PFS Ruling Required: Two-Weapon Fighting & Multiweapon Fighting

[Nefreet]

I still think it is a fallacy to use Double Slice as an example the way you are.

Double Slice clearly states the benefit you get by taking it. You know the cost (the feat), and you know the benefit (extra damage).

This is how the game works.

You are the one coming up with your own benefits to taking Vestigial Arm outside of what the Discovery says.

This is not how the game works.

[Jiggy]

Nefreet wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

I'd be curious to know if anyone can show me an attack routine that does so without combining TWF and a 2H weapon.

Easy. Character with +16 BAB and 4 Longswords.

Arm#1: Slash at +16
Arm#2: Slash at +11
Arm#3: Slash at +6
Arm#4: Slash at +1

Yeah, thought of that after I hit submit and removed that line from my post. :)

In context though, I think it's pretty clear that's not what SKR was talking about. The person he was replying to was talking about arms used per round "or in each bracket of an iterative".

So again, if we don't take things out of context, SKR was saying you aren't limited to only using two of your arms to attack in a given round or iterative bracket. The fact that SKR didn't include that detail when summarizing the long post he was refuting does not change his meaning.

[Nefreet]

And it's not like SKR is a flawless human being, who gets tired, or doesn't post every detail with the foresight of how it will be used in future arguments, right? ;-)

[Jiggy]

N N 959 wrote:

SKR's statement that VA does not allow you to dual - "wield" two 2HWs and attack with them both in the same round.

He never made such a statement. He stated that it wasn't originally intended. Please don't put words in his mouth.

He also stated that TWF+shield wasnt' intended but was still legal, thus clearly showing that "not the intent" and "not legal" are not the same thing.

[Nefreet]

But why would he call out TWF+Shield, and not TWF w/ 2HWs? Hmm...

[Jiggy]

Nefreet wrote:

And it's not like SKR is a flawless human being, who gets tired, or doesn't post every detail with the foresight of how it will be used in future arguments, right? ;-)

I really hope you're not going to tell me that you think SKR was talking about 3+ iteratives when he commented on not being restricted to two arms' worth of attacks in a discussion specifically about attacks in a single iterative bracket and in reply to a post about a single iterative bracket, because you're waaaaaaay better than that.

[N N 959]

Jiggy wrote:

N N 959 wrote:

SKR's statement that VA does not allow you to dual - "wield" two 2HWs and attack with them both in the same round.

He never made such a statement. He stated that it wasn't originally intended. Please don't put words in his mouth.

He also stated that TWF+shield wasnt' intended but was still legal, thus clearly showing that "not the intent" and "not legal" are not the same thing.

He did say that.

SKR wrote:

The intent is that you have an extra arm for holding stuff, not to turn you into a double-greatsword-wielding maniac.

Emphasis mine.

That is the rule. The intent and the rule are one and the same here. SKR didn't fail to stop the last part from actually being how the rule works.

You're trying to create a bogus argument that if uses the word "intent" then he can't be expressing what the actual rule is. Sometimes he's strictly talking about intent and not what the rule is and sometimes he's talking about intent in the context of how the rule actually works. This is the latter. Nowhere, ever, does he say anything that contradicts this rule. In fact, all his subsequent example reinforce this rule.

Give us one single example of VA allowing TWF with THWs.

[Jiggy]

Nefreet wrote:

You are the one coming up with your own benefits to taking Vestigial Arm outside of what the Discovery says.

This is not how the game works.

No, I didn't come up with anything of my own. I claimed that when Vestigial Arm says it can do what your other arms can do, that it meant it can do what your other arms can do.

Want to know some other things Vestigial Arm doesn't say it can do?
Activate a wand
Perform somatic components for a spell
Be used for climbing or swimming
Be a free hand for Deflect Arrows
Deliver a touch spell
Perform a Disable Device or Sleight of Hand check
Etc.

But you know what? The rules let your original arms do those things, and VA says it works like your original arms. The rules let your original arms add force to your attacks, and VA says it works like your original arms.

If the latter is "coming up with your own benefits", then so is the former. You don't get to pick and choose which normal functions of an arm apply and which don't.

