Dash Lestowe's page

What happens to their prestige awards? (sorry, never been a part of a collapsed faction - other than shadow lodge)

I have two characters, and their faction was a central part of development, and selection.

Dash Lestowe wrote:

If you get a tiefling boon, can you apply it to a 7th level tiefling that was created when you didn't need the boon to play it?

Does this change basically retire all tieflings?

If the aasimar or tiefling character had experience applied to it before August 14th, then it's grandfathered in and can be played without need for a boon.

Awesome, thanks! Sorry, saw retired and panicked!

What's up with Qadira and Sczarni retiring too?

Where do I read about the update? Seems someone quoted some grandfather stuff.

Deathless wrote:

This armor protects its wearer from harmful negative and positive energy, including channeled energy. The armor absorbs the first 10 points of positive or negative energy damage per attack that the wearer would normally take. The wearer has a 25% chance to ignore negative levels from any attack. Deathless armor does not block healing of any kind and does not protect against positive or negative energy effects that do not deal damage or bestow negative levels.

Nexus Crystal wrote:

This black crystal feels cold to the touch. Simply carrying this crystal provides protection against negative energy. Whenever the bearer takes damage from negative energy, such as channel energy or an inflict spell, she takes 10 less points of damage. This reduction is applied after any saving throw is made. The crystal may possess other powers, but they are unknown at this time.

Protection from Energy wrote:

Protection from energy grants temporary immunity to the type of energy you specify when you cast it (acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic). When the spell absorbs 12 points per caster level of energy damage (to a maximum of 120 points at 10th level), it is discharged.

Protection from energy overlaps (and does not stack with) resist energy. If a character is warded by protection from energy and resist energy, the protection spell absorbs damage until its power is exhausted.

Resist Energy wrote:

This abjuration grants a creature limited protection from damage of whichever one of five energy types you select: acid, cold, electricity, fire, or sonic. The subject gains resist energy 10 against the energy type chosen, meaning that each time the creature is subjected to such damage (whether from a natural or magical source), that damage is reduced by 10 points before being applied to the creature's hit points.

So, imagine you had Protection from Energy (fire) up with 10 points of absorption remaining, and you were under...

I agree with that interpretation of the rules.

You aren't exchanging claw damage with monk damage.

You are modifying your claw damage, the same way a monk does.

That's important to realize.

You modify the natural attack once, then again differently.

There is no swap being done.

There really is no tie to UAS at all.

Ok, I have a Catfolk Monk with Claw Attacks. He has Feral Combat Training which states:

Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.

There was a FAQ post also saying that you would use the unarmed damage in place of the natural attack damage.

If you then take Improved Natural Attack it would improve the damage of said attack. I understand that INA says it does not work for Unarmed Strikes, but in the case above you are not making an Unarmed Strike, you are making a Claw attack. In the case above if your UAS was 1d8, it would make the Claw attack 1d8 and then INA would make it 2d6, correct?

Yes. INA would change a 1d8 normal damage of a natural attack (improved from feral combat training, with levels of monk) into a 2d8 attack.

These two feats do not limit each other in any way.

INA improves a natural attack. (changes the size of the weapon)

FCT improves a natural attack. (with levels of monk, changes the base damage of the weapon)

Neither say that you cannot apply the other.
Neither apply the "same bonus".

When you make an Unarmed Strike, it's a D8.
When you make a Claw attack, it's 2d6.
When you flurry, you can use either.

I'm trying to figure out how I can get a specific wayfinder, but the rules and the way everything is written is not making any sense.

I would like a wayfinder that casts detect magic, and read magic. (nothing else).

As I read it, in what makes sense to me:

I must first buy a standard wayfinder (500g).

Then, I can use prestige, and "inherit" it. An inherited wayfinder can cast light and another ability of my choosing.
- This allows me to use read magic, in addition to light.

Then, I use prestige, and add discerning.
- This allows me to use detect magic, instead of light.

As I believe it should work; 500gp, and prestige. The way each section of each book reads, this isn't how it reads that it should work.

