| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whats the easiest way for my character to get whip proficiency without taking the exotic weapon proficiency feat? are there any traits or other feats or something?
He's a half-elf inquisitor. Do not suggest class dipping or race changing.
Edit: Alternatively, do you know if a whip has reach if you don't have proficiency with it?
Worship Jalaijatali(CG), Selket(CG also weapon is actually Scorpion Whip), Matravash(LN), Calistria(CN), Lissala(LE), Moloch(LE), Ahriman(NE), Llamolaek(NE), Abraxas(CE), Dahak(CE), Gogunta(CE), or Ragadahn(CE)
A whip still has reach if you don't have have proficiency in it, but you take a -4 on making attacks and it does non-lethal damage, and it doesn't do that to anyone wearing armor.
Without Whip Mastery, Improved Whip Mastery, and Greater Whip Mastery the whip isn't really a very good weapon. And those are all separate from whip proficiency.
Worship Jalaijatali(CG), Selket(CG also weapon is actually Scorpion Whip), Matravash(LN), Calistria(CN), Lissala(LE), Moloch(LE), Ahriman(NE), Llamolaek(NE), Abraxas(CE), Dahak(CE), Gogunta(CE), or Ragadahn(CE)
Nice, thank you!
A whip still has reach if you don't have have proficiency in it, but you take a -4 on making attacks and it does non-lethal damage, and it doesn't do that to anyone wearing armor.
Without Whip Mastery, Improved Whip Mastery, and Greater Whip Mastery the whip isn't really a very good weapon. And those are all separate from whip proficiency.
I'm just looking for a way to threaten someone 10ft away without a feat investment, actually hitting them is irrelevant. As far as I could tell without using questionable "small 2h weapon" shenanigans, whips were the only one handed reach weapon.
I assumed from the "Choose one type of exotic weapon, such as the spiked chain or whip. You understand how to use that type of exotic weapon in combat, and can utilize any special tricks or qualities that exotic weapon might allow." text that you couldnt use the reach property without being proficient. Is this not the case?
URGH: just noticed the description of the whip says you dont threaten anything in its range...
DOES ANYONE KNOW A ONE HANDED REACH WEAPON?
Contributor
|
The problem is that, without significant feat investment, it won't threaten at 10 feet (even if you're proficient).
The problem is that, without significant feat investment, it won't threaten at 10 feet (even if you're proficient).
Yeah I just noticed that... Any suggestions on threatening a square 10ft away while using a shield without having to spend too many feats or dipping classes?
Edit: I take it scorpion whips also dont threaten?
Yeah, while the whip has 10ft reach (for the purpose of making attacks), you don't actually threaten with it at 10ft.
For most weapons if you have reach you have it for threatening too, but that is not the case with whips.
They are a....unique weapon.
The problem is that, without significant feat investment, it won't threaten at 10 feet (even if you're proficient).Yeah I just noticed that... Any suggestions on threatening a square 10ft away without having to spend lots of feats?
Assuming using only a one-handed weapon? There are basically no options except a small version of two-handed reach weapon.
Not one-handed? Any two handed reach weapon.
I think maybe you're looking for the Lunge feat, but you're still looking at a feat investment.
Dwarven dorn-dergar comes to mind, but pretty sure that's no diety's Favored weapon.
You could trade your skill focus for ancestral arms proficiency in an exotic, not technically a race change.
You could try to pull the small-sized reach weapon shenanigans to 1-hand a small polearm.
I think Bestow Weapon Proficiency is a 2nd level inq spell.
I think maybe you're looking for the Lunge feat, but you're still looking at a feat investment.nope, lunge only lasts till the end of your turn, so you wont threaten any extra range on their turns.
Huh. I somehow misread that. Whelp, we've been using that wrong.
|
As far as I could tell without using questionable "small 2h weapon" shenanigans, whips were the only one handed reach weapon.
Why is it 'shenanigans'?
