All your adding is giving you 2+2=5. There exists no rule text that says off-hand equals attack.The two weapon combat section grants an 1 extra attack with your 1 singular offhand.
Multiweapon Fighting points out that creature with more than 2 arms have more off hands.
You can only have an offhand when you make an attack with more than 1 weapon.So add them all together. To get multiple off hands, each must grant an attack (or they wouldn't be an offhand). If that isn't the case, the normal section of the Multiweapon Fighting is wrong.
PLEASE: If you don't agree then explain how you can have an off-hand if it's not used in multiweapon combat. That is the crux of the debate. Off hand is a term ONLY used for two weapon combat.
Another way to look at it is to again, look at the Multiweapon Fighting. "a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands." How do I take a penalty with an attack you say I don't get? I get a "–10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands" NOT '–10 penalty on attacks made with the off hand you use". You are saying only one off hand attack and that doesn't track with the normal section of the feat.
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
If you wield a weapon in an off hand, you get can get an extra attack with that weapon. This is common sense if you look at any of the game rules surrounding TWF/MWF. Unless you're honestly proposing that MWF has no benefit.
Sometimes you have to read a tiny bit into rules to make them work. The devs assume that the people reading the rules are at least mildly competent human beings, and thus are able to take into account context and precedent. This lets them save space when it comes time to print the book, which saves them money and lets them keep putting out books.
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)
This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks with multiple weapons.
Prerequisites:Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by -2 with the primary hand and by -6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special:This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
First. Will you accept that PCs are creatures?
If you'll accept that, will you accept that some PCs - such as a Kasatha PC - have "three or more hands" and a Dex score of 13 or higher?
If you'll accept that, will you accept that Multiweapon Fighting "replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms?"
If you'll accept that, then does the benefit - reducing penalties for fighting with multiple weapons applies?
If it does, then will you accept that given the text of the equivalent feat for two-armed creatures, Two Weapon Fighting, says "Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced" that multiple weapons in this case can include more than two weapons?
If so, will you accept the implication that a creature with multiple arms can make an attack with each offhand - in the same way a two-armed creature can - with or without this feat, and that this feat reduces the penalties for doing so?
If so, why would this not benefit a PC? IF you didn't follow this chain all the way through, where do you take issue and why?
The whole accepting the implication that multiple arms can make an attack with each offhand is the issue. No rule says that.
Multiweapon Fighting clearly states that all of your arms except one are off-hand.
Creatures can make an attack with the weapon in their off-hand when they use a full attack action. That's clearly stated in the Two Weapon Fighting rules.
Where's the problem here?
Two-weapon fighting (combat)
Prereq:15 dex
Benifit: your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. the penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your offhand lessens by6. see two weapon fighting chapter 8
Normal: if you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. when fighting in this way you suffer a -6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a -10 penalty to the attack with your off hand. if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. an unarmed strike is always concidered light.
pardon any spelling mistakes i typed that quote by hand, but the point stands that it implies you can use your off hand to do un armed strikes even untrained in TWF multi weapon fighting builds off this same assumption that you get attacks with off hands just for having them, if untrained it would be at a massive penalty though.
your using thhings like armour spikes to hold your ground on the 2 hands worth of effort thing, when really those rulings were made because paizo didnt right the rules for armor spikes clear enough, multi weapon fighting should give you one attack per hand you have as its writen
you can make an attack with an off hand correct? if you have more hands you have more off hands, thereby giving you more attacks, be they unarmed or used to wield manufactured weapons. more hands equals more attacks, and the MWF feat chain makes those attacks more likly to hit as well as granting more and more attacks just like the TWF feat chain
players should in theory hardly ever need th9s information as there a key few ways to gain more arms, but should a player have more arms they do gain more attacks
ya they are usually fairly specific when it comes to gaining limbs to call out when you CANT attack with them because the base assumption is you can use additional limbs to attack with
Not in pathfinder.The word "wield" doesn't mean "to hold" it means "to use".And again, nowhere in that text is anything that grants additional attacks. All it grant is the ability to hold additional weapons simultaneously.
Multi-armed itself doesn't even give extra attacks, it simply states that you still only have one primary hand and X off-hands. Having an off-hand does not grant additional attacks.
Multi-Armed (4 RP): Prerequisites: None; Benefit: Members of this race possess three arms. A member of this race can wield multiple weapons, but only one hand is its primary hand, and all others are off hands. It can also use its hands for other purposes that require free hands. Special: This trait can be taken up to twice. When it is taken a second time, the race gains a fourth arm.