Each wayfinder upgrade section says you must first purchase a wayfinder, then upgrade it as follows...

Discerning says can be added to any existing wayfinder, but the description says this wayfinder can cast detect magic instead of light. Seems to imply that when you buy discerning, it is a wayfinder all of it's own.

Same deal with inherited. The wording makes it seem like you buy that upgrade, and you are given a wayfinder that can do these two things.

The rules seem to imply that when you buy a wayfinder upgrade, you do not get that ability added to your existing wayfinder, thereby not allowing multiple enhancements.

Am I reading this right?

Oh.

Ok, thanks!

Resonate powers are talked about in the primer.

The additional resources page specifically calls out the resonate powers of the primer are usable.

What powers are they talking about?

Why say you can use something out of a book, if it's not in the book?

Sorry, I misspoke. It's the Primer, not the Field Guide. Post updated.

Wayfinders ... "Many ioun stones interact with wayfinders to create additional magical effects—see Pathfinder Campaign Setting: Seekers of Secrets for further details on how ioun stones interact with wayfinders."

Page 278 of Ultimate Equipment guide lists Dusty Rose Ioun Stone.

Is Seeker of Secrets needed for the Dusty Rose Ioun Stone to have a resonate power in PFS play?

In the Pathfinder Society Primer, it says that Ioun Stones resonate as per the Seeker of Secrets.

Which book(s) do you need to have to be able to use ioun stones Resonate Powers in PFS play?

Is just the primer enough?

The resources page says that the Seeker of Secrets and Primer both allow resonate powers per the...

But only the Seeker of Secrets lists them.

Ah yes. I meant Sequence B. FAQ'd, though I don't think it needs to be. Rules seem clear to me upon reading them.

The way I read Grapple, you can't maintain on the first round.

While you still can maintain as a quickened action, you're not maintaining anything on the first round.

The default text says "If you do not release the grapple, you must continue to make a check each round, as a standard action, to maintain the hold."

So in the first round, you gain the grappled condition. The second round you maintain it, which means you do it as a move. You can pin a creature as a move, and still have a standard action left.

It seems clear to me that it's Sequence A in the original post.

Though, I'd also put a move in there. Move up to a foe, grapple it. Next round etc...

The PRD wrote:

Prerequisites

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he gains the prerequisite.

A character can't use a feat if he loses a prerequisite, but he does not lose the feat itself. If, at a later time, he regains the lost prerequisite, he immediately regains full use of the feat that prerequisite enables.

Most of the time this comes into play when something along the lines of level drain takes away the spellcasting ability of a class, but not the associated feat the character took, or more often when a character loses a virtual feat. Note, however, there are quite a few places where a character can take up a feat that is useless to them. Take the spell focus feat. No prerequisites, so anyone can take it. If you never take a spellcasting class, it is completely useless. Same with Spell penetration.

the PRD wrote:

While some feats are more useful to certain types of characters than others, and many of them have special prerequisites that must be met before they are selected, as a general rule feats represent abilities outside of the normal scope of your character's race and class.

the PRD wrote:

Many of them alter or enhance class abilities or soften class restrictions, while others might apply bonuses to your statistics or grant you the ability to take actions otherwise prohibited to you.

These two phrases (taken from the same paragraph, even) are the heart of this discussion. Certainly racial Heritage (Kobold) would allow you to take Tail Terror, and the second seems to imply that it would allow actual use. However, it is in the benefit section of Tail Terror that its non-use becomes implicit (not explicit). It allows the character to use his tail to make a tail attack. It does NOT allow one to grow a tail, regrow a lost tail, etc. In a similar manner Draconic...

This post (back on page 2) really adds a lot to this discussion. It looks like it was posted, and no one quoted it, nor even acknowledged it. It has made a solid point.

Gotcha, thanks!

Can a human take Racial Heritage(Grippli), and then take the Agile Tongue feat?

Agile Tongue (Grippli)
Your long pink tongue is capable of manipulating small items and even stealing objects.
Prerequisites: Grippli.

