| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Wouldn't reload 0 mean that you draw it as part of the attack on its own?
Wouldn't reload 0 mean that you draw it as part of the attack on its own?
Yes. It's better than Quick Draw.
Other thrown weapons might have an issue, but one Returning shuriken should work as well as a bow unless an ability mentions releasing two+ missiles at once (not just in the same Action). Then you'd need two+ shuriken.
I was wondering since someone had stated you needed to have it in hand already to count as Wielding it for the feats.
I was wondering since someone had stated you needed to have it in hand already to count as Wielding it for the feats.
Apologies, I was thinking in terms of having one in hand to start.
There are odd situations, like with Point Blank Shot Stance, that require you to be equipped for the feat; to have the shuriken in hand. Many others simply need you to use a ranged Strike or ranged weapon, in which case you do not need a shuriken in hand.I do not know if there's an intentional difference between "wielding" (having in hand) or "using" (making a Strike with) re: PF2. In casual usage it's the same circumstance, but technically they differ, though this difference has led to some awkward situations & loopholes.
But does a reload 0 thrown weapon have to be in hand to count as wielded?
I mean it seems a bit silly that I don't have to have an arrow drawn to count as wielding a bow but having a free hand and a reload 0 thrown weapon I have to be walking around with a shuriken in hand at all times.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But does a reload 0 thrown weapon have to be in hand to count as wielded?
I mean it seems a bit silly that I don't have to have an arrow drawn to count as wielding a bow but having a free hand and a reload 0 thrown weapon I have to be walking around with a shuriken in hand at all times.
Technically, yes. Though I wouldn't mind a ruling otherwise.
In most (all?) other senses, no, since it's ready to Strike by default.So ask your GM. It might be a good litmus test re: their reasonableness.
And the bow does need to be in hand, so I'm not certain that analogy works. If anything, the situation mechanically balances better if the shuriken has to occupy a hand too.
I was wondering since someone had stated you needed to have it in hand already to count as Wielding it for the feats.
Nothing stops you from having an empty sling in your other hand you never use. It costs nothing other than the use of that hand to have a ranged weapon wielded.
Nothing other than the utter ridiculousness of carrying around a sling you never use just so you can use a certain featI was wondering since someone had stated you needed to have it in hand already to count as Wielding it for the feats.Nothing stops you from having an empty sling in your other hand you never use. It costs nothing other than the use of that hand to have a ranged weapon wielded.
Technically correct is the best kind of correct. ;)
Now is it ideal? No, but it's better than wanting to use a stance but you keep dropping out of it because you picked thrown weapons as your weapon of choice. If this was a thread about houserules or what we wanted the rule to read, then sure I'd want it to work differently: we're in the rules section though and you're thinking it's "utter ridiculousness" doesn't change them. Wielding a weapon you'll never use makes the rules work for thrown weapons no matter how you feel about it. I'd say 'hit the FAQ button' if such a thing existed but it's not a thing anymore...
Incidentally, though, for someone who is trying to make a thrower, I might suggest carrying an actual thrown weapon rather than a sling. A dart, javelin, or shuriken would work just as well, and not require you to use both hands while reloading should you decide to use the weapon in that hand.
There is almost no reason to have another thrown weapon in your other hand: they all cost more and might also have more bulk. At best it gets you one more attack before you drop out of your ranged stance while the sling allows you to stay in it while at worst you're wasting bulk and cash for no return.
For example, a fighter had multiclassed into monk and now has both Point Blank Shot and Monastic Weaponry: with a sling and shuriken he only has to enter the stance once and can attack as he likes and even has the option of entering melee without dropping out of it [replacing shuriken with melee leaves the sling in hand for the stance]. Now if they do as you suggest, he attacks twice [one with each shuriken], then drops out of the stance and has to spend an action to reenter it or you're just holding it in the other hand like the sling without ever planning on attacking with it...
Other that the optics of it, what do you see as the benefits of your suggestion?
Well if the person has quick draw, they could carry a javelin in the other hand as a higher damage, higher range alternative. It would still require an action to draw and not throw a javelin to get back to shuriken use, but... it would work....
Look I'm not saying it's great, but it's something. Carrying a sling just to enable a feat is so video gamey it just kills me inside, I'm sorry for having feelings. I'll just keep my mouth shut next time D:
I mean there are a lot of things I am noticing in this edition that don't make a lot of sense at times.
Well if the person has quick draw, they could carry a javelin in the other hand as a higher damage, higher range alternative. It would still require an action to draw and not throw a javelin to get back to shuriken use, but... it would work....
