Like I said...go ask...stop getting so defensive and go ask. It's NOT an extra attack. You are in no way, shape, or form gaining any extra attack. The vestigial arm basically frees up a 'limb' so you can use your other claw attack.
That's what its designed for.
It has nothing to do with cheese...it is simply the rules.
I'm sorry if you don't like it, but this is 'seriously' how vestigial arms work.
The only reason you couldn't make the 2nd 'claw attack' in addition to the dagger attacks is because you were using the same limb.
Vestigial arm allows you to bypass this restriction by giving you another limb to manipulate.
If your normal attack routine is +6/+1...guess what: you can make all the attacks with that routine using your vestigial arm.
which also frees up your other 2 arms to make natural claw attacks (in addition to the bite).
Sorry bro :(
the rules don't say that by using the vestigial arm you can never be able to use more attacks than normal, it says 'the arm does not give an extra attack'. arms don't grant extra attacks, but natural attacks do. if you have the natural attack on a different limb than one you using for iterative weapon attacks, the rules say you can use that natural attack as an additional attack (to your BAB justified ones). the extra attack is not coming from the vestigial arm, but from the natural attack.
i don't think anybody really has a problem with the idea that bite, gore, tail slap, wing buffets, can all be added on to normal iterative attacks. yet claws don't actually have any specific rule saying they are cancelled out by BAB/2wf iteratives... you just cant use claws in the same hand used to wield a weapon... which isnt the case here, so claws are just as valid an additional attack as bite/gore/etc.
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor
|
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'.
? Um no.
Much like you cannot use a claw or a bite in place of all your unarmed strikes, you can't use the tentacle in place of them. The tentacle doesn't actually substitute for anything; it places a limit to the total number of attacks per round.
Additionally, tentacles are always secondary attacks.
Summary: You are getting a tentacle attack; it follows all the normal rules for natural attacks save you can only use it by giving up a different attack. Much like any other natural attack, you can only use it once per round and since it's a secondary natural attack it's always at -5 to hit.
@ Dennis
Okay, so you're saying that you have to give up a single attack to use it.
Alright..lets say I have feral mutagen activated...and I'm basically going to use my tentacle attack.
In this instance, I give up an attack I 'could have made' with an unarmed strike...thus allowing me to attack with a 'tentacle attack', bite attack, and 2 claw attacks (which would all be considered primary).
Is this correct?
Also, is the tentacle attack at my full strength modifier or half strength modifier? Is it a secondary natural attack, or does it use my Full BAB if I give up my hightest attack for an 'unarmed strike' to make it?
[again, I am not trying to be stubborn, but I honestly am not really sure how this discovery works, and all explanations thus far aren't really explaining it very well either]
@ Dennis
Also, just wanted to say I am a huge fan of your alchemist guide :) I hope you decide to update it soon (sorry, I know it was random and kinda off topic...but I just had to say it)
the rules don't say that by using the vestigial arm you can never be able to use more attacks than normal, it says 'the arm does not give an extra attack'.
These two sentences are synonymous.
Dusk,
Please show me how you could possibly violate the no extra attacks clause by your reading.
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor
|
Additionally, tentacles are always secondary attacks.
Summary: You are getting a tentacle attack; it follows all the normal rules for natural attacks save you can only use it by giving up a different attack. Much like any other natural attack, you can only use it once per round and since it's a secondary natural attack it's always at -5 to hit.
Edit: Sorry about the repeat for those who showed up late, I made edits that crossed with Duskblade's post.
the rules don't say that by using the vestigial arm you can never be able to use more attacks than normal, it says 'the arm does not give an extra attack'.These two sentences are synonymous.
Ahem...normally I could make 2 claw attacks and a bite attack.
'normally' i could make 2 attacks with my dagger (in the example I gave) at +6/+1.
I was not able to do this because I had to hold a dagger in one of my 'claw' hands.
Vestigial arm is now holding my dagger.
thus, my 'normal' attack routine can now include +6/+1 dagger attacks in addition to all my natural attacks because I am no longer restricted to holding a dagger in my clawed hand.
Again, I am gaining no 'extra attacks'.
