Two Weapon Fighting with a Bow and Unarmed Strike


Rules Questions

101 to 150 of 214 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Okay, it boils down to:

Does the FAQ cover just two-handed weapons, or any weapon that requires two hands to use?

Gotta point out, it literally can't be just two handed weapons otherwise you could dualwield falcatas while two handing them with 4 arms, which is exactly the kind of silliness they wanted to eliminate in the first place.

So clearly its probably closer to say you cannot dual wield weapons wielded in two hands.


it covers any weapon that requires two hands to use. That is the wording of the FAQ. As you use two hands to use a weapon you then don't have an off hand. Since a bow requires two hands to use, just the exact same wording as a THW. And since the FAQ says "if you are using two hands to use it, it subsumes your off-hand."

Shadow Lodge

Perhaps you need a rank in Knowledge[Phiosophy] or Profession[Philosopher] to Two-weapon fight with a bow and an unarmed strike, to represent your understanding of where the metaphorical hand is, so that you can use it to deliver a proper metaphorical punch.

FAQ'd.


Thomas Long 175 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Okay, it boils down to:

Does the FAQ cover just two-handed weapons, or any weapon that requires two hands to use?

Gotta point out, it literally can't be just two handed weapons otherwise you could dualwield falcatas while two handing them with 4 arms, which is exactly the kind of silliness they wanted to eliminate in the first place.

So clearly its probably closer to say you cannot dual wield weapons wielded in two hands.

The DEV team has been on record many times that they do not write with the assumption that a player character has more than 2 arms and 2 legs. They have said that their rulings are based on the regular form. So extrapolating their logic out into a 4 armed character does not function. You cannot break their logic foundation to prove how an interaction works.


Chess Pwn wrote:
it covers any weapon that requires two hands to use. That is the wording of the FAQ. As you use two hands to use a weapon you then don't have an off hand. Since a bow requires two hands to use, just the exact same wording as a THW. And since the FAQ says "if you are using two hands to use it, it subsumes your off-hand."

use != wield

The language in the bow entry is use.

The language in the FAQ entry is wield.

These words are not the same thing, they are not interchangeable, and they do not have a specific in-game definition that makes them that way.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Ack.

A number of my have gotten a bit muddy.

Time to rest, collect my thoughts, and my evidence.

I shall return.


BigDTBone wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Okay, it boils down to:

Does the FAQ cover just two-handed weapons, or any weapon that requires two hands to use?

Gotta point out, it literally can't be just two handed weapons otherwise you could dualwield falcatas while two handing them with 4 arms, which is exactly the kind of silliness they wanted to eliminate in the first place.

So clearly its probably closer to say you cannot dual wield weapons wielded in two hands.

The DEV team has been on record many times that they do not write with the assumption that a player character has more than 2 arms and 2 legs. They have said that their rulings are based on the regular form. So extrapolating their logic out into a 4 armed character does not function. You cannot break their logic foundation to prove how an interaction works.

Right but an alchemist can have 4 arms. How he interacts with TWF is the same as one with 2 arms.


Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Thomas Long 175 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Okay, it boils down to:

Does the FAQ cover just two-handed weapons, or any weapon that requires two hands to use?

Gotta point out, it literally can't be just two handed weapons otherwise you could dualwield falcatas while two handing them with 4 arms, which is exactly the kind of silliness they wanted to eliminate in the first place.

So clearly its probably closer to say you cannot dual wield weapons wielded in two hands.

The DEV team has been on record many times that they do not write with the assumption that a player character has more than 2 arms and 2 legs. They have said that their rulings are based on the regular form. So extrapolating their logic out into a 4 armed character does not function. You cannot break their logic foundation to prove how an interaction works.
Right but an alchemist can have 4 arms. How he interacts with TWF is the same as one with 2 arms.

That was the point I was making to Thomas Long. The Dev's are so loathe to introduce rules for 4 arms because it would basically break the game wide open in about 87,000 places. That is why rules like vestigial limbs have restrictions build right in. That way they don't have to write global rules about how to govern them.

Thus, giving an example of a creature with 4 limbs as "evidence" of "how the devs intended it to work" isn't useful because the devs didn't write the FAQ with 4 limbs in mind to begin with.


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
it covers any weapon that requires two hands to use. That is the wording of the FAQ. As you use two hands to use a weapon you then don't have an off hand. Since a bow requires two hands to use, just the exact same wording as a THW. And since the FAQ says "if you are using two hands to use it, it subsumes your off-hand."

use != wield

The language in the bow entry is use.

