What sort of action does it take to begin or stop "two handing" a weapon?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

I'm sure there are other situations this could come up but I am mainly looking at this in terms of two handing a weapon means I don't have a free hand to cast spells. So what kind of action is it to simply remove one of my hands so that I can cast? Would it be possible to go back to gripping my weapon in two hands after I cast?


It is a free action. But beware, your "off-hand" action economy is used up by attacking with a two handed weapon.


Yes, it is a free action, but you cant attack and cast a spell in the same round unless the spell is a non standard action. But a good example is a wizard that has a staff, ungrips staff to cast spell, then regrips for aot


So can a magus cast the spell for spell strike then proceed to swing his weapon two handed? I'm assuming no

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
bowser36 wrote:
So can a magus cast the spell for spell strike then proceed to swing his weapon two handed? I'm assuming no

Spell strike? Yes, you can absolutely do that.

Spell combat, however, only works with a weapon wielded in one hand.


Huh, well that's fun to know. :D


1 person marked this as a favorite.
bowser36 wrote:
So can a magus cast the spell for spell strike then proceed to swing his weapon two handed? I'm assuming no

The problem is spell combat not spell strike.

Spell strike just allows you to "channel" the spell through your weapon into the enemy. It doesn't care how many hands are on the weapon.

Spell combat however, requires you to have a free hand for the entire time you are using spell combat.

So, if you wanted to cast a spell as a standard action and then on the next round attack with it (using your weapon two-handed or not) you could do that.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite.

It's also worth noting that while putting a hand on or off a weapon is a free action, it's not an immediate action. So you can't use a reach 2-hander while wearing spiked gauntlets and threaten both reach and adjacent outside your turn.


Claxon wrote:
bowser36 wrote:
So can a magus cast the spell for spell strike then proceed to swing his weapon two handed? I'm assuming no

The problem is spell combat not spell strike.

Spell strike just allows you to "channel" the spell through your weapon into the enemy. It doesn't care how many hands are on the weapon.

Spell combat however, requires you to have a free hand for the entire time you are using spell combat.

So, if you wanted to cast a spell as a standard action and then on the next round attack with it (using your weapon two-handed or not) you could do that.

You get a free touch attack on the same round you cast a spell like shocking grasp. Spellstrike let's you turn that into a free weapon attack, yes even two handed.


Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

Silver Crusade

Juda de Kerioth wrote:

Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

TWF with a greatsword is totally doable with the rules, but I'm afraid Paizo has disallowed this by referring to unwritten rules.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

Wait, what?

What is your second weapon?

The reason to hold a two handed weapon in one hand is when you have to use that (now) free hand to...

  • draw a potion
  • cast a spell
  • wave "hello"
  • Use a wand
  • Scratch butt

What you can't do is attack with that hand (barring any spell effects, which would be your attack instead). Higher level characters will get Iterative attacks, but one can not Two Weapon Fight with a Two Handed Weapon.


thaX wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

Wait, what?

What is your second weapon?

The reason to hold a two handed weapon in one hand is when you have to use that (now) free hand to...

  • draw a potion
  • cast a spell
  • wave "hello"
  • Use a wand
  • Scratch butt

What you can't do is attack with that hand (barring any spell effects, which would be your attack instead). Higher level characters will get Iterative attacks, but one can not Two Weapon Fight with a Two Handed Weapon.

The same greatsword with -2 extra for oversized weapon for one hand :3

Of course, two weapon defense and two weapon rend dont work with that thechnique I Called it The "Demon Dance Style" The Witcher 1 Reference

Grand Lodge

Juda de Kerioth wrote:
thaX wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

Wait, what?

What is your second weapon?

The reason to hold a two handed weapon in one hand is when you have to use that (now) free hand to...

  • draw a potion
  • cast a spell
  • wave "hello"
  • Use a wand
  • Scratch butt

What you can't do is attack with that hand (barring any spell effects, which would be your attack instead). Higher level characters will get Iterative attacks, but one can not Two Weapon Fight with a Two Handed Weapon.

The same greatsword with -2 extra for oversized weapon for one hand :3

Of course, two weapon defense and two weapon rend dont work with that thechnique I Called it The "Demon Dance Style" The Witcher 1 Reference

It's impossible to use a Greatsword with one hand. Stop being cheesy.

Silver Crusade

Since it's just been pointed out that you can switch grips as a free action, using two hands for your main attacks with your greatsword and then using a free action to remove one hand and use that hand for the off hand attacks is perfectly RAW. The attack penalty is based on the size of the off hand weapon, not the main weapon.

