Actually, given I've been sick with a cold the past week or so, it's actually probably a miracle I've been as free of sarcasm as I have been. But just so you guys all know (and totally not sarcastic here), I love all you guys (well, except maybe a few). Anyway, I think I'm off the boards for the evening ladies and gentle-golems. (^_^)
(I was not drunk when making this post.)
Also, RAW, yes the amulet applies to each natural attack.
You don't consider the FAQ to be RAW?
(Boots of Speed) provides an extra attack with ANY weapon EXCEPT a speed weapon (and unarmed strike but that's a system failing).
Are you unaware of haste working with unarmed strikes or is that also not official enough?
|
Also, RAW, yes the amulet applies to each natural attack.You don't consider the FAQ to be RAW?
(Boots of Speed) provides an extra attack with ANY weapon EXCEPT a speed weapon (and unarmed strike but that's a system failing).Are you unaware of haste working with unarmed strikes or is that also not official enough?
Bah! Ninja'd by Grick! Serves me right for sleeping for five whole hours!
I usually find myself agreeing with Ashiel in these threads (and disagreeing with Grick), but it's the merits of each case that matter, and in this case Ashiel is mistaken. And Grick is right.
The Speed property gives the wielder (I use that word with caution) an extra attack! Swords don't attack! They don't have a BAB! They cannot move themselves unless they have some weird magic saying they can, and Speed is not that magic!
Compaining about the price? Save it! Complain about Brilliant Energy at +4, while still not ignoring natural armour!
Complain about Mighty Cleaving (in 3rd ed) giving you one extra Cleave if you had the Cleave feat, but then became a totally useless enchantment as soon as you got the Great Cleave feat, which you would! Speed never becomes useless unless you can somehow be hasted permanently, no matter how many castings of haste the party has.
Saying it should stack on the grounds it makes sense? Keen and Improved Critical should stack, on the grounds that Keen (sharper weapon) and Imp. Crit. (ability to target vital spots) are different concepts. Speed and haste are the same concept!
Hi, Grick. So this is what it's like over here! : )
Saying the wording hasn't changed since 3.0? Agreed! And it didn't stack then, either!
SKR's FAQ on Speed AoMF is just saying that, no, it's not one extra attack per limb; that's not how Speed works, and imagine how stupidly powerful it'd be if Speed did work like that!
The Speed property gives the wielder (I use that word with caution) an extra attack!
That doesn't really counter anything Ashiel actually said.
Yes, speed gives you an extra attack. Ashiel is saying it's granting you an extra attack with that weapon, which is a different effect from getting an extra attack with a different weapon.
Her argument about using two different speed weapons has merit, since each one can only effect that particular weapon. (Basically, she's defining the effect as "Make an extra attack with Rapier Serial number 5584739" rather than just "Make an extra attack")
One could argue that she's wrong about Speed + Haste (using two weapons) because haste allows you to "make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon", and you could say that by having the potential to use that haste-granted-attack with the speed weapon, the stacking clause comes into effect.
And since she doesn't consider James/SKR/FAQ to be RAW, it doesn't matter if that's the RAI or not.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm sorry I was unclear.
My point about Speed giving the wielder an extra attack (with that weapon), as opposed to giving that weapon an extra attack, is that this clarifies that both Speed and haste grant the wielder an extra attack, and that is why they do not stack, and why two Speed weapons would not allow the wielder to make two extra attacks, even if each extra attack was with a different Speed weapon.
I understand Ashiel's logic, but that logic is flawed in this case.
|
|
I said that earlier, and he said if that was the case, the wielder could make extra attack with any weapon. Still wrong, IMO. The wielder is attacking faster with that weapon specifically.
Yeah, I favourited (is that a word?) your earlier post because you said what I was going to say. : )
Any effect that allows a wielder to take an extra attack does not stack with any effect that allows a wielder to take an extra attack!
Speed is an effect wich grants a wielder an extra attack. Any wielder can only take one extra attack granted this way in any single round, no matter how many such effects he has access to.
