Do you threaten at both 5' and 10' when using a reach weapon with a Brawler / Monk?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

As a Brawler with a longspear and combat reflexes can you make multiple AoOs in the same round at both the 5' and 10' squares with both the longspear and IUS?

After the Brawler had made his full attack an opponent tried to enter melee with him from out side 10' provoking an AoO and he tripped that opponent, then later in the round a different prone opponent adjacent to the Brawler stood up. Could you then take a 2nd AoO with an unarmed kick considering you had already taken one with the long spear as this is a different weapon with the different threat range?


Actually, yes.

Since the unarmed strikes don't have to be with your hands, you can make them with your hands full.

Knees, elbows, head, whatever.


Yes. As long as he dosent use the same oppotunity more than once and dont take more AoOs than his Dex modifier +1.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

Correct.


Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

yes, it is one of the advantages of the monk (and classes that have similar unarmed strike abilities as the monk) that you can make those attacks even when wielding a two handed weapon since they don't have to be made with your hands at all.


Yup.


lol, you have so many yeses, i shall add.


I'll go further. Let's say your Brawler with a long spear takes Great Cleave, which says you can make 1 attack against each opponent within reach as long as you keep hitting with each attack roll and as long as your opponents are adjacent to each other. It doesn't say you have to use the same weapon on each opponent, so you might use a reach weapon on your 10' opponents and your unarmed strikes on your adjacent opponents.


Yeah but then you took great cleave instead of something useful :(


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber
CWheezy wrote:
Yeah but then you took great cleave instead of something useful :(

If you're a Brawler, then you can use Martial Flexibility to get it temporarily, theoretically.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Thanks for the answers guys.


I agreed with this at first as well (positive intent), until I read the flurry of blows, Improved Unarmed Strike, and threatened square rules, and ran a few scenarios at different levels to see how broken this would be if allow. It is super broken with 6~7 attacks per round at 1st level. No supporting evidence/source quoted from any of the replies that answered yes that specifically states you can use a two handed-weapon and flurry of blows, or two handed-weapon and IUS at the same time anywhere in the rules.

The great cleave comment "It doesn't say you can't do it" was the dead give away that people will read the rules as they want to see them, rather than the mechanics they were built for. I am guilty of this as well from time to time. There is the rule of law, and then there is the spirit of the law.

FOB specifically states flurry of blows can be done with monk weapons only. Since it states this is the only time you can use IUS and monk weapons only, you wouldn't be able to make a melee attack with IUS and a two handed-weapon at the same time. Which means the two handed-weapon becomes unarmed and wouldn't grant you an AOO even if you are holding it during combat. Clearly stated in Threatened squares rules you must be able to make a melee attack with the weapon, and be armed with it to be able to get an AOO.

I.E. if you had a kama, sickle or other monk weapon you could make an AOO with it and IUS as you could make a melee attack normally with both per FOB, and are armed with both as well.

FLurry of Blows: Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so, he may make one additional attack, taking a –2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. These attacks can be any combination of unarmed strikes and attacks with a monk special weapon (he does not need to use two weapons to utilize this ability).

Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity.

Reach Weapons: Most creatures of Medium or smaller size have a reach of only 5 feet. This means that they can make melee attacks only against creatures up to 5 feet (1 square) away. However, Small and Medium creatures wielding reach weapons threaten more squares than a typical creature. In addition, most creatures larger than Medium have a natural reach of 10 feet or more.

I don't see anywhere in that wording nor in the IUS rules that state you can use two handed-weapons and IUS at the same time for AOO. Also see multiweapon fighting feat, and two weapon fighting feat for further details on how IUS/FOB works with using multiple weapons. I'm positive Paizo didn't want a monk/brawler to have AOO on reach and adjacent squares at the same time at 1st level without having to taking a single feat while using two weapons (unarmed, and two handed-weapons).

