2) If a Eidolon has multiple limbs (arms x3) (APG pg 62) could it wield 3 greatswords? My GM is against this in terms of mechanics. I.e how could it hold 3 greatswords and use them effectively.
There is a huge debate about this in PFS section and the consensus is "No" from what I can understand. However best you read through it...LOL
|
BloodyManticore meant Multiweapon Fighting.
I have no idea why the consensus would be "no." The eidolon description specifically says "Arms that have hands can be used to wield weapons, if the eidolon is proficient." I see no reason why an eidolon with 6 arms (3x arms evolution) couldn't use 3 greatswords - you'd just have to follow the multiweapon fighting rules.
6 arms is weird in real world biology, but in a fantasy it's generally assumed that a creature with multiple arms has them arranged in a way that's useable. Look at the marilith.
EDIT: it occurs to me that 2HW would get odd with primary/off hand designations in MWF but you could probably just reduce the Str bonus to damage on the second two greatswords and call it a day - or use 6 shortswords or kukri instead.
|
Are you playing in a home game of for PFS?
Regarding three greatswords, this is how I would adjudicate it: I am of the firm belief that the reason why two-handed attacks get 1.5 STR is because you are adding the strength bonus from the primary hand with the strength bonus of the off-hand. If, for some reason, your six-armed eidolon were to attack with six longswords, the primary attack would get 1 STR, while the remaining five off-hand attacks would get .5 STR. It stands to reason then, that if the six-armed eidolon attacked with three greatswords, the "primary" attack would get 1.5 STR and the remaining two would get 1 STR.
The eidolon would need to take the multi-weapon fighting feat for a -4 to each attack, otherwise it would be a -6 to the "primary" and -10 to the other two. Note that if the eidolon already had the two-weapon fighting feat, it would automatically convert into multi-weapon fighting once it got the second "arms" evolution (giving it three or more arms).
If your GM is open to discussion about it, that's what I would approach him with.
|
|
Thread here with the debate
FWIW: the discussion is hinged around the use of vestigial arms, not a three (or more) armed creature. There is a huge difference.
|
|
My take. Notice that (AFAIK) there aren't clear rules regarding using more than 2 manufactured weapons at the same time so ,y opinion si based on different sections of the rules and the iconic multi armed monster, the Marilith.
1) You can make multiple armed attack if you are a creature that can already make multiple attacks with several limbs and those limbs can use manufactured weapons.
A multi armed eidolon satisfies that condition with enough attacks.
2) the fist limb get the full strength bonus to damage, the other limbs get half that.
3) AFAIK all or almost all of the creature using multiple limbs at the same time use 1 handed weapons. I vaguely recall 1 example of a creature using a longspear 2 handed and several 1 handed weapons and, with the exception of a 3.5 demon that was capable to use 2 bows at the same time (and its abilities listed that as a special ability) none that used 2 or more 2 handed weapons.
The iconic Marilith use 6 longswords.
I think that there is a [u]unwritten[/u] rule in the monster creation that using 2+ two handed weapons is not possible as one set of arms will be hinder the movement of another set of arms when using a 2 handed weapon.
With all the above in mind, when speaking of a 6 armed eidolon, I would allow at most the use of:
1 two handed weapon with the "primary" attack and x1.5 times his strength bonus to damage
4 1 handed weapons with the "off hand" attacks, and x0.5 times his strength bonus to damage with those weapons.
Each limb use would "consume" one of the attacks allowed to the eidolon, so to use 6 weapons he would need to be able to make 6 attacks, i.e. he would be the eidolon of a fourteen level summoner.
|
|
Diego Rossi
1) How would BAB apply in the situation of 1 2-hd weapon + 4 1-hd weapon?
2) Also wouldn't it be 5 attacks needed not 6
1) exactly how it work with two weapon fighting. Full iterative attacks on the primary hand (or set of hands in this situation), 1 attack with the secondary hands.
2) No, you are using 6 limbs, 2 on the primary weapon and one on each secondary weapon.
It is the same of a guys using a 2 handed weapon. He is using 2 hands worth of weapons, so he don't get a extra attack with a "off hand" weapon even if that weapon don't require hands. (see the relevant FAQ and threads for that)
Essentially, a human has 2 hands worth of attacks, 1 primary and one secondary. He can sue those attacks with manufactured weaposn or unarmed attacks.
