Amulet of Mighty Fists and Grappling: Can We Get An Answer?


Rules Questions

301 to 326 of 326 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>

Man this thread is really long for, "Yes of course AoMF adds to grappling."

The rules forums never cease to amaze me!


Actually, it was clarified awhile ago by the Devs that AoMF doesn't add to grappling. Mydrrin just won't let it die and seems intent on ignoring posts when people answer his questions.

It's like:

Myrddin: Show me where it says only Disarm, Trip and Sunder gain weapon bonuses?

(Poster links the FAQ and Blog Post)

(Another poster brings up that weapons are deemed inconsequential to a maneuver except in the case of Disarm, Trip and Sunder)

Myrddrin: But Gapple is an attack and AoMF enhances unarmed attacks!

(Poster clarifies that Unarmed Attacks and Unarmed Strikes are the same language and used interchangeably)

(Another poster jumps in to explain how a Permissive System works)

(A different poster explains that only Disarm, Trip and Sunder gain weapon bonuses)

Mydrrin: Show me where it says only Disarm, Trip and Sunder gain weapon bonuses?

.......

Repeat ad infinitum.

You can also toss in bits about how if a weapon has one of the grapple properties, it does benefit from weapon bonuses (such as the garrote).

Someone else will occasionally bring up Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) and Weapon Focus (grapple) to show the two are different.

Basically it comes down to Mydrrin keeping this thread going with him not understanding a couple points:

1) Grapple is not an unarmed attack or unarmed strike as they are the same thing (meaning an attack made to deal damage using hands, knees, feet, elbows etc). Since it's not an unarmed strike or unarmed attack, it doesn't benefit from AoMF.

2) Unless explicitly stated otherwise through some special circumstance (trip weapon for drag maneuvers), Combat Maneuvers do not benefit from weapon bonuses of any sort, only bonuses to attack rolls in general.


Tels wrote:
Actually, it was clarified awhile ago by the Devs that AoMF doesn't add to grappling.

See when I read that response by the devs it clearly meant, "Yes and here is the specific part of the rules that should lead you to that conclusion."


Marthkus wrote:
Tels wrote:
Actually, it was clarified awhile ago by the Devs that AoMF doesn't add to grappling.

See when I read that response by the devs it clearly meant, "Yes and here is the specific part of the rules that should lead you to that conclusion."

Really? My I must of failed my reading comprehension check then...

master arminas wrote:
When a character or creature is wearing an Amulet of Mighty Fists and attempts a grapple maneuver, does the enhancement bonus of the AoMF (if any) add to the character's roll to perform the grapple?
Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
The answer is no. An amulet of might fists "grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons." You make a combat maneuver to grapple.

Nope, didn't fail my comprehension check. Doesn't get any more clearer than, "The answer is no. I mean, they even put a period after no. Must be serious answer.

[Edit] Also, weren't you using a Trinia avatar before? Totally threw me off.


Tels wrote:
[Edit] Also, weren't you using a Trinia avatar before? Totally threw me off.

I flip around.

Enhancement bonus does add to relevant CMB checks. Which grapple is easily relevant here. As someone referenced SKR basically saying.

Can you link the Pathfinder Design Team's actual post?


Marthkus wrote:
Tels wrote:
[Edit] Also, weren't you using a Trinia avatar before? Totally threw me off.

I flip around.

Enhancement bonus does add to relevant CMB checks. Which grapple is easily relevant here. As someone referenced SKR basically saying.

Can you link the Pathfinder Design Team's actual post?

It's on page 3 of this thread about half way down. Don't know how to link to a certain spot on the page, but here is the page.

http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2qsrb&page=3?Amulet-of-Mighty-Fists-and-Gra ppling-Can-We


Below the 'Submit Post' button and the Most Important Rule is "How to format your text" with a [Show] box. Click the box and it will tell you the various was to add special options to your posts.

For linking, the format is [url]http://www.youraddresshere.com[/ url] with no spaces.

To link to a certain post in a thread, if you click on the timestamp next to [FLAG] it will re-set the url in the current tab to that post.

Pathfinder Design Team post.

Pathfinder Design Team wrote:
master arminas wrote:

This is a thread for a simple question that has arisen time and time again:

When a character or creature is wearing an Amulet of Mighty Fists and attempts a grapple maneuver, does the enhancement bonus of the AoMF (if any) add to the character's roll to perform the grapple?

If it does, then does the enhancement bonus (if any) also apply to the character resisting a grapple maneuver?

I post this because the question keeps on popping up in thread after thread, and nowhere have I (with my admittedly weak search-fu) been able to find an answer from the developers. I, for one, would like to see the issue settled once and for all with a simple answer: YES or NO.

If you feel the same way, please click FAQ and here is hoping that we will finally receive an answer.

Post your own opinions and thoughts below, if you like.

MA

The answer is no. An amulet of might fists "grants an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons." You make a combat maneuver to grapple.

I snipped some of Master Arminas's post in my previous quote because it wasn't relevant to the question or answer.


