Does anyone else see how silly this just got?
I agree, this has gotten rather absurd and should be left up to the GM.
I got the "no x4 claws", part.
How one Longspear, is more than two Daggers, makes no sense to me, in any rules context.
I really need to have a better explanation, as I have no real way to make this so, in my mind.
I don't think the spear, 2xclaws should be an issue.
Yeah, can't remember the exact quote from SKR. But it amounted to, "The intent was not to create twf greatsword wielding maniacs".Regarding manufactured weapons, the rules assume you have two "hands" worth of actions. You can wield two one-handed weapons, or one two-handed weapon.
You cannot wield two two-handed weapons, regardless of how many actual hands you have.
Found it.
The intent is that you have an extra arm for holding stuff, not to turn you into a double-greatsword-wielding maniac.
The vestigial limb is also not giving you any extra actions. For example, a normal character can use twf to attack with a manufactured weapon in one hand and one unarmed strike, whether that's a punch, kick, or headbutt. He doesn't get multiple extra unarmed strikes per round just because he has an arm, two legs, and a head free. Therefore, you don't get any extra attacks just because you now have a vestigial arm, or two vestigial arms. You're still limited by the normal limitations of the attack sequence.
|
Outside of the Claw attacks, SKR has explained how it functions, as I had always assumed it did.
Still, there are some who see any use of the arms, that doesn't cripple you, and give less actions, with a response of "go screw yourself".
If that's your view, houserule it, and never see it's use again.
Read everything he said, though. The only reason the four-armed character is getting 5 attacks is because it was capable of getting that same number of attacks when it had two arms.Because a two-armed character would not be capable of making 4 claw attacks.Where is that restriction coming from? The rule was that the character could not make more attacks through Vestigial Arms than he could without. It did not say anything about what kind of attacks those were.
A two armed character couldn't make two dagger attacks and two claw attacks either, but SKR specifically called that out as doable.
That's exactly my point. The character in my example was also capable of making 5 attacks (either kick/kick/claw/claw/bite or in the second example, beard/spikes/claw/claw/bite) before the extra arms.
Claw x4/Bite is 5 attacks. Why is that not allowed but Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite is?
|
|
Read everything he said, though. The only reason the four-armed character is getting 5 attacks is because it was capable of getting that same number of attacks when it had two arms.Because a two-armed character would not be capable of making 4 claw attacks.Where is that restriction coming from? The rule was that the character could not make more attacks through Vestigial Arms than he could without. It did not say anything about what kind of attacks those were.
A two armed character couldn't make two dagger attacks and two claw attacks either, but SKR specifically called that out as doable.
That's exactly my point. The character in my example was also capable of making 5 attacks (either kick/kick/claw/claw/bite or in the second example, beard/spikes/claw/claw/bite) before the extra arms.
Claw x4/Bite is 5 attacks. Why is that not allowed but Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite is?
I am not too sure either.
Also, I don't think the beard/bite thing works. Same "limb" thing.
Sub boot blade, and you're good though.
Though maybe I got this wrong? Is it allowed to replace an off-hand attack or iterative attack with a natural attack instead? Do you apply the same penalties, or just replace the attack outright?
As it currently stands there are no penalties for the claw claw claw claw bite attack routine. Since you're not actually using dual wielding and not actually using your natural weapons as offhand weapons you don't take the -2 or the -5 for doing so.
|
Without vestigial arms, you would only have 2 claws. That doesn't change when you add vestigial arms, you don't get to choose to have 4 claws any more than you can have 2 bite attacks with a toothy barbarian halforc.
Vestigial arms can be used to hold weapons and attack with them instead of using other attacks, but they can't be used to make claw attacks, even if you later take feral mutagen, because you have to figure how your number of attacks *without* the vestigial arms (effectively, they are added last).
So feral mutagen is a wasted discovery on a tengu with the right racial features, since he already has 2 claws and 1 bite. 4x claw attacks are a no go. And you can do a couple unarmed strikes with -4 and -8 penalties.
Now, if you have vestigial arms, you can wield a couple of daggers in them, and do dagger(-4)/dagger(-8)/claw(-5)/claw(-5)/bite(-5), but you don't have 4 claw attacks.
This pretty much sums up how I understand it.
Claw x4/Bite is 5 attacks. Why is that not allowed but Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite is?
+0/+0/+0/+0/+0 (all full STR) is loads better than -2/-2/-5/-5/-5 (with only one at full STR). That's why you shouldn't be able to do 4xClaw/Bite.