If you wait around long enough, I'm sure even more people will show to agree with me (unless you wanna keep holding your breath...in which case you might pass out in under 5 minutes...just sayin') ;)
the rules don't say that by using the vestigial arm you can never be able to use more attacks than normal, it says 'the arm does not give an extra attack'.These two sentences are synonymous.
pedaling a bicycle does not set off a nuclear explosion.
but one can pedal one's bicycle to the shed containing the remote control for a nuclear bomb.no extra attacks are coming from the vestigial arm, they are coming from sources which already existed.
whether those sources are usable with iterative attacks may depend on many factors,
whether you are wearing a blue shirt or not, or whether you are wielding a weapon in the same limb or not.
those are parameters of each natural attack, outside the scope of the vestigial arm,
just as where you may pedal your bicycle to is outside the scope of whether the bicycle is a nuclear bomb or not.
Additionally, tentacles are always secondary attacks.
Summary: You are getting a tentacle attack; it follows all the normal rules for natural attacks save you can only use it by giving up a different attack. Much like any other natural attack, you can only use it once per round and since it's a secondary natural attack it's always at -5 to hit.
Edit: Sorry about the repeat for those who showed up late, I made edits that crossed with Duskblade's post.
@ Dennis
Okay, that makes total sense. I just want to make one last question (just to be clear).If I give up an 'unarmed strike' to make my 'tentacle attack'...can I still combine that 'tentacle attack' with the attacks gained from Feral Mutagen (thus giving me 1 tentacle attack [secondary], 2 claw attacks [primary], and 1 bite attack [primary])
Also, if you want to help settle the debate about putting 'claw attacks' on vestigial arms, that would be great! :)
Duskblade, i didn't ask you to NOT violate the rule. I asked you to violate it. Presumably the clause means something. Your reading makes it a null set.
Duskblade, i didn't ask you to NOT violate the rule. I asked you to violate it. Presumably the clause means something. Your reading makes it a null set.
The clause is very simple: no extra attacks right?
so therefore, if I have a BAB of +6/+1, having the 'vestigial arm' does not grant me something like a BAB of +6/+6/+1 or some ridiculous 'extra attack' like that.
It doesn't give me access to multiweapon fighting either.
that's what the 'no extra attack' clause is there to stipulate.
So, a base attack +6/+1 to base attack +6/+6/+1 is an extra attack, but claw +6/claw+6/bite+6 to claw+6/ claw+6/ claw+6/ bite+6 Isn't.... why?
|
RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16, Contributor
|
If I give up an 'unarmed strike' to make my 'tentacle attack'...can I still combine that 'tentacle attack' with the attacks gained from Feral Mutagen (thus giving me 1 tentacle attack [secondary], 2 claw attacks [primary], and 1 bite attack [primary])
Also, if you want to help settle the debate about putting 'claw attacks' on vestigial arms, that would be great! :)
It is a cart-before-the-horse problem. Unless you are using unarmed strikes you have no attack to forgo. Does a forgone attack reduce your natural weapons to secondary weapons?
I'll leave that debate up to people who care about rules lawyering.
As far as I'm concerned, the intent is pretty clear and that's enough for me.
So, a base attack +6/+1 to base attack +6/+6/+1 is an extra attack, but claw +6/claw+6/bite+6 to claw+6/ claw+6/ claw+6/ bite+6 Isn't.... why?
because that is the rules for how 'natural attacks' work: They do not rely on iterative strikes.
if you place a 'natural attack' on a vestigial arm, you can therefore use that 'natural attack' as part of your 'normal attack routine'.
You even said it yourself: placing a 'natural attack' on a limb causes it to function per the rules of 'natural weapons'. This is no different when using vestigial arms.
Nothing in the vestigial arms discovery says you don't get extra attacks from a higher base attack bonus... that would be ridiculous. An extra limbs discovery has no reason to give a warning against an extra attack from base attack bonus. No one expects to get extra base attack attacks from having an extra limb.
An extra limbs discovery has EVERY reason to tell you that you do not get extra attacks because of the limb because without that rule you WOULD get extra attacks with it. Any way you look at it you are trying to get extra attacks out of a discovery that clearly and explicitly says that you do not get extra attacks for there being a limb there.
You do realize that the 'definition' of an 'extra attack' in the terms of the pathfinder game basically falls under something like the 'haste' spell (which specifically grants an 'extra attack').
Moreover, the definition of an 'extra attack' (in game terms) is an attack that you can make beyond your normal attack routine.
You do realize that in my previous examples for the dagger build + vestigial arms, that I have NEVER ONCE made an attack that exceeded my 'normal attack routine'.
Again, I am sorry if you're confused by this, as I understand that it is an easy thing to get confused by, but like I said, if you don't believe me, ask around, or wait for other people to support my claim on this thread.
Really? So in an ability that gives you an extra hand they're worried you will somehow misread it as granting a haste attack? Really? Does that make ANY sense?
