Quick question for you all, my friends last night figure out that thaumaturge might be able to use a two handed Bastard Sword as it's weapon implement, while i argued that since the two handed trait makes a weapon two handed, it's thus an invalid weapon for weapon implement, thus the bastard sword is no longer your implement. A clarification on this would be amazing if anyone has the time.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
A one handed weapon with the two handed trait is still a one handed weapon. This was covered in CRB clarifications.
Core Rulebook Clarifications wrote: Pages 279–280 (Clarification): If I hold a weapon that requires 1 hand in 2 hands, is it a 2-handed weapon?
There are two answers to this.
For abilities that count the number of hands for a weapon while you're using it, such as an action with "Requirements You are wielding a one-handed melee weapon," count the actual number of hands you're using at the time. If you're holding a bastard sword in two hands, you couldn't use it with that ability. Weapons with the "1+" notation in their description, such as most bows, use both your hands when shooting, but leave you with a hand free for other actions the rest of the time.
Anything that's an intrinsic part of the weapon, such as a shifting rune, works differently. Reference the weapon's "Hands" entry in the weapons table—a bastard sword requires 1 hand, even though it gets a benefit in two hands from the two-hand trait. If you were holding a shifting bastard sword in two hands and activated it, you could turn it into a longsword (which you'd still be holding in two hands), but couldn't turn it into a greatsword (which requires 2 hands). For this purpose, "1" and "1+" are the same (though this doesn't matter for shifting since "1+" appears ranged weapons).
This was later added in PC1.
Player Core pg. 276 wrote: If an action or other ability requires you to use a “two-handed weapon,” it applies for any weapon you wield in two hands. Any permanent adjustments to the weapon, such as a rune that can be added to a “one-handed weapon,” uses the Hands entry in the weapon table exactly (1+ counts as one-handed for this purpose). In this case, The bastard sword is and will always be a one handed weapon for the purposes of being an implement or recieving runes. But it ceases to be a one-handed weapon for the purposes of fulfilling ability/action prerequisites of wielding such a weapon when used two handed.
Though... as I missed to state,
This has other ramifactions for a Thaumaturge.
Implement's Empowerment wrote: You don't gain the benefit of implement's empowerment if you are holding anything in either hand other than a single one-handed weapon, other implements, or esoterica, and you must be holding at least one implement to gain the benefit.
NorrKnekten wrote: A one handed weapon with the two handed trait is still a one handed weapon. This was covered in CRB clarifications.
Core Rulebook Clarifications wrote: Pages 279–280 (Clarification): If I hold a weapon that requires 1 hand in 2 hands, is it a 2-handed weapon?
There are two answers to this.
For abilities that count the number of hands for a weapon while you're using it, such as an action with "Requirements You are wielding a one-handed melee weapon," count the actual number of hands you're using at the time. If you're holding a bastard sword in two hands, you couldn't use it with that ability. Weapons with the "1+" notation in their description, such as most bows, use both your hands when shooting, but leave you with a hand free for other actions the rest of the time.
Anything that's an intrinsic part of the weapon, such as a shifting rune, works differently. Reference the weapon's "Hands" entry in the weapons table—a bastard sword requires 1 hand, even though it gets a benefit in two hands from the two-hand trait. If you were holding a shifting bastard sword in two hands and activated it, you could turn it into a longsword (which you'd still be holding in two hands), but couldn't turn it into a greatsword (which requires 2 hands). For this purpose, "1" and "1+" are the same (though this doesn't matter for shifting since "1+" appears ranged weapons).
This was later added in PC1.
Player Core pg. 276 wrote: If an action or other ability requires you to use a “two-handed weapon,” it applies for any weapon you wield in two hands. Any permanent adjustments to the weapon, such as a rune that can be added to a “one-handed weapon,” uses the Hands entry in the weapon table exactly (1+ counts as one-handed for this purpose). In this case, The bastard sword is and will always be a one handed weapon for the purposes of being an implement or recieving runes. But it ceases to be a one-handed weapon for the purposes of fulfilling ability/action prerequisites of wielding such a weapon when...
Thank you for the clarification here, though I must ask, since thaumatuge requires only a one handed weapon, would it be wrong to house rule against the two handed trait counting? It's of course, only flavor, but it does specify "it leaves your other hand open to do magic runes or hold other esoterica"?
