A two-handed weapon weilded in one hand with no special ability, like Jotungrip, would be a one-handed Imoroved weapon, wouldn't it?
If you were willing to change your damage dice then it'd alright if I gmed
|
Oh yes, a core rulebook faq that isn’t even true totally is the end all statement to this.
I’m willing to believe the feat might be wrong, but not if you have to cite factually wrong sources to disprove it.
Right now I think the feat might be wrong, but still, the fact that you have to cite incorrect sources to counter it is making me doubt whether it could be wrong.
“The hell it doesn’t. Less leverage means you have to apply more strength to achieve the same results. Which would be applied in game as a penalty to attack rolls.”
"Because leverage doesn't work that way"One part of the FAQ being wrong doesn't make the entire FAQ wrong. Other FAQ's have also had typos. They just fixed the erroneous part. The rest was still accurate.
If you are the GM feel free to do what you want until the FAQ I'd fixed, but as a player don't be surprised when they don't allow it.Here’s the thing though, how do I know the other part of the faq is accurate when they already screwed up completely with the whole point of the main focus of the faq? That makes it extremely untrustworthy to me. I’m not saying it isn’t right. I’m saying I can’t trust that it is right. If you can provide some other more trustworthy source, I’ll accept it, but as it stands, the faq that was provided is hurting, not helping, the argument that you can’t do this, at least for me anyways.
If it helps at all, I have Asperger’s Syndrome, so my way of thinking is sometimes vastly different from a non-Autistic person’s way of thinking.
The problem is that you aren't refusing only the FAQ, but all other evidence that exist in the other books, like the existence of archetypes that have you pay a cost in abilities and suffer a penalty to do what you want to do.
You focus on a line of text and trust it, deciding that all other text in other books is wrong. Your single point of reference that is a piece of incidental text for some reason should overcome all other points of reference. If it was a"special" piece of text you could be right, as those supersede the other rules, but it is a "normal" piece of text. They don't change rules, at most they explain them (like the mount piece of text, it explain a rule that wasn't explicit before, but it don't change the rules about mounts printed before that date).
Probably who wrote that text in the feat was thinking that the klar was a buckler, as it is generally depicted strapped to the arm, not gripped into the hand. And a buckler has a specific penalty when fighting with two hands.
|
|
A two-handed weapon weilded in one hand with no special ability, like Jotungrip, would be a one-handed Imoroved weapon, wouldn't it?
As a two handed weapon is a large weapon, it will be a large improvised weapon and still require two hands.
If you were willing to change your damage dice then it'd alright if I gmed
Perfectly fine as a jome rule.
jome rule.
Now I HAVE to know what the jome rule is!!! :)
It is when you write a rule without looking the keyboard. Some text become very interesting. :Djome rule.Now I HAVE to know what the jome rule is!!! :)
LOL I usually find it when I'm using the micro-sized screen on a mobile device, though auto-correct usually finds a word as FAR away from the word I wanted to replace it with. :P
It is when you write a rule without looking the keyboard. Some text become very interesting. :Djome rule.Now I HAVE to know what the jome rule is!!! :)
Boo, I thought it meant Jank Home rule.
A two-handed weapon weilded in one hand with no special ability, like Jotungrip, would be a one-handed Imoroved weapon, wouldn't it?
No. it would be something too big to use as a one handed weapon
I think the stages outlined below provide a reasonable explanation for the Normal wording of the Thunder & Fang feat.
Stage 0: In the absence of a feat and/or class ability and/or race ability stating otherwise, a two-handed weapon cannot be wielded in one hand. (Ref: FAQ)
Stage 1: One or more feats and/or class/race features either currently exist or may exist in the future, which allow wielding of a two-handed weapon in one hand. (Example: Titan Mauler)
Stage 2: The aforementioned class/race features and/or feats may or may not include numeric penalties.
Stage 3: The aforementioned possible penalties are overridden by the Thunder and Fang feat when/where applicable.
A two-handed weapon weilded in one hand with no special ability, like Jotungrip, would be a one-handed improvised weapon, wouldn't it?No. it would be something too big to use as a one handed weapon
I could see it. Big, clumsy, hard to leverage, can't build enough momentum for a clean strike, but a person can wield a 10-ft steel pipe on one arm. I tried it once. (Home Depot, empty isle, thing weighed at least 30 lbs.) Dealing d6 with a -4 attack penalty would be fair. As a GM, I'd allow it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Oh yes, a core rulebook faq that isn’t even true totally is the end all statement to this.
I’m willing to believe the feat might be wrong, but not if you have to cite factually wrong sources to disprove it.
Right now I think the feat might be wrong, but still, the fact that you have to cite incorrect sources to counter it is making me doubt whether it could be wrong.
You're really going to call a FAQ wrong, when they are actually more in-line with how the rules are supposed to work than developer posts and RAW?
The FAQ states the general rule, that two-handed weapons cannot be wielded in a single hand. The other part of the FAQ (that a Bastard Sword cannot be wielded in one hand without proficiency) is also factually true, and is stated clearly as to how and why that is.
Honestly, the only thing that potentially makes the FAQ wrong is in relation to other Exotic weapons, but those usually have specific wording (such as the Dwarven Dorn Dergar and the Katana) which coincide with wording that the Bastard Sword possesses, so even on that front it's accurate.
I could see it. Big, clumsy, hard to leverage, can't build enough momentum for a clean strike, but a person can wield a 10-ft steel pipe on one arm. I tried it once. (Home Depot, empty isle, thing weighed at least 30 lbs.) Dealing d6 with a -4 attack penalty would be fair. As a GM, I'd allow it.
No. it would be something too big to use as a one handed weapon
Wielding is kind of a vague term. I don't doubt that you can pick something up like that and wave it around, but effectively striking with it against an opponent who can dodge, block, or just step into it is out of the question.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
They're wrong about the basted sword, but not about the part I bolded.mmm gravy
LOL
I had to read this three times to figure out what the joke was.|
|
The FAQ referenced is clarifying that the Bastard Sword is considered Two Handed for those that do not have the Exotic Proficiency to use it as intended. (One Handed Weapon) It does this as it also mentions that Two Handed weapons can not be wielded with just one hand.
The confusion is that it is not stated outright as I did above as well as not mentioning that it is a One Handed weapon on the chart list.