| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You're not misunderstanding anything. He should try to get used to just having at least one weapon in hand whenever possible.
|
Quick Draw having to Draw and Strike is very inflexible and clunky to use.
You may want to use it to possibly throw an ax if you can't get into melee but you always end up without a weapon in hand. Or you end up moving into melee range and quick drawing and provoking AoOs.
It would have been nice if you had the flexibility to Draw and Strike (or reverse order) as well as Draw and Move (or reversed). And even then you still couldn't use Twin Takedown.
Is he switching from a ranged weapon to his swords? If not, why doesn't he have them drawn already? If you're exploring a dungeon, the wilderness, or some other dangerous area, you go in weapons drawn.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That varies.
Exploring a dungeon? Almost definitely keeping a weapon ready, except when you need to use your hands for something else, so only an issue if you're interrupted right in the middle of something.
In the wilderness, in general, travelling long distances? A lot more likely that you wouldn't keep a weapon in hand at all times, though of course you may see signs that a specific part of the route is more dangerous.
It's a lot like how you're likely to be moving at half speed to use cautious exploration tactics in a dungeon, but not on the road between two towns.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is he switching from a ranged weapon to his swords?Yes, he's trying to be a switch hitter of sorts.
It also seems like he'd be better served, technically, by going something like Rapier/Short Sword rather than two Short Swords.
As a Ranger myself, PF2 really disincentivizes this. A Shortbow is just as good in Melee as a Shortsword. The only real reason to switch is if the enemy has specific Resistances or Weaknesses.
Is he switching from a ranged weapon to his swords?Yes, he's trying to be a switch hitter of sorts.
It also seems like he'd be better served, technically, by going something like Rapier/Short Sword rather than two Short Swords.
I think that is his problem. He is juggling two styles in combat, and not making any concessions.
if I was going to go switch hitter TWF, then I would go with gauntlets. Sure, there is a loss of damage, but you don't have to draw anything.
When he gets enough money for a returning weapon he can start mixing it up a bit by throwing his weapons and still being ready for melee.Yes, he's trying to be a switch hitter of sorts.
Oh, certainly another good compromise. Most one handed spears both have decent damage and ....well, decent range as far as thrown weapons go. There are also options for most light axes, and of course daggers.
Daggers seem like they are the easiest to work with given his current image.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I agree about gauntlets. Gauntlets are a really good fallback plan. You can attack with gauntlets right now and if you have actions to spare, you can draw a different weapon. But you're always at least basic ready for battle.
They also have their uses as a backup bludgeoning weapon for a sword user and so forth.
Basically, the OP would be well advised to consider this a challenge rather than clunkiness.
That is, the rules specifically isn't about just having character magically have whatever they need at hand. This is a fiddly game and that extends to hand usage. Embrace the mini-game instead of considering it a chore! ..is what I'm saying :)
One perfect example is Grab an Edge.
If you're a Ranger wielding twin blades (or a Barbarian wielding a Greataxe etc), you're up for a nasty surprise the first time you walk too close to a cliff.
Well said. Action economy is an integral part of the game that players should have to include it in their tactical strategy. Bandolier is another good example. You want to take two actions to drink a Healing potion in the heat of combat or just 1!
Well said. Action economy is an integral part of the game that players should have to include it in their tactical strategy. Bandolier is another good example. You want to take two actions to drink a Healing potion in the heat of combat or just 1!Basically, the OP would be well advised to consider this a challenge rather than clunkiness.
That is, the rules specifically isn't about just having character magically have whatever they need at hand. This is a fiddly game and that extends to hand usage. Embrace the mini-game instead of considering it a chore! ..is what I'm saying :)
One perfect example is Grab an Edge.
If you're a Ranger wielding twin blades (or a Barbarian wielding a Greataxe etc), you're up for a nasty surprise the first time you walk too close to a cliff.
A bandolier does not allow you to draw a potion for free it still takes an action to draw it and another to drink....but if it's in your pack then it takes 2 actions to draw it and a 3rd to drink so there is that at least.
As a Ranger myself, PF2 really disincentivizes this. A Shortbow is just as good in Melee as a Shortsword. The only real reason to switch is if the enemy has specific Resistances or Weaknesses.Is he switching from a ranged weapon to his swords?Yes, he's trying to be a switch hitter of sorts.
It also seems like he'd be better served, technically, by going something like Rapier/Short Sword rather than two Short Swords.
Other reasons to switch are 1) if you suspect target has AoO ability and 2) you also don't get the damage ability bonus.