My point about Speed giving the wielder an extra attack (with that weapon), as opposed to giving that weapon an extra attack, is that this clarifies that both Speed and haste grant the wielder an extra attack, and that is why they do not stack, and why two Speed weapons would not allow the wielder to make two extra attacks, even if each extra attack was with a different Speed weapon.
I understand Ashiel's logic, but that logic is flawed in this case.
That still doesn't address her point, which is that the effect "Make an extra attack with weapon A" is not the same thing as "Make an extra attack with weapon B".
Thus, since the speed effect on weapon A has absolutely no effect on any attacks made with weapon B, it's not similar, so the stacking rule doesn't come into effect.
So in order to counter this argument, you'll have to explain why the effect is considered "make an extra attack" instead of "make an extra attack with this specific weapon."
If I give you a promissory note which can be redeemed for one apple, which cannot be used in conjunction with a similar offer, does that mean you can use it with a different note which can be redeemed for one pear?
IE: is the purpose of the note "free apple" or is the purpose "free fruit"?
You have to show us why it's free fruit.
(Even though we all know the store was intending you to only get one free piece of fruit, they're legally bound to honor the coupon)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sigh, are people still arguing this even after the creative director and a key developer have weighed in on this from the game creator's perspective?
This is sort of like arguing the finer rhetorical points of a legal brief after the Supreme Court has ruled on it.
It might be fun, but it doesn't have any real impact on things.
You can always house rule it if you want it to be this way. Why do you feel a need to twist the wording into rhetorical gordian knots? Just say "this is my ruling" and be done.
|
|
My point about Speed giving the wielder an extra attack (with that weapon), as opposed to giving that weapon an extra attack, is that this clarifies that both Speed and haste grant the wielder an extra attack, and that is why they do not stack, and why two Speed weapons would not allow the wielder to make two extra attacks, even if each extra attack was with a different Speed weapon.
I understand Ashiel's logic, but that logic is flawed in this case.
That still doesn't address her point, which is that the effect "Make an extra attack with weapon A" is not the same thing as "Make an extra attack with weapon B".
Thus, since the speed effect on weapon A has absolutely no effect on any attacks made with weapon B, it's not similar, so the stacking rule doesn't come into effect.
So in order to counter this argument, you'll have to explain why the effect is considered "make an extra attack" instead of "make an extra attack with this specific weapon."
If I give you a promissory note which can be redeemed for one apple, which cannot be used in conjunction with a similar offer, does that mean you can use it with a different note which can be redeemed for one pear?
IE: is the purpose of the note "free apple" or is the purpose "free fruit"?
You have to show us why it's free fruit.
(Even though we all know the store was intending you to only get one free piece of fruit, they're legally bound to honor the coupon)
It's fruit.
Gaining an extra attack, and using that extra attack with a particular weapon, does not make an extra attack with a different weapon suddenly not an extra attack!
I'm sure the devs (who did answer this) are astonished that it could be understood in any other way!
Design Manager
|
It's always a little weird when I find that Malachi and I are on exactly the same page....
That being said, I'm feeling like it should be self evident that "Make an extra attack with weapon A" is "similar" to "make an extra attack with weapon B" or even "make an extra attack" and thus prevented by the plain RAW. That being said, the clarifications from SKR and JJ should really have been the nails in this coffin. I'm actually a little startled that they weren't.
Speed weapons haven't really changed since the game was made before Pathfinder. And it's not that hard to argue when the rule remains and probably wasn't written by either of the developers involved in the clarification (no disrespect implied, but the original rules were authored by Monte Cook, Skip Williams, and Jonathan Tweet according to the book).
It's been shown time and time again that developers do not always agree on things...
Except, Speed weapons didn't stack in 3.5, or 3.0, either. That's why the language hasn't changed - it does work the same.
Umm, 3.5e Speed Weapons did Stack... I can't navigate the WotC Blog for the Confirmation Post though.
So umm I have a hypothetical statement regarding what Ashiel has been stating and the arguments against. In a campaign where the spell haste didnt exist but somehow the enchantment speed did exist, you could isolate the two concepts from eachother. It makes sense that haste and speed are more or less the same rulings given that haste is the prerequisite for creation but as seperate concepts speed is specific enough to state that only the speed weapon gets the bonus and that the extra attack has no effect on your other weapons and or attacks. So it makes sense that you can't do what Ashiel says if you look at the "spirit of the law" but in a literal sense he/she is right. However, GMs can decide to make / break rules as is so subject should be done for discussion.
