Nevan Oaks's page

GM Rednal wrote:

Hmm... well, can you find an example of a feat that can explicitly be taken more than once - as in, it actually says so - but does not say that in a Special section?

Spell Mastery (from the Core Rulebook) is the only such feat that I know of. Its benefit section reads as follows:

"Benefit: Each time you take this feat, choose a number of spells that you already know equal to your Intelligence modifier. From that point on, you can prepare these spells without referring to a spellbook."

You all seem to have missed this example of a feat that can be taken multiple times and has no special listing allowing it.(at least in the prd write up).

So scott has rules quotes and a specific feat example, and while develoler quotes can help they are not RAW.

In the oven trap example you described above you would use the rules from the magic section. which covers the general rules for casting (they are not in combat).
If there was a creature or something that puts them in combat you would then use the rules from the combat section (as they would then be in combat).
There is no conflict just different conditions for casting, in different situations.

I would say it should be fine. I would set the magus level at 12 instead of 11. Since there is not a magus arcana at level 11, and there is at level 12.

Evolved companion, can also be useful. Increase damage dice, or natural ac increase.

The spell doesn't need an update.

Club and quarterstaff are made of wood.
Pathfinder provides no guidance for what wood you use to make clubs, so oak is valid.
At worse the spell requires oak clubs, not cedar clubs.
The entire game system is designed such that club and greatclub are different weapons like long sword and great sword are.
John Compton the Pathfinder Society Lead Developer responded in this thread that the spell was designed with a damage cap so using it with a great club is beyond the design of the spell.

There is no problem here. Nothing needs fixed.

Right the rules don't say you can, so you can't, the whole Pathfinder is exclusive argument. So you have to use a house rule right out of the gate.

I'm not sure why all the hate on snow Lilly she is not the only one with the same inturpitation on the spell none of you have shown a conclusive way either side is correct especially since you are all house ruling it work on clubs at all.

As I have pointed out earlier the spell targets oak clubs and since there are no rules for gaining a club made of oak (Pathfinder is exclusive) it can't happen.

The spell IMO is a copy past from a time before great clubs even existed. That being said both side have valid arguments and the spell most definitely needs an update.

UMM. What is the difference between casting the spell on a large club (two handed weapon) used by a medium player and a great club (two handed weapon).

WOW, large clubs suck for medium players. two handed and only d8.

But large piece of wood is still a large piece of wood (right).

lol. Please, show one spot in the rules where oak is a material your club can be made of. I mean what if I want my club to be hedge (which is a very nice hard wood). By RAW the club from the equipment list is wood (not oak) so they are not leagal shillelagh targets

Edit: I mean can you even show that oak is a type of tree on the Pathfinder world. Just because they are a real tree doesn't mean they exsist in the game world. And yes I do believe it is a typo or unentened but it is there in black and white.

Doesn't matter. Spell says it works on Clubs and Quarterstaves, nothing else.

If somebody wields a Greatclub or a Bo Staff, it won't work with them.

Also, if Greatclubs and Clubs are the same, then why do they have different entries in the weapon table?

Actually the spell targets a nonmagical oak club or quarterstaff. Since you can't by or get an oak club the spell is only good for quarterstaffs.

That being said a club is a club IMO.

The rules say no. If the AC is on the list of both class features then they stack.
Scalykind gives class level minus 2, animal is class level minus 3. So at 4th level scalykind gives A druid level of 2, animal domain gives a druid level of 1. Since snakes are on both list (scalykind and animal) the druid levels have to add so your snake is at druid level 3.

Edit: appears I may have miss remembered the faq. So may be legal. As always talk with your DM.

The count shall be 3. Four is right out. I am surprised by the number of bunny monsters, but even more shocked that none of them just have sharp pointy teeth. Runs away banging 2 coconuts halves together. (Clip, clop)

The amulet does grant special effects that can be applied to unarmed strikes, so yes brawling can be added.

No, boon companion is limited to maximum druid level equal to character level. You have 5 character levels so your max druid level is 5. So with the 5 levels of AC you already have this feat would not change anything for your AC.

eriktd wrote:

KunoichiSong wrote:

Also, if I have Reach Spell metamagic feat, can i make my familiar hold a Touch spell that has been meta-magicked into a ranged spell? Or make the spell become a ranged spell when my familiar releases it?

