|Paizo Pathfinder® Paizo Games|
|About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ|
Just re-read this thread and realized that was where you were coming from. Not sure how I gapped out and missed it the first time through.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
If you were new to Pathfinder/D&D 3.5, which way would YOU choose for the game to work? I'm confident that tha devs chose 'our' way of reading it as part of their writing process.
That's hilarious! Scroll back a few pages and you will find quotes (with links to the original posts) from just about every person on the development team who frequents these boards unilaterally diasgreeing with your camps point of view.
Malachi Silverclaw wrote:
Unless, of course, you 'decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks.'
That right there ^ is where you slide off the rails. You are not being asked to decide between iterative attacks or a move action - you are being asked to decide between a Standard Action or a Full-Attack.
-A Full-Attack is a full round action that prohibits movement (other then a 5' step).
-A Standard Action is not a full round action and allows you enough time left over to take a Move action.
Generally speaking a character does not have to decide between an Attack (standard action) or a Full-Attack (full round action) until after he or she has made their first attack.
There are of course Feats and Abilities that preclude being able to make this choice.
This is not an example of that. The rules are crystal clear in this case. You must make a full-attack in order to gain the benefit from Manyshot. Making a full-attack precludes movement beyond a 5' step.
Malachi: you post long posts! I basically stop reading them so I apologize. I did read to the part where you go off the rails: making an attack and cashing in your iterative attacks for a move action IS NOT a full attack.
It's the "Attack" referred to in "Deciding between an Attack and a Full Attack".
Regrettably until this sinks in we'll just keep chasing our tails.
Barbarians go well with Rogue. Play a Shoanti and use an Earthbreaker + Sap Master!
Personally, regardless of which build you go with I'd consider taking Furious Focus sooner if possible. It synergizes soooo well with Power Attack - especially at low levels and even more so for a 3/4 BAB class. The last thing a 3/4 bab class needs is penalties to attack rolls.
If you do decide to dip Fighter or Barbarian take that class first - more HP and +1 Bab gives more options for feats @ first level. Heck, take Weapon Focus, Power Attack & Furious Focus at level 1 if you go Fighter.
1level of Cleric + Crusaders Flurry. If Sheylin is your deity you now fluffy w/glaive and get 3:1 with Power Attack on account of 2 handed weapon.
Or how about a Hungry Ghost Monk of Sarenrae with a keen scimitar?
I like some of the Halfling stuff from the ARG. So much so that they are probably my second choice to human for many classes. Half-Orcs got a boost as well. And until they errata some of the alternate racial traits I'll let my players dump dark vision for skill points and then drop ferocity for even better dark vision (at least I think those are the traits that are replaced - don't have my book in front of me).
This speaks to the importance of making an effort to undetstand the spirit of the rule. It's clear that the intent is to provide a maximum bonus of up to +2, so long as you don't exceed you current HD.
As for the Wizard 5/Fighter 1 - allowing a caster level of 6 passes the sniff test: it doesn't reek of cheese.
It's not just for multi-classing though. Magical Knack is almost a must have for my Ranger characters.
To be honest when I read your previous post Thod, I couldn't really ascertain what question you were asking or which position you were supporting - if you don't mind re-phrasing it may elicit a more detailed response.
Also, bear in mind one of the prerequisites for Manyshot is BAB +6, which insures you're getting at least 1 iterative attack. Then again if you feel option 1 in the original post is a valid interpretation of the RAW & RAI you're obvioulsy ignoring prerequisites (and common sense) so your questions become valid in that context...
Then again I'm admittedly uncertain what you're asking...
The Guided property is not 3rd party as someone alluded to above. And it is usable on ranged weapons - at least it was used on a ranged weapon in the Paizo published Curse of the Crimsom Throne adventure path.
There is an NPC called the Cinderlander who has a Guided Crossbow in "A History of Ashes".
I don't have the book in front of me at the moment but I will check and see how & if it modified attack rolls...
I will admit I have not seen it any Paizo material that wasn't written as basically 3.5 stuff from back in the day - so maybe they banned it?
I can tell you that the sourcebook it appears in is not listed as acceptable material for PFS play.
That is what he is asserting. I don't think he'll answer you though - so maybe he'll correct me for answering for him if I'm wrong.
Edit: Ninja'd by the man himself!
But you're still wrong - full attacks do not allow you to move anything more then a 5' step. If you make an Attack and then follow it up with a move action you are not making a Full Attack.
You're jumping to incorrect conclusions. Nobody is asserting that the Zen Archer is making ranged attacks. We're talking about using a bow as an improvised weapon to make melee attacks. So I guess it is a reading comprehension "thing".
Again please cite the rule that says you cannot make a melee attack with an improvised weapon to make a trip attempt.
To be clear I'm not arguing that this allowable - I just don't think it's prohibited by the rule you think it is.