You can't do it because without the Vestigial Arms, you can't make 5 natural attacks. Since Vestigial Arms doesn't let you make a number of attacks after taking it that you couldn't take before taking it, you can't use it to increase the number of natural attacks you make in a round. So, even though you can typically make "all of your natural attacks", "all of them (2)" is different (less than) "all of them (4)". You're limited to the number you had prior to Vestigial Arms.
|
|
Sub boot blade, and you're good though.
Given the current trend of errata, I'm pretty sure that boot blade will inevitably be fixed so that it occupies your "off-hand" (man they need to clean up their terminology in the next iteration of the rules). They seem be to steering away from creative ways of holding weapons to gain extra attacks.
I think I had a brainfart reading SKR's post last night (thank you helpful shamrock). I'll take another whack at it when more caffinated.
|
|
I got the "no x4 claws", part.
How one Longspear, is more than two Daggers, makes no sense to me, in any rules context.
I really need to have a better explanation, as I have no real way to make this so, in my mind.
Because using a two-handed weapon "consumes" both a main-hand and an off-hand attack. So you may only roll the dice once, but using the longspear uses, in this case, two of the alchemists' attacks.
Note that it's not consuming two iterative attacks, and if you weren't entitled to an off-hand attack you could still use the spear. For example, an alchemist with BAB 6 but not Improved TWF could attack with +6dagger/+6dagger/+1spear, or +6spear/+1dagger.
Claws have nothing to do with the "off-hand", or iterative attacks.
In fact, your "off-hand" comment only supports combining a Longspear attack with claws, as we already know you can make an attack with a dagger, and an off-hand attack with another dagger, in addition to claw attacks.
This would be so much easier if PDT would just issue an errata on how natural attacks and manufactured weapons interacted so that these silly frackin builds weren't an issue. The whole thing just needs to be sat down and reconsidered in my opinion so that this crap can be simplified and this BS can all go away.
|
|
This would be so much easier if PDT would just issue an errata on how natural attacks and manufactured weapons interacted so that these silly frackin builds weren't an issue. The whole thing just needs to be sat down and reconsidered in my opinion so that this crap can be simplified and this BS can all go away.
Actually, the rules regarding mixing the two are quite clear.
What exactly are you confused about?
Actually, the rules regarding mixing the two are quite clear.
What exactly are you confused about?
I think it is less confusing as it is undesired.
I personally don't like the thought that claw/claw/bite/unarmed/unarmed is allowed on a Tengu Monk/Alchemist.
I actually am not a fan of the UAS/UAS/Claw/Claw/Bite thing, either. But that appears to be allowable by RAW.
Maybe my Natural Weapon Tiefling Ranger should take a one level dip into Monk?
|
|
Actually, the rules regarding mixing the two are quite clear.
What exactly are you confused about?
I think it is less confusing as it is undesired.
I personally don't like the thought that claw/claw/bite/unarmed/unarmed is allowed on a Tengu Monk/Alchemist.
The massive penalties and the fact that you are getting a total of x2 strength to damage, which is the same as two claw attacks, balances it.
Actually, the rules regarding mixing the two are quite clear.
What exactly are you confused about?
I think it is less confusing as it is undesired.
I personally don't like the thought that claw/claw/bite/unarmed/unarmed is allowed on a Tengu Monk/Alchemist.
BINGO!
I am not confused by the rules. I just don't think they funciton as desired on intended by Paizo. I think they heldover the system from 3.5, and that it turns out it doesn't work so well or fit in line with what they actually desire. Thats why I said I'd like to see an ERRATA (a change in the rules) not a FAQ (which should only be a clarification of the rules).
I don't like any of this business of tengu getting claw/claw/unarmed strike/unarmed strike. It's silly to me and I already house rule against it. Based on the rulings the PDT have made and the opinions expressed by SKR and others I believe they agree with me.
... Did you just see the number "3.5" and assume I was talking about editions? I wasn't.
Anyway, It'd still total x3.0 damage instead of the x2.0 you indicated before. Again, the character has hefty penalties to their attacks to balance, but there it is.
No, I think that 3.5 mention was in response to Claxon.
|
|
No, I think that 3.5 mention was in response to Claxon.... Did you just see the number "3.5" and assume I was talking about editions? I wasn't.
Anyway, It'd still total x3.0 damage instead of the x2.0 you indicated before. Again, the character has hefty penalties to their attacks to balance, but there it is.
Yes.
Off-hand attacks only receive half strength to damage.
Also, the natural attack rules in general, are different from 3.5.
It's been so long since I played I guess I don't remember accurately.
So here is something about SKR post that is bothering me.
A tengu with IUS and 2 vestitial arms can make a Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite attack routine.
Can any race with feral mutagen and IUS can get this routine as well?