[Jiggy]

N N 959 wrote:

Give us one single example of VA allowing TWF with THWs.

That would be the last link in my long post, where—in the context of a discussion (and in reply to a specific post) dealing with attacks within a single iterative bracket and using VA—he says that "Your idea of 'You can't attack with more than two arms out of any combination of arms and vestigial arms' isn't in the rules anywhere, and it's not an idea the design team supports."

He said that. The link is upthread. So unless you rip it out of context (which I suppose is your perogative if you like), SKR specifically said that there's nothing stopping you from using more than two arms to attack within a given iterative bracket.

So there you go. He said it (in stronger rules-language than the intent statement, too). You can choose to accept it, ignore it, or take it out of context, but there it is.

[N N 959]

Jiggy wrote:

"Your idea of 'You can't attack with more than two arms out of any combination of arms and vestigial arms' isn't in the rules anywhere, and it's not an idea the design team supports."

He said that.

You're actually reading more into this than what was stated. SKR uses the word "attack." He's referring to any type of attack. You've taken this out of context and tried to insist that he's allowing additional primary/off-hands. He's not. In fact, in the same post where I quoted the man holding the barrel, SKR gives an example of using VA and getting four attacks from arms and one from a bite.

Here:

SKR wrote:

Now replace the TWF human with a TWF tengu, and get rid of the barrel. The tengu can make two unarmed strikes per round (one with the left leg and one with the right leg), and gets to add his three natural attacks as secondary attacks. That's 5 attacks per round, total. Overall, that puts his attack bonuses at –2 kick/–2 kick/–5 bite/–5 claw/–5 claw. This is a legitimate attack routine.

Now give him the vestigial arm discovery x2. Instead of making two kick attacks, he's making two manufactured weapon attacks. So his total attack routine is weapon/weapon/bite/claw/claw. That's 5 attacks per round, total. This is a legitimate attack routine.

So your quote isn't some change to anything that SKR had already stated. Neither one of the weapon attacks can be a THW if you are going to attack twice using TWF rules. Why? Because you are still using the primary hand for one weapon and the off-hand for the other weapon. The other claw/bite attacks are not off-hand attacks. They are "secondary" attacks and do not count against the primary/off-hand restriction.

The quote which you think serves you does not say what you are claiming. It does not allow one to violate the primary/off-hand limitation. It simply allows the Tengu to use his normal hands as secondary claw attacks and his VA as primary/off-hand attacks.

Barring some other feat, each humanoid has one primary hand and one off-hand. You must allocate both to "wield" a two-handed weapon and this precludes one from making any additional weapon attacks as an "off-hand attack" regardless of what appendage is available. Nothing SKR says about VA contradicts this.

Apologies for my constant edits. I keep seeing things that need clarification or need to be expanded to make the post as accurate as I can.

[Nefreet]

^ this is how I pretty much see it as well.

[N N 959]

In order to put this to bed, I'm actually going to show where SKR specifically says you can't do what you think you can and he doesn't use the word "intent."

In fact this series of posts immediately follows SKR's post about the barrel holding man and the tengu attacks. Coincidentally, it's a an exchange between Nefreet and SKR which starts here. I'll put the quotes here:

Nefreet wrote:

Sean K Reynolds wrote: wrote:

Nefreet wrote: wrote:

With two-weapon fighting he can swing a sword, and make an unarmed strike, for two attacks.

The above quote is false, by the way.

In that particular example I wasn't talking about a two-handed sword.

You can still swing a one-handed sword, and make an unarmed strike with the other hand, yes?

Thank you for all of the Q's and A's. I think that answers all of the questions I'm aware of.

SKR responds,

SKR wrote:

Ah, yes, I misread that as two-handing a sword.
You can use one hand for a 1H sword and another limb for an unarmed strike, no problem.

Emphasis mine. In black and white SKR says you can't THF and unarmed strike in the context of VA, ironically because he misreads nefreet's assertion as asking if one can. It doesn't get any clearer than that.

To use your own vernacular:

Jiggy wrote:

So there you go. He said it (in stronger rules-language than the intent statement, too). You can choose to accept it, ignore it, or take it out of context, but there it is.

