Brawler’s Flurry and Power Attack


Rules Questions

251 to 300 of 454 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>

Perfect Tommy wrote:
I'd like to see that quote.

I could find it with enough digging. I was in the debate at the time. it's been a while though.

Perfect Tommy wrote:
But since those attacks would be at hefty penalties (either combining unarmed strikes with natural weapons); and/or twf penalties; Sure. Knock yourself out.

You missed the important part: it looks at total attacks and NOT the penalties involved. So 4 attack at huge minuses are only seen as 4 attack. It doesn't CARE about anything but the number meaning you can get 4 full BAB attacks from 4 very heavily penalized ones.

Perfect Tommy wrote:
But since the fundamental ruling is you can't wield a 2h sword and attack with armor spikes; as a regular person, and you can't get more hands of effort than a regular person....

Yes, and where was it implied that shields not used to attack use a hand of effort again?

Fluff: No fluff, I'm looking at a FAQ that states outright that TWF and 2 handed weapons don't mix. No fluff needed. As such, the section can't be written with 2 handed weapons in mind. As such, we can't assume the penalties apply to them in the same way.


Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

Once again demonstrating you do not understand.

The rules do not say the brawler doesn't need an off hand weapon to make an extra attack.

The rules say the OFF HAND attack *IS* THE EXTRA ATTACK.

ITS REAL SIMPLE: QUOTE THE RULE.

no need for an off hand weapon so the attack is not off hand. [WRONG}
Heres the rule:

Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
So if you think there is NO OFF HAND WEAPON YOU GET NO EXTRA ATTACK.
Once again, this demonstrates your lack of understanding of the rules. There is this thing in pathfinder called specific overrides general. Brawler has a specific rule that overrides TWF general rule.

QUOTE IT.

FOR ONCE QUOTE SOMETHING TO BACK UP YOUR OPINION.

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THE PRIMARY ATTACK GETS THE EXTRA ATTACK.


Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

Once again demonstrating you do not understand.

The rules do not say the brawler doesn't need an off hand weapon to make an extra attack.

The rules say the OFF HAND attack *IS* THE EXTRA ATTACK.

ITS REAL SIMPLE: QUOTE THE RULE.

no need for an off hand weapon so the attack is not off hand. [WRONG}
Heres the rule:

Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
Quote:
off hand weapon only gets the extra attack,
So if you think there is NO OFF HAND WEAPON YOU GET NO EXTRA ATTACK.
Once again, this demonstrates your lack of understanding of the rules. There is this thing in pathfinder called specific overrides general. Brawler has a specific rule that overrides TWF general rule.

QUOTE IT.

FOR ONCE QUOTE SOMETHING TO BACK UP YOUR OPINION.

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THE PRIMARY ATTACK GETS THE EXTRA ATTACK.

For specific to trump general you actually have to have a rule.
QUOTE IT.


Perfect Tommy wrote:

I've take the position that the Brawler's weapon is both the main-hand and the off-hand weapon in the special two-weapon fighting flurry that Brawlers can use.

The table doesn't care if your off-hand weapon is one-handed or two-handed, only that it's light.

Yep close enough. You make the extra attack with the weapon, you get the extra attack penalties.

And as a corollary - it reduces the penalty if its light.
It reduces it you have twf
It reduces it to -2/-2 if you have both.

The penalties you calculated upthread are exactly right.

Yes this is your position. My position is there is no way to wield a a weapon in a 2 handed grip, as an off hand weapon, so a 2 handed grip is not defined for an off hand weapon.

In the absence of an exception, assume there is not an exception.


Perfect Tommy wrote:

QUOTE IT.

FOR ONCE QUOTE SOMETHING TO BACK UP YOUR OPINION.

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THE PRIMARY ATTACK GETS THE EXTRA ATTACK.

For specific to trump general you actually have to have a rule.
QUOTE IT.

I have done so several times.

"When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat when attacking with any combination of unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the “monk” special feature. She does not need to use two different weapons to use this ability.

A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."


graystone wrote:
If only we weren't told that that table/section/feat doesn't apply to two handed weapons. You're pointing to a section we know doesn't work with the item in question.

But, thats not what they said. They said you normally cannot do so. People are asserting that Brawlers specifically can. Okay. So now they can use those rules that they otherwise could not. Okay. So you apply the rules that otherwise would not apply. So far, par for the course. Any exceptions for 2handers? No. So there are none. The only assumption needed is that it is even possible, which both sides are making.


Can we maybe leave the shield thing for a diffrent thread? This is already hard enough to follow and shields, while related, are a bit if a tangent and unlikely to get us any closer to an agreement upon the primary topic. I'm sorry I mentioned them.


Bladelock wrote:

My position is there is no way to wield a a weapon in a 2 handed grip, as an off hand weapon, so a 2 handed grip is not defined for an off hand weapon.

In the absence of an exception, assume there is not an exception.

So then it is not possible.

'But brawler says it is...'
Okay, so it is possible with the given exception. Apply the ones listed, don't assume more.


toastedamphibian wrote:
But, thats not what they said.

What they did was invent hands of effort. Those rules make having a two handed weapon incompatible with an offhand. We hand no idea what having a weapon that requires 2 hands of effort in a hand that can only use 1 hand of effort.

As the the combat section/chart, we have the penalties for using a light weapon in the offhand's hand of effort and a one handed weapon in that offhands hand of effort. What we can't figure out is what penalties there are for having 2 hands of effort being used by one hands of effort in the offhand...

toastedamphibian wrote:
They said you normally cannot do so.

And they say why. Nothing in brawler's flurry explains HOW it's an exception. We're missing how 2 hands of effort for a normally one hand of effort attack affects penalties.

toastedamphibian wrote:
People are asserting that Brawlers specifically can.

Yep, you can use a two handed weapon in TWF just no explanation how.

toastedamphibian wrote:
Any exceptions for 2handers? No. So there are none. The only assumption needed is that it is even possible, which both sides are making.

That's where we differ. If something allows me to use a bow in TWF without any explanation, how do I figure out the penalty? It's not on the chart much like the two handed weapon. it's not that the two handed weapon needs an exception but that it needs an explanation in the first place. it's adding something not included into the rules for TWF.

The assumption you're making is that 2 handed weapons use one handed weapon penalties on the chart. We only know what the penalties for one hand of effort weapons.


graystone wrote:


As the the combat section/chart,

Chart is not relevant. Chart is not rules. We also don't have an entry saying what the penalties are for dual balanced weapons on the chart. That does not make them randomly unknowable and unusable.

