Alchemist "Vestigial Arm" discovery question


Rules Questions

251 to 300 of 388 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Quantum Steve wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
jlighter wrote:
You can't wield a dagger with your feet.
Actually, you can. They're called Blade Boots.

So, this whole time when you were saying dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite, you really meant blade boot/blade boot/claw/claw/bite?

What a lot of unnecessary confusion. In the future, try to use the proper terms for things like weapons.

I do not understand your confusion.

Where do you think I mispoke?


The faq says a low lvl alchemist using twf only has 2 atks...just pointing that out

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Redneckdevil wrote:
The faq says a low lvl alchemist using twf only has 2 atks...just pointing that out

Yep.

That is true.
Two manufactured attacks.

It cannot reduce your attacks to less than a PC without Vestigial Arms could make.


Nefreet wrote:
Quantum Steve wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
jlighter wrote:
You can't wield a dagger with your feet.
Actually, you can. They're called Blade Boots.

So, this whole time when you were saying dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite, you really meant blade boot/blade boot/claw/claw/bite?

What a lot of unnecessary confusion. In the future, try to use the proper terms for things like weapons.

I do not understand your confusion.

Where do you think I mispoke?

When you referred to wielding daggers any of the numerous instances you mentioned a dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite routine, were you not referring to wielding those daggers with your feet i.e. blade boots?

If not, and you were referring to wielding traditional daggers in the traditional fashion, what was the point of your Blade Boot remark just there? Were you merely being argumentative? I don't understand.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

He is likely saying that a manufactured attack, is a manufactured attack.

Dagger, or Blade Boot, you get no more, or less.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
Redneckdevil wrote:
The faq says a low lvl alchemist using twf only has 2 atks...just pointing that out

Yep.

That is true.
Two manufactured attacks.

It cannot reduce your attacks to less than a PC without Vestigial Arms could make.

Correct. Now someone with vestigial arms gets the same amount of attacks with someone with 2 arms. Someone with 2 arms gets 5 atks when they use uas with their feet to get their 5 atks off, that's the same exact amount someone with 4 arms gets their 5 atks off...kick kick claw claw bite. Now a 2 arm person NOT using their feet only gets 3 atks off, a 4 armed from vestigial discovery not using their feet only gets 3 atks claw claw bite or weapon weapon bite etc etc.

The numbers don't go down or up, they stay the same inbhow they get their number of atks according to the faq. Vestigial arms doesn't let u use ALL 4 arms in a single atk sequence, says straight up in the faq.

And that is where I am confused with skr writing, because the faq says qith vestigial arms u CANNOT use all 4 arms in a single atk because without it u couldn't make an atk with 4 arms, but skr says that u do.

Which is right? The official faq fr om the pathfinder team or what skr has written?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
Redneckdevil wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Redneckdevil wrote:
The faq says a low lvl alchemist using twf only has 2 atks...just pointing that out

Yep.

That is true.
Two manufactured attacks.

It cannot reduce your attacks to less than a PC without Vestigial Arms could make.

Correct. Now someone with vestigial arms gets the same amount of attacks with someone with 2 arms. Someone with 2 arms gets 5 atks when they use uas with their feet to get their 5 atks off, that's the same exact amount someone with 4 arms gets their 5 atks off...kick kick claw claw bite. Now a 2 arm person NOT using their feet only gets 3 atks off, a 4 armed from vestigial discovery only gets 3 atks claw claw bite or weapon weapon bite etc etc.

The numbers don't go down or up, they stay the same inbhow they get their number of atks according to the faq. Vestigial arms doesn't let u use ALL 4 arms in a single atk sequence, says straight up in the faq.

And that is where I am confused with skr writing, because the faq says qith vestigial arms u CANNOT use all 4 arms in a single atk because without it u couldn't make an atk with 4 arms, but skr says that u do.

Which is right? The official faq fr om the pathfinder team or what skr has written?

The arms are not granting "extra" attacks with dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite, any more than boot blade/boot blade/claw/claw/bite.

