| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The above FAQ only clarifies attacks made on your turn while using two-weapon fighting.
Would you be able to attack with both armor spikes and the greatsword if you were NOT using two-weapon fighting, splitting up the attacks between your iterative attacks?
If you attacked with a reach weapon, such as a longspear, could you still threaten adjacent spaces with another weapon (such as armor spikes), and could make attacks of opportunity with them, until your next turn?
This is a long one so bear with me.
A) Rules as Written you may make a "regular melee attack (or off-hand attack)" with Spiked Armor. Spiked Armor is classified as a light weapon; which is always "used in one hand" (armor spikes are no exception.)
B) This FAQ http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm#v5748eaic9sk0 states that you may shift your grip as a free action to hold a two-handed weapon one-handed.
C) Rules as Written, "you can perform one or more free actions while taking another action normally". This includes Full-Round Actions (such as making a full attack).
Therefore you may take an AoO with Spiked Armor after attacking with a Longspear (or any other two-handed weapon, regardless of it's reach or lack thereof) if you make the appropriate declaration:
So long as you declare after making attack(s) with a two-handed and/or reach weapon that you are shifting your grip to hold said weapon one-handed, then you now have the off-hand available to attack with Armor Spikes. Thus allowing you to threaten and make attacks of opportunity with Armor Spikes until you shift your grip back to holding the weapon two-handed (as a free action).
Likewise you can attack with either weapon interchangeably by shifting your grip between attacks as outlined above. Technically the FAQ regarding shifting grip as a free action contradicts the older FAQ quoted by the OP (and posted two entries above it). TWF specifically states that to gain the extra attacks you must "wield a second weapon in your off-hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon", which is only unavailable while holding the two-handed weapon in two hands. The newer FAQ allows you to shift your grip multiple times to free your "off-hand" as necessary to make extra attacks with it.
If a GM chooses to enforce both FAQs regardless of the apparent contradiction you may only use either weapon interchangeably when you are not using the two-weapon fighting mechanics.
The above FAQ only clarifies attacks made on your turn while using two-weapon fighting.
Correct.
Would you be able to attack with both armor spikes and the greatsword if you were NOT using two-weapon fighting, splitting up the attacks between your iterative attacks?
Yes.
If you attacked with a reach weapon, such as a longspear, could you still threaten adjacent spaces with another weapon (such as armor spikes), and could make attacks of opportunity with them, until your next turn?
Yup.
That FAQ was only to stop one from benefiting two-handed weapon use + light weapon off-hand while TWF.
Just using iterative attacks one could attack with two-handed weapon, let go with one hand or drop sword entire and do other things like shoot bow (for switch hitting builds), or quickdraw throw dagger, or punch, or don't bother letting go of weapon and kick with unarmed strike or armor spike someone. One just isn't allowed to do that with a two-handed attack with all the two-handed bonuses with two weapon fighting. I believe unchained monk would be the closest thing to actually benefit from such a thing though.
For threatening with AoOs, even if both hands are occupied, you're still threatening with your armor spikes, just as if a monk or anyone with improved unarmed strike would be threatening with unarmed strikes. The TWF restriction specified from the FAQ doesn't impede your AoOs.
You can attack with a two-handed weapon and with armor spikes in the same round. You just can't do it when using two weapon fighting.
So, if you can attack with both when not two weapon fighting, then you must be able to threaten with both when not two weapon fighting.
The explanation given was that in pathfinder you punch with armor spikes to use them, meaning if your hands are full you can't use them
Armor spikes are treated as light weapons for the purpose of threatening adjacent squares. Light weapons require the use of limbs, so you would only be able to make attacks with them if you have a free hand. Thus, wielding a two-handed reach weapon would negate your ability to "wield" (and thus threaten with) armor spikes. This isn't necessarily clear in the rules, but I just discussed it with Jason, and we're both on the same page about the intent.
Since armored spikes aren't a real world thing, thats the explanation we have, even if it's different from 3.5.
Would you be able to attack with both armor spikes and the greatsword if you were NOT using two-weapon fighting, splitting up the attacks between your iterative attacks?
Yes. It is a free (not non) action to shift your grip. So you would go both hands greatswording on attack 1 , release as a free action, Punch someone with the spikes, free action resume your baseball swing grip.
If you attacked with a reach weapon, such as a longspear, could you still threaten adjacent spaces with another weapon (such as armor spikes), and could make attacks of opportunity with them, until your next turn?
It is a free (not non) action to shift your grip, so you can do that on your turn but can't do that in between your turns. you would have to pick which one you wanted to threaten with (probably the longspear, unless you have a wizard trapped in a corner or something)
I think a more accurate precedent would be whether you could use/ get value from a buckler with your 2 handed weapon.
