So according to a faq ruling here:
If a creature with multiple natural attacks (such as bite/claw/claw) wears an Amulet of Mighty Fists with the speed property, does it get one extra attack with each of its natural weapons?
No... mainly because that combination is way too good for monsters with multiple attacks, and gets better the more natural attacks a monster has. Doubling a creature's attacks per round is really powerful, even for 80,000 gp (the price of a +4 amulet).
Speed doesn't apply to every natural attack, so what does it apply to? One natural attack? If I'm TWFing unarmed strikes as a monk does it apply to both unarmed strikes (as two speed shortswords would apply to a ranger TWFing)?
prototype00
Fair enough, does unarmed strike count as a natural weapon in this case? If you had unarmed strike and say a bite attack (an orc monk say), could you enhance both with the speed enhancement?
prototype00
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe you only get one extra attack per round with a speed weapon. Having two speed weapons does not give two extra attacks... just one. The speed quality does not stack in my opinion based upon my reading of the core book.
Oh, my mistake then, I had thought that if you had two weapons of speed that you would get an extra attack for each weapon.
prototype00
You only enhace one amulet so just one extra attack.could you enhance both with the speed enhancement?
prototype00
So if you enhanced your amulet with keen, only one of your natural weapons would get an enhanced critical chance? Or if you enhanced it with +2, you pick which natural weapon/unarmed strike got that +2 enhancement bonus?
prototype00
Speed just simulates haste. Haste only grants one extra attack. Which weapon gets the attack is up to the character.
edit:As for the keen question I would let the player choose one natural attack.
Speed just simulates haste. Haste only grants one extra attack. Which weapon gets the attack is up to the character.
edit:As for the keen question I would let the player choose one natural attack.
Man, then your player is paying two and a half times the price of an equivalent magic item for the pleasure of duplicating one ability. Rough. And also, it seems contrary to the rules of the amulet itself.
prototype00
Speed just simulates haste. Haste only grants one extra attack. Which weapon gets the attack is up to the character.
edit:As for the keen question I would let the player choose one natural attack.
Man, then your player is paying two and a half times the price of an equivalent magic item for the pleasure of duplicating one ability. Rough. And also, it seems contrary to the rules of the amulet itself.
prototype00
Actually now that I've re-read the faq, I have come to the conclusion that you might be wrong Wraithstrike, because the reply:
No... mainly because that combination is way too good for monsters with multiple attacks, and gets better the more natural attacks a monster has. Doubling a creature's attacks per round is really powerful, even for 80,000 gp (the price of a +4 amulet).
doesn't out and out say that you only get one extra attack, (as that would have been the easiest way to answer the question, i.e. "No, speed doesn't work like that" but instead answers as if you could have speed on multiple weapons and each weapon would then deliver an extra attack during a full attack action.
Or am I wrong in this conclusion?
prototype00
Speed just simulates haste. Haste only grants one extra attack. Which weapon gets the attack is up to the character.
edit:As for the keen question I would let the player choose one natural attack.
Man, then your player is paying two and a half times the price of an equivalent magic item for the pleasure of duplicating one ability. Rough. And also, it seems contrary to the rules of the amulet itself.
prototype00
The amulet cost too much. I agree with that.
Speed just simulates haste. Haste only grants one extra attack. Which weapon gets the attack is up to the character.
edit:As for the keen question I would let the player choose one natural attack.
Man, then your player is paying two and a half times the price of an equivalent magic item for the pleasure of duplicating one ability. Rough. And also, it seems contrary to the rules of the amulet itself.
prototype00
Actually now that I've re-read the faq, I have come to the conclusion that you might be wrong Wraithstrike, because the reply:
No... mainly because that combination is way too good for monsters with multiple attacks, and gets better the more natural attacks a monster has. Doubling a creature's attacks per round is really powerful, even for 80,000 gp (the price of a +4 amulet).doesn't out and out say that you only get one extra attack, (as that would have been the easiest way to answer the question, i.e. "No, speed doesn't work like that" but instead answers as if you could have speed on multiple weapons and each weapon would then deliver an extra attack during a full attack action.
Or am I wrong in this conclusion?
prototype00
Your text just proved my point.
