| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are Rapiers light weapons for the purpose of Two-weapon Fighting?
They are in the 'Light Blades' group but in the one-handed category
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No they are not light weapons in any way shape or form.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are Rapiers light weapons for the purpose of Two-weapon Fighting?
They are in the 'Light Blades' group but in the one-handed category
If the phrase 'weapon group' is not used, weapon groups aren't involved. The word "group" does not appear in the TWF description, and therefore weapon groups aren't used.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The main appeal of the rapier is that you can finesse it, despite it being a one-handed weapon.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In terms of handedness category, the Rapier is a 'one handed' weapon that can be used with the Weapon Finesse feat despite being one handed: Source
PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 140
Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon’s size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one’s off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Chapter 8). Add the wielder’s Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder’s primary hand only. An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.
One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls.
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon. Source
Ultimate Equipment pg. 18, PRPG Core Rulebook pg. 142
Cost 20 gp Weight 2 lbs.
Damage 1d4 (small), 1d6 (medium); Critical 18-20/x2; Range —; Type P; Special —
Category One-Handed; Proficiency Martial
Weapon Groups Blades, Light
Description
You can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with a rapier sized for you, even though it isn’t a light weapon. You can’t wield a rapier in two hands in order to apply 1-1/2 times your Strength modifier to its damage.
While this weapon is in the 'Blades, Light' weapon group, this only comes into play for abilities that specifically refer to the Weapon Group (generally speaking, this only comes into play for specific Fighter class features).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rapier sadly is not a light weapon - which is why you want this little gem.
Which doesn't do anything for TWF, because it's a general rule option, and neither "feat, spell, or special weapon ability".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The rapier sadly is not a light weapon - which is why you want this little gem.Which doesn't do anything for TWF, because it's a general rule option, and neither "feat, spell, or special weapon ability".
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/two-weapon-fighting-combat
If you have the TWF feat and the Effortless Lace on the offhand weapon, Hero Lab lets you use 2 rapiers or 2 longswords at the -2 step in the chart. And I have done it that way many times too in home games [since the Lace is banned in PFS]. My interpretation is that the magic item works with the TWF feat, since that's indeed a feat. {Note that Hero Lab does apply a benefit though even if you don't have the feat, which is incorrect from what you are saying [that I agree with]}.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Point of order: Herolab is not an official rule source.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My interpretation is that the magic item works with the TWF feat, since that's indeed a feat.
This makes no sense, as the feat doesn't care about the wieldability of the weapon. It does exactly the same whether your off-hand is one-handed or light. The feat doesn't even use the word "light" in the benefits section, and a feat's normal section is never rule text.
The only thing related to TWF that cares about the off-hand weapon being light is this part of the main TWF rules: "if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each." CRB pg. 202
That's it. It's completely independant of the feat (and applies even if you don't have the TWF feat).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
that's why in my games i homebrewed the 'Effortleast Lace' which does the same as the 'Effortless Lace' but cost 2 cp more to buy (1 more to craft) and has:
'the weapon count and act as a light weapon for situation where there is a difference between light and one handed weapons, such as using it with two weapon fighting.'
in the section about using a weapon sized to the wielder.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Point of order: Herolab is not an official rule source.
Except when it is E.G Courageous.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
“ the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon when determining whether it can be used with Weapon Finesse, as well as with any feat, spell, or special weapon ability that can be used in conjunction with light weapons” Salient questions: is the feat “Two-weapon Fighting” a feat? The answer is yes. Can it be used “in conjunction with light weapons”? The answer is yes. By strictest RAW Effortless Lace can be used with the Two-weapon Fighting feat (but not when ONLY using the general rule for fighting with two weapons).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Can it be used “in conjunction with light weapons”? The answer is yes.
You can also use the feat with the weapon in question when it doesn't have Effortless Lace. Which means "Effortless Lace can be used with the Two-weapon Fighting feat" is am meaningless sentence because it has zero effect.
Strictly speaking, even if general rules would be listed would the penalty not be reduced, because the item only treats the weapon as light for "determining whether it can be used (...) in conjunction with light weapons", not for which wieldability-based effects something that works with either kind of weapon applies.
Basically, Effortless Lace works for things that say "only functions with light weapons", not for things that say "this does A for light and B for one-handed (or non-light) weapons".
As written Effortless Lace does not reduce TWF penalties, period. There is no ambiguity.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like there’s enough ambiguity that at least some people have questions. I happen to disagree with your interpretation and likely so do others. Just because you feel that this ability unambiguously aligns with your interpretation does not make it so. Weapon Focus can be used “in conjunction with” light weapons and they aren’t mentioned in the feat description either. Light weapons need not be mentioned in the description of the feat or ability for them to be used “in conjunction with” them. “In conjunction with” is itself a somewhat ambiguous term hence the ambiguity you say doesn’t exist.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seems like there’s enough ambiguity that at least some people have questions.
