AoMF does not even need to have an enhancement bonus in order to have special weapon abilities.
True as well.
From the PRD, I can see that the AoMF can get as high as +5, no more. We could extrapolate this up to +10 but that would be a house rule.
With +5, you can have any number of special properties (as long as their cost doesn't get over +5) without even giving it the starting +1. However, by having at least +2 from special properties, you could never make an AoMF able to bypass adamantine DR. And GMF doesn't stack with AoMF. And, as said before, GMF doesn't help to bypass DR (from alignment, cold iron, silver, and adamantine) as a magical weapon would.
And... sorry for the threadjack.
You don't become an ape. You might say you become an ape with the soul / mind of a druid. You still keep your feats, skill ranks, base save bonus, BAB and Class Features such as Weapon and Armor Proficiency unless the Class Features depend upon form. An ape has a humanoid form.You could always wildshape into a dire ape and still wield the shield...Is there an actual rule or ruling somewhere that says apes can use weapons, or have people just assumed that they can because their paws seem closer to human hands than other animals'?
It's this last line that I disagree with. An ape is an animal, not a humanoid; certainly the rules under the "ape" description in the bestiary don't indicate any greater ability to use weapons than a wolf.
RAW, I don't think an ape is considered to have hands as a humanoid does, and I don't think a wildshaped ape can wield weapons.I feel like if an ape was the exception to the rule that you can't wildshape into animals and still wield weapons, it would appear in the rules somewhere. Is there a rule I'm missing? Have the Rulegivers proclaimed on this question?
You don't become an ape. You might say you become an ape with the soul / mind of a druid. You still keep your feats, skill ranks, base save bonus, BAB and Class Features such as Weapon and Armor Proficiency unless the Class Features depend upon form. An ape has a humanoid form.You could always wildshape into a dire ape and still wield the shield...Is there an actual rule or ruling somewhere that says apes can use weapons, or have people just assumed that they can because their paws seem closer to human hands than other animals'?It's this last line that I disagree with. An ape is an animal, not a humanoid; certainly the rules under the "ape" description in the bestiary don't indicate any greater ability to use weapons than a wolf.
RAW, I don't think an ape is considered to have hands as a humanoid does, and I don't think a wildshaped ape can wield weapons.
I feel like if an ape was the exception to the rule that you can't wildshape into animals and still wield weapons, it would appear in the rules somewhere. Is there a rule I'm missing? Have the Rulegivers proclaimed on this question?
Yea, but apes have hands, opposable thumbs and use tools. Apart from making fancy ashtrays an ape would be able to pick a sword and wave it around. If he had the smarts he would be able to turn poacher's hands into ashtrays for itself.
Is this your houserule, or is there anything in RAW backing you up?
Is this your houserule, or is there anything in RAW backing you up?
Its called common sense and a little knowledge of basic anatomy.
Its called common sense and a little knowledge of basic anatomy.
In other words -- no RAW to back it up; it's a houserule. Thanks for the clarification.
Its called common sense and a little knowledge of basic anatomy.In other words -- no RAW to back it up; it's a houserule. Thanks for the clarification.
Bwhahahahaha!
Its in the rules where the grass is green and the sky blue. Next to the bit which says iron rusts if left in the rain. Elephants can't climb trees or jump 5'. Ooo wait it doesn't say so in the rules so they can!Thanks for clearing that up.
*walks away shaking head*
Its in the rules where the grass is green and the sky blue. Next to the bit which says iron rusts if left in the rain. Elephants can't climb trees or jump 5'. Ooo wait it doesn't say so in the rules so they can!Its called common sense and a little knowledge of basic anatomy.In other words -- no RAW to back it up; it's a houserule. Thanks for the clarification.
I can show you plenty of real-world examples where grass is usually green and the sky is usually blue.
Can you show me even a single real-world example of a gorilla wielding a sword as well as a person? The answer, by the way, is no. Their arms and hands aren't set up for it; it would be incredibly awkward, and if the game were designed around the real world I would certainly not allow itAnd since you're going to allow this rule for "common sense", how far do you take it? All animals with grasping hands? Raccoons? Bears? Eagles? Or only ones with opposable thumbs? How opposable? There's an incredible range of anatomy of forelimbs in the animal kingdom.
