| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
When using feral can I also wield weapons in my vestigal arms or put the claws on them to have both natural attacks and my weapon attacks.
The part I'm unsure of is that vestigal arms can't give extra attacks but my group sees this as meaning no having 4 arms at second level for 4 attacks since we know you can make the attacks you have from BAB with any of the arms.
It seems to be legal too me, since it's the claws granting the extra attacks, not the actual arms, but I'm not 100% clear on the raw ruling. Seems like a GM decision too me.
Shameless bump.
|
The problem that I see is that in general and using the monster rules each limb gives an extra attack. I'll bet that's why the restriction is in there. This is to avoid having an early blowout of weapon attacks, so the relative power level and challenge doesn't dissolve.
Now, as to whether you can put the claws in your vestigial arms and use your original limbs to fight with weapons, to that I have no clear answer. RAW the "no extra attacks" clause is a very clear prohibition of getting any extra attacks - natural or with weapons. However, I do feel RAI the claws can be used in conjunction with weapon attacks this way. Otherwise why would they have had the tentacle discovery? Sure, the damage die is puny compared to the d6 but it's still a secondary natural attack like the claws in this case and can be used to deliver your damage boni(str, power attack, brutality whathaveyou) just as well.
Answer: ask your gm for a ruling.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Sean Reynolds addressed that a bit here.
I think it probably should be an FAQ item because a lot of people try this and there is a lot of confusion.
The relevant bit:
"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."
He talks about it a good bit more.
Essentially the arms are meant as a utility thing, holding a potion or wand while you fight, etc.
Sean Reynolds addressed that a bit here.
I think it probably should be an FAQ item because a lot of people try this and there is a lot of confusion.
The relevant bit:
"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."He talks about it a good bit more.
Essentially the arms are meant as a utility thing, holding a potion or wand while you fight, etc.
Helps some but still leaves the question of the extra attacks not coming from the arms but from the claws just hoping for a definate link or something.
It seems obvious that it is not supposed to give you more attacks/actions and the like though you could use them to switch from weapon style to weapon style easily. Not using the arms for extra actions seems to include the hands or claws attached to those arms.
A decent use would be having potions ready to drink, combined with a certain barbarian archetype maybe to drink them as a move action, and having a spare (throwing)weapon 'handy' at all times.
I absolutly love how that word gets thrown at every build regardless of intent. Nothing stops me from attacking with my arms holding weapons or with claws on vestigal arms. Nothing stops me from shooting two guns having a free hand to reload and still getting a shield bonus. But as soon as i ask if its okay to attack with claws and with held weapons with two differnt sets of arms someone calls munchkin.
This is a thought bouncing around in my head for a character not an attempt to bust the rules system to be the uberleet guy in my group.
Benefit: The alchemist gains a new arm (left or right) on his torso. The arm is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing. The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though the arm can wield a weapon and make attacks as part of the alchemist’s attack routine (using two-weapon fighting). The arm can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist’s original arms (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, another hand to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). The arm has its own “hand” and “ring” magic item slots (though the alchemist can still only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time).
The bolded is the relevant rules section the arms can make attacks as part of my attack routine. Meaning i can attack with shortsword/shortsword in my vestigal arms and then claw claw with my normal arms.
You could use your claws and hold a shield. No extra attacks and RAW without question.
I am not sure by RAW, but I think the intent is to not have the hands being actively used at the same time, I would think using a shield should be as prohibited as making extra attacks, just like using a 2handed weapon and a shield.
I think the extra hand/arm in itself is a good enough benefit without trying too squeeze in more benefits which it seems like it is written to specifically avoid.
Answer seems obvious to me. You make your regular attack routine using a weapon (or weapons) in your vestigial arms, then you attack with your claws and bite on your natural limbs (as secondary attacks).
I don't see where the RAW contradicts this at all. I could just as easily have wielded armor spikes and other "n0-hands-necessary" weapons along with my claws and bite, so it's certainly not a balance issue.