Oh, I've seen it. A 'true' rules lawyer would accept the errata (however begrudgingly) and play by it. I'm not sure what wraithstrike described should be called, but they are a whole other breed of bad gamer. I'm surprised that they can still find groups to play with.
As futile as it may be, it's about (and I know that it is a sore spot; don't jump me for this) things like what they did to the monk. That level of inconsideration should not be tolerated.
Not to go off topic, but is making the Monk pay for two weapons if he wants to TWF (like any other character) really that intolerable? Or are you referring to something else?
But I thought it was human nature to push limits as far as they can go...(or maybe that was a bad line from a bad movie). This thread has derailed so badly that the train is in the Pacific. I believe the answer to the OP is "no official answer; just pick one of the attacks".
EDIT: @ Quantum Steve: It's the fact that they literally broke an archetype and a half.
One extra attack on a Full Attack action with that weapon.
I always took that bolded part to be a restriction of the ability.
Get a sack of daggers, and attack with each one twice, dropping and quickdrawing as necessary. For all 7 TWF attacks. Then quickdraw a bow and fire 3 more times (RS, MS, Speed) 17 attacks in 6 seconds.
Get a sack of daggers, and attack with each one twice, dropping and quickdrawing as necessary. For all 7 TWF attacks. Then quickdraw a bow and fire 3 more times (RS, MS, Speed) 17 attacks in 6 seconds.
Don't give them any ideas..
Anyway the quote :
"When making a full-attack action, the wielder of a speed weapon may make one extra attack with it. The attack uses the wielder's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This benefit is not cumulative with similar effects, such as a haste spell.)"
It stands to reason that attacks from speed weapons or similar effects should not accumulate in a particular full-attack action. That could be stated clearer though, and similar effects is a bit too vague as well, though I'd say that the same weapon property is as similar as it is going to get.
I
Under a strict reading of the RAW, speed weapons work. And by work, I mean fighting with multiple speed weapons still give you the extra attack. Specifically because it notes that regardless you get an extra attack with that weapon but notes that it doesn't stack with haste or similar effects. Now the speed enhancement is not a similar effect because it grants an attack with another weapon. However...
When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a speed weapon, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)
Now haste specifically notes that it grants an additional attack with a natural attack or a weapon.
All in all, the strictest reading of speed seems to mean that you get an extra attack with that weapon, but you can't use that weapon to make an extra attack again. Some examples follow.
A dual-wielder is using a +1 speed weapon and a +1 weapon. She is hasted. She gets +1 attack with the speed weapon, and then applies her haste effect to the other weapon. Thus her attack routine becomes +x/+x/+y/+y.
A 2 hander is using a +1 speed weapon. She is hasted. She gets +1 attack with her speed weapon, but cannot apply her haste attack with the same weapon. Thus her attack routine becomes +x/+x.
Notice: I'm not arguing RAI. However, RAW, you get an attack with that weapon, regardless of your normal attack routine. It does note that you can't push it further with haste, presumably for game balance purposes. A +4 weapon enhancement is pretty big. Having two of them would naturally work, and do so RAW. However, you can't push it except for just so far.
Makes for good usage for natural attack folks, if they don't mind the issues of damage reduction (do you choose more natural attacks, or do you choose the ability to penetrate DR? Decisions, decisions).
Under a strict reading of the rules, it's ambigous (because similar is undefined).
It depends on two interpretations:
1. If speed is "similar" to speed.
2. If "one extra attack" is a numerical bonus.
RAW is NOT clear one way or another, so it's better to look at RAI (and whatever's most balanced).
Under a strict reading of the rules, it's ambigous (because similar is undefined).
It depends on two interpretations:
1. If speed is "similar" to speed.
2. If "one extra attack" is a numerical bonus.RAW is NOT clear one way or another, so it's better to look at RAI (and whatever's most balanced).
Fair enough. I'll accept that, my friend.
Personally I don't think there was a balance issue with it working the other way, at least before summoners. I can't think of any animal forms that allow druids to get more than 3 attacks per round (most cap out at 2 claws + 1 bite and maybe a rake under a special condition). That brings you to 6 attacks per round with a speed weapon, but doing so is costing you in +hit, +damage, and DR-penetration; which offsets it significantly.
