.

Shadow Lodge

Andrew Nevin wrote:
Because they have taken the wrong feat, if they have 3 arms and are taking TWF that's an illegal feat choice, the character has to take MWF instead as per the special ruling part of MWF. If they already have TWF and gain a third arm like all other feats that you violate the prerequisites for by losing them or falling under a different ruling the feat becomes suppressed until the condition causing it to become illegal is removed.

No it is not an illegal feat choice. There is no way you don't know you are misinterpreting both Vestigial Arm and Multi-Attack. It is too clear that it doesn't apply in the way you are claiming.

It is very obvious you have an agenda here with this argument to deny the player a perfectly legal tactic you don't like.

Shadow Lodge

Nefreet wrote:
Eridan wrote:
So a multi-armed PC in PFS can attack with all his arms but he will get very high penalties (-6 with the main and -10 with the off-hands) or he uses the TWF feat and fights only with two arms (with lowered TWF penalties and fewer attacks).

This is incorrect. The Vestigial Arm Discovery specifically states you may not make extra attacks with the arms.

Likewise, replying back to the 2nd poster, you may not wield two two-handed weapons. That argument has been done to death. It's the added "oomph" you want that is specifically not allowed.

The discovery does say you can attack with the arms including using Two-Weapon Fighting. Wielding a weapon in two hands for the Str and a half damage isn't "Extra attacks".

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Two different statements, separated by paragraphs.

Eridan stated "attack with all his arms". That is the section of his post I was referring to.

E-Spaceshot wants to TWF with 2H weapons. This also cannot be done (and please don't start that argument again).

Grand Lodge

PatientWolf I posted here for an Official clarification above my own ruling. As easily as you are saying that my own agenda applies here as may your own.

MWF is an overruling feat, there is no 2 ways to argue around that. Vestigial Arms says it uses TWF which refers to chapter 8 of the core rule book. Which is a completely and utterly separate from the TWF feat which is immediately overruled by MWF once you have 3 or more arms.

I am not here to argue with you I am here for a direct answer from the Design team as your opinion is your opinion not a ruling.

Grand Lodge

Can we please steer away from the extra attacks section as it isn't relevant to the rules question at hand.

Shadow Lodge

Nefreet wrote:
Eridan stated "attack with all his arms". That is the section I was referring to.

Ahh in that case you are correct. The part about "extra oomph" threw me off because in the original post it was referring to using two-weapon fighting with only two weapons but wielding both of those weapons with two hands giving the increased Str bonus to damage.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

You're not likely to get a direct response from the Design team about this corner case, so our "opinions" may be all you have to go off of.

Shadow Lodge

Andrew Nevin wrote:

PatientWolf I posted here for an Official clarification above my own ruling. As easily as you are saying that my own agenda applies here as may your own.

MWF is an overruling feat, there is no 2 ways to argue around that. Vestigial Arms says it uses TWF which refers to chapter 8 of the core rule book. Which is a completely and utterly separate from the TWF feat which is immediately overruled by MWF once you have 3 or more arms.

I am not here to argue with you I am here for a direct answer from the Design team as your opinion is your opinion not a ruling.

MWF is not an overruling feat. That is your assertion which directly contradicts the text of Vestigial Arm.

BTW I don't have an agenda as I don't play PFS and have never (and will never) play an Alchemist (really, really don't like them). So I have no dog in this fight. However, the rules are clear and the only way you can come up with your interpretation is deliberate misinterpretation. It is just not possible to legitimately read the rules the way you do.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Nevin wrote:
MWF is an overruling feat, there is no 2 ways to argue around that.

Except for the question that you keep refusing to answer: Why does a feat's text apply to a character who does not possess that feat?

The rule you're clinging so desperately to (about MWF repacing TWF) is part of MWF's text. Generally, the text of a feat only applies to character who actually have that feat (except for the "Normal" section, which specifically describes how things work without the feat).

So in order for MWF to replace TWF, a character first needs to actually possess the MWF feat. Otherwise, MWF's line about replacing TWF doesn't apply.

Unless you can show where in the rules it says that a feat's effects can apply to characters who don't have the feat?

