|
see the thing is I don't see anywhere that it says you get combine them to get even more attacks than otherwise possible.
I'll grant you critters have attack entries that indicate otherwise, but there are no rules that I can see that explicitly tell you this.
if you can quote something that is from a rule book that indicates you can add your full attack option to your natural weapons and thus get full attack + natural, I'm all ears.
I don't think creatures are going to be a good way to argue for or against this though. I do see the three attacks, but again there's nothing in the rules that tell players to do this.
as an aside, it's still in parallel with a pc that would be using two weapon fighting, or slightly behind if you factor improved two weapon fighting (ie max of 4)
Not trying to be rude but...I think you're kinda reaching at this point. I mean, you clearly see how mixing natural attacks and manufactured weapons works now, but you still want to say that such a thing doesn't apply to PCs because...of an unknown reason you can't explain.
I think we've already (and clearly) established the 'proper' way of combining natural attacks and manufactured weapons, as the evidence pretty much speaks for itself. The fact that you are trying to make exceptions without any evidence to support your claim is only weakening your stance.
Effectively what you now want to say is that 'natural attacks' don't function the same way for PCs as they do with monsters (Or essentially any other NPC for that matter). You do realize that this is a very wild claim, and has no basis to support it whatsoever.
Now, in your example, lets say I have 4 claw attacks and 1 bite attack level 1. If such is the case, it is perfectly within a player's ability to make 6 attack during a full round.
In this case, a character could make an 'unarmed strike' (proficient or not) with a kick, and because that character never used the limbs that are holding his 'claws' or his 'bite', he or she can also use his or her natural attacks as well.
Granted, all the attacks would be 'secondary natural attacks', but it is still something that a player character could do if they really wanted to.
And I think I would just ask you to look at the evidence that's been presented against your case and accept the fact that natural attacks work the way that I (and several others) have already suggested.
if the 'tentacle attack' is not considered a secondary natural attack (as per the rules of ALL other tentacle attacks) what kind of 'attack' is it?
Dunno, but it's usually the unwanted type of attack.
We had this mate, Anthony, and all the girls used to call him 'The Octopus' because every time they got drunk, there was Anthony with his arms and hands all over them; they reckoned it was like he had 8 tentacles on the go, hence they gave him that moniker.
If you aren't Anthony Octopus and are actually an Alchemist, and not just mauling drunk young college girls but applying it with gusto, I would describe the attack as a 'Natural' attack - pretty much in line with your reasoning.
|
see the thing is I don't see anywhere that it says you get combine them to get even more attacks than otherwise possible.
I'll grant you critters have attack entries that indicate otherwise, but there are no rules that I can see that explicitly tell you this.
if you can quote something that is from a rule book that indicates you can add your full attack option to your natural weapons and thus get full attack + natural, I'm all ears.
You will notice that the example I posted followed this exactly. The creature either uses it's natural attacks or combines them with the longsword. You will notice that when it uses the longsword, it drops one of the claws from the attack pattern since that claw is holding the longsword. You will also notice that the claw and bite both took -5 penalties and 1/2 strength penalties to damage.
These rules are uniform for PCs and Monsters (The rules above came from the Core Rulebook for players after-all.)
Incidentally, this is exactly why we were confused about the tentacle discovery for the alchemist, because it breaks this otherwise uniform rule. As SKR has stated earlier in the thread, apparently this is intentional. But it is the exception that proves the rule so to speak.
In an attempt to settle this whole debate lantzkev, I would like to go ahead and draw your attention to an 'NPC' rather than a monster (I think you can agree that NPC's function under the same rules to that of normal PCs, correct?)
Take a look at the Human Cannibal (or basically a human barbarian)
Melee: greatclub +6 (1d10+6) and bite +1 (1d4+2) OR unarmed strike +6 (1d3+4) and bite +1 (1d4+2) OR bite +6 (1d4+4 plus +2 bonus on grapple)
Ranged throwing axe +3 (1d6+4)
Special Attacks rage (9 rounds/day), rage power (animal fury)
If you like, you can look it up yourself...
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/npc-s/npc-1/cannibal
As you can see, we have a human (level 2) who is clearly combining unarmed strikes on top of his natural attacks. He is 'clearly' getting 2 attacks during a full round, even though his BAB would normally only restrict him to 1. Thus, he is getting the additional attack from the 'bite attack' granted from the animal fury rage power.
Except he is getting 'extra' attacks because of the natural attacks, yet the Alchemist doesn't.
In an attempt to settle this whole debate lantzkev, I would like to go ahead and draw your attention to an 'NPC' rather than a monster (I think you can agree that NPC's function under the same rules to that of normal PCs, correct?)
Take a look at the Human Cannibal (or basically a human barbarian)
Melee: greatclub +6 (1d10+6) and bite +1 (1d4+2) OR unarmed strike +6 (1d3+4) and bite +1 (1d4+2) OR bite +6 (1d4+4 plus +2 bonus on grapple)
Ranged throwing axe +3 (1d6+4)Special Attacks rage (9 rounds/day), rage power (animal fury)
If you like, you can look it up yourself...
