| 33 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger's favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.
After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
You don't have to decide whether you are full attacking or just standard attacking until after you see if your first attack hit. You only get an extra arrow for your first attack if you full attack.
If I am an archer with Manyshot do I:
1. Standard attack, firing two arrow, then decide to move or continue with a full attack after seeing if I hit?
2. Standard attack, firing one arrow, then decide to move or continue with a full attack after I see if I hit; if I continue to full attack I add extra arrow's worth of damage to my previously attacked foe since I am now full attacking.
3. Need to declare that I will be full attacking to get an extra arrow on my first attack and give up the chance to move after my first attack roll.
4. Somethine else?
Thank you.
number 3.
some actions such as many shot or taking a full withdrawal give you a benefit in exchange for giving up versatility.
If you lock in a full attack (such as with many shot) you are giving up the freedom to move in order to max out your damage.
note however that your free to stop firing. so you can basically only use your many shot attack, your five foot step and chose not to use the rest of your attacks. (though its probably best to max out your attack)
|
Number #1. Read the text quoted above:
'After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round.'
It goes like this;
- Start of your turn. You declare a full attack. Manyshot, Monk flurry BAB etc all trigger here.
- Your first shot kills your target, and no enemies remain. You elect to take a move action in place of subsequent attacks. You have, however, already declared a full attack; you've just aborted that full attack before it was fully complete using a legal opportunity to do so.
To the people suggesting it's number 3, what happens in this situation?
- You full attack with a bow. After your first attack hits, the target leaves your target area. Maybe the target readies an action (or has a contingency) with a trigger of 'when I am struck by an arrow, dimension door'. Would you deny the attacker Manyshot on that first attack?
What about if the readied action was 'scorching ray on the first person that shoots me with an arrow' and the spell's damage dropped the archer? Are they then forced into only being allowed a single attack with no Manyshot benefits, having been felled after the first attack of their full attack?
Manyshot damage is added on the first attack of a declared full attack. You may then legally abort the full attack after the first shot, and still have used Manyshot on that first arrow.
Ninja,
Its a matter of intent. You INTEND to make a full attack action and give up your movement with the purpose of making that action. should the situation change after the first hit you have already given up your movement even if you never intended to fire more than once for what ever reason once you declare the full round action of many shot you have already given up your move action other than a 5 foot step
. you can stop attacking or change targets but you no longer have a move action beyond a 5 foot step.
Number 4. You need to declare a full attack to get your manyshot arrow, but you can cancel your full attack after the first attack is resolved and take a move action.
Can't see that being the case, because it would be far easier to just say that on your first attack in a round, etc, etc.
That would cover firing two arrows as a standard attack action, and as part of a full attack.
I would let someone abort the full attack if the first attack missed with Manyshot, since they have not gained any advantage from the feat, but if it hits, they're locked into a full attack action.
chem, that sounds nice and all but it fundamentally ignores game tactics.
taking the full round action to use your many shot is a trade off, you have to give up one to get the other.
your ruling is like saying, "If a caster casts a spell against a target and the spell fails due to SR or making the save or some immunity then they can just have the spell back since nothing actually happened."
its a NICE thing to do but not the intent of the rules and doesnt encourage smart play.
Bottom line is if they many shot they have chosen a full round action. they have given up the freedom of full movement and cannot get it back no matter what happens after the die roll even if they abort the full attack.
I guess I'm just a nice person. :D
Anyway, RAW, option 3 - if you Manyshot, you're using the full attack action, even if you only make that first shot with two arrows.
To the people advocating 'many shot arrow shots' then stop and do a move action if that were the case then many shot may as well be a standard action.
By choosing to do many shot after firing it you have alyready done something that you could not have done without a full attack action. In otherwords at that point you are fully commited to a full attack action.
This is different than Say Deciding to do rapid shot taking one shot at -2 killing your target then deciding to move. At this point all youve done is taken one shot at a penalty.
With many shot Once you fire two arrows with that first arrow your doing a full attack action.