[N N 959]

Given what I now believe to be true, let's reexamine the OP and the player who wanted 2xTHW.

Multi Weapon Fighting wrote:

This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks

with multiple weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons
are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with
off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty
on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty
on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one
primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-
Weapon Fighting in the Pathfinder RPG Core Rulebook.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting
feat for creatures with more than two arms.

Rereading MWF in the context of what I now understand, this is how I see it:

1. Per the rules of MWF, you still have one primary hand (damage 1x), but "all the others are off-hands" (damage 1/2x).

2. A multi-armed creature does not need a feat to make off-hand attacks. The feat simply reduces the penalty. So a person with three arms gets one primary attack at normal damage and two off-hand attacks at 1/2 damage, with or without the MWF feat.

3. A multi-armed creature can automatically use a THW and a 1H weapon and make two attacks. In other words, the other arms can all "wield" weapons concurrently. These attacks are made at the -6, -10 penalty.

4. The rules for Vestigial Arms supersedes the MWF rules when using the vestigial arms. In other words, per the VA description, the extra arms are not by default "off-hands" but can be exclusively designated as either primary/off-hands in an given round.

There are, by my understanding, some unanswered question for multi-armed fighting rules.

1. Do all the off-hands have to have light weapons to get the -2 reduction or do I get it if only one of the hands is wielding a light weapon?

2. Can two "off-hands" wield a THW? or do I have to have a primary hand on a THW? If the answer is yes, to the first part, then I imagine the damage bonus would be just 1x if the creature uses two off-hands to wield a THW.

As an aside, I have to agree that the illegality of the MWF feat does not stop a PC from fighting under the MWF rules. It simply stops a player from reducing the penalty by way of the feat. However, I am not aware of any race that can acquire a third limb outside of VA. I suppose a Wish spell could grant the arm?

[Nefreet]

I'm happy to finally put this to rest.

I feel that between the links, quotes, and arguments on both sides we've covered everything there is to discuss. I've linked this thread and the post two comments up on my profile for future access, because you know this question will resurface another couple months down the road.

The difference will be that (hopefully!) it won't ever last more than a handful of posts =).

[David Bowles]

Even if this WERE legal, the player would take -4 on each attack. That's horrible.

[LazarX]

Nefreet wrote:

It really saddens me that this debate continues, despite being argued ad nauseum this last year. I realize many ppl in this thread weren't a part of those debates, but seriously, how many times must we go over this?

The cheesemongers will perpetuate this until they get the answer they want from the Devs, which they won't get. Their opponents feel obliged to respond even though they should know that rules aren't going to change in this area.

[CWheezy]

All I see in this thread is jiggy making the correct claims and other people not.

That makes me sad as well.

[Viskous]

Why does Jiggy making reasonable statements make you sad?

[N N 959]

CWheezy wrote:

All I see in this thread is jiggy making the correct claims and other people not.

That makes me sad as well.

That made me laugh out loud. I just quoted a post where SKR says exactly the opposite of what Jiggy claims is allowed. But hey, you can lead a horse to water...and all that jazz.

EDIT:
In fairness, at the beginning of the discussion, I actually thought Jiggy was providing the better arguments. After I actually took the time to read and understand what SKR was saying, I had to reverse my position and acknowledge that Nefreet had been correct from the beginning. But to be honest, my understanding might be a result of a fluke that I had previously read SKR's explanation of "wield" and the distinction of primary/off-hands in wielding. Without knowing that piece of the puzzle, I would have had a hard time understanding why SKR was actually being consistent.

I also have to partially retract my earlier assertion of VA/SKR contradictions. I say partially because the use of the word "vestigial" along with the description indicating the hands are fully functional, combined with SKR's own words do reveal some sort of disconnect in the creation of the feat. But SKR does not wavier on how VA actually works and he's consistent on that from start to finish.

[Garble Facechomper]

JOOST BITE DEM!

[Nefreet]

CWheezy wrote:

All I see in this thread is jiggy making the correct claims and other people not.