You're defining your "normal attack routine" as the attack routine of a three armed biter that gets to use all three limbs. Oddly enough with that definition of a normal attack routine you don't get more attacks than you think you should get with a three armed biting alchemist.
Also, the definition of an extra attack is not as limited as you think
Two-Weapon Fighting
If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
Double Weapons: You can use a double weapon to make an extra attack with the off-hand end of the weapon
Two weapon fighting feat: If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.
Do you think that MIGHT be the extra attack they were worried about people thinking you got with an extra arm?
Again, I think you are 'misunderstanding' what is meant by gaining an 'extra attack'.
In my dagger example, I would 'normally' be able to make a dagger attack at +6/+1, along with 3 natural attacks. The reason I could not do this is because one of my limbs was being used to hold said dagger.
With a vestigial arm holding the dagger though, that limb is now free to make it's 'normal' attack (not extra...NORMAL).
The vestigial arm is not what's granting me this so-called 'extra attack' you keep preaching about. The attack that I am making is simply from my claw attack, which I am now allowed to make as part of my normal attack routine, because I am no longer holding a weapon in that hand.
|
I'm amazed at how much arguing is being done without rule quotes.
I'm also amazed at how much monsters are being used to support the "this is what my pc does"
Seems if you really want to make a convincing argument, you'd point to things that definitively support your position, rather than vague points and "well I've seen alot and know it's this way" when you can't support it with "alot of rules"
your wereboar example only gets three attacks when it's turned into a "wereboar" as a human, he's only got two attacks. And again, it's a NPC.
so let's go back to the rules, please?
Natural Attacks Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon). These attacks fall into one of two categories, primary and secondary attacks. Primary attacks are made using the creature's full base attack bonus and add the creature's full Strength bonus on damage rolls. Secondary attacks are made using the creature's base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature's Strength bonus on damage rolls. If a creature has only one natural attack, it is always made using the creature's full base attack bonus and adds 1-1/2 times the creature's Strength bonus on damage rolls. This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one. If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type. The natural attacks by size table lists some of the most common types of natural attacks and their classifications.
Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently, such as dragons, which always receive 1-1/2 times their Strength bonus on damage rolls with their bite attack. These exceptions are noted in the creature's description.
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do. See the natural attacks by size table for typical damage values for natural attacks by creature size.
Format: bite +5 (1d6+1), 2 claws +5 (1d4+2), 4 tentacles +0 (1d4+1); Location: Melee and Ranged.
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.
Some natural attacks are denoted as secondary natural attacks, such as tails and wings. Attacks with secondary natural attacks are made using your base attack bonus minus 5. These attacks deal an amount of damage depending on their type, but you only add half your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword. When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only 1/2 of your Strength modifier on damage rolls. Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack can reduce these penalties.
I'm amazed at how a tiny ant hill of a phrase "so long as a different limb is used" and "when you make additional attacks this way"(ie beyond one attack) has turned into a whole school of cheese to break and bend the game beyond what was clearly meant. Go look at eidolon "optimizers" that add as many arms and pounce and think they get 14 attacks on a charge.
the
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
I know must have thrown some folks, because it says they attack with their weapons normally, but there's nothing in there that says you get to add them completely on. Everything until that has said you do it in place of, and can't if that natural attack is holding a weapon.
Correct me if there's a rule that explicitly says you may add them directly to a player character. So far your results are "the beastiary says so" but even that's falling flat, as it does not. Creature entries have more attacks than a full attack option, in some cases, but there is no rule that allows a player to do so. Monsters =/= players.
Again, I think you are 'misunderstanding' what is meant by gaining an 'extra attack'.
I already cleared up your misconception that the only extra attacks come from high bab. The phrase is used to describe using a weapon in an off hand, which is exactly what you want to do with the extra limb.
You would not normally be able to make a dagger attack at +6/+1 and make three natural attacks. Having an extra arm growing out of your ribcage is pretty much the definition of abnormal circumstances.
The vestigial arm is not what's granting me this so-called 'extra attack' you keep preaching about. The attack that I am making is simply from my claw attack, which I am now allowed to make as part of my normal attack routine, because I am no longer holding a weapon in that hand.
So if you put the dagger In your right hand (stab stab), claw with your left, and then claw with your vestigial have you made an extra attack?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@ lantzkev: Read the last paragraph of your second quote very carefully, particularly this bit: "When you make additional attacks in this way..."