A creature with multiweapon fighting need to have the ability to make more than 2 hands of attacks, the eidolon can have that,but the eidolon rules limit the number of attacks he can make, so I would require an appropriate number of natural attacks.
Note that the Max attack note on the edilon rules say "This does not include attacks made with weapons." so my interpretation is likely not RAW, but giving an eidolon 1 primary attack weapon with iteratives, 5 off hand weapon attacks and N (level dependant) natural attacks seem a bit excessive. And extremely time consuming.
|
|
If you're using one 2HW and four 1HW, with MWF, you'll make your full set of iterative attacks with your 2HW at a -4 penalty, then make four attacks at full BAB-4 (and 0.5xStr to damage) with your off-hand weapons.
If you've got a BAB of +6, Str 16, a greatsword and four longswords:
+5/+0 Greatsword 2d6+4
four times +0 Longsword d8+1
Like TWF, you can reduce the attack penalties to -2 each if you swap the longswords for light weapons.
This is clearly allowed by the Multiweapon Fighting rules. However, I personally would be fine with one greatsword with 1.5xStr to damage and two with 1xStr to damage (since there's nothing officially prohibiting it and it cuts down on number of dice rolled).
Note that the Max attack note on the edilon rules say "This does not include attacks made with weapons." so my interpretation is likely not RAW, but giving an eidolon 1 primary attack weapon with iteratives, 5 off hand weapon attacks and N (level dependant) natural attacks seem a bit excessive. And extremely time consuming.
It's definitely not RAW because of the sentence you cited.
I can see why you'd house-rule otherwise, but in terms of power, consider that it costs at least 4 evolution points (for 4 extra arms) and a feat, which could be used to enhance the eidolon in other ways. Also, in order for these attacks to be effective you need to provide the eidolon with expensive magic weapons (in addition to an AoMF if it's adding natural attacks into the combination). Spreading out your gold over enhancing all of these attack forms limits the strength of any one attack.
|
|
Whether longswords or greatswords does not matter, the theory is all the same.
1) Yes, the eidolon will get an iterative attack when it's BAB is +6.
2) Assuming it has the multi-weapon fighting feat, 3 arms evolutions, 1 wings evolution, the wing buffet evolution, and using three greatswords (not including STR or other attack or DMG modifiers), your full attack sequence would be:
primary greatsword +2 (1.5 STR to DMG)
primary greatsword -3 (1.5 STR to DMG)—iterative attack
off greatsword +2 (1 STR to DMG)
off greatsword +2 (1 STR to DMG)
wing buffet +1 (.5 STR to DMG)
wing buffet +1 (.5 STR to DMG)
Remember, the max attack is for natural weapons only. It is likely that one of the arms evolutions has claws on it, but those claw attacks are consumed by making attacks with manufactured weapons, leaving you with the two buffet attacks. (4 natural attacks at 7th level).
At 14th level, the primary attacks would be +7/+2/-3. The off-hand attacks would be the same. It would normally get 6 natural attacks, but assuming two are claws consumed by the manufactured attacks, it only gets 4 additional natural attacks.
EDIT: As far as Diego's situation with longswords in the off-hands, it would be 4 off-hand attacks, each with +2 to attack and .5 STR to DMG. If it was equipped with all longswords, it would be the 2 primary attacks, +2/-3 (1 STR to DMG) and 5 off-hand attacks (.5 STR to DMG).
Again though, this all requires GM participation because there is nothing in the rules that directly addresses this situation.
|
|
Whether longswords or greatswords does not matter, the theory is all the same.
...
Again though, this all requires GM participation because there is nothing in the rules that directly addresses this situation.
Not if you use the longswords, which are directly addressed by Multiweapon Fighting, which is based on Two-Weapon Fighting. That's why the longswords were discussed.
The GM participation is required when you want to wield additional greatswords, since there's nothing in the rules that states how you would wield a two-handed weapon in two off hands (though attacking at -4 penalty for all attacks* and 1xStr makes sense and is fair).
*Off-hand weapon is not light