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/npc-s/npc-1/cannibal
As you can see, we have a human (level 2) who is clearly combining unarmed strikes on top of his natural attacks. He is 'clearly' getting 2 attacks during a full round, even though his BAB would normally only restrict him to 1. Thus, he is getting the additional attack from the 'bite attack' granted from the animal fury rage power.
Yep. Sometimes they make mistakes when doing those sample creatures.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
As I said, according to what the Devs are saying, the 'tentacle' discovery does not function like other natural attacks.
Okay, I accept that.
However, they explain that the 'tentacle attack' can be substituted in place of a manufactured weapon or an 'unarmed strike' (which is something natural attacks normally can't do).
If that is the case (and since every PC can make an 'unarmed strike'...and they don't even need to be proficient with it either), the the alchemist can basically substitute all his 'unarmed strikes' for 'tentacle attacks'.
Now, because his 'unarmed strikes' are based around his BAB, then that means that the alchemist just gained a number of 'natural attacks' equal to whatever his BAB might be.
For example: if the alchemist had a BAB of +6/+1...according to the Devs...he can now make 2 tentacle attacks in place of his 2 unarmed strikes (again, he doesn't even need to have the 'improved unarmed strike' feat to do this).
Therefore, the alchemist simply makes 2 'tentacle attacks' with his FULL strength modifier at +6/+1.
Now, because the alchemist ONLY used the 'limb' of his tentacle to make these attacks, he is still able to make other 'natural attacks' so long as he has access to them.
In this case, if the Alchemist also had Feral Mutagen activated (which grants him 2 claws and a bite attack), an alchemist would also get to make these attacks as well.
However, here is the REAL kicker: because the alchemist is only using 'natural weapons' to make all these attacks, his claw and bite attacks are still considered primary attacks.
Under normal circumstances, this would not be the case because no other natural weapon is based off of a characters BAB progression. 'Usually', only manufactured weapons and unarmed strikes use the BAB progression to determine the number of attacks you can make. However (and again, according to the Devs), because the tentacle attack behaves in such a unique way, it essentially breaks this rule.
And, if such is the case, it actually makes the 'tentacle' discovery WAY more powerful since you could 'technically' make up to 6 attacks with 'natural weapons'...with 4 of them being based on your full BAB...and all of them gaining your full Strength modifier to damage (not to mention the fact that they would all gain full benefits from Power Attacking as well).
Yep. Sometimes they make mistakes when doing those sample creatures.
You do realize that is VERY poor logic. After all, if we decided to go that route, then anything we quoted from the rule books could essentially be chalked up to "oh...yeah...that was probably just a mistake".
Again, I would ask that people simply look at the 'evidence', and please stop ignoring it just because you don't like what it says. It's already been established how 'monsters' can combine the attacks...and when that didn't satisfy anyone, I then proved how NPCs can do it as well.
The matter is concluded, the case is close- combining natural attacks on top of manufactured weapons or 'unarmed strikes' DOES work.
Sheesh..
Anywho, the thing that I would like to know is if I'm understanding the 'tentacle' discovery correctly now (that's all).
Also, it would be nice to get some confirmation on why Feral Mutagen can't target vestigial arms either, but I suppose I can save that for another thread.
longspear +12/+7 (1d8+7/x3), bite +7 (1d6+2)
I don't see where it gets three attacks at a time.
Longspear attacks at +12
Longspear attacks at +7Bite attacks at +7
[Count von count] One, two, three ways of killing the PC. Ah ah ah. [/count von count]
The rules that tell a player to do this are in the natural weapons section. It says additional attacks as long as you're not using a limb twice.
Dusk, why don't you uh...wait a few days on that question. People can cool their jets in the mean time :)
Dusk, why don't you uh...wait a few days on that question. People can cool their jets in the mean time :)
but but but....i wanna make my 4 armed Tiefling alchemist monster :P
(who, incidentally, can make 4 claw attacks, 1 bite attack, and 3 tentacle attacks all at his full strength modifier...according to what i understand of the current rules) lololol
although I still wish that the 'Enlarge Person' spell could affect a tiefling...oh well, I'm sure it wouldn't be too bad to house rule that or something.
Extra claw attacks Violates the "no extra attacks" clause of vestigal arm.
Extra tentacle attacks violate the "in place of" clause in the tentacle.
This has been explained to you clearly, concisely, and repeatedly by not only the people on the boards but the person who wrote the feat
Simply look at the evidence and please stop ignoring it just because you don't like what it says.
Extra claw attacks Violates the "no extra attacks" clause of vestigal arm.
Extra tentacle attacks violate the "in place of" clause in the tentacle.
This has been explained to you clearly, concisely, and repeatedly by not only the people on the boards but the person who wrote the feat
Simply look at the evidence and please stop ignoring it just because you don't like what it says.
I sense...hostility ;)
Don't worry, I know what you're referring to with the whole 'no extra attacks' clause for vestigial arms. However, the problem is this:
When you change vestigial arms into claws...well...they are no longer vestigial arms...they are claws.
Think of it like a transmutation/polymorph spell: you are essentially altering a limb into something completely different, which allows you to have the claw attack. In other words, the 'vestigial arms' are not granting you the 'extra attacks'...the fact that they are now considered 'claws' is what gains you the claw attacks.
Also, I love the 'stab of irony' you put in there ;) but as I said...the debate about what the tentacle discovery still does is still an issue that needs to be resolved (unless my theories in the above posts were correct).
