So, I have a two-part question regarding combat maneuvers.
There was an interpretation of the rules posted a while back staging weapons that possess the Combat Maneuver Trait such as Trip in addition to the Finesse Trait allows you to use your Dexterity Modifier for the check rather than your Strength Modifier.
Is that correct?
Part two to that question, are you able to do this with a free hand as well since fists/unarmed attacks are also a Finesse Weapon and you're able to perform combat maneuvers with a free hand without needing any additional traits?
Would love to get an official response on this one so I can settle it in my interpretation of these rules. Thanks!!
There is no Combat Maneuver Trait for weapons. Nor is there a Combat Maneuver trait for anything else in PF2
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is no Combat Maneuver Trait for weapons. Nor is there a Combat Maneuver trait for anything else in PF2
They're talking about traits like Trip, Grapple, Disarm, and Shove.
As for the OP, we haven't received any official clarification about those traits, to my knowledge, since the days of the playtest. However, I can definitely say that you can't use Fist's agile trait for those maneuvers because Fist doesn't have the appropriate traits. There's no hidden rule that equates Fist to open hand, as "Fist" is just a generic Unarmed Attack.
There is no Combat Maneuver Trait for weapons. Nor is there a Combat Maneuver trait for anything else in PF2They're talking about traits like Trip, Grapple, Disarm, and Shove.
As for the OP, we haven't received any official clarification about those traits, to my knowledge, since the days of the playtest. However, I can definitely say that you can't use Fist's agile trait for those maneuvers because Fist doesn't have the appropriate traits. There's no hidden rule that equates Fist to open hand, as "Fist" is just a generic Unarmed Attack.
Is there a reason to assume that "Open Hands" do not have the Finesse trait while "Fists" do?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The one where in Attack Rolls are specifically defined as being made against AC, so any roll not made against AC cannot be an Attack Roll.
The book has multiple not completely compatible definitions of an Attack Roll, so both sides have merit.
Armor Class
Attack rolls are compared to a special difficulty class called an Armor Class (AC), which measures how hard it is for your foes to hit you with Strikes and other attack actions.
Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.
However, I believe if your weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.
The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.
As far as I know there aren't Monk styles that have maneuver traits on them, but they would be more likely candidate to have finesse trait and weapon maneuver trait than being able to generically add it to an unarmed strike.
And I think this is intended. You don't use your punch (unarmed strike) to trip someone, you grab their leg and throw them off balance. Which isn't really a strike.
Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.
However, I believe if you weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.
The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.
The problem that I have with this is that technically you don't need a a trait like Trip on your Fists because by default you are able to trip with an open hand. It's pretty much assumed that it's possible.
An open hand and unarmed strike aren't the same thing though.
That's the assumption you're making, but as far as I know that's incorrect.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The one where in Attack Rolls are specifically defined as being made against AC, so any roll not made against AC cannot be an Attack Roll.
The book has multiple not completely compatible definitions of an Attack Roll, so both sides have merit.
Not sure that's really a compelling argument, since that's from the section talking about how armor class works, so of course it specifically deals with armor class.
To try to argue that that invalidates how attack rolls work in the rest of the book doesn't make sense to me.
Any roll you make as part of an action with the "attack" trait is an attack roll. Finesse weapons let you substitute your Dexterity for your Strength when you make an attack roll using them. Honestly, I don't see how this really needs any clarification, unless it's to state it is in fact the intent. You can substitute your Strength for Dexterity on Athletics check to trip when using a whip, for example.
The only *real* question regarding RAW is whether you are "using" the weapon to trip when using it with the trip trait: "You can use this weapon to Trip with the Athletics skill even if you don’t have a free hand." This seems pretty cut-and-dry to me though.
I'll grant you, the way to figure this out is convoluted, but once you do, I think it's pretty clear RAW.
EDIT: I guess what I'm asking is by what interpretation of the rules is the above *not* true?
I'm not disputing the first part of the question, just confirming that it is in fact the way it's supposed to function. And if it is, the second part of my question asks whether or not it functions the same way for someone who is unarmed. The reason for my concern here is that I don't think they'd put Trip, Shove, or any of the other traits for those combat actions on Fists because it's already possible to do with an open hand. It's assumed that you can already perform those actions when you're using your hands.
That's why I'm asking for an official clarification from someone at Paizo on this, because I think it's a little unclear as to whether or not it should function like that. Personally, I'm hoping it does because it makes more sense to me.
Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.
However, I believe if your weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.
The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.
As far as I know there aren't Monk styles that have maneuver traits on them, but they would be more likely candidate to have finesse trait and weapon maneuver trait than being able to generically add it to an unarmed strike.
And I think this is intended. You don't use your punch (unarmed strike) to trip someone, you grab their leg and throw them off balance. Which isn't really a strike.
Wolf Stance has Trip while Flanking. The only reason for that would be to use the Agile Trait of that Attack.
Animal Instinct Barbarians have these Traits for days. (But not on any Finesse Attacks.)
Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.
However, I believe if your weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.
The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.
As far as I know there aren't Monk styles that have maneuver traits on them, but they would be more likely candidate to have finesse trait and weapon maneuver trait than being able to generically add it to an unarmed strike.
And I think this is intended. You don't use your punch (unarmed strike) to trip someone, you grab their leg and throw them off balance. Which isn't really a strike.
Wolf Stance has Trip while Flanking.
Animal Instinct Barbarians have these Traits for days.
Super! Then it's clear to me, a regular unarmed strike lacks the traits (while special unarmed strike do posses them) and thus you do not have the benefit.