Benefit: You have a prehensile tongue with a range of 10 feet. You can pick up items weighing no more than 5 pounds, make Sleight of Hand checks, perform the steal or disarm combat maneuvers, or make melee touch attacks with your tongue.

Character:
4 Monk / 4 Ninja

A monk Ki Pool is based on Wisdom.
A ninja Ki Pool is based on Charisma.

Assuming 18 for each, would said character have a 12 point Ki Pool, that it could use for either class?

(4/2 +4) + (4/2 +4) = 12

I'm not sure I understand your question.

FCT lets your (selected) natural attack deal exactly the same damage that your unarmed attack deals.

ML lets your unarmed (and selected natural if FCT is taken) attacks advance if you take levels of not monk.

If you were all monk, you wouldn't need Monastic Legacy.

You only need FCT to allow 'the damage of your claws (to) reach the level of your unarmed damage'.

Pretty sure this post has relevance to this topic.

Not wanting to start up that whole other thread, please, lets not.

Example build:

Tiefling, Claws ability
1 - Alchemist - Arch type - Ragechemist
- Feat: Weapon Focus (Claw)
2 Barbarian - Arch type - Invulnerable Rager
3 - Alchemist
- Discovery: Feral Mutagen
- Feat Extra Discovery: (Vestigial Arm)
4 Barbarian -
- Rage Power: Fiend Totem (Lesser)
5 - Alchemist
- Feat: Extra Discovery (Vestigial Arm)

Without VA, I should have claw/claw/bite/gore right? claws from race, bite from mutagen, gore from totem - (all primary natural attacks)

4 valid legit, not ua/ua/c/c stuff, normal natural attacks.

After I should be able to claw/claw/claw/claw. Second set of claws from mutagen, replace bite attack with claw attack, replace gore attack with claw attack.

Does anyone disagree? Just for arguments, sake, lets jest keep it to yes or no - like a poll, instead of a discussion.

Thanks!

Where do you read about the ones that cannot be taken together?

Like I've read you can't take lesser this one, and lesser that one at the same time.

Yes, there is an especially stringent over-literal reading that in some small excessively biased way still supports "taking all your attacks". But that is not how PFS or any reasonable GM is going to interpret it. (Especially...

I get the feeling that you disagree with some of the people in this thread. It's my belief that reducing the opinion who disagree with you, would not make them suddenly agree with you without a compelling reason to do so. Could you provide one?

The implication, I read, from your comment is that any GM that disagrees with you (on this issue), is not reasonable.

Finally, the 6 claw attack link, has already been discussed, FAQ'd, ruled not legitimate. I respectfully disagree with any implication that thread is a gateway for an 8 attack discussion.

Apparently an octopus with vestigial arms could get 11 attacks.

I am not saying that an octopus can become the impractical/absurd creation you're implying that this discussion suggests. Creating a corner stone impossible creature does not devalue the points raised, no matter how you feel they are impractical.

It's nigh impossible for an octopus to take class levels, thus qualifying it for vestigial arms (or tentacle discovery). Furthermore, it would not be able to take 8 tentacle attacks, a bite attack, and any unarmed strikes. It's already at limb to natural attack capacity. It has no other limb capable of making an attack that hasn't been already used. Bite/beak=head, tentacle=tentacle. What's left?

I don't disagree with that. But my question is, if we're assuming the arm from Vestigial Arm doesn't function like an ordinary arm for the purpose of making manufactured attacks, why are we assuming it does for natural attacks?

To believe that clawx4/bite is legitimate, does not rely on a different arm function for each type of weapon. The arms function exactly the same with regards to each.

To compare apples to apples, d/d/d/d/b would be the equivalent of ua/ua/c/c/c/c/b, not c/c/c/c/b.

If you understand the difference between manufactured weapons, and natural weapons, you'll have to forgive my confusion. It appears to me that you continue to ask why they don't operate the same.

jlighter wrote:

Dash Lestowe wrote:

Bizbag wrote:

However, as is fairly well agreed upon, 4 claw/bite was not valid before, nor is greataxe/greataxe/bite, so neither is possible with VA (ignoring BAB iteratives of course).

