Duel-wielding the Tarrasque and Hekatonkheires!

[jguy]

Was browsing through my PF books when I came upon a nice monster called the Aghasura (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/outsiders/asura/asura-aghasura). Now It is not incredibly impressive. 3 attacks that are basically claw-claw-bite with extra poison. Pretty stealthy for a huge monster but not good enough for it's CR to actually hide from PC's. Then I came upon the most badly written thing on a monster in a long time for abuse.

"Duel Wielder: An aghasura does not take a penalty on attack or damage rolls when attacking with two weapons."

Now you know why my title makes a bit more sense. 0 penalties! This means it can wield anything without flaw! Dragons, Demons, Gods, as long as it can hold onto two of them at the same time, it is flawless. Funny enough, it even extends to if it is debuffed. Shaken? No problem as long as I have two weapons. Don't take one away or suddenly I am terrible.

Anyone else think of funny ways to abuse this or have seen similar things?

[Snowbluff]

Dump Str. It won't matter you can't hit anything, because when you put something in your other hand, you have no penalties.

Don't take TWF. :smalltongue::smalltongue:

[jguy]

Actually you -should- take two weapon fighting to get the rest of the feat chain. The reason his attack chain is simply +26 with two weapons and a bite is because he uses normal two weapon fighting in place of a full-attack action so it goes weapon/weapon bite. With the full feat chain it would be Main hand +26/+21/+16 and off hand +26/+26/+26

[BWR]

*în his best Kryten voice*
Astounding deduction, sir, with just two minor flaws. One, the tarrasque is not defined as a 'weapon' by the rules.
Two, the hekatonkheires is not defined as a 'weapon' by the rules.

[Snowbluff]

Everything is an improvised weapon. :smalltongue:

[jguy]

Everything is an improvised weapon. :smalltongue:

Exactly. This seems like it would make a good t-shirt

[Snowbluff]

Exactly. This seems like it would make a good t-shirtHm... excuse me while I called my lawyer... I could have a shirt to publish. :smallwink:

[BWR]

But sir! Space Corps Directive 18465612 The SRD clearly states that

Improvised Weapons

Sometimes objects not crafted to be weapons nonetheless see use in combat. Because such objects are not designed for this use, any creature that uses one in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a -4 penalty on attack rolls made with that object.

Unless you have found some manner of creating such beasts with your own hands, I do not think you can claim them as 'crafted'. And to be considered objects in any non scientific sense, generally requires the thing in question to be non-living.

[Drelua]

Shield Master (Combat)

Your mastery of the shield allows you to fight with it without hindrance.

Prerequisites: Improved Shield Bash, Shield Proficiency, Shield Slam, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +11.

Benefit: You do not suffer any penalties on attack rolls made with a shield while you are wielding another weapon. Add your shield’s enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls made with the shield as if it were a weapon enhancement bonus.

This is basically the exact same thing. So if you had an Aghasura with two shields and shield master... it would take no penalties twice, meaning it takes all penalties as a bonus!

[Vedhin]

This thread (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19565390/3d4_damage!_Ill_buy_that_for_a_feat!?pg=1) is relevant. Reading the entire thing is reccommended. Also, don't read it anywhere you'll get in trouble for laughing.

[Rubik]

But sir! Space Corps Directive 18465612 The SRD clearly states that


Unless you have found some manner of creating such beasts with your own hands, I do not think you can claim them as 'crafted'. And to be considered objects in any non scientific sense, generally requires the thing in question to be non-living.Manual animal husbandry?

[Snowbluff]

In most continuities, Big T was crafted by Wizards.

Logs are not crafted and I can definitely hit people with them.

Constructs are not living.

But seriously there are rules somewhere that let you use creatures as weapons. Fling Ally/Enemy comes to mind.

[Ellrin]

Unless you have found some manner of creating such beasts with your own hands, I do not think you can claim them as 'crafted'. And to be considered objects in any non scientific sense, generally requires the thing in question to be non-living.

Nonsense. An object is anything that is not the subject: ie, you. (Technically ie, me, but that's subjective. xP). And the crafting bit has nothing to do with anything; the quote merely says "objects not crafted to be weapons," which merely excludes items specifically crafted as weapons, not items that were uncrafted. A rock can be an improvised weapon quite easily. Therefore, etc., ὅπερ ἔδει δεῖξαι.

In fact, by the passage quoted, speech or thought (or nearly any other non-physical object) could also be used as improvised weapons; though there may be a case for the necessity to prove such could mechanically be wielded. I'm not sure, it's been a while since I thought about abusing the rules like this.

[Darrin]

You can do something similar in 3.5 with an ettin, multi-headed template, or that two-brained blue goblin thing from Eberron (Dolgrim?). Similar "no penalty" wording.