Jeff Merola wrote:
Awesome, thanks! Sorry, saw retired and panicked!
What's up with Qadira and Sczarni retiring too?
I agree with that interpretation of the rules.
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.
When you make an Unarmed Strike, it's a D8.
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.
Then, I use prestige, and add discerning.
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?
Sorry, I misspoke. It's the Primer, not the Field Guide. Post updated.
Pathfinder Society Primer wrote:
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.
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...
Does the Racial Heritage feat, combined with a feat that improves an inherent feature (claws, poison, etc) grant you that feature?
Avatar Unknown wrote:
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.
Can a human take Racial Heritage(Grippli), and then take the Agile Tongue feat?
Agile Tongue (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.
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'.
Not wanting to start up that whole other thread, please, lets not.
Tiefling, Claws ability
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.
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.
Dash Lestowe wrote:
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.
Standard Tengu: Has a number of attacks = 5 (ua/ua/c/c/b). You take your iterative attacks, and then take your natural attacks (as secondary attacks).
Pre-VA: You have a base number of 5 attacks.
After-VA: ua/ua/c/c/b, or c/c/c/c/b is still 5 attacks. You aren't gaining extra attacks from VA.
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.
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
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.
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)
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?
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.
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.
Beaststrike Club wrote:
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?
I appreciate the FAQ, this clears up the grey area about the different interpretations.
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
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.
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:
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?
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?
Some Random Dood wrote:
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.