| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This question has arisen in numerous rules discussions, most of which start out on a related topic. It typically degenerates into an argument, as no consensus can be reached, and each side finds examples to support their perspective. Numerous requests have been made to provide an answer to this question, but to date no answer has been posted in the FAQ.
If a PC has more (or less) than two hands, what is the maximum number of off-hand attacks they can make (when the specific descriptor of the extra or missing hands does not say)?
- {A} They can make a maximum of one off-hand attack regardless of how many hands they have.
- {B} They can make one off-hand attack for each off hand they have, minimum 0 (if they have 1 hand). Wielding a two-handed weapon reduces this number by 1.
- {C} They can make one off-hand attack for each off hand they have, minimum 1 (if they have 1-2 hands). Wielding a two-handed weapon reduces this number by 1.
- {D} They can make one off-hand attack for each off hand, but only with held weapons, not unarmed attacks. Wielding a two-handed weapon reduces this number by 1.
- {E} They can make one off-hand attack for each off hand, unless they wield a two-handed weapon in their main hand, in which case none.
- {F} They can make one off-hand attack for each off hand their species would normally possess, minimum 0. Wielding a two-handed weapon reduces this number by 1.
- {G} They can make one off-hand attack for each off hand their species would normally possess, minimum 1. Wielding a two-handed weapon reduces this number by 1.
- {H} They can make as many off-hand attacks as they can wield weapons (excluding the weapon in their main hand).
- {J} They can make one off-hand attack, unless they have natural weapons that double as prehensile limbs, in which case they can sacrifice natural attacks with these limbs to gain extra off-hand weapon attacks.
- {K} Other: Please describe.
Just to clarify, a 'hand' is a prehensile limb that is capable of wielding a weapon and using it to make attacks. This question does not address natural weapons.
Each of the options listed above is a perspective that at least one individual has insisted to be accurate, per RAW.
This question does not take into account the numeric penalties on attack roles, which are defined in the Two-Weapon and Multiweapon Fighting feats.
Your question is not clear. Having more or less than two hands involves different rules.
Paizo will mark the query as not being clear if you are not very specific. Then you will have to make another FAQ anyway so I would just edit this one to be very precise.
If you want to know about creatures with 2 hands like most PC's that will require a different question than creatures with more than 2 hands such as the Kasatha (probably spelled wrong) or Marilith(also probably spelled wrong).
I will also add that it will help if you give a specific example using a creature, the weapons in hand, and his BAB in this case.
Then you can get an explanation that gives you his options and why.
If a creature has 1 hand, they can still make an offhand attack with a non-held weapon like armor spikes/boulder helmet.
If a creature has multiple off hands, they can take an extra attack per off hand in multi-hand combat.
Wielding a two handed weapon reduces number of available offhands by 1.
As to the wall or questions, I think the above should cover how I see it. If there is a single question that you want answered, I'll go into more detail.
I got locked out of editing while typing up specific examples. So fine. Adding them as a separate reply.
This question does not take into account the numeric penalties on attack rolls, which are defined in the Two-Weapon and Multiweapon Fighting feats. This question does not include extra attacks gained from feats. This question does not include attacks made with the primary hand (which depend on BAB).
_____________________
EDIT: Adding specific cases to be addressed. I am looking for a single ruling which addresses all cases, if possible. For the purpose of these examples, anyone wielding a weapon has proficiency with it.
{CASE 1} An eidolon has 6 hands (3 limb mutations) and no natural weapons. It has a light weapon in each hand. How many off-hand attacks can it make?
{CASE 2} A human loses an arm at the shoulder, then heals. He only has one arm, and is wearing boot blades. How many off-hand attacks can he make?
{CASE 3} A kasatha barbarian has a light weapon in each hand. How many off-hand attacks can he make?
{CASE 4} A human uses ALTER SELF to take the form of a kasatha. He picks up extra weapons, so that has a light weapon in each hand. How many attacks can he make?
