It's more a matter of the Improved/Greater Two-Weapon Fighting feats, which grant you second and third offhand attacks, with iterative attack-style penalties.
|
I searched for threads on Main Hand/Off Hand attack order yesterday. Basically, there's a lot of disagreement about whether or not you have to take attacks in descending attack bonus order Meaning you would have to go Main Hand Primary/Off Hand Primary/Main Hand Iterative/Off Hand Iterative. I don't know if that is actually the case or not, but that's where this line of thinking comes from.
Personally, that's how I always did my TWF melee attack sequences,. with any haste or bonus (from Ki in that case) attacks last. It never occurred to me to do it differently. With guns, though, there's a definite incentive to go Main Hand Primary/Main Hand Iterative/Off Hand Primary/Off Hand Iterative if it's allowed. And a lot of people seem to think it is allowed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So instead of juggling two guns, you're taking turns with them, emptying the barrels of the first gun as appropriate to your BAB, doing glove tricks to switch pistols, and emptying barrels of the second gun as appropriate to your feats in the TWF tree.
So instead of firing both weapons guns akimbo at the target simultaneously, you are firing one, taking a brief pause, then firing the other, which not only seems like it would take more time, it begs the question on why you aren't just using the first gun over again.
Scenario 1: Fire a gun three times in the main hand, pause to do glove tricks, fire a different gun twice with the offhand.
Scenario 2: Fire a gun three times in the main hand, pause to switch which hand you're holding the gun with, fire that same gun twice with the offhand.
Scenario 3: Fire a gun three times in the main hand, pause to do nothing in particular, fire that same gun twice, but these shots count as offhand because you have two offhand attacks and there's a FAQ that says you can decide which hand is your main one on a per-attack basis.
I'd like to know why the first scenario, the one you propose, is legal, and why the other two are not. If it is not a matter of how many attacks you can fit into six seconds, then what is keeping them from the other scenarios?
(EDIT: clarifications)
|
|
For Scenario 2 and 3, I don't know for sure where it is, but I'm willing to guess it's stated or implied somewhere that Two-Weapon Fighting must be with two different weapons (or a double weapon).
EDIT: Like in the first sentence under Two-Weapon Fighting in the Combat section: "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand..."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...forgive me for saying, but I get the feeling this oversteps the "reasonable amount of free actions" by quite a bit.
That's totally fine. I don't think anyone is refuting that, that is a going to be considered a bit excessive for many GMs.
But aside from that, I'm not seeing anything yet that specifically prohibits what my player is doing.
So instead of firing both weapons guns akimbo at the target simultaneously, you are firing one, taking a brief pause, then firing the other, which not only seems like it would take more time, it begs the question on why you aren't just using the first gun over again.
Not so much a problem as it is an unusual side-effect of using an abstract turn-based system. Not every rule is going to make total sense when you think that deeply on it.
|
|
That's why I posted an overly complicated sequence upthread that does not involve switching hands. You can still get a couple of rounds off. More if you have Quickdraw and extra pepperboxes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why can't you switch both guns from one hand to the other? Pretty sure it can be done. It likely wouldn't be elegant, but it's certainly possible.
I already posted why you can't do that. The rules explicitly say that with two weapon fighting, you have to attack with the offhand weapon for the extra attacks.
You need two weapons for two weapon fighting.
If he attacks with both weapons, then how does he not have two weapons???
|
|
I dunno man. That's prettt much juggling and that's decidedly not a class feature.
This does remind me that at one point I was wondering if you could make a Juggler Bard/Gunslinger TWFing build.
Combat Juggling (Ex)
At 2nd level, a juggler can hold and wield (in other words, “juggle”) up to three items or weapons in his hands. The juggler must be able to hold and wield an object in one hand in order to juggle it.
This ability doesn't grant the juggler additional attacks, though it does allow him to use different weapons as part of a full attack. As long as he is juggling fewer than three objects, the juggler is considered to have a free hand (for the purposes of drawing a weapon, using somatic components, using Deflect Arrows, and so on).
