Here are the brass tacks of the discussion:
I've found two different four-armed 0-HD races in third-party OGL resources: Fantasy Flight's siarrans (Mythic Races) and Bastion's knük (Minions: Rebirth). The latter (a fairly powerful race) have a level adjustment of +1; the former (more-or-less balanced) are not level-adjusted.
At any rate, there's a discussion on another site about creating a four-armed variant on a particular race. My suggestion was to remove some of the base race's traits, increase their size from small to medium, and drop one of their ability bonuses and penalties.
The original poster informed me that this was overpowered, apparently because a four-armed being would threaten too many squares at once, would be able to attack too many times per round, and is too easy to "cheese."
Since everyone else in the discussion in question seems to mainly be concerned with discussing paragon classes: what's everyone else think?
Well the alchemist can get four arms in pathfinder -- the extra arms are limited on what they can be used for though. Personally I don't think it's any worse than anything else I've ever seen. At best they'll have a shield while using multi weapon fighting to use a two handed weapon shield bash and a ranged weapon at the same time (simply to cover all their basis).
At the end of the day they still aren't going to be able to drop more than one opponent a round which the fighter can already do -- so the gain in power is... limited at best -- IF you are use to highly efficient characters.
This is mainly due to the limitations of action economy -- they can't drink a potion while full attacking or such so the total value is less than it could be.
This is mainly due to the limitations of action economy -- they can't drink a potion while full attacking or such so the total value is less than it could be.
That's about what I thought. This guy seemed to be banking on some rather outrageous munchkinism. (And on quite a bit of GM discretion, and on the idea that a four-armed martial character would be significantly more powerful than an alchemist with those discoveries.)
For the record, siarrans are as follows: +2 Dex, -2 Con, access to the Multiweapon instead of the Two-Weapon tree, and have an Strength penalty to their lower arms (consider it a highly circumstantial -2 to Str).
Knük appear to have +2 Strength, +4 Dex, +4 Wisdom, claw and bite attacks, and the now-obsolete Multidexterity as a bonus feat. (Their actual character write-up was not included. I'm extrapolating from the monster stats of what I'm guessing is a first-level warrior. Based on that, they seem a bit too "awesome" for a +1 race.)
Yeah the Siarrans don't sound too bad.
Its a case of an excess of a good thing -- simply put a martial character can already get to the point of dropping one a round -- any more is simply more of the same -- it's excess to the point of waste.
I have had this race used several times in various game over the last 6+ years, and they are not overpowered at all. Take the racial feats presented with them to gain better use of their 2nd set of arms, and it all stays balanced.
Heck even had a Dragonstar game with 3 people out of the 5 being siarran. Far from over powered.
I have had this race used several times in various game over the last 6+ years, and they are not overpowered at all. Take the racial feats presented with them to gain better use of their 2nd set of arms, and it all stays balanced.
Heck even had a Dragonstar game with 3 people out of the 5 being siarran. Far from over powered.
The person whom I was debating didn't know about siarrans and couldn't even be bothered to care about them.
The real threat of races that have more than two arms is the use of multiattack and multiweapon fighting. While there is real consideration that needs to be put into deciding if you want to make one extra attack per round while taking a -2 to all attacks (as with two-weapon fighting using a light off-hand) there's much less consideration when its the possibility of taking THREE additional attacks, all with -2.
Now, assuming the -2 penalty to the second set of arms, that's only a one point penalty to hit and damage compared to the first set... so we're looking at -2/-2/-3/-3 adjusted then by BAB, STR, and so on. At first level, thats almost (not quite, obviously, but close enough to discuss it in context of) twice as much potential melee output as their two-armed counterparts.
Additionally, these two extra attacks will persist throughout character progression. Unlike multiattack, which is very front-loaded (natural attacks don't increase in frequency, so eventually they are deprecated in favor of BAB-based melee attacks) the multiweapon fighting abilities tack those two extra attacks onto the full attack of characters of any level.
Hmm. I was operating under the notion that the "diminishing returns" would continue to diminish (i.e. that fourth attack, if not the third as well, would be at -4, not -3).