A bandolier does not allow you to draw a potion for free it still takes an action to draw it and another to drink....but if it's in your pack then it takes 2 actions to draw it and a 3rd to drink so there is that at least.Well said. Action economy is an integral part of the game that players should have to include it in their tactical strategy. Bandolier is another good example. You want to take two actions to drink a Healing potion in the heat of combat or just 1!Basically, the OP would be well advised to consider this a challenge rather than clunkiness.
That is, the rules specifically isn't about just having character magically have whatever they need at hand. This is a fiddly game and that extends to hand usage. Embrace the mini-game instead of considering it a chore! ..is what I'm saying :)
One perfect example is Grab an Edge.
If you're a Ranger wielding twin blades (or a Barbarian wielding a Greataxe etc), you're up for a nasty surprise the first time you walk too close to a cliff.
Bandolier description states "allowing you to draw the tools as part of the action that requires them." for alchemical items and tools. 1 Action to drink a potion from your Bandolier.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm afraid that's wrong. Drawing the tools as part of the use actions is only for toolkits. The full sentence is bolder below. Quoting part of a sentence is usually not the best approach.
A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions. If you are carrying or stowing a bandolier rather than wearing it around your chest, it has light Bulk instead of negligible. A bandolier can be dedicated to a full set of tools, such as healer’s tools, allowing you to draw the tools as part of the action that requires them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm afraid that's wrong. Drawing the tools as part of the use actions is only for toolkits. The full sentence is bolder below. Quoting part of a sentence is usually not the best approach.
A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions. If you are carrying or stowing a bandolier rather than wearing it around your chest, it has light Bulk instead of negligible. A bandolier can be dedicated to a full set of tools, such as healer’s tools, allowing you to draw the tools as part of the action that requires them.
The reference to Alchemical Items or Potions in the first sentence is the qualifier (and was mentioned in my previous post). I have played at a few Paizo local conventions and various other Society scenario events and every GM has allowed it as 1 action. In fact, I've seen GM's ask players if they have a bandolier while pulling a potion just for this reason. I believe there are posts on this in the past (I will look again). I mean, I suppose it could be coincidence that every one of them is wrong. One of them happens to be a VC. Maybe it is an interpretation dispute but if you can point me to where potions aren't included I will concede to your opinion.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Other reasons to switch are 1) if you suspect target has AoO ability and 2) you also don't get the damage ability bonus.As a Ranger myself, PF2 really disincentivizes this. A Shortbow is just as good in Melee as a Shortsword. The only real reason to switch is if the enemy has specific Resistances or Weaknesses.Is he switching from a ranged weapon to his swords?Yes, he's trying to be a switch hitter of sorts.
It also seems like he'd be better served, technically, by going something like Rapier/Short Sword rather than two Short Swords.
Very few things ave AoO, so yes, that is an occasional concern, but not often enough to build around. Certainly not with the amount of Ranger Feats that work with either Range or Melee, but not both.
Composite gives you half your STR Damage modifier. Considering STR damage isn't really what a Ranger is built around, I don't find that a compelling reason for a Ranged Ranger to pull out a Melee Weapon.
However, if you only use a single Melee Weapon instead of 2, you can Quick Draw and Strike without needing to stow your Bow, so it really helps the Action Economy.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I agree about gauntlets. Gauntlets are a really good fallback plan. You can attack with gauntlets right now and if you have actions to spare, you can draw a different weapon. But you're always at least basic ready for battle.
They also have their uses as a backup bludgeoning weapon for a sword user and so forth.
With the ring that shares enhancement bonus across both weapons, there is an argument fir ALWAYS having the gauntlet as one of your weapons.
If you make the gauntlet into your nice, shiny enhanced weapon, you are free to use ANY one handed weapon you want, at any time. You just use the ring to copy the enhancements over to the new item. This is the path of a weapon master- get trip, shove, reach, deadly, agile, sweep, bludgeoning, slashing. Whatever you need.
You can also just have another gauntlet for whatever 'right now' situations you face.
I personally find quick draw a little bit of a trap for dual wielding rangers having played one. Because you have a decent perception skill I often beat monster initiative, so target your prey and move then quickdraw often means I was right next to an enemy having made one total attack. Then they get to go in initiative and unload on me.
I often found it was better to draw/draw/hunt prey and let enemies waste actions getting up to me. This is for random combats where I wouldn't naturally have weapons out.
Plus Quick Draw has the interact tag provoking AoO which is annoying.
