|
| 80 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Should haste work with weapons that are not natural nor manufactured?"
That's the short of it. The main abilities that come to mind are the Warlock's Mystic Bolt and Kineticist's Kinetic Blade which were written long after Haste was (though as Mark Seifter pointed out strictly as written it wouldn't work with Unarmed Strikes either).
A warlock can sling projectiles of magical energy at will by shooting a bolt or touching her foe. A melee mystic bolt requires the target to be within reach, and a ranged mystic bolt is a ranged attack with a range of 30 feet. A mystic bolt deals 1d6 points of damage plus 1 for every 4 vigilante levels the warlock has.
The warlock must choose one type of damage for her mystic bolt: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. Attacking with a mystic bolt takes the place of one of the warlock's normal attacks, and she can make a full attack using mystic bolts. The warlock vigilante attacks with mystic bolts as though they were light one-handed weapons, and the bolts can be used for two-weapon fighting (with each hand creating one mystic bolt) and feats and abilities that apply to weapon attacks (unless they're excluded from that feat, such as with Power Attack). Weapon Focus (ray) doesn't apply to mystic bolts, but a warlock can take Weapon Focus (mystic bolt) and apply it to both melee and ranged mystic bolts.
Creating a mystic bolt requires the hand to be free, but the bolt appears only briefly, so a warlock using mystic bolts has a free hand any time she isn't attacking with a mystic bolt.
The warlock threatens with a mystic bolt, but only if she has a hand free. Because mystic bolts are impermanent, a spell that targets a single weapon (like magic weapon) can't affect it, nor can a mystic bolt be made with magic weapon special abilities. Abilities that affect all weapon attacks the warlock makes, such as the arcane striker warlock talent, function with mystic bolts.
At 7th level and every 6 vigilante levels thereafter, the warlock chooses another damage type from the list above. Each time she creates a mystic bolt, she can have it use any one of the damage types she has selected.
This ability replaces vigilante specialization.
Element(s) universal; Type form infusion; Level 1; Burn 1
Associated Blasts any
Saving Throw noneYou form a weapon using your kinetic abilities. You create a nonreach, light or one-handed weapon in your hand formed of pure energy or elemental matter. (If you're a telekineticist, you instead transfer the power of your kinetic blast to any object held in one hand.) The kinetic blade's shape is purely cosmetic and doesn't affect the damage dice, critical threat range, or critical multiplier of the kinetic blade, nor does it grant the kinetic blade any weapon special features. The object held by a telekineticist for this form infusion doesn't prevent her from using gather power.
You can use this form infusion once as part of an attack action, a charge action, or a full-attack action in order to make melee attacks with your kinetic blade. Since it's part of another action (and isn't an action itself), using this wild talent doesn't provoke any additional attacks of opportunity. The kinetic blade deals your kinetic blast damage on each hit (applying any modifiers to your kinetic blast's damage as normal, but not your Strength modifier). The blade disappears at the end of your turn. The weapon deals the same damage type that your kinetic blast deals, and it interacts with Armor Class and spell resistance as normal for a blast of its type. Even if a telekineticist uses this power on a magic weapon or another unusual object, the attack doesn't use any of the magic weapon's bonuses or effects and simply deals the telekineticist's blast damage. The kinetic blade doesn't add the damage bonus from elemental overflow.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
What does haste excluding things that aren't natural or manufactured weapons even accomplish anyway? It seems like this excludes unarmed strikes from non-monks, and nothing else for like 6 years until the Kineticist was created.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
*shrugs*
The origins writer may have done it to exclude... people reading it a certain way to exclude certain spells? I guess?
And 15 years, actually.
Just went and read 3rd Edition's haste, it just says "with any weapon they are holding" and says absolutely nothing regarding the type of weapon. Odd change.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What does haste excluding things that aren't natural or manufactured weapons even accomplish anyway? It seems like this excludes unarmed strikes from non-monks, and nothing else for like 6 years until the Kineticist was created.
Wait monks fist counted as natural atacks?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Specifically:
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
is part of the "Unarmed Strike" class feature for both the chained and unchained Monk, same with the Brawler except replace "monk" with "brawler".
You want to play anybody else who punches people (e.g. the Unarmed Fighter archetype) and by a strict reading of the rules you couldn't benefit from haste (unless you wear a metal glove or something.) This seems absurd.
Hit the FAQ.
I do appreciate them cementing the benefits and effects of the Shield Master feat (finally); hopefully they can work some identical magic here.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's especially silly since an aerokineticist can provide "haste" to the party but it is very ambiguous RAW on if they can even benefit from the extra attack.