SKR said "Nothing in that says you need to be tracking what type of weapon you're making an attack with."

If ua/ua/c/c/b is legal, then so is c/c/c/c/b.

By that logic, so is d/d/d/d/b, which we know is not legal. Open-ended statement. :)

At high enough levels for a BAB to support that, it is.

If you're not tracking what type of weapon you're making each attack with, why can you not make four attacks with daggers? If you're treating manufactured and natural weapons differently, you're tracking what type of weapon you're making each attack with. A four-armed creature is different than a two-armed creature, so the ordinary limitations ought not apply.

I said I believe that you can... when you meet the required BAB to do so. (6BAB: two with main, two with off - and appropriate feats)

The mechanics of manufactured weapons versus natural weapons seems, to me, to be the source of your confusion. The discovery doesn't track the attacks by weapon type, but the core game mechanics with regards to weapon type are still applicable.

At high enough levels for a BAB to support that, it is.

From the language used in the FAQ. I don't see why this should be applicable to only manufactured and not natural weapons, since it specifically mentions that the restriction applies to natural weapons as well.

It's my thought they do apply the same. Keep in mind that there's a mechanical differences between natural and manufactured weapons in how you determine how many of each you can take.

When your BAB is sufficient enough to make 4 iterative attacks, The wording present says you should be able to put a manufactured weapon in each hand, and take one attack (with the appropriate bonuses/minuses) from each.

Seems that at that point, they are the same.

However, as is fairly well agreed upon, 4 claw/bite was not valid before, nor is greataxe/greataxe/bite, so neither is possible with VA (ignoring BAB iteratives of course).

SKR said "Nothing in that says you need to be tracking what type of weapon you're making an attack with."

If ua/ua/c/c/b is legal, then so is c/c/c/c/b.

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Blackblood: that's what I thought until he said you track natural natural attacks vs. manufactured weapon attacks.

That's the exact opposite of what I said:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It's number of attacks. It's not tracking natural attacks vs. manufactured weapon attacks.

As the FAQ says: "The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs: the text of both discoveries says they do not give you any extra attacks per round, whether used as natural weapons, wielding manufactured weapons, or adding natural weapons to a limb that didn't originally have natural weapons."
Nothing in that says you need to be tracking what type of weapon you're making an attack with.

Because the rule is that it you couldn't do it before, you can't do it now. This means you must come up with a valid combination, pre-VA, then adjust for having extra hands to hold things in after VA.

Seems like those two statements are in opposition.

Claws aren't secondary attacks if your attack routine is Clawx4/Bite. That's two primary natural attacks on top of three more primary attacks (which is five primary natural attacks, an attack combination that wouldn't be possible without Vestigial Arms).

It's also a combination using a right weapon attack, a left weapon attack, and then vestigial hand weapon attacks, though. And that's something explicitly disallowed by the language of the FAQ, because that same restriction applies if you're using natural weapons (even those added to Vestigial Arms by other abilities).

Where are you reading that it says the combination of attacks must be the same type of attacks that you could do without out Vestigial Arm?

That's what I meant that this discovery that isn't supposed to be powerful because it doesn't have a lvl restriction on it is indeed powerful now due to the options it gives you that u didn't have before. One simple discovery gives u those 3 things.

What race gives you two claws and a bite at first level?

Additionally, you can't take VA at first level.

They now can do whatever dmg due to what ever weapon they are carrying (1d4, 1d6, 1d8, etc etc) AND are not to limited to just bludgeoning dmg, they can choose between slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning AND do not take a -6 to hit because they wanna do lethal dmg because now with more options they can bring that -6 down to a -2.

That sounds like multi-weapon fighting. I believe the FAQ says no on that. - 4 daggers, or (2 daggers, and two claws)

So, now we have confirmation that Race with claws + 2 Vestigial Arms + Feral Mutagen = 5 attacks.

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It's number of attacks. It's not tracking natural attacks vs. manufactured weapon attacks.

