There are no explicit rules on the matter. The GM just has to rule accordingly. Personally I'd go with "main hand at 1.5x str, off-hand at 1.0x str", with normal penalties for using an off-hand weapon that isn't light.
Steadfast Slayer, on the other hand, is very clear. The off-hand attack is being made with a two-handed weapon, therefor the feat works here.
Aside from an archetype that lets Kasatha wield two bows, I'm not sure one can actually wield 2 two-handed weapons.
My understanding of game mechanics is always that you have 1 primary hand, and all others are off-hands. Two-handed weapons require a primary hand, and so you cannot use a two-handed weapon in 2 off-hands. That is my understanding of the rules.
That said, Kasatha are the only race I know of capable of doing this and it's not really made clear anywhere in the rules simply because it's not really expected to happen.
xill are capable to duelweilding 2nd weapons and they dont take any twf penalties for doing so
Xill can wield 4 weapons without penalty, this doesn't mean they can wield more than 1 two-handed weapon.
Xill also aren't a playable race, unless I missed that someplace.
Whether or not they're a playable race, monsters still follow the general rules. If a monster stat block is shown to be dual-wielding two-handed weapons and doesn't have a specific ability to make it possible, that is evidence that the rules permit it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
just look at the xill stat block it has them duelweilding bows(which are 2h weapons)
Actually bows are ranged weapons which require 2 hands to use. Not Two Handed Weapons. The difference in pathfinder terms is important since they are handled very differently.
For example bows do NOT get 1.5 strength to damage. 2 handed weapons do.
2 handed weapons are also melee weapons. Bows are ranged.
In any case I bet this will get cleared up when Starfinder launches given that tha Kasatha will be a core race there and this exact issue has been seen by the dev's and acknowledged in that thread.
But as it stands now, there are no rules for using a 2 handed weapon in offhands nor are there any penalties in the rules for such in either the multi weapon or two weapon fighting rules which only address the use of light and one handed weapons simultaneously.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Two-handed weapons require a primary hand, and so you cannot use a two-handed weapon in 2 off-hands.
Nothing states you two-handed weapons need a primary hand, only that you need two hands.
Supporting using a two-handed weapon with two off hands
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Supporting using a two-handed weapon with two off hands
** spoiler omitted **
Adventure/Module writers are notorious for not understanding the rules exactly. If anything its probably evidence otherwise.
The 2WF rules do NOT only address penalties for 1h/Light combo in 2WF.
They give basic penalties and say how they are lessened if off-hand is Light.
If you are willing to suffer heavy penalty, it doesn't matter for that purpose if off-hand is 1H or 2H.
Designation of Main/Off-hand seems arbitrary, even holding a 1H and Light Weapon you could CHOOSE to designate Light Weapon as Main Hand
although that means you suffer higher attack penalty because Off-Hand is now 1H not Light.
(but who knows, perhaps there is some combination of circumstances that would make that preferable)
The off-hand damage rule does say "you add ONLY 1/2 your Strength bonus" which I understand as meaning any 2H modifier doesn't apply, the 1/2 is the only STR-related bonus you can use. (I would extend that even against any auxiliary 2H STR bonus such as thru archetype)
I believe Power Attack should also apply using ONLY the stat re: off-hand attack, although it doesn't have "only" language, the over-all grammar suggests two mutually exclusive modes that don't stack.
I believe Paizo did rule against being able to make off-hand 2WF attack in addition to 2H weapon used as main-hand attack, but since that didn't seem to have a solid basis in RAW, I can't be sure of the outcome if you are trying to use 2H weapon as off-hand attack only (at higher penalty and without 2H STR dmg bonus, which I believe was part of the rationale against allowing the other combo).
The claim bows are not 2H weapons is silly. They use 2 hands.
There is no explicitly defined category of "2H weapons" in the first place, never mind one that excludes bows.
The Equipment chapter has "2H MELEE WEAPON" category that excludes bows, but nobody claims bows are melee weapon.
The fact bows have their own rule re: STR damage also doesn't mean they aren't 2H weapons,
it just means they are excepted from using the normal rules for 2H STR damage.
Leaving us to treat the phrase "2H weapon" naturalistically as "weapons that require 2 hands to use". Which includes bows.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The claim bows are not 2H weapons is silly. They use 2 hands.
There is no explicitly defined category of "2H weapons" in the first place, never mind one that excludes bows.
The Equipment chapter has "2H MELEE WEAPON" category that excludes bows, but nobody claims bows are melee weapon.
