|
1. Well... I believe a dagger is a light weapon, not a one-handed weapon, so you couldn't select it as a valid weapon for Slashing Grace.
2. Precise strike requires melee, not ranged.
May I suggest you consider the flying blade archetype for your dagger hurling needs? It's not dex to damage, but it allows precise strike to work with daggers.
|
A pair of questions:
1- can I apply the dex bonus damage of Slashing Grace when i throw a dagger?
No. As worded, Slashing Grace only works with one-handed weapons. By RAW a dagger is a light weapon, not a one-handed weapon.
2- can I use Swashbukler precise strike with two weapon fighting in this way: 2 hands free, I retrieve a dagger as a free action(quick draw)and throw it with the main hand(adding precise strike damage), then retrieving another dagger with the off hand and throwing it(adding precise strike) and so on?
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.
In order to have a second weapon in your off hand, you must have a first weapon in another hand. Ergo, in order to get the extra attack from two-weapon fighting you must have a weapon in each hand at the moment you are making the extra attack. Ergo, you cannot use both two-weapon fighting and precise strike at the same time.
Edited my post in order to address both questions.
|
|
You can two-weapon fight using weapons that require no hands, such as the Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes, or Blade Boot.
You can even do this while using both your hands to do something else, like hold a Longspear, Bucket, or 10ft Pole.
In fact, you do not even need to possess hands, or even arms, to two-weapon fight.
|
|
Ehh... I kind of have to disagree with you there, blackbloodtroll.
Even if you're making attacks without using limbs, two-weapon fighting requires a main hand designation and an off-hand designation. Even if they're not actual hands.
Copypasta from two weapon fighting section.
"If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon."
In order to get that extra attack, you must have a designated off-hand, regardless of what limb or non-limb ends up being used.
Even when you are two-weapon fighting with no hands, you're still two-weapon fighting with two hands :D
|
|
You can two-weapon fight using weapons that require no hands, such as the Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes, or Blade Boot.
Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes and Blade Boot all have specific wording saying you can do this. Specific overrides general. Nothing in Precise Strike calls out a specific exception so it does not override the general rule.
You can even do this while using both your hands to do something else, like hold a Longspear, Bucket, or 10ft Pole.
In fact, you do not even need to possess hands, or even arms, to two-weapon fight.
I have shown you in there rules where is says you can't do this. Please show me in the rules where is says you can other than specific exceptions.
|
...can you two-hand a one-handed weapon and still get Precise Strike damage?
Precise Strike (Ex): At 3rd level, while she has at least 1 panache point, a swashbuckler gains the ability to strike precisely with a light or one-handed piercing melee weapon (though not natural weapon attacks), adding her swashbuckler level to the damage dealt. To use this deed, a swashbuckler cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield other than a buckler. She can even use this ability with thrown light or onehanded piercing melee weapons, so long as the target is within 30 feet of her.
...I'm inclined to say no, since the weapon you're wielding is "a weapon in [your] other hand". But that wording got me excited for a minute there.
I think it would work with flurry of blows instead of TWF because you do not have to use your off-hand for the flurry. You'd need a monk weapon but there are some that work, like the wushu dart.
That way you get the same number of attacks as with TWF.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
we need to consider what the devs were thinking when they wrote the ability. they were probably thinking that adding your level to dmg AND getting multiple attacks with two weapon fighting was overkill especially given the way a swashbuckler can counter attack every time they are attacked and the fact that extra attacks mean more chances to gain panche). As such they disallowed off hand weapons.
The only problem is, they worded it bad. mechanically speaking, there should be no problem with alternating weapons, just so long as you don't get extra attacks (via Two weapon fighting). however, they wrote it such that someone with two different weapons can't use them both.
all this being said, I think we could use an FAQ errata for that deed. we need to know:
1. can you alternate weapons and still use precise strike?
2. how do monk unarmed strikes work with the deed for flurry of blows and two weapon fighting?
|
|
You can two-weapon fight using weapons that require no hands, such as the Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes, or Blade Boot.Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes and Blade Boot all have specific wording saying you can do this. Specific overrides general. Nothing in Precise Strike calls out a specific exception so it does not override the general rule.
I have shown you in there rules where is says you can't do this. Please show me in the rules where is says you can other than specific exceptions.You can even do this while using both your hands to do something else, like hold a Longspear, Bucket, or 10ft Pole.
In fact, you do not even need to possess hands, or even arms, to two-weapon fight.
So, you need free hands to kick?
Also, you can prevent someone from kicking twice, by cutting off their hands?
Really, you want to walk down this road?
Is it certain that the meaning of the feat is meant to imply that only One-Handed weapons meet the requirement of Slashing Grace and not merely "weapons that are used in one hand [not-two-handed weapons]?"