Armor spikes not a real world thing? Some Roman gladiators might have a quibble with that. Uncommon, yes, nonexistent, no.
If you got armor spikes, you probably got armor spikes on knees or elbows or whatever, so one has the free limb to attack with, so don't have to readjust grip on longspear in order to threaten and make AoO. Much like the same case with Improved Unarmed Strike or a natural attack that doesn't involve hands/arms. One simply doesn't have the free hand/limb available for TWF use when also using a two-handed weapon.
Threatening and attacking with an offhand weapon are two different things. That FAQ does not impact on your ability to threaten or your ability to make AoO with armour spikes. It solely prevents you from making extra offhand attacks when 2 weapon fighting.
Melkiador makes the key point, you can attack with armour spikes and a two handed weapon as long as you don't gain any extra attacks beyond those granted by your BAB.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But do I really have to do that "adjust your grip" business even though I can't possibly "grip" my armor spikes?
Anybody who expects you to "adjust your grip" is misapplying the 2 weapon fighting rules into a situation where they simply don't apply.
Anybody who expects you to "adjust your grip" is misapplying the 2 weapon fighting rules into a situation where they simply don't apply.
No, i'm not. I simply have a different idea about how pathifnder expects you to use armor spikes as a weapon, and thats pretty incompatible with holding 5 feet of steel in your hands.
But do I really have to do that "adjust your grip" business even though I can't possibly "grip" my armor spikes?
you need to put your hands into a position where they can freely attack, which they can't really do while holding onto a weapon.
You don't have to "adjust your grip" if attacking with armor spike on a knee or some other limb besides the arm that could be used to attack. As with unarmed strikes with a kick. That limb is "free" to use to attack with. It's just with TWF that "free hands" are unavailable when also using a two-handed weapon.
You don't have to "adjust your grip" if attacking with armor spike on a knee or some other limb besides the arm that could be used to attack. As with unarmed strikes with a kick. That limb is "free" to use to attack with. It's just with TWF that "free hands" are unavailable when also using a two-handed weapon.
That is how it worked in 3.5. Per the quote above that does not seem to be how they were intended to work in pathfinder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You don't have to "adjust your grip" if attacking with armor spike on a knee or some other limb besides the arm that could be used to attack. As with unarmed strikes with a kick. That limb is "free" to use to attack with. It's just with TWF that "free hands" are unavailable when also using a two-handed weapon.That is how it worked in 3.5. Per the quote above that does not seem to be how they were intended to work in pathfinder.
Had to do a bit of digging for that quote source.
Armor spikes are treated as light weapons for the purpose of threatening adjacent squares. Light weapons require the use of limbs, so you would only be able to make attacks with them if you have a free hand. Thus, wielding a two-handed reach weapon would negate your ability to "wield" (and thus threaten with) armor spikes. This isn't necessarily clear in the rules, but I just discussed it with Jason, and we're both on the same page about the intent.
Later in that thread he goes:
The rule hasn't changed. Until there's a change to the Core Rulebook, the PFRPG FAQ, or the Pathfinder Society rules documentation, this is just me posting on the messageboards. If you were playing at my table, that's how I'd rule it, after having a conversation with the game's lead designer and based on my own interpretation. If you have a GM who reads these boards or doesn't, whether she values my suggestions or those of any other participant in the conversation or not, she remains free to adjudicate and interpret the official rules as she sees fit at her own table.
No matter how much people may want "official" rulings on any number of issues, there is no way we can ever cover every rules element in the game. This, as with many other issues, is up to GM interpretation unless Jason or someone else on the design team decides it's a large enough issue that it needs to be errata'd in a future printing of the core rules or clarified in an official FAQ.
THEN Jason Bulhahn joined in with:
- We are currently looking into the whole armor spike/misc non-hand weapons and how they threaten. This was a slightly bigger issue than I first thought when I gave an off the cuff opinion.
- The thing to remember here, that I want to stress, is that generally speaking, the only places where a PFS judge is required to follow rulings is the rulebooks, updates, FAQ posts, and PFS rules documents. Everything else is left to judge discretion at the table. There is no way around this. We cannot ask our judges to be familiar with every ruling or thought from every messageboard post, even if it comes from a staff member.
- For you home game, you don't even have to pay attention to the above sources. Its your game after all.
In another thread, Mark posts:
Since we've instituted the change to what messageboard clarifications are and are not binding in the campaign, I'd prefer this rules issue be directed to the rules team, since any ruling on it in PFS would adhere to the interpretation they decide upon. So I'm not going to comment on it, as it will undoubtedly lead to more confusion. For questions of how the core rules work (and not just how they work in Pathfinder Society games), please request FAQs from Jason, Sean, and Stephen.