As the FAQ says: "The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs: the text of both discoveries says they do not give you any extra attacks per round, whether used as natural weapons, wielding manufactured weapons, or adding natural weapons to a limb that didn't originally have natural weapons."

Nothing in that says you need to be tracking what type of weapon you're making an attack with.

So, since anyone can make unarmed strikes, and anyone can dual wield, anyone can dual wield unarmed strikes.

Therefore, a race with claws and a bite will be capable of making Unarmed Strike/Unarmed Strike/Claw/Claw/Bite, which is five attacks. If you get a feral mutagen and two vestigial arms, now you are allowed to make a maximum of 5 attacks, which means you can make claw x4/bite, since that's 5.

SKR specifically said you are not tracking what type of attack in any way, all you're doing is counting total number of attacks. 5 = 5, so it's legal and confirmed.

You still can't multi-weapon fight, though, because you still have to follow all the other rules, including only having a main and an off-hand, etc.

Thanks MPLIndustries for breaking it down.

Haven't been following this thread, just looked now. I thought the FAQ was clear (I was surprised to see as much conversation continuing).

I wasn't thinking unarmed/unarmed/claw/claw/bite was valid, but if is, and if the type doesn't matter, does that mean this clearly stated question is still valid?

The club is not a natural weapon. It IS a manucatured weapon. Its treated as a natural weapon for a limited number of things (magic fang strongjaw etc).

Fair enough, I see your point. I have nothing else to add.

I don't think that your other natural attacks are spells or effects that enhance your natural weapons.

They don't need to be. The rules for natural attacks are that you take all of them that you have weapons for. Your full-attack natural weapon sequence, is now whatever it was, plus one.

It's a 7,300 gp magical weapon. Do you think that's worth granting a completely separate attack? Why would you ever not use this weapon as a natural weapon if it literally meant you could not make an attack with any other manufactured weapon in that same hand as well as making the natural weapon attack?

I'm sorry, but you are not understanding what I've said. If you believe I said you can attack twice (natural and manufactured), please re-read my post.

Full-attack natural weapon sequence, makes no mention of manufactured weapons.

So then follow through with that thought... you get to take that natural attack, in full sequence with all the other natural attacks you have.

who knew that language saying "you get no extra attacks" meant just that...

I'm not sure why you vent your angst at me. When people ask a question frequently, it should become a FAQ. Harassing people, just because you don't agree with them just makes you look like an anonymous bully.

This +1 club is often decorated with large teeth and carved with stylized images of different animals. As a standard action, the wielder may transform the club into the head or limb of an animal; the weapon's damage does not change but the type of damage changes to suit the shape of the club: bite (piercing), claw (slashing), gore (piercing), slam (bludgeoning), sting (piercing), or talon (slashing). When transformed, the club counts as a natural weapon and a manufactured weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured or natural weapons. The club also counts as the natural weapon of its current shape for the purpose of feats and spells that rely on specific natural weapons, such as Weapon Focus (bite) or the bloody claws spell. If the wielder has the wild shape ability, she can expend one use of wild shape to increase the weapon's damage by one step for the duration of that wild shape as long as the druid remains in contact with the weapon; if the wielder can wild shape at will, the club's damage is always increased in this fashion. If unattended, the club reverts to its normal shape.

The club is transformed into the limb. If we follow your idea that you do not gain the limb, how do you believe you make a bite attack?

Does your hand becomes a mouth, all Vampire Hunter D like?

Dash Lestowe wrote:

Yay! FAQ

Keep in mind its not directly (or directly enough) the 4 claws 1 bite loophole.

and you are being rude why?

I appreciate the FAQ, this clears up the grey area about the different interpretations.

The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs: the text of both discoveries says they do not give you any extra attacks per round, whether used as natural weapons, wielding manufactured weapons, or adding natural weapons to a limb that didn't originally have natural weapons.

Remember that these two discoveries do not have any level requirements, and therefore are not especially powerful; permanently adding additional attacks per round is beyond the scope of a discovery available to 2nd-level alchemists.

I don't like the answer in the FAQ. What can I do?