Additional is a synonym for extra. That paragraph is the exact rules quote you've been asking others to provide. No one has bothered because one person not reading the rules and then arguing against the obvious RAW doesn't bother people here - it happens just about every thread :)
Edit: And that someone has certainly been me more than once!
You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword
It says as long as a different limb is used for each attack, not that you must effectively loose one attack per limb used. You cannot Sword sword sword claw claw. But you can sword sword sword wing wing tail talon talon gore if you have those actual attacks (not just those body parts)
The only other option is that you're right, and not only is everyone in this thread wrong, but every weapon using monster from 3.0 to the present.
And yes, pouncing eidolons with obscene numbers of attacks are completely legal. They really do get to make a full attack when they charge. (sad to say)
@ lantzkev
Your point has already been rendered moot. The distinction you're making between monsters and player characters has no merit, and even after being given proper examples, you still insist (for no reason) that natural attacks behave differently for monsters and player characters. Your inability to point out a single rule that supports your theory, as well as your refusal to acknowledge the evidence presented against you give me no reason continue the argument.
@ BigNorseWolf
I drink feral mutagen...I gain 3 natural attacks.
I have a vestigial arm...I put a manufactured weapon in my vestigial arm.
When making a full-attack action, I wish to combine my natural attacks with my manufactured weapon.
My vestigial arm uses my BAB to determine the number of attacks it can make.
My natural attacks use the rules governing natural weapons (in other words, so long as I don't use the limb to attack with a manufactured or unarmed strike, I can use the limb to make a natural attack).
If I have base attack of +6/+1...I can make 2 attacks with my manufactured weapon. (per the rules....none of these attacks are considered 'extra attacks')
If I have not used the corresponding limbs, I may also make 3 natural attacks (per the rules...these are ALSO not considered 'extra attacks').
This is pretty much the most basic way I can think of (at the moment) to explain to you why NONE OF THIS qualifies as an 'extra' attack.
All these attacks...ALL of them...can be made as part of your normal attack routine...no cheese...no desire to be overpowered...that is just the rules.
The fact that you seem to think that I somehow 'lose' the ability to make my other 'natural claw attack' just because I'm using the vestigial arm to make the attacks with a manufactured weapon honestly sounds FAR more convoluted then anything that I have suggested thus far.
At least lantzkev has managed to unite everyone else on this thread for at least brief moments!
Seriously though, one of the big innovations of 3.0 was making monster stats consistent with the paradigm used to create PCs and other characters, rather than just arbitrary sets of numbers. So it is very wrong, in fact entirely wrong, to suggest that rules for monsters and PCs are separate and don't apply to each other.
Edit: I recall a thread, or a blog, from one of the devs discussing this very thing, but I can't be bothered to find it. Do everyone a favour and just let it go lantzkev :)
You don't get an extra attack with it, period. You can use it in place of any of your natural attacks, but it never allows you to get more attacks per round than you would if you didn't have the tentacle.
<--- Thats one of the heavier rule guys from paizo talking about the tentacle, and i believe the person who wrote the vestigial limb and tentacle abilities. The tentacle and the vestigial limb have the same no extra attack phrase.
Getting Two dagger and three claw attacks is more attacks than you would have if you did not have the vestigial limb.
No convolution, no wierd stuff, just simple counting. If you're taking the vestigial limbs trying to get more attacks out of them it doesn't work.
...it never allows you to get more attacks per round than you would if you didn't have the tentacle.
It's hard to imagine how this could be more definitive.
...ya know, I'm starting to understand why you think vestigial arms can't use 'natural attacks'...heck...by your interpretation... vestigial arms actually SUBTRACT from the amount of attacks that a player could 'normally' make.
In my example, and given the rules, I am perfectly capable of making 2 dagger attacks and 3 natural attacks so long as I hold the dagger in the vestigial arm.
but you insist that I end up 'losing' an attack because I am using a vestigial arm.
and what's your reasoning? Vestigial arms don't gain you any extra attacks.
i will say again, I am NOT using vestigial arms to gain EXTRA ATTACKS. I am using my vestigial arm to 'free up' my other claw attack so that I may use that claw attack as part of my normal attack routine.
Also, please don't try comparing Vestigial arms to the tentacle discovery. It has already been established that the tentacle discovery is some 'weird version' of a secondary natural attack that must be replaced by another attack you could normally make. Vestigial arms are obviously not secondary natural attacks, and thus comparing the two is once again, a moot point.
.ya know, I'm starting to understand why you think vestigial arms can't use 'natural attacks'...heck...by your interpretation... vestigial arms actually SUBTRACT from the amount of attacks that a player could 'normally' make.