In this case it was Jiggy misinterpreting what SKR had said.

[Jiggy]

Nefreet wrote:

CWheezy wrote:

All I see in this thread is jiggy making the correct claims and other people not.

In this case it was Jiggy misinterpreting what SKR had said.

Possibly; my certainty of my position has dropped sharply - currently sitting at around 62%. I'll chime in if I have further thoughts.

[N N 959]

heh

[Todd Morgan]

After reading through this thread I'm a bit confused on one subject:

I understand the intent is not to dual-wield two two-handed weapons (hereby called THW) by taking the Discovery "Vestigial Arms" twice.

I also get that SKR vetoed this in the answer to Nefreet's question on wielding a THW and making an offhand attack if you had ONE Vestigial Arm (thereby nixing the idea of TWF with THWs).

However, if you spend THREE feats (Double Slice, Extra Alch Disc. x2) in addition to TWF, wouldn't you get 1.5x Str damage per hit when fighting with two longswords?

You'd take a big penalty for not using a light off-hand weapon, BUT since you are spending FEATS (or using a couple Discoveries) I don't see why this couldn't happen.

There are already other feats that you can take that increase damage (Vital Strike feat chain, Double Slice).

[Nefreet]

Double Slice would increase the damage bonus of your off-hand Longsword from x.5 to x1. How do you get x1.5?

[HangarFlying]

PatientWolf wrote:

HangarFlying wrote:

Multi-weapon Fighting replaces Two-Weapon Fighting if the race has three or more arms.

The point is moot, though, because there are no three- (or more) armed races that are legal for PFS. Thus, the availability of Multi-weapon Fighting is irrelevant.

The question centers around the Vestigial Arm discovery which I believe is legal in PFS and, taken twice, can give you two additional arms for a total of four arms.

Late reply. The issue is moot. Vestigial arms doesn't provide additional attacks. You can hold four daggers in each hand but only attack with two, unlike a four-armed creature (such as a gug, perhaps) which could attack with all four. Even though vestigial arms gets you more arms, you don't qualify for the multi-weapon fighting fear because your character only has two real arms.

[HangarFlying]

cuatroespada wrote:

HangarFlying wrote:

Multi-weapon Fighting replaces Two-Weapon Fighting if the race has three or more arms and takes the Multi-weapon Fighting feat.

fixed that for you. if you don't have the MWF feat, you have no reason to worry about replacing TWF. there is nothing about the text of TWF that stops you from reducing your penalties with two weapons wielded in two hands just because you have more than two. if you wield two weapons in two of your 500 hands, you can still take advantage of TWF. if you pick up another weapon (which you can't do with vestigial arm, but you might have your extra arm from some other source), you can still get the appropriate TWF penalty reduction on two of your hands and the third takes the full -10 or -8. if at some point you qualify for and pick up MWF, it then replaces TWF rather than reducing the penalties to -0/-0/-2/-2/-2... etc.

Don't fix anything for me. Who do you think you are?

I'm not talking about a human with a vestigial arm, which for the record, is not a qualifier for the multi-weapon fighting feat. Currently, there are no legal races for PFS which would allow you to get the multi-weapon fighting feat.

If a Kasatha wanted to take the two-weapon fighting feat, it would instead take the multi-weapon fighting feat because it has four arms. A human with a vestigial arm discovery cannot replace two-weapon fighting with multi-weapon fighting, because a human does not have three or more arms.

Furthermore, each hand beyond the second would grant an additional off-hand attack. So, a Kasatha's full attack would be -6/-10/-10/-10. If it had the multi-weapon fighting feat, it would be -4/-8/-8/-8. If it was also using light weapons in the off-hands, it would be -2/-2/-2/-2.

On the other hand, a human with two vestigial arms discoveries would have a full attack as -6/-10. It doesn't get any additional off hand attacks, even if it has 500 vestigial arms discoveries. With the two-weapon fighting feat (he can't replace it with multi-weapon fighting) it becomes -4/-8, and with a light off-hand weapon -2/-2. Now, with those two vestigial arms, he has plenty of options with which to make those attacks, but he doesn't get to make more attacks.