Amulet of Mighty Fists: If a creature with multiple natural attacks (such as bite/claw/claw) wears an amulet with the speed property, does it get one extra attack with each of its natural weapons?
... mainly because that combination is way too good for monsters with multiple attacks, and gets better the more natural attacks a monster has. Doubling a creature's attacks per round is really powerful, even for 80,000 gp (the price of a +4 amulet).
—Sean K Reynolds, 07/29/11
SKR is saying that it does not double the monster's attacks.
You cannot put keen on an amulet of mighty fists (as it specifies you can only apply abilities that would work with unarmed strike which is a blugeoning attack and thus not valid for keen)
Well, you could, but it would have absolutely no effect, unless you have some means to make your unarmed strikes slashing weapons. Other than raising the price.
EDIT: And it also works with natural weapons, some of which (claws, for example) slashing weapons.
Master Arminas
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
An amulet of mighty fists is explicitly designed to augment natural weapons or unarmed strikes, per its text. These options include slashing, piercing and bludgeoning weapons, so any enhancement that has a damage type prerequisite can be put into the amulet. A keen amulet of mighty fists would still only affect unarmed strikes and natural attacks that met its prerequisite (i.e., only piercing or slashing attacks).
A speed amulet of mighty fists emulates haste for your attacks, so as the spell: "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon." Even if you consider the amulet to affect all of the wearer's natural attacks the way pretty much any other amulet of mighty fists ability does, the speed ability states: "This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell." Since you cannot use multiple manufactured weapons of speed to gain multiple extra attacks, the enhanced natural weapons are likewise exclusive.
|
Speed just simulates haste. Haste only grants one extra attack. Which weapon gets the attack is up to the character.
edit:As for the keen question I would let the player choose one natural attack.
Keen will affect ALL natural weapons that meet it's requirement (slashing/piercing). It's ONLY Speed enchant that is applied to 1 weapon. It is an exception to the rules that AoMF affects all natural/unarmed strikes the character has.
It's bad (overlooked?) design.
There.
I said it.
The AoMF grants it's abilities to ALL Natural Attacks and the Unarmed Strike a creature posesses. There is no reason, by a strict reading of the rules, that a Haste effect coming from an AoMF wouldn't be granted to a bite/claw x2/tail all at the same time, except for this once place in a FAQ where the developers said "that would be too good, so no, not because there's any reason we can prove, but just because we said no."
(And the reason it should work? The same reason dual-wielding two +1 Speed Shortswords grants you an extra attack with each shortsword... even though a haste spell cast on your buddy who's dual-wielding with two non-magic daggers only gets one extra attack.)
So, long story short... It's up to your DM entirely.
You will not get a better answer until Pathfinder 2.0: The Non-Backwards Compatable Edition
:P
Speed on two weapons does not get you two extra attacks. The idea behind is that the character can only benefit from a haste-like effect once. It does not matter whether or not the spell is directly affecting the person or a weapon.
Speed on two weapons does not get you two extra attacks. The idea behind is that the character can only benefit from a haste-like effect once. It does not matter whether or not the spell is directly affecting the person or a weapon.
The Speed enchantment, placed on a weapon twice, will not grant two extra attacks, nor will a Haste spell stack with the Speed enchantment for two extra attacks.
But that doesn't mean that two different sources don't get the benefits of said enchantment.The clincher here is that the weapons are the things that are enchanted, not the wielder, so there is no "stacking" present with two different weapons.
Speed is one source just like defending is one source. You can't get a higher AC from defending just by having two defending weapons. The source is the enhancement not the weapon.
Where are you getting the idea that Defending from two different weapons doesn't stack from? Can you point me to that rule, because the bonus to your AC "stacks with all others."
Speed: When making a full-attack action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.)
Moderate transmutation; CL 7th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, haste; Price +3 bonus.
Haste is just one example, and I am sure that "speed" is similar to "speed".
Which is exactly why if you enchant a weapon with Speed twice, you've wasted a +4modifier's worth of gold, because you won't get another attack with that weapon.
But I see nothing in the rules, and no reason to assume that an entirely different attack with an entirely different weapon wouldn't be possible.
Who said anything about giving a weapon the same enhancement twice? You can't even do that by the rules unless they specifically say otherwise.