Quote:
We have the penalties for using a light weapon in the offhand's hand of effort and a one handed weapon in that offhands hand of effort.

We have the penalty, and we have information on how much a light weapon specifically reduces it. All that is left to figure out is "is this 2handed weapon a light weapon", and in the absence of a given exception, it isn't.

graystone wrote:
We're missing how 2 hands of effort for a normally one hand of effort attack affects penalties.

None given, so none. Same as your response to what penalty ine takes on skill checks for having one hand. Exactly what is stated. None.

graystone wrote:
If something allows me to use a bow in TWF without any explanation, how do I figure out the penalty?

Would need a better quote to extrapolate from. As already pointed out, nowhere does it actually say you can use a 2handed weapon. It implies that you can. Which suggests it is the ability to use just one weapon that makes that possible. If you get a Monk bow as a brawler, somehow? -4, because it is not a light weapon and you have the TWF feat.

Quote:
The assumption you're making is that 2 handed weapons use one handed weapon penalties on the chart.

I make no assumptions that charts mean anything when paired with rules, especially not when said charts are noted as being a summary of the text.


Say there are 3 abilites:
1)increase your flanking bonus to attack rolls by +2
2)double your bonus to attack rolls from flanking
3)gain a +4 bonus from flanking instead of your normal bonus

In a vacume, all of these do the same thing, but when interacting with other abilities or each other are vastly diffrent.

Everyone keeps pretending the TWF rules are 3, when clearly, by the text, they are more like 1.

Penalties are not replaced with different values for different weapons. Light weapons just give you a bonus (penalty reduction realy)


toastedamphibian wrote:
Everyone keeps pretending the TWF rules are 3, when clearly, by the text, they are more like 1.

If it's like #1, it's 'reduce your penalties by two with a light weapon in your offhand and a light or one handed weapon in your primary hand.' We step outside that by putting in a two handed weapon that not the expected primary OR offhand weapon.


toastedamphibian wrote:
Chart is not relevant.

Note I included the combat section AND the chart. Are you calling the combat section not relevant?

toastedamphibian wrote:
All that is left to figure out is "is this 2handed weapon a light weapon", and in the absence of a given exception, it isn't.

No, we haven't figured out how it fits into the rules. It's not either of the types of weapons the combat section talks about [one handed and light]. So it's not light [-2] but it's NOT the 'normal' base TWF. It complete assumption that a weapon used as both primary and off hand in TWF checks the non-existent offhand for penalties.

toastedamphibian wrote:
None given, so none. Same as your response to what penalty ine takes on skill checks for having one hand. Exactly what is stated. None.

There is no mention of needing a second weapon and no mention of checking for it's type. If we're going with "None given, so none" then where are you getting a weapon to even check for a penalty? If we're going pedantic, it stops there. No penalties at all as there is no off hand weapon.

toastedamphibian wrote:
As already pointed out, nowhere does it actually say you can use a 2handed weapon.

It's quite explicit: it allows flurry with 2 groups that have two handed weapons.

toastedamphibian wrote:
It implies that you can.

Explicitly allows isn't implies. There is NO need to make a logical leap. If we're going by 'there needs to be an exception', how can you say allowing a group with two handed weapons is implying?

toastedamphibian wrote:
Which suggests it is the ability to use just one weapon that makes that possible.

Bayonet, Seven-branched sword, Kyoketsu shoge, Kusarigama, Double-chained kama, Bo staff, Monk's spade, Sansetsukon, Tiger fork and Quarterstaff. My math might be a bit off but that look at LITTLE more than 1...

Now think about Versatile design Weapon Mod and every two handed weapon in the game can be flurried...

toastedamphibian wrote:
I make no assumptions that charts mean anything when paired with rules, especially not when said charts are noted as being a summary of the text.

Again, I was talking about and posted that I was talking about both rules and chart. I have no idea what your obsession with the chart is but i simply added it for completeness. My arguments are using all available rules and text for the rules we're talking about.


graystone wrote:
'reduce your penalties by two with a light weapon in your offhand and a light or one handed weapon in your primary hand.'

No. As i pointed out when you where talking about "doubling the weapon for penalties", the primary weapon is irrelevant for determining the penalties.

Note I did not include the text when I said the chart is irrelevant.

"Normal" is a vague term that is NOT in the rules we are discussing. One handed weapons are also NOT in the rules we are discussing. Only types of weapons mentioned in the rules are light weapons and unarmed strikes.

Quote:
It's quite explicit: it allows flurry with 2 groups that have two handed weapons.

No, it restricts you to only using those groups when you Brawler's Flurry. Your reading also allows a medium brawler to flurry with a colossal shield. After all, it's a close weapon.

Quote:
My math might be a bit off but that look at LITTLE more than 1...

You misread. Was referring to brawlers not needing to use two seperate weapons.

The TEXT makes no mention of "normal" penalties, what the "penalty" for a light off hand weapon is, nor any mention of one handed weapons at all. None of your points appear in the rules, only the summary in the chart. Basically, my obsession with the chart is that you and others keep talking about what it says as being what the rules say. In a vacuum they all add to 4...


disagree toasted. many posts eaten so that's it... hope post gets through. try latter.


Is that our point of contention? You feel its the "weapons you may flurry" with clause that letts them use a 2handed weapon?

After reading through the vast majority of this thread, I never got the impression that is what anyone was saying.

Feel free to correct any of the following you disagree with please. Anyone.

1) A weapon wielded in 2 hands is treated as being wielded with both your primary hand and your off hand (assuming you only have one off hand)

2) Normally, someone needs to weild 2 diffeent weapons to use the TWF special attack

3) Brawler's do not need to use two different weapons to twf during a flurry

4) Normally, TWF lets you make extra attacks with a weapon wielded in your off hand

5) If your using your offhand to weild your primary weapon, it is not free to attack with a second weapon.

If your wielding a 2 handed weapon you meet the prerequisite of weilding a weapon in your off hand (1). If your making a Brawler's Flurry, the requirement that your off hand weapon used be a seperate weapon from your primary weapon(2) is waived(3). Thus, you may use it to make the extra attack (4) granted to an off hand weapon where others cannot (5) because they need to use 2 diffrent weapons.


toastedamphibian wrote:

Is that our point of contention? You feel its the "weapons you may flurry" with clause that letts them use a 2handed weapon?

After reading through the vast majority of this thread, I never got the impression that is what anyone was saying.

Feel free to correct any of the following you disagree with please. Anyone.