The language in the FAQ entry is wield.

These words are not the same thing, they are not interchangeable, and they do not have a specific in-game definition that makes them that way.

Fine we can take this a step back if you want. So you're saying use does not equal wield. So when do you wield a bow? When do you wield a THW?


Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
it covers any weapon that requires two hands to use. That is the wording of the FAQ. As you use two hands to use a weapon you then don't have an off hand. Since a bow requires two hands to use, just the exact same wording as a THW. And since the FAQ says "if you are using two hands to use it, it subsumes your off-hand."

use != wield

The language in the bow entry is use.

The language in the FAQ entry is wield.

These words are not the same thing, they are not interchangeable, and they do not have a specific in-game definition that makes them that way.

Fine we can take this a step back if you want. So you're saying use does not equal wield. So when do you wield a bow? When do you wield a THW?

Wield as it relates to handedness of a bow doesn't happen at all in pathfinder.

Wield as it relates to handedness of a Two-handed weapon happens when you use it. Melee weapons are convenient like that, because their handedness is built into their category.


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
it covers any weapon that requires two hands to use. That is the wording of the FAQ. As you use two hands to use a weapon you then don't have an off hand. Since a bow requires two hands to use, just the exact same wording as a THW. And since the FAQ says "if you are using two hands to use it, it subsumes your off-hand."

use != wield

The language in the bow entry is use.

The language in the FAQ entry is wield.

These words are not the same thing, they are not interchangeable, and they do not have a specific in-game definition that makes them that way.

Fine we can take this a step back if you want. So you're saying use does not equal wield. So when do you wield a bow? When do you wield a THW?

Wield as it relates to handedness of a bow doesn't happen at all in pathfinder.

Wield as it relates to handedness of a Two-handed weapon happens when you use it. Melee weapons are convenient like that, because their handedness is built into their category.

wait what? I don't care about the handedness. I don't even know what you're talking about. When in the game do you wield a bow? When in the game do you wield a THW?


If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?


KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?

this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.


Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.

Wielding a bow as it relates to action economy happens when you attack with it.


Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.

So you are saying two weapon fighting has nothing to do with handedness? There's no aspect of, for example, a greatsword that makes it be treated differently in relation to TWF, compared to a dagger?


I have to say, I don't agree with chess pwn but I hope he nails a really good point in this debate so he can say 'CHECKMATE!'


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
Wielding a bow as it relates to action economy happens when you attack with it.

And what about a THW? When do you wield it?


KuntaSS wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
So you are saying two weapon fighting has nothing to do with handedness? There's no aspect of, for example, a greatsword that makes it be treated differently in relation to TWF, compared to a dagger?

So before this goes on, what are you meaning when you say "handedness." It's important I understand what you're meaning with that term if I'm to give an accurate answer.

but that would be boring to not do more and this could save time if I'm right about what you mean.

Now if "handedness" means "how many hands does this take to use to attack with" Then handedness does affect TWF and it consumes your primary attack and your off hand attack.

If "handedness" means which category it's in on the weapon table then it
doesn't. because a one-handed weapon wielded by two hands to attack is not a two-handed weapon. Thus a ranged weapon will never be any of those if used as intended.

If "handedness" means how much STR you add to it, then again it's not relevant. how much STR and whether you can TWF are not related. SKR did post their design philosophy which has to do with this, but it doesn't change or modify how the rules work.

If it means something else please share so I can see how it's fitting into the discussion.


Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
Wielding a bow as it relates to action economy happens when you attack with it.
And what about a THW? When do you wield it?

As it relates to action economy, also when you attack with it.


Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
So you are saying two weapon fighting has nothing to do with handedness? There's no aspect of, for example, a greatsword that makes it be treated differently in relation to TWF, compared to a dagger?

So before this goes on, what are you meaning when you say "handedness." It's important I understand what you're meaning with that term if I'm to give an accurate answer.

but that would be boring to not do more and this could save time if I'm right about what you mean.

Now if "handedness" means "how many hands does this take to use to attack with" Then handedness does affect TWF and it consumes your primary attack and your off hand attack.

If "handedness" means which category it's in on the weapon table then it
doesn't. because a one-handed weapon wielded by two hands to attack is not a two-handed weapon. Thus a ranged weapon will never be any of those if used as intended.