Likewise, dual-wielding is widely considered underpowered, for all the usual reasons. Since you can't combine speed and haste effects that grant additional weapon attacks, it's more attractive for a dual-wielder to have a speed weapon than a 2 hander, because the 2 hander is probably going to be hasted as well but can't get the extra hit the higher-damage weapon.
I've never seen or had problems with running speed which grants an extra attack with the appropriate weapon. It's not even that popular of an enhancement despite this interpretation. That being said, there is one thing that does bother me about the AoMF (speed) and it's not anything in core (hell, the absolute worst I could imagine would perhaps be some sort of advanced half-dragon hydra wearing one, but that's in the realm of pure theorycraft as far as the likelihood goes). Instead, it's the summoner's eidolon. If there was any reason to consider reading it in the very lackluster way (and it is lackluster, because it's a +4 weapon enhancement which means minimum a +5 weapon price, and boots of speed provide better bonuses for 12,000 gp) would be to avoid eidolon abuse.
Since eidolons could get up to 14 natural attacks per round that way, that's where it becomes a bit scary (at least in theory). I'm not entirely certain it would be super amazing (since you would be sacrificing enhancement bonuses and DR penetration), but the sheer number of attacks is pretty scary (it's about 5 attacks more than a dual-wielder could get with a single speed weapon + haste on the other hand).
But in core, about the worst you'll see is a druid with 6 attacks natural attacks that don't penetrate DRs, and that's not that scary IMHO. Worth it for druids. Not for monks. It's never been worth it for monks. :(
======================================
That being said, I do believe that "one extra attack with that weapon" is indeed a numerical bonus in a sense. It clearly doesn't stack with the haste effect that grants one extra attack with a weapon (you couldn't apply the haste to the speed weapon).
Just casting my lot into the pile.
EDIT: I will say however, the wording really needs to be cleaned up severely if it works the other way people are saying. It's worded horribly if that's what the intent of the original devs back in the day was. :(
The only problem I have with that interpretation is that it gives 2-handers a larger advantage over 2-handers, it may be negligible in the long run but it can start to make a larger impact over the course of several attacks.
Do you mean dual-wielders over 2-handers? 'Cause 2-handers already have a pretty amazing advantage over dual-wielders as it is. :o
I'm torn on this issue.
I think by RAW it doesn't work even though I understand the opinion of the possibility of the wording being ambiguous enough to allow it I believe that the intention of the wording of RAW is that it should not work.
However, I fall slightly into the camp that thinks it should. I do not see a balance issue aside from a couple corner cases (a bucket full of daggers of speed, etc). I'm not sure how it could be changed to disallow those few cases. But honestly, with the cost of the weapons being so high I think it is permissible to allow the player to get some advantage out of having more than one speed weapon.
I'm torn on this issue.
I think by RAW it doesn't work even though I understand the opinion of the possibility of the wording being ambiguous enough to allow it I believe that the intention of the wording of RAW is that it should not work.
However, I fall slightly into the camp that thinks it should. I do not see a balance issue aside from a couple corner cases (a bucket full of daggers of speed, etc). I'm not sure how it could be changed to disallow those few cases. But honestly, with the cost of the weapons being so high I think it is permissible to allow the player to get some advantage out of having more than one speed weapon.
The first question I would ask, is where the heck did someone get a bucket full of daggers that cost at minimum 32,000 gp a piece? After that question was answered, I'd then wonder if it really mattered since they would only be throwing 1d4+1 daggers (I mean even with fighter bonuses, that seems very lackluster). O.o
The first question I would ask, is where the heck did someone get a bucket full of daggers that cost at minimum 32,000 gp a piece?
From Quantum Steve. (see above)
I think it's the meaning of "it" that's causing the problem. ("It" being either the specific weapon in question, or the full attack action being used, and the wording used is "wielding it", which clouds the issue by focusing attention on the specific weapon.)
However, to come at the problem from a completely different angle (which requires a judgement call from the GM), try this on for size:
The Speed weapon property has a Caster Level of 7, which strongly implies a spell or spell-like effect of level 4 or lower.