Is IUS strictly required since you are not making any unarmed strikes?
The part that is bugging me is that it seems that we are saying that you have to take the IUS feat just so you can get 2 more dagger attacks, which seems like a really odd and counter intuative feat tax.
|
First of all, unarmed strike can't be *any* body part you want. It's undefined for non-monks, but the monk class specifically calls out "a monk's [unarmed] attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet," so it's reasonable that non-monks have to follow a similar restriction (otherwise the non-monk has more versatile unarmed strike options, which is silly).
So a human holding a barrel with his could make a kick or knee unarmed strike (his arms are busy holding the barrel, so no fists or elbows). If he had TWF, he could make two unarmed strikes, one with the left leg and one with the right leg.
So I had two questions on this one. Specifically, related to several quotes below:
A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet.
This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full.
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, ...
Now, if we go off of what you said above, then parts of these three quotes stop making sense.
So here is something about SKR post that is bothering me.
A tengu with IUS and 2 vestitial arms can make a Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite attack routine.
Can any race with feral mutagen and IUS can get this routine as well?
Is IUS strictly required since you are not making any unarmed strikes?
The part that is bugging me is that it seems that we are saying that you have to take the IUS feat just so you can get 2 more dagger attacks, which seems like a really odd and counter intuative feat tax.
Any creature can make unarmed strikes, you just provoke doing it without the feat. Conceivably, any character can weapon/weapon/claw/claw/bite.
Was there ever an explicit ruling on using the vestigial arm(s) to wield two-handed weapons? I know SKR mentioned that wasn't the intent.
The explicit ruling would be this one that says, basically, you can't do anything after Vestigial Arms that you couldn't do before (paraphrasing, obviously). You couldn't two-hand two separate weapons before VA, so you can't afterwards. Along with the THW/TWF FAQ, the suggestion is that fighting with a THW is the equivalent of fighting with two one-handed/light weapons. Attacking with two THW would then be like attacking with four one-handed/light weapons.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Was there ever an explicit ruling on using the vestigial arm(s) to wield two-handed weapons? I know SKR mentioned that wasn't the intent.The explicit ruling would be this one that says, basically, you can't do anything after Vestigial Arms that you couldn't do before (paraphrasing, obviously). You couldn't two-hand two separate weapons before VA, so you can't afterwards.
No, this ruling is only about the number of attacks having to be the same whether you had VA or not, not that you can't do anything with it that you couldn't do without it. For example, a normal human can't use a greatsword and a heavy shield at the same time, but as long as you don't take any extra attacks you could do so with Vestigial Arm.
No, this ruling is only about the number of attacks having to be the same whether you had VA or not, not that you can't do anything with it that you couldn't do without it. For example, a normal human can't use a greatsword and a heavy shield at the same time, but as long as you don't take any extra attacks you could do so with Vestigial Arm.Was there ever an explicit ruling on using the vestigial arm(s) to wield two-handed weapons? I know SKR mentioned that wasn't the intent.The explicit ruling would be this one that says, basically, you can't do anything after Vestigial Arms that you couldn't do before (paraphrasing, obviously). You couldn't two-hand two separate weapons before VA, so you can't afterwards.
Sure. I was being a bit loose. But the part of my post you excised dealt with why this FAQ (in conjunction with another) implies that you cannot TWF with THW.
I didn't really want to dive into the handedness/exertion stuff, but that's basically what it boils down to. You don't get extra "hands" to make additional attacks with, which is what would be required to TWF with THW. Hands being used metaphorically here, of course.
Claw x4/Bite is 5 attacks. Why is that not allowed but Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite is?+0/+0/+0/+0/+0 (all full STR) is loads better than -2/-2/-5/-5/-5 (with only one at full STR). That's why you shouldn't be able to do 4xClaw/Bite.
There are a lot of things that shouldn't be in Pathfinder, but are anyway, so I understand why you want me to be wrong, but I don't think I am.
You can't do it because without the Vestigial Arms, you can't make 5 natural attacks. Since Vestigial Arms doesn't let you make a number of attacks after taking it that you couldn't take before taking it, you can't use it to increase the number of natural attacks you make in a round.
It doesn't separate manufactured or natural attacks in any way. It simply says "attacks" and only cares about the number. This character can make 5 attacks before the arms, and is still making 5 afterwards. That should be all there is to it, and I've yet to see anything actually relating to the ability or FAQ ruling that says there is anything more.
Vestigial Arms + Feral Mutagen + Race with Claws = 5 attacks as long as you're wielding two non-hand weapons (including IUS). And, well, obviously that is a silly restriction.