Small characters using two-handed reach weapons sized for them threaten foes 10' away. Why would the exact same weapon wielded one-handed by a medium creature suddenly NOT be able to threaten foes 10' away?
Basically... this is the obvious answer, so why is it being discarded?
Because with a few minor exception, all reach weapons are two-handed.
The ones that aren't are two-handed are exotic weapons and have serious drawbacks normally. Whips notably. The other is the kobold long-lash tail attachment. Dwarven Dorn-Degar with feats.
The problem is that, without significant feat investment, it won't threaten at 10 feet (even if you're proficient).Yeah I just noticed that... Any suggestions on threatening a square 10ft away while using a shield without having to spend too many feats or dipping classes?
Edit: I take it scorpion whips also dont threaten?
Ride a horse, use a lance.
Basically... this is the obvious answer, so why is it being discarded?
Just seems odd to me that no weapon exists for a medium sized creature that has reach and can be wielded one handed. Which says to me they probably didnt want such an item to exist mechanically for pathfinder (despite the existance of 1h spears irl that they couldve made reach).
Then because they didnt want to exclude small races from all the fun of reach weapons they made "small sized" reach weapons a thing for those races.
I'm not saying it isnt perfectly allowed by pathfinder rules to use the obvious answer. It just feels cheap to me, legal shenanigans.
As far as I could tell without using questionable "small 2h weapon" shenanigans, whips were the only one handed reach weapon.Why is it 'shenanigans'?
Small characters using two-handed reach weapons sized for them threaten foes 10' away. Why would the exact same weapon wielded one-handed by a medium creature suddenly NOT be able to threaten foes 10' away?
Basically... this is the obvious answer, so why is it being discarded?
Because it also comes with the -2 to hit from using an inappropriate sized weapon. Maybe even more than that because you're effectively using an improvised weapon.
Ride a horse, use a lance.
That's not a bad idea for some combats where mounts are logical, thanks!
Because it also comes with the -2 to hit from using an inappropriate sized weapon. Maybe even more than that because you're effectively using an improvised weapon.
Nah, that wasn't the reason, see the post above yours for the reason I dislike using off-sized weapons.
every combat mounts are logical! My level 8 PRS Legalcavalier has NEVER had a hard time getting his charge off, except the two scenarios where his mount was obliterated by instant deathspells... It's a good day to be a beast master!
every combat mounts are logical! My level 8 PRS Legalcavalier has NEVER had a hard time getting his charge off, except the two scenarios where his mount was obliterated by instant deathspells... It's a good day to be a beast master!
Ha, even through dungeons or in a tavern brawl? ^^
Half elves have an alternate racial trait called ancestral arms. If your character is already made you could retrain the racial traits. (Ultimate Campaign).
Opalescent White Pyramid ioun stone would grant proficiency.
You have the good ol' Flying Talon if you want a one-handed reach weapon (well, it's light, not one-handed). It's exotic though.
You have the good ol' Flying Talon if you want a one-handed reach weapon (well, it's light, not one-handed). It's exotic though.
Just checked, despite not having the reach property on the srd it does say it "gives its wielder a reach of 10 feet", does it threaten at 10ft too?
It should, considering how the only reason the whip doesn't threaten at range is because it states so specifically in the whip weapon description.
The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack.
It should, considering how the only reason the whip doesn't threaten at range is because it states so specifically in the whip weapon description.
The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack.
I'm totally thrown by the wording of flying talon, the weapon doesnt have the reach property, but it says it "gives its wielder a reach of 10 feet" what the hell? Does that mean it's not a reach weapon? does it allow the wielder to make unarmed at reach? does it actually mean range of 10ft when thrown like all other light weapons with range mean?!
Is there some clarification on this unique wording? Seems too coincidental that its the only 1h reach weapon if it is infact a reach weapon...