"weapons you may flurry with" as well as "A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."

toastedamphibian wrote:


1) A weapon wielded in 2 hands is treated as being wielded with both your primary hand and your off hand (assuming you only have one off hand)

Only if a double weapon. Primary and off hand have no meaning in a 2 handed grip. It is a grip that requires both hands and one weapon that is a primary weapon.

toastedamphibian wrote:


2) Normally, someone needs to weild 2 diffeent weapons to use the TWF special attack

They need 2 different weapons for the standard TWF rules. Yes

toastedamphibian wrote:


3) Brawler's do not need to use two different weapons to twf during a flurry

Agreed.

toastedamphibian wrote:


4) Normally, TWF lets you make extra attacks with a weapon wielded in your off hand

Agreed

toastedamphibian wrote:


5) If your using your offhand to weild your primary weapon, it is not free to attack with a second weapon.

There is no way for the off hand to wield the primary weapon. The off hand by definition is wielding the off hand weapon.

toastedamphibian wrote:


If your wielding a 2 handed weapon you meet the prerequisite of weilding a weapon in your off hand (1). If your making a Brawler's Flurry, the requirement that your off hand weapon used be a seperate weapon from your primary weapon(2) is waived(3). Thus, you may use it to make the extra attack (4) granted to an off hand weapon where others cannot (5) because they need to use 2 diffrent weapons.

This is where our disagreement lies. When 2 handing a weapon their is no off hand and no primary hand. It is one grip with one primary weapon.


Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

QUOTE IT.

FOR ONCE QUOTE SOMETHING TO BACK UP YOUR OPINION.

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THE PRIMARY ATTACK GETS THE EXTRA ATTACK.

For specific to trump general you actually have to have a rule.
QUOTE IT.

I have done so several times.

"When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat when attacking with any combination of unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the “monk” special feature. She does not need to use two different weapons to use this ability.

A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are ade with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."

Irrelevent.

You need to establish *why* wielding a monk weapon in two hands entitles you to a second attack. A rule - an actual rule, not an opinion.

Then you need a quote - a rule - to establish what the penalty should be.

Waiting....


Perfect Tommy wrote:
Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

QUOTE IT.

FOR ONCE QUOTE SOMETHING TO BACK UP YOUR OPINION.

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THE PRIMARY ATTACK GETS THE EXTRA ATTACK.

For specific to trump general you actually have to have a rule.
QUOTE IT.

I have done so several times.

"When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat when attacking with any combination of unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the “monk” special feature. She does not need to use two different weapons to use this ability.

A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are ade with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."

Irrelevent.

You need to establish *why* wielding a monk weapon in two hands entitles you to a second attack. A rule - an actual rule, not an opinion.

Then you need a quote - a rule - to establish what the penalty should be.

Waiting....

Seriously? Are you crossing your arms and tapping your foot while you wait?

I have told you what I have is an opinion. I have quoted the rules that form that opinion. That is what you have done as well but you don't seem to realize your opinion is only an opinion.

Everyone else is discussion the topic with the knowledge that their stances are opinions except you.


So here's a rule you guys aren't going to like. But its the nail in the coffin for your argument.

From the October 2013 FAQ.

Quote:


"An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects."

tldr: if a class feature treats it as a one-handed weapon; it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.

Since Brawler's Flurry says

Quote:
A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands

That means its treated as a one-handed weapon. It also means the offhand is treated as a 1handed weapon.

Which means you would be at -4/-4.


Perfect Tommy wrote:

So here's a rule you guys aren't going to like. But its the nail in the coffin for your argument.

From the October 2013 FAQ.

Quote:


"An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects."

tldr: if a class feature treats it as a one-handed weapon; it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.

Since Brawler's Flurry says

Quote:
A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands

That means its treated as a one-handed weapon. It also means the offhand is treated as a 1handed weapon.

Which means you would be at -4/-4.

Are you saying that since a Flurry gives full str value to an attack that the attack is treated as a 1 hand weapon? You do know that you get full strength damage to light weapons as well?

You also realize you have been trying to impeach my rules knowledge throughout this entire thread. I will just walk away from the keyboard now.


Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:
Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

QUOTE IT.

FOR ONCE QUOTE SOMETHING TO BACK UP YOUR OPINION.

SHOW ME WHERE IT SAYS THE PRIMARY ATTACK GETS THE EXTRA ATTACK.

For specific to trump general you actually have to have a rule.
QUOTE IT.

I have done so several times.

"When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat when attacking with any combination of unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the “monk” special feature. She does not need to use two different weapons to use this ability.

A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are ade with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."

Irrelevent.

You need to establish *why* wielding a monk weapon in two hands entitles you to a second attack. A rule - an actual rule, not an opinion.

Then you need a quote - a rule - to establish what the penalty should be.

Waiting....

Seriously? Are you crossing your arms and tapping your foot while you wait?

I have told you what I have is an opinion. I have quoted the rules that form that opinion. That is what you have done as well but you don't seem to realize your opinion is only an opinion.

Everyone else is discussion the topic with the knowledge that their stances are opinions except you.

No Bladelock, I have quoted RULES to you.

It is RULES which say handedness is irrelevant: here's the quote:

Quote:
In other words, once you decide you're using two-weapon fighting to get that extra attack on your turn (which you have to decide before you take any attacks on your turn), that decision locks you in to the format of "my primary weapon gets my main attack and my iterative attack, and my off hand weapon only gets the extra attack, and I apply two-weapon fighting penalties."

Thats not opinion - thats rules.

So you would like to say - but I'm wielding weapon in both hands - I don't have a primary hand and an off hand.

Of course thats utter idiocy. But fortunately, we already have rules for that.

Quote:

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.

wo-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon (see FAQ at right for more information.)

Do you see anything that says [double] weapons aren't wielded in two hands?

Oh good. Me neither. Good cuz thats the rules.

You have one physical weapon - wielded in both hands. Which is the primary attack - the one you choose. Which is the offhand attack
THE SAME ONE.

Notice, I'm not talking about how the weapon is treated. (1h and light) I'm simply addressing the question of a 2h weapon wielded in two hands.

So clearly its possible that offhand and primary are the same weapon.
Possible - because thats already the rule.

So then you go into super secret magical grips. Of course thats not right either.

Its double weapon, wielded in two hands. If you choose an extra attack, you treat it as 1h and light. Still weilded in 2 h.

So in summary again:
Until you have a RULE that entitles you to an extra attack you have to use TWF rules.

TWF rules say that whatever attack is the EXTRA attack gets the offhand penalty. The other attacks get the primary penalty.

And these rules are in force until you find a rule to over ride them.


Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

So here's a rule you guys aren't going to like. But its the nail in the coffin for your argument.

From the October 2013 FAQ.

Quote:


"An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects."

tldr: if a class feature treats it as a one-handed weapon; it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects.

Since Brawler's Flurry says

Quote:
A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands

That means its treated as a one-handed weapon. It also means the offhand is treated as a 1handed weapon.

Which means you would be at -4/-4.

Are you saying that since a Flurry gives full str value to an attack that the attack is treated as a 1 hand weapon? You do know that you get full strength damage to light weapons as well?

*I'm* not saying it. I'm quoting you a RULE that says it.

Apparently you don't realize I've been saying you get full str damage to the light weapons the entire time? Good Lord man, I specifically calledd it out as an advantage to Brawler's Flurry.

Quote:


You also realize you have been trying to impeach my rules knowledge throughout this entire thread. I will just walk away from the keyboard now.

And if you would quote actual rules, I would stop impeaching your knowledge of them. All I've done is quote you rules which you don't refute with rules, just your unsupported opinion.

Rule: (paraphrased here, I've quote it time and time again)
Extra attack = offhand attack.

Rule: Hands don't matter for determination of offhand
0 hands can still be an off hand attack. 2h can still but a primary.
2h can be a primary and a secondary.

I tried to get you to demonstrate a knowledge of TWF fighting by getting you to recite what the rules were. So we could go from there to a discussion of Brawler's Flurry. You refuse.


Tommy, all light weapons do gain a bonus of strx1 damage. It is not some Brawler advantage.

Again, you shouldn't accuse someone of not knowing the rules when your knowledge is severely lacking.

I now understand that you might not actually know the difference between a double weapon and 2 hand weapon wielded in two hands. Let me try to explain. If you are using a weapon as a double weapon you are not 2 handing the weapon. I have tried to modify my verbiage to help you see the difference between a 2 hand weapon and a double weapon. You are confusing the two.

Yes you can use a double weapon in normal 2 weapon fighting and it is defined. However you cannot use your double weapon as a 2 handed weapon while two weapon fighting unless there is an exception from a feat or class. I tried to use the term "wielded as a two handed weapon" to help you see the difference. For example a staff when used as double weapon, it acts as a 1h weapon that does str mod x1 damage, and a light off hand weapon that does str mod x.5 damage as per twf rules. However you can grip it as a 2 hand weapon and do str mod x1.5, but have no access to twf. Wielding a weapon as a two hand weapon is undefined for two weapon fighting.

Now just because a double weapon treats its off hand attack as light and does str mod x.5 damage, that doesn't mean that all light weapons are str mod x.5 damage. This is something specific to TWF. In fact off hand 1h weapons also only add str modx.5 damage. Light weapons outside twf are all str mod x1 just like 1h weapons.

Quoting a rule and applying it correctly are two very different things. Do you understand now?


Bladelock wrote:

"weapons you may flurry with" as well as "A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."

The latter does not support your position. But we have already discussed that and I do not care further.

Quote:


toastedamphibian wrote:


1) A weapon wielded in 2 hands is treated as being wielded with both your primary hand and your off hand (assuming you only have one off hand)
Only if a double weapon. Primary and off hand have no meaning in a 2 handed grip. It is a grip that requires both hands and one weapon that is a primary weapon.

Double weapons are not what I am referencing. I am speaking of the FAQ about armor spikes and 2 handed weapons where it says two handed weapons take both of your hands, so you have no off hands (because your off hand is being used to wield your weapon. Do you still disagree with my statment after reviewing the FAQ?

Quote:


toastedamphibian wrote:


5) If your using your offhand to weild your primary weapon, it is not free to attack with a second weapon.
There is no way for the off hand to wield the primary weapon. The off hand by definition is wielding the off hand weapon.

Please reconsider and elaborate after reviewing the FAQ above.

Quote:


This is where our disagreement lies. When 2 handing a weapon their is no off hand and no primary hand. It is one grip with one primary weapon.

Please reevaluate. The FAQ seems to imply that, for the consideration of two weapon fighting, your two handed grip constitutes both your primary and off hands, which is why you cannot also attack with armor spikes (or, presumably, other weapons that do not require the use of physical hands: bootblades, dwarf hats, shin kicks, ect.)


Perfect Tommy wrote:

And if you would quote actual rules, I would stop impeaching your knowledge of them. All I've done is quote you rules which you don't refute with rules, just your unsupported opinion.

Rule: (paraphrased here, I've quote it time and time again)
Extra attack = offhand attack.

Rule: Hands don't matter for determination of offhand
0 hands can still be an off hand attack. 2h can still but a primary.
2h can be a primary and a secondary.

I tried to get you to demonstrate a knowledge of TWF fighting by getting you to recite what the rules were. So we could go from there to a discussion of Brawler's Flurry. You refuse.

What I have done is quote the exceptions to the TWF rules. Those are also rules. In fact you could say the are more important because specific exceptions trump the general rules. I know you don't feel the exceptions in Brawler's flurry are adequate enough to modify your feelings on TWF, but I feel they are.


Perfect Tommy wrote:


Since Brawler's Flurry says
Quote:
A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands

That means its treated as a one-handed weapon. It also means the offhand is treated as a 1handed weapon.

Which means you would be at -4/-4.

No, that does not track. If anything, all it proves is that you are wrong about how double weapons interact with brawler's flurry. They have nothing to do with anything dealing with double weapons as they are treated as 1 handed / light for all effects.

Sharing some rules with is not equal to "treating as". The rules for enchanting weapons also treats light and two handed weapons the same.


toastedamphibian wrote:
Bladelock wrote:

"weapons you may flurry with" as well as "A brawler applies her full Strength modifier to her damage rolls for all attacks made with brawler’s flurry, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand weapon or a weapon wielded in both hands."

The latter does not support your position. But we have already discussed that and I do not care further.

IMO fully supported and reinforced.

toastedamphibian wrote:


1) A weapon wielded in 2 hands is treated as being wielded with both your primary hand and your off hand (assuming you only have one off hand)
Bladelock wrote:
Only if a double weapon. Primary and off hand have no meaning in a 2 handed grip. It is a grip that requires both hands and one weapon that is a primary weapon.
Double weapons are not what I am referencing. I am speaking of the FAQ about armor spikes and 2 handed weapons where it says two handed weapons take both of your hands, so you have no off hands (because your off hand is being used to wield your weapon. Do you still disagree with my statment after reviewing the FAQ?