Ok so it wasn't their Blog... It was another of their books that has a Enemy using 2 Speed Weapons for an extra attack with each weapon... Though IIRC it was on a Quarterstaff... It was a +5 Speed/+5 Speed Quarterstaff...
I think Deities & Demigods even has a God wielding a similar combo...
And my PDF of the Book is not displaying the name of the Monster correctly...
Also, RAW, yes the amulet applies to each natural attack.You don't consider the FAQ to be RAW?
(Boots of Speed) provides an extra attack with ANY weapon EXCEPT a speed weapon (and unarmed strike but that's a system failing).Are you unaware of haste working with unarmed strikes or is that also not official enough?
Basically. Perhaps it is because I was burned by WotC too frequently during the 3.x days, but there were examples that people caught on the D&D 3.x FAQs that were incorrect, and customer service often gave answers that were either incorrect or even completely different depending on when you asked. The RAW is found here and in the manual. Everything else is just a suggestion IMHO. Especially when the FAQ has already been determined to be flawed several times (the animal creature type is written in a fashion akin to the other creature types that receive proficiencies due to type and notes animals to be proficient with armor if trained for war, while the FAQ contradicts this). Meanwhile, the "FAQ" on the d20pfsrd.com is over 90% unofficial, with only a small handful of official FAQ (including things such as the animal armor FAQ), and makes it clear so (including having portions of the FAQ struck out when actual FAQ material comes out).
So, again, perhaps it is because I've seen FAQs fail, and devs not knowing the rules they're talking about (like with Sean K. trying to say that you have to target individual limbs on a monk with magic fang which virtually everyone who read knew was not in accordance with the rules), and the fact it's a rule-system that is credited to Monte Cook, Skip Williams, and Jonathan Tweet (what parts of it haven't been altered), but I am very slow to take FAQs over what I see written in the book.
Especially when what is written in the book works one way (is balanced) and doesn't work another (creates situations like worthless expensive magic items).
Like I said before, if they want to make an errata to change the wording so that it is not possible to interpret it the second way, I would also hope that such errata also included reducing the cost of a speed weapon down to a +1 modifier or - even better - making it a flat GP adjustment independent from the +X modifiers of a weapon so that you're not gouged for a very bad ability.
EDIT: It should be noted that I don't play with haste not applying to unarmed strikes. Merely that I acknowledge that, by RAW, haste does not work on unarmed strikes (because the rules go to extreme lengths to note that unarmed strikes are neither manufactured nor natural weapons, and haste specifically applies only to the latter and not the former). That's an example of RAW. It cannot be interpreted any other way that is in keeping with the text. So most people will simply ignore it (a minor house rule).
It is one of the reasons I hold anything I myself write (for others or for my own personal use) to very high standards. I respect my responsibility to write good rules. I wouldn't have been caught dead writing something like "Prone Shooter" or "Elephant Stomp" or a number of other things (but I'm going to hope they were mangled in the editing somehow for space concerns or something, and give those writers the benefit of the doubt). RAW is a responsibility, and it is the rules, but as a tabletop RPG that is a shared experience it is entirely fine for a group to ignore or change a rule that is not working for them (it is so expected that it is the first and most important rule of Pathfinder).
|
| 7 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The SKR FAQ does strike me as kind of moot considering the AoMF description states that melee weapon special abilities can only be applied to unarmed attacks. To the best of my knowledge, natural weapons are not unarmed attacks, and therefore a creature could not use a speed AoMF to grant it an extra natural attack (though it would still get the benefit of any '+' bonuses).
That being said, whether or not my presumption is right or wrong is completely irrelevant, because ultimately, the wrong question is being asked for the type of answer that is desired.
The proper question is:
If a humanoid is wielding a +1 speed longsword and a +1 speed short sword, is that humanoid able to gain an extra attack with each weapon during a full-attack, or does he/she only gain one additional attack and must choose which weapon makes the additional attack?