Now I do admit the RAW is murky, but I can use the amulet of mighty fist as precedent to show intent.
Per the FAQ the over-priced AoMF which would be a +1 speed AMoF is 125,000 gp, and that is considered to be too cheap.
A +1 speed weapon is 32000 gp. Two of them are 64000.
No matter how you slice it, it won't happen.
So Neo2151, according to you, if a monk with TWF (i.e. both weapons are unarmed strikes) wears an amulet of mighty fists with the speed enhancement, both unarmed strikes would count as seperate speed weapons? And thus the monk would get an extra attack with both? (I'm not 100% on flurry working with this as it is the same unarmed strike)
prototype00
So Neo2151, according to you, if a monk with TWF (i.e. both weapons are unarmed strikes) wears an amulet of mighty fists with the speed enhancement, both unarmed strikes would count as seperate speed weapons? And thus the monk would get an extra attack with both? (I'm not 100% on flurry working with this as it is the same unarmed strike)
prototype00
Personally, no. But I'm in the group of people who believe that Unarmed Strike is counted as a single weapon (the only way it actually makes sense, honestly) and since you only have one, you can't TWF with it. (Otherwise, why can't any/all humanoid creatures take the Multiweapon Fighting feats for their Punch x2/Kick x2/Headbutt attacks?)
Unclear rules are what the root of the problem is here. The Speed thing with the AoMF is no different in that regard.
|
Which is exactly why if you enchant a weapon with Speed twice, you've wasted a +4modifier's worth of gold, because you won't get another attack with that weapon.
But I see nothing in the rules, and no reason to assume that an entirely different attack with an entirely different weapon wouldn't be possible.
From the Getting started section of the rules:
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.
Speed: When making a full-attack action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.)
Note that it is 1 extra attack, not "one extra attack sequence".
The problem arises when:
If you apply that logic to Speed, why don't you apply the same logic to all other weapon properties? (Flaming, Bane, etc?)
A flaming weapon deals extra damage.
A speed weapon _grants its wielder_ an extra attack.
Thus, stacking works differently.
A speed weapon _grants its wielder_ an extra attack.
You left out a very important distinction: "with that weapon."
Haste grants you an extra attack with any weapon you wish to use. Speed only applies to the weapon it's enchanted on. Because of that, you really can't assume they work exactly the same.
It still grants the wielder an ability, thus stacking is based on character and not on weapon.
Its the same difference that makes a +1 shield of fire resistance and +1 armor of fire resistance both get bonus to hardness and hp (because the bonuses are to the items) but the fire resistance doesnt stack (because its a bonus to the character).
But that isn't a fair comparison, because that's a numerical bonus, and the rules are crystal on "likes bonuses don't stack unless they specify otherwise."
An extra attack isn't a numerical bonus, and therefore you can't use the same rules to govern it.
"One extra attack". One is a number.
|
|
But that isn't a fair comparison, because that's a numerical bonus, and the rules are crystal on "likes bonuses don't stack unless they specify otherwise."
An extra attack isn't a numerical bonus, and therefore you can't use the same rules to govern it.
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.
Can you point to me where in this rule a numerical bonus is cited?
Beside that, +1 attack or +N attacks where N is the number of weapons or attacks of a creature are numerical bonus.
Can you point to me where in this rule a numerical bonus is cited?
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.
Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.
Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another.
I never said it was balanced... All I said was that the rules support it, and the FAQ was nothing more than "no, because no."
:P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Because he didn't provide any rule that supported his statement. He just said "no, creatures with many multiple attacks would get too much of a benefit for the cost."
Rules guys have been wrong about their own systems before, especially since this system isn't even theirs to begin with. LOTS of room for error there (Monks... nuff said.)
I disregard it because the rules are not clear on it. Hence why this thread can even exist (and it's not even my thread, so I'm not the only one.)
Weapons of speed probably should stack, it is jsut that applying it in the case of an amulet of mighty fists is considered too powerful.
* Personally I think the distinction between natural weapons and weapons is many ways just flawed and unnecesarily complex.
I'd probably treat someone with an amulet of mighty fists +1 speed, as under the effects of permanent haste, it makes sense in a way and is pretty cool.