Which would be using a ranged weapon as an improvised "melee" weapon? Maybe it is a reading comprehension "thing."
For the sake of argument can you quote the rule that says an improvised weapon cannot be used to make a Trip attempt?
While I'm not convinced that a Zen Archer should be wasting his time trying to trip foes while using his bow as an improvised weapon, I don't think it's the 'Trip' rules that prohibit it... There may be rules specific to the Zen Archer (like Axl referenced) that prohibit such a thing however...
Thanks for posting that stuff from JJ.
Now that we can put the nonsensensical debate regarding "Deciding between an Attack and a Full-Attack" behind us we can now debate Manyshot.
Oh, wait. No debate is needed as the rules are crystal clear on what kind of action is required with Manyshot...
Gauss - you mentioned above that the rules for deciding between an Attack and a Full-Attack had to be somewhere - I think they were placed where they are for a reason...
For the first 5 levels of the game (assuming full BAB progression) there is very little differenc between a Standard Action & a Full-Attack (barring specific feats and abilities that are governed with specific rules pertaining to their use). When you only get 1 attack action with either a Standard or Full round action the general rules don't come into effect much.
Once you hit BAB 6/1 and have iterative attacks without relying on special abilities or feats it makes sense that the clarification pertaining to Attack actions and Full Attack actions be presented under the Full Attack heading - afterall, the Standard action has remained the same throughout.
Not sure if that makes sense as I am neither articulate or eloquent...
Thank you for that. I followed the link to rules of the game and read the entry on Actions (part one).
In that article Skip Williams clearly explains the following (under using actions);
skip williams wrote:
Why is this significant? Because it should put to rest the insane assertion that you can use one standard action plus one move action and call it a "Full-Attack" and then attempt to game the system by applying the benefits of Manyshot (which requires a Full Attack) to this standard action.
master arminas wrote:
Or dip 2 levels Rogue/Ninja to get a Ki Pool and voila! Abundant Step. Throw in the Dimensional Agility feat chain and you have a Nightcrawler to call your own.
Remember the Rogue's Sneak Attack does not multiply on a critical hit.
So really if she wants to hit a lot she should play a ful BAB class.
Fighters, Paladins and Rangers all have proficiency in Kukri's so you get to save a feat.
Each of them has additional static damage that they can add to the hits and it gets multiplied on critical hits.
I did the numbers a while back comparing Ranger to Fighter and I believe the Ranger's "Favoured Enemy" bonus out paces the Fighters "Weapon Training & Specialization" until at least level 11 or so.
A Ranger also has the option of selecting the TWF style and he or she does not have to meet the DEX pre-reqs for the feat chain - meaning they can pump their STR or CON or any other stat higher then a comparable fighter would.
A Ranger also gets 6 skill point per level and can take arcetypes that will give them Trap Finding.
If she wants to maximize her damage output look at Ranger/Fighter/Paladin. The bonus feat from being Human is always a nice bonus too!
If she wants to be a Rogue I think the Scout arcetype also stacks with Knifemaster and should present her more opportunities to sneak attack.
There is also a trait called "River Rat" that gives +1 bonus to damage with daggers - she could ask her GM to rule it applues to Kukri's instead... If she did all her chores without complaint for 1 week I'd probably allow it.
I can't believe it is this hard for some people to understand.
When you decide between an Attack and a Full Attack, you actually have to decide between making an Attack and a Full Attack.
If you decide to Attack (note the capital "A") you can make a move action after your first attack.
or you can choose to Full Attack by continuing with your remaining or iterative attacks and restrict yourself to a 5' step.
That's all the rule is saying.
Nothing more. Nothing less.
There are not two-types of Full-Attack - the "Full Attack" where you get to make a move action after making your first attack is actually just an Attack.
I am going to ask this can anyone name me any full attack action other than manyshot that locks you into a full attack from the get go?
Why? What would that accomplish? An absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.Manyshot requires a full attack action - that wouldn't change even if it were the only feat to "lock" you into a full attack from the get go.
There are several feats i can think of that only work on a full-attack. And has always been the case the only move you can make with a full-attack is a 5' step.
Thanks for moving the thread and thanks for the responses thus far.
I didn't necessarily create a zombie horde, but I made a few appearances of plague zombies in the chapter, and tied them to Rolth. So instead of run-of-the-mill zombies, I made exploding, plague-infested ones. Too bad only 2 of my PCs were susceptible....
This is pretty much what I'm thinking I will do.
Hrothgar Rannúlfr wrote:
Any combatant has the option to opt out of a full attack (and move, instead) after the results of the first attack are determined.
This is very true. What people are failing to understand is that if you "opt out" after the first attack and move instead you are taking a standard action followed by a move action.
Standard Action + Move Action does not equal "Full Attack"
Therefore you have not met the requirements of Manyshot and are not entitled to receive the benefit.
