lets avoid the RAW vs RAI arguement, this clearly not a RAI situation, but I'm curious if this would be an option;
To use this deed, a swashbuckler cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand or use a shield other than a buckler.
Buckler Bash (Ex)
At 2nd level, a buckler duelist can perform a shield bash with a buckler (use the same damage and critical modifier as for a light shield).
So I am not attacking with any weapon in my hand (as my Buckler is strapped to my arm) and I am not using a shield other than my Buckler.
Sound legit to you guys for TWF with Precise Stirke?
If that were the case wouldn't Paizo just write "you may not Two-Weapon Fight while using Precise Strike?"
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sorry, "cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand" and "cannot use two weapon fighting" sound different to me.
|
If you're using two unarmed strikes, you are two-weapon fighting.
There's even an FAQ confirming that.
If you're using Armor Spikes in conjunction with another weapon, you are two-weapon fighting.
There is also an FAQ confirming that.
The Boulder Helmet is a light weapon, treated no differently from Armor Spikes.
The Beard and the Boot *are* different, but that's a different story reserved for a dozen more threads, and they are the exception, not the rule.
|
|
Also, if you're newer here to the forums, I will inform you that there exists an unwritten assumption in Pathfinder (which the Designers used and still use when writing material) that a normal, bipedal, humanoid character has two "hands" worth of utility.
(notice the quotation marks)
This utility is used by designating your "primary" hand and your "off" hand to particular tasks.
If you're wielding a two-handed weapon, both your primary and your off hand are "used up".
If you're wielding two one-handed weapons, both your primary and your off hand are "used up".
"Hand" needn't be an actual, physical, hand. Wielding a Boulder Helmet requires a "hand" as well. Same for Armor Spikes and unarmed strikes with other parts of your body.
If you feel some unholy need to debate that, there are other threads that have gone on ad nauseum about it, and I won't continue that debate here. I'm just telling you how it is.
But however you parse it, Precise Strike will not work if you attack with another weapon.
|
|
THIS thread is also a good read regarding this topic. It garnered responses from two of Paizo's designers.
It's in reference to an older, but very similarly designed ability.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I am not attacking with any weapon in my hand (as my Buckler is strapped to my arm) and I am not using a shield other than my Buckler.
Sound legit to you guys for TWF with Precise Strike?
No. The buckler can't normally be used to make shield bash attacks, but a buckler duelist can (at 2nd level), and does so as if using a light shield. Light shields:
Shield Bash Attacks: You can shield bash an opponent with a light shield, using it as an off-hand weapon.
They are dead-on accurate here, as, I hate to break it to you, shields used in both offensive and defensive applications rely most greatly upon the shield strap held in your hand. When use offensively, you literally do have a portion of your now weaponized buckler/shield in your hand. So, no, you can't do it, as you actually have a weapon in your off-hand, the rules (very properly) stating as much.
I'm sorry, "cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand" and "cannot use two weapon fighting" sound different to me.
How so?
well different combinations of letters make different sounds, for example "hand" and "fighting" sound compleatly different.
"cannot attack with a weapon in her other hand" means that if I have a rapier in my left hand, I can't attack with a dagger in my right, but I can still kick people.
"cannot use two weapon fighting" means I can not use two weapon fighting.
If you're using two unarmed strikes, you are two-weapon fighting.
There's even an FAQ confirming that.
This says you can two-weapon fight with Unarmed Strikes, it doesn't say that my +6 BAB character can't puch someone for his first attack and kick him for the second. "Unarmed Strike" is the weapon, not "fist" and "foot." This isn't relevent to Precise Strike
If you're using Armor Spikes in conjunction with another weapon, you are two-weapon fighting.
There is also an FAQ confirming that.
This isn't relevent, I'm holding my piercing weapon in one hand, this FAQ was to prevent characters from 1.5x STR to damage AND and TWF at the same time.
No. The buckler can't normally be used to make shield bash attacks, but a buckler duelist can (at 2nd level), and does so as if using a light shield.
This is wrong; my Buckler does the same damage as a Light Shield, that is not the same thing as using my buckler as a Light Shield. Read the wording
My point was moreso that Precise Strike specifically makes and exception for Bucklers cancelling out Precise Strikes effects, so lets focus our arguements on how those interact insead of bringing in all this unrelated stuff.