My contention is that there does not exist any spell or spell-like effect that allows someone more than one extra attack (period) on a full attack action, regardless of the number of different weapons used with the full attack. Certain Feats do (Improved Two Weapon Fighting, obtainable at 6th level is one that springs to mind).
Therefore, the power of the effect created by the Speed weapon property should be in line with that created by existing spell and spell-like effects of 4th Level or lower that have similar effect.
The base spell or spell-like effect that meets those criteria is haste.
Ergo, a creature using a Speed AoMF can, at best, be operating under an effect that operates like a 4th level version of haste. It is more likely to be operating under an effect identical to haste itself, since that is the spell used in the creation of the item.
The GM judgement call is thus the following question: would a 4th level version of haste allow an additional attack with each weapon/natural attack being used? (For comparison, this would allow an ITWF to make 6 attacks each round (50% more than normal at the minimum level for the effect, and 20% more than the same character under the effect of haste), and all creatures with 3 natural attacks to likewise make 6 (100% more than normal, and 50% more than when hasted).
I'm inclined to say "no", for myself, but I don't think it necessarily breaks the game if you say "yes". However, "doesn't necessarily" is NOT a balance call. Can it break things? Yes. Then the more stringent restriction should be used.
|
Can you point to me where in this rule a numerical bonus is cited?
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.Bonuses are numerical values that are added to checks and statistical scores. Most bonuses have a type, and as a general rule, bonuses of the same type are not cumulative (do not “stack”)—only the greater bonus granted applies.Penalties are numerical values that are subtracted from a check or statistical score. Penalties do not have a type and most penalties stack with one another.Clap, Clap, Clap.
You have replied with a citation from www.d20pfsrd.com. That is not an official source and tend to paraphrase rules. Sometime that generate differences in the rules , as in this situation.
I have cited the PRD, that is on Paizo official site, use the books actual text and don't use the term number.
Maybe you need to check your sources before you use them to dispute a rule citation.
Most of what is from D20Pfsrd is copied and pasted from this site. I know that when I add stuff to that site, that is how I do it, and how the others are supposed to do it.
I will tell you what I tell RD when he tries to say "it is D20PFsrd, so it does not count", check to make sure they match because most of the time they do.
I checked what he cited against the piece about Stacking that I had cited. My error not checking that his pieces was in the PRD too, under the definiton of Bonus. In my defence I can point out that the question was:
Stacking: Stacking refers to the act of adding together bonuses or penalties that apply to one particular check or statistic. Generally speaking, most bonuses of the same type do not stack. Instead, only the highest bonus applies. Most penalties do stack, meaning that their values are added together. Penalties and bonuses generally stack with one another, meaning that the penalties might negate or exceed part or all of the bonuses, and vice versa.Can you point to me where in this rule a numerical bonus is cited?
and his reply was citing a different section of the rules.
Yes, I am a nitpicker and no, I am not saying thst D20PFsrd doesn't count, but when there are differences between the PRD and PFsrd, what count is the PRD.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
One extra attack on a Full Attack action with that weapon.I always took that bolded part to be a restriction of the ability.
I always took that wording to be there so that a player could not have his +1 dagger of speed in his off hand and use the 'extra attack' on his main hand weapon of '+5 with additional +5 of annihilate the bad guy enhancements'. Or claim he has the +1 dagger of speed on his person somewhere so he is now under the effects of a permanent haste for attacks per round. RAI it is abundantly clear (in my mind) that TWF speed weapons would still only grant 1 extra attack total.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Damn, this would be so much easier if Hastened were a condition that grants one extra attack at full BAB when taking a full attack action and only one effect granting the condition functions at any one time.
Then all the Speed special ability would need to do is apply the Hastened condition, and the haste spell could apply the Hastened condition with the extra bits tagged on.
The first question I would ask, is where the heck did someone get a bucket full of daggers that cost at minimum 32,000 gp a piece? After that question was answered, I'd then wonder if it really mattered since they would only be throwing 1d4+1 daggers (I mean even with fighter bonuses, that seems very lackluster). O.oI'm torn on this issue.