No reach weapons have range measurements, i'm almost certain that its not a reach weapon, pounce. But then again, I wouldnt claim to be a pathfinder rules guru <.<
It should, considering how the only reason the whip doesn't threaten at range is because it states so specifically in the whip weapon description.
The whip is treated as a melee weapon with 15-foot reach, though you don't threaten the area into which you can make an attack.I'm totally thrown by the wording of flying talon, the weapon doesnt have the reach property, but it says it "gives its wielder a reach of 10 feet" what the hell? Does that mean it's not a reach weapon? does it allow the wielder to make unarmed at reach? does it actually mean range of 10ft when thrown like all other light weapons with range mean?!
Is there some clarification on this unique wording? Seems too coincidental that its the only 1h reach weapon if it is infact a reach weapon...
No reach weapons have range measurements, i'm almost certain that its not a reach weapon, pounce. But then again, I wouldnt claim to be a pathfinder rules guru <.<
It's pretty murky, granted. I suspect it is mainly due to a holdover from an earlier Paizo product or something, since the weapon originates from a module from 2007 - like, two years before the core rulebook was released.
That being said, it specifically says that it gives you a reach of 10 feet. I guess you could compare to the Meteor Hammer, for instance, which is a reach weapon, but also has the double property - yet it doesn't have the double property in the table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm totally thrown by the wording of flying talon, the weapon doesnt have the reach property, but it says it "gives its wielder a reach of 10 feet" what the hell? Does that mean it's not a reach weapon? does it allow the wielder to make unarmed at reach? does it actually mean range of 10ft when thrown like all other light weapons with range mean?!
First of, it is the 'weilder' that gets reach, for any attack that you aren't weilding the flying talon, you don't have reach, so no unarmed attacks.
I believe the reason is 'gives the wielder 10' reach' rather than having the reach property, is to represent that you can still make attacks against targets adjacent to you.
That said, it does predate pathfinder so it is a very questionable weapon.
I'm totally thrown by the wording of flying talon, the weapon doesnt have the reach property, but it says it "gives its wielder a reach of 10 feet" what the hell? Does that mean it's not a reach weapon? does it allow the wielder to make unarmed at reach? does it actually mean range of 10ft when thrown like all other light weapons with range mean?!First of, it is the 'weilder' that gets reach, for any attack that you aren't weilding the flying talon, you don't have reach, so no unarmed attacks.
I believe the reason is 'gives the wielder 10' reach' rather than having the reach property, is to represent that you can still make attacks against targets adjacent to you.
That said, it does predate pathfinder so it is a very questionable weapon.
The fact that it has a range of 10ft on the srd table and no weapon with reach has a range (only throwable / ranged weapons have a number in that column) AND it lacks the reach property tells me that the text is meant to say "range of 10ft" and they just weren't being as careful with wording back then.
The fact that it has a range of 10ft on the srd table and no weapon with reach has a range (only throwable / ranged weapons have a number in that column) AND it lacks the reach property tells me that the text is meant to say "range of 10ft" and they just weren't being as careful with wording back then.
That seems pretty unlikely. It is a hook on the end of a chain so having an extended reach makes sense, especially when you consider the 3.5 spike chain had reach and could also target adjacent foes.
It also, apparently, can be thrown with a range increment of 10'.
The fact that it has a range of 10ft on the srd table and no weapon with reach has a range (only throwable / ranged weapons have a number in that column) AND it lacks the reach property tells me that the text is meant to say "range of 10ft" and they just weren't being as careful with wording back then.That seems pretty unlikely. It is a hook on the end of a chain so having an extended reach makes sense, especially when you consider the 3.5 spike chain had reach and could also target adjacent foes.
It also, apparently, can be thrown with a range increment of 10'.
Alas, every reach weapon in pathfinder is rigid allowing to control it at reach like wiggling a stick, (exception being the already weird whip for obvious reasons and drawbacks, and the kobold tail attach, which the majority of the reach likely comes from his actual tail - see pseudodragon for an example of a tail giving extended reach) the using of a flying talon at reach seems wholly impractical. Its much more likely a thrown weapon that you can recover easily like all other weapons of its kind in pathfinder. That would perfectly explain its stats in the range column reflecting the text that was meant to say "range of 10 feet", it explains why it lacks the reach property and explains why it's not a unique light blade with reach.