I find the fact that they created the Flying Blade archetype (and restrained it to thrown daggers and starknives) extremely strange if so.
I wish that they had just written their material more clearly. It blows my mind how unclear everything seems to be.
|
|
Is it certain that the meaning of the feat is meant to imply that only One-Handed weapons meet the requirement of Slashing Grace and not merely "weapons that are used in one hand [not-two-handed weapons]?"
I find the fact that they created the Flying Blade archetype (and restrained it to thrown daggers and starknives) extremely strange if so.
I wish that they had just written their material more clearly. It blows my mind how unclear everything seems to be.
It's not unclear. "One-handed" is a type of weapon. If a weapon is not in this category (which is explicitly, clearly, and unambiguously defined in the rules, by the way), it is not a "one-handed" weapon.
I recognize a majority of the material does not conform to Grod's Law:
"Grod's Law: You cannot and should not balance bad mechanics by making them annoying to use."
There is a fundamental (and aggravating, by the way) reluctance to allow finesse fighters to add their dexterity to their damage rolls; however, excluding light weapons from benefiting from a feat simply "because" is not a good enough reason.
I am merely expressing that I am unsure as to whether they are INTENDING to use the term of art "One-Handed" or if they are using the short hand definition of the compound word to simply mean a weapon that one may wield in one hand (because a dagger is, in fact, wielded in one hand).
Finally, I will say that if it not meant to be inclusive, that is dumb. That is all.
I think it's worth noting that a chakram would also make a fine weapon for a Swashbuckler, as it is one-handed and slashing and therefore qualifies for Slashing Grace.
I think it's worth noting that a chakram would also make a fine weapon for a Swashbuckler, as it is one-handed and slashing and therefore qualifies for Slashing Grace.
Is a chakram one-handed? Or is it light? Not to mention it can't work with precise strike (or precise throw since it's limited to thrown daggers and starknives). Otherwise I would completely agree.
This raises another question: would someone who took the feats to use a Chakram with all this be able to apply Martial Versatility to Slashing Grace to let it work with Daggers?
Prerequisites: Fighter level 4th, human.
Benefit: Choose one combat feat you know that applies to a specific weapon (e.g., Weapon Focus). You can use that feat with any weapon within the same weapon group.
Special: You may take this feat more than once. Each time it applies to a different feat.
|
|
So, you need free hands to kick?You can two-weapon fight using weapons that require no hands, such as the Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes, or Blade Boot.Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes and Blade Boot all have specific wording saying you can do this. Specific overrides general. Nothing in Precise Strike calls out a specific exception so it does not override the general rule.
I have shown you in there rules where is says you can't do this. Please show me in the rules where is says you can other than specific exceptions.You can even do this while using both your hands to do something else, like hold a Longspear, Bucket, or 10ft Pole.
In fact, you do not even need to possess hands, or even arms, to two-weapon fight.
I asked you to show me in the rules, instead you come back with more subjective arguments. So again, show me in the rules.
Let me help you out a little. The rules mention nothing about allowing you to kick, bite, head bump or any other form of unarmed strike as an off-hand attack. So by RAW, you can only use your off-hand as an off-hand weapon for two-weapon fighting with unarmed strike. A monk's unarmed strike calls out specific exceptions to this for flurry which is essentially a monk's version of two-weapon fighting, but again, this is a specific called out exception and thus does not disprove the rule. A GM might reasonably make a house rule that says you can use a foot as an off-hand attack when two weapon fighting, but that is a house rule and does not disprove the rule.
Really, you want to walk down this road?
I have no problems walking down a road you are blindly stumbling about on.
|
|
Everyone can kick. Look here.
Even Commoners, without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, can kick, without a free hand.
|
|
Everyone can kick. Look here.
Even Commoners, without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, can kick, without a free hand.
I never said you could not make an unarmed strike with your foot. I said, by RAW, you cannot use your foot as an off-hand weapon when using two-weapon fighting because even though it is a light weapon by RAW, RAW for TWF says you must be wielding a second weapon in your off hand. So, by RAW, this limits you to only being able to use your hand as an off-hand weapon when using two-weapon fighting and unarmed strike except where otherwise mentioned. RAW stating you can make an unarmed strike with your foot while holding a weapon in your hand is not the same thing as RAW stating you can make an unarmed strike with your foot while attacking with a weapon in your hand.
Now I realize that this is a rather narrow treatment of RAW. However, the rules for Precise Strike say you cannot use it when you have a weapon in your off-hand. This strongly suggests that RAI is that you cannot use Precise Strike and Two-Weapon Fighting. Given that, the burden of proof to the contrary lies with the person trying to interpret it otherwise, not the person stating it doesn't. This means a clear case of RAW stating otherwise is required. RAW does not clearly state otherwise.
|
|
See this FAQ.