If you have found rules that appear to override a FAQ, post about it as a reply to the thread and open up the idea for more discussion. What you found might be an exception to the rule, or it might be the evidence to overturn the ruling.
If you disagree with a ruling but don't have any additional evidence to show that the ruling is incorrect, accept the ruling and move on (restating your points from earlier in the discussion is not "additional evidence").

This might be viewed as a restating, if you view it as so, please disregard.

A Beaststrike club, is a weapon that acts as both a manufactured weapon, and a natural weapon.

When used as a manufactured weapon, it's only a club, and grants no additional attacks.

When it's used as a natural weapon, you grow a limb, and that limb gains a natural weapon (tail slap, for example). This means when you take a full-attack action, you get to include it in your sequence. To use it as a natural weapon, does in-fact grant you an additional attack.

The additional attack is a derivative of the core difference between the two types of attacks, and that difference, was the basis for my questions, and discussion about the topic.

I understand the reason behind the FAQ, however, I feel that a unilateral restriction on two different types of attacks only muddies the water between those two attacks, and removes part of their unique differences.

Yay! FAQ

But the arm must be used to allow the claw attack.

I will try a different example. Say you are hit by a spell that rendered one arm useless. Your argument seems to say that I would still get two claw attacks, because I have a limb to put the claw onto and the claw makes the attack, not the (now useless) arm.

I understand what you are saying. Had the discovery said this arm is unable to make attacks any attacks at all, I would agree with your example.

However the discovery says the arm can be used in the normal combat sequence. If something else grants an additional attack, the arm can be used to facilitate that normal attack sequence. It's not useless. To "pretend" it is would run counter to the text in the discovery.

The discovery says the arm (just in it of itself) does not grant extra attacks. Sean's post further illustrates this saying the number of attacks before and after are the same.

By your definition, prior to drinking the mutagen, I would have to be saying that your attacks are now more than they were before the arm, which I am not.

An arm without natural weapons can't give you any attacks by itself, so the line would be meaningless. The attacks come from the weapon (natural or manufactured).

Don't forget unarmed. There are three different type of melee attacks.

Arguments that you normally attack with *all* natural attacks aren't persuasive to me since A)the limitation in Vestigial Arms would be a specific rule overriding the general natural weapon rule, just as specific rules trump general rules so many times; and B)*all* is not a number, so it doesn't prevent the addition of more attacks from being "extra." Having 3, then 5, means you gained 2 more, or extra, attacks.

I don't know that I can get behind this idea. In the OP, you can see how after VA, the number of attacks remained unchanged. From a combat perspective, nothing was changed by VA.

Levels afterwards another effect was taken, that says you gain two claw attacks, and a bite. How is it that you are retroactively saying that VA changed the combat sequence, and now it's the source of attacks that were given by the effect you just took. Why wouldn't the source be the effect that you just took?

I don't see how this is much different than the idea of haste being cast. Haste says you gain an additional attack. Feral Mutagen says you gain three.

Do you feel that Haste, and Feral mutagen are different? (and why?)

b)What happens when you gain multiple natural attacks of the same type from different sources? For instance, if a tiefling alchemist with racial claws imbibes a feral mutagen, how many claw attacks does he possess? Is he limited by his number of limbs or hands?

That one has been FAQ'd.

I would really like for those who feel that VA gives the alchemist in the OP extra attacks to offer their insight on this:

Person, typical in every way.

Takes Feral mutagen.
They went from 1 attack at full bab to 3.

What was the source of those additional attacks?

The source of those additional attacks, is the same source of the alchemist in the OP. Vestigial Arms or not, the mutagen is the source.

adding claws to the arms is the same as adding two short swords...

The rules as written explicitly disagree with this statement.

You can make a natural attack with every natural weapon you own in one full-attack sequence.

You cannot do that with a sword.

If you had wing wing claw claw bite tail slap, you take ALL of them.

If you had 6 swords, you have too many.

It doesn't say no attacks, it specifically says the arm can make attacks in a sequence.

If you receive an extra attack from haste, you can take it with a vestigial arm.

If the source of the extra attack is the arm, you cannot.