Dark Archive

You can, as a Medium sized character, wield a Small sized Greatsword (that is, a 2H weapon designed for a Small sized character) in one hand. You just take penalties for it.

You could, of course, just do the logical thing, and wield a Medium sized Longsword. Which has the exact same stats as a Small sized Greatsword, and no to-hit penalty due to being incorrectly sized. And you can still 2H it if the urge strikes you.


_Ozy_ wrote:
Claxon wrote:
bowser36 wrote:
So can a magus cast the spell for spell strike then proceed to swing his weapon two handed? I'm assuming no

The problem is spell combat not spell strike.

Spell strike just allows you to "channel" the spell through your weapon into the enemy. It doesn't care how many hands are on the weapon.

Spell combat however, requires you to have a free hand for the entire time you are using spell combat.

So, if you wanted to cast a spell as a standard action and then on the next round attack with it (using your weapon two-handed or not) you could do that.

You get a free touch attack on the same round you cast a spell like shocking grasp. Spellstrike let's you turn that into a free weapon attack, yes even two handed.

You are of course right, I wasn't thinking all the way through. I was trying to respond rather quickly.

If you are holding the weapon two-handed use a free action to remove hand and cast spell. If you are not holding it two-handed then just cast the spell.

Spell grants free touch attack, which you can convey using spell strike. After casting you can use a free action to grasp your sword two handed again, and then attack with the sword and spell in one action.

Grand Lodge

Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Since it's just been pointed out that you can switch grips as a free action, using two hands for your main attacks with your greatsword and then using a free action to remove one hand and use that hand for the off hand attacks is perfectly RAW. The attack penalty is based on the size of the off hand weapon, not the main weapon.

Are you attacking with the Greatsword again, or a gauntlet or something in the off hand?


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

TWF with a greatsword is totally doable with the rules, but I'm afraid Paizo has disallowed this by referring to unwritten rules.

Per the FAQ this is not allowed. I don't agree with it, since it is not broken, but that is their intent. I allow it at my tables, at least until someone gives me a reason not to.

Sovereign Court

Corvino wrote:
It's also worth noting that while putting a hand on or off a weapon is a free action, it's not an immediate action. So you can't use a reach 2-hander while wearing spiked gauntlets and threaten both reach and adjacent outside your turn.

That's why armor spikes are superior to spiked gauntlets.

Silver Crusade

Oncoming_Storm wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Since it's just been pointed out that you can switch grips as a free action, using two hands for your main attacks with your greatsword and then using a free action to remove one hand and use that hand for the off hand attacks is perfectly RAW. The attack penalty is based on the size of the off hand weapon, not the main weapon.
Are you attacking with the Greatsword again, or a gauntlet or something in the off hand?

You can't use the same specific weapon as both your main attack and your off hand attack in the same full attack, no matter the size of the weapon.

For the purpose of practicality, a worn weapon, natural weapon or unarmed strike (basically, any weapon that doesn't need to be grasped and released) would be the off hand weapon.

This creates its own drawbacks. Those types of weapons (like spiked gauntlets) tend to be the least good light weapons, and having identical weapons is the best way to TWF so that you don't have to spend twice the feats/abilities (focus, specialisation. weapon groups, etc.) to maximise their use.

As powerful as it seems at first glance, when you analyze it TWF with a greatsword and worn weapon does less DPR than twin kukri (light weapon) for any serious weapon user. It doesn't actually unbalance the game in any way.

It's not even as good as a single two-handed weapon.

It is cool though. : )


Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Oncoming_Storm wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Since it's just been pointed out that you can switch grips as a free action, using two hands for your main attacks with your greatsword and then using a free action to remove one hand and use that hand for the off hand attacks is perfectly RAW. The attack penalty is based on the size of the off hand weapon, not the main weapon.
Are you attacking with the Greatsword again, or a gauntlet or something in the off hand?

You can't use the same specific weapon as both your main attack and your off hand attack in the same full attack, no matter the size of the weapon.

For the purpose of practicality, a worn weapon, natural weapon or unarmed strike (basically, any weapon that doesn't need to be grasped and released) would be the off hand weapon.

This creates its own drawbacks. Those types of weapons (like spiked gauntlets) tend to be the least good light weapons, and having identical weapons is the best way to TWF so that you don't have to spend twice the feats/abilities (focus, specialisation. weapon groups, etc.) to maximise their use.