Sadly, this is yet another poorly worded FAQ. Nothing I noted early said you could not use two unarmed strikes with two-weapon fighting. By RAW you could always do this, you were just restricted to using your hands as those unarmed strikes. However, I will accept that what this FAQ is actually trying to say is that you may use any form of unarmed strike with two-weapon fighting. So this, then, is an exception to the two-weapon fighting rules. But, again, exceptions to the rules do not disprove the rule. If fact, they prove you need an exception to bypass the rules. And, again, Precise Strike has no such stated exception.
I suppose generous GM may interpret the rules in your favor but I am fairly certain it is not RAI, and it is certainly well within RAW to interpret against you.
|
|
There was never a restriction to using only your hands.
In the two-handed+armor spikes conundrum, Jason Bulmahn himself notes that a PC, holding a torch, could attack with a Longsword, and make an off-hand attack with an unarmed strike.
See here.
|
|
I don't see that as a rule, thus there is no restriction.
He, and SKR, note in other posts, note Armor Spikes, Boot Blades, and other non-hand weapons, as being used as off-hand attacks.
I am not seeing a need to scour for every single post, noting every non-hand weapon, being used as an off-hand weapon.
Many of these weapons, note in their description, that they are available to be used as an off-hand attacks.
I would say that a non-hand weapon, that cannot be used as an off-hand weapon, as an exception.
Not the other way around.
|
|
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.
This is what is stated in the Core Rulebook for the general rules for Two-Weapon Fighting. As you have proven, Unarmed Strike has been specifically stated to bypass the second weapon in your off hand requirement of the general rule. Armor Spikes and Blade Boots also have specific wording that contradicts the general rule. Since specific overrides general, then you are allowed to override the general rule for those things that specify you can. That does not mean that the general rule is not the general rule and that specific rules are not an exception to the general rules.
|
|
Can you give an example of a non-hand weapon, that cannot be used as an off-hand attack?Sorry, I don't understand what that would prove. Especially since we are discussing the use of daggers, which are not non-hand weapons.
No, the Dagger question was answered.
You stated that an off-hand attack must be made with an actual hand, or hand based weapon.
I say this is untrue, and there are no examples of a non-hand weapon, that cannot be used to make an off-hand attack.
|
|
The problem is that Trollbill is reading "off hand" literally, when it obviously refers to the metaphorical off hand.
I am being literal because this is clearly an attempt to twist the rules to bypass RAI. If I truly wanted to be literal, I would point out that since you are always considered to be armed in your off hand if you have Improved Unarmed Strike, then you would you lose the ability to benefit from Precise Strike if you have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. That, however, would clearly be against RAI as well.
non-hand weapons are considered off-hand ("off hand" here being a mechanical term used to limit two weapon fighting.) unless you claim your kick to be your main attack in which case your kick is on hand and your actual hands are off hand.
Basicly, you can't two weapon fight and use precise strike at the same time. (though you are free to use two separate weapons to make your normal number of attacks. "off hand" is probably not meant to limit your weapons, just how many attacks you get without penalty and you should get away with it unless you have a DM who is big on realism and nit picky details)
the Monk unarmed strike seems to be the exception here. Precise strike, as worded, works with a two weapon fighting monk because you have no off hand so long as it's an unarmed strike.
|
|
So, you need free hands to kick?You can two-weapon fight using weapons that require no hands, such as the Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes, or Blade Boot.Unarmed Strike, Armor Spikes and Blade Boot all have specific wording saying you can do this. Specific overrides general. Nothing in Precise Strike calls out a specific exception so it does not override the general rule.
I have shown you in there rules where is says you can't do this. Please show me in the rules where is says you can other than specific exceptions.You can even do this while using both your hands to do something else, like hold a Longspear, Bucket, or 10ft Pole.
In fact, you do not even need to possess hands, or even arms, to two-weapon fight.
I asked you to show me in the rules, instead you come back with more subjective arguments. So again, show me in the rules.
Let me help you out a little. The rules mention nothing about allowing you to kick, bite, head bump or any other form of unarmed strike as an off-hand attack. So by RAW, you can only use your off-hand as an off-hand weapon for two-weapon fighting with unarmed strike. A monk's unarmed strike calls out specific exceptions to this for flurry which is essentially a monk's version of two-weapon fighting, but again, this is a specific called out exception and thus does not disprove the rule. A GM might reasonably make a house rule that says you can use a foot as an off-hand attack when two weapon fighting, but that is a house rule and does not disprove the rule.
Really, you want to walk down this road?
I have no problems walking down a road you are blindly stumbling about on.That house rule would be in no way necessary, because unarmed strikes can still be off hand and still not require an actual hand, even by the normal rules for making unarmed strikes without having to take levels in monk. Provided, taking levels in monk wouldn't hurt.