I posted this FAQ further upthread. Yes, what would be the off hand is occupied because when wielding a weapon in both hands there is no access to an off hand. "Not having access to" is not the same as defining an off hand while wielding a weapon in 2 hands.

toastedamphibian wrote:


Quote:


This is where our disagreement lies. When 2 handing a weapon their is no off hand and no primary hand. It is one grip with one primary weapon.
Please reevaluate. The FAQ seems to imply that, for the consideration of two weapon fighting, your two handed grip constitutes both your primary and off hands, which is why you cannot also attack with armor spikes (or, presumably, other weapons that do not require the use of physical hands: bootblades, dwarf hats, shin kicks, ect.)

When 2 handing a weapon you can't use any off 'whatever' attacks. That just means that you can't make any extra attacks. As Tommy likes to say it has nothing to do with your hands. This FAQ simply reinforces that wielding a 2 hand weapon is not defined in two weapon fighting. That is part of the reason I posted it above.


Bladelock wrote:
Tommy, all light weapons do gain a bonus of strx1 damage. It is not some Brawler advantage.

Try to be intellectually honest.

DURING BRAWLERS FLURRY, brawler's get 1x str to light weapons.
During normal TWF, its .5xstr.

If you seriously honestly questions what I mean - I laid the 7 things brawlers flurry did upthread.

Quote:

I now understand that you might not actually know the difference between a double weapon and 2 hand weapon wielded in two hands. Let me try to explain. If you are using a weapon as a double weapon you are not 2 handing the weapon. I have tried to modify my verbiage to help you see the difference between a 2 hand weapon and a double weapon. You are confusing the two.

This will be highly entertaining. Wrong but entertaining. But hey, I look forward to it. Maybe you'll actually demonstrate your knowledge of how TWF works, as I've been asking too?

Quote:

blah blah blah

.... For example a staff when used as double weapon, it acts as a 1h weapon that does str mod x1 damage, and a light off hand weapon that does str mod x.5 damage as per twf rules. However you can grip it as a 2 hand weapon and do str mod x1.5, but have no access to twf. Wielding a weapon as a two hand weapon is undefined for two weapon fighting.

Mostly correct. Of course there is no magical "grip" you keep hallucinating about. You wield a 2h weapon in 2h. PERIOD, unless a rules exception allows otherwise.

Quote:

Now just because a double weapon treats its off hand attack as light and does str mod x.5 damage, that doesn't mean that all light weapons are str mod x.5 damage. This is something specific to TWF. In fact off hand 1h weapons also only add str modx.5 damage. Light weapons outside twf are all str mod x1 just like 1h weapons.

Quote:


Quoting a rule and applying it correctly are two very different things. Do you understand now?

Yes. I understand I will never get you to quote OR understand an actual TWF rule.


Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

And if you would quote actual rules, I would stop impeaching your knowledge of them. All I've done is quote you rules which you don't refute with rules, just your unsupported opinion.

Rule: (paraphrased here, I've quote it time and time again)
Extra attack = offhand attack.

Rule: Hands don't matter for determination of offhand
0 hands can still be an off hand attack. 2h can still but a primary.
2h can be a primary and a secondary.

I tried to get you to demonstrate a knowledge of TWF fighting by getting you to recite what the rules were. So we could go from there to a discussion of Brawler's Flurry. You refuse.

What I have done is quote the exceptions to the TWF rules. Those are also rules. In fact you could say the are more important because specific exceptions trump the general rules. I know you don't feel the exceptions in Brawler's flurry are adequate enough to modify your feelings on TWF, but I feel they are.

No, what you have done is quote reasons why you think the rules shouldn't apply.

You say: because I am flurrying with a 2h weapon, I THINK the TWF shoudln't apply.

Thats not a rule.


Perfect Tommy wrote:


Quote:

blah blah blah

.... For example a staff when used as double weapon, it acts as a 1h weapon that does str mod x1 damage, and a light off hand weapon that does str mod x.5 damage as per twf rules. However you can grip it as a 2 hand weapon and do str mod x1.5, but have no access to twf. Wielding a weapon as a two hand weapon is undefined for two weapon fighting.

Mostly correct. Of course there is no magical "grip" you keep hallucinating about. You wield a 2h weapon in 2h. PERIOD, unless a rules exception allows otherwise.

You must understand at the very least this basic rule. A double weapon used as a double weapon is different when wielding it as a 2 hand weapon. I will quote the rule for a double weapon to help you.

"Double: You can use a double weapon to fight as if fighting with two weapons, but if you do, you incur all the normal attack penalties associated with fighting with two weapons, just as if you were using a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. You can choose to wield one end of a double weapon two-handed, but it cannot be used as a double weapon when wielded in this way—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round."

Do you see that wielding a weapon two handed is indeed a thing? How else do you think you get -1/+3 with power attack?


Perfect Tommy wrote:
Bladelock wrote:
Perfect Tommy wrote:

And if you would quote actual rules, I would stop impeaching your knowledge of them. All I've done is quote you rules which you don't refute with rules, just your unsupported opinion.

Rule: (paraphrased here, I've quote it time and time again)
Extra attack = offhand attack.

Rule: Hands don't matter for determination of offhand
0 hands can still be an off hand attack. 2h can still but a primary.
2h can be a primary and a secondary.

I tried to get you to demonstrate a knowledge of TWF fighting by getting you to recite what the rules were. So we could go from there to a discussion of Brawler's Flurry. You refuse.

What I have done is quote the exceptions to the TWF rules. Those are also rules. In fact you could say the are more important because specific exceptions trump the general rules. I know you don't feel the exceptions in Brawler's flurry are adequate enough to modify your feelings on TWF, but I feel they are.

No, what you have done is quote reasons why you think the rules shouldn't apply.

You say: because I am flurrying with a 2h weapon, I THINK the TWF shoudln't apply.

Thats not a rule.

No. I gave you rules quote from Brawler's flurry exempting Brawlers from using a second (off hand) weapon while 2 weapon fighting. I also reinforced that assertion by pointing out that an off hand is undefined when fighting with a weapon wielded in two hands. I then pointed to the rules that show that a brawler can wield a weapon 2 handed while flurrying.

I then expressed my opinion about the exceptions that flurry gave to two weapon fighting.


I'll summarize for any future readers:

Brawlers flurry does seven things.

A. It allows you the benefit of the twf feat while
Flurrying.
B. It allows you to use monk weapons, close weapons, and unarmed strikes, in any combination.
C. As a subset of that, you can use non double 2h weapons as part of the flurry, an ability usually you can not do.
D. It allows you to substitute combat maneuvers.
E. It allows you to b. Flurry with one weapon.
F. It specifies how to apply str modifiers.
G. It specifies you may not flurry with natural weapons.