If "handedness" means how much STR you add to it, then again it's not relevant. how much STR and whether you can TWF are not related. SKR did post their design philosophy which has to do with this, but it doesn't change or modify how the rules work.

If it means something else please share so I can see how it's fitting into the discussion.

Yes, handedness means the minimum amount of effort required to wield the weapon.

Melee weapons are noted that their handedness is equal to their category. Ranged weapons do not have a handedness unless assigned it, ie light crossbows count as light weapons for handedness.

Sczarni

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Ack.

A number of my have gotten a bit muddy.

Time to rest, collect my thoughts, and my evidence.

I shall return.

I'm going to wait for this... I honestly like the way you approach things BBT, generally speaking, when it comes to unique rules quirks or builds or what have you... But I'm honestly not seeing this one - however, I must confess; I had a few beers last night, perhaps it was a few too many and I'm failing my Perception check?


Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
So you are saying two weapon fighting has nothing to do with handedness? There's no aspect of, for example, a greatsword that makes it be treated differently in relation to TWF, compared to a dagger?

So before this goes on, what are you meaning when you say "handedness." It's important I understand what you're meaning with that term if I'm to give an accurate answer.

but that would be boring to not do more and this could save time if I'm right about what you mean.

Now if "handedness" means "how many hands does this take to use to attack with" Then handedness does affect TWF and it consumes your primary attack and your off hand attack.

If "handedness" means which category it's in on the weapon table then it
doesn't. because a one-handed weapon wielded by two hands to attack is not a two-handed weapon. Thus a ranged weapon will never be any of those if used as intended.

If "handedness" means how much STR you add to it, then again it's not relevant. how much STR and whether you can TWF are not related. SKR did post their design philosophy which has to do with this, but it doesn't change or modify how the rules work.

If it means something else please share so I can see how it's fitting into the discussion.

The first one, the bow doesn't explicitly use up your off hand attack. It explicitly uses your off hand, physically, but not the off hand attack, which could be a head butt or a kick. Your argument is the bow uses both hands, thus it uses the off hand attack, where by the rules it doesn't appear to do so currently. This is what I mean when I say this is an argument about the handedness of bows.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
LoneKnave wrote:
FAQd, but wouldn't this fall into the same category as the armor spikes+two handed weapon thing?
That is why this is being asked. If the Longbow/Shortbow counts as a two-handed weapon, in regards to the FAQ on Armor Spikes.

^ this basically.


KuntaSS wrote:
The first one, the bow doesn't explicitly use up your off hand attack. It explicitly uses your off hand, physically, but not the off hand attack, which could be a head butt or a kick. Your argument is the bow uses both hands, thus it uses the off hand attack, where by the rules it doesn't appear to do so currently. This is what I mean when I say this is an argument about the handedness of bows.

To expand on this, it's like having a heavy shield in your off hand. It uses your offhand but it doesn't take up your off hand attack by default. The question here is does the bow use up your off hand attack. (you can swing your axe and hit with your boulder helmet in TWF while using a heavy shield) It's not clear by the new FAQ since it only talks about THW and not about weapons that use two hands.


graystone wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
The first one, the bow doesn't explicitly use up your off hand attack. It explicitly uses your off hand, physically, but not the off hand attack, which could be a head butt or a kick. Your argument is the bow uses both hands, thus it uses the off hand attack, where by the rules it doesn't appear to do so currently. This is what I mean when I say this is an argument about the handedness of bows.
To expand on this, it's like having a heavy shield in your off hand. It uses your offhand but it doesn't take up your off hand attack by default. The question here is does the bow use up your off hand attack. (you can swing your axe and hit with your boulder helmet in TWF while using a heavy shield) It's not clear by the new FAQ since it only talks about THW and not about weapons that use two hands.

Looks like I'll go over this with you now. Why do you say the FAQ only applies to THW? What does the FAQ actually say?


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
Wielding a bow as it relates to action economy happens when you attack with it.
And what about a THW? When do you wield it?
As it relates to action economy, also when you attack with it.

Okay so you've say you wield a bow when you attack with it, and you wield a THW when you attack with it. And both take two hands to use.

THW: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively
projectile weapon: projectile weapons require two hands to use

Now to the FAQ, "as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon" So as you are using both of your hands to wield your weapon. You have stated that attacking with either is wielding it. Also we know that attacking is using it as intended. So according to what you've said and the text, both weapons use both hands to be wielded. Therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks with either.