Bob the 8th level alchemist has no vestigial arms. He has feral mutagen running. He gets either
Claw claw bite OR
Dagger/Dagger claw bite.
Gregor the alchemist has the vestigial limb. He has feral mutagen running. He gets either
Claw claw bite OR
Dagger/Dagger claw bite.
In no way, shape, form, or possibility is that subtraction. You can do whatever you want to do with the pathfinder rules in your home game but leave the law of identity alone.
Seriously...just go ask a dev. I'm confident in the interpretation, and I think I've been more than patient in trying to explain how the whole thing works to you.
If u want to deny players the ability to use their attacks by contradicting the rules...then that is a house rule YOU need to make.
The vestigial is not giving someone an 'extra attack'...it is simply allowing them to free up their hand in order to make an attack that they would normally be able to make as part of their normal attack routine.
If you don't want to accept this, that's fine, but that won't change the fact that your interpretation is wrong.
Yes, the vestigial arm must replace an attack, so if you replace the dagger attack of your left hand, you can't just go and use your left hand to make an attack - you've replaced that hand's attack, with either dagger or claw, with the vestigial arm's attack. If not, any way you look at it you're gaining an extra attack, which you are specifically not permitted to do.
Seriously...just go ask a dev. I'm confident in the interpretation, and I think I've been more than patient in trying to explain how the whole thing works to you.
If u want to deny players the ability to use their attacks by contradicting the rules...then that is a house rule YOU need to make.
The vestigial is not giving someone an 'extra attack'...it is simply allowing them to free up their hand in order to make an attack that they would normally be able to make as part of their normal attack routine.
If you don't want to accept this, that's fine, but that won't change the fact that your interpretation is wrong.
Dude, multiple devs have told you no on your doc oc concept. Telling ME to ask a dev because i disagree with you isn't going to help.
From james jacobs 3) Note that the description of this discovery specifically says: "The tentacle does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round." If you make an attack with the tentacle, you can't attack with weapons held in your hands, or with claws, or whatever; it's really primarily useful to have around when you're not carrying melee weapons (you CAN make attacks of opportunity, and threaten foes so you can flank when you wouldn't otherwise be able to). NO natural attack, such as this tentacle, gains additional attacks from having a high base attack bonus.
Compare that with the language in vestigial arms
The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round
"The tentacle does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round."
The vestigial is not giving someone an 'extra attack'...it is simply allowing them to free up their hand in order to make an attack that they would normally be able to make as part of their normal attack routine.
Where you are incorrect is in assuming that your normal attack routine includes a manufactured weapon and 3 natural attacks. It doesn't. Ever. You get either 3 natural attacks or 2 natural attacks and a manufactured weapon attack. Either way this is 3 attacks. Count 'em twice just to make sure. 3.
So when you put the manufactured weapon in your vestigial arm, you can still only make 3, repeat attacks.
If you make 4 attacks, you have gained an extra one above and beyond your normal attack routine. It's very simple.
again you are ignoring that the tentacle discovery functions as a secondary natural attack, which again is completely different from how the vestigial arm functions.
Stop comparing the two, because the argument will get you nowhere.
And another thing, please stop ignoring what a 'normal attack routine' is. If I have 2 claw attacks and a bite attack, I can make 3 natural attacks...yes...that is true. If I use a dagger in the hand of one of my claws...I can make 1 dagger attack, 1 claw attack, and 1 bite attack...and yes..that also equals 3.
However, if I wasn't using my dagger in my claw hand, I could also make a 4th attack using my claw (I cannot do this because the claw is holding the dagger).
I put the dagger in the vestigial arm and make my attacks with the vestigial arm using my normal attack routine.
My other claw is now free to attack because it is no longer being used to hold a dagger.
Thus i can now make the other claw attack.
the 'no extra attacks' from vestigial arms DOES NOT prevent me from making this attack. It has nothing to do with my ability to make a natural attack that I could 'normally' make.
God, what did you guys do while I was sleeping? Why is this thread suddenly 70+ Posts bigger?
Dude...it's a mess...but I'll give you the quick version:
1) Tentacle discovery is a silly 'secondary natural attack' that can only be used once during a round and must be used to replace another attack (basically you can just replace an unarmed strike and use it alongside your feral mutagen attacks)
2) lantzkev presented like...7 paragraphs worth of quotes that STILL didn't help his argument regarding how natural attacks 'somehow' behave differently for monsters and PCs.