{CASE 5} A kasatha has a greatsword in his main hand and one other hand. His other two hands have light weapons, and he is wearing boot blades. How many off-hand attacks can he make?
{CASE 6} An eidolon has 2 normal hands, 2 clawed hands, 2 clawed feet, and 2 normal feet. It wields a light weapon in each of the four hands, opting not to use those claws. How many off-hand attacks can it make?
{CASE 7} A kasatha rogue takes the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. He has no weapons in hand, and makes an unarmed strike with the main hand. How many off-hand unarmed strikes can he make?
{CASE 8} An eidolon has six arms. It wields a greataxe, two short swords, and two daggers, and has no natural attacks. How many off-hand attacks can it make?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1. He has 5 offhand attacks. This is supported by monsters in the bestiary getting attacks for every weapon they can hold. Some have multiweapon mastery, but that only removes the penalties associated for fighting with two weapons. It doesn't grant extra off-hand attacks so they are from the creature's build. In addition the ones that dont' have multiweapon mastery still get the offhand attacks.
2. PC's get one offhand attack so if he had a sword and spiked armor he could still use the spike armor as an offhand attack or he could kick with an unarmed strike. As shown by the FAQ the offhand for a PC does not have to be an actual hand. If you come back and ask more "what if" questions then you are stepping outside the normal assumptions the rules make and it falls to GM fiat at some point since the rules can't cover every abnormal situation. And losing limbs, despite regenerate existing as a spell, is not a normal thing.
3. He has 3 off-hand attacks for the same reason that example 1 has 5 offhand attacks.
4. I'm going to say 3, but this has been up for debate. Ideally when you take a form you get full use of its limbs, but for some reason unlike other creatures with multiple limbs it has the "Multi-Armed" trait which if you read the rules strictly, are what grants it the extra off-hand attacks unless most monsters who can do so without having this trait.
5. Unknown due to a lack of knowledge on kasathas, and how multi-limbed monsters interact with off-hand attacks when they are combined with two-handed weapons. This is one of those highly debated things that I don't remember anyone being able to nail down.
6. Clawed feet dont get to hold weapons so they don't get off-hand attacks. Off-hand attacks are for limbs that can actually make attacks. That is why tigers and hellcats can't use daggers. If they can wield weapons then nothing is going to stop an eidolon from stabbing with his clawed feet that hold daggers. To answer the question it gets 3 off hand attacks.
7. He gets 3 offhand attacks. As stated in the other thread which quoted the rules unarmed strikes are treated like manufactured weapons when it comes to number of attacks.
Basically each limb that can hold a weapon aside from the primary hand grants an offhand attack.
edit: 8. Two-handed weapons and off-hand attacks has no point of reference as mentioned above, and Paizo has not made an official ruling on the topic.
Also we have stated that there is no single ruling already. That is one reason why the kasatha has been debated several times when people try to combine to two weapon fight with 2 two-handed weapons or when they try to combine a two-handed weapon with light weapons for the purpose of two-weapon fighting.
I'm looking over wraithstrike's answers and I think I agree with everything he said. I'm unsure what point the walls of questions have. If you make an single point it's easier to reply to and easier to get a FAQ for. Having 8 questions makes it 8 times harder to work with. All the "specific cases" are mostly just muddying the waters. It's not really that complicated as it boils down to pretty much what my last post was.
Now the single thing that's a true sticking point is if multiple 2 handed weapons are possible. I fall on the side of it being possible but it's heavily debated so there is no concrete answer for you there.
Also we have stated that there is no single ruling already. That is one reason why the kasatha has been debated several times when people try to combine to two weapon fight with 2 two-handed weapons or when they try to combine a two-handed weapon with light weapons for the purpose of two-weapon fighting.
The only part of that which can't be addressed by a single ruling can be answered by an entirely different question: can a weapon be wielded in two off hands?