That's two manufactured, and three natural.

Five attacks each.

Nothing extra.


Redneckdevil wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Redneckdevil wrote:
The faq says a low lvl alchemist using twf only has 2 atks...just pointing that out

Yep.

That is true.
Two manufactured attacks.

It cannot reduce your attacks to less than a PC without Vestigial Arms could make.

Correct. Now someone with vestigial arms gets the same amount of attacks with someone with 2 arms. Someone with 2 arms gets 5 atks when they use uas with their feet to get their 5 atks off, that's the same exact amount someone with 4 arms gets their 5 atks off...kick kick claw claw bite. Now a 2 arm person NOT using their feet only gets 3 atks off, a 4 armed from vestigial discovery not using their feet only gets 3 atks claw claw bite or weapon weapon bite etc etc.

The numbers don't go down or up, they stay the same inbhow they get their number of atks according to the faq. Vestigial arms doesn't let u use ALL 4 arms in a single atk sequence, says straight up in the faq.

And that is where I am confused with skr writing, because the faq says qith vestigial arms u CANNOT use all 4 arms in a single atk because without it u couldn't make an atk with 4 arms, but skr says that u do.

Which is right? The official faq fr om the pathfinder team or what skr has written?

And you don't think that maybe the fact that SKR seems to be contradicting the FAQ while trying to clarify it might be a clue that the FAQ doesn't really clear up the issue?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Really, it looks like the FAQ says no extra manufactured attacks, and no extra natural attacks.

So, no four daggers.

No four claws.

Two daggers, and two claws is all you get with the hands.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Really, it looks like the FAQ says no extra manufactured attacks, and no extra natural attacks.

So, no four daggers.

No four claws.

Two daggers, and two claws is all you get with the hands.

Only thing is the faq says that at no time can u use a left hand weapon attack, right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial arm weapon attack in the same turn. It goes on to say that natural attacks, manufactured attacks, and natural attacks gained on a limb that didn't have it to begin with are all under the same restrictions.

That straight up says u CANNOT use ur left hand, right hand, AND vestigial arms to attack with in the same turn.


To be fair, there's a legitimate question in the language used here:

PDT wrote:

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.

Is the "weapon" used in the first paragraph short for "manufactured weapon" or does it stand for any weapon (manufactured, natural, unarmed strike)? We've all generally assumed it was referring to "manufactured weapon", which is a fair and obvious reading.

However, note the language from the tentacle portion of the FAQ:

PDT wrote:
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).

It's the exact same language. If you took the Tentacle discovery, you could not use your tentacle attack in conjunction with two other attacks made with your natural hands, whether they're manufactured weapon attacks or otherwise. Despite the fact that the tentacle attack is a natural weapon, you cannot add it in to a normal attack sequence that includes any other natural or manufactured weapon if that attack sequence already includes using both hands to attack (here I think the hands-as-effort definition of "hands" is probably in play).

If the two discoveries were intended to function the same way, then it is certainly reasonable to conclude that with Vestigial Arm, you could not do any kind of dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite routine, because that would be utilizing all four hands to attack and the implication could be that you're only allowed to use two of the four hands (in any combination ) to make attacks in any one given round.

If that is the intent, that "weapon" is to be interpreted broadly (and I'm not saying it necessarily is, just that it's probably a valid reading of the words on the page), then SKR's post is contradictory. If the "weapon" used is not intended to be read broadly, then there's nothing wrong with dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite.

Like I have said, I'm not really a fan of the UAS/UAS/claw/claw/bite routine that's the basis of all this in the first place. That being said, I don't think it's particularly overpowered, particularly since it's -2/-2/-5/-5/-5 with only one getting full STR - two if you take Double Slice; and potentially -2/-2/-2/-2/-2 - if you take Multiattack (which I really would have much problem with since it's a feat investment to make those changes), and it seems to follow from the natural reading of the rules regarding natural weapon attacks.