3) The Feral Mutagen claw attacks on vestigial arms debate has been currently dropped in order for me to explain how 'vestigial arms' properly work.
4) And yea...I'm tired, and I think I need to let someone else take up the torch for awhile instead.
You have 3 attacks in your regular routine. I don't see how you can suggest that making dagger/claw/claw/bite attacks is not an extra attack on your regular routine of claw/claw/bite.
If claw/claw/bite is an acceptable regular routine, then weapon/claw/claw/bite is an extra attack that you get from the vestigial arm. Like I said, simple. Twist it how you want though.
Or to put it another way: you're cruising along unarmed bite with your two claws and bite attacks, and a vestigial arm. How many attacks can you make? 3.
You walk into a room with a dagger on the table. Can you pick it up with your vestigial arm and attack with it? No. Because that makes 4 attacks, which (you guessed it) is 1 extra attack beyond your normal attack routine.
Or to put it another way: without vestigial arm, you need to make a choice about using your claw or a weapon. With vestigial arm, you still need to make the same choice. Regardless of which arm you use to wield the weapon.
This is RAW and RAI.
the term 'extra' implies that i am making an attack beyond what I would 'normally' be allowed to make.
if I have both my claws free...I can 'normally' make 2 claw attacks.
Vestigial arms allow me to have both my claws free...thus I am simply making my attacks via my 'normal' attack routine.
Like...is it really that hard to understand?
I won't deny that the conditions for making my 3 natural attacks has 'obviously' changed...but that does not mean that I am making an attack beyond what am I 'normally' allowed to make.
with 2 free claws...I am allowed to make 2 claw attacks.
By using my vestigial arm, I am allowed to make attacks using my BAB progression.
Nothing in the description of vestigial arms prevents me from abiding from these rules.
The conditions to use all of the above attacks have all been met...thus...I can use them.
No. Making a fourth attack is taking an extra action/attack you couldn't if you didn't have the vestigial arm. Which vestigial arm specifically cannot provide. Specific overrides general.
again you are ignoring that the tentacle discovery functions as a secondary natural attack, which again is completely different from how the vestigial arm functions
You problem isn't with the phrase secondary natural attack. Your problem is with the phrase "extra attack" which you are insisting only has one definition despite the context of the feat, despite the same phrase appearing in a similar situation re two weapon fighting, and despite what multiple devs have told you about what the phrase means and about the intent of the feat (its for holding stuff)
If gregor has more attacks than bob then that's an extra attack. Plain as day clear as crystal.
Yes it has kinda reached the "fingers in the ears" stage of discussion :)
In the game I run I let the alchemist (who has a tentacle, vestigial arm, feral mutagen) make Claw, Claw, Claw, Bite, Tentacle attacks treating the tentacle and vestigial arm as secondary attacks.
So far so good, no conflict with our monk or fighter who still kick liberal amounts of ass regardless.
Haters gonna hate.
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)
Me: Why not?
You: Because I say so...
..
Why not? Because the rules say so and the guys who wrote the rules have come in here and said so.
I mean why can't a 1st level wizard cast Fireball every round? I mean- wizards can cast spells, right?
My bad, Dusk, you're still wrong on this particular issue as a whole though.
Hello lantzkev. While Duskblade tone wasn't the better, he's actually right about natural attacks providing extra attacks. The cannibal NPC exemple illustrates this well. Let's see it again:
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)
His BAB is +2 and his Strengh (raging) is 19 (+4 bonus), which give us the +6 bonus on attacks. He's using a greatclub, a two-handed weapon, which give 1-1/2 Strengh bonus on damage, +6. Now, receives a extra natural attack, as he has only one attack from his BAB. As he's using a manufactured weapon, the natural attack is secondary, hence +6 - 5 = +1, and the damage bonus is at 1/2 Strengh, +2.
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.
Sure, but if he has using two weapon fighting he would receive the penalties, -4 main hand, -8 off hand, or -2/-2 with the feat. The stat block doesn't have it.
As his BAB only provides one attack, and he's not two weapon fighting, he's receiving an extra attack from the natural attack. This is as long as he's not using a member being used for another attack (his hands). As he's biting, everything is fine.That said, I understand why you thought it didn't could receive more attacks. At low levels it's easy to get a lot of attacks with naturals at a high bonus. But as they level up, manufactured weapon attacks becomes better as they're easier to enchant.
Hello lantzkev. While Duskblade tone wasn't the better, he's actually right about natural attacks providing extra attacks.
This was never really in question.