My point here is that the Developers are using "extra attacks" as if there's some place that tells you how many attacks you can make. It's just not true. Everyone can dual wield, for example, with or without a feat. Really, unarmed strikes don't require a feat, and you can attack with a slotless weapon non-proficiently. So, really, the restriction is meaningless.
Here's what they meant:
"A Vestigial Arm does not qualify you for multi-weapon fighting."
Done. Simple. There's no reason to add all this extra language explaining away that they don't want people making extra weapon attacks. That's literally all it takes. It's trickier for the tentacle, of course, but I can't really figure out what the point of the tentacle is (vs. say, the arm).
Any creature can make unarmed strikes, you just provoke doing it without the feat. Conceivably, any character can weapon/weapon/claw/claw/bite.So here is something about SKR post that is bothering me.
A tengu with IUS and 2 vestitial arms can make a Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite attack routine.
Can any race with feral mutagen and IUS can get this routine as well?
Is IUS strictly required since you are not making any unarmed strikes?
The part that is bugging me is that it seems that we are saying that you have to take the IUS feat just so you can get 2 more dagger attacks, which seems like a really odd and counter intuative feat tax.
Good point. So basically, anyone can use their normal weapon attacks(TWF or Two-handed), and claw/claw/bite in the same full attack.
The FAQ does not say anywhere that you must keep the same type of attack(manufactured vs natural), so based on the ruling is there any precedence for disallowing Claw/Claw/Claw/Claw/Bite?
You realize the whole point of these threads that lead to this FAQ was people asking whether you could use Feral Mutagen in conjunction with Vestigial Arms to make four claw attacks? That is literally the only thing that people were still arguing about.
Beyond that, if you can make all of your natural attacks, why could you then not combine them with two more UAS, just like normal? Then you could have 7 attacks. But which two are you not allowed to make? The two that are above and beyond what you could do prior to taking Vestigial Arms. That would be the two extra claw attacks.
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).
***
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.
The restrictions are the same for both discoveries. Despite what natural weapons ordinarily allow a character to do, these natural weapons do not necessarily follow the same rules that say ordinarily you can attack all of the natural weapons you have available.
Anyway, I wasn't asking about two-weapon fighting with a two-handed weapon necessarily. For instance, is there any reason you couldn't make two claw attacks with your normal arms, then use your vestigial arms to make iterative attacks with a two-handed sword (replacing the iterative attacks you could be making with an unarmed strike).
That's perfectly fine (assuming just one THW, of course ;) ). Basically, you've got four limbs available to make two claw attacks and two manufactured weapon attacks/UAS, if you want to go that far.
Since it's ordinarily something that can be done by any character (which claws), whether the character has vestigial arms or not, it's something that a character with vestigial arms can do.
Any creature can make unarmed strikes, you just provoke doing it without the feat. Conceivably, any character can weapon/weapon/claw/claw/bite.So here is something about SKR post that is bothering me.
A tengu with IUS and 2 vestitial arms can make a Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite attack routine.
Can any race with feral mutagen and IUS can get this routine as well?
Is IUS strictly required since you are not making any unarmed strikes?
The part that is bugging me is that it seems that we are saying that you have to take the IUS feat just so you can get 2 more dagger attacks, which seems like a really odd and counter intuative feat tax.
Good point. So basically, anyone can use their normal weapon attacks(TWF or Two-handed), and claw/claw/bite in the same full attack.
The FAQ does not say anywhere that you must keep the same type of attack(manufactured vs natural), so based on the ruling is there any precedence for disallowing Claw/Claw/Claw/Claw/Bite?
Honestly, that's basically the question that led to this whole recent fervor: whether you can get 4xClaw with VA and Feral Mutagen.
The strongest reasoning against it is that you cannot make four natural claw attacks prior to getting VA, so you cannot after, either. That would be adding two extra natural attacks. You can do weapon/weapon/claw/claw because anybody can do that. Some people disagree with that, though. They argue that it's simply a numbers game. Since the language in the FAQ specifically calls out that VA and Tentacle aren't really supposed to be like standard natural attacks, I find that argument unpersuasive.
Any creature can make unarmed strikes, you just provoke doing it without the feat. Conceivably, any character can weapon/weapon/claw/claw/bite.So here is something about SKR post that is bothering me.
A tengu with IUS and 2 vestitial arms can make a Dagger/Dagger/Claw/Claw/Bite attack routine.
Can any race with feral mutagen and IUS can get this routine as well?
Is IUS strictly required since you are not making any unarmed strikes?
The part that is bugging me is that it seems that we are saying that you have to take the IUS feat just so you can get 2 more dagger attacks, which seems like a really odd and counter intuative feat tax.