I would also like to see someone from Paizo make a ruling either way, and erreta either to say yes that was our intention, or no that wasn't our intention. Making it clear for the Monk/Brawler wanting to use two weapons, ISU and a non monk two handed-weapon for AOO at the same time in one round while someone is adjacent, and in the 10' threat range.


Unarmed Strike Monk Class Feature wrote:
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.

This is the 'evidence'. It proves that you can use unarmed strikes while holding something in your hand (ie reach weapon). Thus, you threaten the squares around you with unarmed strikes and the squares one step further away with your reach weapon.

@Straph - The rules for Attack of Opportunity states that only a single one may be taken for each action. I fail to see how being able to threaten both adjacent and reach squares would break anything? One would simply have the same reach as a Large creature.

Note: The question was if you threaten with both weapons at the same time, not if one could attack twice on each AoO :)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

There is absolutely nothing that suggests one can only threaten with one weapon at a time.


@Lessah you are right you can use IUS with a reach weapon in your hand. I'm not disputing that. I also wasn't disputing attacking twice on an AOO (not okay).

I'm disputing using both a two handed-weapon with reach and using IUS for AOO at the same time on different targets. The two situations are completely different from one another. In one case you aren't using the two handed-weapon with reach weapon with IUS you are simply holding the two handed-weapon (okay), the other you are using the two handed-weapon with reach weapon and IUS (not okay).

However if you look at my points above again, specifically the Threatened Square rule you must be able to make a melee attack with the weapon, and be armed with it to be able to make an AOO in the first place. You cannot be armed with a two handed-weapon with reach and IUS at the same time. Neither IUS rules or FOB rules say you can do that. Specifically states that in FOB, which says you can use monk weapons only with IUS during a FOB full attack thus making them armed weapons, and able to make melee attacks with both the monk weapons and IUS. This also lets you AOO with both monk weapon and IUS.

If you look at FOB it also states it treats this exception as two weapon fighting with a -2 to all attacks. You can't use two weapon fighting with two handed-weapons per the feat description. You'll also want to read the multiweapon fighting feat I mentioned. In order to use multiple weapons in this case a two handed-weapon, and an IUS (two different weapons not covered under the two weapon fighting feat) it says you'll need 3 or more arms to use multiple weapons at the same time.

To make my point clear it doesn't even mention weapons at all in IUS feat. Only in the monk class feature does it mention using fist, elbows, knees, and feet. Again the word weapon wasn't used.

The only time weapons are mentioned again as I stated above is with FOB. These are only Monk weapons. No monk two handed-weapons weapons have reach. You couldn't even use any two handed weapons in order to threaten in the first place as you wouldn't be considered armed with them the moment you use IUS.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

There is absolutely nothing that suggests one can only threaten with one weapon at a time.

Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.


Straph wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

There is absolutely nothing that suggests one can only threaten with one weapon at a time.

Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that IUS requires free hands, it does not.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Straph wrote:
Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.

He hits you with his reach weapon at 10ft and kicks you with his unarmed strike at 5ft.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Straph wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

There is absolutely nothing that suggests one can only threaten with one weapon at a time.

Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.

You threaten with any weapon you can attack with.

You could threaten with two daggers, two boot blades, armor spikes, a dwarven boulder helmet, and your unarmed strike, all at the same time.

You have to create a very odd, and illogical, unwritten restriction, to disallow it.

Are really suggesting that a PC with a dagger in each hand, has to "declare" which one he/she is threatening with?

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Card Game, Companion, Lost Omens, Maps, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

Or head-butts, or hip-checks, or elbows you, or .... Monks are versatile!

My monk has often taught this lesson to opponents who think that just because he's holding a crossbow he can't threaten them.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Headbutts and Kicks are not a Monk-only thing.

John the Fighter doesn't need special training to kick someone.


I'd consider taking IUS as a feat as being special training. Though technically I suppose you're right, there's nothing stopping John the Fighter from headbutting someone and provoking an AOO to do so.


