Unique position: Do two weapon focuses stack?

[Zarius]

So, as bizarre as it sounds, I've just realized that I have the potential to have two different Weapon Focus feats stack (I wouldn't blow two feats on them, but some cash? Maybe...). Dan bong are a weapon used to enhance grappling... so, in theory, it's POSSIBLE to have Weapon Focus (Dan Bong) and Weapon Focus (Grappling) to work on the same grapple attempt. In this freakishly rare instance, would they stack?

[I'm Hiding In Your Closet]

Can you even GET Weapon Focus in a combat maneuver (as opposed to an actual weapon)? That in itself would be news to me.

[Jeraa]

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Can you even GET Weapon Focus in a combat maneuver (as opposed to an actual weapon)? That in itself would be news to me.

Then you need to read the Weapon Focus feat. Grapple is a valid choice (and has been since 3.5 D&D, so effectively forever).

That being said, Weapon Focus states the effects of multiple Weapon Focus feats do not stack. That was probably to prevent applying multiple Weapon Focus feats to a single weapon, but can very easily be read as preventing multiple Weapon Focus feats from adding to any roll, even if they are applied to different things.

[dragonhunterq]

You know, part of me feels I should be saying no as it probably falls foul of the 'same source' limitation, but it might just work. It is an untyped bonus, and when you use a weapon in a combat manoeuvre you get to add all the bonuses that apply to that weapon to your CMB.

I am undecided. I expect most people will come down on the more conservative interpretation.

[UnArcaneElection]

By analogy with Weapon Training, in which only the greater Weapon Training bonus applies if a weapon falls into 2 Weapon Groups for which you have Weapon Training, only the larger Weapon Focus bonus would apply (so if you had Greater Weapon Focus for Grapple and just Weapon Focus for Unarmed Strike, you would get the Greater Weapon Focus, but not more).

[Zarius]

Grappling doesn't actually fall under unarmed strikes. There are, sadly, several rules and items that make clear distinction between the two. Also, it specifically says "the effects don't stack. Each time to take the feat, it applies to a different weapon." That seems a key factor to me.

But is Weapon Focus (Dan Bong) actually the same feat as Weapon Focus (Grappling)? They're different 'weapons', and as dragonhungerq pointed out, you DO add your weapon bonuses to the maneuver you're using, on top of anything you apply to your actual CMB, general or CM specific.

I'll be honest, this is mostly academic, as I'm not likely to drop the cash on anything to provide EITHER one, but I'm curious.

[James Risner]

You can get weapon focus gauntlet.

You can’t stack two weapon focus as the same source rules prevent.

[Cyrad]

"Grappling" is not a weapon. You can't get Weapon Focus (grappling).

Two bonuses from the same source never stack.

[Rules Police]

Cyrad wrote:

"Grappling" is not a weapon. You can't get Weapon Focus (grappling).

Read the feat. Unarmed Strike, Rays, and Grappling are special things that you can take Weapon Focus for.

[I'm Hiding In Your Closet]

Rules Police wrote:

Read the feat. Unarmed Strike, Rays, and Grappling are special things that you can take Weapon Focus for.

So as a rule, you indeed can't take Weapon Focus in combat maneuvers, but grappling is an exception? Kinda weird.

[dragonhunterq]

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Rules Police wrote:

Read the feat. Unarmed Strike, Rays, and Grappling are special things that you can take Weapon Focus for.

So as a rule, you indeed can't take Weapon Focus in combat maneuvers, but grappling is an exception? Kinda weird.

Where is the general rule that you cannot take weapon focus in combat manoeuvres? It is not an exhaustive list, and the presence of grapple means it would be kind of hard to argue against that you can actually take e.g. weapon focus:trip without an explicit rule saying you can't

[Rules Police]

dragonhunterq wrote:

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Rules Police wrote:

Read the feat. Unarmed Strike, Rays, and Grappling are special things that you can take Weapon Focus for.

So as a rule, you indeed can't take Weapon Focus in combat maneuvers, but grappling is an exception? Kinda weird.

Where is the general rule that you cannot take weapon focus in combat manoeuvres? It is not an exhaustive list, and the presence of grapple means it would be kind of hard to argue against that you can actually take e.g. weapon focus:trip without an explicit rule saying you can't

Read the feat, citizen. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Weapon Focus wrote:

Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.

You can take WF for any weapon. This includes natural weapons, which, as the name indicates, are weapons.

You can take WF grapple. You cannot take trip, or bull rush, or dirty trick, or any other maneuver.

You can also take WF ray. You cannot take it for ranged touch attacks that are not rays.

You can also take it for unarmed strikes.

You cannot take it for anything else not listed in the quote above.

[blahpers]

Jeraa wrote:

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Can you even GET Weapon Focus in a combat maneuver (as opposed to an actual weapon)? That in itself would be news to me.

Then you need to read the Weapon Focus feat. Grapple is a valid choice (and has been since 3.5 D&D, so effectively forever).

That being said, Weapon Focus states the effects of multiple Weapon Focus feats do not stack. That was probably to prevent applying multiple Weapon Focus feats to a single weapon, but can very easily be read as preventing multiple Weapon Focus feats from adding to any roll, even if they are applied to different things.

This is the answer. The feat itself says you can't stack them.

[dragonhunterq]

Rules Police wrote:

dragonhunterq wrote:

I'm Hiding In Your Closet wrote:

Rules Police wrote:

Read the feat. Unarmed Strike, Rays, and Grappling are special things that you can take Weapon Focus for.

So as a rule, you indeed can't take Weapon Focus in combat maneuvers, but grappling is an exception? Kinda weird.

Where is the general rule that you cannot take weapon focus in combat manoeuvres? It is not an exhaustive list, and the presence of grapple means it would be kind of hard to argue against that you can actually take e.g. weapon focus:trip without an explicit rule saying you can't

Read the feat, citizen. Ignorance of the law is no excuse.

Weapon Focus wrote:

Choose one type of weapon. You can also choose unarmed strike or grapple (or ray, if you are a spellcaster) as your weapon for the purposes of this feat.

You can take WF for any weapon. This includes natural weapons, which, as the name indicates, are weapons.

You can take WF grapple. You cannot take trip, or bull rush, or dirty trick, or any other maneuver.

You can also take WF ray. You cannot take it for ranged touch attacks that are not rays.

You can also take it for unarmed strikes.

You cannot take it for anything else not listed in the quote above.

Aye, more restrictive than I recalled - my apologies officer!

[Cavall]

Two don't stack. Take the greatest.

[Bob Bob Bob]

So the rules question has merit but I feel the need to point out that a Dan Bong, unless it's been reprinted recently, doesn't actually help in a grapple. It gives you a bonus to grapple (and a penalty for not having two hands free) but you don't use weapons to grapple (normally). Weapon Focus (dan bong) affects a grapple just as much as Weapon Focus (longsword). Unless you've got a houserule or other rule that changes that.

For your example, you can just replace it with a mancatcher. That one is definitely used in a grapple.