What rule explicitly redefined the basic, common word "wield" to mean something other than "wield"?
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks with multiple weapons.
Prerequisites:Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by -2 with the primary hand and by -6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special:This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
can i point out that the text above says HANDS plurel, not once but twice, you have more off hands you apply this text to every hand, so dont have this feat -6 on main hand attacks and -10 on all off handS. with this feat you reduce that penalty by -2 for main hand and by -6 for of handS again plurl, thats not a writing mistake, its plurel on purpose
No, it's cool. I understand now.
Calth doesn't want a 500ish page core rulebook to give to his/her children when they grow old and want to pass on the family tradition.
Calth wants a 2000 page tome *called* the Core Rulebook that requires you to lift with your legs in order to move it around, because everything has to be completely spelled out, since reading into things - even the tiniest bit - is *bad* and *wrong.*
Unfortunately for Calth and others of the same viewpoint, 2000 page tomes don't get published unless they're a holy book, or your name is Oxford and you're putting out a reference book.
|
Right, two weapon fighting explicitly grants an attack in the combat rules section. Where are you getting the other attacks? Find an actual rule anywhere that explicitly grants additional attacks due to arms and Ill change my stance, but as far I know none exists. Again, nothing in the multiweapon fighting feat text, multiarmed trait, or the core rules does, so you've got your work cut out for you.Name one time you have an off hand and you aren't two weapon fighting. The armor spikes use an off hand of effort but doesn't give you any. And multi-weapon fighting doesn't grant attack. The second quote is from it's normal section: "(It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.)" The rules for two weapon fighting grant it as an off hand grant an extra attack and that's in the core rules.
So I'll say to you, play how you like but you are wrong on the RAW.
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)
...
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.
Happy?
I wish there was a underscore option to further emphasize the all part.
Again that doesn't grant any attacks. All your offhand attacks = 1.
You are aware of what a plural noun is, yes?
Attacks =/= 1 attack. Attacks = >1 attack.
Guys...
Those that argue that the two weapon fighting entry under combat prohibits more than two attacks (because it specifically refers to two weapons) are not paying attention to the context of the rules they are in.
This is in the combat section of the core rules. Which means it doesn't just apply to player characters - it applies to all creatures capable of making attacks.
Saying that under this rule a player cannot make more than two weapon attacks also means that monsters cannot either.
But wait! The Multiweapon fighting feat specifically refers to "all it's off hands." Specific trumps general, and this is a specific case where more attacks are mentioned.
On top of that, the multiweapon feat says this:
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
(emphasis mine.)
As a GM I would rule that if a creature with the TWF feat gained extra arms, it would immediately replace the TWF feat, because the text of the feat says that MWF replaces TWF for creatures with more than two arms. You gain two more arms? Your TWF automatically becomes MWF. Frankly, there probably shouldn't have even been a TWF feat; it should have just been MWF all along.
Read Multi-Armed under Kasatha. It designates specific hands as off-hands for the purposes of using them in combat.
Specific penalties for doing so are listed under the Multi-Weapon Feat. The Feat itself is NOT necessary to make the attacks, but it will lessen the penalties if taken.
Also, it appears the Calikang uses their arms like shields, boosting AC, but they are able to perform Slams with them.
PRD:
Multi-Armed (4 RP): Prerequisites: None; Benefit: Members of this race possess three arms. A member of this race can wield multiple weapons, but only one hand is its primary hand, and all others are off hands. It can also use its hands for other purposes that require free hands. Special: This trait can be taken up to twice. When it is taken a second time, the race gains a fourth arm.
This is not even an ability, it's part of the race builder "things you can buy", like Dragon(10 RP), Standard(0 RP) or Stubborn(2 RP).
The only creature with the Multi-Armed(Ex) ability is the Kasatha, and it actually says:
Multi-Armed(Ex) A kasatha has four arms. One hand is considered it's primary hand; all others are considered off hands. It can use any of it's hands for other purposes that require free hands.
It doesn't even say you can use weapons with it. Hell! I just saw that the Kasatha creature in the Beastiary 4 has only 2 attacks! Jesus... this creature was obviously copy/pasted from the Advanced Races Guide and adapted by some clueless sorry excuse of a intern from Paizo who doesn't even know how TWF or MWF works.
Well, according to that guy and some people here, the Kasatha Multi-Armed abililty allows him to have 2 extra hands to do nothing with it, except hold potions, since they don't actualy grant him attacks.
