|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 16:01:16 GMT -8
Sorry, I'm not being clear.
The way I'm reading it, you get claw/claw if you are unarmed. If you are holding a weapon, then it's weapon/claw, not weapon/claw/claw. When you asked me in the Character Creation thread if I would allow you to dual-wield claw and weapon, that's what I thought you were asking.
If you pass the Natural Fighting check, then it does become claw/claw/claw or weapon/claw/claw.
|
|
|
Post by Snacs on Mar 4, 2019 16:11:52 GMT -8
Sorry, I'm not being clear. The way I'm reading it, you get claw/claw if you are unarmed. If you are holding a weapon, then it's weapon/claw, not weapon/claw/claw. When you asked me in the Character Creation thread if I would allow you to dual-wield claw and weapon, that's what I thought you were asking.
If you pass the Natural Fighting check, then it does become claw/claw/claw or weapon/claw/claw.
?? So if I have 2/1 attacks with my main weapon, then two weapon fighting with an offhand weapon, I lose an attack? That seems off and bizarre, especially considering I can substitute any of those claw attacks for a bite at any time. It doesn't say anything about being unarmed. To be clear where I'm getting this attack chain from. Two weapon fighting gives me an additional attack each round with a weapon in my off-hand. Baaz racial entry reads: • Baaz can attack twice in a round with their sharp claws (1d4 dmg); they can also use their fangs instead of one of the claw attacks (the bite also causes 1d4 points of damage), but they prefer their claws. So, using a club in my off-hand(it doesn't matter which one it's being actively wielded in, Runt is Ambidextrous.)- I should get Claw(or bite)/ Claw(or bite)/ Two-weapon fighting hit. With natural Fighting, I'd get an additional natural attack each round, which would be Claw/Claw/Bite(or claw)/Weapon(TWF) hit.
|
|
|
Post by Ezeze on Mar 4, 2019 16:16:28 GMT -8
I think I'm getting what Snacs is saying. He's not wielding a club, with a claw off hand. He is wielding his CLAWS, with a weapon off hand. So he gets the two claws (or bites) - because none of the crunch about that says he can't be carrying something in the hand he is not using then he gets an off-hand attack with the club because of two weapon fighting. Makes sense to me? Edit: GravityEmblem rolled a one. That makes FOUR botches since this game began. Fantastic
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 16:50:27 GMT -8
I am so confused right now. @_@
I don't understand. Your attack rate with a club is 3/2, not 2/1. It will be 2/1 someday, at level 7, I believe.
No, not explicitly, I guess. But according to their MM entry, their rate of attack is "2 or 1." I take that to mean "2/1 with claws/bites or 1/1 with weapon." The 3E version seems to agree with that, saying outright, "A baaz may use his claws and bite as natural weapons, making 2 attacks...A baaz can attack with a weapon at his normal attack bonus and make one claw or bite attack as a secondary attack..."
The assumption is you get two attacks, one with each weapon. If someone with two weapon fighting is dual-wielding daggers, for instance, he gets two attacks per round--one with the primary dagger and one with the secondary dagger. If someone then disarms him of one of his daggers, he then only gets to attack once per round with the remaining dagger. He doesn't get to attack twice with the same dagger.
But isn't that just common sense? He can't claw someone with a claw that's carrying something.
|
|
|
Post by Ezeze on Mar 4, 2019 16:53:42 GMT -8
But isn't that just common sense? He can't claw someone with a claw that's carrying something. No, he can't claw someone with a claw that's carrying something. But he has a free claw. The club is only one-handed. So, claw-claw (or, if you prefer, claw-bite) - club.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 16:57:00 GMT -8
So to make sure I'm clear on this, you're arguing that two weapon fighting means you get two attacks per round, regardless of how many weapons you actually have? Like, if someone chopped off one of Runt's hands, he could still make two claw attacks per round? Or if he had two clubs and lost one, he could still strike twice with the one club? Because that doesn't make sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by Snacs on Mar 4, 2019 17:04:25 GMT -8