Depends on who you ask, I would advise against forbidding it as two handed is quite a trade off. It even does say that you can wield esoterica in the same hand used for an implement or in this case, The weapon.
Just as a few examples of tradeoffs;
The difference in average damage when used two handed does not exist, You just grew the variance, Gaining a +2 average per die while trading off a +2 flat per die.
They are going get another implement at 5.
It takes one action to change grip from one-handed to two handed.
They can only swap straight into two handed if their other hand is free.
They cannot release their weapon outside of their turn to draw another implement for free when held 2-handed, They would need to swap the weapon entirely.
(cannot take free actions outside your turn, Exception is those with a trigger)
So not only does it not give any meaningful damage increase, it also means your action economy suffers terribly when other implements enter the fray. Its flavor, its kinda bad, They can change to another weapon with 1 days downtime.
Just as a personal thing, I would've preferred litterary any other martial sword. a Longsword, Talwar or Kopesh. Especially the Kopesh to trip with the weapon as Thaumaturge is notoriously bad at keeping their hands free. But if someone wants the theme of gripping the bastardsword two handed for extra damage gambling with same average then I dont see any reason as to not let them.
Provided that doesn't lead to other issues at the table ofcourse.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
NGT nova wrote: since thaumatuge requires only a one handed weapon, would it be wrong to house rule against the two handed trait counting? Nerfing the Bastard Sword isn't necessary. Thaumaturge already has balance consideration for this case. When they use the Bastard Sword in two hands, then it counts as a two-handed weapon and turns off Implements Empowerment at the least.
It may also disable other abilities that involve the Weapon being an Implement, since the item no longer meets the requirements for being a Weapon Implement - which is brutal. It would disable Implement's Interruption. And since they are no longer holding anything that qualifies as an Implement, then they wouldn't be able to benefit from the weaknesses caused by Exploit Vulnerability either.
*in my best GM voice* Are you sure that you want to choose a Bastard Sword as your Weapon Implement?
Finoan wrote: It may also disable other abilities that involve the Weapon being an Implement, since the item no longer meets the requirements for being a Weapon Implement This was already covered under the CRB clarifications posted above.
For abilities that require or count the number of hands for a weapon while you're using it then yes it is a two handed weapon For those Purposeses.
In all other cases when it asks for a one handed or two handed weapon, use the hands entry on the weapon. This includes runes and abilities that rely on the intrinsics of the weapon.
The requirement here is that the Implement needs to be a one handed weapon. Which the bastard sword will always be outside of the purposes of requirements that need you to be holding or wielding a one handed weapon.
Its Two-handed trait is mediocre and gives nothing but a headache if you seriously try to rely on it. But it doesn't break the main class features.
NorrKnekten wrote: Its Two-handed trait is mediocre and gives nothing but a headache if you seriously try to rely on it. But it doesn't break the main class features. It does break at least the one of them. Implement's Empowerment doesn't work while holding a two-handed weapon.
I will agree that nothing explicitly says that an Implement stops functioning as an Implement if it no longer meets the requirements needed to be that type of Implement. I can still see GMs running the class's rules that way in general for any Implement. For example, if your Wand Implement gets put into a Bag of Weasels and gets transmuted into a small furry creature that hates you instead of a wand, then it wouldn't function as an Implement during the time that it is transmuted even if you can manage to keep hold of it.
So if OP is looking for houserules to dissuade or disallow a Bastard Sword Weapon Implement, that would be a better choice than removing the 2-hand trait from the base weapon.
Indeed, Implements empowerment doesn't work and is the reason to why Two-handed trait is a waste on Thaumaturge. The feature meant to give Thaumaturge a damage bonus doesn't work with two handed while also being roughly equivalent to increasing your damage dice two sizes.
As for things that stop you from holding or wielding your implement, Well if it turns into a creature you certainly are doing neither, At most you have it grabbed and restrained and a GM can decide what happens.
I think we are in agreement though that nerfing or otherwise forbidding the Bastardsword as an implement is just unneccesary as two-handed doesnt bring any real boons for the class, Only downsides.
Yeah, trying to use a two-handed weapon or a weapon with the two-hand trait (wielded in two-hands) will definitely not go well for a thaumaturge.
Regardless of whether or not the weapon still counts as an implement, you would definitely lose the benefit of implement's empowerment. It's also unclear if you could benefit from Exploit Vulnerability or not.