So, I'm not really advocating reading "weapon" broadly here. Just thought I should mention that it might be a reason people are confused and that I do think it's a legitimate way to read the FAQ.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

So, you can do less with four arms, than two?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

The Tentacle is it's own weird mess.

It really works all different.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
So, you can do less with four arms, than two?

Well, I think the implication is that maybe you shouldn't be able to do all that with two.

or

You can do all that with two, but you can literally only do the exact same thing with the four from VA. You can't do less, because you'd still have the same option to kick/kick/claw/claw/bite that a two-armed character could do. You just couldn't translate the kick/kick to other manufactured weapon attacks.

That's not "less"; it's the exact same thing. So, either you can do literally no more than a two-armed character can do, or we've been overselling what a two-armed character can do.

I'm guessing that's it's probably the former, not the latter. You can do literally the exact same thing that a two-armed character can do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
fretgod99 wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
So, you can do less with four arms, than two?

Well, I think the implication is that maybe you shouldn't be able to do all that with two.

or

You can do all that with two, but you can literally only do the exact same thing with the four from VA. You can't do less, because you'd still have the same option to kick/kick/claw/claw/bite that a two-armed character could do. You just couldn't translate the kick/kick to other manufactured weapon attacks.

That's not "less"; it's the exact same thing. So, either you can do literally no more than a two-armed character can do, or we've been overselling what a two-armed character can do.

I'm guessing that's it's probably the former, not the latter. You can do literally the exact same thing that a two-armed character can do.

Which is the funny part, I am starting to think that Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite is superior to any combination involving vestigial arms. Mainly because I can enhance all my attacks with a single magic item.

I'll use the vestigial arm to hold my +5 Heavy shield while I kick/kick/claw/claw/bite.


Charender wrote:
Quantum Steve wrote:
Nefreet wrote:
jlighter wrote:
You can't wield a dagger with your feet.
Actually, you can. They're called Blade Boots.

So, this whole time when you were saying dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite, you really meant blade boot/blade boot/claw/claw/bite?

What a lot of unnecessary confusion. In the future, try to use the proper terms for things like weapons.

Because there are a couple ways to get those attacks.

Unarmed Strike(Kick)/Unarmed Strike(Kick)
Boot Blade/Boot Blade

There are probably other ways I am not aware of. It really doesn't matter because as long as there is any way to get your normal manufactured weapon attacks without using your hands or head, then you can get 5 attacks without vestigial arms.

Exactly this. You can achieve 5 attacks without VA, but your weapon choice is limited due to lack of actual hands to hold things. VA expands your options to any weapon two hands can hold.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I don't even get the "only hold shield or potion" thing.

With things like Quickdraw Shields, and Springloaded Wristsheathes, there is no reason to waste a Discovery on something that does nothing.


Quote:
Which is the funny part, I am starting to think that Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite is superior to any combination involving vestigial arms. Mainly because I can enhance all my attacks with a single magic item.

Maybe, if you are monk. Even then, the lower base damage and Crit range may not be worth it, especially as you gain a few levels and other classes gain additional attacks. Having six or seven weaker attacks is less impressive when another class has four or five strong ones.


Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
Which is the funny part, I am starting to think that Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite is superior to any combination involving vestigial arms. Mainly because I can enhance all my attacks with a single magic item.
Maybe, if you are monk. Even then, the lower base damage and Crit range may not be worth it, especially as you gain a few levels and other classes gain additional attacks. Having six or seven weaker attacks is less impressive when another class has four or five strong ones.

If you are looking at sneak attack damage, then crit range isn't as big of a deal. Suffice to say it is very possible for a proper alchemist/rogue build to turn those small weak attacks into something significant.

A rogue could get a lot of mileage out of taking a 2 level dip in alchemist for a feral mutagen, a monk could do the same, and that doesn't even touch what a beastmorph vivisectionist could do with it(read broken as hell).

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Quantum Steve wrote:

When you referred to wielding daggers any of the numerous instances you mentioned a dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite routine, were you not referring to wielding those daggers with your feet i.e. blade boots?