How much do you penalize the ape's movement while wielding weapons? You're aware they walk on all fours, right? And move much, much more slowly on their back legs? Did you take that into account with your "common sense" houserule?
We have RAW because "common sense" isn't going to give a workable answer here, as in many cases. The idea of a gorilla wielding a sword and shield as well as a human is remarkably stupid; the idea that it's obvious that they should be able to is moreso. Gorillas are simple tool-users, but humanoids' upright posture and hind-only locamotion makes us uniquely suited for melee weapons. Apes don't come close.
I'll ask again -- any rules to back up your houserule?
... Elephants can't climb trees or jump 5'. Ooo wait it doesn't say so in the rules so they can!
...
Actually since an elephant has a Dex 10 it can make a 5' high jump (DC20) 5% of the time ;)
Actually since an elephant has a Dex 10 it can make a 5' high jump (DC20) 5% of the time ;)... Elephants can't climb trees or jump 5'. Ooo wait it doesn't say so in the rules so they can!
...
LOL!
Actually since an elephant has a Dex 10 it can make a 5' high jump (DC20) 5% of the time ;)... Elephants can't climb trees or jump 5'. Ooo wait it doesn't say so in the rules so they can!
...
Elephant has a base movement speed of 40, which gives a +4 racial bonus. So he actually makes it 1 out of 4 times.
Again, RAW is not reality, and common sense is not raw -- especially when it comes to physics and biology.
Can you show me even a single real-world example of a gorilla wielding a sword as well as a person? The answer, by the way, is no. Their arms and hands aren't set up for it; it would be incredibly awkward, and if the game were designed around the real world I would certainly not allow it
A gorilla have a gorilla brain. A human have an human brain.
A gorilla not wielding a sword as well as a person? It has nothing to to with their hands.Ever seen paralympics? Most of those athletes (or at least some of them) could beat any 'normal person'.
Edit:
There are painters and writers without hands that paint and write using their feat. And they are far more skilled than you and me.
Huh...wow...no! I don't think it does! "Humanoid" is a keyword in dnd/pf. It is a creature type. A humanoid "form", in this case, I think, likely refers to a polymorph that turns you into a humanoid. An ape is an animal. A polymorph to turn you into an ape turns you into an animal form.
Yes an ape is an animal because of it has an int score of 2.
"Humanoid" is a keyword in dnd/pf" Yes but what it means is not clear. But acording to James statement in another thread an ape with an int score of 3 or higher would not be an animal but a Humanoid.
/end of threadjack
It depends on CL (PRPG p.562).Trust me. It's a problem. GMF doesn't help overcomming DR good, Cold iron, Silver, etc.I don't see how even a high-level druid could defeat DR when wildshaped...and amulet of mighty fists
Besides... who needs to overcome DR if you just have a +20 to your damage roll? ;p
I was talking about GMF. At higher levels you can get a +3, holy. but that will cost you. Until then you will have a problem.
Even if you have a +3 holy what if you meat DR Lawful?The cleric can't cast align weapon on you
alomst end of threadjack?
Even if you have a +3 holy what if you meat DR Lawful?
Then you wait until CL 16 / +4 enhancement. Tough break!
...Even if you have a +3 holy what if you meat DR Lawful?
Not?
Honestly, if anyone everywhere could easily overcome any DR - why even put it in the game?
Monsters are balanced against their CR assuming that not every melee in the party has the means to overcome their damage reduction.
And to grapple or to trip you don't even need it...
Is this your houserule, or is there anything in RAW backing you up?
Is there something in RAW that says animals can't use weapons? I thought people were just using common sense.
You seem to be indicating animals not using weapons is actually a rule. I would be interested for you to point it out.
Why do apes become humanoids, but not horses? Purely an arbitrary distinction based on real-world common sense, or is there some sort of underlying rule that causes that result?
Humaniod = like a human
Intelligent apes - 2 arms, legs, 1 head, mouth, can use tools, can speak - yes, sounds human
Intelligent Horse - 0 arms, 4 legs, can not use tools - no, no human
Then you wait until CL 16 / +4 enhancement. Tough break!Even if you have a +3 holy what if you meat DR Lawful?
+4 won't help. It has to be +5 and....
