Rapid shot and manyshot


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

I'm not sure if this has been covered elsewhere but can you stack rapid shot with manyshot?

Also, does rapid shot still work as in 3.5? The extra attack is at your highest BA?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been covered elsewhere but can you stack rapid shot with manyshot?

Manyshot requires a full-round action and so does Rapid Shot. So you can't stack them as you only get one full-round action per round to use. In 3.5 where Manshot was a standard action and rapid shot full-round action you still could not stack them.

Javell DeLeon wrote:


Also, does rapid shot still work as in 3.5? The extra attack is at your highest BA?

I would have to say yes its at the highest BAB, but I also agree that its not really worded that well. Nothing seems to be saying it works any differently than it did in 3.5.


Are they both not only a part of a fullattack-action ?

Manyshot says that the first Attack of your fullattack-action fires 2 arrows at once.

And Rapidshot just states that you get a extra Attack at a fullattack-action, but all attacks suffer a -2 penalty on the attackroll.

So it should be (with just the base attack bonus):

+18/+18 (Manyshot)/+18 (Rapidshot)/+13/+8/+3 (Normal)

It would make up for the 7 attacks while dualwielding.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber

It would be five attacks, since Manyshot does not give an extra attack, but uses one attack roll for two arrows.

Dark Archive

Alistair wrote:

Are they both not only a part of a fullattack-action ?

Manyshot says that the first Attack of your fullattack-action fires 2 arrows at once.

And Rapidshot just states that you get a extra Attack at a fullattack-action, but all attacks suffer a -2 penalty on the attackroll.

So it should be (with just the base attack bonus):

+18/+18 (Manyshot)/+18 (Rapidshot)/+13/+8/+3 (Normal)

It would make up for the 7 attacks while dualwielding.

We ruled that the two feats stack during the Beta and have played that way for a year now without trouble. Note that the first attack the one you apply the many shot to and that you have denoted as "+18/+18" above, is determined by only one attack roll at Highest BAB (-2 if also rapidshooting) both arrows either hit or miss.


ShadowChemosh wrote:
Manyshot requires a full-round action and so does Rapid Shot. So you can't stack them as you only get one full-round action per round to use. In 3.5 where Manshot was a standard action and rapid shot full-round action you still could not stack them.

That's not correct - both Manyshot and Rapid Shot are available at the same time. They aren't separate full-round actions - they're options you can use when taking a full attack, so you can use both together (just like you can use Combat Expertise and Power attack together - they aren't separate actions, they're simply modifiers to your attacks that add damage or AC).

ShadowChemosh wrote:
I would have to say yes its at the highest BAB, but I also agree that its not really worded that well. Nothing seems to be saying it works any differently than it did in 3.5.

This is right though. It should specify that it's at the highest attack bonus, but as far as I'm aware any time an extra attack is given and a penalty isn't outright stated, it's made at your full attack bonus.


DrowVampyre wrote:
ShadowChemosh wrote:
Manyshot requires a full-round action and so does Rapid Shot. So you can't stack them as you only get one full-round action per round to use. In 3.5 where Manshot was a standard action and rapid shot full-round action you still could not stack them.

That's not correct - both Manyshot and Rapid Shot are available at the same time. They aren't separate full-round actions - they're options you can use when taking a full attack, so you can use both together (just like you can use Combat Expertise and Power attack together - they aren't separate actions, they're simply modifiers to your attacks that add damage or AC).

ShadowChemosh wrote:
I would have to say yes its at the highest BAB, but I also agree that its not really worded that well. Nothing seems to be saying it works any differently than it did in 3.5.
This is right though. It should specify that it's at the highest attack bonus, but as far as I'm aware any time an extra attack is given and a penalty isn't outright stated, it's made at your full attack bonus.

I was about to dispute that but after reading it, I notice it now says when making a full attack action as opposed to 3.5's "as a standard action..."


concerro wrote:
I was about to dispute that but after reading it, I notice it now says when making a full attack action as opposed to 3.5's "as a standard action..."

Heh, yeah, Manyshot got reworked. I'm not quite sure whether I like the new or old form better...but I know I like that fighter archers are actually feasible damage dealers now, in comparison with two-handed fighters (and that fighters are comparable to barbarians and such too)! ^_^


]but uses one attack roll for two arrows[/QUOTE wrote:

Ah sorry got it noted as 2 seperate shots, but surely its only one roll.