So a 2nd level Juggler Bard can be wielding two weapons and is still considered to have a free hand.
Sorry, went off topic a little.
And that very much is a way to dual wield two pistols without needing to mess with an absurd amount of free actions. It would look utterly bizarre, but it works without needing to worry where you're getting the free hand from!
The gloves of storing provide a free hand, as a free action.You can't imagine a heroic gunslinger spinning the barrel along one arm while firing at the same time?
I can. I could even imagine a feat for it. However that isn't the issue, because an arm isn't a free hand.
If you wanted a feat to this, it's pretty reasonable. But currently there isn't a feat for it and that still doesn't address the issue of needing a hand free as per the firearm requirements for this weapon.
and that is when the free actions get ridiculous as you can only have one glove of storing per RAW resulting in a lot of gun juggling.
each iterative becomes "shoot, shoot, store, spin, retrieve, juggle (x2), store, spin, retrieve." that's 8 free actions per iterative attack.
The mental image from that is so awesome though - just imagine how fast his hands would be moving
This just in: firearms are poorly supported.
This just in: firearms are poorly supported.
This is a problem with crossbowmen too you know.
As I understand it, it's not the free actions that keep the Glove of Storing from giving you full iteratives with both hands, it's the swapping items between hands. That's not covered or allowed by any rule I know.
There are magic items that do allow full TWF with pistols. A Monkey Belt would be one. There's no restriction there on which item you can grab with the tail.
Or you can just take gun twirling and ignore the whole problem.
I'm certain game developers have commented on this in some capacity or another, though I haven't been able to find a source yet.
EDIT: Found a few...
...switching items from one hand to another is a free action...
Switching a held object from one hand to the other doesn't require an action...
I found still more developer posts (from other developers) about switching hands, but these appear to be the only two that declare what action it is. Shame they are somewhat contradictory...
The mental image from that is so awesome though - just imagine how fast his hands would be moving
each iterative becomes "shoot, shoot, store, spin, retrieve, juggle (x2), store, spin, retrieve." that's 8 free actions per iterative attack.
for me personally, i'd rather just ignore the rules about the gloves and give him two.
but without ignoring rules he could become a juggler bard, or get a prehensile tail, or get a third arm...
|
|
I dunno man. That's prettt much juggling and that's decidedly not a class feature.This does remind me that at one point I was wondering if you could make a Juggler Bard/Gunslinger TWFing build.
Combat Juggling (Ex)
At 2nd level, a juggler can hold and wield (in other words, “juggle”) up to three items or weapons in his hands. The juggler must be able to hold and wield an object in one hand in order to juggle it.
This ability doesn't grant the juggler additional attacks, though it does allow him to use different weapons as part of a full attack. As long as he is juggling fewer than three objects, the juggler is considered to have a free hand (for the purposes of drawing a weapon, using somatic components, using Deflect Arrows, and so on).
So a 2nd level Juggler Bard can be wielding two weapons and is still considered to have a free hand.
Sorry, went off topic a little.
This is exactly what I was going to suggest. It's my go-to class for three-handing.
The best part is, though you need two levels of it those levels are packed with great stuff including deflect arrows(for fighting against other gunslingers!), evasion, bardic performance and wand usage with a couple spell slots.
|
|
This is exactly what I was going to suggest. It's my go-to class for three-handing.
The best part is, though you need two levels of it those levels are packed with great stuff including deflect arrows(for fighting against other gunslingers!), evasion, bardic performance and wand usage with a couple spell slots.
Pistolero seems logical, though as much fun as it would be to create a "Jugglero," I keep wondering if Mysterious Stranger might be better to switch grit to Cha-based and get Cha-damage earlier.
I think if you're going Bard dip for 2 levels, then Pistolero makes more sense, and TWF makes more sense.
If you're dipping a level of Gunslinger, then taking the rest Bard, Mysterious Stranger seems to be the better option, concentrating on CHA more equally to DEX. Losing Quick Clear is rough, but Bards have jury-rig on their spell list.