I am not asking that question. I have an opinion on it, but I am not asking it. My opinion is that I would expect multiple two-handed weapons to get in each others' way, unless they are piercing weapons, in which case it's more a question of damage. If one assumes that the number of off-hand attacks is based on the number of hands (which I agree with, BTW, but not everyone does), then each two-handed weapon occupies two hands, reducing the available number of off-hand attacks by one per two-handed weapon. I would not make any judgements regarding application of strength to damage. I am perfectly willing to accept that others may disagree with this opinion. If someone wants to request a FAQ response on multiple two-handed weapons, that's fine. But they will need the opening question of this FAQ request answered first.
As far as my own question, here is how I would answer the eight cases.
- C1 = 5
- C2 = 1
- C3 = 3
- C4 = 3
- C5 = 2
- C6 = 3
- C7 = 3
- C8 = 4
My opinion in this regard is based on wording found in the Multiweapon Fighting feat, as well as monster examples such as the Marilith, the Upasunda Asura, the Four-Armed Mudra Skeleton, and the High Girallon. All of which were mentioned by blackbloodtroll back in 2013.
Actually, the Upasunda appears to answer by example the question of a weapon in two off hands (the spear). It still only wields one two-handed weapon, since its main hand holds a longsword.
I'm looking over wraithstrike's answers and I think I agree with everything he said. I'm unsure what point the walls of questions have. If you make an single point it's easier to reply to and easier to get a FAQ for. Having 8 questions makes it 8 times harder to work with. All the "specific cases" are mostly just muddying the waters. It's not really that complicated as it boils down to pretty much what my last post was.
I posted eight examples to be addressed by one question and one ruling. Why? Because Wraithstrike said I needed to present a specific case to get an answer, but all eight cases (and may more) can be answered by a single response of 1-2 sentences... or by picking any one of the nine answers already supplied.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yaba may be new. As the FAQ process has been explained, the faster they can:
Read the question.
Read the links to the rules.
See the pitfalls you provided.
Make a ruling.
If all that can be done in 15 minutes, you are likely to get an answer.
Otherwise, be patient. It could take months, years, never.
I'm looking over wraithstrike's answers and I think I agree with everything he said. I'm unsure what point the walls of questions have. If you make an single point it's easier to reply to and easier to get a FAQ for. Having 8 questions makes it 8 times harder to work with. All the "specific cases" are mostly just muddying the waters. It's not really that complicated as it boils down to pretty much what my last post was.I posted eight examples to be addressed by one question and one ruling. Why? Because Wraithstrike said I needed to present a specific case to get an answer, but all eight cases (and may more) can be answered by a single response of 1-2 sentences... or by picking any one of the nine answers already supplied.
Spears are two-handed weapons, but they are only getting the x1 modifier on strength. There is no rule or precedent to support that so I am wondering how they came to the conclusion of x1 damage on the spear. I am thinking that someone made a judgement call. Sometimes monsters are just allowed to break rules. As an example nagas don't have hands, but they get sorcerers levels. This was brought up and a dev explained that their body motions replaced the hand motions. However that is more of a way to explain the flavor of things, more than it is a rule. A GM could easily say that a monster with innate sorcerer levels doesn't need to have hands.
Now back to this spear, it would need something written in stone, but I am guessing that since this is not something that is common it is not a question that is high on their(PDT) priority list.
-------------------------------------------------------------
I also wasnt expecting 8 questions. I just didnt understand what you were trying to ask. I knew that if you were asking multiple questions vs one question that Paizo would be less likely to answer it.
The only confusion(lack of clarity) is on the on the interaction of two-handed weapons and two-weapon fighting. Outside of that most of the board is in agreement on how many attacks a creature may get.
edit: made correction to previous post.
"If a character loses a hand, by Hand's Detachment or another effect, how does this affect game mechanics involving hands? (Skill checks, Two Weapon Fighting, Spellcasting, Swashbucklers)"
He loses a limb that can use fine motor skills and loses a physical free hand. He keep two hands of effort though.
Skills: only if the skill requires 2 hands : for instance. climb requires 2 hands.
TWF: Works just fine. Just requires the use of a light/1 handed weapon and a non-hand/unarmed attack.
Spellcasting: no issues as you still have free hand.