Since then we'd only had the one FAQ dealing with armor spikes and it's only related to TWF.
So Mark's quote was made as an opinion backed up by discussion with Jason on his "off the cuff opinion" made at the time, but since then Jason states the situation was more complex than originally realized.
I'm concluding that it isn't yet ruled on if one can wield armor spikes while also wielding two-handed weapon. Until I see evidence to the contrary I'll simply rule with what I see as my own common sense for now and say any free limb will work for armor spikes (or unarmed attacks) and still have hands free for two-handed weapon, while keeping mind the FAQ for TWF purposes.
So Mark's quote was made as an opinion backed up by discussion with Jason on his "off the cuff opinion" made at the time, but since then he states the situation was more complex than originally realized.
Ok, aaaaand?
Given paizo's speed on rules questions like that (i think that quote is old enough to play pathfinder) I think the quote we have is the best we're going to get, and it's all i can go off of really. If we were talking about a real world weapon I could say "no you knee someone with the spikes" but spiked armor is pure fantasy so i DON"T know how you're physically supposed to use it.
Attacking at melee and range at the same time is supposed to be a little harder in pathfinder than it was in 3.5. There's a few ways to do it, but they seem to come at a higher cost than a few gold pieces: Exotic weapons like the dwarven boulder helmet , improved unarmed strike, orc bites and stabby beaks.
Well an unarmed strike is a light weapon also. With the statement of, "Light weapons require the use of limbs, so you would only be able to make attacks with them if you have a free hand" I'd have enforce a player to have a free hand to threaten with unarmed strikes when the character has other free limbs?
Armor spikes is a fantasy item sure, so I don't find it outside the realms of fantasy that it can be used more easily than you're suggesting it is.
I think the quote we have is the best we're going to get, and it's all i can go off of really.
You could go off of the rules maybe...
Because an FAQ in line with that quote would be a stealth rule change, it is not supported by the rules, or by the 2WF FAQ.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You could go off of the rules maybe...
Stop that.
Someone is not cheating, not breaking the rules, or making stuff up every.single. time they come to a disagreement with you over a gray area.
Enough.
Try again and this time leave out the accusations.
How 'bout we all just go with "Agree to Disagree" and "Expect Table Variance" for now til it ever gets clarified, if ever?
Well an unarmed strike is a light weapon also. With the statement of, "Light weapons require the use of limbs, so you would only be able to make attacks with them if you have a free hand" I'd have enforce a player to have a free hand to threaten with unarmed strikes when the character has other free limbs?
Because we know how kicks work. (all too well in my case...still have the bumps) We don't know how armored spikes work.
Armor spikes is a fantasy item sure, so I don't find it outside the realms of fantasy that it can be used more easily than you're suggesting it is.
I would not either. But it's apparently not what's intended.
There's also game balance to consider. Paizo seems to have gone out of its way to make threatening at melee and at ranged cost you something: a feat, an exotic weapon, etc. All much heavier investments than a few gold for the KISS look.
How 'bout we all just go with "Agree to Disagree" and "Expect Table Variance" for now til it ever gets clarified, if ever?
I think it's important to lay out why the disagreement is there so people know how they can be discussed and resolved.
The only fair way to reach a rules decision is to weigh the evidence for and against a position. All too often people try to circumvent that so that their side "wins" by leveling accusations of cheating, munchkinism, or setting the goalposts so that the conversation is a foregone conclusion like "where is your proof that i'm wrong" , or assuming that the rules are perfect so that once an argument can be made for your side, there's absolutely no way you can possibly be wrong no matter how good the argument is for the other side.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two-Weapon Fighting: If you use this on your turn to attack with two weapons, do you also take that penalty on attacks of opportunity made before the start of your next turn?
No. The penalties end as soon as you have completed the full-attack action that allowed you to attack with both weapons. Any attacks of opportunity you make are at your normal attack bonus.
Generally speaking, penalties on attacks made during your turn do not carry over to attacks of opportunity unless they specifically state otherwise (such as the penalty from using Power Attack or Combat Expertise).
This answer originally appeared in the 9/25/12 Paizo blog.
While the FAQ above covers TWF penalties rather than allowed actions, I'd argue that the same logic applies.
You cannot attack with a two-handed weapon and an off-hand weapon on your turn for the simple reason that you do not have enough hands (unless playing a character with 3+). However, once your turn is over that is irrelevant. Just as the attack penalties incurred on your turn cease to matter (unless actually stated to continue), so too do the restrictions on which attacks you can make. You can then make your AoO, if one is provoked, with any weapon which threatens.