For the record, the TWF FAQ (not the Armor Spikes one, though that helps reinforce the other FAQ) implies that you need to be able to properly attack with your chosen weapons at every point in your TWF action.
This means you can't, for example, have a Bow out, complete one set of iteratives, use your Gloves of Storing to switch Bows out, and then do your other set, because those two hands were already being used to perform attacks with the other Bow at the time you took the TWF action. This is evidenced by the TWF FAQ stating that you must draw out (or be ready to attack with) your chosen weapons before taking the TWF action in order to actually take the TWF action. At no point are you able to fire both bows simultaneously, regardless of whatever action finagling you attempt.
The same is true for any ranged weapon that requires more than one hand to load, and quite frankly, fails upon itself via the "Hands" debacle (as evidenced by the Armor Spikes FAQ).
So I'll agree with you RD; the Gunslinger isn't supposed to be able to do that, according to FAQ precedents.
I am pretty sure any hand you use to attack with in a round is not also a "free hand" during that same round.
While I think two pepperboxes definitely could be fired once with each hand, those two hands would not be free to reload until the following round.
Rules wise I would have to rule with the no crowd.
However if you wanted to house rule it you could say the guy just uses his thumb on one hand to rotate the barrel on the other.
In reality though I think a guy could probably empty one pepperbox drop it and draw/empty a second, faster then he could two at the same time with alternating shots.
For the record, the TWF FAQ (not the Armor Spikes one, though that helps reinforce the other FAQ) implies that you need to be able to properly attack with your chosen weapons at every point in your TWF action.
This means you can't, for example, have a Bow out, complete one set of iteratives, use your Gloves of Storing to switch Bows out, and then do your other set, because those two hands were already being used to perform attacks with the other Bow at the time you took the TWF action. This is evidenced by the TWF FAQ stating that you must draw out (or be ready to attack with) your chosen weapons before taking the TWF action in order to actually take the TWF action. At no point are you able to fire both bows simultaneously, regardless of whatever action finagling you attempt.
The same is true for any ranged weapon that requires more than one hand to load, and quite frankly, fails upon itself via the "Hands" debacle (as evidenced by the Armor Spikes FAQ).
So I'll agree with you RD; the Gunslinger isn't supposed to be able to do that, according to FAQ precedents.
I'm not clear what you think that means for pistols.
Can you not TWF at all with them? Or at least not reload or turn the barrel since you need a free hand to do so and however you get that free hand, you're no longer able to properly attack with both weapons at once?
All I'm saying is that if you do, you can only get one attack, presuming they're loaded. Otherwise, you'd have to take hands off of your one gun to reload the other, which the Armor Spikes FAQ wouldn't allow.
I don't think that's true at all. You can declare two weapon fighting while wielding one weapon, take all of your iteratives, then free action quickdraw an offhand weapon for your offhand attack.
There's nothing in the rules that say otherwise, and the two weapon fighting rules say nothing about keeping a weapon in your offhand the entire round. The armor spikes FAQ only says that you can't get 'more hands of effort for attacks' than you have available. If you're using two hands to attack with a greatsword, you can't use a 'hand' to attack with armor spikes. Neither the scenario I just presented, nor TWF with pistols violates that FAQ.
FAQs say what they say. You are extrapolating to a lot of scenarios that just don't fit the armor spikes FAQ.
I will admit that I was incorrect on the normal TWF FAQ, but that's because I misremembered what it said, and put more restriction on it than I gave credit for. To that end, I apologize.
As for the Armor Spikes, I do not, as that's conclusive proof. Let's re-read it for the Nth time and see why that is:
Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon?
No.
Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks.
If your hand is being occupied with a form of attack, or to help execute a form of attack, with a weapon, then you can't use it to perform another manner of attack. Case in point, the FAQ specifically references being unable to use a Gauntlet to attack with because that same hand is being used to perform attacks with a two-handed weapon, which is for the entire course of the theoretical TWF action.
There's also the factor of Natural Weapons and Manufactured Weapons being used in conjunction, if your argument is "Hey, why can't I just make my iterative attacks with my one-handed weapon, attack with one claw, switch my one-handed weapon to my other hand, and attack with that claw too?" Because that's basically what you're saying can, and should, happen.