If not, and you were referring to wielding traditional daggers in the traditional fashion, what was the point of your Blade Boot remark just there? Were you merely being argumentative? I don't understand.

If I said "Daggers", I meant "Daggers".

If I said "Blade Boots", I meant "Blade Boots".

I've also used such terms as "Unarmed Strike", "Claw", "Manufactured Weapon", "Bite", and "Natural Attack".

We need to be specific in these discussions, as one wrong example can ruin an entire statement, or force you to start all over again in your explanation.

Hence why I was (am) confused by your statement, as we seem to be saying the same thing here.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

I keep rereading the FAQ, and I don't see how dagger/dagger/claw/claw or longspear/claw/claw is disallowed.

It really seems to press the issue, that dagger/dagger/dagger/dagger or claw/claw/claw/claw is not allowed.

I get that.

What makes some so, well, inflamed, about the dagger/dagger/claw/claw or longspear/claw/claw, is beyond me, and just makes no sense.


Blackblood troll wrote:
I keep rereading the FAQ, and I don't see how dagger/dagger/claw/claw or longspear/claw/claw is disallowed.

How to get there from the FAQ (but it really doesn't jive well with SKR's post)

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

If you didn't have the discovery and you use a longspear.. that's it, you're done.

Sczarni

Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Ah, Steve, I believe I understand your misunderstanding.

Go up thread and read jlighter's lengthy comment. My phone only lets me modify so much text, so I only quoted the one sentence I needed to.

He was basically saying "you can't wield manufactured weapons with your feet", to which my reply was that you could, and that they are called "Blade Boots".

Does that clear up things?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
BigNorseWolf wrote:
Blackblood troll wrote:
I keep rereading the FAQ, and I don't see how dagger/dagger/claw/claw or longspear/claw/claw is disallowed.

How to get there from the FAQ (but it really doesn't jive well with SKR's post)

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

If you didn't have the discovery and you use a longspear.. that's it, you're done.

Well, no, you can still attack with any available natural attacks.

Gore, Bite, Slam, or Talon, are all available.


Now I know why the Devs were reluctant to answer such a simple question. You guys just won’t give up. How about earlobe attacks?


DrDeth wrote:
Now I know why the Devs were reluctant to answer such a simple question. You guys just won’t give up. How about earlobe attacks?

SKR said in this very thread that Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite is a valid attack sequence WITHOUT vestigial arms. So baring your derailing sarcasm, no one is suggesting ear strikes. Now do you have anything constructive to add?


The FAQ wasn't about Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite . Now, we all know that's bogus.

But go ahead and start a new thread for a FAQ if you like.

The FAQ was clear and what I have been saying all along “How many attacks did you get BEFORE vestigial arm? That’s how many you get after vestigial arm”.

Whether you have Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite or bastard sword/bastard sword/armorspike/armorspike/codpiece or earlobe/eyebrow/pinky/toenail/tonguestud or whatever LEGAL combo you can dream up, vestigial arms don’t add. The question has been answered.

I am pretty sure SKR has already weighed in on Kick/Kick/Claw/Claw/Bite but if you think he hasn’t you could do one of three things:

1.Ask a new FAQ
2.Play it however you want.
3.Use a rule we call “common sense”.

The rules here are very clear to me, and to the developers. They just don't choose to answer some outre scenarios and questions. Which is a Good Thing.

But some wouldn't listen even if they did.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
DrDeth wrote:
Now I know why the Devs were reluctant to answer such a simple question. You guys just won’t give up. How about earlobe attacks?

So, you got it all mastered?

The air must be thin up there, but a great view.

All of us, way down here, will never know.

;)


blackbloodtroll wrote:
DrDeth wrote:
Now I know why the Devs were reluctant to answer such a simple question. You guys just won’t give up. How about earlobe attacks?

So, you got it all mastered?

The air must be thin up there, but a great view.

All of us, way down here, will never know.

