Reference
SKR explained it in BBT's link but it requires reading in context. Your character has a primary hand and an off-hand. The CRB (pg 141) gives you the rules for using light weapons and one-handed weapons in either your primary hand or your off-hand and tells you a two-handed weapon requires two hands. In context, the two hands are your primary and off-hand. So a two-handed weapon requires a primary and an off-hand. Now multiple armed creatures still only have one primary hand, extra hands are off-hands. They do not have a second primary hand required for a two-handed weapon.
Now, looking at projectile weapons in general, and bows specifically, we see they also require two hands. Once again, in context, this is a primary and off-hand. That's why the Bow Nomad has special rules for two-weapon fighting with bows. They get a specific rule to override the general.
|
So, just wanted to point out that using the sea knife as example to prove you can use a two handed weapon while two weapon fighting is a terrible example, as it is clearly an exemption to the rule. It has a clear negative effect as it specifically states to use the weapon you have to be swimming, flying or prone, cannot use your leg to walk or run, and take an additional penalty to attack. It also says specifically in the write up for the weapon that it can be used this way, because without that line you wouldn't be able to use it with a two handed weapon while two weapon fighting.
Graystone I'd suggest making it clear when you're talking about a race with 4 arms vs having four arms. I don't know of playable races that have 4 arms. And I personally don't think polymorph spells change the rules for a races with 2 arms.
Nothing in there says that you can use multiple arms for combat so the rules for a 2 armed race would still be in effect. Nothing in the FAQ says anything that having 4 arms means you get around it.
if you wield a weapon with both hands you don't get an off-hand attack.
So both is limited to 2. So for player characters this restricts 3+ arms as much as 2 arms.
|
Have we moved past flat out personal insults, and derogatory accusations?
Probably not.
Anyways, it should noted that SKR said the two-handed weapon and Armor Spikes restriction was put out, due to a violation of an unwritten rule, that I quote here: "The most damage you can do without TWF is using a 1H or 2H weapon in two hands for x1.5 Str damage, and the most damage you can do with TWF is x1 in the main hand and x.5 in the off-hand (for a total of x1.5 Str added to your weapons), so optimally you're getting no more that x1.5 Str no matter which attack mode you choose.", which using a Bow, and an unarmed strike, does not violate.
I can't find the both rule now, so I remove that.
|
Actually you can't. Read the thread BBT linked if you wish to know more.Just for my curiosity, graystone, do you believe someone with four arms could dual wield two-handed Melee weapons?By RAW, yes, but the penalties would be horrendous.
Actually, I can. I can read RAW.
People keep confusing the word "both" with the word "all." That assumption only works for characters with 2 hands.
|
|
You can't, dualwielding doesn't happen if you have a two-handed weapon as from the FAQ. And vestigial arms don't change that at all.Just for my curiosity, graystone, do you believe someone with four arms could dual wield two-handed Melee weapons?By RAW, yes, but the penalties would be horrendous.
If only where were a way to pick up fully functional extra arms.
Or maybe if vestigial arms were allowed to wield weapons.
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).
Emphasis mine.
Actually you can't. Read the thread BBT linked if you wish to know more.Just for my curiosity, graystone, do you believe someone with four arms could dual wield two-handed Melee weapons?By RAW, yes, but the penalties would be horrendous.Actually, I can. I can read RAW.
People keep confusing the word "both" with the word "all." That assumption only works for characters with 2 hands.
You'll forgive me if I take SKR's word over yours.
|
|
You'll forgive me if I take SKR's word over yours.Actually you can't. Read the thread BBT linked if you wish to know more.Just for my curiosity, graystone, do you believe someone with four arms could dual wield two-handed Melee weapons?By RAW, yes, but the penalties would be horrendous.Actually, I can. I can read RAW.
People keep confusing the word "both" with the word "all." That assumption only works for characters with 2 hands.
All the rulings linked to date have been written with the assumption of a standard body configuration.
If you can link a ruling addressing non-standard body configurations I will happily accept that. Until then, both =/= all.
You'll forgive me if I take SKR's word over yours.Actually you can't. Read the thread BBT linked if you wish to know more.Just for my curiosity, graystone, do you believe someone with four arms could dual wield two-handed Melee weapons?By RAW, yes, but the penalties would be horrendous.Actually, I can. I can read RAW.
People keep confusing the word "both" with the word "all." That assumption only works for characters with 2 hands.
All the rulings linked to date have been written with the assumption of a standard body configuration.