Anyhow as alot of people have said its option #3
Option 3. Remember, what make that first shot many shot is that you declare it many shot. You only roll the one attack, its the damage you roll twice.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The "Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack" rule states that after your first attack,you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks. As far a I know, there is no rule for "locking" yourself into a full attack action.
I agree that a Manyshot archer can abuse this rule and effectively get one extra arrow as part of a standard attack as long as he takes his move action after the attack rather than before. For instance, armed with a bow at the beginning of combat, he could declare a Full Attack with the intent to cancel, fire two arrows from Manyshot, cancel the Full Attack, drop the bow as a Free Action, then draw his sword as a Move Action and be ready for melee combat. I think the intent to cancel part is the rules abuse.
There was a long and heated discussion about this a few months ago. In that discussion I was of the opinion that you cannot declare a Full Attack action with the intent to cancel because of the phrase "depending on how the first attack turns out." Because of this phrase I think it is an abuse of the rule to decide to cancel your Full Attack action before seeing how the first attack turns out. The decision to cancel is dependent upon how the first attack turns out.
However, this rule is easily abused because, as a DM, you can only guess at what a players intents are?
Manyshot should have been written to work on a standard action anyway, so I have no problem with this.
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
By RAW it's #4. You declare a full attack, take your manyshot and then decide if you want to continue your full attack. Manyshot says you can only do manyshot on a full attack, so whether you "declare it" or not, by using manyshot, you have declared it to be a full attack.
However, full attack allows you to bail out of the full attack after your first attack if you like. Here's the ruling on full attacks:
After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you've already taken a 5-foot step, you can't use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
It looks pretty clear to me.
However, this may not be developer intent and it is probably worth FAQing to see if the developers want to have you committed to a full attack if you use manyshot. As written it seems pretty clear that you can do manyshot and then move.
However, you could NOT move and then manyshot.
There is no "decision" to make here. One melee or ranged attack is a standard action. Manyshot is a full-round action. Therefore like it or not, you must use the the full attack action to use Manyshot.
Nobody contests that.
The point of contest is that the rules for a "full attack action" says you can abort the full attack after the first attack, and then take a move action.
|
|
The option to abort does not apply to Manyshot. Manyshot is not a standard action. One melee attack or one ranged attack is a standard action. If your character has multiple attacks, you decide AFTER you make a single attack if you want make further attacks, which requires a full attack action. That is why there is nothing to contest. I mean no disrespect it is only a matter of attack mechanics.
Manyshot isn't an action at all. It applies "when you make a full-attack action".
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just to weigh in here: If you are making a single, regular, attack action (which manyshot is not) then YES, you can bail out after the first attack.
BUT, if you do anything that irrevocably commits you to full attack action (and manyshot is that) you cannot then bail out and take a move action.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Manyshot is an adjustment to your "first attack" of a full attack action. That's all the feat says about the mechanics of it. Since the full attack action says you can bail out after your first attack, then by RAW you can bail out after manyshot.
Again, this may not be what the game designers intended. Since manyshot does the damage of two arrows it may be that the developers consider it to be more than a single attack which allows you to bail out of full attack.
But that's pure supposition. By raw you can make your first attack, use manyshot, adn then decide to move instead of take your further actions.
My druid does this quite a bit. Until the devs rule otherwise, it's a perfectly valid exploit.
Just to weigh in here: If you are making a single, regular, attack action (which manyshot is not) then YES, you can bail out after the first attack.
BUT, if you do anything that irrevocably commits you to full attack action (and manyshot is that) you cannot then bail out and take a move action.
- Gauss
Gauss, with all due respect please cite the rules which support this interpretation. "Full attack" says what I quoted above. It says nothing about the first attack being a "single, regular atttack action." It says "after the first attack."
You can rule this way in your games, but it is not RAW.
Heh. I just realized something funny: If you have the Manyshot feat, as the feat is written, you can't start a full-attack action with a bow in any other way than by firing two arrows at once :)
Other feats that alter your attacks all say "you can" do this or that in their Benefits text, but Manyshot doesn't.