KuntaSS wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
So you are saying two weapon fighting has nothing to do with handedness? There's no aspect of, for example, a greatsword that makes it be treated differently in relation to TWF, compared to a dagger?

Now if "handedness" means "how many hands does this take to use to attack with" Then handedness does affect TWF and it consumes your primary attack and your off hand attack.

The first one, the bow doesn't explicitly use up your off hand attack. It explicitly uses your off hand, physically, but not the off hand attack, which could be a head butt or a kick. Your argument is the bow uses both hands, thus it uses the off hand attack, where by the rules it doesn't appear to do so currently. This is what I mean when I say this is an argument about the handedness of bows.

okay, according to my understanding you're saying that THW don't explicitly use up your off hand attack, just like the Bow. Both explicitly use your off hand, physically. Now according to the FAQ that clears this up.

"as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."
So to use either you use two hands. BigDTBone has been so helpful in sharing that you wield either of them when using them to attack. SO what is the FAQ actually saying? Is it because of the weapon? Lets read the text carefully.

As you: this means its referring to the player, not the weapon.
are using both of your hands: okay so we are using both hands to do something.
to wield: okay we are wielding something.
So what do we have so far?
Since the character is using both hands to wield (a weapon), therefore the characters off-hand attack is unavailable to make any attacks.

So now, this is an example to answer a question, so the example will use the items relevant to the question, a THW. But this is why wielding a one-handed weapon in two hands also wont work with TWF. And why a bow wont work either. Both of these also are using both hands to wield them. Thus they prohibit off-hand attacks. Nothing in here is saying that the THW uses the off hand for any reason, nor that there's anything unique about wielding a THW in two hands as opposed to wielding any other weapon with two hands.

Now if it was the weapon they could have just said, "since you're using a two-handed weapon you cannot make off-hand attacks" This is directing the condition on the weapon. While they way they have it now is directing the condition to the hands needed to wield.


Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
KuntaSS wrote:
If you don't care about handedness then why are you involved in this argument about handedness of bows?
this isn't about the "handedness" of the bow. It's about whether or not you can use a bow as part of two-weapon fighting. And the question I asked BigDTBone was when do they count as being wielded. Which has nothing to do about handedness.
Wielding a bow as it relates to action economy happens when you attack with it.
And what about a THW? When do you wield it?
As it relates to action economy, also when you attack with it.

Okay so you've say you wield a bow when you attack with it, and you wield a THW when you attack with it. And both take two hands to use.

THW: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively
projectile weapon: projectile weapons require two hands to use

Now to the FAQ, "as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon" So as you are using both of your hands to wield your weapon. You have stated that attacking with either is wielding it. Also we know that attacking is using it as intended. So according to what you've said and the text, both weapons use both hands to be wielded. Therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks with either.

As it relates to action economy, not to handedness.


Chess Pwn wrote:
So to use either you use two hands. BigDTBone has been so helpful in sharing that you wield either of them when using them to attack.

Don't quote me out of context. I specifically told you that bows aren't wielded with a handedness.

Here let me help you understand.

Wield = use + hold

2 hand wield = 2 hand use + 2 hand hold

2 hand wield > 2 hand use + 1 hand hold

bow = 2 hand use + 1 hand hold

2 hand wield > bow

FAQ QUESTION IS:

2 hand wield > bow + offhand attack

2 hand wield = bow + offhand attack

2 hand wield < bow + offhand attack


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
So to use either you use two hands. BigDTBone has been so helpful in sharing that you wield either of them when using them to attack.

Don't quote me out of context. I specifically told you that bows aren't wielded with a handedness.

Here let me help you understand.

Wield = use + hold
2 hand wield = 2 hand use + 2 hand hold
2 hand wield > 2 hand use + 1 hand hold
bow = 2 hand use + 1 hand hold
2 hand wield > bow
FAQ QUESTION IS:
2 hand wield > bow + offhand attack
2 hand wield = bow + offhand attack
2 hand wield < bow + offhand attack

And the FAQ says when you use both hands to wield a weapon. So the FAQ doesn't care about this "handedness" All it cares is the amount of hands needed to wield the weapon. The FAQ doesn't care about holding. Or what weapon category the weapon falls into.

Also you totally can "hold" a 2 handed weapon in one hand. you just can't wield it with one hand.


Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
So to use either you use two hands. BigDTBone has been so helpful in sharing that you wield either of them when using them to attack.