There's more than one reason why people ask questions. Ambiguity is a possible reason, but so are lack of careful reading, lack of comprehension, and (worst of all) lack of acceptance.
People spread what they want to believe, no ambiguity required.
Just because you feel that this ability unambiguously aligns with your interpretation does not make it so. Weapon Focus can be used “in conjunction with” light weapons and they aren’t mentioned in the feat description either.
It stops being ambiguous when you stop ignoring words. "the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon when determining whether it can be used with Weapon Finesse, as well as with any feat, spell, or special weapon ability that can be used in conjunction with light weapons".
I highlighted the two important words that you completely ignore. First is "when" - an adverb that tells you that something only happens at a specific time or under specific circumstances. The second is "whether", a conjunction that denotes a dichotomy, i.e. a division into two mutually exclusive things.
What these two words do in the quoted sentence is tell you that something only happens at the time that a specific dichotomy is encountered: The described effect ("the weapon is treated as a light melee weapon") is only applied when a "feat, spell, or special weapon ability" splits the group of weapons into two groups by allowing it to only "be used in conjunction with light weapons".
And yes, this split can only exist if "light weapon" is mentioned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The fact that you felt the need to define common words like when and whether while throwing in 10 dollar words like dichotomy doesn’t make this seem any less ambiguous than before, in fact I feel it only muddies the waters further. Readers who don’t know the definition of dichotomy will need a dictionary just to understand what you said. The devs have stated that they don’t write in legalese, that the rules text simply won’t stand up to the scrutiny of being broken down into word by word definitions. You’ve chosen to jump down the legalese rabbit hole. I chose not to follow. I will simply agree to disagree and walk away.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Readers who don’t know the definition of dichotomy will need a dictionary just to understand what you said.
Either you lack the ability to properly read, or you're just being intellectual dishonest so that you don't have to admit having been wrong.
I explained what a dichotomy is in the same sentence: "a division into two mutually exclusive things." Are these words too complicated for you to understand, too?
The only one who needs a dictionary is people who can't be bothered to actually read the entire sentence. By claiming that you needed a dictionary for a word that I explained in the same sentence, you've just proven that you have to be counted among those. Which means that any ambiguity you claim to have found can be attributed to you not properly reading the text.
The devs have stated that they don’t write in legalese, that the rules text simply won’t stand up to the scrutiny of being broken down into word by word definitions.
I can honestly say that this is the first time I've ever seen someone claim that not completely ignoring words like "when" and "whether" was "legalese".
I will simply agree to disagree and walk away.
What do you disagree on - the meaning of the words "when" and "whether"? Or that they can't just be ignored? In either case, you've reached the pinnacle of intellectual dishonesty.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel you have reached the pinnacle of intellectual elitism. I have stated that I disagree with your interpretation of the rules text but you seem incapable of accepting that anyone else may have a differing opinion and use any means at your disposal to browbeat them into submission. I don’t claim that my interpretation is the ONLY POSSIBLE interpretation. I’ll leave that kind of obstinacy to you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's nothing too complicated here. Derklord is 100% correct. Two-weapon fighting is a base combat feature. The feat itself has nothing to do with the classification of the offhand penalty.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There's nothing too complicated here. Derklord is 100% correct. Two-weapon fighting is a base combat feature. The feat itself has nothing to do with the classification of the offhand penalty.
Agreed: I suspect people just forget that Two-Weapon Fighting is actually an option without any of the relevant feats due to the huge penalties it incurs without those feats...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
After taking a step back to calmly re-evaluate my position I do believe you are correct. I’m afraid a recent death in the family has left me a little easily triggered and prone to less than clear thinking at times. I apologize to all for my intractable attitude and for any hard feelings I may have caused.
My condolences for your recent loss, Trokarr.
If you want to dual-wield the same weapon, keep the minimal -2/-2 to attack, and have a high crit range, dual wield kukris. They only average 1 less point of damage than rapiers (2 less on a crit).
Another possibility for twf is go with Hand’s Autonomy from the Possessed Hand feat tree. ;)
Another possibility for twf is go with Hand’s Autonomy from the Possessed Hand feat tree. ;)
Heh, messed up on the linking part, Hand’s Autonomy should be located here. ;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
. . .
Another possibility for twf is go with Hand’s Autonomy from the Possessed Hand feat tree. ;)
I think someone was inspired by watching or reading Vampire Hunter D. The concentration penalty for a Left Hand seems a little light... what? He was good at getting under D's skin.