The feral mutagen issue I am purposely saving for another thread :P
I sense...hostility ;)
*shaves head* Thank you Diana.
When you change vestigial arms into claws...well...they are no longer vestigial arms...they are claws.
No, its a vestigial arm with lee press on nails on it. which is sort of like putting toes on the end of a seals flippers and expecting it to walk upright. It doesn't matter how big or sharp the nails are if the arm doesn't have enough strength and coordination behind it it to attack.
Think of it like a transmutation/polymorph spell: you are essentially altering a limb into something completely different, which allows you to have the claw attack.
I know this is what you WANT it to do, but its not. Growing claws does not in any way, shape, or form necessitate a change to the entire arm.
Also, I love the 'stab of irony' you put in there ;) but as I said...the debate about what the tentacle discovery still does is still an issue that needs to be resolved (unless my theories in the above posts were correct)
Take one attack that you would normally get in a round.
Replace it with a secondary natural attack that has the grab special ability.
Whats still unresolved?
Problem 1) The devs have already said that the 'tentacle' discovery is NOT a secondary natural attack.
Problem 2) You do realize that a vestigial arm can do everything that your 'normal' arm can do. For example, it can make an unarmed strike, or you can use it to make an attack with a one-handed weapon (so long as it doesn't violate the number of attacks it can use via its base attack progression of course). Therefore, since it is essentially treated like your 'normal' arms...and because your 'normal arms' can be targeted for the claws gained with the Feral Mutagen...why am I not allowed to target the vestigial arms instead? No rule says that I cannot do this.
Problem 3) I don't need the change the entire arm because the arm is no different then my normal arm anyway. By your logic, if I were to place my claws on my 'normal' arms...well...I didn't really CHANGE them either...and thus I wouldn't be able to use them.
As I said before, Vestigial arms can be treated like 'normal' arms (no difference). They just don't give you anything 'extra'. However, the feral mutagen clearly allows you to gain claw attacks...so therefore, the question then becomes this:
what limbs on the body can be legally targeted to gain claw attacks?
Well, obviously you can just 'spontaneously grow claws' out of your stomach or anything...so I'm assuming you need to have a corresponding limb that qualifies for 'claws'.
Now, it has been argued that you can target your feet for claws (I'm not gonna touch this issue, but I'm just saying that it has been said). I'm not entirely sure I'm on board with this idea of course, but I know for a fact that you CAN target your arms.
Thus, since that is the case, vestigial arms are a perfectly legal target to place your claws upon.
(again, I really would like to save this issue for another thread if possible).
Problem 1) The devs have already said that the 'tentacle' discovery is NOT a secondary natural attack.
Link please?
Problem 2) You do realize that a vestigial arm can do everything that your 'normal' arm can do.
This isn't a problem for anything I said. Its your interpretation that allows you to get multiple attacks based on your interpretation to get multiple attacks.
For example, it can make an unarmed strike, or you can use it to make an attack with a one-handed weapon (so long as it doesn't violate the number of attacks it can use via its base attack progression of course). Therefore, since it is essentially treated like your 'normal' arms...and because your 'normal arms' can be targeted for the claws gained with the Feral Mutagen...why am I not allowed to target the vestigial arms instead? No rule says that I cannot do this.
Its vestigal. Smaller, stunted, less developed than your other arms. It doesn't work as well as them, and is in fact different than your other arms.
2. (of certain organs or parts of organisms) having attained a simple structure and reduced size and function during the evolution of the species: the vestigial pelvic girdle of a snake
Now, HOW small and stunted is it? How reduced is the functionality? There are many, MANY corner cases for what the limb may or may not be able to do depending on the DM's call. Can it load a firearm? Can it hold the stock of a fire arm so a more dexterous hand can reload it? Can it hold a shield? (answered by skr elsewhere but not readily spelled out in the feat) Shut a door? Point a wand? Operate the levers on a loom to turn you into a 1 man weaving factory...
THOSE aren't readily apparent from the rules. The fact that your 8 limbed Doc OC heading for Doctor Squid character is IS quite obviously in violation of the letter and intent of the rules.
If you're in PFS, you're hosed.
If you're in a home game you need to convince the DM, and I don't think you have a good argument to bring them.
what limbs on the body can be legally targeted to gain claw attacks?
I'm not saying you can't grow a claw out of your vestigial limb. I'm saying that You can't use it to make more attacks. This is clearly in line with the rules. Just because a limb HAS a claw doesn't mean you can use it.
I wouldn't let a fighter make claw/claw/bite plus knees and kicks any more than I'd let a fighter make rapier/dagger plus knees and kicks, or punch/punch plus knees and kicks.
If the fighter can normally use lefthand/righthand, and is instead using leftclaw/rightclaw, he can't start making kicks, knees, and headbutts in addition to those claw attacks "just because he's not using unarmed strikes."
OK, the latter paragraph from Sean is obviously making the error of confusing punches and UAS, and thinking that kick is not an UAS when that 100% fits the definition of UAS. The first paragraph I will just take as Sean's personal GM'ing decision at this point, since he doesn't otherwise justify it as 'RAW proscribed'.