I think by RAW it doesn't work even though I understand the opinion of the possibility of the wording being ambiguous enough to allow it I believe that the intention of the wording of RAW is that it should not work.
However, I fall slightly into the camp that thinks it should. I do not see a balance issue aside from a couple corner cases (a bucket full of daggers of speed, etc). I'm not sure how it could be changed to disallow those few cases. But honestly, with the cost of the weapons being so high I think it is permissible to allow the player to get some advantage out of having more than one speed weapon.
They're not throwing the daggers, they're using them in melee, and they don't have to be daggers, feel free to substitute Falchions if it pleases you.
Also, plenty of classes can magic up their weapons, so no need to spend 32,000gp each, normal mundane weapons will do.
|
|
Damn, this would be so much easier if Hastened were a condition that grants one extra attack at full BAB when taking a full attack action and only one effect granting the condition functions at any one time.
Then all the Speed special ability would need to do is apply the Hastened condition, and the haste spell could apply the Hastened condition with the extra bits tagged on.
Actually that wouldn't work, as one could use a speed weapon to get an extra attack with a different weapon.
But the idea is nice,
James
And a speed effect give only 1 of the effects of haste, the extra attack. Not the extra movement, +1 to reflex save, +1 to hit, +1 to AC.
So you would need a speeded condition. and probably something for a condition giving extra movement and one for a dodge bonus thanks to being hasted and so on. Too many conditions.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Seriously?
Okay, now that I'm actually at a keyboard, rather than trying to write clean text on an iPad, try this:
Hastened(condition)
When making a full attack action, the creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. Only one extra attack may ever be gained from this condition, regardless of the number of effects that grant the condition, and it does not actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.
Haste
School transmutation; Level bard 3, sorcerer/wizard 3
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M (a shaving of licorice root)
Range close (25 ft. + 5 ft./2 levels)
Targets one creature/level, no two of which can be more than 30 ft. apart
Duration 1 round/level
Saving Throw Fortitude negates (harmless); Spell Resistance yes (harmless)The transmuted creatures move and act more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects.
The targets gain the hastened condition.
Also, the targets gains a +1 bonus on attack rolls and a +1 dodge bonus to AC and Reflex saves. Any condition that makes you lose your Dexterity bonus to Armor Class (if any) also makes you lose dodge bonuses.
All of the targets' modes of movement (including land movement, burrow, climb, fly, and swim) increase by 30 feet, to a maximum of twice the subject's normal speed using that form of movement. This increase counts as an enhancement bonus, and it affects the creature's jumping distance as normal for increased speed. Multiple haste effects don't stack. Haste dispels and counters slow.
Speed: Grants the wielder the hastened condition for use with this weapon only. If more than one weapon wielded has this property, the wielder chooses which one makes the extra attack.
Word count 299 vs 304 for the existing text.
I'm torn on this issue.
I think by RAW it doesn't work even though I understand the opinion of the possibility of the wording being ambiguous enough to allow it I believe that the intention of the wording of RAW is that it should not work.
However, I fall slightly into the camp that thinks it should. I do not see a balance issue aside from a couple corner cases (a bucket full of daggers of speed, etc). I'm not sure how it could be changed to disallow those few cases. But honestly, with the cost of the weapons being so high I think it is permissible to allow the player to get some advantage out of having more than one speed weapon.
Getting an extra attack is a huge bonus to DPR. If it applied to each weapon separately the +3(price for haste) would outclass every other enhancement by a long shot for the purpose of DPR. Giving up the +1 to AC and reflexes is a small price to pay for the increased damage. Since both of these attacks would be a full BAB it would be a no-brainer.
Except we already got a ruling from a Dev, in the FAQ (meaning that it was vetted by all devs) saying it gives you one extra attack, period, full stop.
How the hell is this thread still going?
Only the errata counts. ;)
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just because my mind is completely blown at this point...Am I wrong that the people who wrote the book have answered this question, posted it in the FAQ, and that unless you are planning on saving up a lot of money, buying Paizo, firing the current Devs and republishing it, this is now a settled ruling and anything you may do in your game would be a house rule.