18(2 damage rolls),18,13,8,3

Dark Archive

Alistair wrote:
]but uses one attack roll for two arrows[/QUOTE wrote:

Ah sorry got it noted as 2 seperate shots, but surely its only one roll.

18(2 damage rolls),18,13,8,3

You should add a speed weapon to get another 18.


Ah Thanks Jadeite, knew there was something missing.

1 Manyshot > turns to 2 Dam-rolls
1 Rapid shot
1 Speedweapon
3 Normal

So actually 7 Damage-rolls.

Speed don`t stack with haste?

If not, Dual Wield gets 1 attackroll as an advantage.

Dark Archive

Alistair wrote:

Ah Thanks Jadeite, knew there was something missing.

1 Manyshot > turns to 2 Dam-rolls
1 Rapid shot
1 Speedweapon
3 Normal

So actually 7 Damage-rolls.

Speed don`t stack with haste?

If not, Dual Wield gets 1 attackroll as an advantage.

Well, there's nothing stopping dual wield from taking a speed weapon, too.

But the extra attacks dual wield gets are at a lower bonus. They'll also probably deal less damage (since power attacking with an off-hand weapon only grants +1 per -1 on the attack roll, while Deadly Aim gives +2 for each -1).
You also get to use a buckler with archery (which gives you 7 points of AC more than dual wield).
And you probably get a greater chance to actually use full attacks since you don't have to move toward your enemy.


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
DrowVampyre wrote:

...

That's not correct - both Manyshot and Rapid Shot are available at the same time. They aren't separate full-round actions - they're options you can use when taking a full attack, so you can use both together (just like you can use Combat Expertise and Power attack together - they aren't separate actions, they're simply modifiers to your attacks that add damage or AC).
.....

Damn good catch. You are correct I read the feats too fast and too stuck in my 3.5 rules still. The wording is a little subtle, but it is saying during a full-attack not it actually requires a full-round action. I was also still stuck in the Vital Strike Cleave discussions I guess. =)

Now I really like the changes they did to these feats now as at first I didn't.

Thanks


ShadowChemosh wrote:

Damn good catch. You are correct I read the feats too fast and too stuck in my 3.5 rules still. The wording is a little subtle, but it is saying during a full-attack not it actually requires a full-round action. I was also still stuck in the Vital Strike Cleave discussions I guess. =)

Now I really like the changes they did to these feats now as at first I didn't.

Thanks

You're quite welcome. I might have missed it myself, except that I've been trying to decide whether to play an archer or a crit-based dual wield build in an upcoming campaign. If only they made a ranged weapon with 18-20 crit...


Jadeite wrote:


You also get to use a buckler with archery (which gives you 7 points of AC more than dual wield).

I thought that using a two handed weapon prevented you from including a buckler's AC bonus. Is this accurate?

Also the description of Speed weapons makes it's bonus attack incompatible with "similar effects, such as a Haste spell", and I think this includes Rapid Shot.


Good stuff all! Thanks!

I was thinking they might stack but I thought I better get some other thoughts on this in case I was wrong.

I guess until there is something stated more definitively, will just keep using RS at highest attack bonus.

Thanks again!:)


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Dilvish the Danged wrote:


I thought that using a two handed weapon prevented you from including a buckler's AC bonus. Is this accurate?

Its correct as Bows and Crossbows are an exception.

Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.


ShadowChemosh wrote:
In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn.

This is the precise passage I was referring to. I believe that wielding a two handed weapon means that you are wielding a weapon in your off hand, and can't get the buckler's AC bonus.


Does a Speed weapon not stack with Rapid Shot? I know you can't stack haste with a Speed wpn but would either/or stack with RS?


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Dilvish the Danged wrote:
ShadowChemosh wrote:
In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn.
This is the precise passage I was referring to. I believe that wielding a two handed weapon means that you are wielding a weapon in your off hand, and can't get the buckler's AC bonus.

Damn another good catch. Its an added sentence from 3.5 and with that it looks like you do lose it now. Heck it now even says if you cast a spell you lose it. Ouch that just hurt most cleric builds I have ever seen.

The problem I have with new rules like this is very few players will remember to remove the buckler AC bonus when being attacked. Was the buckler so over powered that it needed to have this change? Never seen it cause a problem in any game I saw. Did others have the buckler being abused?