So: you use the two weapon fighting rules to gain an extra attack.
Which means:

A: Whatever attack is the extra attack gets offhand attacks. All other attacks take the primary penalties.

Here is a link to the rules on two weapon fighting:http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering/combat/

Here's a link to the FAQ which specifies how TWF fighting works: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fm

Search for TWF to get to the appropriate spot on the pages.

B: What are the appropriate penalties?
Here's what the rules say.

1. "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...
You can reduce these penalties in two ways:"
1a: "First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each."
1b. "Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6."

This means brawlers using a 2h non double monk weapon (and really, there is only one) would take a penalty of -4/-4.

There is an alternate explanation, that gets to the same penalty, using the 2013 FAQ. Search the above listed FAQ for "titan" and you will find:

"An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects."

Since Brawler's Flurry tells you to treat the 2h weapon as 1h wielded with one hand (1x str modifier) you must treat it as a 1h weapon for other effects.

This means the attack penalty using a non double 2h monks weapon:
The offhand attack is made with a 1h weapon, the primary attack is a 1 handed weapon. Since brawlers flurry gives you TWF, the penalty once again is -4/-4.


For future readers Tommy did a good job summarizing what Brawlers flurry does, but his opinion on how it is done and the penalties it incurs are likely incorrect and definitely in dispute.

So we are clear, his opinion is solely opinion and should never be confused with rules. See Tommy's summary:
A. It allows you the benefit of the twf feat while Flurrying.
B. It allows you to use monk weapons, close weapons, and unarmed strikes, in any combination.
C. As a subset of that, you can use non double 2h weapons as part of the flurry, an ability usually you can not do.
D. It allows you to substitute combat maneuvers.
E. It allows you to b. Flurry with one weapon.
F. It specifies how to apply str modifiers.
G. It specifies you may not flurry with natural weapons.

See the rules regarding below:
A. It[Brawler's Flurry] allows you the benefit of the twf feat while Flurrying.
An off hand attack in TWF is defined by the following line:
"If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon."

As mentioned above in (E.) Brawler is not required to use off hand weapon to gain an extra attack, as flurry specifically says a Brawler can flurry with one weapon rather than a second off hand weapon.

Brawler also allows for two weapon fighting with a weapon wielded in 2 hands which is undefined in two weapon fighting. It is undefined because it is not possible for a weapon wielded 2 handed to be wielded in an off hand. It can't be in the off hand because wielding a weapon 2 handed requires 2 hands of effort leaving no option for an additional hand of effort.
See FAQ clarifying hands of effort..

also see handed rules here:
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.

Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one’s off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). 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. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder’s primary hand only. An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.

One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls.

Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.

At the time of writing two weapon fighting the only options for TWF hand effort were light or 1 hand effort. Flurry introduces "no hand effort" to the off hand and "2 handed effort" to the primary hand. As the off hand is the only determination of two weapon fighting penalties, and with flurry there is never an off hand effort "no hand effort" the twf penalty should reflect the lightest effort penalty available, which is -2.


Perfect Tommy wrote:

There is an alternate explanation, that gets to the same penalty, using the 2013 FAQ. Search the above listed FAQ for "titan" and you will find:

"An unusual case of the handedness rule is an ability that allows you to treat a two-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon. For example, the titan mauler's jotungrip (which allows you to wield a two-handed weapon with one hand) allows you to wield a bastard sword in one hand even without the Exotic Weapon Proficiency, and (as the ability states) treats it as a one-handed weapon, therefore it is treated as a one-handed weapon for other effects."

Since Brawler's Flurry tells you to treat the 2h weapon as 1h wielded with one hand (1x str modifier) you must treat it as a 1h weapon for other effects.

This means the attack penalty using a non double 2h monks weapon:
The offhand attack is made with a 1h weapon, the primary attack is a 1 handed weapon. Since brawlers flurry gives you TWF, the penalty once again is -4/-4.

This is also a 100% misunderstanding of how to apply rules. I mentioned to you upthread that it didn't apply to light weapons because the were already x1 str mod. However this is in general not how the rule applies to handedness. Handedness does determine initial str multiple, but a str multiple doesn't reciprocally determine handedness.


Hasn't it been stated before to not overreach on what FAQs apply to?

I see your issue with the rules now that you brought it up..

The problem is that you're assuming that the faq applies, which you need to show.

"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."

So why does this / does this not apply?

I would contend that it does not apply, as the statement is not complete for the case we are discussing:
We have the logic:
"you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon"
Therefore:
"your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

This says that because you are using both hands for the TH weapon, you do not have an available offhand to make an attack with.

Why?
Well thats because the offhand is unable to use a second weapon, so it cant make an extra attack.

But we dont care about needing a second weapon. The offhand is perfectly allowed to attack with the weapon it is wielding.

This fulfills the requirement of TWF and does not disagree with the logic of the faq.

You really need to use some explicit rules logic if you want me to believe that this is not the case.

Show that the faq applies past the standard case.
Show that the twf rules you claim for this case actually exist.
You have not yet shown any way of getting an extra attack using a two handed weapon and this brawlers flurry.
You have made claims of penalties being less due to not having a penalty reducing requirement, which is ridiculous.

Please back up your claims with actual rules text in some clear progression of logic.


Oneyou I posted the handed rules.

Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.

The FAQ only supports supports them and remove ambiguity. You have 2 hands of effort. If both are used in a 2 hand grip there is no off hand. The off hand is undefined under core Two Handed rules.

Brawlers flurry explicitly state that you can use two weapon fighting with only one weapon and no secondary off hand weapon. It also lays out rules for wielded a 2 hand weapon where the off hand is undefined in the core rules and confirmed that the off hand is unavailable in an FAQ.

If the above, and my previous post, is not clear logic to you then I can't help you.


Bladelock wrote:

See the rules regarding below:

A. It[Brawler's Flurry] allows you the benefit of the twf feat while Flurrying.
An off hand attack in TWF is defined by the following line:
Quote:


"If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon."

This is not a rule, it is flavor text. It holds no weight on rules discussion.

Go to Paizo's definition of rules elements to confirm this, or search the rules forum for the discussion on leprechauns humanoid fey to see an example where the flavor text says leprechauns are humanoids and the rules text say they are fey.

The text is italicized; this is a general flavor discussion of the rules which follow.

