Pathfinder 2E Two-Handed Trait and Two-Handed Weapons

[Filthy Lucre]

Howdy All,

When you're wielding a weapon with the Two-Handed trait in both hands, is it considered a two handed weapon? Or does it remain a one handed weapon you happen to be wielding in to hands?

 

[kenada]

Do you have more context for the question?

I don’t think PF2 uses handedness for classification. The rules refer to how many hands you use to wield the weapon. The two-handed trait gives you a bonus when you wield a weapon with two hands, but you can wield any weapon in two hands, and that is sufficient to use any weapon with an ability that requires it to be wielded in two hands.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

Do you have more context for the question?

I don’t think PF2 uses handedness for classification. The rules refer to how many hands you use to wield the weapon. The two-handed trait gives you a bonus when you wield a weapon with two hands, but you can wield any weapon in two hands, and that is sufficient to use any weapon with an ability that requires it to be wielded in two hands.

For example, the feat Brutish Shove requires that "You are wielding a two-handed melee weapon."

Hence: Is a bastard sword in both hands a two-handed melee weapon or is it a one-handed melee weapon being used with two hands?

Question clarified by the RAW as linked. Thanks!

 

[kenada]

Thanks for the example too. I guess I misremembered, but I’m glad I had the answer you needed anyway.

 

[Filthy Lucre]

Thanks for the example too. I guess I misremembered, but I’m glad I had the answer you needed anyway.

It's a little strange that they phrase feats that way, because according to the rules you linked what they actually mean is "wielding a weapon in two hands".

 

[CapnZapp]

Well, as written it does not include a Hands: 1+ weapon. Whether that's intentional remains an open question, as far as my limited googling could tell.

By a RAW reading, the answer to your initial question is "yes, but this does not apply to Brutish Shove".

Yes in that if you wield any weapon in two hands, it qualifies for any ability requiring you to wield it in two hands.

But no, Brutish Shove is not such an ability. It requires a two-handed (melee) weapon instead.

An ability that requires a two-handed melee weapon doesn't work with a 1+ weapon such as the Bastard Sword, since there is no rules language saying something like "a weapon counts as a two-handed weapon when you hold it in two hands".

Also, the weapon trait "two-hand" states:

Two-Hand: This weapon can be wielded with two hands.

Note how this doesn't make the weapon two-handed. It only allows you to wield it with two hands.

This is important because there is language that works the other way, however:

In addition, some abilities require you to wield a weapon in two hands. You meet this requirement while holding the weapon in two hands, even if it doesn’t require two hands or have the two-hand trait.

Note how this allows you to wield even a Shortsword in two hands to qualify for abilities that tell you to use two hands.

But again, Brutish Shove isn't such an ability as written. It's requirement is "You are wielding a two-handed melee weapon," not "You are wielding a melee weapon in two hands." A text search of the rule-book reveals three feats written like this: Brutish Shove, Knockdown (the ignore Trip part), and Positioning Assault.

In contrast, Advantageous Assault, Furious Focus, and Brutal Finish, has the "wielding in two hands" style language. There any weapon works, as long as you wield it in two hands.

So its an even split 3 feats using each phrasing. This suggests the difference is intentional, but I haven't looked deeper.

 

[kenada]

It’s wouldn’t be unprecedented (see: checks with the attack trait are not necessarily attack rolls), but that has to be sloppy editing. Paizo really needs to clarify what the mean by “two-handed weapon” vs. “a weapon wielded in two hands”. If they aren’t the same thing, then that’s some ”melee attack” vs. “attack with a melee weapon” level of silliness.

 

[CapnZapp]

I now googled a bit more, but couldn't find a single instance of people discussing this. I'm thinking of discussions such as "Why can't I use Brutish Shove with my Bastard Sword?" for example. But nope. And no, there's nothing about Brutish Shove or Bastard Swords in official errata. (There is one hit on "two hands" but that's unrelated)

My best suggestion is to ask over at Paizo, in the Rules sub-forum.

PS. You might think the "obvious" conclusion Paizo has made a typo-level error here. But with Pathfinder 2 it's rarely that simple. There are lots of design decisions that can charitably be called "exotic"... and as I said upthread, it is entirely plausible this works exactly as intended!

PPS. It's curious how both Paizo and WotC managed to score what I consider a critical failure regarding the rules related to what constitutes attacks...

 

[CapnZapp]

I found this:


Unfortunately, all it represents is a great example of how people can't read rules. (The question is "Does a bastard sword or katana held in two hands count as a two-handed weapon?" to which the answer should have been "no, but holding it in two hands does qualify you for feats requiring you to hold a weapon in two hands")

I should also add that if Paizo wanted this to work the "obvious" way, they could errata the Hands entry thusly (my emphasis):

In addition, some abilities require you to wield a weapon in two hands and some abilities require you to wield a two-handed weapon. You meet these requirements while holding the weapon in two hands, even if it doesn’t require two hands or have the two-hand trait.

This does make some degree of sense, because of the "...or have the two-hand trait" part at the end. This last part indicates that at least the writer of this part of the rules might have thought weapons with the two-hand trait should qualify as two-handed.

PS. I should again make it clear I haven't done an exhaustive search - it is still possible this has been discussed or even addressed by a dev.
PPS. I apologize for the huge reddit blob. The forum software insists, and makes it impossible to insert a regular link.