I think this is fine. Your arcane bond allows you to deliver touch spells through your familiar, and (for example) chill touch is certainly a touch spell. And reach chill touch is the same spell, it just allows you to touch your target at close range instead of at touch range. You or your familiar can hold the charge as normal, until you cast another spell or your familiar touches something to disrupt it.

Reach Spell says that "[s]pells modified by this feat that require melee touch attacks instead require ranged touch attacks." You can't hold charges for ranged touch attacks, and so you can't hold charges for a Reach Chill Touch spell. Furthermore, Familiars only get the ability to deliver melee touch attacks, not ranged touch attacks, so it couldn't make the attacks for you even if it was possible to hold the charges.

This doesn't change the spells type just the range, The spell is still a touch spell. That line in the reach reat just tells you it is now a Dex attack and not a strength attack. Ranged vs. melee.

But would only get the gloves bonus once as bonuses from the same source don’t stack.

Avoron wrote:

Rule: If damage from a silver weapon is piercing, it is reduced by one point.

Missing Rule: If damage from a silver weapon is bludgeoning it is not reduced.

the statement "is not reduced" or "normal damage" is inaccurate.

Modifier*

This is a number added to a die roll or a number on your character sheet. For example, your attack roll might have a modifier of +5, meaning that when you make an attack, you add 5 to the number you roll on the d20 die to get your result (thus, a 12 on the die would count as a 17, and so on). A bonus is a modifier that is +0 or higher; a penalty is one that's –1 or lower.

Is the damage bludgeoning...yes +0

Tuvarkz wrote:

Why aren't you discussing a Familiar at all?

Because I don't care.

We are discussing martial feats for martial characters, not OP spells, OP familiars, etc.
I know that casters have nasty tricks, why do you keep derailing this thread to martial vs caster arguments?
Yes, Familiar Folio in my opinion has some too powerfull stuff (this archtype is an example), but I DO NOT CARE.

This feat is mainly for fighters, so I dare you to finally stop arguing about Magus and start thinking how these feats change fighter gameplay.

I repeat only for 1 feat fighter with greataxe can potentially get a +6 AC bonus. Please advice, do we have comparable option for fighter with a greataxe to have +6 AC just for 1 feat?

Dodge (one feat) gauntlets of defence +5 all core.

Sorry missed that one important word.

After damage is dealt you gain a +1 to AC, not each time you deal damage (IMO). But if raging increase by +3 (not to +3) which would make the armour +4 (when raging).

Right under water is it piercing: yes plus or minus 0 (ie.. Normal damage), is it bludgeoning: yes 1/2 damage.

Untyped bonuses stack.
So you get half damage.

If you have an orc bane weapon and attack a half orc you don't just get normal damage (human) because it is human. You get bonus damage because it is orc. May not be the same rule but is the same principal

It is all conditional. Under water: is it bludgeoning, yes = half damage.

DR5/bludgeoning: is it bludgeoning, yes = no damage reduction.

The silver morning star is still -1, since it is a piercing weapon.

The spell targets an oak club, but you can't buy an oak club, just a club. So the only thing this spell can work on is the quarter staff.

The feat requires two weapon fighting which does need a 15 Dex.

Derek Dalton wrote:

...

Grond wrote:

...

Unfortunately all Hybrid classes are band because of reasons only the DM knows (he's relatively new at this and I don't think he wants to deal with them).

Then how can the magus be in the group, it is a hybrid class

The real problem is that improved familiars are not type animal, so they can't talk to an animal of their type.

So what is shield proficiency?

Shield Proficiency (Combat)

You are trained in how to properly use a shield.

Benefit: When you use a shield (except a tower shield), the shield's armor check penalty only applies to Strength- and Dexterity-based skills.
Normal: When you are using a shield with which you are not proficient, you take the shield's armor check penalty on attack rolls and on all skill checks that involve moving.
Special: Barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, fighters, paladins, and rangers all automatically have Shield Proficiency as a bonus feat. They need not select it.

So all types of shields not all types of weapons.

Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield. See "shield, heavy" on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a heavy shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a heavy shield as a one-handed weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

Armor proficiencies and weapon proficiencies are different things.

For what you want to work it would have to say weapon proficiency with all shields.

