|
| 15 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Thunder and Fang (Combat)
You have mastered the ancient Shoanti Thunder and Fang fighting style, allowing you to fight with increased effectiveness when wielding an earth breaker and klar.
Prerequisite: Str 15, Two-Weapon Fighting, Weapon Focus (earth breaker), Weapon Focus (klar)
Benefit: You can use an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon. When using an earth breaker in one hand and a klar in your off hand, you retain the shield bonus your klar grants to your Armor Class even when you use it to attack. Treat your klar as a light weapon for the purposes of determining your two-weapon fighting penalty."
I need to ask the messageboard about this, I have been discussion this line of usage from the feat with other GM's and my VC, and they all have different views on how this feat works.
Some believe I have to apply by the favor text of the feat and only use Earth Breaker with a Klar.
Others says i can use 2 Earth Breaker as it dosn't state that i can't use the Earth Breakers in both hands but with the -4/-4 attack roll.
If this has been answered before could some one post me a link because i couldn't find any answer to this question, and i apologise for my lack on that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wish they'd kept the original wording for this feat from the Crimson Throne AP. There was no room for misinterpretation.
As written it seems to work. And as you need at least one prerequisite you'll not be using and the -4/-4 is a hefty penalty I wouldn't have any problems with it.
The way it's written now, you should be able to use two Earthbreakers, one in each hand, and apply penalties as though you were two-weapon fighting with two one-handed weapons. (So it works the way you think)
Make sure you have the book on hand (you should, anyway, since it's PFS) so you can show that the verbiage has changed (pretty significantly) since the feat was first published.
As Umbranus points out, you will be burning a feat on Weapon Focus: Klar and never using it, as well as taking hefty penalties, so your GM and VOs should adjudicate that it's perfectly fine to use Thunder and Fang in this fashion.
Does it allow you to use a large Earthbreaker?
Same as some other abilities* that's a grey zone that's not clearly forbidden and by thus could be read as possible.
I would not allow it as a GM because I do not like the large two-handed weapon shenanigans. But apart from my dislike it seems balanced enough. You can't use WF: Klar and TWF and get a penalty to hit.* the other abilities that are similar in being a grey zone are: Quarterstaff master and the phalanx fighter ability when combined with a buckler.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a DM idd veto this, ask your Dm.
Its his call.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think it's pretty clear that you can't do that. The style clearly intends you to use the earth breaker in one hand and the klar in the other. I would not allow you to use Thunder and Fang with two earthbreakers.
Isn't a Klar already a light weapon?
It is listed as one-handed martial weapon
The style clearly intends you to use the earth breaker in one hand and the klar in the other.
The core of this problem is the question: "Is flavour static to provide a specific environment to play in or is flavour something that can be changed if it stands in the way of fun?"
For some, like me the rules have to be fixed and the flavour can be bend to support what you want to play.For others (and it seems for you) flavour is the basis for their view of the game world and changing it would require you to change the world.
|
|
I read the flavour text as thats the traditional way of fighting with it, but i could also imagine some Shoanti warriors might have gone the same way i wanted to go with this feat.
but i can also see some gm's might be against it, and would leave me with having to bring a second char along for just such an incident.
@ Warrick Blackstone
Honestly I can't agree with this primarily because it makes no sense. The feat as written is clearly mean't to use a Earthbreaker and Klar style of combat.
/an/
determiner
determiner: an
1.
the form of a before an initial vowel sound ( an arch; an honor ) and sometimes, especially in British English, before an initial unstressed syllable beginning with a silent or weakly pronounced h : an historian.
So as the grammar states you can wield a earth breaker as a one handed weapon. One Earthbreaker + One Klar. Its not only clear but without question how the feat works.
Besides as I have always understood it, even if it isn't written there then assume you can't just do as you want. Besides have you ever tried wielding two 14 lb. sledgehammers? Doesn't work that well.
Kazaan Guess we found the Grammar Paladin. :P
So lets rewrite this in a terrible manner.
Benefit: You can use a an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon. When using a an earth breaker in one hand and a klar in your off hand, you retain the shield bonus your klar grants to your Armor Class even when you use it to attack. Treat your klar as a light weapon for the purposes of determining your two-weapon fighting penalty."
Blackbloodtroll
Now that would be interesting. And much like a certain iconic barbarian. ;)
|
Thunder and Fang specifically states: "You can use an earth breaker as though it were a one-handed weapon." This means that you can dual-wield Medium-sized earth breakers and two-hand a Large-sized earth breaker.
The rest of the feat says nothing to contradict this. In fact, the rest of the feat only applies to using a Klar (normally a one-handed weapon) as a light weapon for purposes of TWF and allows you to retain your Shield bonus while attacking with it.
Wilaml Fmelvam: You are assuming too much. Nowhere does it state you must wield one earth breaker and one klar.
|
|
The use of "a" or "an" is irrelevant. The feat does not require you to use AN earth breaker and A klar. You are free to use two earth breakers. You are assuming that, because the feat addresses both earth breakers and klars, it is forcing you to use both. This is untrue and definitively not a fact.
Also, I agree. The feat is extremely clear as it is written.