Shadow Lodge

Jiggy wrote:
Andrew Nevin wrote:
MWF is an overruling feat, there is no 2 ways to argue around that.

Except for the question that you keep refusing to answer: Why does a feat's text apply to a character who does not possess that feat?

The rule you're clinging so desperately to (about MWF repacing TWF) is part of MWF's text. Generally, the text of a feat only applies to character who actually have that feat (except for the "Normal" section, which specifically describes how things work without the feat).

So in order for MWF to replace TWF, a character first needs to actually possess the MWF feat. Otherwise, MWF's line about replacing TWF doesn't apply.

Unless you can show where in the rules it says that a feat's effects can apply to characters who don't have the feat?

He's already made up his mind, already dismissed our "opinions", and declared that only a Dev answer will change his mind knowing that the boards don't work that way and that he is highly unlikely to get one. So he never has to change ruling.

Grand Lodge

Okay PatientWolf there is the 1 point you are not understanding that I have said multiple times now.

The text of Vestigial Arm does not refer to the FEAT Two-Weapon Fighting, it refers specifically to the section of chapter 8 in the core rule book on page 202 titled Two-Weapon Fighting.

The FEAT "Two-Weapon Fighting" only reduces the penalty as per the rules within the Two-Weapon Fighting section of chapter 8. If the character has more than 2 arms they can not take the FEAT Two-Weapon Fighting they have to take the FEAT Multiweapon Fighting.

Please refer to the MWF Special section, how you are saying it's not an overruling feat I don't know, it states exactly what it does clearly. TWF and MWF only apply reductions to the rules for Two-Weapon Fighting. Once again this being the section from chapter 8 in the core rule book on page 202 which is what the part of Vestigial Arms is referring to not the FEAT "Two-Weapon Fighting".

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Andrew Nevin wrote:
Please refer to the MWF Special section, how you are saying it's not an overruling feat I don't know, it states exactly what it does clearly.

If you have the MWF feat. If you don't have the MWF feat, then none of that feat's text applies to you. So if you don't have MWF, then MWF doesn't replace TWF for you.

How many times are you going to just ignore that fact?

Grand Lodge

You can still fight with 4 arms and 2 2Handed Weapons. Just you can never lesson in PFS the penalties for doing so.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Andrew Nevin wrote:
You can still fight with 4 arms and 2 2Handed Weapons. Just you can never lesson in PFS the penalties for doing so.

No, you absolutely cannot. Read any of the other lengthy arguments about this.

Or reference the FAQ on two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon. Take your pick.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Nefreet wrote:
Andrew Nevin wrote:
You can still fight with 4 arms and 2 2Handed Weapons. Just you can never lesson in PFS the penalties for doing so.

No, you absolutely cannot. Read any of the other lengthy arguments about this.

Or reference the FAQ on two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon. Take your pick.

Hrm... I'm seeing the FAQ about TWFing with armor spikes and a two-hander, but it cites as its reasoning the fact that all your hands are occupied. If you have more hands, wouldn't that cease to apply?

Shadow Lodge

Andrew Nevin wrote:

Okay PatientWolf there is the 1 point you are not understanding that I have said multiple times now.

The text of Vestigial Arm does not refer to the FEAT Two-Weapon Fighting, it refers specifically to the section of chapter 8 in the core rule book on page 202 titled Two-Weapon Fighting.

The FEAT "Two-Weapon Fighting" only reduces the penalty as per the rules within the Two-Weapon Fighting section of chapter 8. If the character has more than 2 arms they can not take the FEAT Two-Weapon Fighting they have to take the FEAT Multiweapon Fighting.

Please refer to the MWF Special section, how you are saying it's not an overruling feat I don't know, it states exactly what it does clearly. TWF and MWF only apply reductions to the rules for Two-Weapon Fighting. Once again this being the section from chapter 8 in the core rule book on page 202 which is what the part of Vestigial Arms is referring to not the FEAT "Two-Weapon Fighting".

As I have told you when you said that the first time, you are correct Vestigal Arm points to the rules in the Core-Book. So what it is saying is to use those rules, exactly those rules including the mention in those rules of the feat to use.