No, my *HAIR* is thin up there. Not the air.

No, no, you won't. ;-)


blackbloodtroll wrote:


Well, no, you can still attack with any available natural attacks.
Gore, Bite, Slam, or Talon, are all available.

Ok, and without the vestigial arms how many natural weapon attacks would you have available? Zero unless you have a bite.


Redneckdevil wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Really, it looks like the FAQ says no extra manufactured attacks, and no extra natural attacks.

So, no four daggers.

No four claws.

Two daggers, and two claws is all you get with the hands.

Only thing is the faq says that at no time can u use a left hand weapon attack, right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial arm weapon attack in the same turn. It goes on to say that natural attacks, manufactured attacks, and natural attacks gained on a limb that didn't have it to begin with are all under the same restrictions.

That straight up says u CANNOT use ur left hand, right hand, AND vestigial arms to attack with in the same turn.

Woah, emphasis mine. I think you're both taking that statement out of context. It's referencing a specific example.

PDT wrote:

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)...

[examples]
Likewise, if you instead took the vestigial arm discovery and put a weapon in that arm's hand, on your turn you can make...
[examples]
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."

Emphasis mine. That's the example. At no time can [the low-level alchemist who uses two-weapon fighting] make an attack with three weapons, because he only has two attacks to make that round.

I think that everyone wants to read into the implications of the perceived logic of the ruling, and that's a mistake. Count how many attacks you could make without the arms. That's how many attacks you can make with the arms. No limitations of what kind of attacks those can be (as currently written). It's odd, but that's it.

Or, as an alternative, just don't make attacks with your vestigial arms. It's a mess and not worth the rules deliberation.


BigNorseWolf wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:


Well, no, you can still attack with any available natural attacks.
Gore, Bite, Slam, or Talon, are all available.

Ok, and without the vestigial arms how many natural weapon attacks would you have available? Zero unless you have a bite.

I think we're all getting caught up in specific examples.

A given character has X attacks with manufactured weapons per round. Sometimes more due to TWF or high BAB
They also have X natural attacks per round.

This character ALSO has various limbs, which can each only be accounted for once at the same time, generally (some strategies, like dropping a weapon, may circumvent this).

A character with two claws and a longspear cannot usually make his attacks with his claws because he is holding the spear in his hands.

A character with two claws and armor spikes can attack with all three because the spikes don't occupy his hands.

A character with two claws, a longspear, and Vestigial Arms can attack with all three, because he now has other hands in which to hold the spear while leaving his claws available. The advantage of the VA is his access to better manufactured attacks in conjunction with his claws, but has no additional attacks than his normal routine might allow.


Nefreet wrote:
Quantum Steve wrote:

When you referred to wielding daggers any of the numerous instances you mentioned a dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite routine, were you not referring to wielding those daggers with your feet i.e. blade boots?

If not, and you were referring to wielding traditional daggers in the traditional fashion, what was the point of your Blade Boot remark just there? Were you merely being argumentative? I don't understand.

If I said "Daggers", I meant "Daggers".

If I said "Blade Boots", I meant "Blade Boots".

I've also used such terms as "Unarmed Strike", "Claw", "Manufactured Weapon", "Bite", and "Natural Attack".

We need to be specific in these discussions, as one wrong example can ruin an entire statement, or force you to start all over again in your explanation.

Hence why I was (am) confused by your statement, as we seem to be saying the same thing here.

I'm confused by this post:

Nefreet wrote:
jlighter wrote:
You can't wield a dagger with your feet.
Actually, you can. They're called Blade Boots.

Blade Boots are not daggers. You cannot, in fact, wield a dagger with your feet. I thought you were using specific terms interchangeably.

Edit:

Nefreet wrote:

Kenku

Ah, Steve, I believe I understand your misunderstanding.

Go up thread and read jlighter's lengthy comment. My phone only lets me modify so much text, so I only quoted the one sentence I needed to.

He was basically saying "you can't wield manufactured weapons with your feet", to which my reply was that you could, and that they are called "Blade Boots".

