Yeah, how many times have you mispelled my name Concerro? :D
- Gauss
I am pretty sure the forum somehow keeps mixing the letters up to make it say Guass. :)
Committing to his Flurry and dropping an enemy with no one else within 5 feet is gonna be super lame for our monk.
I recommend giving the monk a full base attack progression (and adjusting what the AC bonus does so that his CMD stays the same). It's always seemed silly to me that the Monk has a lower attack bonus on a standard attack than a full round TWF Flurry, and that they give the Monk all these special abilities that replicate the effects of a full base attack instead of just letting him have it for real.
Ssalarn, Im not ignoring that thread. I am researching it slowly. It is a bit of a confusing setup though so I am hesistant to comment on it until I understand it fully.
- Gauss
Design Manager
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ssalarn, Im not included in that list I hope. That would be...scary.
- Gauss
You, at the least, ask quality questions and present an open mind available for reasoned discourse. The ability to provide thought-out and supported conclusions makes you a valued voice on these forums.
Plus, if I find my petty nature asserting itself, I can agree with you on something and leech some of your good name to my own credit. So that's cool.
|
Design Manager
|
Ssalarn, Im not ignoring that thread. I am researching it slowly. It is a bit of a confusing setup though so I am hesistant to comment on it until I understand it fully.
- Gauss
Yeah, I'm trying to squeeze a lot out of relatively limited resources there. Using an ability to activate a feat, so that that feat qualifies an ability to activate another feat is a little... Much? Maybe?
What question got pushed down the list?I was trying to get a little clarification on the abilities Amplified Rage and Sympathetic Rage (the title of the thread) how they interact with each other, and whether Amplified Rage would work with an Urban Barbarian's Controlled Rage.
I just posted there under my alter ego.
My good name? WTF am I in bizarro world? Damn! Here I came on the boards to argue and fight and somehow people are calling me eloquent, open minded, and state I have a good name. God Im doing something wrong. Wrong I say!
Yes, Im joking :)
- Gauss
Now look at the capitalization of every other header like it. see the disparity. Capitalization stands for nothing in a header.since it never even utters the words "standard action",Once again yes it does. Right where it says "Attack" or "Full Attack".
The Attack action is a standard action. Look at the capitalization.
Interesting 'disparity'. :) All other capitalizations I just looked at (Withdraw, Manipulate an Item, Charge, etc) are all game terms. I guess you agree with me.
Axl, if we would only be nice to them perhaps they would do so. FAQs stopped when people became abusive to SKR.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I am not sure they mishandled it. From my POV they took a step back, said wow, everyone is running it how we did not intend it, even the other writers and realized they had a big problem. They are taking thier time yes. But, they have a major schedule to keep and such a discussion is not going to happen quickly.
As for SKR, one of the FAQ rulings that SKR got the shaft on was WBL. It was not that small a minority that went off on SKR. I was just coming on the boards at that point so only caught a peice of it but basically everyone blamed him when in fact he is just the guy posting the FAQ. It was a Paizo decision, not an SKR decision. One thread that had alot of venom in it went on for around 2000posts before it was locked.
Other things like that have occured and I don't blame him for taking a break from us. I hope he ends his break soon.
- Gauss
In short fellas when SKR says I am right, which he will, I expect for all of you to remain civil.
Gotta say I'm interested in an official answer on this.
I'm late in converting to the PFRPG, so I'm still used to the 3.5 core where manyshot was a standard action. I vaguely remember seeing a thread around the time of PF playtesting about this issue, but I can't remember anything about the reasons this feat was changed for the PFRPG.
To me, it looks like the spirit of the PF rules supports being able to take the first attack with manyshot (two arrows) and then being able to take the move action, if the full attack is aborted.
But, I'm no expert with the PF ruleset.
Wow; didn't expect this to turn into a "thing." I hit FAQ and hope to see an official answer at some point in the near future.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just a note, concerro is right because he agrees with me ;)
Ya, a single attack isn't a full attack. If you used Many Shot you couldn't then decide to change it to a single attack, because you can't retroactively take away one of your arrows.