If you can link a ruling addressing non-standard body configurations I will happily accept that. Until then, both =/= all.
It's not all, it's the primary hand. Two-handed weapons and bows require a primary and off-hand. You only have one primary hand regardless of how many arms you have or how you got them. Without a second primary hand, you cannot wield a second two-handed weapon or bow.
|
|
Bows do not use the off-hand, and do not break the unwritten rule noted by SKR.
If you want to use unwritten rules, and SKR's comments, as the sole basis for an argument, then actually know what you are talking about.
It's no different than an attack with a Sling, and an unarmed strike.
It violates neither the FAQ, or the noted unwritten rules.
Bows do not use the off-hand, and do not break the unwritten rule noted by SKR.
If you want to use unwritten rules, and SKR's comments, as the sole basis for an argument, then actually know what you are talking about.
It's no different than an attack with a Sling, and an unarmed strike.
It violates neither the FAQ, or the noted unwritten rules.
Do two-handed weapons use your off hands?
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.
Projectile Weapons: Blowguns, light crossbows, slings, heavy crossbows, shortbows, composite shortbows, longbows, composite longbows, halfling sling staves, hand crossbows, and repeating crossbows are projectile weapons. Most projectile weapons require two hands to use (see specific weapon descriptions). A character gets no Strength bonus on damage rolls with a projectile weapon unless it's a specially built composite shortbow or longbow, or a sling. If the character has a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.
I don't see how it would apply to one but not the other. These are literally from the same page in the CRB. (Actually written down and everything!)
That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
Does a two-handed Melee weapon use your off-hand?
|
|
It is no different than a PC holding a Shield, whilst two-weapon fighting with a Longsword and an Unarmed Strike, or holding a shield, and two-weapon fighting with a Sling, and an Unarmed Strike.
All that has been put forth, is that it is denied, not because the Bow is a two-handed weapon, and not because it violates the unwritten rules, but because it requires to hands.
That restriction is not covered, and not even suggested, and has to be brought forth as additional unwritten rules, extrapolated from other unwritten rules.
Of course, when asked about this, the response "find the written rules, that disproves my unwritten rules", which is maddening.
No one should ever have to scour the written rules, to dispute unwritten rules.
Hell, since they are not written, I have just as much right to say the unwritten rules, contradict your unwritten rules.
Does a two-handed Melee weapon use your off-hand?That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
By RAW, no.
That's why they needed unwritten rules to make the FAQ.
so it never occured to use common sense?
Does a two-handed Melee weapon use your off-hand?That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
By RAW, no.
That's why they needed unwritten rules to make the FAQ.
Well at least other people can see your position now. I don't believe you and I have anything further to discuss.
|
|
Well at least other people can see your position now. I don't believe you and I have anything further to discuss.Does a two-handed Melee weapon use your off-hand?That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
By RAW, no.
That's why they needed unwritten rules to make the FAQ.
Look, agree, or disagree, the personal insults, accusations of nefarious intent, lying, and outright mockery has to stop.
Seriously, don't be jerk.
|
|
Bows do not use the off-hand, and do not break the unwritten rule noted by SKR.
If you want to use unwritten rules, and SKR's comments, as the sole basis for an argument, then actually know what you are talking about.
It's no different than an attack with a Sling, and an unarmed strike.
It violates neither the FAQ, or the noted unwritten rules.
Do two-handed weapons use your off hands?
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.Projectile Weapons: Blowguns, light crossbows, slings, heavy crossbows, shortbows, composite shortbows, longbows, composite longbows, halfling sling staves, hand crossbows, and repeating crossbows are projectile weapons. Most projectile weapons require two hands to use (see specific weapon descriptions). A character gets no Strength bonus on damage rolls with a projectile weapon unless it's a specially built composite shortbow or longbow, or a sling. If the character has a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.I don't see how it would apply to one but not the other. These are literally from the same page in the CRB. (Actually written down and everything!)
Neither specifies a primary hand. The only requirement is two hands.
What im wondering in this discussion is whether i need my primary hand to wield a bow.
|
|
I thought my suggestion of simply limiting the Primary attack to x1 Strength to damage, and the Off-hand attack to x0.5 Strength to damage, as a much more elegant solution.
You rid the need to reference tons of unwritten rules, metaphorical hands, and other such nonsense.
It even fits into SKR's reasons behind the FAQ.
Hell, it was what we did in 3.5, when two-weapon fighting with two-handed weapons was explicitly allowed.