I agree. Quick Draw is just bad for a Ranger in general. They have far too many excellent Feats to waste one on Quick Draw. I originally had that in my previous post, but the forums reverted it to an older version for reasons, I guess.
|
The reference to Alchemical Items or Potions in the first sentence is the qualifier (and was mentioned in my previous post). I have played at a few Paizo local conventions and various other Society scenario events and every GM has allowed it as 1 action. In fact, I've seen GM's ask players if they have a bandolier while pulling a potion just for this reason. I believe there are posts on this in the past (I will look again). I mean, I suppose it could be coincidence that every one of them is wrong. One of them happens to be a VC. Maybe it is an interpretation dispute but if you can point me to where potions aren't included I will concede to your opinion.I'm afraid that's wrong. Drawing the tools as part of the use actions is only for toolkits. The full sentence is bolder below. Quoting part of a sentence is usually not the best approach.
A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions. If you are carrying or stowing a bandolier rather than wearing it around your chest, it has light Bulk instead of negligible. A bandolier can be dedicated to a full set of tools, such as healer’s tools, allowing you to draw the tools as part of the action that requires them.
The bolder part only mentions tool kits, where does it mention you can draw and drink a potion as the same Action? The only mention of Potions in the bandolier is that it holds them.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.
"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."
I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.
Feel it should or was meant to state the tools are also within 'easy reach' but the tools take up all the space in the bandolier and there is no room for potions too.
Intuitively, a player with Battle Medicine can reach into their bandolier, pull out their bandages and Treat Wounds in 1-action but you can't pull out a vial, pop the cork, and drink it in 1-Action?
It's just very confusingly written. Why say that it is "usually" used for items that it grants no bonus for at all?
It should just say "is used for Healer's Tools", as that's really the only Toolkit you're ever going to use in combat.
Yes, you could argue Thieves Tools, but having to pick a lock in combat is rare.
If your Bombs and Potions in your Belt Pouch work exactly the same way, it's silly to call them out in the Bandolier description.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's just very confusingly written. Why say that it is "usually" used for items that it grants no bonus for at all?
Maybe because my fellow players and I usually used a bandolier for potions or daggers in Pathfinder 1st Edition. It seemed thematically better for holding 8 similar items than using a pair of belt pouches. The Paizo designers probably thought that bandoliers would be used the same way in PF2. In feat and ability descriptions, the first sentence is often fluff. In gear descriptions, the one and only sentence might be part fluff.
As for the original question about the dual-wielding ranger, the elf ranger in my PF2 Ironfang Invasion campaign had the same problem. I recalled the footnote from the PF1 Actions In Combat table" "If you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat, you can draw two light or one-handed weapons in the time it would normally take you to draw one."
I declared as a houserule that the ranger's Twin Takedown feat operated the same way, that he could draw both weapons in a single Interact Action. He could also sheathe both weapons in a single Interact action, but he could not combine drawing and sheathing. This appears to be all the ranger needed to make dual-wielding feasible.
|
|
No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.
"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."
I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.
That’s purely an assumption on your part though.
Feel it should or was meant to state the tools are also within 'easy reach' but the tools take up all the space in the bandolier and there is no room for potions too.
Intuitively, a player with Battle Medicine can reach into their bandolier, pull out their bandages and Treat Wounds in 1-action but you can't pull out a vial, pop the cork, and drink it in 1-Action?
Yes, a player with a Feat can do the cool thing the Feat says they can do, nothing else.
No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.
"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."
I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.
That’s purely an assumption on your part though.
Yes, I was offering up a possible explanation as to why many others seem to be playing it as 1-action or there is confusion about it. Maybe it will get mention in the next errata.
I am GM for a player playing an Outwit Ranger using a glaive as primary weapon. He often starts combat with Hunt Target and casting Produce Flame. He often finds that he was having to spend an action drawing the glaive in the second round. With those conditions, Quick Draw is looking good enough to be worth taking even with the very valid problems that have been pointed out for the feat in general.
--------
And regarding the bandolier: It is very clear that those two sentences are describing two separate uses of a bandolier. Especially since there is an entire third sentence between the two which presents a completely different, mechanically significant piece of information about them.
Even when reading only that second sentence, it specifically calls out that only tools can be drawn out as part of the action that they are being used in. A potion is not a tool.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Plus Quick Draw has the interact tag provoking AoO which is annoying.Uh I thought it was Manipulate which causes AoOs, not Interact?
Interact is tagged as a manipulate action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Interact is tagged as a manipulate action....Really? Drawing a dagger provokes an AoO? Even when Quick Drawing?