---------------------
I'm not saying you can't grow a claw out of your vestigial limb. I'm saying that You can't use it to make more attacks.
well, if you have a claw, whatever limb it is, it follows the natural attack rules which mean you can make attacks with it as primary if not using iteratives, or as secondary if also using iteratives with a full attack (as long as you don't use the same limb as the claw for another attack, or to hold an object/weapon).
that said, i don't really see where this idea of choosing where claws appear comes from.
what ability states you can choose which limb to 'target' with claws?
if you can't target the effect, then it will do the same thing on anybody who uses it.
i feel that duskblade is pretty much with RAW here, except for:
However, here is the REAL kicker: because the alchemist is only using 'natural weapons' to make all these attacks, his claw and bite attacks are still considered primary attacks.
if the tentacle discovery isn't functioning as a natural weapon, but as on par with a weapon/UAS iterative attack, then it functions so for all purposes unless otherwise stated. so using the tentacle iterative attack WOULD force other natural attacks to secondary status (unless otherwise stated).
well, if you have a claw, whatever limb it is, it follows the natural attack rules which mean you can make attacks with it as primary if not using iteratives, or as secondary if also using iteratives with a full attack (as long as you don't use the same limb as the claw for another attack, or to hold an object/weapon).
Specific trumps general. This limb says no extra attacks. The claw is on the limb. You couldn't make the "Extra" attack without the limb, so the limb won't help you get there.
well it doesn't say 'this limb may never be used for an extra attack', it says 'the tentacle does not give [e.g. grant] an extra attack'. having 1 arm or 2 arms doesn't affect your number of attacks either. but for every natural attack you have you get an extra attack. that isn't granted by the limb, but by the natural attack. there's nothing saying that you can't have more than one natural attack on a given limb, so there isn't really correlation there (limb is only relevant for using natural attack OR weapon/UAS on that limb).
but re: feral mutagen, nothing about it indicates any choice or 'targetting'.
you gain a bite on your head, as per normal, and claws on arms as per normal. (talons go on feet, unless stated otherwise)
the tentacle is not an arm, but a tentacle, even if it /holds and manipulates objects/ as an arm.
so claws wouldn't go on it. specifically, it says it doesn't have magic slots like an arm,
so it does not count as an 'arm slot'... pretty parallel to claws 'applying to' arms.
|
|
I've yet to see an example provided that lets it exceed the max possible with a full attack + twp fighting, or exceeding their number of natural attacks.
When you claim they work completely together the way you're saying, you're reaching a bit after what sean has said and with all the examples in the books.
As you can see, we have a human (level 2) who is clearly combining unarmed strikes on top of his natural attacks. He is 'clearly' getting 2 attacks during a full round, even though his BAB would normally only restrict him to 1. Thus, he is getting the additional attack from the 'bite attack' granted from the animal fury rage power.
He's not exceeding a full round attack option with two weapon fighting.
Your greatclub example also has him apparently wielding it in one hand. hence the +6dmg while raging. Since he's one handing it, he could make a second attack using twf with his offhand, and in this case he's using the bite in place of that offhand.
This is what it appears to be anyhow, and after looking through the beastiary, and reading SKRs comment, and ya know reading the rules and seeing that it never says you tack them onto full attack options, but that you can replace attacks... yeah I'm inclined to not argue with SKR and go with this reading of the rules, which is fortunate enough to have support of a developer while yours is in contradiction.
The claw ability lets you grow a claw. It does not let you grow an entire claw attack. Growing a claw on your vestigial arm is no different than growing it out of your stomach.
Well, seeing as how the opposition is simply ignoring the fact that the 'feral mutagen' changes the 'limb' into something different (in this case, a claw), I can see we are not going to be getting anywhere with that argument. Lets jut also 'ignore' the fact that nowhere in the description of the 'vestigial arm' does it EVER say that this limb is 'stunted' or 'weaker' then your normal arms. Nope, we are just going to base that 'assumption' on the name of the discovery.
Let us also ignore the fact that vestigial arms can do everything that a normal arm could do (without any penalty mind you), such as wear a glove or use a ring. Yet, for 'some strange reason'...if we decide to transform this 'new arms' into a claw...well...the claw won't work...why?
Well...for no good reason...that's why.
(Can you see why I'm not convinced yet)
This really is a silly argument mind you...I mean, what your basically saying is this:
You: oh...you can put the 'claw attacks' on your vestigial arms'...but you can't use them because they count as 'extra attacks'.
Me: Um, that makes no sense...my 'claws' are now natural attacks...and given the rules of natural attacks it clearly states that I--
You: nope nope nope...your claws are still vestigial arms...you can't use those limbs in that manner.
Me: Uh...but they are no longer vestigial arms...they are claws...its kinda like how my 'normal hands' are no longer considered 'normal hands if I used feral mutagen to grow claws on them...they would be claws...which means I can attack with them as natural weapons.
You: Yes...u can give claws to your normal hands...but not vestigial arms.
Me: Why not?
You: Because I say so...
Me: ......
(again, see why this doesn't satisfy me)
@lantzkev
Again, you're reaching. It's not enough that i've given examples that clearly denounce your position, but now you are simply choosing to ignore them by trying to offer a bizarre explanation that natural attacks are somehow limited based on two weapon fighting.
Um...can you please show me where it expressly states that?