As powerful as it seems at first glance, when you analyze it TWF with a greatsword and worn weapon does less DPR than twin kukri (light weapon) for any serious weapon user. It doesn't actually unbalance the game in any way.

It's not even as good as a single two-handed weapon.

It is cool though. : )

It is not an off hand attack:

Build:
- Two Weapon Fighting
- Weapon Focus greatsword
- Str 16+

First Attack 2H Standard greatsword (at -2 due TWF) 2d6+str*1.5
2nd one; as a free action you release your off hand from the grip and attack again (at -4 [-2 TWF, -2 due a one handed weapon for larger creatures in one medium size hand)

Im not being cheessy, im only telling him that you can use even using phisics for this to happen. I believe this isn´t RAW but RAF though


Quote:
(at -4 [-2 TWF, -2 due a one handed weapon for larger creatures in one medium size hand)

this is the specific part that isnt allowed.

Using a larger weapon than normal raises the 'handedness' by one step. As there is no step larger than a two handed weapon, you cannot do this whatsoever.

Look at it this way, can you normally pick up a greatsword, and one hand it at a -2? No, so why could you with 2WF, even if you could attack with the same weapon again (which you cant)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

To clarify...

One can't Two Weapon Fight with One Weapon.

Now, using worn/natural attacks as your second weapon might seem cool, but it is sub-par damage compared to just full attacking with the Two Handed Weapon.

If you want to do this as a *shudder* Monk, he already has the ability to Flurry with a monk two handed weapon, or with his own attacks at higher level that exceeds most weapons eventually. (1d20 damage?)

Read TWF again. Notice the weapons you need to use.

Another thing is the Larger weapon thing. The size of the Medium two handed weapon does not change when you change the grip on the weapon. I am guessing something was misread here. One can not wield a two handed weapon that is sized larger than the character, at all. A one handed weapon that is a size larger needs to be used with two hands. A light weapon that is two sizes larger need to be used with two hands. They can be held in one hand, but to attack, two hands are needed for these examples.

If your going by the Pre Gen Amari (Sp?), she is using an oversized Bastard Sword, which for her is a one handed weapon. She uses it two handed.

Silver Crusade

Yeah, I'm talking about not being able to TWF with only one weapon.

When you TWF, you are taking a full attack action. In order to TWF, you must choose one weapon which will be your off hand attack during that full attack. Only that weapon can take the extra attacks granted by TWF and that line of feats. All of your 'normal' attacks (sometimes referred to as your 'main hand' attacks) can be taken with any weapons you can get into your hands at the time you make each attack. The only exception is that you cannot use your designated off hand weapon to make any of your normal attacks.

The result of this is that you cannot TWF using the same actual weapon for both your main AND off hand attacks in the the same full attack.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Juda de Kerioth wrote:

Free action!! thats how you can get TWF with a Greatsword (with tons of penalties)

-2 first attack (but with 1.5 str bonus)
-4 second attack (but only full str if you get Doble Slice)

TWF with a greatsword is totally doable with the rules, but I'm afraid Paizo has disallowed this by referring to unwritten rules.

If you repeat a lie often enough...


Classic Usage: Start turn: Free action remove hand from Nodachi(in my case), Swift Action to Lay On Hands, Free Action to re-grip Nodachi, Full Round Action to bring the Light of Durga to the Spawn of the Beast! (=hit them repeatedly with said sword!) :End of turn.


Well if you are a brawler and using a two handed weapon with the monk property with brawlers flurry you can two weapon fight with one weapon but this is a fringe case.

Silver Crusade

fel_horfrost wrote:
Well if you are a brawler and using a two handed weapon with the monk property with brawlers flurry you can two weapon fight with one weapon but this is a fringe case.

Yeah, the monk's flurry is a variation of TWF, where it does allow you to use the same weapon for all your attacks.


wraithstrike wrote:
Per the FAQ this is not allowed. I don't agree with it, since it is not broken, but that is their intent. I allow it at my tables, at least until someone gives me a reason not to.

Game balance

If you have multiple attacks thanks to BAB +11, I see no problem with using them to attack with any combination of 2h weapon, spiked gauntlet, improved unarmed strike, armor skpikes or whatever weapon you can wield at once, but if you want to get more attacks with the TWF feats, then you should not use them like 2h weapon/off-hand, as that would be an unfair advantage over the intended main-hand/off-hand; one-handed/light; double-weapon weapon setup.