Meaning this thread is over, unless it wishes to be continued in the house rules thread.
Did I miss something, or perhaps the RAWyers (I am stealing that and running it into the ground because it is so perfect) are being paid a commission by some unknown force seeking to increase world suck by arguing about things that are already decided until the Devs decide to stop making rulings because "Some men you just can't reach. So you get what we had here (today), which is the way (the RAWyers) wants it... well, (they) gets it."
Cue either the rest of the film, or perhaps Guns and Roses.
Either way, I wish a merciful death to this thread.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why does it matter? If they put out errata it will be the same end result.
Perhaps if they put out an errata, it would have a well thought out justification instead of just "Because I think it would be OP in this case, it's being arbitrarily ruled against."
I see how this is OP to give to the druid's 12 legged, two headed dire tiger. The monk with 2 attacks? He's paying 2.5x the cost and giving up his AC booster for what the ranger gets for 2x cost and his weapon slots (far less valuable, as the monk doesn't have weapon slots for unarmed attacks).
But then, SKR's justification of the ridiculous price of the AMF is pretty weak to begin with, and that's where this whole kerfuffle (and the Flurry Kerfuffle) came from.
If they would acknowledge that AMF is a good weapon for Animal Companions, and a terrible option for monks, and build something for monks that is comparable to what TWFers get (same price scheme, takes the same item slots, etc), it would be a big improvement.
Often though it seems pathfinder is less about good mechanical balance and more about "this sounds like an option people may want to do". Unfortunately people end up seeing the options, and many just don't realize that the option they have chosen just isn't worth taking, as they often don't have the degree of system mastery required to go "Wait a minute... Is this option worth taking, or am I shooting myself in the foot?" - TWF, Monk, and Rogue, I'm looking at you the most.
Getting an extra attack is a huge bonus to DPR. If it applied to each weapon separately the +3(price for haste) would outclass every other enhancement by a long shot for the purpose of DPR. Giving up the +1 to AC and reflexes is a small price to pay for the increased damage. Since both of these attacks would be a full BAB it would be a no-brainer.I'm torn on this issue.
I think by RAW it doesn't work even though I understand the opinion of the possibility of the wording being ambiguous enough to allow it I believe that the intention of the wording of RAW is that it should not work.
However, I fall slightly into the camp that thinks it should. I do not see a balance issue aside from a couple corner cases (a bucket full of daggers of speed, etc). I'm not sure how it could be changed to disallow those few cases. But honestly, with the cost of the weapons being so high I think it is permissible to allow the player to get some advantage out of having more than one speed weapon.
Interesting bit, discussing from core would be the following.
It would be fair to assume that if speed stacked, it would be favored naturally by those who dual-wield and those who have a crapton of natural attacks (like Druids). So let's look at what sort of effect that has on the DPR for a moment.
Now at 20th level, a hasted warrior with a +10 Strength and a +5 weapon will attack at +36/+36/+31/+26/+21. Assuming, say, a greatsword, he deals 2d6+20 damage per hit or about 27 damage per hit. Against a pit fiend (AC 42 with inborn buffs), he has the following damage output per full-attack.
75%/75%/50%/25%/5% or 72.1 DPR w/out crits.
His +5 weapon ignores the monster's DR completely.
A dual-wielder with haste main hand and speed off-hand and double slice, and a +10 strength would have about 1d8+15 on his main hand, and 1d8+12 on his off hand, or about 19.5 on main, and 16.5 off. Their attack routine would be about...
+34/+34/+31/+31/+29/+26/+24/+21/+19 for a full attack off...
65%(main)/65%(main)/50%(off)/50%(off)/40%(main)/25%(off)/15%(main)/5%(off)/ 5%(main) or 58.5 DPR w/out crits.
Unfortunately, his off-hand weapon is not a +5 weapon, but instead a +2 weapon with a +3 enhancement. So his off hand weapon eats -15 per hit, and drops his DPR much lower (more or less negates every off-hand hit). However, with some setup he can bypass it (perhaps with an oil of blessed weapon).