That's a definite change from PF1 then when stowing a weapon provoked but drawing it didn't...
Yes. A lot of things that you might not think would be a trigger for an AoO include the manipulate trait. You really can't use PF1 as a good precedent for it.
I expect that the manipulate trait in general will see some attention when the expected 2nd round of CRB errata happens, and it is possible some things will change, but as it stands drawing weapons, using the parry trait of weapons and all kinds of things can trigger AoO.
No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.
"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."
I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.
Feel it should or was meant to state the tools are also within 'easy reach' but the tools take up all the space in the bandolier and there is no room for potions too.
Just want to point out that I'd agree on a bandolier being related to the action economy... in that it allows you to retrieve an item in one action rather than two (similar to benefits of a belt pouch). One of my first questions as a GM when a player wants to pull out a potion/etc is, "where were you carrying that?" If I get a blank stare, that means it was in a backpack (2 actions to retrieve) because the player never thought to purchase items to carry stuff.
Intuitively, a player with Battle Medicine can reach into their bandolier, pull out their bandages and Treat Wounds in 1-action but you can't pull out a vial, pop the cork, and drink it in 1-Action?
Battle Medicine is a feat, and thus allows a character to do things faster than normal as a result of specific training. If paizo were to reprint a version of Accelerated Drinker as a feat in PF2, I could see you drinking a potion in one action - but until then I'd rule 2 actions total to take out and drink.
From the thread title I actually was assuming this was sparked from the recent thread discussing "Double Weapons" which consensus would have being drawn as single weapon even if they are enchanted as two etc (and thus be an advantage for exactly this scenario which normal dual weapon set-up is challenged by).
Regardless, I agree on just approaching the mechanics on this as written and working with them.
I'm not really sure what the OP's concerns are, if in 3 actions you can Quickdraw twice making two attacks...
Well that's not especially worse than what other people do with 3 actions, in all honesty.
(it also seems the other benefits of Hunting prey are ignored, from lower MAP/ more damage/ AC/ Recall Knowledge etc)
The OP didn't really state so, but it seems they assume some entitlement to do all that and use Twin Takedown.
Not really necessary IMHO, and I don't think the style falls apart without being able to do that.
On the gauntlet thing, I'm not sure if I 100% back the idea of enchanting gauntlet as primary to use with doubling rings,
at least if you are interested in using 2 other "real" weapons together in 2WF set-up,
but at minimum it does seem good "quick backup" for situations like the OP describes,
because with a doubling ring on primary weapon, the gauntlet exists as insta-offhand weapon.
As combat continues, you might spend another Quickdraw action for the "real" off-hand weapon,
but if your priority is making more 2WF attacks quickly, you can go ahead and do that with single main weapon and gauntlet.
I am GM for a player playing an Outwit Ranger using a glaive as primary weapon. He often starts combat with Hunt Target and casting Produce Flame. He often finds that he was having to spend an action drawing the glaive in the second round. With those conditions, Quick Draw is looking good enough to be worth taking even with the very valid problems that have been pointed out for the feat in general.
Is he keeping his glaive stored all the time? If he's in an obviously dangerous area such as a dungeon, he should probably have it drawn before combat. Don't forget you can still cast with your hands full as long as there isn't a material component.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No doubt an errata update on the bandolier would be very helpful given the controversy I've seen in past posts and what I have been seeing in game play (if it is not 1 action). Here is my take though.
"A bandolier holds up to eight items of light Bulk within easy reach and is usually used for alchemical items or potions."
I read the first statement to be it's primary use (usually) is for alchemical items or potions. It says 'easy reach' (free action?) which seems, to me anyway, to relate to the action economy.
Feel it should or was meant to state the tools are also within 'easy reach' but the tools take up all the space in the bandolier and there is no room for potions too.
Just want to point out that I'd agree on a bandolier being related to the action economy... in that it allows you to retrieve an item in one action rather than two (similar to benefits of a belt pouch). One of my first questions as a GM when a player wants to pull out a potion/etc is, "where were you carrying that?" If I get a blank stare, that means it was in a backpack (2 actions to retrieve) because the player never thought to purchase items to carry stuff.
Intuitively, a player with Battle Medicine can reach into their bandolier, pull out their bandages and Treat Wounds in 1-action but you can't pull out a vial, pop the cork, and drink it in 1-Action?Battle Medicine is a feat, and thus allows a character to do things faster than normal as a result of specific training. If paizo were to reprint a version of Accelerated Drinker as a feat in PF2, I could see you drinking a potion in one action - but until then I'd rule 2 actions total to take out and drink.