What you could do is trade a 2h weapon attack for a set of main-hand + off-hand attack with -2 to attack (if you have the feats), and vice versa. So, a character with BAB +16 could use his first two highest attacks (+16:+11) to attack with a bastard sword as the main-hand and a shortsword as the off hand and strike twice with each with -2 penalty to each attack, then drop the shortsword and use his last two attacks (+6;+1) to attack with the bastard sword as a 2h weapon with no penalty. That would still be fair.

As you said, it won't break the game, but if you allow that, there would be no point in TWFing with a one-handed weapon as your main hand or with a double weapon, as opposed to a 2h weapon, as the one-handed weapond would most likelly almost always be worse.


Juda de Kerioth wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Oncoming_Storm wrote:
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Since it's just been pointed out that you can switch grips as a free action, using two hands for your main attacks with your greatsword and then using a free action to remove one hand and use that hand for the off hand attacks is perfectly RAW. The attack penalty is based on the size of the off hand weapon, not the main weapon.
Are you attacking with the Greatsword again, or a gauntlet or something in the off hand?

You can't use the same specific weapon as both your main attack and your off hand attack in the same full attack, no matter the size of the weapon.

For the purpose of practicality, a worn weapon, natural weapon or unarmed strike (basically, any weapon that doesn't need to be grasped and released) would be the off hand weapon.

This creates its own drawbacks. Those types of weapons (like spiked gauntlets) tend to be the least good light weapons, and having identical weapons is the best way to TWF so that you don't have to spend twice the feats/abilities (focus, specialisation. weapon groups, etc.) to maximise their use.

As powerful as it seems at first glance, when you analyze it TWF with a greatsword and worn weapon does less DPR than twin kukri (light weapon) for any serious weapon user. It doesn't actually unbalance the game in any way.

It's not even as good as a single two-handed weapon.

It is cool though. : )

It is not an off hand attack:

Build:
- Two Weapon Fighting
- Weapon Focus greatsword
- Str 16+

First Attack 2H Standard greatsword (at -2 due TWF) 2d6+str*1.5
2nd one; as a free action you release your off hand from the grip and attack again (at -4 [-2 TWF, -2 due a one handed weapon for larger creatures in one medium size hand)

Im not being cheessy, im only telling him that you can use even using phisics for this to happen. I believe this isn´t RAW but RAF though

You can't (normally) swing a greatsword with one hand.


You also can't use the same hand for non-iterative attacks.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Kchaka wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Per the FAQ this is not allowed. I don't agree with it, since it is not broken, but that is their intent. I allow it at my tables, at least until someone gives me a reason not to.
Game balance

No, this is wrong.

Every single time.

This, is often perceived as a balance issue, but the numbers show otherwise.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
No, this is wrong.

Very well, BBT,

Why would anybody with GTWF, Double Slice, use two bastard swords (sunblade)(1d10 + STR x1 / 1d10 + STR x1) if they could just use a greatswrod and a dancing sunblade (2d6 + STR x1.5 / 1d10 + STR x1), or something like that instead?


Kchaka wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
No, this is wrong.

Very well, BBT,

Why would anybody with GTWF, Double Slice, use two bastard swords (sunblade)(1d10 + STR x1 / 1d10 + STR x1) if they could just use a greatswrod and a dancing sunblade (2d6 + STR x1.5 / 1d10 + STR x1), or something like that instead?

Because one is two-weapon fighting and the other one isn't?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Whatever anyone's issue is with two handed weapons, and two-weapon fighting is, it isn't balance.

Also, your example, isn't two-weapon fighting.

Ninja'd.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Whatever anyone's issue is with two handed weapons, and two-weapon fighting is, it isn't balance.

It is about balance but only very low level. By the time you're dual-wielding Sunblades it's no longer a concern.


ok, so how do you TWF with a 2h weapon?


Kchaka wrote:
ok, so how do you TWF with a 2h weapon?

Usually a THW and armour spikes or the like. Not technically legal in Pathfinder but not really overpowered.


Durngrun, if you are allowing someone to TWF with a 2h weapon and armor spikes, you would have no reason to deny someone else from TWF with a 2h weapon and a boot knife, a dwarven bolder helmet, improved unarmed strikes, or even with spiked gauntlets if you considering you can remove a hand from the 2h weapon as a free action.