Regardless of my personal opinions on the matter, I ask the following question for completeness:
If a humanoid is wielding a +1 speed longsword and a mundane short sword, but is also under the effects of a haste spell, is that humanoid able to make an extra attack with each weapon during a full-attack (the mundane short sword from haste and the longsword from the speed ability), or does he/she only gain one additional attack and must choose which weapon makes the additional attack?
I think those questions will get you the answers you desire.
They get the extra attacks with both.
|
Design Manager
|
They get the extra attacks with both.
Except for the fact that the Creative director and the abilities say they don't.
@HangarFlying
An Amulet of Mighty Fists specifically states "This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons."
What Sean is saying in the FAQ is that you couldn't have (for example) a Marilith with an Amulet of Mighty Fists who then gets an extra attack with each of her 6 slams because they've all got the Speed property now. You'd only get one extra attack.
I'm with Ashiel on this one. The wording of Haste allows you to make an extra attack with a natural or manufactured weapon. The wording of speed allows you to make an extra attack with that specific weapon. As long as you use the hasted attack with a weapon other than the speed weapon. It should work IMO. I don't know exactly what the devs said, but if it's contrary to the way it's currently written, then I find thier decision wrong IMO.
As Ashiel said, the cost of the speed property seems to match the way it's written or it would be a much cheaper property.
Heck, even if you dont go with boots of speed, you could buy a 50 charge wand of Haste for cheaper than the property goes for, and then you arent restricted to a single weapon.
The cost of speed isn't so bad when you take into account that speed lasts every round, all day. Boots of speed gives you 10 rounds that you have to activate, haste depends on the caster.
There's a huge difference in cost of an item that gives you limited use, and one that is always active.
Haven't the devs already weighed in, twice now, in the thread this spun off from, saying that you can never get more than 1 extra attack from haste/speed items? That's as clear and authoritative answer as you can get.
Ok so it wasn't their Blog... It was another of their books that has a Enemy using 2 Speed Weapons for an extra attack with each weapon... Though IIRC it was on a Quarterstaff... It was a +5 Speed/+5 Speed Quarterstaff...
I think Deities & Demigods even has a God wielding a similar combo...
And my PDF of the Book is not displaying the name of the Monster correctly...
Sad to say even Paizo isn't immune to putting illegal stat blocks in their products. WOTC more so.
Sad to say even Paizo isn't immune to putting illegal stat blocks in their products. WOTC more so.Ok so it wasn't their Blog... It was another of their books that has a Enemy using 2 Speed Weapons for an extra attack with each weapon... Though IIRC it was on a Quarterstaff... It was a +5 Speed/+5 Speed Quarterstaff...
I think Deities & Demigods even has a God wielding a similar combo...
And my PDF of the Book is not displaying the name of the Monster correctly...
Also, I believe you are referring to the Quarterstaff of Alacrity which was an epic weapon that specifically broke the rules regarding speed weapons. And Gods probably had more powerful abilities than mortals (but I don't remember that book per se).
What I can't get around is this: How are two identical items not similar? Speed doesn't stack with speed. Seems fairly simple (but apparently it's not). Right now you have on one side: the RAW, the FAQ, and the devs; and the other side has a stat in a splat book of an older edition of a different game.
P.S. Been said before but, Boots of speed last 1 minute a day, speed lasts for 1440 minutes a day.
Yeah, I still have never found an argument that relies on grammatical analysis to be very convincing.
Speed does not stack with speed. You get your normal number of attacks (as determined by your weapon style/natural attacks) +1. If you get a value of +2 attacks, you did it wrong.
Yeah, I still have never found an argument that relies on grammatical analysis to be very convincing.
Speed does not stack with speed. You get your normal number of attacks (as determined by your weapon style/natural attacks) +1. If you get a value of +2 attacks, you did it wrong.
Of course speed does not stack with speed. Having a +1 speed shortsword and a +1 speed longsword doesn't mean you get to make two extra attacks with your longsword. That would be silly good sir.