It seems not too far fetched to assume that "attacking with a weapon in his other hand" implies an off-hand attack and one only every has an off-hand when one is using two weapon fighting.
It's a premise based on somantics; had they said Arm instead of hand, the situation would be reversed. Since your asking a RAW request instead of RAI, I'd say; run it by your GM. Some will say yes, some will say no.
|
And back to flurry of blows, you can make a full flurry attack with the same weapon. A Monk 1 / Swashbuckler 3 could make a flurry of blows with a siangham or unarmed strike doing piercing and be using two weapon fighting, but apply precise strike on all attacks, because flurry allows you to make all attack with the same weapon.
Regardless of any unwritten rules of virtual hands, Flurry allows two weapon fighting with one weapon, and thus bypasses the hand requirement.
|
Are we talking about a literal hand or the metaphorical construct of "offhand"?. Wouldnt it have been easier to say "you cannot make off hand attacks while ..(etc)". Now it depends on wether we are talking about one or two. RAW they are talking about "HAND", literal, and not "OFF HAND", so by RAW this works, of course that may not have been not RAI but thats what it is.
This is of course under the assumption pcs always have 1 offhand, something I agree with but some dont.
The sad part is I don't intend to ever use this build, my next panashe user is a Phalanx Soldier3/Daring Champion
It's almost like the hand vs. "hand" FAQ was incredibly stupid.
Or something.
No. The buckler can't normally be used to make shield bash attacks, but a buckler duelist can (at 2nd level), and does so as if using a light shield.
This is wrong; my Buckler does the same damage as a Light Shield, that is not the same thing as using my buckler as a Light Shield. Read the wording.
Buckler Bash (Ex)
At 2nd level, a buckler duelist can perform a shield bash with a buckler (use the same damage and critical modifier as for a light shield).
Ah, so the buckler just does damage and has the critical modifier of a light shield, and you're doing a shield bash attack, as the buckler bash rule states...but not really doing a shield bash attack because it is being done with a buckler, so you obviously can't use the light shield shield bash rules, because those rules only apply literally to light shields. And we can't use the shield bash rules for heavy shields, as that would be insane because they are huge! Doesn't matter that the rules for shield bashing for light and heavy shields are identical, with the exception of the words "light" and "heavy" in the descriptions, and there are no other rules anywhere else for employing a "shield bash" in the CRB. I guess they left them out.
But, yes, that is totally not the same thing. How silly of me, and how silly of the writers for referring to the buckler bash as a "shield bash" in the first place; something that is all too easily confused with the immediately recognizable term, "shield bash", the rules for which are clearly defined in the CRB in multiple places (but not for when you actually can use a buckler to do one, which you usually cannot). And then they equate the buckler with a light shield with regards to damage and crit modifier, as if that is some sort of point. What were they thinking? Their reasoning is unfathomable.
Might as well close the thread, as there is no answer to be had for a shield bash that does not follow shield bash rules because it is being made with buckler, which you can't use to shield bash normally, but in this case you can using the statistics of a light shield, but it doesn't use the shield bash rules for a light shield (and not any other shield bash rules in the CRB, because the only other rules there are is for heavy shields, and using those rules would obviously be insane, even though they are identical except for the word "heavy"), but some other utterly generic shield bash rules that they forgot to include in the CRB.
Yep, I am totally with you now. :P
Cebrion, you've marked my quotes as yours and yours as mine. Your whole post is a mess.
On point though, I never suggested a Buckler Shield Bash is any different from the rules for a Light or Heavy Shield Bash, what I said is that I was not using my Buckler as a Light Shield.
If I was using my Buckler as a Light Shield I could use Ray Shield with my Buckler, and that is not the case. If I was using my Buckler as a Light Shield I would gain my shield bonus to my CMD when I use Shield Specialization (Light Shield,) and that is not the case.
My ONLY point is that Buckler Bash (Ex) creates a new weapon called Buckler that does 1d3 damage, rather than changing my buckler to a shield.
*Light Shield
Which is fine, but the buckler still counts as an off-hand weapon, as all shield bash attacks do, meaning you can't make a Precise Strike and a shield bash in the same attack routine, as the former precludes the latter.