How do you believe the arm is granting you an extra attack?

In the OP, before and after the arm, all attacks are the same.

What extra attack do you believe is being listed in the OP?

This thread has not gone off-topic, as the issues about manufactured and natural weapons are one and the same.

I respectfully disagree.

The number of natural attacks you can make is determined by the number of natural weapons you have.

The amount of manufactured attacks you can make is determined by your base attack bonus.

This is the basis for what makes them not just different, but very different.

For example, you can put a sword in each hand, and that does not allow you to make two sword attacks at full base bonus. (There are all sorts of limitations, and modifiers that you are subject to to do this)

Converse to this, if your hands become a pair of natural attacks, there are no penalties to taking an attack with each natural weapon at full base bonus.

This difference in the abilities is why the original question exists.

All of this is without vestigial arms even entering the discussion.

It's important that you treat these seperately, as they are not the same.

The "you gain a pair of claw attacks" grants you an additional attack at your full base attack bonus, due to it giving you a pair of natural weapons.

It seems that we've gone off topic.

The question asked is specifically about the natural weapon full-attack sequence of the initially mentioned alchemist.

Before the Vestigial Arm, and after the arm, the number of attacks is the same. In number, quantity, and type. No additional attacks, or effects have been gained by taking the discovery.

All the talk of daggers, weapons, other discoveries and whatnot is indeed valuable, but does not offer an answer to the OP. Perhaps one of the many other threads about those topics would be a better fit for that discussion?

So if I have 3 arms, two normal and one vestigial, and am under the effect of haste I could make one attack from my primary hand, and make an additional attack with the vestigial hand?

Did you read past anything you high lighted? Well, I moved the highlight to help with that. The sentences both go on to say that it can make additional attacks once they get natural weapons. That additional wording in those two evolutions allow for the additional attacks. The vestigial limb lacks such additional rules, and instead it has rules placing restrictions.

If you don't mind, could I bring us back on track? What do you believe the full-attack sequence in the OP should be?

Follow-up question: What are your thoughts on this post?

The answer should be simple, can you make all those attacks without vestigial arms?...

Is it that simple?

Can you hold a tower shield in one arm, a spear in another, and a sword in a third. With combat reflexes, could you take the combat action to set your shield, take an aoo of someone near you, and someone further away from you?

You can't do those combat actions without taking Vestigial Arm, but I don't see a reason in how it's written that you should be denied the ability to do that after taking it.

Is it possible that the can you do this before/and after argument is not applicable to every situation?

When you have a bite attack, and you gain another, I agree. It replaces the other one (or you use the better). This had been talked about in a FAQ. It said unless you grew a second head. Doesn't that imply if you had a second valid location for the natural weapon to be, they would go there?

Legs cannot grow claws. They would need to be talons.

I think the other thing to point out is that having 4 clawed limbs does not necessarily grant you 4 claw attacks. Cats are a good example of this. They can get 4 claw attacks conditionally, because 2 of their attacks are stuffed into the Rake ability. This is often true for Pounce creatures. On a regular full attack, the Cat gets bite/claw/claw even though it has 4 claws on its body.

A cat has 4 clawed limbs in the description text. Description text is not a game mechanic.

The animal stat block of a cat lists that it has two claw natural attacks.

The natural attack sequence (in the core rule book) says you can take a natural attack with all natural weapons. It would be reasonable to assume that to mean, of the four clawed limbs a cat has, it only has two claw natural weapons.

If you took two different abilities that grant two claw natural weapons, it's possible that they replace each other, but if you have 4 hands available, why would they?

The rules state that the arm doesn't give you any extra attacks per round. Does this mean that they can't be used to gain additional attacks, or that the arms themselves don't provide any additional attacks (such as additional unarmed strikes)? I find the use of give ambiguous.

I believe you are allowed to make an additional attack roll with a Vestigial Arm, when a different effect gives you one. The discovery says you can make attacks as part of the alchemist's attack routine.

Example: Cast haste on the alchemist.

The Vestigial Arm should be allowed to make the attack that haste gives you.

The FAQ has been added.