I believe you are referring to the Quarterstaff of Alacrity which was an epic weapon that specifically broke the rules regarding speed weapons.
Oh good call!
Technically that would be 3.0. Checking the 3.0 SRD, the language was slightly different (same effect). It still specifically called out that a speed weapon does not stack ("is not cumulative") with Haste. That's a bigger deal since Haste gave a full extra standard ("partial") action then. That means you couldn't full-attack, getting a speed weapon attack, and then completely separately get a haste action attack.
What I can't get around is this: How are two identical items not similar? Speed doesn't stack with speed. Seems fairly simple (but apparently it's not). Right now you have on one side: the RAW, the FAQ, and the devs; and the other side has a stat in a splat book of an older edition of a different game.
P.S. Been said before but, Boots of speed last 1 minute a day, speed lasts for 1440 minutes a day.
There is an extreme rate of diminishing returns. Unless you are literally going to be in battle for 24 hours then speed is never going to be worth the metal its weaved onto. By the time you can get the teeniest, tiniest, least expensive speed weapon, you can purchase 30 rounds worth of boots of speed. 30 rounds of +1 to hit, +1 to AC, +1 Reflex, +30ft. speed, +1 attack with ANY manufactured or natural weapon. And those rounds needn't be consecutive (and it also adds +12 to Acrobatics jumps on a round you get +30 ft. speed).
So beyond the bonus to hit, avoid being hit, speed, and saving throws, the you also get to say "Hm, that wyvern is flying, eh? I will activate one round of haste from my boots and full-attack the wyvern with my bow. I have an additional +1 to hit this round as well.", and then "Oh, the wyvern charged into melee with me? I quickdraw my greatsword and activate another round of haste and make an extra attack at +1".
Speed as in the weapon enhancement only matters when you are making a full attack. Every round of every day that you are not full-attacking, speed doesn't mean diddly.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You've mentioned multiple boots before, and that's totally within the rules (insert obligitatory every play style is the best comment) but I can't imagine gaming like that. I enjoy high fantasy but having several pairs of the same pair of boots seems silly. I know that is not a good rules arguement but the pricing on the items comes from duration. You don't get a refund on the rounds you're not hasted, you don't get a refund on the rounds you're not full attacking.
"Come on man he's getting away!"
"Hold on, I gotta change my shoes."
Of course speed does not stack with speed. Having a +1 speed shortsword and a +1 speed longsword doesn't mean you get to make two extra attacks with your longsword. That would be silly good sir.Yeah, I still have never found an argument that relies on grammatical analysis to be very convincing.
Speed does not stack with speed. You get your normal number of attacks (as determined by your weapon style/natural attacks) +1. If you get a value of +2 attacks, you did it wrong.
Word your opinion clearly, because I know you aren't agreeing with me, but its better if you don't try to hide it with smugness.
Word your opinion clearly, because I know you aren't agreeing with me, but its better if you don't try to hide it with smugness.Of course speed does not stack with speed. Having a +1 speed shortsword and a +1 speed longsword doesn't mean you get to make two extra attacks with your longsword. That would be silly good sir.Yeah, I still have never found an argument that relies on grammatical analysis to be very convincing.
Speed does not stack with speed. You get your normal number of attacks (as determined by your weapon style/natural attacks) +1. If you get a value of +2 attacks, you did it wrong.
I was being entirely serious and was agreeing with you. What you said coincides with what I've said as well.
You've mentioned multiple boots before, and that's totally within the rules (insert obligitatory every play style is the best comment) but I can't imagine gaming like that. I enjoy high fantasy but having several pairs of the same pair of boots seems silly. I know that is not a good rules arguement but the pricing on the items comes from duration. You don't get a refund on the rounds you're not hasted, you don't get a refund on the rounds you're not full attacking.
"Come on man he's getting away!"
"Hold on, I gotta change my shoes."
Is it silly to have several scrolls of the same sort? Silly to have more than one magic arrow? If you're going to dump 32,000+ gp into your equipment to get multiple attacks, I don't see how carrying an extra pair of shoes is silly at all. Hell, it's probably a good idea to carry extra pairs of shoes as an adventurer anyway (along with spare clothing).