@lantzkav: you somehow missed the minotaur example that people patiently provided on the previous page?
Hmmm, answer me this Lantzkev...can you explain how a minotaur's full attack looks like this then:
Melee greataxe +9/+4 (3d6+6/×3) and gore +4 (1d6+2)Well gee...a minotaur's BAB seems to allow 2 attacks...oh wait...but he can also make a gore attack in addition to that one as well.
And what do you know...a gore attack is a natural attack...in this case...it counts as secondary because he's using it with a manufactured weapon.
greataxe is a 2-handed weapon. although that doesn't matter since you can use a 2-hander weapon as mainhand in 2wf and make off-hand with a kick or headbutt or a 3rd arm.
check out marilith. it's using 6 arms to multi-weapon fight (i.e. like 2wf) AND use a tail slap in addition.
or the vrolikai has 4 arms to multi-weapon fight, and bite and sting in addition.
the tarry demodand is using 2wf and a bite on top,
why don't you address the paizo-confirmed RAW of combining iteratives with natural weapons, namely the 'in additon' wording?
Melee dagger +8 (1d4+6/19–20), bite +3 (1d4+3 plus curse of lycanthropy), gore +3 (1d8+3)
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/humanoids/lycanthrope/wer eboar
I know it's a 'wereboar', but its the first example I could find.
Clearly the BAB for this 'human barbarian' allows for one attack...or 2 attacks with this so-called TWF restriction.
However, as we can clearly see...this character is getting 3 attacks.
This obviously goes beyond the limit of TWF with natural attacks.
explanation finished.
Heck...while we're at it...go look up a Troglodyte as well.
Melee: club +2 (1d6+1), claw –3 (1d4), bite –3 (1d4) OR 2 claws +2 (1d4+1), bite +2 (1d4+1)
can we please move past this now?
i'm not sure why the parameters of 2wf (# of attacks) would ever be invoked (for combining iteratives w/ natural attacks) when that is never mentioned in connection with the rules for combining iteratives and natural weapons. i mean, why not invoke the bonus attacks of flurry w/ ki usage as the baseline for # of attacks? why not rapid shot? etc.
Wow this is starting to look pretty cheezy now.
Well, seeing as how the opposition is simply ignoring the fact that the 'feral mutagen' changes the 'limb' into something different (in this case, a claw)
There's nothing to ignore because this is simply not the case. Feral mutagen does no such thing. Feral mutagen does not change the entire limb. There is no such limb as a "claw attack" . You have an arm that can move around and on the end of it you have hands. Feral mutagen puts claws at the end of those hands and gives you a whopping big set of chompers. Thats it. If your hands are occupied with a greatsword you cannot grow a claw and expect to use it.
I can see we are not going to be getting anywhere with that argument. Lets jut also 'ignore' the fact that nowhere in the description of the 'vestigial arm' does it EVER say that this limb is 'stunted' or 'weaker' then your normal arms. Nope, we are just going to base that 'assumption' on the name of the discovery.
The name of the discovery and the listed restrictions. either the limb itself is weaker or your brain doesn't have the coordination to run it and your other limbs at the same time.
If you think its silly that you can put claws on your left arm, vesitgial arm, and right arm, and only pick two of them to attack fine.
But you have to distinguish between "thats not clear in the rules" from Hey i want this to be more powerful!
Let us also ignore the fact that vestigial arms can do everything that a normal arm could do (without any penalty mind you), such as wear a glove or use a ring. Yet, for 'some strange reason'...if we decide to transform this 'new arms' into a claw...well...the claw won't work...why?Well...for no good reason...that's why.
It won't work for entirely game mechanics reasons. They don't want people cheesing the system and making 30 attacks at level 5. In other words the raw is written and doing EXACTLY what its supposed to be doing by putting the kibosh on your character.
(Can you see why I'm not convinced yet)
Because you don't want to be. Because you're willing to turn anything said against what you want to happen into straw man
This really is a silly argument mind you...I mean, what your basically saying is this:
You: oh...you can put the 'claw attacks' on your vestigial arms'...bup
If you don't have the ability to understand people you don't have the ability to put words in my mouth. Don't.
(again, see why this doesn't satisfy me)
Nothing would satisfy you except getting to play your character with 7 attacks.
You do realize that a post designed to dissect my statements with underhanded insults doesn't really get you anywhere in an argument, right?
For starters, whether you want to accept it or not, a character's 'limb' is very important when understanding how natural attacks work. The reason for this is very simple: you cannot use the same limb to make multiple natural attacks with it. Each limb can only be used ONCE in a full-round action.
That being said, lets say that I have a character who already has claws as part of his race (a changeling, for example). Well, if I drink feral mutagen...do I suddenly gain 2 additional claw attacks on top of the ones I already have?
I would say no.
Why?
Because I don't have the 'limbs' to accommodate the new set of claws (as we have already said...you can't just put 'claw attacks' on your stomach because the stomach won't qualify as the proper 'limb' to hold the natural attack).
It is already accepted that when you gain the additional 'claw attacks' from feral mutagen, the claw attacks are placed upon your hands (that is the 'limb' that the claw attack uses).
Now, as I said, if you already have claw attacks on your hands (from, lets say, your race or a feat), you can't just add 2 new claw attacks to those limbs (because, as I said before, a limb can only hold 1 natural attack at a time).