Neither specifies a primary hand. The only requirement is two hands.Bows do not use the off-hand, and do not break the unwritten rule noted by SKR.
If you want to use unwritten rules, and SKR's comments, as the sole basis for an argument, then actually know what you are talking about.
It's no different than an attack with a Sling, and an unarmed strike.
It violates neither the FAQ, or the noted unwritten rules.
Do two-handed weapons use your off hands?
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.Projectile Weapons: Blowguns, light crossbows, slings, heavy crossbows, shortbows, composite shortbows, longbows, composite longbows, halfling sling staves, hand crossbows, and repeating crossbows are projectile weapons. Most projectile weapons require two hands to use (see specific weapon descriptions). A character gets no Strength bonus on damage rolls with a projectile weapon unless it's a specially built composite shortbow or longbow, or a sling. If the character has a penalty for low Strength, apply it to damage rolls when he uses a bow or a sling.I don't see how it would apply to one but not the other. These are literally from the same page in the CRB. (Actually written down and everything!)
So you feel two-handed weapons do not require a primary or an off-hand to wield?
Outside of two-weapon fighting, the off-hand does not exist.
Also, doing something that requires two hands, does not automatically stop one from two weapon fighting.
One could hold on to a rope with two hands, and two-weapon fight with unarmed strikes, and never need to let go of the rope.
You are correct, DOING something with two hands does not stop two weapon fighting. WIELDING with two hands does. And the "unwritten" rule isn't a rule, it's a design philosophy they have. The rule is the written FAQ. Which talks about wielding. That if you attack with a weapon wielded with two hands then you can't make an off-hand attack. Nothing in the FAQ cares about damage, str bonuses, or how many hands you have.
Well at least other people can see your position now. I don't believe you and I have anything further to discuss.Does a two-handed Melee weapon use your off-hand?That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
By RAW, no.
That's why they needed unwritten rules to make the FAQ.
Look, agree, or disagree, the personal insults, accusations of nefarious intent, lying, and outright mockery has to stop.
Seriously, don't be jerk.
Dude where is this personal insult? The accusation of nefarious intent? his lying? Or mockery?
Nothing in what you quoted here does any of that.He said that he feels your position has been made clear. And that he feels there's no reason for him to continue. I feel you're reading his posts looking for insult than reading it how it is.
That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
Dude, you are really, really going around the bend with this one.
You don't appear to have an argument at all.
Your only "point" is to simultaneously demand that its everyone elses responsibility to prove a negative, and then say "nope that doesn't do it" to everything thats said.
You are making an argument so bad that it self parodies in order to gain mechanical advantage for your character. Yes people are going to take a negative view of that, its munchkining.
|
|
You are correct, DOING something with two hands does not stop two weapon fighting. WIELDING with two hands does. And the "unwritten" rule isn't a rule, it's a design philosophy they have. The rule is the written FAQ. Which talks about wielding. That if you attack with a weapon wielded with two hands then you can't make an off-hand attack. Nothing in the FAQ cares about damage, str bonuses, or how many hands you have.Outside of two-weapon fighting, the off-hand does not exist.
Also, doing something that requires two hands, does not automatically stop one from two weapon fighting.
One could hold on to a rope with two hands, and two-weapon fight with unarmed strikes, and never need to let go of the rope.
The FAQ only addresses characters with standard body configurations. It makes no attempt to address characters with more than two hands available.
|
|
That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
Dude, you are really, really going around the bend with this one.
You don't appear to have an argument at all.
Your only "point" is to simultaneously demand that its everyone elses responsibility to prove a negative, and then say "nope that doesn't do it" to everything thats said.
You are making an argument so bad that it self parodies in order to gain mechanical advantage for your character. Yes people are going to take a negative view of that, its munchkining.
Show me, anywhere in the FAQ, where the issue of characters with more than one off-hand is addressed. The usage of the word "both" is a blatant signpost that the assumption is made that characters only have two hands available.
You are attempting to shoehorn characters with additional limbs into a FAQ that in no way addresses their situation.
Graystone I'd suggest making it clear when you're talking about a race with 4 arms vs having four arms. I don't know of playable races that have 4 arms. And I personally don't think polymorph spells change the rules for a races with 2 arms.
Sorry you missed it but a 4 armed race has been around since the ARG and reprinted in the bestiary 4 and people of the stars. I thought it was clear when I replied to a post asking about 4 armed races.