I very much doubt that's RAI though :)
Are, It sort of reads that way, but that is part of the "benefit" clause. Is there anything in the rules that says you HAVE to take the benefit of a feat? I don't believe there is. Is there anything that says you can IGNORE the benefit of a feat if you like?
|
|
Adamantine, I mean no disrespect but you are not interpreting RAW correctly. There is a breakdown in the understanding of the basic attack action with some of the folks in this thread. You may only use Manyshot as part of a full-round action, it cannot be separated. What was quoted has nothing to do with Manyshot. I am not sure how to explain it any better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adamantine, I mean no disrespect but you not interpreting RAW correctly. There is a breakdown in the understanding of the basic attack action with some of the folks in this thread. You may only use Manyshot as part of a full-round action, it cannot be separated. What was quoted has nothing to do with Manyshot. I am not sure how to explain it any better.
Corbin, please cite the rule that supports your and Gauss's interpretation that the "first attack" mentioned in the full attack action has to be the same attack that could be made in a standard action.
If you can't cite the rule, then it is just your interpretation. I don't care how many of you agree with some interpretation unless it is supported by RAW.
Play your game the way you like. Join in clubs that support your interpretation and slap each other on the back.
But don't claim that it's the rule unless you can cite it.
I cited the rule. It says "first attack" of a full attack. That's all it says. Manyshot is the "first attack" of a full attack.
It works by RAW. Unless you can show me rules which prove otherwise.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Adamantine, there are no interpretations, claims or clubs at work here. You already cited the rules involved in this discussion, you and I are simply not communicating well with each other regarding the mechanics in RAW.
Corbin. ? WTF?
The OP posted not only ONE request for an "interpretation" he posted FOUR and asked which one should apply.
The whole friggin POINT of this thread was to determine what to do about Manyshot. The friggin' title of the THREAD is "Full attacks and manyshot."
And now you say that interpretation is not in play? You say in your last post that this has "nothing to do with manyshot"?
I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone.
Whatever.
Have fun.
|
There is no "decision" to make here. One melee or ranged attack is a standard action. Manyshot is a full-round action. Therefore like it or not, you must use the the full attack action to use Manyshot.
+1 for #3. Full attack means full attack. "Deciding" to not full attack after an attack which can ONLY be done on a full attack makes no sense to me.
No problem with anyone home brewing it, and I can conceptually see it, but it is not RAW by my reading.
There is no "decision" to make here. One melee or ranged attack is a standard action. Manyshot is a full-round action. Therefore like it or not, you must use the the full attack action to use Manyshot.+1 for #3. Full attack means full attack. "Deciding" to not full attack after an attack which can ONLY be done on a full attack makes no sense to me.
No problem with anyone home brewing it, and I can conceptually see it, but it is not RAW by my reading.
Again, the RAW is clear. You can abandon your full attack and move after your "first attack" if you wish. Many shot is applied on your "first attack".
That's ALL that RAW says.
This interpretation, that you can't manyshot and then move is what is a "homebrew."
Again, cite the rule that says you HAVE to make a standard action type of attack on your "first attack" with a full attack.
Nobody has done so. Until someone does I am going to assume there is no such rule. Which means by RAW you can Manyshot and then abandon the full attack and move. By RAW. Because "RAW" means "Rules as Written". And that's what is written.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Look, the 'i can abort a full attack' rule is to let you stop attacking after your first shot kills somone and do something else rather than be comitted to standing there with nothing else to do. Probly some other tactical reasons.
It isnt there so you can turn an attack that is clearly intended as 'im going to stand here as part of a full round action' and somehow turn it by rules fenagling into a standard attack.
General:
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.
Specific:
Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger’s favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.
So there are two possibilities:
1) The Specific trumps the General. Specific in this case states it is a Full-attack action in order to use the ability. Thus, the decision is already made.2) The Specific does not trump the general. This is based on an interpretation that regardless of the specific wording it is still a single attack and thus single attack rules apply.
Personally I think this is a situation of specific trumping General. However enough leeway exists that if someone made a FAQ on this I would hit the FAQ button if only to remove people's confusion.