However, what if your character had another set of arms and hands in addition to his normal set? Could you not target those limbs to place your natural attacks upon if those additional limbs meet the qualifications for said natural attack?
The answer would be...yes.
Also, lets try to be clear on what you've already said:
I'm not saying you can't grow a claw out of your vestigial limb. I'm saying that You can't use it to make more attacks. This is clearly in line with the rules. Just because a limb HAS a claw doesn't mean you can use it.
I'm not putting words in your mouth...but perhaps you should be more careful with the position your trying to make.
This is not a matter of wanting to be overpowered, this is simply a matter of wanting to understand the rules and gain an explanation as to why they work the way they do.
Also, in regards to the whole 'nothing will satisfy me' statements...perhaps you should take your own advice and stop trying to put words in my mouth instead ;)
[Oh irony...how I love u so much]
you cannot use the same limb to make multiple natural attacks with it. Each limb can only be used ONCE in a full-round action.
as i already wrote, that rule only applies to combining iterative weapon attacks with natural attacks. while i'm not aware of any examples, there is no rule preventing using multiple natural attacks on the same limb. actually, there is plenty of cases of bite and gore which are both on the head.
.its kinda like how my 'normal hands' are no longer considered 'normal hands if I used feral mutagen to grow claws on them
your hands don't go away or are not considered hands when you have claws. you simply can't use a claw attack if that limb is being used to hold or attack with an item/weapon. hand still exists, claw still exists, just how you use the claw has parameters.
anyhow, glad that it's agreed that claws go onto arms, not other limbs.
next: the tentacle is never called an arm, it simply holds and manipulates objects' like one. it is never called a prehensile arm.
Tentacle (Ex): The alchemist gains a prehensile, arm-length tentacle on his body. The tentacle is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing.The tentacle does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though he can use it to make a tentacle attack (1d4 damage for a Medium alchemist, 1d3 damage for a Small one) with the grab ability. The tentacle can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist's original arms can (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, the tentacle to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). Unlike an arm, the tentacle has no magic item slots.
You do realize that a post designed to dissect my statements with underhanded insults doesn't really get you anywhere in an argument, right?
I'm dissecting your post in to answer you point by point, so that when i start talking you know what point i'm addressing.
However, what if your character had another set of arms and hands in addition to his normal set? Could you not target those limbs to place your natural attacks upon if those additional limbs meet the qualifications for said natural attack?
The answer would be...yes.
Yes, you can put a claw on your third limb.
No, you cannot use that third limb to make another attack. Whether the limb has claws growing out of it or the limb is holding a dagger the rules are clear: " The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round"
Bite claw claw (without limb) to Bite claw claw claw would be an extra attack. Bite claw claw to Bite claw claw dagger would be an extra attack. Its clear that you're trying to get the extra attack out of the limb, NOT out of the claw, or out of the dagger.
Yes, its kind of silly that you can
1) Left hand claw, right hand claw, Vestigial arm Give someone the finger ( free action) or
2) you can left hand claw, vestigial arm claw, and right arm give someone the finger.
but you can't left hand claw, right hand claw, vestigial arm claw
because that's an extra attack.
Its silly, but its clearly the rule.
Also, in regards to the whole 'nothing with satisfy me' statements...perhaps you should take your own advice and stop trying to put words in my mouth instead ;)
Thats a motive I'm putting in your head, not words in your mouth. I think I've got more than enough evidence to reach that conclusion.
Also, lets try to be clear on what you've already said:
Its perfectly clear and not contradictory. What are you having trouble understanding?
In regards to the tentacle discovery, I just don't understand how it works (and I'm really hoping Sean will come back to clarify on it as well). On one hand, the Devs seem to suggest that it is a special natural attack that can be used in place of unarmed strikes or manufactured weapons.
In my above examples (where you basically gain 'tentacle attacks' based off of your BAB progression), I've already listed several issues that might occur if such is the case. Again, I can only assume that this 'special natural attack' uses your full strength modifier...and because it still qualifies as a 'natural weapon'...you basically can still make all your other natural attacks without having to drop them down to secondary natural attacks.
Now, I am willing to assume that you can only make the 'tentacle attack' once per round, especially since natural attacks using limbs is pretty much limited to a 'once a round' sort of deal. In other words, while the 'tentacle attack' can replace an unarmed strike or manufactured weapon, it can only ever do so once per round because you can only use that particular 'limb' once per round to make the attack.
That could be another alternative, but again I'm not sure.
Yes, you can put a claw on your third limb.
why could you 'put' a claw on a tentacle?
feral mutagen says you grow a bite and claws. barring an exception, those appear where they normally do: head and arms.the tentacle is not an arm. so if you grow claws, they are no more likely to appear on the tentacle than on your butt.
sure, if it STATED you grow them on any available limb, that would be an exception, but that's not stated.
tentacle =/= arm, even if said tentacle can do things that arms can.
Yes, you can put a claw on your third limb.why could you 'put' a claw on a tentacle?
I didn't say you could, we wandered off into a vestigial limb question.
sorry i misread you, 'third' seemed to naturally reference a tenctacle, when you were actually hypothesizing about a 4 arm scenario (arms usually come in pairs, not in odd #s like 3).