Good point. So basically, anyone can use their normal weapon attacks(TWF or Two-handed), and claw/claw/bite in the same full attack.
The FAQ does not say anywhere that you must keep the same type of attack(manufactured vs natural), so based on the ruling is there any precedence for disallowing Claw/Claw/Claw/Claw/Bite?
Honestly, that's basically the question that led to this whole recent fervor: whether you can get 4xClaw with VA and Feral Mutagen.
The strongest reasoning against it is that you cannot make four natural claw attacks prior to getting VA, so you cannot after, either. That would be adding two extra natural attacks. You can do weapon/weapon/claw/claw because anybody can do that. Some people disagree with that, though. They argue that it's simply a numbers game. Since the language in the FAQ specifically calls out that VA and Tentacle aren't really supposed to be like standard natural attacks, I find that argument unpersuasive.
I understand, but the actual FAQ say you cannot get more attacks without saying anything about types of attacks. thus, Claw/Claw/Claw/Claw/Bite is 5 attacks. Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bit is 5 attacks. In the strictest sense, you are not gaining any attacks. You ARE however changing the types of attacks from manufactured to natural. I think the intent may have been to disallow it, but I feel the wording falls short of that goal.
The FAQ does not say anywhere that you must keep the same type of attack(manufactured vs natural), so based on the ruling is there any precedence for disallowing Claw/Claw/Claw/Claw/Bite?
The line in the faq is an alchemist using two weapon fighting etc.
'Once you are using claw claw claw claw bite you're not using two weapon fighting anymore.
Ok, hold on. I just got here, and I'm not quite sure what's going on.
The new FAQ says:
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...it also says
The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws..
So left hand weapon attack, right hand weapon attack, vestigial arm weapon attack (or weapon/weapon/weapon) is no go; same with left hand claw attack, right hand claw attack, vestigial arm weapon attack (weapon/claw/claw).
But, a few posts latter SKR says that Nefreet's weapon/weapon/bite/claw/claw is legit, which means that with only one vestigial arm and no bite weapon/claw/claw is also legit.
This completely contradicts the FAQ.
What am I missing?
What am I missing?
That the devs have a very clear idea of what they want, but they seem unable to put it into text.
What they seem to want is an ability that functions one way in the hands of a novice player and another in the hands of an optimizer.
They seem to want you to be able to do suboptimal, but "cool," stuff, like using two daggers with a shield while holding a potion. They absolutely do not want you to be able to make an optimized natural attacker that handily outdoes the classes designed to fight in melee.
They simply have not yet found the way to word the ability to get the divider they want, and are stuck relying on trying to shame the optimizers into quiescence.
Ok, hold on. I just got here, and I'm not quite sure what's going on.
The new FAQ says: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...it also saysThe exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws..So left hand weapon attack, right hand weapon attack, vestigial arm weapon attack (or weapon/weapon/weapon) is no go; same with left hand claw attack, right hand claw attack, vestigial arm weapon attack (weapon/claw/claw).
But, a few posts latter SKR says that Nefreet's weapon/weapon/bite/claw/claw is legit, which means that with only one vestigial arm and no bite weapon/claw/claw is also legit.
This completely contradicts the FAQ.
What am I missing?
+1
I am totally confused. We got one faq saying with vestigial arms, if we use an attack with one of those arms we lose an attack with our main arms that we couldn't do dagger dagger claw claw bite with it. Then we got another person saying its legal to do so......Which one is right?
What am I missing?That the devs have a very clear idea of what they want, but they seem unable to put it into text.
What they seem to want is an ability that functions one way in the hands of a novice player and another in the hands of an optimizer.
They seem to want you to be able to do suboptimal, but "cool," stuff, like using two daggers with a shield while holding a potion. They absolutely do not want you to be able to make an optimized natural attacker that handily outdoes the classes designed to fight in melee.
They simply have not yet found the way to word the ability to get the divider they want, and are stuck relying on trying to shame the optimizers into quiescence.
Well, I suppose this is one way to interpret things.
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
Actually, reading this again this does address the 4xClaws question.
You cannot make two attacks with manufactured weapons, then make another attack with a manufactured weapon with a Vestigial Arm. It then says, "The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs". To me that means you cannot make two attacks with natural weapons with your normal hands, then make another attack with a natural weapon associated with a Vestigial Arm.
So the FAQ does actually cover that case.
|
|
Now, I don't like how you can have claws on all four hands, but not attack with them, but I understand why.
Now, trying to limit the number of manufactured attacks, to be less than a two armed PC, is just silly.
I don't really see that restriction in the FAQ, and I don't know where people are getting it.