So, if you are allowing TWF with any of these, and if you find a way to have a hovering sunblade next to you that you can grab as a free action, like a dancing sunblade, or maybe with gloves of storing, then, according to these rules, one would be able to make the off-hand attacks of TWF with the sunblade, or even with a regular bastard sword with -4 penalty, right?


Kchaka wrote:

Durngrun, if you are allowing someone to TWF with a 2h weapon and armor spikes, you would have no reason to deny someone else from TWF with a 2h weapon and a boot knife, a dwarven bolder helmet, improved unarmed strikes, or even with spiked gauntlets if you considering you can remove a hand from the 2h weapon as a free action.

So, if you are allowing TWF with any of these, and if you find a way to have a hovering sunblade next to you that you can grab as a free action, like a dancing sunblade, or maybe with gloves of storing, then, according to these rules, one would be able to make the off-hand attacks of TWF with the sunblade, or even with a regular bastard sword with -4 penalty, right?

I allow all but the spiked gauntlet (as I feel you are already using that hand to attack). A Dancing weapon attacks on its own while dancing and doesn't use any of your effort. You could even activate a Dancing weapon and draw two more weapons and two-weapon fight while it was dancing.

Sovereign Court

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
ok, so how do you TWF with a 2h weapon?
Usually a THW and armour spikes or the like. Not technically legal in Pathfinder but not really overpowered.

It's OP because it lets you get more strength damage than any other fighting style. You get 2.5x strength damage total with double slice. In addition - you get the benefits of two-handing for PA along with TWF. Normally the lack is a major disadvantage of TWF.

Is it game-breaking? No. By the time you can work the combo to full effect casters are starting to run the show. But it'd still be OP - especially at high levels where the dex requirement for TWF isn't significant and strength scores can crest 40 with ease.


A Sunblade is 50,000 GP, to add Dancing would be an extra 60,000. To have two Sunblades and have one of them be Dancing would take all of a 14th level character's wealth. By that level, two-weapon fighting is no longer a concern.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Whatever anyone's issue is with two handed weapons, and two-weapon fighting is, it isn't balance.

Also, your example, isn't two-weapon fighting.

Ninja'd.

Oh boo hoo, his example still stands, change the 1d10 to a 1d4 or 1d6 and it still stands, you're getting more out of it than normal.


Charon's Little Helper wrote:
Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
ok, so how do you TWF with a 2h weapon?
Usually a THW and armour spikes or the like. Not technically legal in Pathfinder but not really overpowered.

It's OP because it lets you get more strength damage than any other fighting style. You get 2.5x strength damage total with double slice. In addition - you get the benefits of two-handing for PA along with TWF. Normally the lack is a major disadvantage of TWF.

Is it game-breaking? No. By the time you can work the combo to full effect casters are starting to run the show. But it'd still be OP - especially at high levels where the dex requirement for TWF isn't significant and strength scores can crest 40 with ease.

Except you're running into major attack penalties by then, plus the added cost of maintaining two weapons, and a heavy feat investment. I'm fine with a character who invests all of his resources into two-weapon fighting being good at two-weapon fighting.


Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.

Sovereign Court

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Except you're running into major attack penalties by then, plus the added cost of maintaining two weapons, and a heavy feat investment. I'm fine with a character who invests all of his resources into two-weapon fighting being good at two-weapon fighting.

1. The cost is identical to any other TWF build. For most classes this would be far superior. (probably not fighter due to how many static bonuses they get tied to a single weapon - but basically everyone else)

2. Without using PA - the attack bonuses are far smaller than a two-handed weapon with PA and without TWF. The damage would be considerably higher and it'd be more accurate. I can run the #s for you if you insist. PA would be somewhat more situational than usual.


Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.

Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:
Kchaka wrote:
Ok, forget the damn Dancing weapon, I thought you could see I was talking about it's ability to be grabbed as a free action instead of drawn. The gloves of storing and an Effortless lace are a cheaper version of the same combo.
Again, two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon is not allowed by the rules of Pathfinder. I allow two weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon and a weapon that does not require a physical. I do not allow someone to fight with a two-handed weapon, then take one hand of that weapon and fight with a different weapon in the hand they have already used. So the glove of storing/effortless lace combo would not work in my game.

I'm curious as to what you feel the difference between the two is. Why allow a kick/helmet/whatever to work, but not another weapon in their hand? It's achieving the same effect as far as I can see. So I'm curious what's the reasoning behind it is

1 to 50 of 120 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / What sort of action does it take to begin or stop "two handing" a weapon? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.