Here is the text from Ultimate Equipment,

Ultimate Equipment wrote:
Shield Bonus —
Deadly spikes and bladed projections extend from some shields, transforming such pieces of armor into weapon in their own right. Shield spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger (see "spiked light shield" and "spiked heavy shield" in the Martial Weapons table). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.
An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

Shield spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger (see "spiked light shield" and "spiked heavy shield" in the Martial Weapons table)

Grapple
If you do not release the grapple, you must continue to make a check each round, as a standard action, to maintain the hold

Since it is a standard action usually can only grapple once a turn, so can only maintain in subsequent rounds.

Greater grapple lets you do 2 grapple check in a round so you could initiate (standard action) a grapple, then maintain (move action)the grapple and pin

greater grapple
This feat allows you to make two grapple checks each round

But only maintaining becomes a move action

Once you have grappled a creature, maintaining the grapple is a move action

Grab
If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action

The only information I could find about grab

So for the OP fleet charge with grab makes grapple check a free action Initiates grapple (1st grapple) then move action maintain grapple pin (2nd grapple) this covers the 2 grapple check from greater grapple
So to make the "tie up" you would have to use the ability that gives extra actions in the turn other wise you have to wait till next turn.

Dwarf in the Flask wrote:

Knitifine wrote:

Dwarf in the Flask wrote:

Thought that was flavor text given their mechanic of them not getting morale bonuses.

If its mechanics based it then Androids should be immune to mind-effects and other effects like that. But they only have a +4 Race bonus to it. So I would argue that they can.

Mind-affecting =/= emotions.

Then they are capable of having emotions because they only have a bonus against mind-effecting spells. So if they are not immune they should be able to produce emotions enough, just not be very emotional.

Uhm... are sure that's what you meant to type because it sounds a little... off.

The fear spell is a mind effect, fear is an emotion. If androids are not immune to mind effects then they can have emotions. They are just not overly emotional (don't display or factor emotion into their life actions).

Glove of Storing

Aura moderate transmutation; CL 6th

Slot hands; Price 10,000 gp (one glove); Weight —

Description

This device is a single leather glove. On command, one item held in the hand wearing the glove disappears. The item can weigh no more than 20 pounds and must be able to be held in one hand. While stored, the item has negligible weight. With a snap of the fingers wearing the glove, the item reappears. A glove can only store one item at a time. Storing or retrieving the item is a free action. The item is shrunk down so small within the palm of the glove that it cannot be seen. Spell durations are not suppressed, but continue to expire. If the glove's effect is suppressed or dispelled, the stored item appears instantly. A glove of storing uses up your entire hands slot. You may not use another item (even another glove of storing) that also uses the hands slot.

Construction

Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, shrink item; Cost 5,000 gp

edit:..
Gauntlets of the Weaponmaster

Price 110,000 gp; Aura strong conjuration; CL 10th; Weight 5 lbs.

These gauntlets come in a variety of forms. Some are mostly leather with small steel plates, and are suited for fine swordplay. Others are fully articulated plate favored by knights in full plate. On command, the wearer of the gauntlet can store a single weapon he is holding in the gauntlets. When he does so, a graven image of the weapon appears on the gauntlet's plates. The wearer can store up to 10 weapons in the gauntlets in this manner. Retrieving a weapon requires the wearer to touch the image of the weapon he wants. Doing so is a swift action. When a weapon is retrieved, it appears in the hands of the wearer and any weapons the wearer had in his hands is stored in the gauntlets. If there is no room in the gauntlet for the weapons the wearer is holding, those weapons are dropped. The gauntlets can only store weapons; other items cannot be placed in the gauntlet.

Furthermore, three times per day on command, the gloves affect the wearer as the greater heroism spell.

Construction Requirements

Cost 55,000 gp

Craft Wondrous Item, heroism, rope trick

How can they stack Scott, if as some of the arguments in this post point out a spiked shield is an item in its own right then a spiked light shield is not a light shield and by the RAW bashing can't be add to it at all.

If a spiked light shield is a light shield with spikes added then bashing can be added but can not be stacked with shield spikes per the stacking rules.

I don't see another way to look at the RAW, but if there is please point me to the relevant text. I do have to agree it does look as though the klar is a candidate for bashing as posted on the PDR.