As to your ONLY point, the ability doesn't change your buckler into "buckler: the new weapon whose stats we purposely didn't put anywhere", but into "buckler: the tiniest of shields which normally can't shield bash, but which now can do so using the damage and crit profile of a light shield. It is however not new weapon with its own special rules of whatever you want them to be, but a weapon with stats just as you state them to be, and which can make a shield bash attack, the rules for which are clearly known regardless of whether you want to call a shield a heavy shield, light shield, or new weapon "buckler", the latter of which does not need to be changed into a shield because it is the smallest form of a shield (you may have noticed bucklers give a*shield* bonus to AC, as they are *shields*). You don't find rules in the book containing buckler bash for a new weapon "buckler", as there is no need to do so when they state to just use the damage profile for a light shield. The method of conducting a shield bash does not need to be mentioned at all either, as it works the same for all shield bash attacks. ALL shield bash attacks are considered attacks with an off-hand weapon. That's the way they work, and you wanting to ignore it by inventing the mythical "buckler" weapon and saying it is not a shield (which it is), and that obviously can't use the actual shield bash rules, but must use other rules that don't exist anywhere, won't change the fact that it is so. I get what you mean, but you are really reaching.
Paizo did screw up by copy/pasting the 3.5E buckler usage, which came from 3.0E, which is based on the fallacious descriptions of use in 2E and even in Unearthed Arcana 1E. When in use, bucklers are held in the hand, not let to flop about on the forearm in such a way that one would not have much hope of blocking much of anything. Strapped to the forearm, a buckler might deflect an arrow enough, but most attacks, even an arrow, will just spin the buckler around your arm when hit, as there is nothing...like a hand...holding it and keeping it from doing so; either the attack deflects up into your face, or down into your abdomen/leg- not exactly excellent locations to be hit/wounded! Bucklers can be slid up the arm (if they have straps and not metal or wooden handles), such that they are out of the way enough for a bow or crossbow to be easily used, but are still conveniently there to slide down to your hand in the event you need to drop your bow/crossbow and draw a weapon to defend yourself against enemies that have gotten too close to shoot at. The forearm position is not the position of use though. For those who don't know any better, as seems to be the case with pretty much everyone who ever wrote D&D rules for the buckler, here is an informative link:
13th century German Sword & Buckler Manual
A medieval training manual is a pretty legit source, no? Anyone could find this (among other things) if they bothered to look. The buckler really should be able to shield bash as a standard feature, but it can't. This is all just for information though, and has nothing to do with my point about the rules (the only point I am making here is that the buckler rules in (A)D&D in general have been horrible for literally decades).
Also, for some reason the quote within a quote didn't take, thus the quote foul-up.
Cebrion, short and concise areguements are great, you should try them.
The thing, about the Buckler using the Light Shields damage profile, but not being used as a Light Shield was not made to stregthen or weaken my position, (I honestly believes it does niether) I was just pointing out there is a difference.
The ThunderStriker Archetype actually uses a Buckler as a Light Shield when attacking, which would be a situation where a Buckler is treated as one.
The Katana and Urumi also have an identicle damage profile but they are still different weapons.
That whole second paragraph is all covering real world physics, which dont apply in Pathfinder. I would also say if we followed the rules of this paragraph then the ThunderStriker Archetype would be invadiated. we follow the rules written, not what sounds realistic.
This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it.
In retort, where does Precise Strike state that I can not make off-hand (which can be a bootblade, bolder helmet, ect) attacks while using it; by my reading it only disallows the use of another hand, with an exception for bucklers. (which is strapped to my arm anyway)
It's pretty clear that a shield bash is an off-hand weapon. That seems pretty RAW to me.
|
|
It's pretty clear that a shield bash is an off-hand weapon. That seems pretty RAW to me.
This: when making a shield bash, you are using your shield as a weapon. It uses the stats of a light shield, a light martial weapon.
again, where does precise strike say I can't use off hand weapons?
my off-hand attack and my other hand are two differnt things. I could use a bootblade for an off-hand attack for example, whilest having nothing in my other hand.
it's actually strapped to my arm. Not in my hand.
It's almost like the hand vs. "hand" FAQ was incredibly stupid.
Most FAQs for complex problems have been stupid so far.
Don't know is it is because they make FAQ decisions too quick because they don't net them money or if they are just not as good at correcting mistakes as they are at making new stuff.| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
it's actually strapped to my arm. Not in my hand.
You came to the forums and asked, we answered. You don't like our answer then do what you really wanted to do anyway. I think you being pedantic, and you know what the rules really mean but they go against what you want to do and aren't really asking if it's legal, you're asking us to find a loop hole.