Nope but there is another point to consider:
Fighter full attack with multiweapon fighting and 4 arms:
+20/+20/+20/+20/+15/+10/+5
Fighter full attack with greater two weapon fighting and 2 arms:
+20/+20/+15/+15/+10/+10/+5
See the difference? Only the bonus on attacks really changes, and a fighter is going to hit with all his attacks if he tries either way.
In fact the extra damage is still going to be the same since three arms are 'off hands' meaning the .5 stuff kicks in for them.
Fighter full attack with multiweapon fighting and 4 arms:
+20/+20/+20/+20/+15/+10/+5Fighter full attack with greater two weapon fighting and 2 arms:
+20/+20/+15/+15/+10/+10/+5
I don't know how you arrived at those numbers. If we're only factoring in BAB at level 20 then the numbers should be:
2 arms and 2-wep fighting:
+18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2 arms and both 2wep and greater2wep fighting:
+18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+3
4 arms and multiwep fighting:
+18/+18/+18/+18/+13/+8/+3
4 arms and both multiwep and greater multiwep fighting:
+18/+18/+18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+3
In your example, you're comparing a fighter with two arms that has both an extra feat (with a minimum level of 6), and at least two points higher minimum dex with one that has four arms, and saying that at level 20 it almost balances out.
When comparing races, you really do have to use the same sets of stats, class levels, and feats... otherwise you're putting your thumb on the scale.
Um... you are lacking improved two weapon fighting which you must have for greater two weapon fighting.
With any two weapon we have
20/15/10/5
With just two weapon fighting:
18/18/13/8/3
with improved
18/18/13/13/8/3
with greater
18/18/13/13/8/8/3
Now compared to four arms and multi weapon fighting:
18/18/18/18/13/8/3
Please note there isn't an improved multi weapon fighting, and multi weapon fighting replaces two weapon fighting -- meaning you do not have two weapon fighting... which also means you can't take improved or greater two weapon fighting.
So you still end up with the same number of attacks -- just with fewer feats. However you also don't qualify for two weapon rend or the feat that gives full strength bonus to your off hand weapons.
Besides I don't need to know any more about the build or stats -- yes the thumb is on the scale but I know how much the thumb weighs.
This is because I've ran the numbers -- I know for example that fighters at any level achieve overkill when it comes to martial combat.
The funny thing about overkill? Anything past it is simply more overkill -- since the kill is achieved anything beyond that isn't needed and is waste.
Now is it exactly the same? No -- but is it going to have a different effect in the long run? No. Overkill is achieve either way therefore it doesn't matter how much there is.
Again the keys to this discussion:
1. Fighters can achieve auto hit status with all of their attacks. This tells me all I need to know about the class.
2. Fighters can at any level drop an opponent of equal CR in one round (or less). At several levels they can do this with opponents well beyond their level in CR.
3. Given that these two are true anything that increases their ability to do this doesn't matter in the slightest since it's something that is already in their capacity to do.
The difference here is you are doing a literary comparison while I'm doing an empirical comparison. Since we are dealing with a formula that ends the same either way we can dispense anything that doesn't actually alter that formula.
Since extra arms doesn't change actual action economy, and doesn't actually increase total number of possible attacks at end game we know that the end game is still the same.
And all of that amazing math only comes into play if they play a Fighter, cause in the OP, class wasn't listed, or have I missed something. Some people always see things as over powered even when they are far from it. Nice math btw Abe, made me crack out the books and all, forget at times how much a beast Fighters can be.
|
Wonder how much a -2 STR, -2 CON in the racial stats changes things, possibly with one of those being pushed to -4.
Or perhaps the individual arms could be too weak to handle certain weapon weights right out the gate. Just trying to figure the best way to get the aesthetics of four arms for a relatively physically weak race.[/slighttangent]
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see a problem with it. The only exception would be a diviner character.
It would be totally OP to forewarned and four-armed.
Um... you are lacking improved two weapon fighting which you must have for greater two weapon fighting.
I stand corrected - you're comparing a 2 armed fighter with TWO extra feats and a dex requirement of 19, with a 4-armed fighter with a dex requirement of 15. In essence, you're saying its not an issue because having an extra set of arms is no different than having two bonus feats and +4 DEX... once you get to level 20.
Please note there isn't an improved multi weapon fighting, and multi weapon fighting replaces two weapon fighting -- meaning you do not have two weapon fighting... which also means you can't take improved or greater two weapon fighting.