Two-Weapon Fighting: If you use this on your turn to attack with two weapons, do you also take that penalty on attacks of opportunity made before the start of your next turn?
No. The penalties end as soon as you have completed the full-attack action that allowed you to attack with both weapons. Any attacks of opportunity you make are at your normal attack bonus.
Generally speaking, penalties on attacks made during your turn do not carry over to attacks of opportunity unless they specifically state otherwise (such as the penalty from using Power Attack or Combat Expertise).
This answer originally appeared in the 9/25/12 Paizo blog.While the FAQ above covers TWF penalties rather than allowed actions, I'd argue that the same logic applies.
You cannot attack with a two-handed weapon and an off-hand weapon on your turn for the simple reason that you do not have enough hands (unless playing a character with 3+). However, once your turn is over that is irrelevant. Just as the attack penalties incurred on your turn cease to matter (unless actually stated to continue), so too do the restrictions on which attacks you can make. You can then make your AoO, if one is provoked, with any weapon which threatens.
Unless you are a Monk:
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.Even if Hands are Full. Even if. Hands Full.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hands full. Not hands in use.
Two-Weapon Fighting: If you use this on your turn to attack with two weapons, do you also take that penalty on attacks of opportunity made before the start of your next turn?
No. The penalties end as soon as you have completed the full-attack action that allowed you to attack with both weapons. Any attacks of opportunity you make are at your normal attack bonus.
Generally speaking, penalties on attacks made during your turn do not carry over to attacks of opportunity unless they specifically state otherwise (such as the penalty from using Power Attack or Combat Expertise).
This answer originally appeared in the 9/25/12 Paizo blog.While the FAQ above covers TWF penalties rather than allowed actions, I'd argue that the same logic applies.
You cannot attack with a two-handed weapon and an off-hand weapon on your turn for the simple reason that you do not have enough hands (unless playing a character with 3+). However, once your turn is over that is irrelevant. Just as the attack penalties incurred on your turn cease to matter (unless actually stated to continue), so too do the restrictions on which attacks you can make. You can then make your AoO, if one is provoked, with any weapon which threatens.
That is the way I approach this issue.
|
|
I have a character that can bite. I can make an AoO with that bite at anytime someone provokes it, no matter what I am wielding.
The problem with Armor Spikes is the fact that it can't be used as an extra attack when TWF. My bite is a Natural attack that can be done if I wanted, at a -5 when using Manufactured weapons.
But after my turn is over, and AoO's are provoked, any threatening weapon can be used to hit the provoker no matter how it is wielded or worn. I can Bite, you can use your Armor Spikes.
Uh Oh wields a whip most of the time, with a wand in the other hand, so being able to AoO with a Bite is very important to me.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unless you are a Monk:
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.Even if Hands are Full. Even if. Hands Full.
It is true that monks, unlike most other characters, can make unarmed attacks while their hands are full. However, that is completely irrelevant to the question at hand;
Any character, not just a monk, can make an attack with armor spikes on their turn while their hands are full... provided they haven't otherwise attacked.
No character, including a monk, can make an attack with armor spikes on their turn if they have already used all of their hands to attack (e.g. with a two-handed weapon or two-weapon fighting).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So, legs are limbs. If you require limbs for armor spikes, legs should suffice. Likewise for boot blades. I don't think anyone's really going to argue you need to be holding those in hand. And I don't think we should clutch too tightly to limbs even, because that makes the dwarven boulder helmet very weird.
Mark and Jason have basically walked back their original opinion to "we're not so sure". So we have to use our own good sense.
I think the main thing to understand really is that we need to keep separate the concept of actual hands and metaphorical hands of effort. 2H weapon attacks require both metaphorical hands on the weapon to get the extra damage, and 2WF requires you to distribute them to gain the extra attacks.
All of that has a lot of bearing on how you do your full attack, and pretty much nothing on whether you can make attacks of opportunity, because the amount of actions you're getting there isn't in question. The only questions is:
Can you attack the threatened space, with whatever weapons you have available right now?
Since you can kick someone with your boot blade, headbut them with your boulder helmet, bite them with your bite attack, hipster them with your barbazu beard, or stab them with your 80s power (metal) shoulders, all without taking your hands off your longspear, yes, you can.
With this much discussion, I would have thought more people would have FAQ'd the OP by now. I guess most are worried what the official response might end up being?
With this much discussion, I would have thought more people would have FAQ'd the OP by now. I guess most are worried what the official response might end up being?
I don't see anyone saying Yes to the original question, so i'm not sure what to FAQ. WHY people answer "No" varies though, which has implications for other questions you're not directly asking, like can i threaten with a longspear and armored spikes at the same time. (another often overloosed close/far threatened combo would be a lance and shield)