[Nefreet]

+1

(although I think this four-legged horse has been beaten to death by now)

[N N 959]

Todd Morgan wrote:

After reading through this thread I'm a bit confused on one subject:

I understand the intent is not to dual-wield two two-handed weapons (hereby called THW) by taking the Discovery "Vestigial Arms" twice.

I also get that SKR vetoed this in the answer to Nefreet's question on wielding a THW and making an offhand attack if you had ONE Vestigial Arm (thereby nixing the idea of TWF with THWs).

However, if you spend THREE feats (Double Slice, Extra Alch Disc. x2) in addition to TWF, wouldn't you get 1.5x Str damage per hit when fighting with two longswords?

You'd take a big penalty for not using a light off-hand weapon, BUT since you are spending FEATS (or using a couple Discoveries) I don't see why this couldn't happen.

There are already other feats that you can take that increase damage (Vital Strike feat chain, Double Slice).

The key in understanding how VA works and doesn't work is the Primary/Off-Hand requirement to "wield" a weapon. An Off-Hand is a specific category for an appendage that can "wield" a weapon. Every Primary and Off-Hand you have is allowed to attack in the same round, regardless of how many you have.

Any creature with multiple Off-Hands, does not need a feat to attack with any or all of them. The TWF and MWF feat, just reduce the penalty.

However, the arms created by the ability Vestigial Arms, are not Off-Hands. They can be designated as Off-Hands, but VA does not increase the number of Primary/Off-hands you started with before you acquired the ability. VA just gives you the option of holding more weapons which could be specifically assigned as a Primary/Off-hand in any given round.

Just to clarify (though I know you aren't confused) what SKR does point out is that if your normal arms can function as "natural weapons" then your VA can perform your Primary/Off-hand attacks and you can use all your "natural weapons" as secondary attacks. This is how someone gets four "arm" attacks in a single round.

Let me add, though I didn't see it stated, only a Primary/Off-hand can contribute to a weapon's damage. I believe the formula is 1.x / .5x, respectively. A vestigial arm does not increase a weapon's damage if it is not designated as a Primary / Off-hand in that round.

[Nefreet]

Off topic run-on sentence, but after a good year's worth of discussion on one particular subject, such as this, where you've watched the discussion evolve into a debate, or possibly an argument, and it's finally come to a clear and concise conclusion, doesn't your head just want to explode when you sit down at a table and one of your players asks, "Hey, can I wield two Greatswords if I take Vestigial Arms twice?"

Sometimes a blank stare just doesn't quite convey the message you want it to.

[thaX]

I still can't believe that someone actually would thing that a character would get 1.5 times strength damage doing this. Your attention in swordplay is divided, the swing and energy to deal out the damage would not be the same in doing THW with TWF.

I don't need the rules to tell me this...

[Todd Morgan]

Nefreet wrote:

Double Slice would increase the damage bonus of your off-hand Longsword from x.5 to x1. How do you get x1.5?

Wielding a longsword with two hands.

[Talcrion]

not sure what all the arguments are about, it's clearly been pointed out that you have one Primary hand and one offhand, and that your hands have nothing to do with your arms, granting an extra arm does not grant an extra hand.

Saying you want an extra attack because you have an extra arm is no different than you want one because of your spiffy hat. or spiffy armor, or spiffy boots.

All of which would LOGICALLY be able to be used with a greatsword in your hands, but CANNOT be.

[Nefreet]

Todd Morgan wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Double Slice would increase the damage bonus of your off-hand Longsword from x.5 to x1. How do you get x1.5?

Wielding a longsword with two hands.

If you wield a Longsword in two hands, you don't need Double Slice.

EDIT: And, after all this discussion, I hope you're not meaning wielding a 2nd Longsword with two hands...

[N N 959]

Talcrion wrote:

not sure what all the arguments are about, it's clearly been pointed out that you have one Primary hand and one offhand, and that your hands have nothing to do with your arms, granting an extra arm does not grant an extra hand.

That's actually incorrect. Granting another arm does grant another hand. Vestigial Arms is an exception to this rule.