Look, it should be simple. If you get more arms you get more attacks, just like how you get more attacks if you polymorph into something with a bite, horn, or a tail attack. If the creature has them, so do you, since these are Extraordinary abilities dependent on the new creature's form.
There is no rule that says you can't use your natural attacks to make weapon attacks instead, and no rule that says you only get extra attacks for one off-hand if you manage to get more by any means.
The rule you are looking for, that more arms grant you more attacks, doesn't exist, because it should be OBVIOUS.
|
I have a rhetorical question or two:
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
If you can only have two hands of effort, how come this feat references reducing the penalty for attack with multi weapons with 1 primary hand and 2+ off hands? Thats at least 3 hands that the feat assumes your reducing a penalty for. It assumes that your attacking with 3 hands. Why would this be... if you can't attack with more than two?
Some would call this a logical fallacy. Others, such as all of those here, would say that two rules are in conflict.
Specific trumps general. (<--- extra emphasis on the period)
If you are going off dev quotes, how about this one?
So, while not able to avoid the penalties, like the Marilith, the Kasatha is still able to make an attack with each of the four weapons it wields, as a full-round action?Does the Kasatha(from the ARG) have the ability to attack with a weapon in each hand, as full round action?
Is he limited by the number of attacks outlined in two-weapon fighting, even though he is multi-armed, and qualifies for the Multiweapon Fighting feat?
Does he have a number of attacks, like the Marilith, equal to the number of weapons wielded?
He, like all multi-armed creatures, needs to get Multiweapon Fighting if he wants to maximize that. He would gain his full attacks with one weapon and one attack with all the rest.
The marilith has special rules that let her wield weapons and not take penalties. The kasatha does not get to do that.
Yes, at significant penalties without Multiweapon Fighting or normal penalties with the feat.
Personally, I think that having four arms is too good for a PC race, but we included the creature in the book as an example of how robust the race creation rules can be.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2l7ns&page=557?Ask-James-Jacobs-ALL-your-Qu estions-Here#27844
|
|
Look, it should be simple. If you get more arms you get more attacks, just like how you get more attacks if you polymorph into something with a bite, horn, or a tail attack. If the creature has them, so do you, since these are Extraordinary abilities dependent on the new creature's form.
This isn't 3.x. You don't get all of a extraordinary abilities a creature has when you polymorph in its form. You get only those listed in the spell you used plus: "Your base speed changes to match that of the form you assume. If the form grants a swim or burrow speed, you maintain the ability to breathe if you are swimming or burrowing.", "In addition to these benefits, you gain any of the natural attacks of the base creature, including proficiency in those attacks. These attacks are based on your base attack bonus, modified by your Strength or Dexterity as appropriate, and use your Strength modifier for determining damage bonuses." and the creature size.
Natural attacks. Being able to make more than 2 hands of manufactures weapons attacks is a different thing.
|
|
I have a rhetorical question or two:
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
If you can only have two hands of effort, how come this feat references reducing the penalty for attack with multi weapons with 1 primary hand and 2+ off hands? Thats at least 3 hands that the feat assumes your reducing a penalty for. It assumes that your attacking with 3 hands. Why would this be... if you can't attack with more than two?
Some would call this a logical fallacy. Others, such as all of those here, would say that two rules are in conflict.
Specific trumps general. (<--- extra emphasis on the period)
If you really want to go into the RAI, monsters are by explicit dev quotes allowed to break the RAW in ways not normally available to pcs. One of the most common ways this is done was multi-armed monsters getting extra attacks. This is supported by multi-weapon fighting and multiweapon mastery(the monster ability). The devs have also explicitly explained that the PC rules are balanced and designed around the base humanoid form, and that multi-armed races is something they really don't want to deal with, because they break the math if you allow them extra attacks due to arms. So, they skirt the issue by not having arms = attacks rule, but letting monsters do it anyways because "creatures are allowed to break the RAW in cool ways."
So RAW: arms don't equal attacks
RAI: monsters are allowed to break the RAW
RAI: PCs still shouldn't be allowed the extra attacks that...
Misunderstanding here?
"off hands" is plural, meaning more than 1. If you have 1 primary hand, and more than 1 off hand that your making attacks with (as the feat supposes you are), then you are attacking with a minimum of 3 hands. The feat supposes this, that it is rules legal to do so.
For player characters, this would not be breaking any rules, but rather following a specific rule that trumps a general rule.
RAW: Arms don't normally equal attacks
RAW: But they do when you have the multiweapon fighting feat
#1 he said he thought they where too good but they included them.