If you're GM allows you to take away one of your arrows you could then make a move action.
This is RAW.
It is an interesting house rule though. Not sure I'd want to buff archers even more... I did remove manyshot in my houserules.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I just wanted to say WOW that it is still dragging on. Oh well, we shall have to wait until JJ gets back from his 'fun' to see what he says. Or maybe SKR will grace us with his comments (one could hope).
An identical discussion about Full Attacks and Manyshot happened a few months ago, and in that thread somebody actually got James Jacobs to weigh in.
You can find James' comment here.
I just wanted to say WOW that it is still dragging on. Oh well, we shall have to wait until JJ gets back from his 'fun' to see what he says. Or maybe SKR will grace us with his comments (one could hope).An identical discussion about Full Attacks and Manyshot happened a few months ago, and in that thread somebody actually got James Jacobs to weigh in.
You can find James' comment here.
Thank you for the links. I appreciate James Jacobs reasoning.
That said, I still feel that the following is true.
Manyshot: "When making a full-attack action with a bow, your first attack fires two arrows. If the attack hits, both arrows hit."
Combat: "After your first attack, you can decide to take a move action instead of making your remaining attacks..."
To me, it really seems that you should be able to decide to take a move action after your first attack. And, the shot that fires two arrows is your first attack with manyshot.
Is there an official ruling on this for Pathfinder Society play?
If you move then you are not taking a full attack action though, which is what I keep saying. The official answer is the same as the regular rules.
No full attack=no manyshot
And one attack means no TWF so if you declare TWF then if you get lucky and one shot a guy your not moving.
And one attack means no TWF so if you declare TWF then if you get lucky and one shot a guy your not moving.
I agree following the manyshot logic and RAW*, but I think RAI is not as strict. The reason for declaring the TWF for the first attack is so they take the -2 to hit since the benefit of TWF does not occur until later attacks. Since manyshot gives you the "bonus" at the first attack it makes sense for it to lock you in.
*assuming TWF itself calls for a full attack action. I don't see the verbage that it does.
I am not saying anyone can TWF as a standard action. I am saying you have to declare the intent to TWF so the GM knows you are taking the -2 penalty. It is not like that -2 is giving you anything for free if you decide to not take the remaining attacks.
Intent is important since I think the spirit of the rules trumps the letter of the rules.
As much back and forth has gone on in this thread I do mostly agree with JJ and Concerro on this.
TWF: no advantage to choosing to stop attacking (so long as you started with the -2penalty).
Flurry of Blows: I disagree with JJ on this. There IS advantage to FoB in that your BAB-2 could be higher. Unfortunately that makes this one complicated.
Complicated version: Is your attack bonus with FoB equal to or lower than a single attack? If so, then you can stop. Otherwise, you have benefited and cannot stop.
Simple version: FoB = full attack action, cannot use it as standard.
(Note: I also think Monk should be a full BAB class and that would remove this whole FoB problem.)
Manyshot: Clearly a case of advantage. Cannot go back on that so cannot make this a single attack with a move.
- Gauss
Maybe having two paths for the monk is an option. The brawler monk can use use two handed weapons.
PS:There is no brawler monk. I was just using that as an example.
If you move then you are not taking a full attack action though, which is what I keep saying. The official answer is the same as the regular rules.
No full attack=no manyshot
The wording allows that interpretation, to be sure. And, that's why I like to see it addressed in the Core Rulebook FAQ.
Personally, I don't see adding a second arrow to the first attack as all that powerful, if the archer decides to give up the rest of his attacks and move, instead. He's already spent a few feats to get it. I see this as having already taken the disadvantage that James Jacobs was concerned about (realizing that he doesn't agree).
It's odd that they'd use the "first attack" wording in the manyshot feat, if they didn't intend for it to allow for the option of giving up the rest of the archer's attacks in order to move.