Do you think when the devs wrote this they did not know about the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat? Of course they did but they refer directly to the text about TWF in the Core Book without any mention of it. If Multi-Weapon Fighting alters these rules for everyone as you claim why in the world would the devs write Vestigal Arm to refer to those rules knowing that the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat is necessary as soon as you take the discovery and yet give no indication to the player, who shouldn't be reading the Bestiary, that such a feat even exists? It is clear to any reasonable person that they intended the player to use the TWF rules exactly as written including using the TWF feat.

Also as Jiggy has stated time and again with no response, Feats apply to those who have them they do not set rules for everyone else.


Andrew, you are overreading the feat's special text. It does not say a multi-limbed creature cannot take TWF. It's saying a total of two things:

  • Don't expect to take both feats and combine the benefits
  • You don't need TWF also - this feat alone gives you the reduced penalties on all your multi-limb offhand attacks.

    It's an understandable misreading, but that is all it means.

  • Sczarni

    Starfinder Charter Superscriber
    Jiggy wrote:
    Nefreet wrote:
    Andrew Nevin wrote:
    You can still fight with 4 arms and 2 2Handed Weapons. Just you can never lesson in PFS the penalties for doing so.

    No, you absolutely cannot. Read any of the other lengthy arguments about this.

    Or reference the FAQ on two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon. Take your pick.

    Hrm... I'm seeing the FAQ about TWFing with armor spikes and a two-hander, but it cites as its reasoning the fact that all your hands are occupied. If you have more hands, wouldn't that cease to apply?

    I don't recall if you've been a part of the lengthy Vestigial Arm discussions in the past, but suffice it to say that the extra arms you gain do not increase the "hands" worth of actions all characters get. You cannot fight with two two-handed weapons any more than four one-handed weapons.

    Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

    Nefreet wrote:
    Jiggy wrote:
    Nefreet wrote:
    Andrew Nevin wrote:
    You can still fight with 4 arms and 2 2Handed Weapons. Just you can never lesson in PFS the penalties for doing so.

    No, you absolutely cannot. Read any of the other lengthy arguments about this.

    Or reference the FAQ on two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon. Take your pick.

    Hrm... I'm seeing the FAQ about TWFing with armor spikes and a two-hander, but it cites as its reasoning the fact that all your hands are occupied. If you have more hands, wouldn't that cease to apply?
    I don't recall if you've been a part of the lengthy Vestigial Arm discussions in the past, but suffice it to say that the extra arms you gain do not increase the "hands" worth of actions all characters get. You cannot fight with two two-handed weapons any more than four one-handed weapons.

    I'd like to read up; PM me a link?

    Grand Lodge

    There are people that have posted on both sides of the conversation however some are more vocal than others. I know there are both points of view, that's why the post went up initially to look for an appropriate answer from someone with authority.

    I appreciate your opinions, I am saying they are not the opinions I am seeking at this point. That's not meant to be taken as offensive I am looking for a source point to answer as it puts a definitive end to the conversation. If I am wrong I am wrong, that's fine and I don't mind that I just want an end to result that isn't questionable either way.

    Grand Lodge

    I believe Sean K Reynolds has said it before the Vestigial Arm discovery was intended as a resource to have different options to them as indicated by the example. It was not intended to provide additional arms for combat, but arms to do other things like use potions and other items.

    Sczarni

    Starfinder Charter Superscriber

    HERE is a 1500+ post thread (it's locked now) where a Designer discusses a great deal about what you can and can't do with Vestigial Arms. You are welcome to read it.

    Nowhere in there does he mention the necessity of MWF over TWF.

    Liberty's Edge

    Multi-weapon Fighting replaces Two-Weapon Fighting if the race has three or more arms.

    The point is moot, though, because there are no three- (or more) armed races that are legal for PFS. Thus, the availability of Multi-weapon Fighting is irrelevant.

    Sczarni

    Starfinder Charter Superscriber

    I need to jet. My phone is at 4% battery.

    1 to 50 of 344 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
    Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / PFS Ruling Required: Two-Weapon Fighting & Multiweapon Fighting All Messageboards

    Want to post a reply? Sign in.