Artanthos is pretty much seeing this as I do. Having more than two arms gets you more off hands so going by the FAQ a two handed weapon only uses ONE of those. (see multiweapon fighting on off hands) Add that to two handed weapons only requiring 2 hands (not a primary and off hand) and I see no reason you couldn't TWF with 2 two handed weapons assuming you have 4 fully working hands.
multiweapon fighting: "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.)" Note ALL of it's off hands.
You are correct, DOING something with two hands does not stop two weapon fighting. WIELDING with two hands does. And the "unwritten" rule isn't a rule, it's a design philosophy they have. The rule is the written FAQ. Which talks about wielding. That if you attack with a weapon wielded with two hands then you can't make an off-hand attack. Nothing in the FAQ cares about damage, str bonuses, or how many hands you have.Outside of two-weapon fighting, the off-hand does not exist.
Also, doing something that requires two hands, does not automatically stop one from two weapon fighting.
One could hold on to a rope with two hands, and two-weapon fight with unarmed strikes, and never need to let go of the rope.
You don't wield a now with two hands, you use a bow with two hands. Which has the same game meaning as hold. In the rules there is no distinction between use, hold, and wield.
Okay you know what, I'm out too.
Graystone and artanhos can go play their 4 armed races. I'm so confused of what you you are even wanting or arguing over anymore. Or maybe you're just debating to debate, I don't know.
BiDTBone you can continue to believe what you want about wielding, holding and using.
And BBT can continue to want the FAQ changed.
This isn't worth continuing for me. Bye :D
That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
Dude, you are really, really going around the bend with this one.
You don't appear to have an argument at all.
Your only "point" is to simultaneously demand that its everyone elses responsibility to prove a negative, and then say "nope that doesn't do it" to everything thats said.
You are making an argument so bad that it self parodies in order to gain mechanical advantage for your character. Yes people are going to take a negative view of that, its munchkining.
First off, quit being a damn jerk. This isn't BBT's thread, he's not talking about his character AND YOU DONT EVEN KNOW IF HE PLAYS OR GM's MORE. You have absolutely ZERO reason to read into his arguments what you are . That is the worst kind of direct jerk statement you could possibly make.
Second, just because you don't agree with someone doesn't make their logic poor. The way BBT reads the rules IS EXACTLY HOW THE 3.0 DESIGNERS THAT WROTE THE EXACT WORDS IN DISCUSSION READ IT. We know this because it is was explicitly clarified in a 3.5 FAQ as permissible.
The pathfinder FAQ makes a mess out of a simple issue for absolutely no reason. THERE IS NO MECHANICAL ADVANTAGE. DPR analysis clearly shows that taking the to hit penalty greatly out weighs the benefit of the second attack. If you think there is a mechanical advantage in what BBT is talking about then you are FLAT WRONG.
Additionally, the pathfinder FAQ leaves nasty corner cases like this dangling that were not an issue previously. TWF with bow and IUS is a completely valid sequence in the current rules.
Of course that's ignoring the original 3.5 FAQ which didn't allow it but was changed after enough people complained.
Graystone I'd suggest making it clear when you're talking about a race with 4 arms vs having four arms. I don't know of playable races that have 4 arms. And I personally don't think polymorph spells change the rules for a races with 2 arms.Sorry you missed it but a 4 armed race has been around since the ARG and reprinted in the bestiary 4 and people of the stars. I thought it was clear when I replied to a post asking about 4 armed races.
Artanthos is pretty much seeing this as I do. Having more than two arms gets you more off hands so going by the FAQ a two handed weapon only uses ONE of those. (see multiweapon fighting on off hands) Add that to two handed weapons only requiring 2 hands (not a primary and off hand) and I see no reason you couldn't TWF with 2 two handed weapons assuming you have 4 fully working hands.
multiweapon fighting: "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.)" Note ALL of it's off hands.
Light weapons can used in primary or off hand. One-handed weapons can be used in primary or off hand. Two-handed weapons require two hands.
Now, what is the function of that last sentence if not to clarify two-handed weapons require a primary and an off hand?|
|
That still doesn't violate the FAQ, or the stated unwritten rules noted by SKR.
How can you say otherwise?
Dude, you are really, really going around the bend with this one.
You don't appear to have an argument at all.
Your only "point" is to simultaneously demand that its everyone elses responsibility to prove a negative, and then say "nope that doesn't do it" to everything thats said.