The part in the Combat section about deciding between an attack and a full attack could have just as easily have said this:
Hrothgar: If they use that wording then any abilities that use the full-attack action but only make a single attack gain the ability to move.
Honestly, I can understand people parsing this in order to achieve clarity but I really do not understand why people are trying to game the system to acquire a move action when they are in fact using a full-attack action.
Manyshot is as clear a case of 'full-attack to use' as I think you can get. Yes, they could add a line to Manyshot stating that you cannot convert it and thus gain a move action. However, if they did that to every ability that is like this then they would need to add dozens of pages to the book.
I really believe that the intent is clear here. Manyshot is a full-attack action. It is an attempt to parse or game the system in order to make it anything but a full-attack action.
- Gauss
|
Design Manager
|
Hrothgar: If they use that wording then any abilities that use the full-attack action but only make a single attack gain the ability to move.
Honestly, I can understand people parsing this in order to achieve clarity but I really do not understand why people are trying to game the system to acquire a move action when they are in fact using a full-attack action.
Manyshot is as clear a case of 'full-attack to use' as I think you can get. Yes, they could add a line to Manyshot stating that you cannot convert it and thus gain a move action. However, if they did that to every ability that is like this then they would need to add dozens of pages to the book.
I really believe that the intent is clear here. Manyshot is a full-attack action. It is an attempt to parse or game the system in order to make it anything but a full-attack action.
- Gauss
To be fair, I don't think too many people are actually trying to game the system. The wording and placement on the subject were ambiguous enough that even well educated individuals could have misread the full attack action rules. It did take a good bit of discussion and context to win me over after all :)
I do agree that by this point, enough context, precedent, and developer insight have been provided to make it perfectly clear that a move action cannot be taken as part of a full attack action (unless a spell or ability specifically says otherwise).
So just breaking this down once you do anything other than simply take a full attack with no riders that apply just during full attack actions your commited to the full attack and you give up any ability to cancel if somthing goes right or wrong after the first attack?
A short list I'll bring up more as I find them. And note that there is nothing that says you get the option to cancel under x circumstance because its just a penalty on the first attack.
TWF
Manyshot
Rapid shot
FoB
Monk or ninja extra attack from Ki
Whirlwind attack.
Dawnflower dervishish lighting blade
Parry
Powerful and Deadly Sneak
Ssalarn: I agree that prior to James' statement on this it wasn't an attempt to game the system (although I was certainly twitching in that direction). However, after his statement....
- Gauss
With all respect, methinks you put a wee much trust in the statements' of James. Especially in a medium where it's extremely out of place to disagree.
Cheapy:
If his statement is contradictory to clearly established RAW (he has done that on occassion, he is human) then no, I do not put trust into that particular statement.
However, on something which I really think is not as confused as some people make this out to be (yes, my own opinion there) and he confirms it then why wouldnt I trust it? After all, the man is closer to the source than we are.
Yes, SKR or Jason's statements have more force but since they are often silent we only have James to ask.
- Gauss
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, I think Manyshot is a little weak as printed (especially considering its requirements). I would prefer it to work both on full-attack actions and on regular attack actions.
So no, I don't think treating Manyshot as working on standard actions defies rational human logic, although I agree the rules don't allow it.
Once you have used Manyshot feat you have committed to the full attack option..sorry I am thinking this is why they make you double the FIRST shot as opposed to second or any, once you have committed to the feat you have committed fully
Actually, the fact that it is part of the "first attack" is what allows an archer to opt out of the full attack after seeing the outcome of the first attack.
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.
Any combatant has the option to opt out of a full attack (and move, instead) after the results of the first attack are determined.
|
Personally, I think Manyshot is a little weak as printed (especially considering its requirements). I would prefer it to work both on full-attack actions and on regular attack actions.
So no, I don't think treating Manyshot as working on standard actions defies rational human logic, although I agree the rules don't allow it.