Trying to game the system by using Manyshot (as an enhanced standard action) and then employing a move action is neither RAW or RAI.
Are you trying to say the wording could be better or do you really think the "intent" was to allow someone to benefit from a feat that says it needs a full round action to be used with only a standard action.
Concerro; No and No.
I think I am trying to say what you are trying to say - that is;
Manyshot cannot be used to enhance a standard attack by giving the user the benefit of firing 2 arrows and being able to take a move action.
It's very clear that by Manshot's definition that it can only be used as part of a full-attack action.
AD and others appear to be trying to game the system (inadvertantly or otherwise) by invoking the general rule of "deciding between an attack or a full-attack" when the specific rule of Manyshot clearly states you can't use it with a standard action.
I think the designers have done a very good job in this instance of making that as clear as possible - if players were intended to be able to combine Many shot with a standard action & a move action it would say so in the description. It doesn't. That's also why I don't think a FAQ is even needed in this instance...
I apologize if I am neither as eloquent or as articulate as Gauss - but the way he explained it is spot on in my opinion.
No FAQ required on this one...
I have to admit I've given the Paizo authors grief in the past for ambiguity or unclear wording in rules before - but this is certainly not one of those instances.
I don't see how the rules could be made anymore clear; you may use Many shot as part of a full-attack action.
End of story.
If you want to bail on your iterative attacks that's your choice - but the only move you can legally make after applying the benefit of Many shot to your first arrow is a 5' step.
Any other interpretation is wrong. Those of you suggesting option #1 are willfully ignoring the Rules as Written.
I'd rule that BAB is both class and level related and therefore allow a Crusader of Sarenrae take Weapon Focus (Scimitar) at level 1...
I think that's the intent of the Archetype afterall - Sacrifice a Domain and suffer diminished Spell casting for superior (for a Cleric) Martial abbility with your Dieties favoured weapon...
The real question here is; Is it worth it?.
And I have to say that was very well laid out Gauss. Specific trumps general is what the rules are saying and trying to say (RAW & RAI)
As a GM I have my players "declare" what feats they are applying ahead of time. When they say "I'm using Many Shot" they have decided to make a Full attack rather then an Attack (with the option to take a move action).
That player has the option to stop firing after his first shot (which consists of two arrows), but he cannot take a move or move equivalent action.
Just build an Archer Ranger, human of course. If you're playing in Golarion I think it's the Kelish that are "horse lords".
As others have mentioned you can skip mounted feats entirely - use your horse to make a single move with your full attack and your golden.
Tweak Lastoth's build so you take boon companion early as possible If you'd like a bad ass mount.
You could also choose the "skirmisher" archetype if you want some "tricks" that synergize well with mounts/companions. You give up a lot though - tough call.
I'd recommend watching Dirty Rotten Scoundrels for inspiration. It features two very distinct conmen that should give you some inspiration for how such a character could work.
^That's the first thing that came to my mind as well. There is also a Dicaprio movie that was based on a real life conman who got away with some amazing capers - so much so that I think the FBI or CIA eventually employed him. I think it was "Catch me if you can".
Sean H wrote:
Also, I'm not sure you can give up Darkvision with Forest Walker, then get Darkvision back with Acute Darkvision. It seems to me that Acute is meant to be an addition to darkvision, not a replacement.
If that was the case Paizo should have wrote: "... Gain an additional 30 feet range to a maximum darkvision range of 90'..." or something like that.
As it stands, by RAW you can in fact give up dark vision and gain it back (but better) in this manner.
I expect this will be FAQ'd soon enough though - I am on the same page as Sean H with what I think they (the authors) were trying to accomplish with that racial trait.
Archers do very well in combat. With the material available in the APG & UC you can be an archer that mixes it up in the thick of melee with your ranged attack.
Being that Perception is WIS based, the natural fit for a perceptive archer is the Zen Archer. Not only do you get Perception as a class skill you get to base your ranged attacks off WIS by level 2 or 3 (can't recall at the moment).
A magic headband is going to serve double duty for this character - pumping his perception and combat ability.
Your WIS can become so obscene you may want to consider the trait "wisdom in the flesh" (I think that's the name of it) that lets you use your WIS mod on any DEX/CON/STR based skill. Stealth, acrobatics, and disable device would all be good choices and all of a sudden you are way better at more things out of combat.
The Zen Archer is so blessed with feats and class features that replace or replicate feats you can actually be a non-human race and not suffer for it. Dark vision anyone?
Instead of trying to negate the gunslinger why not take him out of his element? A simple invisibility spell on a Tetori Monk to facilitate a grapple should do it. Make him have to fight with a light weapon instead of his gun. The grappler can be a mook - he just has to delay the GS long enough for the rest of the party to deal with the BBEG.