Quote:


As mentioned above in (E.) Brawler is not required to use off hand weapon to gain an extra attack, as flurry specifically says a Brawler can flurry with one weapon rather than a second off hand weapon.

E. Says nothing about not needing an off-hand attack. B. is confusing hands with primary and off-hand.

As quoted in the rules above, and reiterated in the TWF discussion in the FAQ, an off hand attack is simply the attack that makes the extra attack. All others attacks are primary.

A monk can have both hands tied behind his back and he will still make a primary and off hand attack if he chooses to kick with his feet.

Quote:


Brawler also allows for two weapon fighting with a weapon wielded in 2 hands which is undefined in two weapon fighting.

Double weapons are wielded in two hands, and is perfectly defined under twf.

Quote:


It is undefined because it is not possible for a weapon wielded 2 handed to be wielded in an off hand. It can't be in the off hand because wielding a weapon 2 handed requires 2 hands of effort leaving no option for an additional hand of effort.
See FAQ clarifying hands of effort..

Somehow B is saying that a weapon wielded in two hands is requiring 3 hands of effort.

Quote:
At the time of writing two weapon fighting the only options for TWF hand effort were light or 1 hand effort. Flurry introduces "no hand effort" to the off hand and "2 handed effort" to the primary hand. As the off hand is the only determination of two weapon fighting penalties, and with flurry there is never an off hand effort "no hand effort" the twf penalty should reflect the lightest effort penalty available, which is -2.

None of which is true.

There are no rules about "no hands of effort"
let alone that brawlers flurry gives such a thing.
Additionally he ignores that TWF covers fighting with 2h weapons already.

Nor does flurry state there is never an off hand effort.

In short: He is inventing no hands of effort; applying it to Brawlers flurry wielding a 2h weapon, and applying penalties which explicitly require light weapons.

In short - no relationship to the rules, whatsoever.


Tommy until you understand that there is a difference between wielding 2 handed and a two handed double weapon you should refrain from telling people what rules mean.

Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.

Double Weapons: A character can fight with both ends of a double weapon as if fighting with two weapons, but he incurs all the normal attack penalties associated with two-weapon combat, just as though the character were wielding a one-handed weapon and a light weapon. The character can also choose to use a double weapon two-handed, attacking with only one end of it. A creature wielding a double weapon in one hand can’t use it as a double weapon—only one end of the weapon can be used in any given round.

And even then, unless you understand that str mod multiples do not determine handedness you should still check with a friend to see if your interpretation holds any water.


Fun fact: if a brawler is using a quarter staff to makes his brawler’s fury attacks, he only ever has to use one end, which he can attack with like it was a non-double two-handed Weapon.


Please look at my original posts rather than Tommy's twist of it. I referred to "'no hands of effort' to the off hand" not no hands of effort at all.

If you wield a weapon 2 handed there are no hands of effort devoted to the off hand because both hands of effort are being used.

I thought it would be clear but should have considered willful misunderstanding.


oneyou wrote:

Hasn't it been stated before to not overreach on what FAQs apply to?

I see your issue with the rules now that you brought it up..

The problem is that you're assuming that the faq applies, which you need to show.

"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."

So why does this / does this not apply?

I would contend that it does not apply, as the statement is not complete for the case we are discussing:
We have the logic:
"you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon"
Therefore:
"your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

This says that because you are using both hands for the TH weapon, you do not have an available offhand to make an attack with.

Why?
Well thats because the offhand is unable to use a second weapon, so it cant make an extra attack.

But we dont care about needing a second weapon. The offhand is perfectly allowed to attack with the weapon it is wielding.

This fulfills the requirement of TWF and does not disagree with the logic of the faq.

You really need to use some explicit rules logic if you want me to believe that this is not the case.

Show that the faq applies past the standard case.
Show that the twf rules you claim for this case actually exist.
You have not yet shown any way of getting an extra attack using a two handed weapon and this brawlers flurry.
You have made claims of penalties being less due to not having a penalty reducing requirement, which is ridiculous.

Please back up your claims with actual rules text in some clear progression of logic.

This particular FAQ was of major contention when it was new. It applies to all things. Hands of Effort never existed before but clearly did after this FAQ. Some Devs even discussed it on the forums. It might actually be the FAQ that made it so many Devs stopped discussing rules. It most certainly applies to the basic action economy of any rules discussion.

Brawler's Flurry states that you can flurry with both hands on one weapon and tells you the bonus to damage when you do so. It does not have to be a 2H weapon for this discussion. 2H on a dagger will fit the discussion exactly the same way because:

1) There is only one weapon.
2) There are two hands on the weapon.
3) The same x1 str mod is added to the damage.

So, if you use a pole arm with versatile design or a dagger, the rules and rules questions would still be the same.

As such, we are left to guess at the RAI of the rules. Do we base our rules on TWF rules? If so, Do we add penalties, or subtract them? Do we base the rules on balance? We know the brawler does more damage with flurry than the typical TWF option so it makes sense to take the higher penalty of -4/-4. But they are also BETTER at fighting this way so maybe we should take the lower penalty of -2/-2. Or do we base the rules on other similar classes? The monk's flurry is VERY close to brawler's flurry. If we substitute the TWF penalties for the monk's flurry penalties of -2/-2 it would also work within the confines of an established rule.

So again, we are left to decide. I have shown 3 valid questions and possible answers that I don't think anyone can prove or disprove are the actual RAI. So pick one, explain why you picked it, understand that it is an opinion, and get back to killing bad guys and telling great stories!


Wait I'm confused, admittedly I didn't read everything, but are people claiming you get no extra attacks if you flurry with a two handed weapon?

If that was the case, why would you ever flurry wth a two handed weapon? I'm honestly curious. What would be the benefit? Why would you explicitly be allowed to?


oneyou wrote:

Hasn't it been stated before to not overreach on what FAQs apply to?

I see your issue with the rules now that you brought it up..

The problem is that you're assuming that the faq applies, which you need to show.

"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."

So why does this / does this not apply?

I would contend that it does not apply, as the statement is not complete for the case we are discussing:
We have the logic:
"you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon"
Therefore:
"your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."

This says that because you are using both hands for the TH weapon, you do not have an available offhand to make an attack with.

Why?
Well thats because the offhand is unable to use a second weapon, so it cant make an extra attack.

But we dont care about needing a second weapon. The offhand is perfectly allowed to attack with the weapon it is wielding.

This fulfills the requirement of TWF and does not disagree with the logic of the faq.

You really need to use some explicit rules logic if you want me to believe that this is not the case.