Swashbuckler: What's the issue? They LITERALLY have nothing in the offhand so abilities are good.
Kineticist: surprisingly ok, Gather power allows for "unusual kineticists" allowing it's use if "all of her prehensile appendages" are free. Since the number of those drops without a hand, so does the requirements.
Sure, probably, maybe. Rules for any of that?
Yep, sure do.
The 'hands of effort' and 'TWF with unarmed attacks' FAQ cover TWF.Spellcasting is under spellcasting: One hand for S components. Nothing else requires a free hand.
Swashbucklers: light or one-handed piercing melee weapons are usable in one hand: base class covered. Slashing grace works unless "another hand is otherwise occupied". it's hard to occupy a hand you don't have...
Skills are listed under skills...
I don't recal any FAQs addressing 1 handed characters, got a link?
Why is one needed? you're allowed 2 weapon attacks without using hands. You have hands of effort that aren't tied to physical hands. As such, the 2 FAQ's prove that loss of a physical hand has no bearing on your hands of effort. We aren't talking about a 1 armed race but race that started off with 2 and that clearly get 2.
Spellcasters: and if that other hand is otherwise occupied?
What changed in this, from a normal spellcaster. The SAME THING that happen when an caster has their hands full...
Is a hand otherwise occupied if it is climbing a wall, or chilling in a box?
Makes no sense. It acts as a wizard’s familiar, gaining it's own actions: as such, it's not taking any from you. It occupise the same number of hands any familiar takes up.
Very few skills mention number of hands needed, and multiple spells and effects mention manipulations that can or cannot be done one handed, but does not elaborate what these things are.
Correct. That means most skills are usable without issue. It's the same question as 'what skills can I use when wearing a heavy shield.
Spells: Unless it specifically mentions 2 hands, you're fine. Which spell are you thinking of that requires 2 hands worth of elaborate
manipulations.
I don't recal any FAQs addressing 1 handed characters, got a link?Why is one needed?
Sure, probably, maybe. Rules for any of that?Yep, sure do.
The 'hands of effort' and 'TWF with unarmed attacks' FAQ cover TWF.
Sounds like some confusion, as it could easily sound like you're sending him/her looking for a "hands of effort" FAQ entry. To be fair, it's a decent descriptor for a combination of the Two-weapon fighting combat entry with the armor spikes and unarmed strike FAQ entries. It does make certain assumptions, and is not in itself either a FAQ or rule, but it's a decent name/descriptor, which explains why you use it. (I ran a forum search for "hands of effort", so I know other people use the same descriptor, but a search of the other sections of the site comes up empty.)
Yaba may be new.
Not new to the forum. Definitely not new to the system. But this is my first time requesting a FAQ. I have noticed one important trend: the most dominant factor in whether something gets FAQ'd is how many people flag a single post for FAQ. Requests have been for FAQ clarification on every variant of this topic, including exactly the sort of narrow focus that you and Wraithstrike suggest, but since no single post ever gets more than a couple FAQ flags, nothing happens. I went back to a topic from 2013 to support a few posts that were already flagged for FAQ, in case that helps and this discussion doesn't.
If I can find the time, I'll write up a thorough breakdown of my original question into several interconnected branching subquestions, with suggested answers and as much supporting information as I can manage. The breakdown won't be for a FAQ, although it could be used to formulate one (or several). Instead the main goal will be to demonstrate why the question I originally posted merits a FAQ response.
But that's only if I can find the time, because I want it to be thorough, logical, organized, and as unbiased as I can make it, with framework for reasonable follow-up discussion.
toastedamphibian: I'm more than willing to drop in and post if a thread is made. ;)
Yaba: I generally don't make links to FAQ's like that as the normal/usual posters already know what I'm talking about. If a new poster happens to wander in and is confused, that's when I'll point them in the right direction. Most times it's not needed and linking is a pain in the [blank] when on a mobile device. ;)
"I'll write up a thorough breakdown of my original question into several interconnected branching subquestions": Oh, PLEASE don't do this. I totally agree with toastedamphibian. You need to make your request simple/easy/concise for people to look over it, understand it and want to reply. You make a HUGE wall of text and most people are going to move along.
