My question is this: Can a character with Dervish Dance gain its benefits on their initial and iterative attacks, and then using Quick Draw, pull a weapon in their offhand, make Two Weapon Fighting off hand attacks, and then resheath that weapon again.
It seems legal as per the RAW. Am I wrong about this? If so please break it down for me so I understand why.
Example:
A 6th level Swashbuckler with an 18 Dexterity, Weapon Finesse, Dervish Dance, Two Weapon Fighting, and Quickdraw.
Normal: +10(+4Dam)/+5(+4Dam)
2WF: +8/+3//+8
Can It Be: +8(+4Dam)/+3(+4Dam)/Quickdraw/+8/unQuickdraw
Thanks so much in advance!
AtD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't quite recall if there was ever an official answer to the question of what order attacks had to be made in with two weapon fighting, which could be problematic, but beside that you have another more glaring issue. Quick Draw only applies to the draw. It does not let you free action sheathe.
Those issues aside I don't see why it couldn't at least partially work. As long as you meet the prerequisites of Dervish Dance when you make those scimitar attacks they get dex to damage; losing those prerequisites after the damage is done doesn't change it.
You have to do your attacks in order, so if you want to TWF then you have to go main hand/off hand/iterative main hand/etc.
Can you please show me where it says this? I thought in fact that it was the opposite...
Thanks!
but beside that you have another more glaring issue. Quick Draw only applies to the draw. It does not let you free action sheathe.
My assumption was that both drawing and sheathing a weapon is a move action, Quick Draw would apply to both. Has there ever been a ruling otherwise?
Thanks!
but beside that you have another more glaring issue. Quick Draw only applies to the draw. It does not let you free action sheathe.My assumption was that both drawing and sheathing a weapon is a move action, Quick Draw would apply to both. Has there ever been a ruling otherwise?
Thanks!
The text of Quick Draw specifies that it only applies to drawing.
"You can draw a weapon as a free action instead of as a move action. You can draw a hidden weapon (see the Sleight of Hand skill) as a move action.
A character who has selected this feat may throw weapons at his full normal rate of attacks (much like a character with a bow).
Alchemical items, potions, scrolls, and wands cannot be drawn quickly using this feat."
Dervish Dance isn't supposed to reward tricky-thinking two-weapon fighters.
I can see this from a RAI point of view to be sure. My question is, is it legal?
but beside that you have another more glaring issue. Quick Draw only applies to the draw. It does not let you free action sheathe.My assumption was that both drawing and sheathing a weapon is a move action, Quick Draw would apply to both. Has there ever been a ruling otherwise?
Thanks!
See Gun Twirling.
It lets you holster a gun as a free action if you have quick draw as well. Since guns don't have any special rules for putting them away, this implies that quick draw does not allow putting weapons away as a free action.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Dervish Dance isn't supposed to reward tricky-thinking two-weapon fighters.I can see this from a RAI point of view to be sure. My question is, is it legal?
As the linked quote from Paizo's creative lead and retired lead developer just said: no. No, it is not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As the linked quote from Paizo's creative lead and retired lead developer just said: no. No, it is not.Dervish Dance isn't supposed to reward tricky-thinking two-weapon fighters.I can see this from a RAI point of view to be sure. My question is, is it legal?
It's been said many times by the developers that developer commentary should not mistaken for official rulings; that's what erratas and FAQs are for. RAI the answer is no, but RAW seems to be yes. As we are on the rules forum RAW is what matters most.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly, just go Slashing Grace, and you don't have to worry about empty hands.
At this point, it's silly, because you can get the effect you want, without shenanigans.
Replace your Quickdraw and Dervish Dance feat, with Weapon Focus, and Slashing Grace, and you are completely legit.
|
| 20 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's been said many times by the developers that developer commentary should not mistaken for official rulings; that's what erratas and FAQs are for. RAI the answer is no, but RAW seems to be yes. As we are on the rules forum RAW is what matters most.As the linked quote from Paizo's creative lead and retired lead developer just said: no. No, it is not.Dervish Dance isn't supposed to reward tricky-thinking two-weapon fighters.I can see this from a RAI point of view to be sure. My question is, is it legal?