I don't understand. Your attack rate with a club is 3/2, not 2/1. It will be 2/1 someday, at level 7, I believe. My attack rate with a club is 3/2. But I have 2/1 with my claw and bite attacks. I'm not using the club at 3/2. I'm using my club in my off hand, and making either two claws or a claw + bite. I'll never get a second attack with the club, even in subsequent rounds, unless the club is in my 'main' hand instead of the offhand. Ambidextrous makes this a matter of how I feel on a turn, AFAIK. No, not explicitly, I guess. But according to their MM entry, their rate of attack is "2 or 1." I take that to mean "2/1 with claws/bites or 1/1 with weapon." The 3E version seems to agree with that, saying outright, "A baaz may use his claws and bite as natural weapons, making 2 attacks...A baaz can attack with a weapon at his normal attack bonus and make one claw or bite attack as a secondary attack..."The assumption is you get two attacks, one with each weapon. If someone with two weapon fighting is dual-wielding daggers, for instance, he gets two attacks per round--one with the primary dagger and one with the secondary dagger. If someone then disarms him of one of his daggers, he then only gets to attack once per round with the remaining dagger. He doesn't get to attack twice with the same dagger. Yeah, except unlike the MM, I have Two Weapon Fighting. I'm not fighting with just a weapon or just my claws, I'm doing both. The 3E version works that way because 3E doesn't care what you attack with, you have a base number of attacks of any kind(Monsters in their entry just say 'make X attacks', but the Raw for it is that your Base attack bonus = how many attacks total you can make in a round, regardless of what weapon(natural or manufactured) you use. That's not an incorrect assumption, if you can only attack with a dagger once per round. If I had 2/1 in daggers, and two-weapon wielded a second dagger, I would make three attacks(My normal two attacks, + the secondary dagger in my off-hand). If you disarmed Runt's club, he'd only get his two claw/bites. But isn't that just common sense? He can't claw someone with a claw that's carrying something. Unless I can attack twice in a round with a weapon. For example my bow is 2/1, I make two attacks/round with it. Or to make it easier, I can use the free claw, and also make a bite attack, and then in my offhand I get to swat someone with a club.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 18:57:32 GMT -8
Okay, I think I get what you're saying. But I don't agree. And I've never seen it done the way you are describing before. Right, but this would be like arguing that when he is carrying his bow, he gets to attack 2/1 with the bow and then 2/1 with his claws, too. But he cannot, because his claws are occupied with the bow, right? Same premise here.
Ignoring specialization and natural fighting (just to keep things simple), his attack rate would be like this:
If he is unarmed, then claw/claw. He attacks with his first claw and his second claw.
If he is carrying one melee weapon, then weapon/claw (or claw/weapon). He attacks with his weapon and he attacks with his free claw.
If he is carrying two melee weapons, then weapon/weapon. He attacks with his first weapon and his second weapon (both claws are occupied).
I'm pretty sure 'bite' being swapped in for 'claw' is just for flavor. They are the exact same attack and deal the exact same amount of damage.
If he passes his natural weapon proficiency, then he can add one 'claw' attack. So if he's unarmed, it's claw/claw and claw (two on his turn and one at the end of the round). If he's carrying one melee weapon it's weapon/claw and claw. And if he's fighting with two melee weapons, it does not apply at all and remains weapon/weapon because he is not fighting naturally.
He specializes in the club, which gives him an extra attack with it every other round. So if he were carrying a club in one hand, his attack rate would be weapon/claw for Round 1 and then weapon/claw and weapon for Round 2. If he were carrying two clubs, then it would be weapon/weapon for Round 1 and weapon/weapon and weapon for Round 2.
|
|
|
Post by Ezeze on Mar 4, 2019 19:03:26 GMT -8
Okay, I think I get what you're saying. But I don't agree. And I've never seen it done the way you are describing before. Right, but this would be like arguing that when he is carrying his bow, he gets to attack 2/1 with the bow and then 2/1 with his claws, too. But he cannot, because his claws are occupied with the bow, right? Same premise here.
Ignoring specialization and natural fighting (just to keep things simple), his attack rate would be like this: If he is unarmed, then claw/claw. He attacks with his first claw and his second claw.
If he is carrying one melee weapon, then weapon/claw (or claw/weapon). He attacks with his weapon and he attacks with his free claw.
If he is carrying two melee weapons, then weapon/weapon. He attacks with his first weapon and his second weapon (both claws are occupied).
I'm pretty sure 'bite' being swapped in for 'claw' is just for flavor. They are the exact same attack and deal the exact same amount of damage. If he passes his natural weapon proficiency, then he can add one 'claw' attack. So if he's unarmed, it's claw/claw and claw (two on his turn and one at the end of the round). If he's carrying one melee weapon it's weapon/claw and claw. And if he's fighting with two melee weapons, it does not apply at all and remains weapon/weapon because he is not fighting naturally. He specializes in the club, which gives him an extra attack with it every other round. So if he were carrying a club in one hand, his attack rate would be weapon/claw for Round 1 and then weapon/claw and weapon for Round 2. If he were carrying two clubs, then it would be weapon/weapon for Round 1 and weapon/weapon and weapon for Round 2.