For instance, if you're curious about alter self into a 4 armed creature make JUST that question it's own question. Don't sandwitch it in between 50 other questions as it gets lost. But whatever you pick, if you can't boil the question down to a sentence or two, it's going to get skipped over.
Graystone is correct. That is kinda what I was getting at before. You need to ask a very specific question. If you are just trying to get an answer on how many off-hands someone gets based on actual hands there is not really much confusion there. The only real problem is how does TWF interact with two-handed weapons when a creature can has more than 2 hands.
As an example: "If a creature has 4 or more hands/claws that can wield weapons can it combine one or more two-handed weapons with two-weapon fighting? If so what are the penalties to attack, and how much of a strength bonus is applied to the two-handed weapon(s)."
Now this really combines two questions into one, but written this way it would likely avoid several other FAQ's if answered, and it is still simple enough for people to understand what is being asked.
- My original question is a single sentence, with optional elaboration in parentheses, all of which I marked in bold text. The question itself is 20-22 words, depending on whether "or less" is included. All the rest is a combination of suggested answers (each of which someone other than me has insisted to be accurate, and none of which I have managed to sufficiently disprove) out-of-question clarification in case it's needed, and explanation of why I'm asking the question.
- Maybe I am mistaken, but it appears to me that people do not understand why I am asking the question, and/or why I am asking this exact question. Which means I did not sufficiently elaborate my reasoning. Which is why I want to make a "wall of text" post, and hope that the people for whom it matters will at least scan through it. I am aware that large blocks of text may be a deterrent, but if I organize it correctly, and bold the specific component questions to break up the wall into digestable chunks, that should help.
- Contrary to the statements made by people who think there exists some sort of actual consensus on the answer to my question posted in this topic, there is not a sufficient consensus to prevent it from consistently becoming an argument with no consensus. I can, in fact, attest that I was recently left to argue viewpoint {C} alone against someone who firmly believed viewpoint {A}.
- Perhaps part of the confusion here is that I recently asked a different but related question as a Devil's Advocate, and that question was sufficiently answered by links supplied to existing rules & rulings.
/rant
There is no max number of offhand attacks for a PC. There is a max number of offhand attacks for standard(core) PC races.
The difference matters because a PC is a the main character controlled by a player, which could be a kasatha or something modified by a spell to have extra arms.
As an example a kasatha that is a PC, and one that is an NPC would have the same limitations. The PC would not be limited to 2 attacks at level 1 while the NPC would allowed 4 attacks.
If you can somehow get your GM to let you play a maralith you can every attack that the one in the book does.
Now if someone is saying something that supports both versions of a maralith getting treated differently then ask them to post rules to support it. I am sure that if I post a question about this most people will agree that the PC and NPC maralith get treated the same with regard to the number of attacks.
How the FAQ System Works
However, it is not intended to provide answers to niche, situational questions that are uncommonly found at the gaming table.
This is one reason I am providing a question that covers a broader range of situations, rather than one "niche" situation (dual wielding two-handed weapons in four hands).
Wraithstrike: I was hoping to wait for the wall of text, but here is the root component of my original question.
Do PCs and monsters follow the same rules for making off-hand weapon attacks?
The answer is that I have been unable to find an official answer, despite the so-called consensus that I have observed is definitely not a consensus. (The fact that I agree with your opinion is not relevant.) I have seen valid arguments for both yes and no answers. I will save the elaboration on this point for the wall of text, unless someone can find an official rule or ruling to answer this question.
Do PCs and monsters follow the same rules for making off-hand attacks?
To illustrate how useful all those "broader range of situations" where, if you would have asked me what your original question was, I wouldn't have been able to tell you and I read every post. People that 'just scan it' really have no way to pick that out of the multiple 'wall o' text'.