I swear I'm going to blow a lid over this whole "RAW" obsession.
Seriously, people, there is no such [REDACTED] thing as "rules-as-written".
It is made up slang. It is a modern social construction. It has no actual meaning.
Do some research on the matter. There are entire linguistic fields surrounding the analysis of written text, from the modern to the ancient.
In communication, regardless of language, you will find that humans are terrible at deciphering written messages. The goal of written communication is to have a writer transform their complex ideas into simple symbols that a reader must then try to interpret and decipher back into the original meaning.
The fewer words that are used, the higher the failure rate of idea transmission.
And unfortunately, in Pathfinder, fewer words have to be the aim, otherwise our books would be thousands of pages each. Just imagine if the extra word count from the FAQ was added to the Core Rulebook.
Rules are not written. Words are written. Rules are the ideas those words are trying to convey.
The very process of reading is an individual affair, shaped by the reader's experiences and understandings. Two people can read the exact same message and interpret entirely different meanings.
And thus, we have debates about "what the rules say". FYI, rules don't say anything. People speak. Words are read. Rules are interpreted.
This concept *should* be obvious to people. What is the purpose behind an FAQ but to add more words to the originally small collection of text?
And I am constantly stunned by the audacity of posters claiming that RAW is king, or that this forum is only concerned with RAW. No, it is not. It is literally (as in the literal sense) not possible. And the constant repetition of that false statement is highly damaging. Dulling down arguments to RAW creates the hostile posting atmosphere that we see today and fosters some of the most asinine rules interpretations imaginable.
TL;DR: Quit using the acronym "RAW", and quit using your interpretation of "RAW" as a universal truth.
You can two-weapon fight with weapons you Quickdraw.
That is how two-weapon fighting with Thrown weapons work.
Don't throw thrown weapons under the bus, because you don't like this terrible combo.
I don't quite see the proposed problem with TWF and thrown weapons? You need both hands available to use TWF and throwing weapons, right?
Level 3 character with quick draw and rapid shot wants to make a rapid shot TWF attack with throwing daggers. He has 1 (BAB) +1 (rapid shot) +1 (TWF) = 3 attacks. He starts off his turn by drawing two daggers, one in each hand. He throws the right one, draws a new dagger as a free action, throws the left one, draws a new dagger as a free action, then throws another one from either the left or the right hand.
RAI the answer is no, but RAW seems to be yes. As we are on the rules forum RAW is what matters most.
Disagreed, RAW is what matters the least. The rules as the developes intended is what matters most. Sometimes it's unclear what the intention was. But we have posts that make it extremely clear, beyond which the text of the feat makes it clear it isn't intended to be used with two weapons, which would include TWF.
So, you want to:
1) Start full attack action to two weapon fight.
2) Attack with Scimitar, gaining bonus from dervish dance.
3) Drop Scimitar, Quick Draw second Scimitar.
4) Make second attack with Scimitar, gaining bonus from dervish dance.
Right?
.
Actually no, what I was thinking was drawing firing and then reholstering a pistol as my offhand attack using Quick Draw. But it could be applied to daggers, short swords, etc.EDIT Now I see you cant reholster with Quick Draw, but the rest of the routine is what I am still asking about.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
RAI the answer is no, but RAW seems to be yes. As we are on the rules forum RAW is what matters most.Disagreed, RAW is what matters the least. The rules as the developes intended is what matters most. Sometimes it's unclear what the intention was. But we have posts that make it extremely clear, beyond which the text of the feat makes it clear it isn't intended to be used with two weapons, which would include TWF.
Unfortunately RAI>>RAW isn't really true. The developers have written rules text that has been mangled in editing to produce text that is completely contradictory to RAI in a way that isn't really apparent (archaeologist's non-scaling performance uses is this).
There has also been instances of text that is non-sensical and contradictory with existing rules (prone shooter implied a non-existent penalty for prone shots with a crossbow, for example). Note that both the RAW and RAI is nonsense (the person who wrote that text apparently didn't understand how prone penalties work).