If anything, it might be worth asking the question "Should all unarmed strikes possess the maneuver traits?"
Personally I think no, based on some specialized unarmed strikes only having 1 of these traits.
Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.
However, I believe if your weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.
The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.
As far as I know there aren't Monk styles that have maneuver traits on them, but they would be more likely candidate to have finesse trait and weapon maneuver trait than being able to generically add it to an unarmed strike.
And I think this is intended. You don't use your punch (unarmed strike) to trip someone, you grab their leg and throw them off balance. Which isn't really a strike.
Wolf Stance has Trip while Flanking.
Animal Instinct Barbarians have these Traits for days.
Super! Then it's clear to me, a regular unarmed strike lacks the traits (while special unarmed strike do posses them) and thus you do not have the benefit.
If anything, it might be worth asking the question "Should all unarmed strikes possess the maneuver traits?"
Personally I think no, based on some specialized unarmed strikes only having 1 of these traits.
Yes, I agree. Putting Trip on Wolf Jaws would be pointless if you could use Finesse for Tripping normally, as Wolf Stance doesn't restrict you from making other Attacks.
I'd still like to hear what the official response from Paizo is on this. Because to me it still seems a bit nebulous.
Wolf Stance has Trip while Flanking. The only reason for that would be to use the Agile Trait of that Attack.Regular unarmed strikes I don't believe would allow you to use the finesse quality because regular unarmed strikes don't also have the traits for maneuvers.
However, I believe if your weapon has the finesse trait and a maneuver trait you could make your athletics check with your dex bonus instead of your strength bonus.
The sickle is an example of a weapon that has the finesse and trip traits.
As far as I know there aren't Monk styles that have maneuver traits on them, but they would be more likely candidate to have finesse trait and weapon maneuver trait than being able to generically add it to an unarmed strike.
And I think this is intended. You don't use your punch (unarmed strike) to trip someone, you grab their leg and throw them off balance. Which isn't really a strike.
It also lets you add the Item Bonus from your Handwraps to the Athletics Check.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am fine with specific maneuvers which can be performed with dex instead of str, but that should just be exceptions.
To imagine that anybody bare handed could be able to do with dex any of the athletics maneuvers, which are str related ( apart from stuff like wolf stance or whip's trip attack, and I guess something else ), it would mean that Str is meaningless.
Strength isn't meaningless in this edition, even if you get to use dex to attack rolls everyone but thieving rogues uses strength to damage. Something I expect to be (mostly) maintained throughout this edition. While there might be a few specific class options that get dex to damage, I highly doubt it will be possible for virtually anyone to obtain.
Strength maintains its importance as the damage stat.
I am fine with specific maneuvers which can be performed with dex instead of str, but that should just be exceptions.
To imagine that anybody bare handed could be able to do with dex any of the athletics maneuvers, which are str related ( apart from stuff like wolf stance or whip's trip attack, and I guess something else ), it would mean that Str is meaningless.
Strength isn't meaningless in this edition, even if you get to use dex to attack rolls everyone but thieving rogues uses strength to damage. Something I expect to be (mostly) maintained throughout this edition. While there might be a few specific class options that get dex to damage, I highly doubt it will be possible for virtually anyone to obtain.
Strength maintains its importance as the damage stat.
Definitely agree here. I honestly prefer the way they went about giving damage bonuses to classes that were supposed to be more focused on precision. Swashbuckler looks like it's going to be a pretty great standard for that, and Rogue's Sneak Attack is always great to apply in a fight.
I'd go as far as saying I kind of wish they left "Dex to Damage" off of the Thief Racket and compensated with easier sneak attack damage, bonus damage, or bigger sneak attack dice.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Bulk is a thing, though it does get largely ignored. And Bags of Holding (once available) make it quite easy to do so. Even the smallest bag of holding can hold all the personal gear you're likely to want.
@Gloom, I agree that I kind of wish they just gave Thief Rogues either a different set of conditions that they could get sneak attack, or even just a flat damage, or an extra sneak attack die, rather than adding dex to damage. That way dex to damage could die.
I mean, strength/dex really only represent 4 to 7 damage on your attack. If they'd simply gave the theif rogue an extra damage die on sneak attack it would work out about the same. Or said that the first attack made in a round always causes sneak attack damage.
There are options.
And it's not that bad that only Thief Rogues get dex to damage, as long as it stays that way.
The backpack rules make Bulk a non-issue. Even with a 10 STR, it's virtually impossible to hit the bulk limit, unless you are carrying a vast array of useless crap. That's even including the Bulk of money.
In 2 campaigns I've never seen a character even hit their Encumbered number.
@Gloom, I agree that I kind of wish they just gave Thief Rogues either a different set of conditions that they could get sneak attack, or even just a flat damage, or an extra sneak attack die, rather than adding dex to damage. That way dex to damage could die.
I mean, strength/dex really only represent 4 to 7 damage on your attack. If they'd simply gave the theif rogue an extra damage die on sneak attack it would work out about the same. Or said that the first attack made in a round always causes sneak attack damage.
There are options.
And it's not that bad that only Thief Rogues get dex to damage, as long as it stays that way.
Definitely agree here. My issue is that it kind of set a precedent and inflates the value of Dexterity making people think it's an all-powerful attribute and they devalue Strength because in that one scenario Dexterity can take the place of it.
Every one of my characters that makes attack rolls has a combination of Dexterity and Strength and there is a negligible difference of 1-3 points of damage. It's not a huge issue in the slightest.
It does however matter a lot more for attack rolls.