[Shimesen]

if the player has the TWF feat he reduces the penalties from using an off hand to make an additional attack in a round. MWF does the exact same thing. nowhere in MWF does it give him MORE attacks. you can only take 1 additional attack (with your offhand) in a round unless you have improved and greater TWF.

that being said, having more than 2 arms would not alter how a player used the two weapon fighting rules. you still only get 1 extra off-hand attack. the only extra attacks you could possibly get would be natural attacks via claws which would be secondary attacks.

if a player has 4 arms there is nothing in the rules prohibiting the use of two two-handed weapons while two-weapon fighting, but unless the offhand weapon is light, you ARE subject to greater penalties for your attacks. so yes, you can duel-wield 2 grwatswords, but you would not get the reduced penalties for TWF or MWF while doing so.

to try to get by this, you could in theory wield a two-handed weapon in your main hand with an offhand holding it for str+1/2 and a light weapon in another off hand. this would net you a strong primary attack and a low offhand. you would get the benefits from TWF/MWF but could not get very much damage out of off hand attacks unless you took Double Slice.

you can even wield 4 weapons and have multiple offhand attacks via greater/improved TWF and CHOOSE which offhand weapon to atk with for each of those attacks, but could not use all of them at once without the full 7 atks granted from a full bab with greater TWF.

[Talcrion]

N N 959 wrote:

Talcrion wrote:

not sure what all the arguments are about, it's clearly been pointed out that you have one Primary hand and one offhand, and that your hands have nothing to do with your arms, granting an extra arm does not grant an extra hand.

That's actually incorrect. Granting another arm does grant another hand. Vestigial Arms is an exception to this rule.

Aw Apparently I'm harsher on it then it's supposed to be, not that the situation has ever come up before in my group.

EDIT: wait a second... so you're saying that if I play a four arm race, I can hold a greatsword, and be allowed to shoulder check people with my spiked armour and headbutt people with my spiffy helment as long as I only used my two other hands to give people the deuce? lol hillarious

[Nefreet]

Shimesen wrote:

if a player has 4 arms there is nothing in the rules prohibiting the use of two two-handed weapons while two-weapon fighting, but unless the offhand weapon is light, you ARE subject to greater penalties for your attacks. so yes, you can duel-wield 2 grwatswords, but you would not get the reduced penalties for TWF or MWF while doing so.

Please read up thread. That's what this whole discussion has been about, and it's over now. You cannot use two-weapon fighting with two two-handed weapons.

[Shimesen]

the answer to everything asked in this thread can be answered in a question: does someone who takes the discovery Vestigial Arm aquire this trait?:

Multi-Armed (Ex) A kasatha has four arms.(exclude the race obviously! this is just where i found it) One
hand is considered its primary hand; all others are
considered off hands. It can use any of its hands for other
purposes that require free hands.

[Shimesen]

N N 959 wrote:

2. A multi-armed creature does not need a feat to make off-hand attacks. The feat simply reduces the penalty. So a person with three arms gets one primary attack at normal damage and two off-hand attacks at 1/2 damage, with or without the MWF feat.

ok wait, now im a little lost...

so how does what SKR said apply to a race that NATURALLY has 4 arms such as a Kasatha? would a level 1 fighter Kasatha have 4 attacks? (1 primary and 3 off-hand)

i was under the assumption that you can only make 1 off-hand attack in a round unless using improved/greater TWF.

if above Kasatha gets improved/greater TWF then does EACH off hand get granted an additional attack? this could potentially give him 13 attacks at level 20...

[N N 959]

Talcrion wrote:

EDIT: wait a second... so you're saying that if I play a four arm race, I can hold a greatsword, and be allowed to shoulder check people with my spiked armour and headbutt people with my spiffy helment as long as I only used my two other hands to give people the deuce? lol hillarious

If you play a four-armed race, you have one primary hand three "off-hands." All four hands can wield a weapon and attack subject to the TWF/MWF penalties.

Sean K. Reynolds has stated that while unarmed attacks are not defined as to what appendage can be used, the options are limited. A shoulder check might skate by. A head butt might not. However, per SKR's posts, you could use a greatsword with two hands, be holding a barrel with two arms, and deliver two kicks, as your off-hand attacks can be transferred to your legs.