Straph:
Look at Spiked Armor. You'll also notice a lack of wording that allows you holding a two handed weapon and using them. Do you think that Spiked Armors don't threaten while you wield a two handed weapon?

Also, no reach monk weapons? Kusarigama and Double-chained kama want a word with you.

Thirdly, cleave/AoO aren't TWF so it's restrictions don't apply. The FAQ ONLY says no 2 handed weapons in TWF.

http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9onf
Nothing stops you from attacking with a 2 handed weapon on the first attack and a kick/armor spikes on the second an a normal BAB +6/+1 attack. The same goes with Greater cleave/cleave.


Calth wrote:
Straph wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

There is absolutely nothing that suggests one can only threaten with one weapon at a time.

Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that IUS requires free hands, it does not.

You seem to be under the mistaken impression that I was disputing that fact. I wasn't, you are correct you can use IUS while holding a weapon.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Straph wrote:
Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.
He hits you with his reach weapon at 10ft and kicks you with his unarmed strike at 5ft.

Interesting how exactly would you do that? Please site rules, and sources. I'm interested to see where you are going with this.


Straph wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Straph wrote:
Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.
He hits you with his reach weapon at 10ft and kicks you with his unarmed strike at 5ft.
Interesting how exactly would you do that? Please site rules, and sources. I'm interested to see where you are going with this.

How about the rules on threatening? "Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn."

You can attack with an unarmed attack AND a reach weapon (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9onf) and AoO aren't TWF so we don't have to worry about it's rules. Anything else?


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Straph wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

There is absolutely nothing that suggests one can only threaten with one weapon at a time.

Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.

You threaten with any weapon you can attack with.

You could threaten with two daggers, two boot blades, armor spikes, a dwarven boulder helmet, and your unarmed strike, all at the same time.

You have to create a very odd, and illogical, unwritten restriction, to disallow it.

Are really suggesting that a PC with a dagger in each hand, has to "declare" which one he/she is threatening with?

False, you do not threaten with any weapon you can attack with. I can attack with a bow, long sword, gauntlet, and whip all of which I have on me and can attack with. Yet I can't use them all to make a AOO. I can only make an AOO with the weapon I'm armed with.

If you read my above statement about two weapon fighting, and FOB you would know I'm not disputing you can use two weapons while using IUS. You can even AOO with both in the same round just not on twice on the same AOO.

The dispute is about getting an AOO with a two handed-weapon with reach (long spear) and AOO with IUS at the same time even though you can't be armed with both weapons at once.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Straph wrote:
Interesting how exactly would you do that? Please site rules, and sources. I'm interested to see where you are going with this.
Threatened Squares wrote:
You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn.
Reach Weapons wrote:
A reach weapon is a melee weapon that allows its wielder to strike at targets that aren't adjacent to him. Most reach weapons double the wielder's natural reach, meaning that a typical Small or Medium wielder of such a weapon can attack a creature 10 feet away, but not a creature in an adjacent square.
Unarmed Strike wrote:
A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full.


Umm, you can be armed with both at once and it's not at the same time because the two weapons never threaten the same square.


Straph wrote:

If you read my above statement about two weapon fighting, and FOB you would know I'm not disputing you can use two weapons while using IUS. You can even AOO with both in the same round just not on twice on the same AOO.

The dispute is about getting an AOO with a two handed-weapon with reach (long spear) and AOO with IUS at the same time even though you can't be armed with both weapons at once.

You've been super unclear about it then. There has NEVER been an issue with this as you can't get more than 1 AoO per "given opportunity". So you've been debating over a dispute that was never there.

However, you CAN be armed with BOTH weapons at the same time. (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9onf)


graystone wrote:
Straph wrote:
TriOmegaZero wrote:
Straph wrote:
Please suggest how you can accomplish the threatening both a 10' and 5 foot area as a brawler/monk using a reach weapon and IUS. I'm curious as to your logic good sir.
He hits you with his reach weapon at 10ft and kicks you with his unarmed strike at 5ft.
Interesting how exactly would you do that? Please site rules, and sources. I'm interested to see where you are going with this.