Klar

Price 12 gp

Type martial

The traditional form of this tribal weapon is a short metal blade bound to the skull of a large horned lizard, but a skilled smith can craft one entirely out of metal. A traditional klar counts as a light wooden shield with armor spikes; a metal klar counts as a light steel shield with armor spikes.

Though not sure what to make of the armor spikes, seem it would be a typo but I can't say for sure.

Bashing: A shield with this special ability is designed to perform a shield bash. A bashing shield deals damage as if it were a weapon of two size categories larger (a Medium light shield thus deals 1d6 points of damage and a Medium heavy shield deals 1d8 points of damage). The shield acts as a +1 weapon when used to bash. Only light and heavy shields can have this ability.

Moderate transmutation; CL 8th; Craft Magic Arms and Armor, bull's strength; Price +1 bonus.

So it looks like neither the klar nor the spiked shields can have the bashing ability.

If I add eggs to flour, it "turns" the flour into batter. Eggs are not an "effect."

If I add blue dye to yellow dye, it "turns" the yellow dye into green dye. Blue dye is not an "effect."

Nevan Oaks wrote:

You will note again there is no spiked, shield description. There are light and heavy shield descriptions and shield spike descriptions. The rules text clearly says "turns" into which is an effect.

Uhhh... what?

Core p. 148 wrote:

Spiked Shield, Heavy or Light: You can bash with a spiked shield instead of using it for defense. See page 152 for details.

Core p.56 on Fighter weapon groups wrote:

Close: gauntlet, heavy shield, light shield, punching dagger, sap, spiked armor, spiked gauntlet, spiked shield, and unarmed strike.

Sorry, a spiked shield is a weapon...not an "effect" on a shield.

Play the game as you see fit.

Eggs cause an effect

Effect Definition

dictionary.search.yahoo.com

n. noun

1. Something brought about by a cause or agent; a result.
2. The power to produce an outcome or achieve a result.
The government's action had little effect on the trade imbalance.

3. Advantage; avail.
used her words to great effect in influencing the jury.

tr.v.

1. To bring about; make happen; cause or accomplish.
effect a cure for a disease; effect a change in policy.

Eggs being added cause an effect ie.. batter
Adding spikes causes an effect ie.. effective size increase/piercing damage
Sorry I missed the weapons text listing for spiked shield, but that text does nothing to change the core rule text: buy a heavy wood shield 7gp add shield spikes for +10pg for the effect of wait for it... a spiked shield.

We all play the way we like but since this is a rules forum...I'm just pointing out the rule as written.

Let's look at another FAQ,

Paizo FAQ wrote:

Weapon Special Ability, Impact: Does this stack with the lead blades spell?

No. The weapon special ability and the spell are similar effects; note that impact lists lead blades as a construction requirement.

What do we see here? A reference to the specific spells, not a general response. What's more...there is a rationale given for why these two spells don't. We see none of that in response to Nefreet's question.

Let's look at the beloved FAQ a little more closely...

"How does damage work if I have various effects...."

Is a...

yes lets look at another FAQ

Exotic Weapons and Hands: If a weapon is wielded two-handed as a martial weapon and one-handed with an exotic weapon proficiency, can I wield it one-handed without the exotic proficiency at a –4 penalty?

No.
Note that normally you can't wield a two-handed weapon in one hand. A bastard sword is an exception to that rule that you can't wield a two-handed weapon in one hand, but you must have special training to use the bastard sword this way. Without that special training, wielding a bastard sword one-handed is as impossible as wielding a greatsword one-handed.
(The same goes for other weapons with this one-handed exotic exception, such as the dwarven waraxe.)

Edit 7/26/13: Correction of a typo in the second sentence that said "you can't wield a two-handed weapon in two hands."

except their explanation makes no sense because a bastard sword is not a two-handed weapon:

Bastard Sword: Is this a one-handed weapon or a two-handed weapon?

A bastard sword is a one-handed weapon (although for some rules it blurs the line between a one-handed and a two-handed weapon).

But NONE of this changes the fact that per the PRD and CRB, shield spikes are an effect. The one listing in the weapons table doesn't trump the rules text and the armor table.

Shield, Heavy; Wooden or Steel: You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A heavy shield is so heavy that you can't use your shield hand for anything else.

Wooden or Steel: Wooden and steel shields offer the same basic protection, though they respond differently to spells and effects.

Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a heavy shield. See “shield, heavy” on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a heavy shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a heavy shield as a one-handed weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

Shield, Light; Wooden or Steel: You strap a shield to your forearm and grip it with your hand. A light shield's weight lets you carry other items in that hand, although you cannot use weapons with it.

Wooden or Steel: Wooden and steel shields offer the same basic protection, though they respond differently to some spells and effects.

Shield Bash Attacks: You can bash an opponent with a light shield. See “shield, light” on Table: Weapons for the damage dealt by a shield bash. Used this way, a light shield is a martial bludgeoning weapon. For the purpose of penalties on attack rolls, treat a light shield as a light weapon. If you use your shield as a weapon, you lose its AC bonus until your next turn. An enhancement bonus on a shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but the shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

Shield Spikes: These spikes turn a shield into a martial piercing weapon and increase the damage dealt by a shield bash as if the shield were designed for a creature one size category larger than you (see “spiked shields” on Table: Weapons). You can't put spikes on a buckler or a tower shield. Otherwise, attacking with a spiked shield is like making a shield bash attack.

An enhancement bonus on a spiked shield does not improve the effectiveness of a shield bash made with it, but a spiked shield can be made into a magic weapon in its own right.

You will note again there is no spiked, shield description. There are light and heavy shield descriptions and shield spike descriptions. The rules text clearly says "turns" into which is an effect.

And for the umpteenth time, a spiked shield is a weapon, not a virtual increase.

On shield spikes, there you might be right. I'll make sure and ask anyone if they bought a spiked shield, or if they put spikes on their shield.

You can't buy a spiked shield.

Per the PRD and CRB shields and spiked shields have A price listing as special in the weapons table.

So we go to the armor section.
Shields have a price listing but there is no listing for spiked shield
There is however a listing for shield spikes under extra in the armor chart +10gp So by the PRD and CRB spikes are added to a shield, so is a virtual size increase.

Uh, are you really trying to say you can reach through it? If so, how do you walk on it?

Magic!

Shadow drake would most likely be saurian type

So why doesn't masterwork give a shield +1 to attack if it's a weapon?

Because the rules says you can't, this has no bearing on weapon status.

How do you arm yourself with two shields with the restrictions they place on use of hands?

There is no restriction placed on hands by shields, the only restrictions are the penalties for TWF

How do you remove them?

TWF, improved shield bash, and many other feats.

If there is only one magic shield slot how then can you use two magic shields? (and so logically two ordinary ones)
Magic weapon slots varies on limbs and abilities so is not specified.

I didn't understand your post about the Klar Darksol.

If you have a +2 shield of arrow catching and a +1 bashing shield of blinding you are correct only one shield would work as a shield.

Sorry it doesn't work. None of your feat/abilities allows you to raise your EDL past your actual character level. Since both cavalier and hunter give companions your EDL is 7 and your character level is 7.

Boon companion add 4 levels but restricts you to your maximum character level so it would give you no bonus as your EDL is already equal to your character level.

Effective druid levels stack. You can't gain another AC by taking a new class with the AC class feature. The new class just adds to your old class for how strong your existing AC is.

Again, you're reading it very differently from me.

It doesn't say "you can't make attacks you wouldn't have without the discovery", it says "you can't make more attacks than you would be able to make without the discovery". These are different things. The latter means you have the attack, but cannot use it if it would mean having a greater total quantity than before. If this weren't the case then their example with Tentacle would be invalid.

So, IMO, you're reading the FAQ to say more than it does to support your position.

The tentacle example is not invalid as it follows natural weapon rules and not weapons rules. That's a completely different topic.

" This language is calling out that the tentacle is not a standard natural weapon and doesn't follow the standard rules for using natural weapons (which would normally allow you to make the natural weapon attack in addition to your other attacks).

As to the topic at hand:

11th level fighter without discovery:
+3/(+1)/+0/-5

It is not just more attacks

"you can't make more attacks than you would be able to make without the discovery"

Could the fighter do this attack:+3/(+1)/(+1)/(+1)/+0/-5 without the discovery? Nope

So
11th level fighter with discovery:
+3/(+1)/+0/-5

How am I taking it out of context?

It means "extra," as in "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery."

Iterative attacks are irrelevant the fighter makes attacks as if there where no extra arms.