Yeah, after looking into this a lot more I do believe the bandolier is meant to be 'something better than a backpack' but not to pull and drink in 1-Action. I think the fact that there is a Quick Bomber Feat was the most compelling reason to see it the other way for me. You wouldn't need the Feat if you could just buy a bandolier for 1 sp. So I recant my earlier position on use of the bandolier. Apologies for cluttering up the original thread on this issue.
I do still believe it could be clarified a little better regardless of what others here have said. Searching through other posts as well as what I've seen happening in game play there is confusion on how the bandolier is used. I've seen some say you can use things like Sunrod or Smokestick in 1-action because they are tools which I don't believe since it says for full set of tools.
"It takes a big man to admit when he's wrong. I am NOT a big man." - Fletch
Just move and quick draw twice and next turn Hunt Prey. Flurry only affect MAP anyway, so you don't even need to have a prey in the first turn if you would only attack once anyway.
I am GM for a player playing an Outwit Ranger using a glaive as primary weapon. He often starts combat with Hunt Target and casting Produce Flame. He often finds that he was having to spend an action drawing the glaive in the second round. With those conditions, Quick Draw is looking good enough to be worth taking even with the very valid problems that have been pointed out for the feat in general.Is he keeping his glaive stored all the time? If he's in an obviously dangerous area such as a dungeon, he should probably have it drawn before combat. Don't forget you can still cast with your hands full as long as there isn't a material component.
You can also hold a 2 handed weapon in 1 hand. It only requires 2 hands to wield.
You can, though you're spending an action to shift grip, instead of an action to draw, if you go that route.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This thread clarified a lot of things for me. I have a dual wielding rogue that uses Twinned Feint. Thing is, so far all I’ve seen at PFS tables is hand waving of the action to draw a weapon. I don’t think I’ve seen a GM enforce it yet. I’m assuming that it’s just an adjustment period, and eventually people will realize that it needs to happen. And it’s not that all of the encounters have been places where we’d already have our weapons out. I think people are just so used to 1E and being able to draw a weapon when you move. I’ll, at least, start keeping track of it for myself, and hopefully everyone else will catch on.
Also, I need to buy a belt pouch, because both my bandoliers are full now with tool kits.
Oh, and is there any penalty for wearing a gauntlet? To something like thievery to pick a lock? If not, I need to add that to my list as well. (Edit: from the Free Hand trait, it looks like no penalty. So, yeah, I need to pick up a pair)
Just want to point out that I'd agree on a bandolier being related to the action economy... in that it allows you to retrieve an item in one action rather than two (similar to benefits of a belt pouch). One of my first questions as a GM when a player wants to pull out a potion/etc is, "where were you carrying that?" If I get a blank stare, that means it was in a backpack (2 actions to retrieve) because the player never thought to purchase items to carry stuff.
As a GM, I'd tend to let the player retcon the purchase of a belt pouch or bandoleer if they've never come across that rule, because the character is likely experienced enough to know why they're useful even if the player had never encountered that rule. Especially a character who is rich enough to own potions, as they've likely seen a fight or two at minimum.
Of course, my follow up question to yours would likely result in retconning a purchase of clothes as well. I'll note the adventurer's pack includes 2 belt pouches, so most characters created by new players will have them, but no clothes. Any of the pregen Iconics who own armor, don't own clothes either. It is kinda odd, as I've been in social situations in PFS where you were not supposed to be in fullplate and carrying a greatsword, and taking a pregen to one of those could be awkward without some on the fly adjustments if people only realize that halfway through the encounter.
Interact is tagged as a manipulate action....Really? Drawing a dagger provokes an AoO? Even when Quick Drawing?
That's a definite change from PF1 then when stowing a weapon provoked but drawing it didn't...
Yeah, I had to look it up too when this question came up. I think they are more comfortable with provoking actions since it is rarer now.
Is AoO really a major concern for people? I can count the number of encounters with AoO that I've run on two hands and the amount of times a player has triggered one on a single finger.
Well, there is a swath of creature types that get AoOs now. First, I saw it on orcs, so lets just assume that is due to them getting it normally via class for a lot of regular humanoids. For more monstrous creatures, you have giants, dragons, and human-ish demons.
Overall, there is a wide enough variety that I could probably insert an AoO capable creature into most situations as minions, powerful controlled creatures, and bosses.
I would probably just plan on using one weapon in the first round, then drawing and using the second weapon the next round.