Javell DeLeon wrote:
Does a Speed weapon not stack with Rapid Shot? I know you can't stack haste with a Speed wpn but would either/or stack with RS?

While the Haste spell description and the Speed weapon's description explicitly rule each other out, the Rapid Shot feat is not explicitly mentioned in either (and the Rapid Shot feat description says nothing about Haste or Speed weapons).

My own interpretation is that any single extra attack effect can be applied, but that none of them stack and give extra extra attacks. Other people may disagree with this interpretation.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Dilvish the Danged wrote:
Javell DeLeon wrote:
Does a Speed weapon not stack with Rapid Shot? I know you can't stack haste with a Speed wpn but would either/or stack with RS?

While the Haste spell description and the Speed weapon's description explicitly rule each other out, the Rapid Shot feat is not explicitly mentioned in either (and the Rapid Shot feat description says nothing about Haste or Speed weapons).

My own interpretation is that any single extra attack effect can be applied, but that none of them stack and give extra extra attacks. Other people may disagree with this interpretation.

I could see that. I would think they probably wouldn't either, but I do wish it was stated a little more clearly.

It'd be nice to have a definitive answer. Sounds like one of those "whatever the DM decides" type things.


ShadowChemosh wrote:
Dilvish the Danged wrote:


I thought that using a two handed weapon prevented you from including a buckler's AC bonus. Is this accurate?

Its correct as Bows and Crossbows are an exception.

Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.

Hmm, I always took it to mean when you were using a Bow or Crossbow you did not take the -1 penalty, but you still didn't get the AC bonus.

Does the last part "if you use a weapon in your off hand, you use lose the buckler's AC bonus.." not apply to the Bow or Crossbow? If not then could you not get the AC bonus with any two-handed weapon?

Konrad

Edited:
I read the Pathfinder version of Buckler and they did clarify it a bit, but I still think its worded not that well.

It now lists two handed weapons as having a -1 penalty. But at the end it does not list two handed weapons as losing the AC bonus, only off hand weapons and spells with somantic components.

I'm not arguing that two handed weapons should keep the AC bonus, just that I don't think Bows or Crossbows should get the AC bonus.

Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.


With the way we have always interpreted the Buckler I think a better description of it would be....

Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. You can use a bow or crossbow without the -1 penalty. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand or your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.


Morval wrote:

With the way we have always interpreted the Buckler I think a better description of it would be....

Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. You can use a bow or crossbow without the -1 penalty. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand or your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.

stealworthy !


Adventure Path Charter Subscriber
Morval wrote:
ShadowChemosh wrote:
Dilvish the Danged wrote:


I thought that using a two handed weapon prevented you from including a buckler's AC bonus. Is this accurate?

Its correct as Bows and Crossbows are an exception.

Buckler: This small metal shield is worn strapped to your forearm. You can use a bow or crossbow without penalty while carrying it. You can also use your shield arm to wield a weapon (whether you are using an off-hand weapon or using your off hand to help wield a two-handed weapon), but you take a –1 penalty on attack rolls while doing so. This penalty stacks with those that may apply for fighting with your off hand and for fighting with two weapons. In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can cast a spell with somatic components using your shield arm, but you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn. You can't make a shield bash with a buckler.

Hmm, I always took it to mean when you were using a Bow or Crossbow you did not take the -1 penalty, but you still didn't get the AC bonus.

I quoted the correct section, but did not know that PFPRG added new stuff for bucklers. In 3.5 using a bow or casting would not have lost you the AC, but it does in PFRPG. Dilvish the Danged did point out above that I was incorrect and still had my 3.5 rules stuck in my head.

Sorry about the mis-quote everyone. I wish I could go back and change posts to prevent such future issues...


ShadowChemosh wrote:
Damn good catch. You are correct I read the feats too fast and too stuck in my 3.5 rules still. The wording is a little subtle, but it is saying during a full-attack not it actually requires a full-round action. I was also still stuck in the Vital Strike Cleave discussions I guess. =)

I think your first interpretation was correct and that poor wording of the feats is opening the door for misinterpretation.