If you have no extra arms you can only fight with the normal TWFing rule

So Normal TWFing -6/-10:
primary +3/+0/-5
1st offhand extra attack (+1)
This gives us +3/(+1)/+0/-5

Multi-Weapon (natural 4-arm race, no vestigial; for comparison):
primary +3/+0/-5
1st offhands extra attack (+1)
2nd offhand extra attack (+1)
3rd offhand extra attack (+1)
This gives us +3/(+1)/(+1)/(+1)/+0/-5

Multi-Weapon (vestigial arms x2):

primary +3/+0/-5
1st offhands extra attack (+1)
2nd offhand extra attack do not have per faq
3rd offhand extra attack do not have per faq
This gives us +3/(+1)/+0/-5
This is completely in context

Again, the FAQ redefined what "extra attack" means for the context of the discovery in question. All other definitions are invalid because the FAQ clarified it to have its own meaning.

Where:

Alchemist, Tentacle/Vestigial Arm: What does "extra attacks" mean for these discoveries?

It means "extra," as in "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery."

For example, if you're low-level alchemist who uses two-weapon fighting, you can normally make two attacks per round (one with each weapon). If you take the tentacle discovery, on your turn you can make
* two weapon attacks but no tentacle attack,
* a weapon attack with your left hand plus a secondary tentacle attack, or
* a weapon attack with your right hand plus a secondary tentacle attack.
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a tentacle attack on the same turn because the tentacle discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round." This language is calling out that the tentacle is not a standard natural weapon and doesn't follow the standard rules for using natural weapons (which would normally allow you to make the natural weapon attack in addition to your other attacks).

Likewise, if you instead took the vestigial arm discovery and put a weapon in that arm's hand, on your turn you can make
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your right hand,
* a weapon attack with your right hand and one with your vestigial arm, or
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your vestigial arm,
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial hand weapon attack on the same turn because the vestigial arm discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round."
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.

An 11th level fighter has a base of +11/+6/+1.

So Normal TWFing -6/-10:
primary +3/+0/-5
1st offhand extra attack (+1)
This gives us +3/(+1)/+0/-5

Multi-Weapon (natural 4-arm race, no vestigial; for comparison):
primary +3/+0/-5
1st offhands extra attack (+1)
2nd offhand extra attack (+1)
3rd offhand extra attack (+1)
This gives us +3/(+1)/(+1)/(+1)/+0/-5

Multi-Weapon (vestigial arms x2):

It means "extra," as in "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery."

So by RAW and FAQ the fighter attacks as if he did not have the discovery Which is the same attack as Normal TWFing +3/(+1)/+0/-5

Right I said nothing about the two weapon fighting feats, I quoted RAW on two weapon fighting. I bolded the important part can gain an extra attack,Vestigial arms says you can not gain extra attacks.

All multi armed creatures gain one extra attack for one extra arm (per TWF (MWF) RAW not TWF/MWF feats). The penalties for MWF are the same as two weapon fighting (and follow that RAW) but with more extra attacks. So if your extra arm can't gain an extra attack, the character can't have that attack.

so four arms says can have extra attacks
Vestigial arms says can not have extra attack

So by RAW I can get an extra attack when fighting with more than one weapon, now specifically this applies to 2 armed creatures in the CRB. For multi armed creatures there is the MWF feat, which says follow the TWF rules quoted below.

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 in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.

so 2 arms equals 1 primary and one extra (-6/-10).

four arms equals 1 primary and three extra (-6/-10/-10/-10).

2 arms and 2 vestigial equals 1 primary and one extra (-6/-10). Since vestigial arms can't gain extra attacks.

This follows the RAW for fighting with two weapons (which is also the RAW for multi weapon fighting. The Faq doesn't change the core rule an any way.

Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

The argument, if I'm following along correctly, is that the arms do give you the extra attacks but you cannot make more than normal so you take the higher BAB attacks and don't make the lower BAB attacks.

Basically yes. They give you extra attacks in the everything-but-these-two-discoveries definition, but not in the definition set forth for these two abilities by the FAQ. Since the FAQ definition is that you can't have more, not that you can't have better, you can give up a -5 BAB for a full BAB with a second off-hand. (And do it again with the third, if you have another attack to give up.)