Does that clear up things?

Ok, consider me enlightened.


Read the paragraph below. It states that natural attacks share the same restrictions and goes on to list the restriction applys weither u are using natural attacks, manufactured attacks,or natural attacks gained onto limbs that didnt have it before.

Also at no times means no time in the past, no time in the present, or no time in the FUTURE (aka when u gained more bab and natural attacks) can u use ur vestigial arm to attack while using BOTH main hands to attack in the same round.

It states its the same as the tentacle, in that using a vestigial arm u are exchanging that attack with said arm to replace an attack with a main (aka original) arm.

I'm seeing a glaring conflict between the faq and what skr wrote and I'm gonna wait and see if skr chimes to explain that he's right and the pathfinder group is wrong or vice versa.

If its legal by the rules I will be okay with it, but what I'm not okay with is 2 viable sourses contradicting each other.


Quote:
Also at no times means no time in the past, no time in the present, or no time in the FUTURE (aka when u gained more bab and natural attacks) can u use ur vestigial arm to attack while using BOTH main hands to attack in the same round.

That would be silly; that would mean a character couldn't alternate his iterative attacks, which is pretty much explicitly allowed by the original mutation description.


Redneckdevil wrote:

Read the paragraph below. It states that natural attacks share the same restrictions and goes on to list the restriction applys weither u are using natural attacks, manufactured attacks,or natural attacks gained onto limbs that didnt have it before.

Also at no times means no time in the past, no time in the present, or no time in the FUTURE (aka when u gained more bab and natural attacks) can u use ur vestigial arm to attack while using BOTH main hands to attack in the same round.

It's stating that those natural attacks share the same restriction as manufactured weapons that they don't grant you extra attacks per round. And again, you're taking that statement out of context. "At no time" means, in this case "At no time in this particular example". If PDT stated "If you have two claw attacks, you can make two claw attacks in a full-attack. At no time can you make three claw attacks." They wouldn't be stating that a character who gains three claw attacks can never make three claw attacks. That statement is referring directly to the example being discussed.


The example being discussed was stated as natural attacks, weilding manufactured weapons, or natural attacks gained on a limb that was originally there.
It states that if that lvl 1 alchemist was someone who had claws as a racial would be under the rules as in u couldn't do weapon weapon claw.
You have 4 arms but to attack u can only use 2 of them in a single round. That sentenced that said all 3 types was imo talking about using at same time or individually.
It has the exact same wording as the tentacles and is shown to use the same rules with the tentacles in that they do not follow the regular rules for natural attacks. Only difference is is that the vestigial arms can hold stuff but u are still limited to only 2 arms for attacking in a single round.

But I dunno really care if someone can or cannot, its just that the faqs seem to contradict each other. One being a faq and one being a post.

But I said my piece and ill quit sounding like a broken record. They really need to work on their wording, because both seem cut and dry but so totally contradicting each other.

Shadow Lodge

For what it is worth, my lengthy post operates on the assumption that SKR is wrong in saying that you can make the dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite combination. Per the FAQ on Vestigial Arms and Tentacles by the PDT, you can't.

THAT SAID, you can make the attack boot blade/boot blade/claw/claw/bite according to the PDT FAQ, because all those attacks were normally allowed. But you can't use a Vestigial Limb or a Tentacle to attack in the same round that you use your two primary hands. It doesn't matter how many VAs you have, you can make two attacks with arms. Period.

Nefreet: Points for not actually reading my entire lengthy post. I even admitted that you could do the 5 attack combo with blade boots. But you cannot wield a dagger with your feet if you have anything approaching normal humanoid feet. It is physically impossible, which was my point.

Setting that part aside, the fact that you can make manufactured weapon attacks in addition to adding on -claw/claw/bite at the end doesn't mean that it doesn't matter what the weapons are. You cannot go Greatsword/claw/claw/bite any more than you could do dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite because a two-armed character could not possibly do it before getting iterative attacks. A character with vestigial limbs (arms or tentacles) cannot make any attack sequence that a two-armed character could not.