How about the rules on threatening? "Threatened Squares: You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn."

You can attack with an unarmed attack AND a reach weapon (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9onf) and AoO aren't TWF so we don't have to worry about it's rules. Anything else?

Lets quote the whole rule not just the part that makes you right. You missed that little bit that says you have to be armed in the last sentence to get an AOO. Can't be armed with two different weapons with out TWF, which doesn't allow two handed-weapons oddly enough. Also Paizo's site doesn't update errata like SRD does.

You threaten all squares into which you can make a melee attack, even when it is not your turn. Generally, that means everything in all squares adjacent to your space (including diagonally). An enemy that takes certain actions while in a threatened square provokes an attack of opportunity from you. If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity.

http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat#TOC-Attacks-of-Opportunity

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Multiple Weapons, Extra Attacks, and Two-Weapon Fighting: If I have extra attacks from a high BAB, can I make attacks with different weapons and not incur a two-weapon fighting penalty? wrote:


Yes. Basically, you only incur TWF penalties if you are trying to get an extra attack per round.
Let's assume you're a 6th-level fighter (BAB +6/+1) holding a longsword in one hand and a light mace in the other. Your possible full attack combinations without using two-weapon fighting are:
(A) longsword at +6, longsword +1
(B) mace +6, mace +1
(C) longsword +6, mace +1
(D) mace +6, longsword +1
All of these combinations result in you making exactly two attacks, one at +6 and one at +1. You're not getting any extra attacks, therefore you're not using the two-weapon fighting rule, and therefore you're not taking any two-weapon fighting penalties.
If you have Quick Draw, you could even start the round wielding only one weapon, make your main attack with it, draw the second weapon as a free action after your first attack, and use that second weapon to make your iterative attack (an "iterative attack" is an informal term meaning "extra attacks you get from having a high BAB"). As long as you're properly using the BAB values for your iterative attacks, and as long as you're not exceeding the number of attacks per round granted by your BAB, you are not considered to be using two-weapon fighting, and therefore do not take any of the penalties for two-weapon fighting.
The two-weapon fighting option in the Core Rulebook specifically refers to getting an extra attack for using a second weapon in your offhand. In the above four examples, there is no extra attack, therefore you're not using two-weapon fighting.
Using the longsword/mace example, if you use two-weapon fighting you actually have fewer options than if you aren't. Your options are (ignoring the primary/off hand penalties):
(A') primary longsword at +6, primary longsword at +1, off hand mace at +6
(B') primary mace at +6, primary mace at +1, off hand longsword at +6
In other words, once you decide you're using two-weapon fighting to get that extra attack on your turn (which you have to decide before you take any attacks on your turn), that decision locks you in to the format of "my primary weapon gets my main attack and my iterative attack, and my off hand weapon only gets the extra attack, and I apply two-weapon fighting penalties."


graystone wrote:
Straph wrote:

If you read my above statement about two weapon fighting, and FOB you would know I'm not disputing you can use two weapons while using IUS. You can even AOO with both in the same round just not on twice on the same AOO.

The dispute is about getting an AOO with a two handed-weapon with reach (long spear) and AOO with IUS at the same time even though you can't be armed with both weapons at once.

You've been super unclear about it then. There has NEVER been an issue with this as you can't get more than 1 AoO per "given opportunity". So you've been debating over a dispute that was never there.

However, you CAN be armed with BOTH weapons at the same time. (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9onf)

I was very clear in my first post. Also that link doesn't have anything about IUS and two handed-weapons. I'm not sure you're being clear on what you are debating over.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You are lost in two-weapon fighting, and the two weapon fighting FAQ.

I am going to surprise with a revelation.