As to why you're asking, that is really secondary to the ACTUAL question. If you think it'll affect people answering at all, post a SINGLE, BEST example of WHY you think it's true. You may like a 50 bullet point presentation on your question but from experience in these threads, that is a serious detriment to getting people to look it over and comment/FAQ. if you REALLY feel the need to fill a few screen with bolded examples, make it a second post, NOT the one you hope to get FAQ'd.
AS to the 'how FAQ's work', that's why I suggested 'alter self into 4 armed creature'. It's a common spell that multiple classes can take and it should answer the question at hand. Or ask 'are there any differences between a natural kasatha and someone using alter self into one for two/multi weapon combat'. Simple, easy and no bolded, bullet points...
I'm still figure that long before we get an answer we will get PF 2.0 and Starfinder attack strings where it won't matter.
I'm still figure that long before we get an answer we will get PF 2.0 and Starfinder attack strings where it won't matter.
Most likely. It's been asked since the start of the game after all.
How the FAQ System Works
However, it is not intended to provide answers to niche, situational questions that are uncommonly found at the gaming table.This is one reason I am providing a question that covers a broader range of situations, rather than one "niche" situation (dual wielding two-handed weapons in four hands).
Wraithstrike: I was hoping to wait for the wall of text, but here is the root component of my original question.
Do PCs and monsters follow the same rules for making off-hand weapon attacks?
The answer is that I have been unable to find an official answer, despite the so-called consensus that I have observed is definitely not a consensus. (The fact that I agree with your opinion is not relevant.) I have seen valid arguments for both yes and no answers. I will save the elaboration on this point for the wall of text, unless someone can find an official rule or ruling to answer this question.
There are rules for attacks in the combat chapter. In order for there to be special attack rules for NPC's and PC's it would have to be stated. Then there would need to be rules for what happens when a PC is also a creatures that is mostly likely to be a monster such as the Kasatha or Marilith.
No such rules exist, and there is nothing to suggest that Kasatha(or Marilith) played as a PC follow different rules than Kasatha(or Marilith) played as an NPC.
That is why you will need some rules to get people behind this FAQ. Otherwise people won't FAQ it because they won't see a reason to press the FAQ button.
So what rules were quoted to suggest that a Kasatha or Marilith played by a PC would be restricted more so than an NPC version?
PC races can even take monster feats unless the GM houserules otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So it's been another couple of weeks and we have another 10 new threads, 203 Posts and 21 FAQs. This brings the running total to 3,265 Posts and 150 FAQs.
Does having extra arms grant extra off hand attacks. +4 Posts +20FAQs (now 269 Posts and 28 FAQs)
TWF with Quarterstaff + non-hand natural weapons 4 Posts 0 FAQs
Attack of Opportunity with a Whip? +73 Posts +1 FAQ (now 95 Posts 1 FAQ) - I missed this thread during the last update
Alternate ways to throw weapons 5 Posts 0 FAQs
Magus+Multiple Touch Spells+TWF 3 Posts 0 FAQs
Magus Spell Combat + Two Weapon Fighting 43 Posts 0 FAQs
Two-Weapon Fighting and combat maneuvers / aid 11 Posts 0 FAQs
Full attack with TWF and Natural Attack 5 Posts 0 FAQs
[PFS] Multiple arms and two weapon fighting 24 Posts 0 FAQs
Feral combat training, flurry of blows, pounce and rake 6 Posts 0 FAQs
What happens on a full attack with only secondary natural weapons? 15 Posts 0 FAQs
Thrown Weapons with Two Weapon Fighting and Rapid Shot 10 Posts 0 FAQs
Here is a good place to start for further reading Yaba
So it's been another couple of weeks and we have another 10 new threads, 203 Posts and 21 FAQs. This brings the running total to 3,265 Posts and 150 FAQs.
Does having extra arms grant extra off hand attacks. +4 Posts +20FAQs (now 269 Posts and 28 FAQs)
This is basically what I was trying to ask, with less specificity. I'll add my FAQ request to the pile. Thanks.