@BigNorseWolf
Sweet! So you agree that you can put claws and vestigial arms, but you still don't think you can make attacks with them? Glad we got that cleared up.
Now, as far as the whole 'doesn't grant extra attacks' clause...we really need to clear up what that really means.
The restriction itself applies to the vestigial arms (I am not denying that). However, what you seem to suggest is that the restriction 'still' applies even if you change your 'vestigial arms' into something else (namely a natural weapon).
From what I can tell (from what you are saying anyway), is that just because you change something into a natural weapon doesn't necessarily mean that you can even use it.
Again I ask...why?
We both agree that you can't just make claws appear out of your stomach...and from what you have said...you accept the fact that claws can be placed upon vestigial arms...which will thus change them into 'natural weapons'.
Yet despite having changed your arms into something else entirely, you still believe that the restriction of 'no extra attacks' still applies even though the vestigial arms have been 'altered' into claws.
Well, if that be the case, then how on earth can I even make claw attacks with my regular arms then? I mean, my 'regular arms' don't allow me to make 2 attacks at my full base attack bonus either...but for some reason...when I gain 'claw attacks' on my regular arms...that is precisely what I'm allowed to do.
Do you know why?
Because my normal arms have changed into 'natural weapons'...and thus they now follow the rules of natural weapons.
The same thing has also happened with my vestigial arms as well: they have changed into natural weapons, and thus now follow all the standard rules. The restrictions of what something 'used to be' does not apply to this newly altered change (hence the reason why I reference polymorph and transmutation...because, effectively, that's what you're doing...changing your 'limb' into a claw...and while this 'limb' is changed in his manner...the 'limb' now takes on the qualities of its new form...thus bypassing the restrictions of the old form)
It's the reason why your 'normal claw attacks' don't provoke an attack of opportunity whenever you use them--because the claw attacks follow the rules of natural weapons...the restrictions of your 'original arms' no longer applies.
ok, i was confused by the intermixing of both tentacles and vestigial arms in the discussion.
the vestigial arm discover does flat out say up front 'The alchemist gains a new arm (left or right) on his torso.'
so those ARE arms and function as arms for all purposes except as otherwise noted.
you can only take feral mutagen once, which will only apply 2 claws to arms.
if you somehow already had claws from another source, i guess per RAW you should still gain 2 claw attacks from feral, which would go on a valid limb: your extra arms from vestigial arm. same thing would apply if you were a race that naturally had 4 or 6 arms (and already had 1 set of claws before taking feral).
so it comes back to that when combining natural weapons with iteratives, you can take all your iteratives (which is fixed per BAB/2wf/rapidshot/etc) AND all natural weapons EXCEPT those that are on the same limb as being used to make iterative attacks (or merely hold an object). if natural weapon is on it's own limb, it can be used.
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.
This next argument might seem petty, but seeing as how the arm can be used to make attacks as part of the 'normal attack routine', then it would stand to reason that if you change the arm into a 'natural claw attack', then it should be able to use that claw attack since it would then qualify as an attack made as part of the alchemist's normal attack routine.
@BigNorseWolf
.
From what I can tell (from what you are saying anyway), is that just because you change something into a natural weapon doesn't necessarily mean that you can even use it.
Again I ask...why?
You do not change your limb into a natural weapon. You do not change your limb into a claw attack. You merely put a claw attack ON the limb. If you can't enter a building with a gun, you can't enter the building with a gun with a scope on it.
Yet despite having changed your arms into something else entirely,
I catagorically reject the idea that the arm has been changed into something else entirely. A limb with claws is not THAT different than a limb.
Well, if that be the case, then how on earth can I even make claw attacks with my regular arms then? I mean, my 'regular arms' don't allow me to make 2 attacks at my full base attack bonus either...but for some reason...when I gain 'claw attacks' on my regular arms...that is precisely what I'm allowed to do.
You very well can put up your dukes and dual wield your left and right fists. Growing claws moves you into the natural weapons mechanics, which work differently than manufactured weapons or unarmed strikes.
Do you know why?
Because my normal arms have changed into 'natural weapons'...and thus they now follow the rules of natural weapons.
And the vestigial arm follows the rule for vestigial arm. Specific trumps general. Would you argue that you can put a dagger in the vestigial arm's hand and say "Well now i'm following the rules for a manufactured weapon... one holds it, one gets to attack with it at my full BAB ?
If u put a dagger in the vestigial arm and attack with it, you are now following the rules of using a manufactured weapon (thus applying your BAB as appropriate).
lets say you only have 1 vestigial arm and you drink feral mutagen.
If you have a dagger in your vestigial arm, and with a BAB of +6/+1, your full round action could look something like this....
dagger +6/ dagger +1 / claw +1 / claw +1 / bite +1
if u have 2 vestigial arms with daggers in them, and u also have the appropriate two-weapon fighting feats, your attack routine could look like this...
dagger +4 / dagger +4 / dagger -1 / dagger -1 / claw +1 / claw +1 / bite +1
do we get that so far?
If u put a dagger in the vestigial arm and attack with it, you are now following the rules of using a manufactured weapon (thus applying your BAB as appropriate).
lets say you only have 1 vestigial arm and you drink feral mutagen.