P.S. - "… have you ever tried wielding two 14 lb. sledgehammers? Doesn't work that well." Have you ever tried to summon a lightning strike accurate to 5 sq. ft.? Doesn't work that well. Have you ever tried to shape shift into an eagle? Doesn't work that well. Have you ever tried to teleport from Absalom to Augustana? Doesn't work that well (on many levels).
P.P.S. - "And you'll excuse me as I am stating AN opinion not A fact." FTFY
|
|
Wilaml Fmelvam: Under your logic, Improved Shield Bash would only allow one shield bash per turn otherwise you would still lose your Shield bonus.
"When you perform A shield bash, you may still apply the shield's shield bonus to your AC."
Obviously, this is not the case, therefore the "an" in Thunder and Fang is not restrictive as you would insist.
|
|
Just imagine: Weapon Focus's selected weapon is a single weapon. Is that shiny new Flaming Burst Longsword +3 so much better than your Masterwork Longsword? Sorry, Weapon Focus doesn't apply. You have to retrain the feat with that specific sword to get the bonus to hit. I mean, the balancing of the newer sword is so different that it will take weeks to master the differences. The basket hilt of the new sword rubs against your hand in a different way from the crossguard of your old weapon. RETRAIN THE FEAT! All in the name of Pathfinder sticklership!
Apologies good luck in your gaming.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, to be fair, your name is Blackbloodtroll.
It's a good rewrite for a house rule if you want to limit the feat.
It actually comes from a nickname I got back in the day, after the Fremont Troll, a long, long time ago, before the internet, and the term "troll" got it's new meaning.
|
|
Honestly, no need to apologize. Understanding feats is an art as much as a science. Honestly, they probably meant to restrict it to your interpretation, but they failed to do so, therefore players cannot be expected to have to "think like Paizo" when reading feats.
You should have left your posts up, so people can follow the argument in case they run into the same problem. At least, in my opinion.
|
In PFS, this is legit.
I encountered a dual-Earth Breaker PC last year at a Convention, right around the time I was designing a Shoanti myself. I told him the feat clearly spelled out that you needed to wield a Klar in order to one hand the Earth Breaker, but when he showed me the updated printing I had to allow it.
He also showed me a forum post confirming it, so that exists as well, but it's not needed at this point (and I'd have no more luck finding it than you already had).
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have a pfs double earthbreaker character that went to two conventions (one was into bonekeep), and had no real problems. Make note that if you do use two, you aterunning at -4/-4 for twf, as other people said. Moreover, you are only doing 1x STR of damage instead of 1.5x, and -1/+2 via power attack, not-1/+3. This was stated in an updated faq a few months back.
@Nefreet & Cao Thank you for your input guys. Marking this as a favorite in case I see a convo like this again.
|
Out of curiousity, other than coolness factor, why would you want to do this? The penalties (-2 to hit, no shield bonus) seem to offset the additional damage. I guess with enlarge person, leadblades, etc the extra damage may compensate but most of the time I don't like the tradeoff.
I'd also very much expect GM variation. I'm not at all sure that I'd allow this in PFS. Parsing the sentences as finely as you are is overdoing RAW in my opinion. This is one case where I'd say the intent is crystal clear.
|
|
I anticipate seeing more Human Barbarians with large-sized Earth Breakers in PFS now, because of this thread.
2d6 for a one-handed Earth Breaker.
3d6 for a large-sized Earth Breaker.
4d6 when using Lead Blades (or Impact).
6d6 when using Enlarge Person.
12d6 with Vital Strike.
Not really.
The Two Weapon Fighting feat, and Weapon Focus(Klar) would be dead feats.
|
|
Does it allow you to use a large Earthbreaker?
AFAIK using a weapon "as though it were a one-handed weapon." don't make it a one handed weapon, so you can't use a large version of a two handed weapon with two hands thanks to this feat.
The text it very similar to jotungrip and this FAQ say that it is not possible to do that:
Barbarian--Titan Mauler: Can a Medium titan mauler wield a Large two-handed weapon, such as a Large greatsword?
No. The "Inappropriately Sized Weapons" rule (Core Rulebook 144) says (in summary) that a creature can't wield an inappropriately-sized weapon if the size difference would increase it one or more "steps" beyond "two-handed." None of the titan mauler's abilities say the character can break the "steps" part of the "Inappropriately Sized Weapons" rule, so the character still has to follow that rule.
—Pathfinder Design Team, 03/15/13
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A bastard sword is a 1 handed weapon that require a special proficiency.
A Earthbreaker is a 2 handed weapon that can be wielded as a 1 handed weapon with a specific feat. But the feat don't change the simple fact that it is a 2 handed weapon.
And, just to explain how the thunder and fang is meant to work RAI (not RAW), the words of James Jacobs (BTW, he is in charge of Golarion canon material, so this is his field of competence).
...
The whole point of Thunder and Fang is to let you fight with that weapon and a klar as if the klar and the earth breaker were one single double weapon. You wield the earthbreaker normally, but when you attack, your klar blade sticks out perpendicular from the earthbrearker's shaft, forming a stubby "T" shape. You can swing the earthbreaker normally, and also stab with the blade of the klar that sticks out from the middle of the shaft as if it were a secondary weapon attached to the earthbreaker itself.
That you get to retain the klar's AC bonus when you attack is actually thus only half of how the feat lets you bend the rules.
No need to change the feat as a result, since it's working as intended.
Interesting, neh? Sad that the feat don't say that.