Two-weapon fighting, and the FAQ on two-weapon fighting, has absolutely no relevance on threatening, and AoOs.

Hell, how can you get to this "armed, and threaten with one weapon only" conclusion?

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Straph wrote:
If you're unarmed, you don't normally threaten any squares and thus can't make attacks of opportunity.
Improved Unarmed Strike wrote:
You are considered to be armed even when unarmed

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Two-weapon fighting, is a full-attack action, in which you gain an extra attack, with a second weapon.

Only during that full attack action, do you have two-weapon fighting penalties, and restrictions.


Straph wrote:
Can't be armed with two different weapons with out TWF, which doesn't allow two handed-weapons oddly enough.

Sorry, where does this rule come from? As far as I know TWF doesn't bestow the ability to wield more than one weapon, it simply reduces the penalty. Being armed with more than one weapon is something that anyone can do, it's just not all that effective without the feat.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Paizo's Law of Argumonics: The more time people spend voicing their consensus on an obvious rules matter, the more likely it becomes that someone will show up to dispute it.

Straph wrote:
You missed that little bit that says you have to be armed in the last sentence to get an AOO. Can't be armed with two different weapons with out TWF, which doesn't allow two handed-weapons oddly enough.

Oh, really? So a guy with a longspear and a bite attack can't make AoOs with either? Would you then apply this logic to mean that a guy with a greatsword and a bite attack must choose one or the other to attack with?

And if not, please cite the rule that states that Natural Attacks and Improved Unarmed Strike operate under different definitions of the word "armed".


Kobold Cleaver wrote:

Paizo's Law of Argumonics: The more time people spend voicing their consensus on an obvious rules matter, the more likely it becomes that someone will show up to dispute it.

Straph wrote:
You missed that little bit that says you have to be armed in the last sentence to get an AOO. Can't be armed with two different weapons with out TWF, which doesn't allow two handed-weapons oddly enough.

Oh, really? So a guy with a longspear and a bite attack can't make AoOs with either? Would you then apply this logic to mean that a guy with a greatsword and a bite attack must choose one or the other to attack with?

And if not, please cite the rule that states that Natural Attacks and Improved Unarmed Strike operate under different definitions of the word "armed".

Shucks Kobold Cleaver your on to me and my Paizo's Law of Argumonics. Shh don't tell anyone.

Natural attacks have a totally different rule set specifically for them that states you can use weapons and natural attacks to use both in the same turn thus making you armed and able to make a melee attack. I'm not disputing this fact.

I however don't see any rule that says you can do the same with IUS. In fact on my first point I go into a long rant on why you can't. Thus far I haven't been proven wrong.

Grand Lodge

3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

I must admit that I am baffled by what you say you have proven.

Grand Lodge

4 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Your argument, reads like this:

Only those wearing the color red can make melee attacks.

Prove me wrong.

Oh, nothing says those not wearing red can make melee attacks?

Well, look how right I am.

ಠ_ಠ


TriOmegaZero wrote:
I must admit that I am baffled by what you say you have proven.

LOL I know. We've both posted the FAQ that states he's wrong and you can attack with multiple weapons without using two-weapon fighting. Pretty much it seems he's proven that he didn't look at/understand the FAQ and our posts.

blackbloodtroll wrote:

Your argument, reads like this:

Only those wearing the color red can make melee attacks.

Prove me wrong.

Oh, nothing says those not wearing red can make melee attacks?

Well, look how right I am.

ಠ_ಠ

My book doesn't say Straph is right, so he MUST be wrong unless he can show he a rule that says he is. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Lance and shield while on horseback is another overlooked 5 foot/reach combo for threatening.

Grand Lodge

The brawler would threaten at both ranges, but still only gets 1 AOO for a given action.

Otherwise a Zen archer can't threaten with IUS when using a bow. Hint: they do.