Druid in huge bear form would have 2 bites and 4 claw attacks at highest bonus. Assuming the druid pumped Strength prime and was going pure melee druid, that would give the druid +13 strength on each attack, and a +2 enhancement from a +2 speed amulet. With a +15 base BAB, the druid would have the following attack routine.
+29(bite)/+29(bite)/+29(claw)/+29(claw)/+29(claw)/+29(claw) at 22 per bite and 19.5 per claw. The druid's DPR without damage reduction accounted would be...
40%/40%/40%/40%/40%/40% or 48.8 the lowest out of the three.
With damage reduction applied, the DPR becomes 23.6. The druid is more than likely just trying to get the critter in a grapple using his Grab special ability, as opposed to actually tearing the fiend apart.
Now the druid would do better if he uses his spells to cast greater magic fang on his bite and both claw attacks, but he still can't penetrate damage reduction, which leaves his DPR pretty lackluster, and only about catches up to the guy who has a single +5 sword and no class features.
It's worth noting again that the 1st guy in the DPR comparison is a 20th level warrior (as in NPC class, so barbarians, rangers, paladins, and fighters have their own tricks for pushing this number much higher) wielding only a +5 sword (50,000 gp). The dual-wielder is wielding a +5 sword and a +2 speed sword (100,000 gp). The druid is using a +2 speed amulet (125,000 gp), has a 36 strength. The 2-hander guy spent less money than all of them and schools all of them with less investment of class abilities and feats.
I guess that shows you just how much TWF lags behind (which doesn't surprise me). Though I'm a bit surprised about the bear.
I guess I wasn't giving DR enough credit; and there aren't that many creatures with more than 3 natural attacks.
Exactly. In core, an AoMF (speed) even with the "beneficial" reading is not that impressive. It's never been unbalanced, and I've seen it used in this way for ages (mainly because our group has always read it as you couldn't get extra attacks with the weapon with haste, which prevents you from making a single really powerful weapon with speed, such as a +5 keen holy speed weapon and then getting +2 attacks with it), and it's never been OP. At low levels it's far to expensive. I mean, a speed amulet with no other benefits costs 45,000 gp. You couldn't afford that until 13th level if you were assuming 25% of WBL (and if your ENTIRE wealth was dedicated to it, you'd not get it earlier than 9th).
And speed weapons have a big drawback. They're reliant upon full-attacks, but are limited to melee weapons. That's a critical thing in an actual game. A druid with pounce (say your druid turns into a tiger instead of a bear) might get the absolute most use out of it (most natural attacks I can fathom in core on a druid form is a pouncing tiger which would get 2 bites and 8 claws counting rakes), so with a tiger form you'd have DPR 80 if the foe has no DR at all, which is comparable to the 20th level warrior with no feats, class abilities, etc (the warrior's DPR would rise drastically if he was a fighter, barbarian, paladin, ranger, or even cleric). But with the DR in play (and it'll be in play because you can't get your claws to bypass them while also possessing speed), then the DPR is only 30.8.
Someone mentioned using speed daggers + quick draw to get tons of attacks. That's actually really funny, and I'd love to see that one day. At 32,301 gp market value for each dagger, that eats into your wealth pretty ferociously, and you have to drop them to get the trick to "work". So you'd get a melee full attack that we shall call "stabby-rip-stab-stab" and at the end of it you have a few hundred thousand gold pieces worth of +4 weapons lying at your feet. :P
EDIT: Putting it another way, the only way that speed is worth a +3 weapon enhancement is if it works the way I'm describing. If not, it's the absolute most useless weapon enhancement on in the game, because you get all its benefits and more with a simple haste spell, which you can get for way cheaper. Remember that the minimum price of a speed weapon is 32,300 gp. Whereas boots of speed allow you to get the entire benefits of haste as a free action, with a duration divided as you like, with any weapon (melee and ranged), and you can activate it when you need it. Boots of speed are 12,000 gp market price. The boots only weigh 1 lb. too. You could carry boots of speed around and it would be cheaper and more powerful than bothering with a speed weapon if it gives +1 attack period.