I don't think I can make any more of a comprehensive argument than that! Of course you could ignore this evidence, I think it's much more likely they accidentally typed reach instead of range, given that the two are really synonyms.
Once again, it isn't actually a weapon in Pathfinder. It is a weapon published by Paizo in a 3.5 module.
You can believe what you like of course, but your interpretation doesn't really make any sense.
You can believe what you like of course, but your interpretation doesn't really make any sense.
Hah, i think we can agree to disagree, but you can't deny that my interpretation does make sense, and there are facts to back it up. If you want to believe they made it unique to the chain/rope attached weapon design, unique to the light melee weapons, unique to the weapons with range, unique to the reach weapons AND forgot to add the reach weapon property - and not that they just used the wrong synonym once in a description, then you are perfectly entitled to do so! ^^
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Consider that the closest comparison we have in Pathfinder is the Kusari-gama, which is an excellent exotic double weapon (pretty much the only flexible reach weapon I'm aware of), and I think you can see the Flying Talon is not intended for PF use.
It came from a very different era, where flexible reach weapons were much more common - like the spiked chain, which was nerfed to oblivion.
Its lack of inclusion in any PF material should be all the indication you need that it's meant for 3.5, not PF.
"give its wielder a range" doesnt make any sense. No one ever gets a range, they just get weapons with range.
You're misunderstanding, im not saying its a typo, im saying "gives its wielder reach of 10 feet" (with a weapon) has the same meaning as "allows the wielder to attack at a range of 20ft" in normal (non pathfinder/gaming) context, so its just that they worded it poorly.
Also, while the rope dart is a ranged weapon, the meteor hammer which has a similar fighting style is melee. Lastly, the Flying Talon is listed as a melee weapon in the chart, while the Rope Dart is listed as a ranged one.
Yes the flying talon IS indeed listed as melee, just like a dagger with shares the trait of a range column entry of 10ft, just like i'm suggesting the flying talon was meant to be.
The rope dart is a ranged weapon and not melee because using it in melee would be terribly ineffective and therefore it can only function as a ranged weapon. whereas, like a dagger, the flying talon is good up close OR thrown.
Aaaand finally, i can't check on the meteor hammer because it doesnt appear on the srd table as of this time. (although I can find its individual page) Is it a one or two handed weapon? If its two handed then yay, points to me for it conforms with pathfinder style weapons, if its not then thats a massive blow to my argument.
To be honest, I believe if the table on the srd was for 3.5 content it would show the flying talon as having reach, but the transition to pathfinder (like the spiked chain and similr nerfs) would make it function in a way that conforms with every other pathfinder weapon (thus reflecting its lack of the reach property on the srd), instead of being some grotesque unique little butterfly relic from a bygone rule set.
Ok, I think I have the Flying Talon nailed down now. It's a melee weapon that can be used against adjacent enemies, but also can be used as a 10' reach weapon. Or, in other words, the weapon gives its wielder 10' reach, functionally treating the wielder as if they had 10' natural reach rather than the normal 5'. This is distinct from normal reach weapons where the weapon has a reach.
By the logic of:
the weapon gives its wielder 10' reach
your unarmed strikes (kicks etc) would have a 10ft reach while you were wielding the weapon... and we both know that's not right.
the weapon gives its wielder 10' reachyour unarmed strikes (kicks etc) would have a 10ft reach while you were wielding the weapon... and we both know that's not right.
Wielding doesn't mean holding. Weilding means holding and using. When you are making an unarmed strike you are not, at that moment, wielding a flying talon.
Here are some other similar style weapons, actually from the Pathfinder RPG.