The thing is, we're not even arguing over the same effect. Speed does not grant the benefits of haste. It simply doesn't. Speed weapons do not grant bonuses to attack rolls, saving throws, armor class, nor movement speed, nor does it grant extra attacks with any weapon you possess.
Arguing "I don't want to buy items" is bizarre. Okay, sorry, don't buy 'em. If you don't want more than one of the same type of item, don't pack spares. That's entirely your choice. But the fact is speed as a weapon enhancement is supposed to be SO AMAZINGLY GOOD as to be the equivalent of a +3 weapon enhancement. That puts it outside the price range of even being purchasable in a standard game, whereas boots of speed are easily available in standard campaigns.
And it's not just boots of speed that it compares to. I picked boots of speed because they provide an incredibly similar role, provide a greater benefit, and do so for roughly a third of the minimum price of a speed weapon.
Compare speed also to other weapon enhancements. It's a +3 enhancement equivalent. Let's compare that to its competition.
+4 weapons penetrate almost all damage reductions and give a significant +15% bonus to hit over a +1 speed weapon, and an additional +3 to damage.
+1 triple bane weapon hits as a +3 weapon versus 3 different creature types and deals +2d6 damage versus 3 creature types.
+1 merciful holy weapon hits an additional +3d6 damage versus anything evil and allows you to take prisoners as desired.
A Fighter with a 2 Speed Gladius OR 1 Speed Gladius and a Normal Gladius with Haste Two-Weapon Fighting:
1st Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2nd Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8
A Fighter with a 2 Speed Gladius OR 1 Speed Gladius and a Normal Gladius with Haste Two-Weapon Fighting:
1st Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2nd Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8
Just no.
At this point, repetitively stating examples the way you prefer isn't effective.
It is legal because they aren't on the same weapon.
& I still find it funny that they same people who adamantly argue against this working are the same that B**** about martials not getting nice things.
|
Design Manager
|
It is legal because they aren't on the same weapon.
& I still find it funny that they same people who adamantly argue against this working are the same that B**** about martials not getting nice things.
It is not legal because the effects don't stack to provide a character with more than 1 total extra attack and there's input from two Paizo employees at the beginning of this thread verifying that.
You've mentioned multiple boots before, and that's totally within the rules (insert obligitatory every play style is the best comment) but I can't imagine gaming like that. I enjoy high fantasy but having several pairs of the same pair of boots seems silly. I know that is not a good rules arguement but the pricing on the items comes from duration. You don't get a refund on the rounds you're not hasted, you don't get a refund on the rounds you're not full attacking.
"Come on man he's getting away!"
"Hold on, I gotta change my shoes."Is it silly to have several scrolls of the same sort? Silly to have more than one magic arrow? If you're going to dump 32,000+ gp into your equipment to get multiple attacks, I don't see how carrying an extra pair of shoes is silly at all. Hell, it's probably a good idea to carry extra pairs of shoes as an adventurer anyway (along with spare clothing).
The thing is, we're not even arguing over the same effect. Speed does not grant the benefits of haste. It simply doesn't. Speed weapons do not grant bonuses to attack rolls, saving throws, armor class, nor movement speed, nor does it grant extra attacks with any weapon you possess.
Arguing "I don't want to buy items" is bizarre. Okay, sorry, don't buy 'em. If you don't want more than one of the same type of item, don't pack spares. That's entirely your choice. But the fact is speed as a weapon enhancement is supposed to be SO AMAZINGLY GOOD as to be the equivalent of a +3 weapon enhancement. That puts it outside the price range of even being purchasable in a standard game, whereas boots of speed are easily available in standard campaigns.
And it's not just boots of speed that it compares to. I picked boots of speed because they provide an incredibly similar role, provide a greater benefit, and do so for roughly a third of the minimum price of a speed weapon.
Compare speed also to other weapon enhancements. It's a...
It's fine if you think only having only one pair of magical boots is silly. Lucky for me that wasn't my argument. I said the price difference comes from the duration. Boots last 1 minute a day, speed lasts 1440 minutes a day. Yes you can buy multiple pairs of boots and I agree thirty rounds should cover you on most days. However, as you've pointed out, that puts the boots near the price of the weapon, so I'm not seeing your argument past that point.