As a GM, I would probably ask the player not to try depending on the two-hand trait because I'm not sure how to parse the rules, but would rule against the player's favor if forced to decide.
NorrKnekten wrote: I think we are in agreement though that nerfing or otherwise forbidding the Bastardsword as an implement is just unneccesary as two-handed doesnt bring any real boons for the class, Only downsides. Partially depends on how the player may interpret the rules of Exploit Vulnerability.
But yeah, I wouldn't ban a player from using a bastard sword....but I would point out to them that they're likely losing a lot of the thaumaturge's benefits to do so.
Claxon wrote: NorrKnekten wrote: I think we are in agreement though that nerfing or otherwise forbidding the Bastardsword as an implement is just unneccesary as two-handed doesnt bring any real boons for the class, Only downsides. Partially depends on how the player may interpret the rules of Exploit Vulnerability.
Depends on interpretation, but RAW you can draw and hold esoterica in the same hand you use for your Implement and Exploit Vulnerability does not care about how many hands are being used to hold the Implement.
Quote: While your implements are your primary tools in your dealings with the supernatural, you know the value of always being prepared. You constantly collect and carry various smaller mystic objects, bits of materials with paranormal affinities, and items used in folk practices: your esoterica. These might include cold iron nails, scraps of scrolls and scriptures, fragments of bones purportedly from a saint, and other similar objects. You keep your esoterica in easy-to-access places on your person and are well practiced in brandishing your implement and esoterica together, so you can draw and use esoterica with the same hand you're using to wield an implement. Together with the CRB clarifications on the two hand-trait leads me to believe that losing the reaction or exploit vulnerability aren't valid readings of RAW.
They do however lose the ability to empower the implement as previously mentioned and also the ability to quick-swap implements as described in Second Implement. Which to me is reason enough not to use the two hand trait at all. So they can use the weapon two handed but its not worth their time.
So yeah... "Are you sure you want to use this for the two handed trait?" is the correct way to go about this, and preferably give the reasons:
"Your average damage doesnt improve when using it two handed due to the loss of Empowerment",
"You can't use the implement quickswap feature when wielding it two handed"
Just be careful your not going too soft because you only see downsides. They could take fighter and grab dual handed assault to get around most of those negatives.
Then it becomes is it worth the cost in feats, but it's something to consider.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
I don't think Dual-Handed Assault avoids the downsides of Thaumaturge using a weapon 2-handed. No matter what the GM decides those downsides are.
Dual-Handed Assault wrote: You quickly switch your grip during the Strike in order to make the attack with two hands. During the Strike action, the weapon is being wielded two-handed. So anything that turns off while the Thaumaturge is holding a two-handed Weapon Implement will still turn off during that Dual-Handed Assault Strike.
The only things promised to not be disrupted are:
Dual-Handed Assault wrote: This action doesn’t end any stance or fighter feat effect that requires you to have one hand free. Stances and Fighter feats.
Thaumaturge abilities are not on the protected list.
Also, the Thaumaturge doesn't require that your hand is free for its abilities. It requires that you do not wield a 2-handed weapon.
OrochiFuror wrote: Just be careful your not going too soft because you only see downsides. They could take fighter and grab dual handed assault to get around most of those negatives.
Then it becomes is it worth the cost in feats, but it's something to consider.
I have actually tried such a character, And they still can't activate Implements Empowerment while using Dual-Handed Assault. And they would still need to put away their other implements before using it. They would need to be level 8 at the least so they absolutely have one more implement, With even Tome giving benefits while held at this point.
Besides.. all it gives is +1 damage per dice and a minor QoL to the action economy that is ruined by a two handed weapon.
It really is just better to grab Swashbuckler, Rogue or actually invest into Fighter's one hand weapon feats at that point.
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Yeah I would discourage this not because of cheese but because it's just a terrible decision. Utilizing the two-handed trait makes you worse.
Squiggit wrote: Yeah I would discourage this not because of cheese but because it's just a terrible decision. Utilizing the two-handed trait makes you worse. Exactly, Its not a good trait for the Class. Can still use it one handed though as a less versatile longsword no problem. But it certainly is one of those cases where I would personally discourage a player from trying to focus on the trait, its not going to be a good time for anyone.
Recent threads in Rules Discussion
|