Adamantine Dragon: Now I have cited the rules but come up with a different interpretation.
- Gauss
|
General:
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.Specific:
Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger’s favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.So there are two possibilities:
1) The Specific trumps the General. Specific in this case states it is a Full-attack action in order to use the ability. Thus, the decision is already made.2) The Specific does not trump the general. This is based on an interpretation that regardless of the specific wording it is still a single attack and thus single attack rules apply.
Personally I think this is a situation of specific trumping General. However enough leeway exists that if someone made a FAQ on this I would hit the FAQ button if only to remove people's confusion.
Adamantine Dragon: Now I have cited the rules but come up with a different interpretation.
- Gauss
^This.
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.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Adamantine Dragon,
Many shot is a full-attack. It is not a standard attack.
CRB p. 130. Manyshot (Combat) You can fire multiple arrows at a single target. Prerequisites: Dex 17, Point-Blank Shot, Rapid Shot, base attack bonus +6. Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack
A full-attack is a full-round action.
CRB p. 187: Full Attack If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Chapter 3), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some s pecial reason, you must use a full-round action to get your a dditional attacks.
A full-round action prevents you from also taking a move action.
CRB p. 187: A full-round action requires an entire round to complete. Thus, it can't be coupled with a standard or a move action, though if it does not involve moving any distance, you can take a 5-foot step. (See also CRB p. 181: Full-Round Action: A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round. The only movement you can take during a full-round action is a 5-foot step before, during, or after the action.)
There, by RAW, rules cited, Many Shot is a full round action and you can't take a move action in the same round you used the Many Shot feat.
You have stated that the rule allowing allowing you to make a single attack before deciding to make multiple attacks allows you to use Many Shot and then take a move action.
CRB p. 187: Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round.
1. The first word, in bold in the CRB is "deciding," and you have to "decid[e]" between an attack or a full attack. If you decide to use Many Shot, you decide to make a full attack. (CRB p.130, quoted above.) It requires a full round action. (CRB p. 187, quoted above.)
2. Many Attack specifies you shoot two arrows as part of your "first attack." That attack must be a full attack. (CRB p. 130, quoted above.) The deciding rule also uses the words "first attack." While if it was written by itself I might also be confused, by looking at the first part of the paragraph the "first attack" is different from a full attack.
3. It may be the word "attack" is confusing you. In Pathfinder terms, an attack may mean one attack roll when you can make multiple attacks in a round, or it may refer to a single round attack action. See CRB p. 183, Table 8.2, which lists attack (ranged) as a standard action.
4. Finally, I would suggest that when two rules can be harmoneously read together, they should be. Your original reading of the rules allowing you to use Many Shot and move, despite Many Shot clearly requiring a full action creates a non sequitur. The interpretation I've provided, and cited the rules for, makes for an internally consistent rules set.
I hope this clears the matter up for you. I wish you a most pleasant evening and good gaming.
-- Ajaxis
PS - I'll note your Druid can charge and attack multiple creatures, if you wildshape into a creature with the pounce ability. I do not believe your Druid can charge, attack one time, forego the pounce attack, and then after that first attack take a move equivalent action, which would have been possible under your reading of the rules.
Adamantine Dragon, your position is not logically sound. Let's say we declare a full attack action using Manyshot, fire two arrows on the first attack, then decide to abandon the remaining attacks and move instead. If we do that then we are not making a full attack action, meaning we are not allowed to use Manyshot... except we're already using Manyshot because we've already fired the extra arrow. Since we must use a full attack to benefit from MS then it follows that we must continue the full attack, or we will be breaking the RAW by using a benefit which only applies on a full attack action without taking that action.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With manyshot the first attack fires two arrows. In order for that to work you must have committed to manyshot from the beginning. It is not a regular full attack action, but a special use of it. Now since manyshot requires a full attack action in order to be used, you are locked into it. The only benefit is that the first attack releases two arrows. To say that you can just say "naw I changed my mind, but I will keep the benefits of the feat without the required action" is not something I would expect to fly at any GM's table.