And on top of that, an aether kineticist uses a weapon that they imbue their energy into so that would be a case of them using a "manufactured weapon." This would create an inconsistency of "Yes if aether kinetic blade but no otherwise" which is ridiculously silly and unnecessarily complicated.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A similar topic was discussed in this thread a while ago and I tend to side with those who claim that a weapon created by magic (or other forms of energy) is still manufactured.
Maybe a native speaker can clarify this further but in my tongue the word "manufactured" is very similar to "created", the only difference being that it usually describes stuff that wouldn't occur naturally.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's still worth a clarification via FAQ since someone could pedantically argue that "manufactured" means "made with one's hands" and if there's no somatic component required you didn't make them with your hands.
I'm not saying that's likely to come up, but I'd like this nailed down so it doesn't.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is it? I guess we'll find out...
|
|
My engineering proffesor explained manufacturing as making something(he gave a much formal and detailed definition).He did mentioned other things too but i will not go into them right now.One thing he didnt mentioned was the material used to create something.He didint put material in the definition.Since magical energy is nothing but another metarial to make something in this case a weapon.Shouldnt kinetic blade be effected by haste?Classes name was design and manufacturing or me224.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
^w^
I'm also very slow. I blame dj-ing the kid's painting session, so multitasking and all.
By that I mean I pressed shuffle twenty minutes ago.
Of course I still used the FAQ button and hope to get an official answer, I was just pointing out stuff for the time being.
I also don't think manufactured is limited to stuff made with hands in our time. That would be handmade. If a car was assembled entirely by machines without any human interaction at all, I would still call it manufactured.
|
|
You would think so, since it's made, it's in existence now. I guess that ties into the other FAQ request with "What is a manufactured weapon?"
That is what ı am saying the word manufactured is already defined in engineering or in other words both american mechanical engineering association(ı think that was the name) and international engineering association already defined what manufactured is.
A minor thing I just noticed, putting FAQ Request in the title thread doesn't exactly make the PDT want to answer the question posed...
|
|
A minor thing I just noticed, putting FAQ Request in the title thread doesn't exactly make the PDT want to answer the question posed...
We just need a pfs legal answer.Kinetic blade haste working togather was a design goal.Now we people in pfs need an answer.Mark seifter(kineticist's designer) already recommended allowing them to work togather.But in pfs his recommendation doesnt do anything.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No FAQ necessary.
Haste gives you an extra attack on a full-attack action. But no extra spells or spell-like abilities. So if your spell gives you a weapon that you can wield using a full-attack action (with the possibility of iterative attacks and so on), then I would argue that you *do* get an extra attack from haste. It's fairly unambiguous about that. Since both the warlock's mystic bolts and the kinetic blade allow full attacks, they ought to benefit from haste, as should any spell that creates a weapon you can full attack with (but not rays or other spell attacks).
A minor thing I just noticed, putting FAQ Request in the title thread doesn't exactly make the PDT want to answer the question posed...
There are a couple of things at play here. One is that if something is difficult to explain based on subtle distinctions (c.f. "what is that Magus doing with his hands" they'll probably leave it alone). If something is fairly obscure and not likely to affect very many characters at all they probably won't touch it (I don't think shielded gauntlet style is fixed yet) since individual GMs can make it work on their own tables.
I think this question is simple enough to state and answer, and sufficiently universal (we have two classes which can cast haste that potentially can't gain haste's primary benefit, and haste is one of the most iconic and popular buffs), that it should probably be answered. Haste is old and has issues, Wheldrake's point of "Haste works with full attacks" is probably how Haste *should* work RAI, but that "natural or manufactured weapons" clause which seems vestigal gets in the way. I mean, what thing that you can make a full-attack action with would you want to exclude from haste anyway?
The "putting FAQ in the title" is mostly an invitation to people to come in and hit the FAQ button, I feel.
|
|
No FAQ necessary.
Haste gives you an extra attack on a full-attack action. But no extra spells or spell-like abilities. So if your spell gives you a weapon that you can wield using a full-attack action (with the possibility of iterative attacks and so on), then I would argue that you *do* get an extra attack from haste. It's fairly unambiguous about that. Since both the warlock's mystic bolts and the kinetic blade allow full attacks, they ought to benefit from haste, as should any spell that creates a weapon you can full attack with (but not rays or other spell attacks).
No.Haste gives an extra atack with a natural or manufactured weapon.
|
|
I realy dont want to spend 700 gold for fervor scrool for every burst and invest stupid amount of skill points in umd to be able to use my emergency burst.