PDT wrote:

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."

Emphasis mine. Makes it clear that in the latter italicized clause indicates manufactured weapons, because you can't put natural weapons into a hand. Even if it did include natural weapons, it wouldn't matter, because the next sentence is:

PDT wrote:
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.

Those who are saying that they aren't giving you extra attacks, I call b$$+%!~~. They are giving you extra attacks in the dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite scenario because they are giving you attacks that you would not otherwise be capable of performing. If you change the dagger to a boot blade or a kick or some other weapon that utilizes the feet, then it is an entirely different story. You are limited to two arm attacks in a round, or at each bracket of an iterative, period. Adding vestigial limbs does not change that in any way.

My apologies if I sound harsh or angry. It is not my intention to sound that way, but I'm slightly irritated at people who refuse to see a point that was actually clearly explained the first time through.

TL;DR: SKR was wrong according to the FAQ


jlighter wrote:
They are giving you extra attacks in the dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite scenario because they are giving you attacks that you would not otherwise be capable of performing.

The term "extra attacks" does not mean "attack options you could not utilize were it not for the vestigial arm". It means "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery." "More" as in "A greater number." That's all the FAQ entry pertains to, and that's all SKR's elaboration pertains to. The number of attacks you can make per round with these discoveries.

Quote:
You are limited to two arm attacks in a round, or at each bracket of an iterative, period. Adding vestigial limbs does not change that in any way.

Everything in the FAQ reply, from "For example..." to right before the last paragraph, gives the example of a low-level alchemist capable of two-weapon fighting. Not a tengu, not an alchemist with feral mutagen. An alchemist with only two potential attacks per round (a primary attack and off-hand attack). So when the PDT says you can't attack with all three weapons in a round, they're talking about the example alchemist, which only has, at most, 2 attacks per round.

Quote:
TL;DR: SKR was wrong according to the FAQ

I don't see anything in SKR's post that contradicts the FAQ. When SKR is talking about making 5 attacks per round, it's with a different example character than is used in the FAQ.


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).

They gave the definition of what extra attacks or actions meant in tbe tentacle paragraph. Since vestigial arms has the very exact same wording, the exact same wording means something for tentacles but totally defferent for the arms? That doesn't make sense.

Shadow Lodge

Rhatahema wrote:
jlighter wrote:
They are giving you extra attacks in the dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite scenario because they are giving you attacks that you would not otherwise be capable of performing.

The term "extra attacks" does not mean "attack options you could not utilize were it not for the vestigial arm". It means "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery." "More" as in "A greater number." That's all the FAQ entry pertains to, and that's all SKR's elaboration pertains to. The number of attacks you can make per round with these discoveries.

Quote:
You are limited to two arm attacks in a round, or at each bracket of an iterative, period. Adding vestigial limbs does not change that in any way.

Everything in the FAQ reply, from "For example..." to right before the last paragraph, gives the example of a low-level alchemist capable of two-weapon fighting. Not a tengu, not an alchemist with feral mutagen. An alchemist with only two potential attacks per round (a primary attack and off-hand attack). So when the PDT says you can't attack with all three weapons in a round, they're talking about the example alchemist, which only has, at most, 2 attacks per round.

Quote:
TL;DR: SKR was wrong according to the FAQ
I don't see anything in SKR's post that contradicts the FAQ. When SKR is talking about making 5 attacks per round, it's with a different example character than is used in the FAQ.

Rhatahema, I pose you a specific question, then. What part of "the exact same restriction would apply if your race had claws ..." allows you to make two weapon attacks and natural attacks?

They clearly define, in the FAQ, that "extra" means "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery," yes. More does mean a greater number. But it does not follow that they specifically mean a greater number overall, especially when they go on to define that you can't make three attacks using arms [i[even if you have claws.[/i] By their wording, and their clarification of what they said within the same post, the most reasonable interpretation of the FAQ is that you can't make more attacks using any combination of arms than you would have been if you hadn't taken the discovery. They even use tentacle attacks as an example of this. The fact that Vestigial Arm uses the same wording as the Tentacle means that you can't apply different standards to them.