Quickdraw doesn't matter in the least: all that means is that you use a javelin instead of a shuriken in the one hand and a sling in the other. Anything else ends up with falling out of the stance or holding a weapon you aren't using in the other. That's the exact same situation.
If we ever wanted to use the off weapon, upgrade to a bow for more range. This doesn't alter the build most times as exactly 1 feat requires just thrown instead of ranged [Raging Thrower].
Look I'm not saying it's great, but it's something. Carrying a sling just to enable a feat is so video gamey it just kills me inside, I'm sorry for having feelings. I'll just keep my mouth shut next time D:
I don't understand. You're FINE with another thrown weapon in the other hand you will NEVER use but it kills you inside to have a sling you'll never use? To me it has the exact same optics/feel but you spent more cash and carry more bulk for no reason. A weapon held in your off hand you never use is a weapon you never use no matter it's shape.
I mean there are a lot of things I am noticing in this edition that don't make a lot of sense at times.
*nods* I'm right there with you. It's easier to carry a knocked out person in gear than it is to carry just the gear making your knocked out halfling the best carrying device ever... When knocked out small creatures become easy to carry at 15-30 pounds while medium sized become 30-60 pounds [even when you build a 210 pound full platemail and towershield character].
Then there is the fact I can put 4 javelins in a belt pouch... I can keep going on.
I mean there are a lot of things I am noticing in this edition that don't make a lot of sense at times.*nods* I'm right there with you. It's easier to carry a knocked out person in gear than it is to carry just the gear making your knocked out halfling the best carrying device ever... When knocked out small creatures become easy to carry at 15-30 pounds while medium sized become 30-60 pounds [even when you build a 210 pound full platemail and towershield character].
Then there is the fact I can put 4 javelins in a belt pouch... I can keep going on.
One of my favorites I can make a barbarian who gets hurt more from a punch than a club, or a house cat scratching him than a dagger.
One of my favorites I can make a barbarian who gets hurt more from a punch than a club, or a house cat scratching him than a dagger.
I mean there are a lot of things I am noticing in this edition that don't make a lot of sense at times.*nods* I'm right there with you. It's easier to carry a knocked out person in gear than it is to carry just the gear making your knocked out halfling the best carrying device ever... When knocked out small creatures become easy to carry at 15-30 pounds while medium sized become 30-60 pounds [even when you build a 210 pound full platemail and towershield character].
Then there is the fact I can put 4 javelins in a belt pouch... I can keep going on.
What lets you ignore the bulk of the creature's items? The book provides bulk for the creature, but also bulk for each item. You should add them up.
You don't get to ignore the bulk of items in a chest, why would you get to ignore the bulk of items on a living container?
What lets you ignore the bulk of the creature's items? The book provides bulk for the creature, but also bulk for each item. You should add them up.
You don't get to ignore the bulk of items in a chest, why would you get to ignore the bulk of items on a living container?
"You might need to know the Bulk of a creature, especially if you need to carry someone off the battlefield. The table that follows lists the typical Bulk of a creature based on its size, but the GM might adjust this number." Nothing in this tells you to add the bulk of the creature: it's a quick bulk number "if you need to carry someone off the battlefield". If that's not it, there is no need for the rule as you can already figure out the bulk with weight conversion and adding up their equipment...
"Size
Source Core Rulebook pg. 33
This tells you the physical size of members of the ancestry. Medium corresponds roughly to the height and weight range of a human adult, and Small is roughly half that."
+
"Estimating an Item's Bulk
Source Core Rulebook pg. 272
As a general rule, an item that weighs 5 to 10 pounds is 1 Bulk"
Those tells you everything you need to know about the bulk [a 210 barbarian is 42-21 bulk]. The carrying creatures section clearly diverges from the norm with it's own rules by giving a number instead of how it would normally be done [ie convert weight to bulk for character and add equipment]. If they cut the bulk by 3.5-7 times so it's easy to move them "off the battlefield" why would they then add the bulk back on making it less likely you can actually do that? Now if the DM wants to add something to the number they can but he doesn't have to.
As to 'it doesn't make sense: why does it make sense that 210 pounds equipment is 3.5 to 7 times Bulkier than 210 pounds of creature? Once that gets explained satisfactorily, we can move on to why equipment doesn't add to it as it's related to why it's SO much easier to move a body than any other object in the game world...
PS: as this is is getting so far away from the topic it's not even tangential anymore, I'll stop at this. I can go on for quite some time on bulk and this isn;t the thread for it.