Don't quote me out of context. I specifically told you that bows aren't wielded with a handedness.

Here let me help you understand.

Wield = use + hold
2 hand wield = 2 hand use + 2 hand hold
2 hand wield > 2 hand use + 1 hand hold
bow = 2 hand use + 1 hand hold
2 hand wield > bow
FAQ QUESTION IS:
2 hand wield > bow + offhand attack
2 hand wield = bow + offhand attack
2 hand wield < bow + offhand attack

And the FAQ says when you use both hands to wield a weapon. So the FAQ doesn't care about this "handedness" All it cares is the amount of hands needed to wield the weapon. The FAQ doesn't care about holding. Or what weapon category the weapon falls into.

Also you totally can "hold" a 2 handed weapon in one hand. you just can't wield it with one hand.

Yes, the "+" operator is a logic descriptor which means addition or concurrently.

The FAQ says wield. Wield is a function of handedness, where Wield(Hf)=use(Ha)+hold(Hb)

The FAQ says when wield = 2

Well, wield(bow)=use(2)+hold(1), bow < 2

Is wield(bow)=> 2? No. FAQ does not apply.


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
So to use either you use two hands. BigDTBone has been so helpful in sharing that you wield either of them when using them to attack.

Don't quote me out of context. I specifically told you that bows aren't wielded with a handedness.

Here let me help you understand.

Wield = use + hold
2 hand wield = 2 hand use + 2 hand hold
2 hand wield > 2 hand use + 1 hand hold
bow = 2 hand use + 1 hand hold
2 hand wield > bow
FAQ QUESTION IS:
2 hand wield > bow + offhand attack
2 hand wield = bow + offhand attack
2 hand wield < bow + offhand attack

And the FAQ says when you use both hands to wield a weapon. So the FAQ doesn't care about this "handedness" All it cares is the amount of hands needed to wield the weapon. The FAQ doesn't care about holding. Or what weapon category the weapon falls into.

Also you totally can "hold" a 2 handed weapon in one hand. you just can't wield it with one hand.

Yes, the "+" operator is a logic descriptor which means addition or concurrently.

The FAQ says wield. Wield is a function of handedness, where Wield(Hf)=use(Ha)+hold(Hb)

The FAQ says when wield = 2

Well, wield(bow)=use(2)+hold(1), bow < 2

Is wield(bow)=> 2? No. FAQ does not apply.

well then with that logic,

wield(THW)= THW is use(2)+hold(1) THW < 2
is Wield(THW) => 2? no. FAQ would not apply


wield happens at attack.

at attack(THW); use(2), hold(2)

at attack(bow); use(2), hold(1)


It's simple.

Bow are two-handed weapons.
Look at the crossbows, fro the same book. hey provide tips on how to use them in regard of two-weapon fighting. Bows, in another way are described as needing 2 hands.


HectorVivis wrote:

It's simple.

Bow are two-handed weapons.

Source cite please.


If Wield happens at attack you already said that attacking with a bow required wield of 2. Also it doesn't matter if you hold at one.

"as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

if at any point it's taking both or "two" hands to wield, it would fall under the FAQ and count.


Chess Pwn wrote:

If Wield happens at attack you already said that attacking with a bow required wield of 2. Also it doesn't matter if you hold at one.

"as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

if at any point it's taking both or "two" hands to wield, it would fall under the FAQ and count.

I said that for action economy, not handedness. Which is a statement that isn't as clear as I would like and doesn't have a good rules basis. Which is why I restated it more plainly using the wield=use+hold.

In order for wield to equal 2 then BOTH hold AND use must equal 2.

Hold for bow never equals 2, so wield for bow never equals 2.


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:

If Wield happens at attack you already said that attacking with a bow required wield of 2. Also it doesn't matter if you hold at one.

"as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

if at any point it's taking both or "two" hands to wield, it would fall under the FAQ and count.

In order for wield to equal 2 then BOTH hold AND use must equal 2.

Hold for bow never equals 2, so wield for bow never equals 2.

So what is the difference between action economy and "handed-ness"?