That FAQ is referring to the use of a two-handed weapon. We are not. We are discussing one-handed weapons. Ergo, that FAQ does not apply here at all.
It's a one handed weapon that requires two hands to completly operate. So the FAQ may apply.
Using hands for non-attacking free actions does not invalidate using them for attacking, and the armor spikes FAQ doesn't apply.
While this is true as written, I think it doesn't touch what the core concern here is.
Yes, you can use the hand for something other than attacking. The most common use for the hand in such a scenario is holding onto whatever weapon it is you are attacking with.
The definition of a free hand, on the other time, while generally up for debate, is mentioned in the core rulebook as one that isn't holding anything, and defined by the English language as one that is not currently occupied with doing something else.
To work with the proposed scenario that your hands are both free enough to reload the other hand's pistol, and yet also wielding the pistol, requires one of two possibilities.
Possibility 1: With superhuman levels of alacrity, you are able to move your hands fast enough to cause your pistols to vanish and reappear every second with your magic gloves, while your hands are simultaneously firing their appropriate pistol and reloading the pistol in the other hand in a virtual blur of movement.
Possibility 2: You live in a world where both your allies and enemies are inherently aware, not only of the turn based nature of the universe, but also that they cannot take their turns until you are finished with yours, so you can take your time in handling your "allocated" actions of the turn, so long as you follow the letter of the law.
The first possibility leads to the initial example in my original post, where you are performing, at minimum, three free actions per shot fired.
The second possibly results in my second example, where you fire one gun, take a moment to switch guns, then fire the other one, because your turn isn't over until your full-round action is complete.
If you can find a GM that is willing to work with either of these possibilities, then more power to you. But I, and I feel most other GMs in this thread, would have had an issue with this scenario halfway along it being explained to them, especially as it seems designed more for cheesing the system than it does making for a robust roleplaying experience.
If your hand is being occupied with a form of attack, or to help execute a form of attack, with a weapon, then you can't use it to perform another manner of attack. Case in point, the FAQ specifically references being unable to use a Gauntlet to attack with because that same hand is being used to perform attacks with a two-handed weapon, which is for the entire course of the theoretical TWF action.
Yes. And this is 100% irrelevant to the current topic because you aren't using 'both hands' to attack. You are using 1 hand to attack, and 1 hand to free action reload. Just like if you use a free action to quickdraw, you can still use that hand to attack with the weapon you drew.
Using hands for non-attacking free actions does not invalidate using them for attacking, and the armor spikes FAQ doesn't apply.
When you are attacking with a two-handed weapon, BOTH hands are used to attack, which is why you get 1.5x STR. That's why you can't use one of those hands to execute another attack via TWF.
In fact, you are. If you were only using one hand to attack, you would only ever get one attack from the pre-loaded gun, because then it's out of ammo and needs to be reloaded, which means your other hand being used to reload it is, in fact, being used to help perform attacks; or to be more precise, more than one attack. It's exactly the same as trying to attack with a bow and arrow, or a crossbow and bolt, you're using one hand to hold the weapon, and the other to load the ammunition into the weapon. This is no different.
So quite frankly, you're telling me that I can TWF with Bows and Crossbows to get more than two attacks. Which is patently absurd. Last I checked, in order to TWF with Bows, much less Crossbows, you need a specific archetype or ability to do so. After all, if we're going to play the "It only does what it says it does" card, then let's make it a two-player game.
And again, if the ONLY reason TWF with Armor Spikes is disallowed because of the unwritten rule, then why would it bother to mention the interactions of performing a Gauntlet attack as an example of something that doesn't work, for a reason completely separate from the unwritten rule?
Are we suggesting now that when using two weapons to make two weapon attacks that you aren't using both hands to attack in a round?
I feel like that's where we are at. Is it?
Pretty much. Evidently, two hands both independently busy aiming and firing guns at enemies are not so busy that they cannot also reload each other at the exact same time.