You are making an argument so bad that it self parodies in order to gain mechanical advantage for your character. Yes people are going to take a negative view of that, its munchkining.
You do realize I am not for twin Bows?
Using a Bow, and a non-hand as an off-hand attack, is fine.
That is what I am debating.
It, at most, brings a total of x1.5 strength to damage, and it is not some "munchkining" BS.
I truly hate that stupid, useless term, used as an insult, and no one can even decide what it means, except "I don't like it".
Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only.
An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.
One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.
Clearly the hands being referenced are the primary and off hands. When two-handed weapons call out requiring two hands, they are not simply being redundant. Two-handed weapons require a primary hand. Nobody has more than one primary hand.
Okay you know what, I'm out too.
Graystone and artanhos can go play their 4 armed races. I'm so confused of what you you are even wanting or arguing over anymore. Or maybe you're just debating to debate, I don't know.BiDTBone you can continue to believe what you want about wielding, holding and using.
And BBT can continue to want the FAQ changed.
This isn't worth continuing for me. Bye :D
I'm sorry you feel that way but 4 armed races are in the game. It's just a fact. Hiding your head in the sand doesn't change that for the overall game.
And I personally don't think polymorph spells change the rules for a races with 2 arms.
On this I disagree. If I turn into a 4 armed creature with claws, such as a Four-Armed Sahuagin Mutant, I gain all 4 attacks. Why would I be able to claw with those arms and not use them as actual hands? I've never had a DM say I wasn't 'proficient' with my limbs when I used polymorph.
Munhckining: Verb. Arguing for the weaker position in rules interpretation because of the mechanical advantage it gives you.
the bow takes two hands to use. Your right hand and your left. That's all that you get to use in a round. You only have six seconds to act in, and yes, while it is possible to shoot a bow and kick, it is hard to do them both effectively in six seconds.
The ability to transfer your left hands actions to your foot, head, or elbow for mostly thematic and descriptive purposes does not actually let you make more attacks. Just because i can kick with either foot, knee, elbow, headbutt, or punch does not mean i can kick with either foot and knee and elbow and headbutt AND punch at the same time.
Thats how the rules work. Thats implied heavily in the rules. Thats how the developers have repeatedly told you it works. Other people do not have to meet some unattainable burden of proving that this is how it works: they just need a better argument than what you present for that's not how it works.
Munhckining: Verb. Arguing for the weaker position in rules interpretation because of the mechanical advantage it gives you.
the bow takes two hands to use. Your right hand and your left. That's all that you get to use in a round. You only have six seconds to act in, and yes, while it is possible to shoot a bow and kick, it is hard to do them both effectively in six seconds.
The ability to transfer your left hands actions to your foot, head, or elbow for mostly thematic and descriptive purposes does not actually let you make more attacks. Just because i can kick with either foot, knee, elbow, headbutt, or punch does not mean i can kick with either foot and knee and elbow and headbutt AND punch at the same time.
Thats how the rules work. Thats implied heavily in the rules. Thats how the developers have repeatedly told you it works. Other people do not have to meet some unattainable burden of proving that this is how it works: they just need a better argument than what you present for that's not how it works.
What mechanical advantage? Prove it.
Clearly the hands being referenced are the primary and off hands. When two-handed weapons call out requiring two hands, they are not simply being redundant. Two-handed weapons require a primary hand. Nobody has more than one primary hand.Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only.
An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.
One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.
This here is where we hit in impasse. Right there you read into the sentence instead of taking it at face value. That's a jump into RAI instead of RAW. The rule simple says 2 hands.
Unless something changes in the rules, two hands means just that. Just in the core rules you have creatures with more than 2 arms and spells that let you change into them. While the rules are written with a normal humanoid shape in mind, they knew these situations could happen. In fact, they have a feat to use 3+ arms in combat. With all that in mind, they had plenty of lead-time to add 'primary hand needed' to two handed weapons even before they added a 4 armed race.
So until/unless they FAQ/errata two handed weapons, 2 off hands can wield them without issue by RAW.
What mechanical advantage? Prove it.Munhckining: Verb. Arguing for the weaker position in rules interpretation because of the mechanical advantage it gives you.
the bow takes two hands to use. Your right hand and your left. That's all that you get to use in a round. You only have six seconds to act in, and yes, while it is possible to shoot a bow and kick, it is hard to do them both effectively in six seconds.