Diego Winterborg wrote:
ShadowChemosh wrote:
Damn good catch. You are correct I read the feats too fast and too stuck in my 3.5 rules still. The wording is a little subtle, but it is saying during a full-attack not it actually requires a full-round action. I was also still stuck in the Vital Strike Cleave discussions I guess. =)
I think your first interpretation was correct and that poor wording of the feats is opening the door for misinterpretation.

If anything I'd say the 3.5 wording is far less clear. Consider the last sentence of Rapid Shot:

You must use the full attack action to use this feat.

Ok, so does that mean it works whenever I make a full attack, or does that mean using the feat is a full attack action? If it's an action of it's own, will other feats apply to it?

The Pathfinder wording is way more clear.

When making a full-attack action with a ranged weapon, you can fire one additional time this round.

All you have to do is check "Am I making a full attack?" and "Am I using a ranged weapon?" if so, it applies, if not, it doesn't, regardless of what other feats or conditions apply.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I see your point.
Rules for TWF and sage advice did however clarify the meaning of that frase. When read in its context there is no doubt that the use of Rapid Shot itself was a full-attack action.

I think that is one of the problems facing PF right now. there is a lot of room for interpretation and we really need the designers to step up and set the rules in their right context.

Basically. Which aspects have been re-written in order to change game ballance and which have been so in order not to copy the PHB word by word.


Diego Winterborg wrote:
Rules for TWF and sage advice did however clarify the meaning of that phrase. When read in its context there is no doubt that the use of Rapid Shot itself was a full-attack action.

I believe you're mistaken, and possibly misremembering something. The Sage (as well as the official 3.5 FAQ) had a question regarding the use of Manyshot and Rapidshot together, and both answered that they could not be used together because the 3.5 version of Manyshot was used "as a standard action" and Rapid Shot can only be used with the Full-Attack action. This in no way indicates that Rapid Shot is a Full-round action, only that it's effects are only applied to full attacks, and thus, was incompatible with Manyshot.


Brodiggan Gale wrote:
I believe you're mistaken, and possibly misremembering something. The Sage (as well as the official 3.5 FAQ) had a question regarding the use of Manyshot and Rapidshot together, and both answered that they could not be used together because the 3.5 version of Manyshot was used "as a standard action" and Rapid Shot can only be used with the Full-Attack action. This in no way indicates that Rapid Shot is a Full-round action, only that it's effects are only applied to full attacks, and thus, was incompatible with Manyshot.

You might be right.

I would love to give a ranged tighter that extra leway, but I would still appreciatesome designer feed back on this question, since it is a real change from 3.5 rules if you are indeed interpreting it correctly.

Sovereign Court

I was in a v.3.5 game a few weeks ago and witnessed some craziness surrounding the use of rapid shot and manyshot together. I posted a thread about it here.

As for Pathfinder RPG, can someone summarize for us where we've landed with this thread. What is our current Pathfinder RPG understanding, please? Thanks.
—Pax


In Pathfinder, you can use manyshot and rapid shot together.

When you do, your first shot shoots two arrows, your all shots suffer a -2 penalty and you gain one extra attack at highest attack bonus.

In 3.5 you can't use manyshot with rapid shot.

Sovereign Court

Lehmuska wrote:

In Pathfinder, you can use manyshot and rapid shot together.

When you do, your first shot shoots two arrows, your all shots suffer a -2 penalty and you gain one extra attack at highest attack bonus.

In 3.5 you can't use manyshot with rapid shot.

Am i the only one who thinks this is broken???

Last night the party's 6th level ranger was firing 4 arrows per round at his favored enemies and (assuming they all hit, and he is very good, so most did) doing 4d8+4(str)+16(favored enemy) damage - that is an AVERAGE of 36 point of damage per round for a 6th level character!!! - This is in a campaign where most of his encounters will be against his favored enemy (Second Darkness...). He was an unstoppable killing machine and had more kills than the rest of the party combined.

I don't mind the change in action type, or the fact that it can be combined with rapid shot, but why was the -4 removed????


kitenerd wrote:

Am i the only one who thinks this is broken???

Last night the party's 6th level ranger was firing 4 arrows per round at his favored enemies and (assuming they all hit, and he is very good, so most did) doing 4d8+4(str)+16(favored enemy) damage - that is an AVERAGE of 36 point of damage per round for a 6th level character!!! - This is in a campaign where most of his encounters will be against his favored enemy (Second Darkness...). He was an unstoppable killing machine and had more kills than the rest of the party combined.