I'd agree with you, if it weren't for the fact that the specific wording of Two weapon fighting is Not "second" attack. Additional attack. So you take the 2/1 rate that Runt has with his natural attacks and you add an attack per round for two-weapon fighting. I literally don't know how else you could possibly interpret that.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 19:08:06 GMT -8
My argument is that his 2/1 with natural attacks does not apply if both hands are not free. In the same way that if he is using his bow, which also gives 2/1, he does not also get to make 2 unarmed attacks, as well, because his claws are occupied with working the bow. Or if he were carrying two clubs, he could not attack with the clubs twice and his claws twice, because the claws are carrying the clubs.
|
|
|
Post by Ezeze on Mar 4, 2019 19:16:11 GMT -8
My argument is that his 2/1 with natural attacks does not apply if both hands are not free. In the same way that if he is using his bow, which also gives 2/1, he does not also get to make 2 unarmed attacks, as well, because his claws are occupied with working the bow. Or if he were carrying two clubs, he could not attack with the clubs twice and his claws twice, because the claws are carrying the clubs. Why is being 2/1 with natural attacks different from being 2/1 with a dagger? Like you said, whether it's a claw or a bite is just flavor.
|
|
|
Post by Snacs on Mar 4, 2019 19:23:20 GMT -8
My argument is that his 2/1 with natural attacks does not apply if both hands are not free. In the same way that if he is using his bow, which also gives 2/1, he does not also get to make 2 unarmed attacks, as well, because his claws are occupied with working the bow. Or if he were carrying two clubs, he could not attack with the clubs twice and his claws twice, because the claws are carrying the clubs. That makes no sense though, even if that were true he's allowed to swap a claw with a bite for two attacks anyway. I wouldn't be able to make additional attacks with the claws if both hands were carrying clubs, because then i'd be attacking at 3/2 club(so Club+club(off) 1st round), then club/club +club(off) 2nd round). The bow is different because it's 1) a two-handed weapon and 2)makes ranged attacks, and isn't covered under Two-weapon fighting(which is explicitly used in melee.) I couldn't make a bite attack at that point(so I couldn't go club/club/bite/club first round while swinging two clubs) because I'd have already filled the conditions of two-weapon fighting(attacking with two separate weapons in a round) and couldn't bite or claw with the bow because I'd have spent my round firing with the bow instead. So you take the 2/1 rate that Runt has with his natural attacks and you add an attack per round for two-weapon fighting. This pretty much.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 19:24:37 GMT -8
There are two ways to be 2/1 with daggers.
The first is if you are dual-wielding two daggers. In this instance, you are attacking twice--once with each dagger.
The second is if you are a fighter who has specialized in daggers, are at least level 7, and are carrying one dagger. In this instance, you are attacking twice--both with the same dagger.
They are different mechanics and have different rules.
Runt falls into the first category. He is dual-wielding his two claws, essentially. Or he is dual-wielding two clubs or dual-wielding a club and a claw. The assumption, regardless, is that he attacks twice--one with each weapon or claw.
|
|
|
Post by Snacs on Mar 4, 2019 19:35:04 GMT -8
There are two ways to be 2/1 with daggers. The first is if you are dual-wielding two daggers. In this instance, you are attacking twice--once with each dagger.
The second is if you are a fighter who has specialized in daggers, are at least level 7, and are carrying one dagger. In this instance, you are attacking twice--both with the same dagger. They are different mechanics and have different rules.
Runt falls into the first category. He is dual-wielding his two claws, essentially. Or he is dual-wielding two clubs or dual-wielding a club and a claw. The assumption, regardless, is that he attacks twice--one with each weapon or claw.
In the Two weapon fighting rules, you are explicitly not 2/1 with daggers when dual wielding(in fact the example in the book states that a 3/2 attack rate becomes 5/2 when dual-wielding, not 2/1 Per TWF: 'Thus, a warrior able to attack 3/2 (once in the first round and twice in the second) can attack 5/2 (twice in the first round and three times in the second).' ) A 2/1 attack would become 3/1. Runt's claw/bite attacks are stated as: • Baaz can attack twice in a round with their sharp claws (1d4 dmg); they can also use their fangs instead of one of the claw attacks (the bite also causes 1d4 points of damage), but they prefer their claws. That's not dual-wielding, that's two attacks in a round with claws or bites. Otherwise they'd get an attack penalty for making multiple attacks with an 'off-handed' weapon, and non-Fighter Baaz wouldn't be able to make use of them either because TWF is specifically Fighter-Only.
|
|
|
Post by Daos on Mar 4, 2019 19:48:55 GMT -8
That's due to specialization. If your attack rate with daggers is 1/1, then it becomes 2/1 when dual-wielding. If it is 3/2, it becomes 5/2. If it is 2/1, then it becomes 4/1.
Dual-wielding can be used by warriors and rogues. But also, keep in mind that draconians were never playable in 2E at all, so technically they were all fighters at the time. (I translated the 3E stats to make them playable.)
|
|