The ability to transfer your left hands actions to your foot, head, or elbow for mostly thematic and descriptive purposes does not actually let you make more attacks. Just because i can kick with either foot, knee, elbow, headbutt, or punch does not mean i can kick with either foot and knee and elbow and headbutt AND punch at the same time.
Thats how the rules work. Thats implied heavily in the rules. Thats how the developers have repeatedly told you it works. Other people do not have to meet some unattainable burden of proving that this is how it works: they just need a better argument than what you present for that's not how it works.
Yeah, that's what I'm struggling to see. You take the HUGE amount of ranged feats needed to make a good archer, THEN try to add in two weapon feats and have -4 hit on top of that. You could get a LOT of arrows in the air but I struggle to see it getting you more damage.
Yeah, that's what I'm struggling to see. You take the HUGE amount of ranged feats needed to make a good archer, THEN try to add in two weapon feats and have -4 hit on top of that. You could get a LOT of arrows in the air but I struggle to see it getting you more damage.What mechanical advantage? Prove it.Munhckining: Verb. Arguing for the weaker position in rules interpretation because of the mechanical advantage it gives you.
the bow takes two hands to use. Your right hand and your left. That's all that you get to use in a round. You only have six seconds to act in, and yes, while it is possible to shoot a bow and kick, it is hard to do them both effectively in six seconds.
The ability to transfer your left hands actions to your foot, head, or elbow for mostly thematic and descriptive purposes does not actually let you make more attacks. Just because i can kick with either foot, knee, elbow, headbutt, or punch does not mean i can kick with either foot and knee and elbow and headbutt AND punch at the same time.
Thats how the rules work. Thats implied heavily in the rules. Thats how the developers have repeatedly told you it works. Other people do not have to meet some unattainable burden of proving that this is how it works: they just need a better argument than what you present for that's not how it works.
You won't, the DPR calculations were done for the THF/TWF and came out behind THF. The bow starts off behind THF to begin with and has more feats and has to split attributes. TWF with a bow will mechanically be subpar to nearly every other combat style.
|
|
In what way is it not considered a two handed weapon?
In the same way a Lance is not considered an One-handed weapon, when used whilst mounted, in one hand.
Effects, Feats, and Class Features, specific to Two-Handed weapons, do not apply to Bows. Example: Overhand Chop.
Why would this, one and only, FAQ, treat a Bow as a Two-handed weapon?
You won't, the DPR calculations were done for the THF/TWF and came out behind THF. The bow starts off behind THF to begin with and has more feats and has to split attributes. TWF with a bow will mechanically be subpar to nearly every other combat style.Yeah, that's what I'm struggling to see. You take the HUGE amount of ranged feats needed to make a good archer, THEN try to add in two weapon feats and have -4 hit on top of that. You could get a LOT of arrows in the air but I struggle to see it getting you more damage.What mechanical advantage? Prove it.Munhckining: Verb. Arguing for the weaker position in rules interpretation because of the mechanical advantage it gives you.
the bow takes two hands to use. Your right hand and your left. That's all that you get to use in a round. You only have six seconds to act in, and yes, while it is possible to shoot a bow and kick, it is hard to do them both effectively in six seconds.
The ability to transfer your left hands actions to your foot, head, or elbow for mostly thematic and descriptive purposes does not actually let you make more attacks. Just because i can kick with either foot, knee, elbow, headbutt, or punch does not mean i can kick with either foot and knee and elbow and headbutt AND punch at the same time.
Thats how the rules work. Thats implied heavily in the rules. Thats how the developers have repeatedly told you it works. Other people do not have to meet some unattainable burden of proving that this is how it works: they just need a better argument than what you present for that's not how it works.
Yeah, that's what I thought. Doing this is more being cool/different but subpar style than seeking a mechanical advantage.
Clearly the hands being referenced are the primary and off hands. When two-handed weapons call out requiring two hands, they are not simply being redundant. Two-handed weapons require a primary hand. Nobody has more than one primary hand.Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only.
An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.
One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.
This here is where we hit in impasse. Right there you read into the sentence instead of taking it at face value. That's a jump into RAI instead of RAW. The rule simple says 2 hands.
Unless...
It's not leaving RAW for RAI, it's reading in context.
|
|
The context?
Did you not read SKR's explanation for the FAQ?
Noting that the extra damage is the reason it was made?
Hell, SKR even goes on to note how to bypass this limit, which the combination of a Bow, and an Unarmed Strike, does not pass.
This has no great mechanical advantage.
It is no different than using a Sling, and an Unarmed Strike.