You're assuming that because the only thing written in a paizo book is related to TWO weapon fighting that there's no natural equivalent for each TWO weapon fighting feat for additional arms? They also haven't written in any player races with more than two arms, either, but here we are discussing them.
Lets say that notion, as silly as it is, holds true... that there cannot be multiweapon equivalents of all two-weapon feats. Your 4-armed combattant can burn a feat on taking two-weapon fighting (which, in your mind, is radically different from four-weapon fighting to the point that it must be learned separately) and then takes subsequent improvements on it, gaining identical benefits to what they'd get if multiweapon equivalent feats existed.
Besides I don't need to know any more about the build or stats -- yes the thumb is on the scale but I know how much the thumb weighs.
Peachy, but you're presenting the information as though you're not skewing things, and you are.
1. Fighters can achieve auto hit status with all of their attacks. This tells me all I need to know about the class.
I don't see how a level 20 fighter achieves this so-called "auto-hit" status with ALL their attacks. Lets look at a CR 20 monster... the Balor, and examine this concept.
Now, we'll use a base strength score of 15 to create our two level 20 fighters, and we'll assume that they improve their strength at every level they're allowed to, which gives them a total strength of 20, so a stat bonus to hit of +5. Now, we'll assume that by level 20 the fighter has a +5 weapon, as well. We'll also assume that the fighter happens to be using a medium main hand, and light off-hand weapon, and that this fighter made the main-hand weapon his or her first weapon training group, and the off-hand weapon his second. Lets look at their chances to hit this Balor, using your unbalanced comparison (the one that assumes +2 feats and +4 dex for one of the two)
Required d20 roll to hit balor (AC 36) with each attack.
2 arms:
4/5/9/10/14/15/19
4 arms:
4/5/5/5/10/14/19
So, given our example, the chance of missing with the fighter's BEST attack, is 20% and it goes down from there. So, I absolutely do challenge your assertion that level 20 fighters will "auto-hit" same CR enemies with every attack. Especially that sad little end one.
Next, lets see what our two fighters do for damage if they happen to connect with every hit, and if we assume the Balor's DR is totally ignored. We'll assume the classic longsword as the mainhand weapon and a shortsword as the off-hand. That's 1d8+14 and 1d6+11 (since we're assuming half-strenght of off-hand attacks), which gives us an average damage of 18.5 and 14.5 respectively. Total damage if the fighters "auto-hit" with all their attacks in a round comes out to 117.5 (again, equal only if we add two other feats to the 2 armed fellow and forbid equivalent, or the use of the same feats for the 4-armed fighter)
The balor has, on average, 370 hitpoints.
So, yeah, I also challenge your assertion that fighters will drop all these CR equivalent enemies in "one round or less".
What's more important is when we look at the disparity prior to the double digit levels. Greater two-weapon fighting isn't available until level 11, and improved is not available until level 6. That said, multiweapon fighting is available at level 1, meaning all the additional attacks are available at character creation.
And all of that amazing math only comes into play if they play a Fighter, cause in the OP, class wasn't listed, or have I missed something. Some people always see things as over powered even when they are far from it. Nice math btw Abe, made me crack out the books and all, forget at times how much a beast Fighters can be.
This was an attempt to build a Medium and more physical version of a Small and more cerebral race, so that might come into play.
Wonder how much a -2 STR, -2 CON in the racial stats changes things, possibly with one of those being pushed to -4.
Or perhaps the individual arms could be too weak to handle certain weapon weights right out the gate. Just trying to figure the best way to get the aesthetics of four arms for a relatively physically weak race.[/slighttangent]
When trying to slightly rework siarrans for Pathfinder, I actually considered giving them a flat Strength penalty. The impression I got of them was "Proud Scholar Race."
I don't see a problem with it. The only exception would be a diviner character.
It would be totally OP to forewarned and four-armed.
Take two handfuls of awesome. You've earned it.
Come to think of it? In the spirit of the thread, take four. :D
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Stuffs
Honestly if that's the best you can do you aren't trying nearly hard enough. It might be best if you do some searches on the forums here -- there's a level 16 fighter that can kill a Balor in 2 rounds or less.
I don't see a problem with it. The only exception would be a diviner character.
It would be totally OP to forewarned and four-armed.
Priceless