"Two-handed weapons" is generally used to mean "two-handed melee weapons". Otherwise an ability like this would apply to archery:
Overhand Chop (Ex)
At 3rd level, when a two-handed fighter makes a single attack (with the attack action or a charge) with a two-handed weapon, he adds double his Strength bonus on damage rolls.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I bolded the part of 2WF rules that discusses the rules for 1H weapons:
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.Table: Two-weapon Fighting Penalties summarizes the interaction of all these factors.
Double Weapons: You can use a double weapon to make an extra attack with the off-hand end of the weapon as if you were fighting with two weapons. The penalties apply as if the off-hand end of the weapon was a light weapon.
Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon.
Table: Two-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal penalties –6 –10
Off-hand weapon is light –4 –8
Two-Weapon Fighting feat –4 –4
Off-hand weapon is light and Two-Weapon Fighting feat –2 –2
;-)
Like I said, Paizo previously ruled out 2Hander Mainhand + (?) Offhand 2WF without solid RAW basis, so it's certainly possible they could rule against this... Although that isn't necessarily clear, if using a 2Hander as Offhand means giving up the STR damage boost, which I believe was used to justify ruling against the other usage. -4/-4 penalties make this "style" sub-optimal for the most part, although it could be under certain circumstances (e.g. big attack bonuses) so it's reasonable to rule against it just to prevent corner case shenanigans. The 2WF rules actually mentioning 1H weapons is not one of the reasons to rule against this, however.
I would think the fact that there are rules for using light weapons in your off-hand, and rules for using one-handed weapons in your off-hand, but no rules at all about using two-handed weapons in your off-hand would suggest that you're not supposed to use two-handed weapons in your off-hand.
That's mainly because most player characters do not have more than two hands, and Paizo has not ruled every situation.
Things get weird in many cases when extra limbs are added. To wield a Two-Handed weapon you require two hands, rules do not say one of those must be the "main hand"...
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.
... so this should allow a creature with enough arms to wield several two-handed weapons no matter she does it with her "main hand + offhand", or with "two offhands".
Still... Since creatures only have a single main hand (for manufactured weapon purposes), you can safely assume only the 2H-Weapon worn with her main hand will be her main weapon, with all others being off hand weapons.
Also, the RAW rule that limits STR damage bonus with offhand weapons to 1/2 STR would apply, even if you're wielding a 2H-weapon.
Off-Hand Weapon: When you deal damage with a weapon in your off hand, you add only 1/2 your Strength bonus. If you have a Strength penalty, the entire penalty applies.
The claim bows are not 2H weapons is silly. They use 2 hands.
There is no explicitly defined category of "2H weapons" in the first place, never mind one that excludes bows.
All the weapon tables in the game list 2 handed weapons separately from ranged weapons. No matter how many hands the ranged weapons require their game rule category is ranged, not 2 handed.
As well as Matthew Downie illustrated, if all bows were two handed weapons then a ton of feats would be interacting with them in seriously odd ways.
For the Pathfinder game, the 2 handed weapon definition means those on the 2 handed weapon chart and those are melee weapons.
Nowhere in the game rules do they ever refer to bows, or how bows interact with the game, as two handed weapons. They just note that bows require 2 hands to use and that was the differentiation I was noting.
Or do you truly think that the 2 handed weapon fighter archetype should get all it's bonuses with any bow that needs 2 hands to use? After all it is made to enhanced 2 handed weapons?
The claim bows are not 2H weapons is silly. They use 2 hands.
There is no explicitly defined category of "2H weapons" in the first place, never mind one that excludes bows.
The Equipment chapter has "2H MELEE WEAPON" category that excludes bows, but nobody claims bows are melee weapon.
The fact bows have their own rule re: STR damage also doesn't mean they aren't 2H weapons,
it just means they are excepted from using the normal rules for 2H STR damage.
Leaving us to treat the phrase "2H weapon" naturalistically as "weapons that require 2 hands to use". Which...
Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
There is no verbage saying that "it indicates where a ranged weapon.....
Also there is no "two handed weapon" category. There are is a "Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons" heading.
Then they go into the different melee types such as two handed, one-handed and light without using the word "melee because they figured the reader would be able to notice the heading and just apply the proper weapon type, and then using it in the description of each subcategory should be enough.
What we don't have is a ranged or general "two handed" category.
Do you really feel like they had to repeat the word "melee" when they went and broke the rules down for each subcategory of melee weapon in order to exclude it from the range weapon category?
Since there is no verbage saying that they can be ranged weapons that means there is no rule support for it. and the rules tend to tell you how things do work, not how they don't work because the list would be endless.
If you go with "but the rules don't say I can't" there are a lot of silly things that happen such as people being able to change direction midjump and go somewhere at 90 degree angles.
Do you REALLY think bows are intended to be 2-handed weapons or are you just playing devil's advocate?