I think it is quite strong, but not broken. And half that damage was from favored enemy (I can guess which one since I'm running Second Darkness with an archer Ranger right now...). Against anyone else, he'd do 20 points per round... that's not high at all for 6th level.


kitenerd wrote:

Am i the only one who thinks this is broken???

Last night the party's 6th level ranger was firing 4 arrows per round at his favored enemies and (assuming they all hit, and he is very good, so most did) doing 4d8+4(str)+16(favored enemy) damage - that is an AVERAGE of 36 point of damage per round for a 6th level character!!! - This is in a campaign where most of his encounters will be against his favored enemy (Second Darkness...). He was an unstoppable killing machine and had more kills than the rest of the party combined.

I don't mind the change in action type, or the fact that it can be combined with rapid shot, but why was the -4 removed????

It's powerful, yes. But broken? Depends on where you set the average power level. Unfortunately, now that there's virtually no way to get any decent damage on a single attack compared to a full attack, archers will be married to their full attacks and 5' steps.

Ranger archers doubly so, since they can take improved precise shot at 6th level and forget about cover and concealment. They don't have to move around to get that clear shot when they can just full attack round after round after round.

Sovereign Court

kitenerd wrote:
Lehmuska wrote:

In Pathfinder, you can use manyshot and rapid shot together.

When you do, your first shot shoots two arrows, your all shots suffer a -2 penalty and you gain one extra attack at highest attack bonus.

In 3.5 you can't use manyshot with rapid shot.

Am i the only one who thinks this is broken???

Last night the party's 6th level ranger was firing 4 arrows per round at his favored enemies and (assuming they all hit, and he is very good, so most did) doing 4d8+4(str)+16(favored enemy) damage - that is an AVERAGE of 36 point of damage per round for a 6th level character!!! - This is in a campaign where most of his encounters will be against his favored enemy (Second Darkness...). He was an unstoppable killing machine and had more kills than the rest of the party combined.

I don't mind the change in action type, or the fact that it can be combined with rapid shot, but why was the -4 removed????

Still a -2, and it costs two feats. I would discount the favored enemy bonus when looking at whether it's broken, since that's a circumstance that won't always apply. You're left with a much smaller amount of average damage after that, one that's probably on par or subpar compared to casters of the same level.

Dark Archive

kitenerd wrote:


Am i the only one who thinks this is broken???

Last night the party's 6th level ranger was firing 4 arrows per round at his favored enemies and (assuming they all hit, and he is very good, so most did) doing 4d8+4(str)+16(favored enemy) damage - that is an AVERAGE of 36 point of damage per round for a 6th level character!!! - This is in a campaign where most of his encounters will be against his favored enemy (Second Darkness...). He was an unstoppable killing machine and had more kills than the rest of the party combined.

I don't mind the change in action type, or the fact that it can be combined with rapid shot, but why was the -4 removed????

It's nice, but it isn't broken at all. A 6th level fighter with a strength of 18 will deal 2d6+15 points of damage with each attack if he powerattacks with a greatsword. If both of his attacks hit, that's an average damage of 44 points per round. He'll also be able to make attacks of opportunity, something that the ranged attacker would not be able to do.

The -4 was removed because it's no longer a standard action. Otherwise it would be a rather bad feat. At the moment, ranged, TWF, THF and weapon and shield are rather nicely balanced.

And a ranger is supposed to shine while fighting his favored enemy.

Sovereign Court

Jadeite wrote:


And a ranger is supposed to shine while fighting his favored enemy.

I appreciate everyones thoughts on this. After a bit of relative figuring, i came to many of the same conclusions. I found that even a rogue two weapon fighting with a flank can deal close to 40 in a full round action, and the fighter can do it every round and move as well.

It was just shocking to see the overnight transformation of the ranger. Suddenly he had an extra attack, an extra arrow and his favored enemy bonus was getting added in 4 times a round. He was unstoppable. Great for him, it was definitely his epic night and he earned a significant amount of credibility with the rest of the party. Terrible for the GM... i wasn't able to cause any havoc at all :(


Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been covered elsewhere but can you stack rapid shot with manyshot?

Also, does rapid shot still work as in 3.5? The extra attack is at your highest BA?

Has there been any official word on this issue?