This transforms, to use my original example, a +9/+9/+4/+4/-1/-1 routine into a +9/+9/+9/+9/+4/+4 routine. Same number of attacks, but now with better to-hit. Sadly, it also means you need more weapons, which is a big wealth problem. Barring unarmed strike (which is not precisely an optimal choice) you have to take into account the loss of at least 1 or 2 points of to-hit due to spreading your wealth thin for those weapons. Unless you have a caster in the party that really likes blowing spell slots on Greater Magic Weapon, but that's what good teammates are for, yeah? (Sadly, this still leaves you with potential DR problems.)

Except there is no higher BAB to move into:

Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. 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 when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.

two arms equals: 1 primary =BAB

four arms equals: 1 primary =BAB
1 extra attack =BAB
2 extra attack =BAB
3 extra attack =BAB

two arms with two vestigial arms: 1 primary =BAB
1 extra attack =BAB
2 no extra attack =no BAB
3 no extra attack =no BAB

If there is no attack at a higher BAB, how are you moving into it?

Stabbity, I don’t see how your math works You are not following RAW.
11th level fighter has +11/+6/+1

Without any feats a two armed fighter can add an offhand attack -4/-8.
So he has +7/+2/-3 with one offhand attack at (+3) giving +7/(+3)/+2/-3.
TWF reduces the penalty to -2/-2 giving as you stated +9/(+9)/+4/-1.

Without any feats a two armed fighter with vestigial arms can add one (because vestigial can’t add attacks) offhand attack -4/-8.
So he has +7/+2/-3 with one offhand attack at (+3) giving +7/(+3)/+2/-3.
TWF reduces the penalty to -2/-2 giving as you stated +9/(+9)/+4/-1.

Now we add:

Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (Combat)

You are skilled at fighting with two weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 17, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6.
Benefit: In addition to the standard single extra attack you get with an off-hand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a –5 penalty.
Normal: Without this feat, you can only get a single extra attack with an off-hand weapon.

So we have an additional offhand attack with an additional -5. It doesn’t matter which offhand is gaining the extra attack it is still at -5. So if I have one offhand or 12 offhands when the fighter in question takes this feat he gains one attack at -5.

This attack is gained from the feat not from extra arms. So it doesn’t matter if you gained the feat with a prereq. Of TWF or MWF the result is the same, you can't move up the BAB ladder

It's not an FAQ. It's part of the definition of animal companion from the
original druid class definition:
"If a character receives an animal companion from more than one source, her effective druid levels stack for the purposes of determining the statistics and abilities of the companion."

It does say they "can stack". It says they do stack, whether you want them to or not.

No, Covert operator You are incorrect, They all can stack because it says effective level So if you have a AC that is only on one list you still use it as if your class was the higher level.

So a cavalier 4/ druid 4 will have an AC as and 8th level cavalier or as an 8th level druid. The levels for effect on the AC stack.

I don't see why this would not work. With improved shield bash you get to attack and keep your ac bonus. I see no difference from shield bashing and attacking with a weapon in the shield hand, and this would allow her to get the ac bonus from the buckler so she would be wielding it.

Imbicatus wrote:

Well, check the post dates. Ultimate magic wasn't released when this discussion was taking place three years ago.

Necroing this to argue about house rules is in poor taste.

Huh, my copy of Ultimate Magic says it WAS first printed in 2011.

This would seem to be supported by the fact that Pendagast's post came on Apr 26, 2011, 04:27 AM, suggesting, "With all this wand-fighter business, why not just play a magus?"

Pendagast's comment came before Davor's comment I was responding to. His came Apr 28, 2011, 03:03 AM. I can tell it came later because the number 28 is bigger than the number 26. It's 2 bigger.

So, I checked the post dates. And it is pretty obvious that you didn't. You are just wrong.

How does THAT taste?

Ultimate Magic! ... Published June 7th 2011 by Paizo Publishing (first published May 17th 2011) you should be looking for the right dates I check the publishing dates and it is clear you didn't. All kinds of posters on these boards have access to play test information, which is not published when first mentioned on the boards.http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/10129673-pathfinder-roleplaying-

So fact remains that these rules where not published at the time of these posts. I know cause May comes after April.

But yes some form of magic (weapon wand is the way to go).

EDIT: sorry tried to link source sight doen't look like it worked.