There are actually a number of druid forms with more than 3 attacks, the Dienonychus, for example, has 4 (one secondary) and there are a few plants with 5, like the Viper Vine, which also has a 20-foot reach + grab/constrict. The Quickwood has 4 attacks, 3 are secondary but they have a 60(!) foot reach. Secondary sucks against a creature like a Balor with high DR and AC though.
Also, rake requires you to start your turn in a grapple, so you can't get those 10 attacks as a tiger.
Ashiel respondingGetting an extra attack is a huge bonus to DPR. If it applied to each weapon separately the +3(price for haste) would outclass every other enhancement by a long shot for the purpose of DPR. Giving up the +1 to AC and reflexes is a small price to pay for the increased damage. Since both of these attacks would be a full BAB it would be a no-brainer.I'm torn on this issue.
I think by RAW it doesn't work even though I understand the opinion of the possibility of the wording being ambiguous enough to allow it I believe that the intention of the wording of RAW is that it should not work.
However, I fall slightly into the camp that thinks it should. I do not see a balance issue aside from a couple corner cases (a bucket full of daggers of speed, etc). I'm not sure how it could be changed to disallow those few cases. But honestly, with the cost of the weapons being so high I think it is permissible to allow the player to get some advantage out of having more than one speed weapon.
Why is that druid not in tiger form? With that aside the druid does more damage than 23.6 DPR without haste, well a druid built to go into melee does anyway.
As for the TWF guy they are not that far behind the THF guy, but I do think that for all of the feats TWF'ing takes up it should do more damage.
A THF'er and a TWF'er at level 10 are not that far part assuming you use the same class. I think a TWF'ing ranger actually outdamage a THF'ing ranger. Using a speed weapon for a THF'er goes farther than using a speed weapon on a TWF'er though, assuming speed is only allowed once.
I am tired of typing. I will make up a THF'er, and a TWF'er at 15th level and compare them with and without speed. To avoid corner cases I won't use the ranger, but the fighter, and the combat rogue(who would probably benefit even more than a monk would. I will also stat up the TWF'er with speed on two different weapons.
I want to see if I my above(previous post) guess is correct. I will also use the core fighter, and the weapon master arcehtype for the fighter. I will use the core rogue for the other build.
EDIT: Putting it another way, the only way that speed is worth a +3 weapon enhancement is if it works the way I'm describing. If not, it's the absolute most useless weapon enhancement on in the game, because you get all its benefits and more with a simple haste spell, which you can get for way cheaper. Remember that the minimum price of a speed weapon is 32,300 gp. Whereas boots of speed allow you to get the entire benefits of haste as a free action, with a duration divided as you like, with any weapon (melee and ranged), and you can activate it when you need it. Boots of speed are 12,000 gp market price. The boots only weigh 1 lb. too. You could carry boots of speed around and it would be cheaper and more powerful than bothering with a speed weapon if it gives +1 attack period.
I think a +2 speed weapon is better for DPR than a +5 weapon. Since speed does not work with haste I don't see why the comparison is made though. The boots are a better deal though. They are useful if the caster is taken out early somehow, the haste is dispelled, or if you just play with people who dont believe in teamwork.
|
|
Hmm.
I think the time you're going to have the most powerful AoMF is a Summoner, as you can build an Eidolon with a decent number of natural attacks at the higher levels.
If Speed works the way it makes sense to for melee weapons on an AoMF, then I can see in SOME BUILDS of Summoner, and potentially SOME BUILDS of Druid, it *Might* be overpowered.
AoMF for a creature like a dragon would be crazy. This could all be solved by making an item for the monk that cost less than the AoMF, and enhances his natural attacks like weapons are enhanced.
Why is that druid not in tiger form?
If you checked my post right after that, I changed to tiger form and updated the DPR, because tiger would be better for someone spamming full attacks than a bear (I just didn't think about tiger at the time).
Why is that druid not in tiger form?If you checked my post right after that, I changed to tiger form and updated the DPR, because tiger would be better for someone spamming full attacks than a bear (I just didn't think about tiger at the time).
I saw it after I made my post. :)
I saw it after I made my post. :)Why is that druid not in tiger form?If you checked my post right after that, I changed to tiger form and updated the DPR, because tiger would be better for someone spamming full attacks than a bear (I just didn't think about tiger at the time).