Trying to run a game solely by RAI leaves us in a limbo because we frequently have absolutely no idea of the thoughts that were going through the devs heads when they wrote the text (or the thoughts going through the editors' heads). We only have the text on the page, and if we are incredibly lucky we might have developer commentary from a blog or forum thread.
In short, developers don't understand the rules sometimes, they don't write what they mean sometimes and what they write isn't always what ends up in the players' rulebook sometimes.
RAW is a way of saying "screw trying to divine the thoughts of the person who wrote this" and just running the rules as per how they are written and reasonably interpreted using the common English meaning for non-game-defined terms. RAI only comes in when RAW produces one of the following:
a)The only interpretation(s) are unreasonably non-sensical
b)There are multiple reasonable interpretations
c)The interpretation(s) lead to contradictory rules text
There is a grey area when it isn't apparent whether the RAW or RAI interpretation should be used due to an unusual but not completely nonsensical RAW interpretation, but this is basically how the rules should be handled.
The point of the rules isn't for you to understand text how the Devs want you to understand it. The point of the rules is to understand the text how other players understand it so you can play a game together. Throwing out the developers' thought processes (and it is developers, plural, because multiple people get their hands on rules text before the players see it) and just interpreting rules based on common english and common sense when reasonably possible facilitates this better than trying to play according to how you think the developers want the rules to work based on how they think other rules are supposed to work. It is much easier to come to a consensus when most rules debates can be settled with a dictionary as opposed to a forum crawl and a psychological analysis.
As for TWF with scimitars, drawing multiple scimitars would probably fall into one of these grey areas. Juggling scimitars seems bizarre, but hitting someone with a scimitar twice and then drawing and throwing a dagger is fairly reasonable. These both use the same mechanics and there is no rules basis for allowing one but disallowing the other. RAW says both are fine but the interpretation comes off as a little weird. Developers have made it fairly clear that RAI for dervish dance with dual scimitars is no, however.
Again, I am not trying to use Dual Wielding Scimitars in my example, rather just Quick Drawing an additional small weapon like a pistol or dagger and taking my off hand attack with it, while still gaining my Dervish Dance bonuses for my initial iterative attacks.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Again, I am not trying to use Dual Wielding Scimitars in my example, rather just Quick Drawing an additional small weapon like a pistol or dagger and taking my off hand attack with it, while still gaining my Dervish Dance bonuses for my initial iterative attacks.
If you're using a weapon in your off-hand, you don't get the benefit of Dervish Dance.
Again, I am not trying to use Dual Wielding Scimitars in my example, rather just Quick Drawing an additional small weapon like a pistol or dagger and taking my off hand attack with it, while still gaining my Dervish Dance bonuses for my initial iterative attacks.
Take two levels of juggler bard. Combat Juggling allows for wielding two weapons AND having a free hand.
You can two-weapon fight with weapons you Quickdraw.
That is how two-weapon fighting with Thrown weapons work.
Don't throw thrown weapons under the bus, because you don't like this terrible combo.
I don't quite see the proposed problem with TWF and thrown weapons? You need both hands available to use TWF and throwing weapons, right?
Level 3 character with quick draw and rapid shot wants to make a rapid shot TWF attack with throwing daggers. He has 1 (BAB) +1 (rapid shot) +1 (TWF) = 3 attacks. He starts off his turn by drawing two daggers, one in each hand. He throws the right one, draws a new dagger as a free action, throws the left one, draws a new dagger as a free action, then throws another one from either the left or the right hand.
i think the implication was that you have to be wielding two weapons at the same time to use TWF and/or start TWF with two weapons in your hands.
Rules are not written. Words are written. Rules are the ideas those words are trying to convey.
What we're talking about here in the rules section is the actual words that are written in the book. That's RAW. RAI is what people think the dev's meant by those words and IMO, are only helpful in these debates when there is some grey area or unclear text. Legal and RAI are two VERY different things. Add to that that we can never be 100% sure of RAI until it actually sees print. Take the 'count as' for 1/2 elf/orc, SLA or monk FAQs as an example of RAI changing over time and NOT being a constant.