Magic Fang , Greater
This spell functions like magic fang, except that the enhancement
bonus on attack and damage rolls is +1 per four caster levels
(maximum +5). This bonus does not allow a natural weapon or
unarmed strike to bypass damage reduction aside from magic.
Director of Games
|
| 4 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
There are a lot of issues floating around here, so I am going to go back to the original and answer that one.
When you wild shape, you should lose your shield bonus. I say should, because as of right now, the rules do not support this as written (although there is some wiggle room in the "require activation" language, in that shields must be wielded, but this is flimsy at best). I will endeavor to fix this issue in the next go around. Until then, it is GM call, but common sense (and a future correction) should indicate your direction.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Edit:
Thanks. :-)
"the rules do not support this as written"....does it matter? You are the
supreme ruler after all ;-)
There are a lot of issues floating around here, so I am going to go back to the original and answer that one.
When you wild shape, you should lose your shield bonus. I say should, because as of right now, the rules do not support this as written (although there is some wiggle room in the "require activation" language, in that shields must be wielded, but this is flimsy at best). I will endeavor to fix this issue in the next go around. Until then, it is GM call, but common sense (and a future correction) should indicate your direction.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thanks for the response Jason.
|
Director of Games
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Edit:
Thanks. :-)
"the rules do not support this as written"....does it matter? You are the
supreme ruler after all ;-)
I am, but in the end, your GM at the table calls the shots. Until I can fix it in a permanent manner, all I can do is tell you what my intent was (or was not as the case may be) and let your GM make the call.
I am here to clarify and clean up the system, your GM still has to run the game and the system will never cover every possibility (nor should it).
Anyway, I am sure that is a lot more serious than you intended, but I just thought I would go an clarify my position.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Edit:
Thanks. :-)
"the rules do not support this as written"....does it matter? You are the
supreme ruler after all ;-)
I am, but in the end, your GM at the table calls the shots. Until I can fix it in a permanent manner, all I can do is tell you what my intent was (or was not as the case may be) and let your GM make the call.
I hope that the fix involves armor and shield bonuses from actual armor and actual shields, rather than all armor and shield bonuses (from items such as bracers of armor, which currently do not work when wild shaped). Since the rest of the rules for this seem to imply that was the intent. If it wasn't, my bad :)
Don't worry. It's armor and shield bonuses from actual armor and actual shields (bracers of armor, mage armor and the shield spell are all of force effects). But I agree. The rules need to be rewritten. As they stand now no ac bonus from bracers of armor.
There are a lot of issues floating around here, so I am going to go back to the original and answer that one.
When you wild shape, you should lose your shield bonus. I say should, because as of right now, the rules do not support this as written (although there is some wiggle room in the "require activation" language, in that shields must be wielded, but this is flimsy at best). I will endeavor to fix this issue in the next go around. Until then, it is GM call, but common sense (and a future correction) should indicate your direction.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I don't remember seeing an official answer to this one so if everyone can FAQ the post I am replying to that would be great.
Ok... this topic got away from me before I saw it, but I want to point out something (note: I didn't read most posts)
Wild says that a character with a wilded armor OR shield retains armor bonus, that means that if I have a wild shield I can retain its bonus, cause its constant or whatever, AND my armor's bonus!
Obviously this is silly, and should point out that clearly it isn't intended to work exactly the way it is written and also it's obvioulsy implied that a shield bonus should not apply in wildshape.
When reading treeant's guides, remember that his title is "shameless optimizer".
Ok... this topic got away from me before I saw it, but I want to point out something (note: I didn't read most posts)
Wild says that a character with a wilded armor OR shield retains armor bonus, that means that if I have a wild shield I can retain its bonus, cause its constant or whatever, AND my armor's bonus!
Obviously this is silly, and should point out that clearly it isn't intended to work exactly the way it is written and also it's obvioulsy implied that a shield bonus should not apply in wildshape.
When reading treeant's guides, remember that his title is "shameless optimizer".
Jason actually says the shield does not count in wildshaped form in this very thread unless it has the Wild enhancement add, but Paizo's stance is that nothing is official unless it is in the FAQ or it has been errata'd. That is why I want to see it FAQ'd or errata'd. Jason coming here and saying how something works is good for me, but not for everyone. It has to specifically be listed under a heading of FAQ or errata.
PS:I always thought the shield was never meant to count. :)