Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon?
No.
Edit: Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks.
SKR wrote:
What was the reason for the 'no' to armour spikes?
Because the game has an unwritten rule which essentially states the following [ . . . ]
SKR clarifying further in a different thread wrote:Just because the rule isn't printed in the book doesn't mean there aren't rules that guide and limit what characters and monsters can and can't do.
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
It gets pretty crazy if you dig into the multiple threads on the topic, at least in SKR's posts. When confronted with the idea that this is nonsensical and 'non-written' rules are likely bad for the game (and don't actually explain anything), he alternately turtles (anyone arguing with him has a closed mind), claims it only matters at low-levels, the unwritten rules are for core races only, and so eventually becomes a non issue, and that the rules are intended for standard races and not 'freaks.' Which is really odd given the number of ways to easily become freaks (multiple arms, bite attacks, tentacles, etc) the game gives you, several of which are in the core rules. And doesn't even touch on the various monsters that have to deal with this from the get go, though given his overall tone, presumably the DM shouldn't be using the freak monsters either, or ever giving anything with a +5 BAB or lower armor spikes.
But the basic gist is all the additional book materials (like the alchemist, master race handbook, and the like), don't have to deal with the secret unwritten rules, and only the core materials actually matter. Which makes you wonder why the print and sell all that stuff if it designed according to completely different principles.
Last edited by Voss on Sat Jul 20, 2013 10:07 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Voss wrote:It gets pretty crazy if you dig into the multiple threads on the topic, at least in SKR's posts. When confronted with the idea that this is nonsensical and 'non-written' rules are likely bad for the game (and don't actually explain anything), he alternately turtles (anyone arguing with him has a closed mind), claims it only matters at low-levels, the unwritten rules are for core races only, and so eventually becomes a non issue, and that the rules are intended for standard races and not 'freaks.'.
You know, I don't actually have a real problem with changing the rules to eliminate certain corner cases. But the "we've always been at war with Eastasia" justifications drive me nuts.
That thing with TWFing and Unarmed Strikes has been kicking them in the nuts (see what I did there) since 3e first hit. The secret rule was always that you needed "hands" or "natural weapons" to make attacks, and attacking (singly or iteratively) with a "two-handed" weapon used up both of your "hand" potentials for the round, so you can't also nad people (because nut-kicks requires another "hand" potential not already used). All the spiked armour and gauntlets are just fancy unarmed strikes, or shitty weapons that give +1 or +2 AC when not being attacked with in the case of the spiked shields.
Speaking of which, getting the AC from a shield also (normally) uses up your "hand" attack potential. There's just none of it phrased that way anywhere, perhaps because you could Polymorph a Monk in 1999 and the 3e playtesters didn't want to take away their special unarmed strikes when they lost their "hands".
PC, SJW, anti-fascist, not being a dick, or working on it, he/him.
Guyr Adamantine wrote:Ah, the famous "I can pull anything out of my ass clause".
Can we really expect anything better than that from Paizo, especially when it's SKR we're talking about?
"Lurker and fan of random stuff." - Icy's occupation
sabs wrote:And Yes, being Finnish makes you Evil.
virgil wrote:And has been successfully proven with Pathfinder, you can just say you improved the system from 3E without doing so and many will believe you to the bitter end.
Posting that link should be the only answer to anyone still defending SKR on the internet. Just post the link and if people don't realize at once that the man is not qualified to opine about D&D, then any further arguing is pointless.
@ @ Nockermensch
Koumei wrote:After all, in Firefox you keep tabs in your browser, but in SovietPutin's Russia, browser keeps tabs on you.
Mord wrote:Chromatic Wolves are massively under-CRed. Its "Dood to stone" spell-like is a TPK waiting to happen if you run into it before anyone in the party has Dance of Sack or Shield of Farts.
Posting that link should be the only answer to anyone still defending SKR on the internet. Just post the link and if people don't realize at once that the man is not qualified to opine about D&D, then any further arguing is pointless.
This system is so offensively stupid, it's hard to believe that SKR isn't simply the most successful troll in the industry right now.
hmm. That may actually be his problem. As he himself puts it in those threads about a ban on a rather simple option (armor spikes and TWF), he firmly believes the game is for 'normals' and not 'freaks.' Yet the game support freakhood out of the box, and every add-on lets them in more and more, with extra support for the fantastical and phantasmagorical. This is very clearly a bad thing in his eyes, yet it is/was a large part of the direction of both 3e and pathfinder.
Which basically means he is a very poor choice of designer for a game that is fundamentally contrary to his personal gaming philosophy.
He also writes shitty rules, and makes snap judgements for no reason at all, so he's all a bad designer in general. But that seems pretty normal for both WotC and Paizo.
Last edited by Voss on Tue Jul 23, 2013 4:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He has some sensible opinions. And he has some dumb ideas. I can say the same for just about everyone who has ever expressed more than one opinion on the internet.