Ninjaiguana: Sorry to hear that, it really is about the fact that the ability starts off as Full-attack action rather than giving you the choice later. However, play your game your way. Unless it is PFS there wont be a problem. :)
- Gauss
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ninjaiguana: Sorry to hear that, it really is about the fact that the ability starts off as Full-attack action rather than giving you the choice later. However, play your game your way. Unless it is PFS there wont be a problem. :)
- Gauss
Oh, I run Manyshot as per option #3 in PFS, too. Your interpretation of the rules is not one I agree with, and it is no more valid than mine and Adamantine Dragon's. Hence this thread - and the one before it - reaching no consensus, because there is no clear-cut right answer by RAW. People can parse the text all they want, stressing various sentences where it will do their position the most good, but the text is ambiguous on the face of it, and that's the end of it. Pending dev commentary, of course.
I will also add that if you take the first attack then do a move action then you are not committing a full round action which manyshot requires, so that is further proof that you must commit to a full attack action to get the benefits of manyshot.
|
|
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.
General:
Deciding between an Attack or a Full Attack: After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round. If you’ve already taken a 5-foot step, you can’t use your move action to move any distance, but you could still use a different kind of move action.Specific:
Benefit: When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit. Apply precision-based damage (such as sneak attack) and critical hit damage only once for this attack. Damage bonuses from using a composite bow with a high Strength bonus apply to each arrow, as do other damage bonuses, such as a ranger’s favored enemy bonus. Damage reduction and resistances apply separately to each arrow.So there are two possibilities:
1) The Specific trumps the General. Specific in this case states it is a Full-attack action in order to use the ability. Thus, the decision is already made.2) The Specific does not trump the general. This is based on an interpretation that regardless of the specific wording it is still a single attack and thus single attack rules apply.
Personally I think this is a situation of specific trumping General. However enough leeway exists that if someone made a FAQ on this I would hit the FAQ button if only to remove people's confusion.
Adamantine Dragon: Now I have cited the rules but come up with a different interpretation.
- Gauss
^This.
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...
The problem here is that the "specific" you are citing does not change anything about the general. The "specific" does not say "attacking as in a standard attack". The "specific" says "first attack fires two arrows." The general says "after your first attack".
Your argument that the "specific trumps the general" simply does not apply.
Nice try though.
I will also add that if you take the first attack then do a move action then you are not committing a full round action which manyshot requires, so that is further proof that you must commit to a full attack action to get the benefits of manyshot.
The error in this interpretation is that somehow choosing not to complete your attacks and taking a move action instead has somehow nullified your full attack action.
It has not. The full attack action is written so that you can do one of two things:
1. Take all of the iterative attacks you are entitled due to BAB, lose your move action but still be able to take a five foot step.
2. Take your first attack, decide to substitute a move action for your remaining attacks.
It does not "negate" the fact that you are making a full attack. The move is part of the rule of a full attack. You are still doing a full attack, you are just choosing to exercise option 2 of the action as described in the rules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Daryl, I understand that you want to win an argument. I just want the rules to be understood. The "Full Attack" rules you quoted from also say this: "After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks, depending on how the first attack turns out and assuming you have not already taken a move action this round".
I can only assume you deliberately left that out since it didn't support your argument even though it is in the rules of Full Attack.
It is at this point in a discussion/debate that I realize that it's no longer about getting the rule right. It's about winning the argument.
Fine.
The rules are what they are. People can go read them themselves. I've pointed out and cited the rules that I believe apply. Horses and water and all that.
Have fun.
For what it's worth Daryl, Gauss and others who don't like the way the rules are written, I think it is a perfectly reasonable approach to rule the way you do. I would have no problem playing that way. It's just not the way the rules are written, that's all.
So, interpretation #3 means you can trap yourself by forfeiting your option to take a move action later. This would happen with any ability that requires a Full Attack action: Manyshot, Two-Weapon Fighting, Monk Flurry, etc.
Is it also correct to state then from interpretation #3 that the option to take a move action later after cancelling a Full Attack action only works with iterative attacks?