EDİT:I forgot to mention that one pfs legal item that gives fervor costs 125k gold and a feat(flag bearer) or bravery class feature to grant fervor to yourself as kineticist.Now instead of boots of speed ı have to spend 125k gold in pfs.......
|
|
No.Haste gives an extra atack with a natural or manufactured weapon.No FAQ necessary.
Haste gives you an extra attack on a full-attack action. But no extra spells or spell-like abilities. So if your spell gives you a weapon that you can wield using a full-attack action (with the possibility of iterative attacks and so on), then I would argue that you *do* get an extra attack from haste. It's fairly unambiguous about that. Since both the warlock's mystic bolts and the kinetic blade allow full attacks, they ought to benefit from haste, as should any spell that creates a weapon you can full attack with (but not rays or other spell attacks).
Hence the need for he Errata/FAQ request.
|
|
The "putting FAQ in the title" is mostly an invitation to people to come in and hit the FAQ button, I feel.
Pretty much.
Way back when they requested you don't do this but nowadays I view it as beneficial to the FAQ process. That and I haven't seen any recent posts by mods or designers requesting that we don't phrase them that way.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
[Insert argumentative counterpoint to keep the thread going another ten pages]
[Initiating stealing TOZ's milk]
|
|
[Insert argumentative counterpoint to keep the thread going another ten pages]
[Initiating stealing TOZ's milk]
Well it has to stay hear to be easly noticed by faq team or whoever is making those sweet Faq's.Even though ı am just answering people why not allowing haste kinetic blade is a bad idea it works for that aswell ı suppose.
|
|
Going back to the root of this discussion is the demonic smiths gloves. Relevant text is:
"if the wearer uses that hand to weild a weapon"
From the mystic bolts:
"the warlock attacks with mystic bolts as though they were light one handed weapons"
so the question is this:
1. Do the count as weapons.
2. Do you count as wielding them.
For kineticist it is yes and no.I dont know about warlock though.I thought heart of the issue was manufactured weapon.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Behold, hero, I grant you Doombane! This legendary artefact blade was called into existence by the very will of the gods to be the ultimate slayer of evil!"
"So it was never manufactured? Doesn't work with Haste? I'll stick with my regular sword, thanks."
I'm for it working and that's how I would run it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monk's Unarmed Strikes have a specific callout as being treated as "manufactured" for effects.
Not true, your mom birthed you so she manufactured your unarmed strike.
Monk's Unarmed Strikes have a specific callout as being treated as "manufactured" for effects.Not true, your mom birthed you so she manufactured your unarmed strike.
Reasonably confident she didn't make you with her hands though, so there's still a pedantic quibble.
Reasonably confident she didn't make you with her hands though, so there's still a pedantic quibble.Monk's Unarmed Strikes have a specific callout as being treated as "manufactured" for effects.Not true, your mom birthed you so she manufactured your unarmed strike.
So if I carve a statue of a goblin and attach it to a chain I made I have a hasteable goblin flail. But not if I use a real goblin?
|
|
So if I carve a statue of a goblin and attach it to a chain I made I have a hasteable goblin flail. But not if I use a real goblin?Reasonably confident she didn't make you with her hands though, so there's still a pedantic quibble.Monk's Unarmed Strikes have a specific callout as being treated as "manufactured" for effects.Not true, your mom birthed you so she manufactured your unarmed strike.
Well you still made the chain so...
Hmm...
*scratches chin*
So if I carve a statue of a goblin and attach it to a chain I made I have a hasteable goblin flail. But not if I use a real goblin?Reasonably confident she didn't make you with her hands though, so there's still a pedantic quibble.Monk's Unarmed Strikes have a specific callout as being treated as "manufactured" for effects.Not true, your mom birthed you so she manufactured your unarmed strike.Well you still made the chain so...
Hmm...
*scratches chin*
This is kinda important to know too, the union might settle for less healthcare if we can assure them we won't use them as weapons unless things are really bad.
well it's largely in part that the FAQ answers seem to be this pedantic. If all attack rolls were weapons then we wouldn't care, but if things are sometimes a weapons and there are various levels of how weapon-like abilities are then you get questions saying what things work for what.
Ooh can we rename this the Rules Pedantry (with questions allowed) section?
Motion on the floor and seconded. All in favor?
I'd be inclined to allow it at my table, but I agree that strict RAW doesn't. FAQing.
Oh, also:
Way back when they requested you don't do this but nowadays I view it as beneficial to the FAQ process. That and I haven't seen any recent posts by mods or designers requesting that we don't phrase them that way.
They ask us not to do this in the rules forum sticky post, so they don't need to remind us every now and then - it's in the sub-forum rules.
Though I do agree that in some cases it can be beneficial.