My complaint is when he tries to justify a sensible opinion with a nonsensical rationale (e.g. "it's not a rules change because the rule was invisibly implied all along") that he probably doesn't even believe himself. (He's not alone of course: some posters on The Gaming Den are black belts at that sort of pretzel logic.)
Voss wrote:[He] makes snap judgements for no reason at all [..]
That too.
Last edited by hogarth on Tue Jul 23, 2013 5:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.
He has [a small number of] sensible opinions. And he has [a whopping truckload of] bad ideas. That is very different from many people on the internet. TGD has very different ratios, and a big majority of people are better with containing the pretzel logic.
I'm not sure if that post was just devil's advocate or you trying to advocate for SKR as a designer, but it's a losing argument either way.
Indeed. Weapons Focus is twice as good as Natural Spell, and Monks should be nerfed every chance you get.
Weapon Focus is twice as good as Natural Spell... for a fighter. Even doese guys take it only as a prerequisite...
But monks are definately too overpowered. HUGE amounts of damage without even using a weapon, billions of attack WHILE moving at ridicules speeds, impossible to hit although not even wearing armor... and of top of that their good saves make them immune to all magic. Ever. How can you not nerf them?
Just in case I wan't clear: SKR is an idiot. Or maybe not, BUT he has no frikkin' idea what D&D actually does. I wouldn't be surprised if his idea of a low level campaign is "the mayor asks you to stop a small tribe of goblins harrassing his town" and a high level campaign is "the king asks you to stop a few small tribes of orcs harrassing his borders".
Sigh. Considering how astonished players are about color spray taking out an entire encounter in round one, SKR might at least deliver what his consumers expect...
To a man with a hammer every problem looks like a nail.
ishy wrote:It is stupid because it makes some races much better if you want to qualify for certain classes / feats.
But prestige classes in pathfinder are terrible. I haven't read their prestige book though.
For example: eldritch Knight, you still need martial proficiency.
Magus has all proficiency and casts spells. So Magus 1/Eldritch Knight X is possible.
On the "Hands" thing:
Apparently, secret rule (unwritten one) is you can't exceed 1.5 Str at 1st level. (they haven't posted what benchmarks are for higher levels) so Greatswords use up your off hand (without a Babazu beard).
Apparently, the designers fear the power of greatsword and armor spikes or Longspear and armor spikes.
Slade wrote:
Apparently, the designers fear the power of greatsword and armor spikes or Longspear and armor spikes.
Which is frankly baffling, since PF shits on mundane characters as it is. So taking the time to take away a mediocre-to-bad option for mundane fighters and nonsensically claiming that it has been that way all along because of {SECRETS!} is just pissing in people's eyes at this point.
Meanwhile the tengu alchemist is sitting on multiple extra arms, a tentacle, a bite attack and simultaneously wielding a crossbow, a great sword, a buckler and a spiked gauntlet plus whatever alter self may or may not give him, toking mutagens and slipping the design team some extra joy juice.
Oh note, Double Weapons in apparently don't deal off hand damage by their rules.
They only treated as one hand a light for TWFing penalties to hit: so each attack is basically still two handed for damage.
...You Lost Me wrote:I'm not sure if that post was just devil's advocate or you trying to advocate for SKR as a designer, but it's a losing argument either way.
From my experience, he's no better or worse than the average 3E/3.5E designer, which is to say that he has a small number of good ideas*, a small number of terrible ideas, and many, many "meh" ideas.
*Sometimes with terrible implementation.
Last edited by hogarth on Wed Jul 24, 2013 12:56 am, edited 1 time in total.
As long as you don't even understand math exists mundanes look awesome. "My barbarian sucks, I only get 3 natural attacks primary while raging at level 2, that's like... suck ass, dude" "but don't worry, i'm a viking fighting with two weapons! This archtype rocks, since it is a shitty barbarian with less hp, skillpoints and worse saves! Also I'm slower and get far less shiny rage shit, but yeah!"
Can't really expect designers to not be shitty in such an enviroment. I'm not even mad at SKR, but he is everything that is wrong with d&d designers and players.
At least he is not Mearls, right?
Last edited by Rawbeard on Wed Jul 24, 2013 1:03 am, edited 2 times in total.
To a man with a hammer every problem looks like a nail.
"Unwritten rule" is an incredibly poor justification.
I can see an argument based around the text of off-hand attacks explicitly requiring a weapon in your off-hand (don't remember the wording, and don't care enough to look), but this was a dumb call.
Vebyast wrote:Here's a fun target for Major Creation: hydrazine. One casting every six seconds at CL9 gives you a bit more than 40 liters per second, which is comparable to the flow rates of some small, but serious, rocket engines. Six items running at full blast through a well-engineered engine will put you, and something like 50 tons of cargo, into space. Alternatively, if you thrust sideways, you will briefly be a fireball screaming across the sky at mach 14 before you melt from atmospheric friction.
