Two weapon fighting with unarmed attacks

[Ambrus]

Originally Posted by Portilis

"There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed." Would to me remove the viability of 2WF from unarmed attacks.

That particular interpretation is new to me; having assumed it merely referred to off-hand penalties rather than a blanket inability to perform 2WF. I suppose it could be read that way though. Unfortunately splitting hairs with the RAW is a rabbit hole down which you could fall for ever. For instance, as written that phrase only applies to monks; so while monks would be theoretically prohibited from performing off-hand attacks, any other class would be good to go with unarmed 2WF. Seems odd that monk's would suffer a hindrance to fighting that sorcerers (for example) don't, but there it is. Perhaps monks could get around the limitation by multiclassing however.

Originally Posted by Portilis

Actually, most of the time the issue is exactly the opposite. They have to stick so closely to the RAW that some things can't be implemented as desired because the RAW doesn't provide enough information to actually implement it

I see what you mean. It does seem that using the strictest possible interpretation is LW's design philosophy. But, as I showed above, it's possible to split hairs further and further to the point of senselessness.

Seems to me that HL would be more useful if more basic flexibility were built in; trusting more to the user's ability to judge how the rules should be implemented. Otherwise it requires add-ons to be built and installed to operate properly; which is were Shadow's fine work comes into the picture. Creating add-ons is clearly easier as well as a pleasure for him, so more power to him. But for those less savvy at coding like me, at some point the additional work required to make HL work outweighs its benefits.

Originally Posted by ShadowChemosh

I do apologize again

Don't worry about it.

Originally Posted by ShadowChemosh

So on the character sheet I am looking at in Bat form its +5H 1d2-3. Well you can't half-damage of a penalty so the Str 5 gives the -3 so half of that is still -3. So that is why I am saying it looks right to me.

There are several issues with the bite. First, I re-created the Agile weapon property and combined it with an amulet of mighty fists; switching damage from light weapons from STR to DEX. It seems to be working fine for the unarmed attacks, but the bite remains stuck with STR to damage for some reason. I don't know whether it's an error with the weapon property I created or with the bite itself. So I used an adjustment to force the bite's damage to switch to DEX, but then the damage bonus goes to 1.5 DEX rather than the 0.5 it should have from being secondary.

[Portilis]

Originally Posted by Ambrus

I suppose it could be read that way though. Unfortunately splitting hairs with the RAW is a rabbit hole down which you could fall for ever... I see what you mean. It does seem that using the strictest possible interpretation is LW's design philosophy. But, as I showed above, it's possible to split hairs further and further to the point of senselessness.

That is kinda the entire problem though. LW have to go with the official rulings made by Paizo wherever possible, which are usually on the less liberal end of the scale (as, realistically, most attempts to push the rules in a particular direction will always be players trying to blag things). In the case of 2WF and unarmed, every thread I can find seems to peter out with no real decision having been made (and no dev involvement).

Seems to me that HL would be more useful if more basic flexibility were built in; trusting more to the user's ability to judge how the rules should be implemented.

Unfortunately, much of the strength of the software is in the fact it can manage everything for you, and code doesn't have that flexibility. Something either is or is not (and no grumbles about quantum tri-state computing at the back there, that's far beyond the scope here), there's no room for that malleability.


I do agree that it is easier for groups like mine who have coder(s) in them who are interested and willing to do custom work, otherwise house rules and variations from the norm can be tricky. Things like the bite secondary weapon issue, which are bugs, I've usually found get fixed pretty quickly, but it can be annoying.

However, as someone who runs and plays full weekend sessions on a regular basis, the sheer difference in time taken during play makes it hugely worthwhile to use. I don't mind if it takes a bit more admin time out of game so that the game itself runs more smoothly - same reason I was an early adopter for Realm Works.


Anyway, have fun

[ShadowChemosh]

Originally Posted by Ambrus

There are several issues with the bite. First, I re-created the Agile weapon property and combined it with an amulet of mighty fists; switching damage from light weapons from STR to DEX. It seems to be working fine for the unarmed attacks, but the bite remains stuck with STR to damage for some reason. I don't know whether it's an error with the weapon property I created or with the bite itself.

Are you saying you created the Agile Item Property in the editor? Cause your .por file does open with lots of missing Things. I mean that can be causing all sorts of issues and why I see totally different values than you.

Without the .user file you created your character does not open the same on my system as it does yours. Plus you can't be reporting bugs with the CORE system when you have custom scripts firing and making changes.