And if that is the case then THWs are out too.

dif FAQ:
Two-Handed Weapons: What kind of action is it to remove your hand from a two-handed weapon or re-grab it with both hands?
Both are free actions. For example, a wizard wielding a quarterstaff can let go of the weapon with one hand as a free action, cast a spell as a standard action, and grasp the weapon again with that hand as a free action; this means the wizard is still able to make attacks of opportunity with the weapon (which requires using two hands).
Since you are able to hold a two-handed weapon with one hand too. Just like this bow of yours. And I can hold my bow with two hand and use it as improvised.
But the main point of that was THWs use the same rules that you say a bow gets disqualified with.

And also note, your definition of wield is yours, mine is different.


Also I still feel that the FAQ says you if you use to hands to wield, and so if at any point the Bow uses two hands to wield then it fall into the FAQ. And so if it's two hand wield for action economy then it is 2 hand wielded for the FAQ. I don't see how this wouldn't work this way.

Liberty's Edge

Can I make a suggestion for a rule in future editions of the rule book?

"If you cannot ask a rules question with a straight face, or if the DM laughs so hard on hearing it s/he can't breathe, the answer is no." I can't help but feel that would take care of so many rules threads that pop up just because the writers assume that everyone is smart enough not to try and twf with a bow.


Exactly how does this...

PRD wrote:
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.

differ from this...

PRD wrote:
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.

?


ShadowcatX wrote:

Can I make a suggestion for a rule in future editions of the rule book?

"If you cannot ask a rules question with a straight face, or if the DM laughs so hard on hearing it s/he can't breathe, the answer is no." I can't help but feel that would take care of so many rules threads that pop up just because the writers assume that everyone is smart enough not to try and twf with a bow.

So if I don't provoke with the bow (say point blank master), what's so funny about firing the bow and kicking at melee ranges? It's no funnier than swinging a 2 handed weapon and using armor spikes.

In fact, if bows ARE treated like two handed weapons, then they can be used in two weapon fighting along with a sea-knife while flying. So the laugh would be at your expense.

Shadow Lodge

ShadowcatX wrote:

Can I make a suggestion for a rule in future editions of the rule book?

"If you cannot ask a rules question with a straight face, or if the DM laughs so hard on hearing it s/he can't breathe, the answer is no." I can't help but feel that would take care of so many rules threads that pop up just because the writers assume that everyone is smart enough not to try and twf with a bow.

Why is this foolish or funny? Unrealistic? Morso than tigers that know kung fu? Implausible? More than Popeye the Sailor Man? Impossible? More than creating a bunch of monkeys with kleptomania by waggling your fingers and chanting? Would you burst out laughing if a player asked if they could do one of these things? Because you can both by RAW and presumably RAI. IMO, kicking someone a couple of times in the same 6 seconds that you shoot someone else, while unrealistic, is much more realistic and less humorous than a lot of things adventures do regularly.


Chess Pwn wrote:
Also I still feel that the FAQ says you if you use to hands to wield, and so if at any point the Bow uses two hands to wield then it fall into the FAQ. And so if it's two hand wield for action economy then it is 2 hand wielded for the FAQ. I don't see how this wouldn't work this way.

Because that isn't the statement I made. That is the statement you are construing from my words.

I specifically said that wielding doesn't happen with regards to handedness.

You asked when does wielding happen. I said @ time of attack with regards to action economy. ie. your hands (actual) are occupied with bow functions at attack time. I still say this has nothing to do with handedness.

Since then, I have also said that I admit that explanation is unclear. Which is why I restated it in a more clear way.

What you are seeing in my previous earlier statement is only the "use" part of wield. use != wield.

That is why I gave the complete definition for wield. (Which by the way is the dictionary definition because wield isn't defined in game terms.) That definition is wield is to use and hold.

We know that to use a bow it requires 2 hands. That is given in the game text.

We know that to hold a bow it requires one hand (even at the time of use).

One hand holds the bow, two hands use the bow. The threshold for wielding with 2 hands is not met.


ShadowcatX wrote:

Can I make a suggestion for a rule in future editions of the rule book?

"If you cannot ask a rules question with a straight face, or if the DM laughs so hard on hearing it s/he can't breathe, the answer is no." I can't help but feel that would take care of so many rules threads that pop up just because the writers assume that everyone is smart enough not to try and twf with a bow.

I asked with a straight face. I am the DM in 2/3 of the games I play.

What about being smart makes you not try to twf with a bow?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Exactly how does this...

PRD wrote:
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.

differ from this...

PRD wrote:
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.
?

that's easy: Two-handed weapon is a specific weapon category and include such beloved weapons such as the Great Axe and Heavy Flail. Notice that Bows are not listed under that category but under the Ranged category.