@Straph

You seem to be arguing that you cannot use a two-handed reach weapon as part of a Flurry of Blows.

In actual fact the rule is that you cannot use any weapon other than Improved Unarmed Strike or one which has the "monk" special quality.

The original post, however had nothing to do with Flurry of Blows. It was specifically chasing the ability of a character to threaten both 5' and 10' from themselves while wielding a reach weapon if they have the Improved Unarmed Strike ability. The answer to this is yes, they do threaten, as Improved Unarmed Strike does not require hands to be free to make an attack.

As such, this allows the equipped character to make that Attack of Opportunity against the foe 10' away, and then with Combat Reflexes, they can also take an Attack of Opportunity with their Unarmed Strike. As the Attacks of Opportunity are standalone attacks and not part of a Flurry of Blows attack action, the character is entitled to use whichever weapon, or attack type, they feel is appropriate at the time (assuming the weapon can make the attack).

Flurry of Blows plays no part in determining the legality of the situation.

Hope this clears it up for you.


ayronc wrote:

@Straph

You seem to be arguing that you cannot use a two-handed reach weapon as part of a Flurry of Blows.

In actual fact the rule is that you cannot use any weapon other than Improved Unarmed Strike or one which has the "monk" special quality.

The original post, however had nothing to do with Flurry of Blows. It was specifically chasing the ability of a character to threaten both 5' and 10' from themselves while wielding a reach weapon if they have the Improved Unarmed Strike ability. The answer to this is yes, they do threaten, as Improved Unarmed Strike does not require hands to be free to make an attack.

As such, this allows the equipped character to make that Attack of Opportunity against the foe 10' away, and then with Combat Reflexes, they can also take an Attack of Opportunity with their Unarmed Strike. As the Attacks of Opportunity are standalone attacks and not part of a Flurry of Blows attack action, the character is entitled to use whichever weapon, or attack type, they feel is appropriate at the time (assuming the weapon can make the attack).

Flurry of Blows plays no part in determining the legality of the situation.

Hope this clears it up for you.

Oh yeah that does clear it up. I totally forgot about the 5ft step when getting up from a prone.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You seem new buddy.

Don't take any reactions to your misunderstandings personally.

Unfortunately, most of us assume that other posters are a bit more learned in the rules, unless told otherwise.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

You seem new buddy.

Don't take any reactions to your misunderstandings personally.

Unfortunately, most of us assume that other posters are a bit more learned in the rules, unless told otherwise.

I'm new to the forums, not new to the game scene been playing for 20+ years. However it's impossible to know every rule in the game with 50+ books and all the small exceptions to the rules. Granted I know a lot of the rules. I just view the rules differently than most looking at them logically from the standpoint of it doesn't say you can so you can't. Most people look at it from the other direction, it doesn't say you can't so you can. So why wouldn't you be able to?

It does say in IUS that you can hold something in your hands and still use IUS. It doesn't say that you can use, or be armed with those items in the hands.

This rule specifically works around that concept of it doesn't say you can't. Even though technically you can't wield both weapons without a feat (multiweapon fighting), and multiple arms.

My misunderstanding of the 5 foot step also makes the above less broken. As you can't continually trip them after taking multiple 5 foot steps each round with a full attack. So it balances slightly better than I thought. Thus I agree that you could do it. As it isn't as broken as I thought it was.

However would still love to have Paizo come in and say if that was their intention with IUS, and holding a two handed-weapon that isn't a monk weapon. Can the monk/brawler get an AOO with both weapons if there is someone threatened at 5' with IUS, and someone threatened at 10' with a reach weapon during the same enemy turn due to two enemies standing up from prone?


The staff isn't going to answer every question. You can try to FAQ it , but when you see this much agreement on a topic with a clear answer they're likely to flag it as no response required.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Where is this "wield limit"?

1 to 50 of 127 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Do you threaten at both 5' and 10' when using a reach weapon with a Brawler / Monk? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.