[ShadowChemosh]

Originally Posted by Ambrus

Seems to me that HL would be more useful if more basic flexibility were built in; trusting more to the user's ability to judge how the rules should be implemented. Otherwise it requires add-ons to be built and installed to operate properly; which is were Shadow's fine work comes into the picture. Creating add-ons is clearly easier as well as a pleasure for him, so more power to him. But for those less savvy at coding like me, at some point the additional work required to make HL work outweighs its benefits.

Having the software be flexible enough to support every interpretation of the Pathfinder rules is not possible. If LW had infinite time, resources, and money then yes this can be done. But as that is not the real world then they have to set a way "X" works.

The other side is that using the editor you can make HL do pretty much anything you wish. In my case as you got right I create many "adjustments" to allow people to make custom changes to characters without using the editor. So that their groups interpretation of the rules or straight up house-rule can be used without opening the editor.

If you are within 60 days of buying HL and find it to be a bad purchase LW will give you 100% of your money back. Contact them using support@wolflair.com.

When you get to areas of Pathfinder rules that are "gray" you may not agree with HL reading of that rule.

[Ambrus]

Originally Posted by Portilis

I do agree that it is easier for groups like mine who have coder(s) in them who are interested and willing to do custom work, otherwise house rules and variations from the norm can be tricky. However, as someone who runs and plays full weekend sessions on a regular basis, the sheer difference in time taken during play makes it hugely worthwhile to use.

You have two coders and you play full weekend sessions?! Damn!!! You're living in some kind of dream world I can barely relate to. Lol

Originally Posted by ShadowChemosh

Are you saying you created the Agile Item Property in the editor? Cause your .por file does open with lots of missing Things. I mean that can be causing all sorts of issues and why I see totally different values than you. Without the .user file you created your character does not open the same on my system as it does yours.

I can post my .hl file if you'd care to review the material.

Originally Posted by Portilis

Having the software be flexible enough to support every interpretation of the Pathfinder rules is not possible.

I'm not talking about every interpretation, just more than the single narrow interpretation that LW adheres to. Your own add-ons are a perfect example. You saw a need for the ability to add an extra unarmed off-hand attack and coded it in; something that HL was setup up to preclude for whatever reason. As far as I can see, that adjustment is in keeping with the RAW and something that should have been included with HL; at worst as an option that could be turned off if a group chooses to disallow it for their own reasons.

Anyhow, I'm taking one last shot at getting this character to function on HL before switching to paper and pencil. I created an Unchained friendly Master of Many Styles archetype which seems to be working correctly and which eliminates a bonus feat conflict along with the Flurry of Blows issue.

My attack and damage bonuses for the two unarmed strikes is coming up correctly now, though selecting two unarmed strikes in the '1st' and '2nd' hand boxes continues to generate a "Too many weapons equipped in off-hand(s)" error message.

The bite attack remains wonky though. Unless I apply some adjustments to the bite, HL continues to consider it a primary attack, doesn't apply the -5 to attacks and doesn't apply the Agile quality to DEX damage. If I apply a Weapon Melee Attack Attribute Overide adjustment, it applies DEX, but increases the bonus to 1.5 DEX instead of the 0.5 DEX for a secondary attack. I suppose a band-aid solution would be an adjustment inflicting a -7 to damage, though that's rather clunky since it'll have to be changed every time my Dex changes.

Any suggestions?

[Portilis]

Originally Posted by Ambrus

You have two coders and you play full weekend sessions?! Damn!!! You're living in some kind of dream world I can barely relate to. Lol

Heh... two of us who are regulars in the group work in the industry, as does one of our irregulars, and my wife can do some as well as she had to learn some coding practice as part of her degree. As for the weekends, it's our only real way to do things as we have people travelling up to about 300 miles to come to the games...

I can post my .hl file if you'd care to review the material.

You'll probably need to include any userfiles you have as well, but there's usually a few of us willing to take a look.

I'm not talking about every interpretation, just more than the single narrow interpretation that LW adheres to. Your own add-ons are a perfect example. You saw a need for the ability to add an extra unarmed off-hand attack and coded it in; something that HL was setup up to preclude for whatever reason. As far as I can see, that adjustment is in keeping with the RAW and something that should have been included with HL; at worst as an option that could be turned off if a group chooses to disallow it for their own reasons.

The problem with it is that there are a lot of rules with alternate interpretations, many of which, like this one, have never had an official paizo ruling.

It's worth noting that a large quantity of the in-built adjustments were submitted to LWD by community contributors - they are one of those things that I think the devs would love to do more on, but tends not to get done because other things are often more important (and they are often one of the easiest things for the community to write as well).