Alchemists can grow extra arms, which grant no extra attacks but don't prevent dual wielding greatswords.
By strict reading a second two-handed weapon is impossible when dual-wielding:
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
It's off hand, singular.
Multiweapon fighting is a different beast:
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)
(...)
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
You could argue that it refers to the same section of the CRB, hence the singular of 'off hand' applies. But it's not a clear case in my opinion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You have to remember that some hands are metaphorical hands.
For example, you can't two-weapon fight with a two-handed (melee) weapon and armor spikes, because your main weapon uses two metaphorical 'hands' of effort.
I guess you can probably two-handed-two-weapon fight if you have four metaphorical 'hands' as well as four actual hands.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
If you use a two hand weapon you use two arms.
The vestigial arm FAQ was explained in depth that it doesn't give you additional arms for attacks, just options.
Attacking with a two hand weapon uses all 2 of your arms, which doesn't afford you to use your additional arms for attacks.
Edit: you keep posting the same FAQ. Maybe we are miss communicating.
If you are saying an 8th level with BAB+6 can make a two hand weapon attack with one weapon and a two hand weapon attack at -5 with a second two hand weapon in two other arms? Sure you can do that.
You can't make two attacks with two weapons because you don't have 4 metaphysical hands.
Dual wield generally means two weapon fighting. If you are holding two but not dual weilding them, you are fine.
If I'm playing a Kasatha, I'm sure as h@ll going to want a four-handed sword to wield.
<g>
Seriously, and as noted above, there are no existing rules to manage a four-handed fighter dual-wielding two two-handed swords. Sure, you've got critters with multiple hands wielding multiple one-handed weapons (using multi-attack, IIRC) but nobody really stopped to think about the dual greatsword question.
So the only answer right now is to move beyond RAW and make a reasonably acceptable houserule covering this fringe situation.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I would think the fact that there are rules for using light weapons in your off-hand, and rules for using one-handed weapons in your off-hand, but no rules at all about using two-handed weapons in your off-hand would suggest that you're not supposed to use two-handed weapons in your off-hand.
What it suggests, and what the developers have repeatedly affirmed, is that the rules were written with the assumption of standard human physiology.
Kasatha have one main hand and three off hands.
A two handed weapon requires one main hand and one off hand.
So dual weilding is out without a race or class feature like the bow nomad for two long swords.
Where in the RAW does it specify one main hand and one off-hand is required to wield a two-handed weapon?
Please provide a link.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Where in the RAW does it specify one main hand and one off-hand is required to wield a two-handed weapon?
Please provide a link.
- One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand
- Light: Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand
- Two Weapon Rend Feat: If you hit an opponent with both your primary hand and your off-hand weapon
- Two Weapon Fighting Feat: The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6.
- Kasatha race: Multi-Armed (Ex) A kasatha has four arms. One hand is considered its primary hand; all others are considered off hands.
Two hands says:
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two- handed melee weapon effectively.
That combined with the rules are written with biped two armed humanoids in mind, "two hands" by RAW means "one primary and one offhand".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's effectively an unwritten rule. Much like the metaphorical hands of effort.
Which of course is much maligned, but was a base assumption the devs made that only with great wailing and gnashing of teeth did we finally get it in wririntg that made it "official".
"Two-handed weapons" is generally used to mean "two-handed melee weapons". Otherwise an ability like [Overhand Chop] would apply to archeryAuthor of said rule wrote:
I'd also probably let it apply to one-handed weapons wielded in two hands, like a battleaxe or longsword).
Which indicates he doesn't truly consider "2H Weapon" to be actual weapon category, rather defaulting to 'weapon wielded in two hands'. I doubt they intend Lances to be used with Overhand Chop when wielded 1H, despite being "2H Melee Weapon" by category, again indicating "2H Weapon" is function of wielding rather than category of weapon per se. Unlike 2HFighter where multiple factors indicate melee focus, we already know 2WF is intended to work with ranged attacks.
As for intention, I've repeatedly brought up Paizo's original ruling re: 2H+2WF and noted and respected the ruling going beyond strict RAW. As I explained, AFAIK that ruling was premised on "total STR dmg bonus should = max 1.5x STR" (barring explicit abilities), so using 2H as Off-Hand (with only 0.5 STR dmg) doesn't conflict with the previously expressed ruling, and I haven't seen anybody make game design justification why it shouldn't be allowed - As far as I know, I'm the only one in the thread who HAS ventured such a reason to disallow it. That I do so while being honest about what RAW says/doesn't say I guess offends the sensibilities of some.
Where in the RAW does it specify one main hand and one off-hand is required to wield a two-handed weapon?
Please provide a link.