As far as speed stacking with speed, I'll repeat. How is something identical but not similar? Speed says it doesn't stack with similar. Anything else seems an almost intentional misreading of the rules.
But they aren't Identical on the same Weapon. You can't use haste or Speed to get:
1st Gladius: +18/+18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2nd Gladius: +18/+13/+3
BUT I could get the one I posted before of:
1st Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2nd Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8
BECAUSE THE EFFECTS ARE NOT ON THE SAME WEAPON!
|
|
@HangarFlying
An Amulet of Mighty Fists specifically states "This amulet grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons."
What Sean is saying in the FAQ is that you couldn't have (for example) a Marilith with an Amulet of Mighty Fists who then gets an extra attack with each of her 6 slams because they've all got the Speed property now. You'd only get one extra attack.
Unfortunately, you didn't quote the relevant part of the AoMF description that pertains to my initial statement that you are trying to refute.
Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks.
So, as far as the Marilith and her slam/tail attacks are concerned: no, she does not get an extra attack while wearing an AoMF that is enhanced with the speed ability. Whether or not this is the way it's supposed to be intended, I don't know, but that's the way it's currently written (and quite honestly, I'm ok with the way it is currently written). That being said, the Marilith would get the enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls to her slam/tail attacks, though the best she would get would be a +2 because that is the max that an AoMF could have while also having the speed ability.
|
|
But they aren't Identical on the same Weapon. You can't use haste or Speed to get:
1st Gladius: +18/+18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2nd Gladius: +18/+13/+3BUT I could get the one I posted before of:
1st Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8/+3
2nd Gladius: +18/+18/+13/+8BECAUSE THE EFFECTS ARE NOT ON THE SAME WEAPON!
Considering you don't cast haste on a weapon to begin with, the issue is completely irrelevant. In the end, a hasted character may only make one extra attack when using the full-attack action.
However, as you've pointed out, that puts the boots near the price of the weapon, so I'm not seeing your argument past that point.
Because the boots are - again - providing superior benefits. +1 to hit, +1 to AC, +1 Reflex, +30 ft. speed, and +1 attack with any manufactured or natural weapon. Furthermore, wearing the boots do not make your weapon become exorbitantly expensive to further enhance. The GP I was comparing it to was the lowest minimum. That is, only a +1 speed weapon. Keep in mind, the only thing this weapon does is allow you an extra attack with that weapon and give you a +1 bonus to damage over a normal masterwork weapon.
A masterwork weapon and boots of speed actually gives you more than a speed weapon does for all practical purposes.
Secondly, the cost to go from a +1 speed weapon to a +2 speed weapon is a whopping 18,000 gp. That's enough to buy ANOTHER set of boots of speed and upgrade a +1 weapon to a +2 weapon. The cost of a +3 speed weapon is 72,000 gp. That's enough to purchase a +4 weapon and 3 sets of boots of speed, and in all cases the boots are going to be more powerful. They work when you want them to, they give bonuses to hit, they give bonuses to not being hit, they give bonuses to Reflex saves (which combo with Rings of Evasion), they give +30 ft. speed which can be used to get a +12 to Acrobatics checks for the round as well as run an extra 120 ft. that round.
But they aren't Identical on the same Weapon.
But are they similar?
Did everyone miss the multiple comments about Ashiel and sarcasm? I hope you did miss them if you are one still even arguing this rule...especially against certain people *cough* trolls *cough*
However, as you've pointed out, that puts the boots near the price of the weapon, so I'm not seeing your argument past that point.Because the boots are - again - providing superior benefits. +1 to hit, +1 to AC, +1 Reflex, +30 ft. speed, and +1 attack with any manufactured or natural weapon. Furthermore, wearing the boots do not make your weapon become exorbitantly expensive to further enhance. The GP I was comparing it to was the lowest minimum. That is, only a +1 speed weapon. Keep in mind, the only thing this weapon does is allow you an extra attack with that weapon and give you a +1 bonus to damage over a normal masterwork weapon.