The Grandfather wrote:
Javell DeLeon wrote:

I'm not sure if this has been covered elsewhere but can you stack rapid shot with manyshot?

Also, does rapid shot still work as in 3.5? The extra attack is at your highest BA?

Has there been any official word on this issue?

I'm not official, but here's a thought. Have you ever made an extra attack that is not at highest BAB, unless the ability that allows you to do the attack specifically stated that you don't do it at your highest BAB?


One friend have a problem with these feats, It will be great any oficial word about this for finish the discussion with his players.


Believe it or not, playing at a con this weekend, ran into a player who refused to use Manyshot and Rapid Shot together, and when I asked him why not, he said it was illegal as they both "modify" a full attack action... I told him he was crazy, but he said that as a GM he doesn't let his players use it, and he's a PFS GM... and he said he thought he saw something in a FAQ.

Please, since there's still a bit of confusion around, can we take a moment to add it to the FAQ that yes indeed, they both work just fine together?


rangerjeff wrote:

Believe it or not, playing at a con this weekend, ran into a player who refused to use Manyshot and Rapid Shot together, and when I asked him why not, he said it was illegal as they both "modify" a full attack action... I told him he was crazy, but he said that as a GM he doesn't let his players use it, and he's a PFS GM... and he said he thought he saw something in a FAQ.

Please, since there's still a bit of confusion around, can we take a moment to add it to the FAQ that yes indeed, they both work just fine together?

Wow... you just used True Resurrection. This thread has been dead a long time.


Yeah, I know, wish I could have let it RIP, but evidently not, as the thought of a PFS GM disallowing something like this irks me so much... that I just had to raise the dead.

But no need to comment just to say wow dead thread...

Guess I'll just point the guy to the relevant section of the Help/FAQ, where there clearly is no FAQ saying you can't use these together...


rangerjeff, I suggest going over his head to the PFS superiors if it comes down to it. This is so clearly not an issue anymore that I am surprised anyone thinks that you cannot use them together.

BTW, ask him if you can combine Haste with Rapid Shot or Manyshot. If he says yes ask him why and then explain that all three use the exact same language.

All three start with: "When making a full attack action"


Does he also not allow power attack and Weapon Specialization on standard actions? If they were supposed to be restricted they wouldn't just be feats, but would say as a swift action or something or cannot be used in conjunction. When does it say you can't stack multiple feats to a full round?


My apologies. I was the player in question refusing to combine the two as I think it is incorrect. I will admit to having thought of Rapid shot and Many shot as 2 different Full Round actions. I have never actually ran a table with the two feats being combined, but based on the feedback here I'll allow others to play their characters in such a fashion. I'm willing to reconsider how I'm running my character if you can provide a reference to prove to me that I'm not cheating.


Kalador101, you are not cheating. The reason is that both Rapid Shot and Manyshot state "When making a full attack action..." so anytime you are making a full attack action those feats apply if there is no wording to the contrary.

However, if something states it is a Full-Round Action (such as Shot on the Run) you cannot combine it with a different kind of Full-round action such as a Full-Attack action.
Here are some examples of feats that are all full-round actions and thus cannot be combined with other full-round actions (such as the Full-attack action):
Dazzling Display, Shot on the Run, and Spring Attack.

With all of that said, because of Manyshot, Rapid Shot, etc, and the ability to almost always use full-attack actions archers are generally considered to be one of the most "effective" (read: highest) damage builds in the game.
If your GM is not prepared for that level of damage output limiting yourself is not necessarily a bad thing. My own Ranger (level 10) still doesn't have Manyshot because I am trying to keep his combat contribution on par with the rest of the group.


Hello Gauss,

I think you are misunderstanding. I as a player was arguing that I wasn't allowed to combine the two when the GM was saying he didn't see why I couldn't. I do run, but I'm likely to be significantly stricter in my interpretations on my own characters than on others. I'll take a closer looking at the exact wording of those feats, but based on your feedback, I'm likely to reverse my opinion.

If I had been running, I'd likely had allowed it and looked it up later on. As a player, I'm more likely to disallow myself(not others, just me) and look it up later. I've been only playing PFS for around 6 months (before that it was D&D 3.5 and 4th) and I do not want to develop any bad habits. I regret being the cause of necromancy in the forums.

Regards,

1 to 50 of 59 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Rapid shot and manyshot All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.