#2 A dev is a dev. Equally fine and quotable. Unless it's in an actual FAQ, it's not official. Feel free to post a dev quote from one you like that says what you think the rules are for 4 armed characters.
So even if I where to ignore the RAW rules in the books, there is also a dev that thinks it works that way. I'm really not seeing much on your side except you not liking it... Raw it works. By a dev it works.
RAW: Arms don't normally equal attacks
RAW: But they do when you have the multiweapon fighting feat
Don't forget the normal section. "–10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands"
SO...RAW: Arms normally equal attacks, multiweapon fighting feat or not.
Did you guys notice that the Kasatha in the Beastiary 4 doesn't have 4 attacks? Was that a piece of $#!% job or what?
Did you guys notice that the Kasatha in the Beastiary 4 doesn't have 4 attacks? Was that a piece of $#!% job or what?
Not, it's right. It's a monk and they don't get two weapon fighting but instead get flurry. It's a pretend two weapon fighting that doesn't count as having the feat which is why it doesn't change to multiweapon fighting. It sucks, but 4 armed monks get the short end of the stick.
edit: there is the People of the Stars BOW NOMAD [KASATHA
RANGER ARCHETYPE], that uses two bows at once. I really nifty trick for a creature that Calth claims only has two hands of effort...
Just saying, what was the point of making a kasatha monk if it can't benefit from the extra arms? The exemple should at least have the Multiweapon Fighting feat.
Just saying, what was the point of making a kasatha monk if it can't benefit from the extra arms? The exemple should at least have the Multiweapon Fighting feat.
I think to let people know how monks work with them. I've seen several people thinking that they'd get 4 attacks so it's good to show it doesn't work like that.
Yeah, but now we have no exemple of how a player with 4 arms should work, which was the whole point of that race, right? They should have made a real example and wrote about the flurry with 4 arms on the FAQ.
Btw, regardless of what RAW says, I know how TWF and MWF works and I know a flurry with 4 arms should work just like MWF, with the exception that you can use any of the weapons to make all attacks if you want and all attacks will be considered main-hands, not off-hands. AND, since I also know how natural attacks work, you should be able to use your secondary attacks with flurry of blows, just like you would with TWF/MWF.
Monk grants you the effects of the two weapon fighting feat. As such, it doesn't get the free upgrade. Tt sucks, but those are the breaks.
You mean the archetype that says this follows the two weapon fighting rules and doesn't grant any additional attacks due to arms?Did you guys notice that the Kasatha in the Beastiary 4 doesn't have 4 attacks? Was that a piece of $#!% job or what?Not, it's right. It's a monk and they don't get two weapon fighting but instead get flurry. It's a pretend two weapon fighting that doesn't count as having the feat which is why it doesn't change to multiweapon fighting. It sucks, but 4 armed monks get the short end of the stick.
edit: there is the People of the Stars BOW NOMAD [KASATHA
RANGER ARCHETYPE], that uses two bows at once. I really nifty trick for a creature that Calth claims only has two hands of effort...
I mean the one that uses TWO weapons that require TWO hands (2+2=4 hands of effort). If it didn't grant extra attacks, you couldn't use them to fire 2 bows in two weapon fighting. (see two handed weapon/spiked armor/2 weapon fighting FAQ)
So, it DOES grant additional attacks. That extra bow is 2 extra.
|
|
Wait a second...
The rules don't say anywhere that you can't fire two bows at once. As diego pointed out, the limitation is as the bolded section:
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. 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.
two bows fit under the two weapon category.
|
|
Addendum:
To use two bows, you need two-weapon fighting, since you are fighting with two weapons. There is no restriction anywhere that you HAVE to use your primary hand to use a longbow, rather it says that need at least two hands to do so. Therefore, to fight with two bows, you need 4 arms, and its questionable if you even need the multiweapon fighting feat, and could instead use the two weapon fighting feat.
Wait a second...
The rules don't say anywhere that you can't fire two bows at once. As diego pointed out, the limitation is as the bolded section:
two bows fit under the two weapon category.Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. 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.
(see two handed weapon/spiked armor/2 weapon fighting FAQ)
The new 'rules' as per the FAQ is that you can't wield a two handed weapon and spiked armor because you don't have enough hands. You need 4 hands of effort to wield two two handed weapons (or weapons that require two hands).
After that you have an argument that weapons that require 2 hands need a primary and an off hand. Even if it is allowed with 2 off hands, there is no clear way to figure damage (1/2 str off hand/1.5 two handed).
Of note, 4 hands of effort require 4 attacks with multiweapon fighting. If you can't attack with a hand, it can't help wield a weapon.