There are differences of course, the biggest one being that the Flying Talon is only a 1 hand weapon.
There are differences of course, the biggest one being that the Flying Talon is only a 1 hand weapon.
That's one of the main distinctions I was making. But as ive explained, thats the tip of the iceberg when it comes to evidence that this weapon is a 3.5 relic never intended to be in pathfinder rules with reach. Hence why it doesnt have the reach property and only mentions the word reach in an oddly worded description, coupled with the fact it doesnt mention throwing range in wording but it clearly has a range number insists to me that its meant to be a melee / throwing weapon in pathfinder rules. (just like daggers and every other light weapon of its kind, i mean its not like its even a one handed weapon, its specifically light one handed, do you think trying to accurately manipulate a blade on the end of a chain without returning it to your hand every time is easy?)
Oh, and since when did wielding not mean holding in the context of weapons (in or outside of pathfinder?)
Outside of pathfinder a man in the street can be wielding a sword, it doesnt mean he's in the motion of cutting someone with it. And as far as i know that logic applies to pathfinder too.
"A man walks into the tavern wielding a bronze longsword" doesnt mean he's hacking at people while he walks in <.<
Wielding doesn't mean holding. Weilding means holding and using. When you are making an unarmed strike you are not, at that moment, wielding a flying talon.
So does that mean that a staff magus only gets their Quarterstaff Defense at the moment they attack and lose it when it's not their turn?
Often the rules DO mean holding and able to attack when it says wield. Not everything uses the defending weapon specific method of wielding.
Often the rules DO mean holding and able to attack when it says wield. Not everything uses the defending weapon specific method of wielding.
Precisely, the definition of wielding isn't attacking, in the context of pathfinder it means being ABLE to make attacks, not attacking. For example the tieflings prehensile tail can hold weapons, but it can't wield them.
Abilities like the brawler's awesome blow specifically say you can deal damage as though hit by "the close weapon she is wielding or an unarmed strike" making the case clear that you dont have to be attacking with the weapon to be "wielding" it.
evidence that this weapon is a 3.5 relic never intended to be in pathfinder rules with reach.
The only evidence required for that is that it was, as I have said repeatedly, it was published in a 3.5 module before the Pathfinder RPG ever existed. It was never, ever, published for the Pathfinder RPG.
That said, when it was published, it was fully intended to allow you to attack targets both 5' and 10' away, and the rules for reach in 3.5 were pretty similar to that of Pathfinder. Your contention that it was just intended to have a range, not give extra reach, doesn't have any merit. Not allowing it in a Pathfinder game would certainly be reasonable though, since it is not part of Pathfinder.
It is, like most 3.5 stuff generally compatible with the Pathfinder RPG.
So does that mean that a staff magus only gets their Quarterstaff Defense at the moment they attack and lose it when it's not their turn?Wielding doesn't mean holding. Weilding means holding and using. When you are making an unarmed strike you are not, at that moment, wielding a flying talon.
Of course not.
For complete clarity I probably should have said that wield means holding and attacking and/or in all respects being ready to attack with the item. That is the English language definition of the term, not a Pathfinder Term of Art.
The Pathfinder term can indeed be a bit complex at times, but one in any event you certainly cannot use properties of a weapon for an attack when you are not attacking with the weapon. In this case, the concept is pretty clear and obvious.
Oh, and since when did wielding not mean holding in the context of weapons (in or outside of pathfinder?)
Outside of pathfinder a man in the street can be wielding a sword, it doesnt mean he's in the motion of cutting someone with it. And as far as i know that logic applies to pathfinder too.
"A man walks into the tavern wielding a bronze longsword" doesnt mean he's hacking at people while he walks in <.<
Actually it does more or less mean that. If you say he is wielding a sword, as opposed to carrying or holding it, it means at the least it is being held as though ready to attack at any time.
See this definition as an example.
If you intend to convey just carrying or holding in a non-threatening manned, wield would be the wrong word to choose.