A level 6 Fighter(using the archer archetype or not it doesn't matter) does an additional 12 damage per attack when using deadly aim and a relatively mundane +1 composite longbow. 12 damage is effectively an extremely bland version of 3d8 (which is 3 times a medium longbows base damage) So the damage would be (1d8+12 + 1d8+12 = 8d8) this is at an AB of +11.
A Hunter will be doing an extra 9 i.e. 3d6 though he will do more to favored enemies.
I understand your point, though I would definitely disagree with your opinion of Manyshot being weak. I could see something like an, "Improved Manyshot" feat that would allow for attack routine described, but it would required at least a 11+ bab prerequisite to keep it relatively normalized in power level and even then would be significantly better than most comparative feats.
Another option would be something like,
"Manyshot: When used as a Standard action Manyshot increases the damage dice of your weapon by x2, x3 when bab +11 or higher, or x4 when bab +16 or higher add the results together before adding bonuses from Strength, weapon abilities (such as flaming), precision-based damage, and other damage bonuses."
I still think this is a handout for the already rich(free ranged vital strike lines), but at least it's a little more balanced in the way the damage scales.
Regardless I just dove deep into the home-brew well, when archers(of all breeds) are already probably the most effective combatants in Pathfinder. Hopefully my opinion of the, "cheat" described in this thread is abundantly clear.
If you choose to take only a single attack you haven't made a full attack action.
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack. If you decide to use a move action after attacking, then your first attack is considered the attack standard action.
Found here in Rules of the Game.
Karlgamer: The problem is that this is not a normal single attack. It is a feat that specifically states to use it requires a Full-attack action. If you are not performing a full-attack action you cannot use it.
There are people that want to state that you can use it and THEN make a move. But you cannot take back the use of the feat.
- Gauss
You can ONLY use that feat IF you make a full attack.
Making a single attack is a standard action.
Ergo you can't use that feat.
Karlgamer: Right :)
Alas, some people seem to believe otherwise. *shrugs*
- Gauss
|
Any combatant has the option to opt out of a full attack (and move, instead) after the results of the first attack are determined.
Exactly, its not any different than someone 5 footing before attacking you have now committed to the full attack, OR you can 5 foot make one attack but why would you? Once you have committed to firing those 2 or more arrows with your first attack you have committed to the full attack sorry no Mulligan
Once you have fired those two arrows with 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 person marked this as a favorite. |
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.
It's not the same as a standard action plus a move action, though. If it were, you could take the move action, first.
Manyshot requires shooting first and asking questions, later.
Two Hundred? Do we have two hundred? We have One hundred and ninety-five can I get one hundred and ninety-six?
- Gauss
Manyshot requires a full-attack action, not a standard.
Manyshot requires a full-attack action, not a standard.
I agree.
Full attacks allow a move action after the first attack, if you haven't moved already. You may exchange your remaining attacks for a move action.
Manyshot requires a full-attack action, not a standard.And, full attacks allow a move action after the first attack, if you haven't moved already.
No.
If you only make one attack it's a standard attack.
Full Attack: This works just like the attack standard action except that you can make any extra attacks you have available because of your base attack bonus or equipment. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You decide between the full attack and attack actions after you make your first attack. If you decide to use a move action after attacking, then your first attack is considered the attack standard action. Even if you choose the full attack action, you can take a 5-foot step before, after, or during the action. You can interrupt your attacks with a 5-foot step to bring new opponents within reach.
I love how special full attacks are gaming the system when you get something out of it but if your not gaining its all cool to use only on full attack options and see how it turns out.
There is no benefit/penalty to this section saying that certian full attacks can be opted out of and others can't so RAW its either all or none keep that in mind.
|
|
Manyshot requires a full-attack action, not a standard.And, full attacks allow a move action after the first attack, if you haven't moved already.
"Blinded by his quest for power, the foolish dwarf could not truly comprehend his tremulous steps towards a dark awakening. Where once dwelt the thinly veiled guilt of a thief caught in the act, instead festered the unrequited malice of a zealot enraptured by his ill-begotten gains!