Show that the faq applies past the standard case.
Show that the twf rules you claim for this case actually exist.
You have not yet shown any way of getting an extra attack using a two handed weapon and this brawlers flurry.
You have made claims of penalties being less due to not having a penalty reducing requirement, which is ridiculous.

Please back up your claims with actual rules text in some clear progression of logic.

I started to make a bunch of replies... I think I'm just going to go with this: oneyou is correct. I agree with everything he said above 100%.

People are claiming the rules do not work as they interpret them, and that rules from a completly different class should be used. Probably because they like the results better and enjoy arguing. It is a strong claim that requires evidence and they have not provided any.

Bladelock keeps pretending the brawler's flurry ability says you do not need an off-hand weapon when it does not say this (it says you don't need it to be a second weapon)

Tommy keeps making incorrect statements about double weapons and light weapons.


Komoda wrote:
As such, we are left to guess at the RAI of the rules.

Everything you said above this is correct. This line does not follow. How so?

Quote:
Do we base our rules on TWF rules?

Yes, because your using TWF. No other rules are given.

Quote:
If so, Do we add penalties, or subtract them?

They are a set value for 2 weapon fighting, which get reduced for meeting certain criteria. This is very clear and explicit in the text.

Quote:
Do we base the rules on balance?

No...


Sah wrote:

Wait I'm confused, admittedly I didn't read everything, but are people claiming you get no extra attacks if you flurry with a two handed weapon?

If that was the case, why would you ever flurry with a two handed weapon? I'm honestly curious. What would be the benefit? Why would you explicitly be allowed to?

There seem to be predominantly two schools of thought here:

A) The rules do not work at all, so lets ignore them all and copy the class feature of another class

B) The rules work fine, treat a brawler attacking with 1 weapon as using that weapon as both his primary and off hand weapon.

The "No extra attacks with a 2 handed weapon" thing was an attempt to point out an absurd side effect of the reading people where using to support A, In that, if the supporting arguments made are held to be true, then a more rational reading is that they cannot be used effectively at all (as opposed to A's proponents claims that it means they should be used as light weapons)

For some reason, no one seems to want to address the problem of Brawler's flurrying with 1 handed weapons... gets the same penalties as what B claims a 2 handed weapon would garner, but without the joy of being able to claim such a thing is "undefined" and thus "whatever we want it to be".


toastedamphibian wrote:

I started to make a bunch of replies... I think I'm just going to go with this: oneyou is correct. I agree with everything he said above 100%.

People are claiming the rules do not work as they interpret them, and that rules from a completly different class should be used. Probably because they like the results better and enjoy arguing. It is a strong claim that requires evidence and they have not provided any.

Bladelock keeps pretending the brawler's flurry ability says you do not need an off-hand weapon when it does not say this (it says you don't need it to be a second weapon)

Tommy keeps making incorrect statements about double weapons and light weapons.

Not certain how you get that I am "pretending" anything.

The definition of Two Weapon Fighting in the core rules is solely in the context of fighting with two weapons that are either light or 1 handed. Flurry specifically says a Brawler can TWF without using a second weapon. No second weapon means no off hand weapon. The fact that you can use a two hand weapon while flurrying, where an off hand is undefined in the core rules and is unavailable as per an FAQ, further supports the fact that there is no off hand needed to use TWF'ing while flurrying.

toastedamphibian wrote:

There seem to be predominantly two schools of thought here:

A) The rules do not work at all, so lets ignore them all and copy the class feature of another class

B) The rules work fine, treat a brawler attacking with 1 weapon as using that weapon as both his primary and off hand weapon.

The "No extra attacks with a 2 handed weapon" thing was an attempt to point out an absurd side effect of the reading people where using to support A, In that, if the supporting arguments made are held to be true, then a more rational reading is that they cannot be used effectively at all (as opposed to A's proponents claims that it means they should be used as light weapons)

It is your assertion that TWF works fine if you ignore rules and create new rules on the side that is questionable. Calling opinions that you disagree with absurd does nothing to strengthen your weak argument.

In Pathfinder, feats and abilities are made specifically to allow characters to take specific actions that alter the way general rules work. Brawler Furry explicitly shows where it alters standard TWF. This is fully in line with the way Pathfinder rules are built. It doesn't mean "the rules do not work at all." It means the rules are working as they should where specific trumps general.


toastedamphibian wrote:
Komoda wrote:

Quote:
If so, Do we add penalties, or subtract them?

They are a set value for 2 weapon fighting, which get reduced for meeting certain criteria. This is very clear and explicit in the text.

You act as if it is so cut and dry. There is no listing under TWF for fighting with two hands on a single weapon. It isn't there. You know it isn't. We all know it isn't. So we are forced to DECIDE (because it isn't there for us) what it means when you have 2 hands on one weapon.

What would the TWF penalties be if you had one hand on one dagger?
What would the TWF penalties be if you had two hands on one dagger?

What would the TWF penalties be if you had one hands on one longsword?
What would the TWF penalties be if you had two hands on one longsword?

What would the TWF penalties be if you had two hands on one polearm?

Would you have different penalties if you had one hand on one longsword vs. two hands on one dagger/longsword? All the math of attacks and damage would be the same.

I would rule -2/-2 for the attacks for all sets.


Komoda wrote:


You act as if it is so cut and dry. There is no listing under TWF for fighting with two hands on a single weapon.

There is no listing for anything. There is text. There is no listing for any particular weapon. Which is the offhand weapon? Is it light? Then you get to reduce the penalty by 2. If not, you don't. Pretty straight forward. I do not care about the table.


toastedamphibian wrote:
Komoda wrote:


You act as if it is so cut and dry. There is no listing under TWF for fighting with two hands on a single weapon.
There is no listing for anything. There is text. There is no listing for any particular weapon. Which is the offhand weapon? Is it light? Then you get to reduce the penalty by 2. If not, you don't. Pretty straight forward. I do not care about the table.

That is an interesting statement.

- Do you care that the rules are only defined for fighting with two weapons, where only the additional weapon is defined as the off hand weapon?
- Do you care that the rules only define two weapon fighting with light and 1 hand weapons?
- Do you care that two weapon fighting while wielding a weapon in 2 hands is undefined?

Why do you feel that the Brawler Flurry TWF exception, that there is no "off hand," is so unlikely when the text specifically calls out the lack of need for a second weapon when two weapon fighting?

Why is it more likely that the primary hand takes on the duel role of primary and off hand when there is no mention or reference to this magical transformation?

251 to 300 of 454 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Brawler’s Flurry and Power Attack All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.