While you cannot TWF while using a weapon from the Two-Handed weapon category, you CAN use twf while using a weapon from the ranged category.

in short, as usual Rules English != Normal English and many a fight happens when people confuse the two.


We have rules for
Light weapons...

PRD wrote:
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.

One-Handed Weapons...

PRD wrote:
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.

Double Weapons...

PRD wrote:
Double Weapons: Dire flails, dwarven urgroshes, gnome hooked hammers, orc double axes, quarterstaves, and two-bladed swords are double weapons. A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon.

Thrown Weapons...

PRD wrote:
Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon.

And Crossbow...

PRD wrote:

Crossbow, Hand: You can draw a hand crossbow back by hand. Loading a hand crossbow is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

You can shoot, but not load, a hand crossbow with one hand at no penalty. You can shoot a hand crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons.

After Crossbow...

PRD wrote:

Crossbow, Heavy: You draw a heavy crossbow back by turning a small winch. Loading a heavy crossbow is a full-round action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

Normally, operating a heavy crossbow requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a heavy crossbow with one hand at a –4 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a heavy crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two one-handed weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.

After Crossbow...

PRD wrote:

Crossbow, Light: You draw a light crossbow back by pulling a lever. Loading a light crossbow is a move action that provokes attacks of opportunity.

Normally, operating a light crossbow requires two hands. However, you can shoot, but not load, a light crossbow with one hand at a –2 penalty on attack rolls. You can shoot a light crossbow with each hand, but you take a penalty on attack rolls as if attacking with two light weapons. This penalty is cumulative with the penalty for one-handed firing.

But not bows...


9mm wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Exactly how does this...

PRD wrote:
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.

differ from this...

PRD wrote:
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.
?

that's easy: Two-handed weapon is a specific weapon category and include such beloved weapons such as the Great Axe and Heavy Flail. Notice that Bows are not listed under that category but under the Ranged category.

While you cannot TWF while using a weapon from the Two-Handed weapon category, you CAN use twf while using a weapon from the ranged category.

in short, as usual Rules English != Normal English and many a fight happens when people confuse the two.

Let me try again...

This-two hands are required to use and this-require two hands to use?

Feel free to use rules English or normal English.


9mm wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

Exactly how does this...

PRD wrote:
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.

differ from this...

PRD wrote:
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.
?

that's easy: Two-handed weapon is a specific weapon category and include such beloved weapons such as the Great Axe and Heavy Flail. Notice that Bows are not listed under that category but under the Ranged category.

While you cannot TWF while using a weapon from the Two-Handed weapon category, you CAN use twf while using a weapon from the ranged category.

in short, as usual Rules English != Normal English and many a fight happens when people confuse the two.

We aren't saying that the bow is a two-handed weapon ever. But that you use two hands to wield it, and this is what the FAQ is addressing, using two hands to wield a weapon.


BigDTBone wrote:
Chess Pwn wrote:
Also I still feel that the FAQ says you if you use to hands to wield, and so if at any point the Bow uses two hands to wield then it fall into the FAQ. And so if it's two hand wield for action economy then it is 2 hand wielded for the FAQ. I don't see how this wouldn't work this way.

Because that isn't the statement I made. That is the statement you are construing from my words.

I specifically said that wielding doesn't happen with regards to handedness.
You asked when does wielding happen. I said @ time of attack with regards to action economy. ie. your hands (actual) are occupied with bow functions at attack time. I still say this has nothing to do with handedness.
Since then, I have also said that I admit that explanation is unclear. Which is why I restated it in a more clear way.
What you are seeing in my previous earlier statement is only the "use" part of wield. use != wield.
That is why I gave the complete definition for wield. (Which by the way is the dictionary definition because wield isn't defined in game terms.) That definition is wield is to use and hold.
We know that to use a bow it requires 2 hands. That is given in the game text.
We know that to hold a bow it requires one hand (even at the time of use).
One hand holds the bow, two hands use the bow. The threshold for wielding with 2 hands is not met.

Well congrats. You have constructed a view that is impenetrable, and thus I am out. Under your definition of wield and what the FAQs wield is you've created a nice spot for yourself. And there aren't any rules, I'm aware of, to clarifying that holding isn't related to wielding. So again. I'm done with this debate since we are at an impasse here.

101 to 150 of 214 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Two Weapon Fighting with a Bow and Unarmed Strike All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.