Now looking at this case, note what James Jacobs says. it "isn't supposed to" and "should stop working". It goes against his personal views of the feat. He didn't say 'it doesn't' and 'it stops working'. So his personal opinion and RAI. This is MUCH more valuble when the question is "should I allow this" vs "Is this legal".
Again, I am not trying to use Dual Wielding Scimitars in my example, rather just Quick Drawing an additional small weapon like a pistol or dagger and taking my off hand attack with it, while still gaining my Dervish Dance bonuses for my initial iterative attacks.If you're using a weapon in your off-hand, you don't get the benefit of Dervish Dance.
That's not the rule though. "You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand." Things like spiked armor and bladed boots that are worn instead of carried should sidestep the restriction. Combat juggling does it better by making it so you aren't carrying the weapons and leaving the offhand free.
Now if you're talking about your metaphysical, imaginary, unwritten 'hand of effort', then who knows. I'd look it up, but by default it's unwritten...
You can two-weapon fight with weapons you Quickdraw.
That is how two-weapon fighting with Thrown weapons work.
Don't throw thrown weapons under the bus, because you don't like this terrible combo.
I don't quite see the proposed problem with TWF and thrown weapons? You need both hands available to use TWF and throwing weapons, right?
Level 3 character with quick draw and rapid shot wants to make a rapid shot TWF attack with throwing daggers. He has 1 (BAB) +1 (rapid shot) +1 (TWF) = 3 attacks. He starts off his turn by drawing two daggers, one in each hand. He throws the right one, draws a new dagger as a free action, throws the left one, draws a new dagger as a free action, then throws another one from either the left or the right hand.
Can he do this?
1) Start his turn with an object in his off hand.2) Draw a dagger with his main hand as a free action and throw it.
3) Switch the object to his main hand as a free action.
4) Draw a second dagger with his off hand as a free action and throw it.
5) Draw a third dagger (with either hand) as a free action, and throw it.
Lots of good stuff
I agree and disagree to an extent.
I think if it's obvious what the intention is, or when developers tell us directly what they intended then that is how the rules should work. Regardless of what was written, because as you note there are several reasons why the rules do not always convey the desired meaning.
In lieu of having obvious intention or direct developer explanation then it is up to us as players to try to interpret the rules in a reasonable manner that allows us to collectively agree about how the game should be played.
So in my mind, yes absolutely the intended rules are always greater than the rules as written. Unfortunately, we don't always have a direct commentary to tell us what the intention is, and it is not always obvious.
I guess ultimately, my point is when a feat says you can't have a weapon in your off hand and benefit from the feat and you ask if you can use a weapon in one hand and then drop it and quick draw a weapon in the other hand to benefit because you're not technically violating the the rules (but are very clearly violating the spirit) that people need to think more of the spirit of the rules than adhering to an exact letter.
|
|
Again, I am not trying to use Dual Wielding Scimitars in my example, rather just Quick Drawing an additional small weapon like a pistol or dagger and taking my off hand attack with it, while still gaining my Dervish Dance bonuses for my initial iterative attacks.
You should really just go with Slashing Grace.
You can do this, or go two Scimitars, and you won't have to worry about any rules finagling.
Is your PC PFS?
If not, is your DM using the Retraining rules from Ultimate Campaign?
|
|
the rules-imposed order of attacks only applies to iterative based attacks and not others like the extra attacks from two weapon fighting
There's a big flaw with this thinking, though.
When you declare that you're making a full attack, you must decide at that moment whether you'll be using two-weapon fighting or not.
We know this is true because the penalties for two-weapon fighting are in effect for your entire attack sequence, regardless of what order you take your attacks.
You can't just *pretend* you're not two-weapon fighting, make a couple of attacks, and then suddenly decide that you'd like to strike with your off-hand.
And the moment you declare that you're two-weapon fighting, Dervish Dance shuts off.
|
|
That's a good point, but it's not really related to what you quoted from me.
I don't see why not.
Your entire post was about changing the order of your off-hand attacks in order to "trick" Dervish Dance, was it not?
As to what you're talking about, what prevents a character from declaring they're two-weapon fighting while only wielding a single scimitar?