Still, it's not scary at all. XD
Still, it's not scary at all. XDI saw it after I made my post. :)Why is that druid not in tiger form?If you checked my post right after that, I changed to tiger form and updated the DPR, because tiger would be better for someone spamming full attacks than a bear (I just didn't think about tiger at the time).
If the druid can double its DPR and not be a threat it needs to be rebuilt.
If the druid can double its DPR and not be a threat it needs to be rebuilt.Still, it's not scary at all. XDI saw it after I made my post. :)Why is that druid not in tiger form?If you checked my post right after that, I changed to tiger form and updated the DPR, because tiger would be better for someone spamming full attacks than a bear (I just didn't think about tiger at the time).
Show me how you'd do it. :)
Show me how you'd do it. :)If the druid can double its DPR and not be a threat it needs to be rebuilt.Still, it's not scary at all. XDI saw it after I made my post. :)Why is that druid not in tiger form?If you checked my post right after that, I changed to tiger form and updated the DPR, because tiger would be better for someone spamming full attacks than a bear (I just didn't think about tiger at the time).
If I thought you really need my help I probably would, but since the DPR threads had a druid bring in at level 10 about 65 to about 125 I am sure that beating 23 DPR at a higher level is not that hard. :)
I am sure you are more than capable though.
PS:If I misread the number 23 or if it was a typo then this is a moot point.
It is more effective on an Eidolon or synthesist anyway.
It is more effective on an Eidolon or synthesist anyway.
Yes it is, but just counting the core material that has existed for ages, it's not particularly impressive.
If I thought you really need my help I probably would, but since the DPR threads had a druid bring in at level 10 about 65 to about 125 I am sure that beating 23 DPR at a higher level is not that hard. :)
I am sure you are more than capable though.
PS:If I misread the number 23 or if it was a typo then this is a moot point.
I don't really keep up with the DPR olympics (I probably should). It's possible that I really don't know. The druid in my previous example was in huge animal form, with a 30 strength (the expected strength as a dedicated 2 hander at 20th), and a +6 bonus from being in large animal form. I included the +2 enhancement bonus and speed properties. I noted you could get it a bit higher if you also cast greater magic fang on all of your natural weapons (+3 to hit and damage) which could bring you closer to a real warrior's DPR with enough prep time (I also included the -2 size modifier to hit for being huge).
Like I said, I'm curious as to how you would do it, because there's not a whole lot of other great buffs on the druid spell list for pushing damage. Defensive buffs abound, but not much in the offense department. So feel free to educate me. As I always say, I'm always learning.
It is more effective on an Eidolon or synthesist anyway.Yes it is, but just counting the core material that has existed for ages, it's not particularly impressive.
If I thought you really need my help I probably would, but since the DPR threads had a druid bring in at level 10 about 65 to about 125 I am sure that beating 23 DPR at a higher level is not that hard. :)
I am sure you are more than capable though.
PS:If I misread the number 23 or if it was a typo then this is a moot point.
I don't really keep up with the DPR olympics (I probably should). It's possible that I really don't know. The druid in my previous example was in huge animal form, with a 30 strength (the expected strength as a dedicated 2 hander at 20th), and a +6 bonus from being in large animal form. I included the +2 enhancement bonus and speed properties. I noted you could get it a bit higher if you also cast greater magic fang on all of your natural weapons (+3 to hit and damage) which could bring you closer to a real warrior's DPR with enough prep time (I also included the -2 size modifier to hit for being huge).
Like I said, I'm curious as to how you would do it, because there's not a whole lot of other great buffs on the druid spell list for pushing damage. Defensive buffs abound, but not much in the offense department. So feel free to educate me. As I always say, I'm always learning.
Ok, I will put it on the to-do list. I need to stop debating so I can get things done, lol. I need to finish the barbarian in the monk thread, compete in a PbP with a 20th level X. I know what X is but I won't say here. I was supposed to test the double speed weapon theory out also.
I can bump the ______ off until Thursday since I am off that day anyway.
The barbarian will be done in a few minutes once I get back to it, and then I will see what I can do with a druid. :)