8
\$\begingroup\$

The Two-Handed Fighter advanced core class (in the Advanced Players Guide) gives two abilities (Overhand Chop and Backswing) that seem like they should overlap, but I'm not sure they do. Am I misreading this?

  1. Overhand Chop says it provides its benefit when a fighter makes a single attack with an attack action or a charge.
  2. Backswing says it provides its benefit on all attacks after the first.

That makes it sound as if I can get the bonus from either Overhand Chop or Backswing, but not both, since Overhand Chop requires that I make only a single attack. Am I correct?

\$\endgroup\$
2
\$\begingroup\$

RAW

Pathfinder defines 'Attack Action' as a series of actions, and a Full Attack Action does not grant you multiple 'attack actions', but rather multiple 'attacks'. There is an FAQ question clarifying that you can use sunder etc in place of an attack in a Full Attack, but otherwise you would be unable to, due to how they have worded it.

As Overhand Chop specifies the attack action or a charge, it does not apply to anything else.

As Backswing specifies a Full Attack (which, to my knowledge, can only be referring to the Full Attack Action as nothing else grants you a Full Attack in PF), it only applies to Full Attacks (and then only the attacks after the first).

This is further clarified by the author, which is in line with the RAW,

Wrote it.

Do not work together. OC on single attack ONLY. Backswing on full attack ONLY.

That is all. :)

Quote Jason Nelson, Paizo Message Boards

which is good as sadly sometimes authors don't actually understand how the rules they wrote down work. The FAQ is an official source, message board posts aren't.

RAI

It's pretty obviously intended to never overlap.

\$\endgroup\$
11
\$\begingroup\$

They do not overlap.

Quoth Jason Nelson, the author of the feat, from the paizo messageboards:

Wrote it.

Do not work together. OC on single attack ONLY. Backswing on full attack ONLY.

That is all. :)

\$\endgroup\$
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Thanks for coming back to post this. When it lets you, you should probably accept this answer too. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Jun 8 '15 at 13:14
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ No need to apologize for self-answers, too. Other people might wonder the same as you, and you have provided these hypothetical people with a good answer. \$\endgroup\$ – MrLemon Jun 8 '15 at 14:32
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Relevant meta question. \$\endgroup\$ – Hey I Can Chan Jun 8 '15 at 15:12

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.