And you have to activate the boots, and then change into your backup magical boots in your backpack after your minute is up...
A masterwork weapon and boots of speed actually gives you more than a speed weapon does for all practical purposes.
Aside from overcoming DR/magic...
Secondly, the cost to go from a +1 speed weapon to a +2 speed weapon is a whopping 18,000 gp. That's enough to buy ANOTHER set of boots of speed and upgrade a +1 weapon to a +2 weapon. The cost of a +3 speed weapon is 72,000 gp. That's enough to purchase a +4 weapon and 3 sets of boots of speed, and in all cases the boots are going to be more powerful. They work when you want them to, they give bonuses to hit, they give bonuses to not being hit, they give bonuses to Reflex saves (which combo with Rings of Evasion), they give +30 ft. speed which can be used to get a +12 to Acrobatics checks for the round as well as run an extra 120 ft. that round.
Yes, adding abilities to a magical item is expensive...
You seemed to have solved your own problem. Don't buy speed weapons, buy boots of speed instead, keep several pairs to last through out the day. Since haste and speed don't stack (and speed and speed don't stack) you're losing nothing.
And as an aside, I would not put magical boots in the same category as scrolls (or wands or potions) or any magic item that is consumed in its use. There should a different category for those type of items. But what would we call it? Hmm...
Aside from overcoming DR/magic...
You must be trollin'. I already mentioned that in every example it's cheaper to just have a non-speed weapon and boots while also being more useful. The masterwork weapon + boots is 12,300 gp. A +1 weapon and boots is 14,300 gp. Add another set of boots brings it to 26,300 gp. Yet another set of boots brings it to 38,300 gp and puts it in the same ballpark as a +1 speed weapon (32,300 gp), or you could have a +2 weapon and two pairs for 32,300 gp.
If "overcomes DR/magic" is the best you've got for a combination that costs 1/3rd the value of a magic item that is mechanically worse than it is with both less power and fewer optional benefits, then this argument is over. GG, good show. It was nice talking with you, have a good day. We've reached the end of our yellow brick road.
Yes, adding abilities to a magical item is expensive...
Nah, see, it's not really. IF you're getting something. See, if what you say is true, speed is not a bonus it is a penalty. A harsh penalty. See, those boots? Well, RAW I can add their effects to another set of boots for +18,000 gp. So if I want boots of speed and teleportation I can do that. It takes Craft Wondrous Item and some time. It doesn't get exponentially more expensive.
+X weapons get exponentially more expensive. The cost of a +5 weapon is 50,000 gp. The cost of a +5 speed weapon is a whopping 128,000 gp. Almost triple the cost. If we wanted a +5 holy speed weapon it would cost 200,000 gp instead of the 98,000 gp of a +5 holy weapon.
See, speed needs to be at least in keeping with its other weapon modifiers. It doesn't even do that. For the same cost of a +1 speed sword, you could get a +1 merciful vicious corrosive weapon that has the same +1 properties and deals +4d6 damage versus almost everything. I don't know a single person who would take a +1 speed weapon if given the option next to a +1 holy weapon and the holy weapon isn't even as "powerful" based on the weapon equivalency.
So as I said before, I read it both ways. One seems more correct in the writing and doesn't make core items useless, the other one less so and does. I'll go with the former due to both strength of text and gameplay.
Did everyone miss the multiple comments about Ashiel and sarcasm? I hope you did miss them if you are one still even arguing this rule...especially against certain people *cough* trolls *cough*
I took a character trait and skill focus {sarcasm}. It was a prerequisite for "preternatural patience" which is a good feat to have on these boards. :P
So Ashiel's argument boils down to: They should stack because this other item does the same thing cheaper.
... We both know you are fully aware of the fact that in PFRPG some options are not as good/cost effective as others, you have an entire GUIDE on ways to be thrifty. Frankly I don't see how this is any different.
The two don't stack. And they don't stack because in the line about "This does not stack with similar effects" it makes zero reference to what you are actually using to make the extra attack with. Ergo, what weapon actually used to make the extra attack does not matter, only that an extra attack was made. This whole thread is ridiculous.