If you have a dagger in your vestigial arm, and with a BAB of +6/+1, your full round action could look something like this....
dagger +6/ dagger +1 / claw +1 / claw +1 / bite +1
No.
Without the vestigial arm Your attack looks like this
Dagger +6 /Dagger +1/Bite+1/Claw+1 (because your other hand is holding the dagger)
1...2...3...4 attacks.
If the vestigial limb does something to get you more than 4 attacks you can't do it. If that breaks versimilitude I understand. If that makes no sense i understand. But its the rule. No. Extra. Attacks. You cannot circumvent that by saying its the claw or dagger not the limb thats giving you the attack.
I think I finally figured out where you are having the issue then.
You see, my above method does not violate the rule of vestigial arms. In other words, you are simply using your vestigial arm to make the 'same number' of attacks you could normally make in a full-round action (namely an attack at +6 and another at a +1).
Making attacks with the vestigial arm in this manner DOES NOT violate the 'extra attacks' clause.
You are simply using that limb to make the same number of attacks that you could 'normally make'.
The fact that you are using your other two hands to make the claw attacks (as well as the additional bite attack) has nothing to do with that restriction.
I've yet to see an example provided that lets it exceed the max possible with a full attack + twp fighting, or exceeding their number of natural attacks.
I don't remember if there are any creatures in the Bestiary that has TWF and natural attacks together, but here's one I do remember:
A calikang (Inner Sea World Guide) has TWF and natural attacks. In its attack routine, it gets 3 longsword attacks with the primary hand, 1 longsword attack with the secondary hand, and 4 slam attacks.
It has BAB +15. This attack routine gives it 8 attacks, which is more than you would get with the entire TWF feat tree.
yeah I'm inclined to not argue with SKR and go with this reading of the rules, which is fortunate enough to have support of a developer while yours is in contradiction.
SKR hasn't said it works the way you try to argue for. He has said you can't use the same limb for a natural attack as you use for a manufactured weapon attack, which is certainly true.
And he has said (I believe) that he doesn't think a person should be able to use the flavor-wording of a monk's unarmed strike to get, say, feet attacks as iterative attacks, which can then be combined with claw attacks, when he wouldn't get those claw attacks if he attacked with his hands iteratively.
He has not said that you can't get more attacks via combining manufactured attacks with natural attacks than you could get via manufactured weapon attacks alone.
I think I finally figured out where you are having the issue then.
You see, my above method does not violate the rule of vestigial arms. In other words, you are simply using your vestigial arm to make the 'same number' of attacks you could normally make in a full-round action (namely an attack at +6 and another at a +1).
Making attacks with the vestigial arm in this manner DOES NOT violate the 'extra attacks' clause.
You are simply using that limb to make the same number of attacks that you could 'normally make'.
The fact that you are using your other two hands to make the claw attacks (as well as the additional bite attack) has nothing to do with that restriction.
Malarky. It has everything to do with that restriction. Its like trying to tell the judge no you don't have enough for intent to sell you just have 2 completely unrelated bags in different pockets. Its not a method its rank chicanery based on nothing but ridiculous sophistry.
Ahem...if your BAB is +6 / +1....and you use a dagger in the vestigial arm to make these attacks...how are you gaining any 'extra attacks'?
Are you not still following the restriction based on your normal attack routine?
The 2 claw attacks and bite attacks are coming from different limbs...and they follow the rules of natural attacks.
So...yea...I think we pretty much figured out where you are getting confused.
If you don't wanna take my word for it, I'm sure other forum members can support my claim as well...but if you still have doubts, just ask around.
Back to the topic at hand..
The way I think of the tentacle attack granted by this discovery is as if it read: "You can make a tentacle attack as a secondary natural attack, by foregoing one of your other attacks this turn".
makes sense to me.
i mean, whether you make your BAB/2wf attacks with 2 vestigial arms or 2 normal arms (or head-butts, kicks, etc)
doesn't affect natural attacks made with claws on other arms, or wing buffets, gores, bites, etc.
those are all additional attacks to your normal BAB attacks.
because you choose to make BAB attacks with a certain limb doesn't convert those BAB attacks into 'additional' attacks (not the 'normal' BAB attacks).
whether you are taking BAB attacks with normal arms or vestigial arms doesn't affect those other natural attacks at all,
beyond the rules for combining natural weapons and iteratives (namely, that all nat weapons become secondary).
if combining natural weapons with iteratives somehow was meant to replace the iterative attacks themself (either the normal ones directly, or 'latent' 2wf ones, etc) then it would have said so. but it doesn't.
Ahem...if your BAB is +6 / +1....and you use a dagger in the vestigial arm to make these attacks...how are you gaining any 'extra attacks'? Are you not still following the restriction based on your normal attack routine?
Without vestigial limb: 4 attacks (Dagger dagger bite claw)
With vestigial limb: 5 attacks (dagger dagger bite claw claw)Thats 1 extra attack no matter how you cut it. Thats not an opinion thats just math.
So...yea...I think we pretty much figured out where you are getting confused.
I'm not getting confused you're getting cheesier.
If you don't wanna take my word for it, I'm sure other forum members can support my claim as well...but if you still have doubts, just ask around.
I wouldn't hold my breath on that one.
Let me try it this way, give me an example of violating the no extra attacks clause.