- One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand
- Light: Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand
- Two Weapon Rend Feat: If you hit an opponent with both your primary hand and your off-hand weapon
- Two Weapon Fighting Feat: The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6.
- Kasatha race: Multi-Armed (Ex) A kasatha has four arms. One hand is considered its primary hand; all others are considered off hands.
Two hands says:
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two- handed melee weapon effectively.That combined with the rules are written with biped two armed humanoids in mind, "two hands" by RAW means "one primary and one offhand".
None of which address the issue of wielding a two-handed weapon with two off-hands. Only the kasatha even addresses the possibility of a character possessing more than one off-hand, and that provides no guidance on what may or may not be done with additional off-hands.
The issue is not discussed in the rules for the very simple reason that the rules are written for characters with a normal human's body structure.
What we do know is that a creature with more than one off-hand can wield weapons in all of its off-hands. How those weapons are wielded is not defined.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Only the kasatha even addresses the possibility of a character possessing more than one off-hand, and that provides no guidance on what may or may not be done with additional off-hands.
Indirectly via the Normad archetype it does.
If you could wield two greatswords then you could two longbows without a class feature enabling two longbows. Ergo, you can't wield two greatswords.
Indirectly via the Normad archetype it does.
If you could wield two greatswords then you could two longbows without a class feature enabling two longbows. Ergo, you can't wield two greatswords.
The problem with that logic is we have previous examples of class features and feats that do nothing as well.
Only the kasatha even addresses the possibility of a character possessing more than one off-hand, and that provides no guidance on what may or may not be done with additional off-hands.Indirectly via the Normad archetype it does.
If you could wield two greatswords then you could two longbows without a class feature enabling two longbows. Ergo, you can't wield two greatswords.
Kasatha nomads make no mention of the normal condition.
Remember the original Prone Shooter
BenefitBenefit: If you have been prone since the end of your last turn, you can ignore the penalty the prone condition imposes on ranged attack rolls
Without knowledge of the normal condition, we don't know what, if any, benefit Twin Bows is granting. Just as, without knowing the Normal condition for ranged attacks, we would be unable to judge the benefits of the original Prone Shooter feat.
Or, the kasatha nomad ability could just as easily be like the two-handed fighters version of Weapon Training. Placing additional restrictions on the nomad that do not exist for others, or simply reiterating what is already possible.
As the fighter class feature, but the bonuses only apply when wielding two-handed melee weapons.
This ability replaces Weapon Training 1, 2, 3 and 4.
Well that logic isn't required, because we have the "primary and offhand" logic that handily solves the question without using the Nomad (which also suggests the same thing but "could be redundant".)
You have yet to provide RAW supporting your position that a "main hand" is required to two-hand a weapon.
All you have provided to date is RAW demonstrating a dual wielding character with two hands holds one weapon in his main hand and one weapon in his off-hand. This has no relevance to how characters with more than two arms interact with two-handed weapons.
This topic was covered in the infamous "metaphorical hands" FAQ.
Someone else is going to have to link it. I'm running out the door.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
This has no relevance to how characters with more than two arms interact with two-handed weapons.
Without rules in the 4 armed race to cover using two primary hands, you can't. The main rules only have 2 hands. The FAQ that started the metaphorical hands goes into more detail.
This has no relevance to how characters with more than two arms interact with two-handed weapons.Without rules in the 4 armed race to cover using two primary hands, you can't. The main rules only have 2 hands. The FAQ that started the metaphorical hands goes into more detail.
Per the FAQ, it's not possible for a creature with only two hands to make an off-hand attack while both hands are occupied with a two-handed weapon.
The Normal condition established by Multi-Weapon Fighting does state that each additional hand can be used to attack with a weapon.
Neither the FAQ nor the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat specify that a primary hand is required to two-hand a weapon.
Alchemists can grow extra arms, which grant no extra attacks but don't prevent dual wielding greatswords.
The burden of proof is to show rules text that vestigial arms DO allow it. No such text is present. The arms specifically say they grant no attacks, which means they don't contribute to granting attacks either.
|
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
Neither the FAQ nor the Multi-Weapon Fighting feat specify that a primary hand is required to two-hand a weapon.
Would it help if I linked a long post by SKR saying the rules are written with you having only 2 hands. That combined with the rules that you have one primary and one offhand plus the rules for two hand weapons requiring "both hands" is very conclusive that a two hand weapon takes one (1) primary and one (1) offhand to wield.
I don't understand. Are you arguing with me or against this? Because it is pretty cut and dry with the known "unwritten" rules and all the details we have about how the rules are written with 2 hands in mind, how they try for 99% of people get it right and getting to 100% would require many more paragraphs per ability.