Nothing. And I stated no such thing.
You can declare that you're TWF while wielding nothing.
Note that Dervish Dance doesn't prevent two-weapon fighting, it only requires that you are not carrying a weapon or shield in your offhand.
It amazes me with the ease of which you can state this.
Proceed to perform Dervish Dance attacks, then Quick Draw a dagger and attack with it in the offhand. Technically, this works.
Repeating a falsehood does not make it true. You've already declared you were TWFing at the beginning of the round.
Actually, I believe you may even be allowed to simply transfer the scimitar from your main hand to your offhand using the free action gripping rules. :P
Absolutely not. Monks can, during a Flurry, but nobody else.
However, I think this is all highly against thespirit of therules and thus discourage it.
Fixed that for you.
|
|
Azara, can you quote me the rule preventing me from TWFing with an unarmed strike and a scimitar?I linked to it in my first post in this thread.No, you linked a dev post.
I'm asking for a rule.
And this is the disconnect.
The rule is already in print, and has been for some time.
It's the text of the Dervish Dance feat itself.
In the thread I linked, two Designers are clarifying how that feat works.
You don't get to misread something, claim it works only as you interpret it, and then go on to ignore all the evidence to the contrary.
That's not how this game works.
Just so we are all clear on the exact wording of the feat so there is no ambiguity:
Dervish Dance (Combat)
You have learned to turn your speed into power, even with a heavier blade.
Prerequisites: Dexterity 13, Weapon Finesse, Perform (dance) 2 ranks, proficient with scimitar.
Benefit: When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The scimitar must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
My question is this: Can a character with Dervish Dance gain its benefits on their initial and iterative attacks, and then using Quick Draw, pull a weapon in their offhand, make Two Weapon Fighting off hand attacks, and then resheath that weapon again.
It seems legal as per the RAW. Am I wrong about this? If so please break it down for me so I understand why.Example:
A 6th level Swashbuckler with an 18 Dexterity, Weapon Finesse, Dervish Dance, Two Weapon Fighting, and Quickdraw.
Normal: +10(+4Dam)/+5(+4Dam)
2WF: +8/+3//+8
Can It Be: +8(+4Dam)/+3(+4Dam)/Quickdraw/+8/unQuickdrawThanks so much in advance!
AtD
This is the same sort of cheese that players have tried to execute using Two-Handed Weapons in conjunction with Crane Riposte. Trying to manipulate the amount of hands necessary to do so is a more fine cut here, because you're trying to cheese Off-Hand attacks with an actual hand-in-weapon method, which I can guarantee you is not going to work.
Here is the TWF FAQ regarding the attack rotation you can make. When it comes to standard iteratives, you can make an attack with your main-hand, and an attack in your off-hand (assuming BAB +6), using different weapons, and it does not constitute TWF. You can mix and match which order you take these attacks, but since you are BAB +6, you only ever get 2 attacks. It is only by getting attacks from beyond your standard BAB, do you have you specify the main-hand/off-hand weapons, which weapon attack goes first (and that they must all be taken first before you can take the attacks in your off-hand).
That being said, reviewing the Dervish Dance feat text:
When wielding a scimitar with one hand, you can use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on melee attack and damage rolls. You treat the scimitar as a one-handed piercing weapon for all feats and class abilities that require such a weapon (such as a duelist’s precise strike ability). The scimitar must be for a creature of your size. You cannot use this feat if you are carrying a weapon or shield in your off hand.
The feat text specifies that you can only gain the feat benefits if the following circumstances apply - if your Scimitar is properly sized for you, and if you aren't carrying a weapon or shield in your other hand. (It says off hand, but that sort of phrasing is only important for TWF purposes.) Since TWF is considered a simultaneous act (you must specify your main-hand and off-hand weapons before you can take the TWF option, you would have you draw your offhand weapon before you take the TWF option, meaning you wouldn't receive the benefits of Dervish Dance.
That being said, if there are weapons that aren't carried (such as a Natural Claw or Unarmed Strike) in your off-hand, it circumvents the cited limitation, and it receives Dexterity to Attack/Damage benefits.