Graystone: Just to be clear, I have no intention of editing the OP. In fact, I can't edit the OP. It locked less than an hour after I posted it. If I do get around to an elaborate breakdown & explanation, it'll be inline with the rest of this conversation, which has (unfortunately) been largely dominated by a discussion of what, if anything, I should have done differently, rather than of the actual question and people's opinions thereof. On another note, if you make a post asking the question you think I should have asked, the way you think I should have asked it, I'd be happy to flag it for FAQ request.
Wraithstrike: The rules for fighting with multiple weapons, as seen in the Combat entry (linked in a previous post in this discussion) dictate exactly one off-hand attack, which runs counter to numerous examples of monsters with multiple off-hands and a corresponding number of off-hand attacks. The two-weapon fighting feat is in a PC-oriented book, the multiweapon fighting feat is in a monster-oriented book, and there's very little reason (although not NO reason) why the two couldn't be combined into one feat, unless the intention was to keep PC rules and monster rules separate. And as far as I can tell, there are no published rules at all for the apparently-standard methodology used for off-hand attacks in monster stat blocks. Plus for some reason, the publishers opted not to include an attack option for four weapons in the Kasatha Monk stat block (at -1/-1/-1/-1 since all hands are primary and it doesn't have a TWF or MWF feat).
Looks like the wall of text is turning into a piecemeal effort on my part, despite my intentions. It honestly would've made more sense if I could find time to organize the whole thing, but since it looks like it may be a moot point, oh well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If this issue was going to be officially answered, it would have happened a long time ago.
The only way forward is to agree with your group how you will handle it at your table.
That FAQ was about PC's with two arms as I mentioned before. It doesn't contradict anything concerning creatures with more than 2 hands.
That FAQ was about PC's with two arms as I mentioned before. It doesn't contradict anything concerning creatures with more than 2 hands.Are you referring to this?
Two-weapon fighting combat entry
Because {a} it's a rule, not a faq (and appears to be the only published rule on the subject, aside from the TWF & MWF feats), and {b} it doesn't actually say that it's exclusive to creatures with two hands. We just make that assumption. It's a logical assumption to make based on the use of the singular "off hand" in the first sentence, but it has certainly not been proven. All we can prove is that monsters in the Bestiary books don't follow this limitation of one extra off-hand attack.
We can have opinions. We can agree on those opinions. But when someone else disagrees with those opinions, we can't prove them wrong, and they can't prove us wrong, and whoever asked the question walks away with "it's a grey area". That's what FAQs are for.
If this issue was going to be officially answered, it would have happened a long time ago. The only way forward is to agree with your group how you will handle it at your table.
Sad truth. Still, at least I tried. I would try harder, but it's hard to stay motivated when all I get are criticisms for trying. Thanks for weighing in. My vote has been cast. Guess I should take your advice and let the matter drop.
<snip>If this issue was going to be officially answered, it would have happened a long time ago. The only way forward is to agree with your group how you will handle it at your table.Sad truth. Still, at least I tried. I would try harder, but it's hard to stay motivated when all I get are criticisms for trying. Thanks for weighing in. My vote has been cast. Guess I should take your advice and let the matter drop.
I agree that it is disappointing that given the number of times threads relating to how does combat work with multiple weapons arise, how much disagreement there is within those threads and how many FAQs have been requested on the subject. As has been suggested by others, I believe that the reason is that the game designers don't actually agree. This could be solved by Jason Bulmahn publishing his definitive answer but I suspect he doesn't want the vitriol and criticism that would arise.
When I collated a lot of the posts on the subject last year, I suggested the subject could be a blog post topic. This would give the design team more room to give a full explanation, the reasoning behind that explanation and to explore variants and their impacts on the game. Perhaps it still requires too much effort, in which case perhaps it could be a subject within a hardback rulebook (e.g. Gamemastery Guide 2 or Gamemastery Unchained) which could explore several contentious and difficult rulesets offering official and established variant rules e.g.
- Stealth
- Light
- Multi-weapon combat
- Falling/Jumping onto an opponent
etc