The fact that they're talking about a TWF Alchemist has no bearing on the situation, because a TWF Alchemist can still get 5 attacks, not just 2. But he can only ever get 2 attacks using arms. You can't attack with more than two arms out of any combination of arms and vestigial arms. That's why I say SKR was wrong. The beginning of his post was accurate, but when he said that dagger/dagger/claw/claw/bite was a legal combo, he was wrong because the FAQ doesn't allow that combination of attacks.

As a note, SKR was also talking about a low-level Alchemist with TWF, so his example character is an extension of the same example character.

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Except I'm not wrong. I got a consensus of the rest of the design team, I wrote the FAQ in question, and I posted it using the PDT account.

Your idea of "You can't attack with more than two arms out of any combination of arms and vestigial arms" isn't in the rules anywhere, and it's not an idea the design team supports.

Shadow Lodge

Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Except I'm not wrong. I got a consensus of the rest of the design team, I wrote the FAQ in question, and I posted it using the PDT account.

Your idea of "You can't attack with more than two arms out of any combination of arms and vestigial arms" isn't in the rules anywhere, and it's not an idea the design team supports.

My apologies. It seemed like the most reasonable interpretation of the way the PDT post was written, especially given the sections I quoted above.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:

Except I'm not wrong. I got a consensus of the rest of the design team, I wrote the FAQ in question, and I posted it using the PDT account.

Your idea of "You can't attack with more than two arms out of any combination of arms and vestigial arms" isn't in the rules anywhere, and it's not an idea the design team supports.

I think this is what has some of us confused.

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."

vs.

Now give him the vestigial arm discovery x2. Instead of making two kick attacks, he's making two manufactured weapon attacks. So his total attack routine is weapon/weapon/bite/claw/claw. That's 5 attacks per round, total. This is a legitimate attack routine.

Attacking with a claw when you're attacking with a great sword seems like an extra attack (because you couldn't do it normally), but its ok because its not a weapon attack?


So is it just maximum number of attacks:
Two-armed alchemist claw/claw/bite/kick/kick = 5 attacks
So
Four-armed alchemist claw/claw/claw/claw/bite = 5 attacks

Or do you track weapons and natural attacks separately:
Two-armed alchemist claw/claw/bite/kick/kick = 3 natural, 2 weapons
So
Four-armed alchemist claw/claw/bite/dagger/dagger = 3 natural, 2 weapon?


To add to the stonebreakers question,

Would two handed weapons count twice or is it just the sheer number that matters?

Designer, RPG Superstar Judge

It's number of attacks. It's not tracking natural attacks vs. manufactured weapon attacks.

As the FAQ says: "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."

Nothing in that says you need to be tracking what type of weapon you're making an attack with.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:

It's number of attacks. It's not tracking natural attacks vs. manufactured weapon attacks.

As the FAQ says: "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."

Nothing in that says you need to be tracking what type of weapon you're making an attack with.

*headscratch*

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."

vs

Now give him the vestigial arm discovery x2. Instead of making two kick attacks, he's making two manufactured weapon attacks. So his total attack routine is weapon (a left hand weapon attack)/weapon (a right hand weapon attack)/bite/claw (a vestigial arm weapon attack)/claw (another vestigial arm weapon attack)

() stuff is mine.


So, now we have confirmation that Race with claws + 2 Vestigial Arms + Feral Mutagen = 5 attacks.

Good, now that can be put to rest.


What that means also is that if you have a Race with claws + 2 Vestigial Arms, you can make 4 weapon attacks (1 with each arm) since normally you can make a kick/kick/claw/claw = 4 attacks. Now there is a reason to pick up Multiweapon Fighting since you can use it now.

251 to 300 of 388 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Alchemist "Vestigial Arm" discovery question All Messageboards