[N N 959]

Shimesen wrote:

the answer to everything asked in this thread can be answered in a question: does someone who takes the discovery Vestigial Arm aquire this trait?:

Multi-Armed (Ex) A kasatha has four arms.(exclude the race obviously! this is just where i found it) One hand is considered its primary hand; all others are
considered off hands. It can use any of its hands for other
purposes that require free hands.

No. The extra arms are not off-hands, but can act as primary/off-hand, taking that designation away from your normal P/OHs.

[Shimesen]

N N 959 wrote:

Shimesen wrote:

the answer to everything asked in this thread can be answered in a question: does someone who takes the discovery Vestigial Arm aquire this trait?:

Multi-Armed (Ex) A kasatha has four arms.(exclude the race obviously! this is just where i found it) One hand is considered its primary hand; all others are
considered off hands. It can use any of its hands for other
purposes that require free hands.

No. The two extra arms are not off-hands, but can act as primary/off-hand, taking that designation away from your normal P/OHs.

i was being funny. but it does bed the question "can a naturally 4 armed race do it?"

[N N 959]

Shimesen wrote:

i was being funny. but it does bed the question "can a naturally 4 armed race do it?"

It's important to understand that a 'naturally 4 armed race" does not function identically to a 2 armed race with Vestigial Arms x2 under the MWF rules. The former has three off-hands, the latter only has one.

[Todd Morgan]

Nefreet wrote:

Todd Morgan wrote:

Nefreet wrote:

Double Slice would increase the damage bonus of your off-hand Longsword from x.5 to x1. How do you get x1.5?

Wielding a longsword with two hands.

If you wield a Longsword in two hands, you don't need Double Slice.

EDIT: And, after all this discussion, I hope you're not meaning wielding a 2nd Longsword with two hands...

Yep I am.

You can already dual wield long swords, albeit at a hefty penalty. Taking the TWF feat reduces those penalties and double slice normalizes the damage of the off-hand attack to match the primary attack.

By taking vestigial arms, you can grasp each sword with two hands, thus getting 1.5 str.

It's subtly different than the original argument. Using two hands to fight with a THW is different than using two hands to fight with a one-handed weapon.

[Shimesen]

N N 959 wrote:

Shimesen wrote:

i was being funny. but it does bed the question "can a naturally 4 armed race do it?"

It's important to understand that a 'naturally 4 armed race" does not function identically to a 2 armed race with Vestigial Arms x2 under the MWF rules. The former has three off-hands, the latter only has one.

so then how does a "naturally 4 armed race" work? would i be correct in saying that Kasatha have 4 attacks at level 1?

[thaX]

I shall say it again. The penalties for TWF are set, and the use of a one handed weapon with a light handed weapon offsets this, to where you only get -2/-2 with TWF feat. What would the penalties be for two two handed weapons being wielded by a four armed rules goliath? Would TWF even matter at this point?

I doubt you would get the 1.5 times strength when doing so, see my post above, though I believe that is the reason why anyone would attempt to do this above average cheese.

[Redneckdevil]

Woulda saved alot ofb headscratching and belly aching if they simply stated the arms can only hold a shield, potion, holy symbol, etc anything non weaponry or to grab something while main hands are copied. The hand cannot hold a weapon or make an attack if the main hands are using weapons or using improved unarmed strike. U cannot grow claws or tentacles on said vestigial arm.

Think that right there woulda locked down what they intended for the arm to be used

[thaX]

Shimesen... Yes, they would have, without the feat MWF, they would be taking the penalties as they would with TWF. MWF would then make it the same as TWF but with four attacks.

I was surprised to see the Kasatha as a player race. Natural attacks (Which the Kasatha does not have, as it would use Unarmed attacks and the entry in the Bestiary 4 is a monk) would take a -5 penalty on secondary attacks.

I wonder if that would make MWF a player feat with that race?

[thaX]

I think the Prehensile tail is the equivalent of the vestigial arm. The inclusion of the hand with the arm is confusing people.