Marthkus wrote:
Tels wrote:
[Edit] Also, weren't you using a Trinia avatar before? Totally threw me off.

I flip around.

Enhancement bonus does add to relevant CMB checks. Which grapple is easily relevant here. As someone referenced SKR basically saying.

Can you link the Pathfinder Design Team's actual post?

Actually, he did not. Here is his exat post: SKR on Grapple.

Which I will quote for ease:

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Belafon wrote:
Quote:
Disarm, sunder, and trip are normally the only kinds of combat maneuvers in which you’re actually using a weapon (natural weapons and unarmed strikes are considered weapons for this purpose) to perform the maneuver, and therefore the weapon’s bonuses (enhancement bonuses, feats such as Weapon Focus, fighter weapon training, and so on) apply to the roll.
So... My monk has Weapon Focus (Unarmed Strike) and is wearing an Amulet of Mighty Fists +1. Does this mean he gets to add those two bonuses to other Combat Maneuvers such as Grapple?
I'd file that under "the GM is free to rule that in certain circumstances, a creature can apply weapon bonuses for these maneuvers."

Note the fact he didn't say it does apply, he said the GM is free to rule that it does, in certain circumstances. What he is, essentially, saying in this post, is that it is up to the GM.

However, the Pathfinder Design Team has clarified that even further: No.

If a GM wants to rule that the AoMF does apply, it's a houserule. In the context of the actual rules for the game, the AoMF does not apply to grapple.

Make no mistake though, I'm all for the AoMF applying to grapple, but I'm also someone who will argue a point, even if I don't believe in it.


Shimesen wrote:
Wow...so a combat maneuver is no longer an attack. good to know the design team doesn't know its own rules....I think perhaps that the answer should have been worded differently...

I share this response to that ruling.

Lantern Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Shall we let the thread die now? I think it's been pretty well beaten, developer input was communicated, some people like it, some people don't. That's just life.


i let it die 4 pages ago...i fail to see why you guys continued to entertain Myrddin in this. i asked for a reason why, you guys said: "because its not using a weapon called 'unarmed strike' its using something else". i took that for the best possible explanation and left. perhaps you should have done the same instead of letting someone troll you for 4 pages...


Marthkus wrote:
Shimesen wrote:
Wow...so a combat maneuver is no longer an attack. good to know the design team doesn't know its own rules....I think perhaps that the answer should have been worded differently...
I share this response to that ruling.

Yes, it should have been worded differently. However, it's still an attack, it's just an attack that doesn't benefit from weapon bonuses, which an enhancement bonus, or weapon training, weapon focus etc, all are.

If, however, you come across something that gives a bonus to attack rolls in general, such as inspire courage, haste or prayer; then it does give the bonus to combat maneuvers.


Pdt never said grapple is not an attack. He said its not an unarmed syrike or matural attack.

But really I tried sricking around to explain why pdt said that to the few people insisting it was a rules tewrite.

Short answer amf never boosted grapple blog posts from 2.5 years ago show design intent and the pdt post confirms it.


According to the rules it should.

According to PDT it shouldn't.

Why the PDT ruled this way isn't clear.

I don't think I'm trolling. I'm responding to people.


The problem is your stuck in a rules paradigm that you cant get out of and that seems to be making it difficult to shift your opinion. I have two questions.

First, do youunderstand that the blog post from two and a half years ago shows Designer intent?

Two, Do you understand tht to use weapons with a maneuver you need explicit permission?

and three, Do you understand that as of my crb 1st printing no where was that permission given.

This is really what it comes down to. the Design team through several faq and that well written blog shows us exactly how they see maneuvers being done.

I'll repeat for like the 50th time to use a maneuver with a weapon the game has to give you permission to do so. This will usually consist of explicitly saying 'you can do it' or there will be special rules explaining how its donw.

This is how i know i can grapple somone with a dagger in hand and do my dagger damage. However the game makes no distinction about the unarmed strikes having a special spot with grappling than the dagger does.

So basically, you need a line that says 'you can use your unarmed strikes to grapple' or something similar. the games internal paradigm is that Unarmed Strikes are attacks to injure not grab or hold. If your using your hands for somthing other than Striking to injure and the game has not said 'you can do this' then you cant.


Mydrrin wrote:

According to the rules it should.

According to PDT it shouldn't.

Why the PDT ruled this way isn't clear.

I don't think I'm trolling. I'm responding to people.

See? Ad Infinitum.

You're not responding at all, you're sticking your head in the ground and blatantly ignoring what people are saying.

Unless you have a rule that says Grapple specifically benefits from enhancement bonuses, such as the Trip special weapon property, then Grapple doesn't benefit.

You've already been shown, repeatedly, that unarmed attacks are the exact same thing as unarmed strikes, but they are not grapples.

The rule is this: Maneuvers don't benefit.

The exceptions include this: Disarm, Trip, Sunder and other special circumstances such as Shield Slam, special weapon properties and the Grab special ability.

Does Grapple have a special exemption to the general rule that maneuvers don't benefit? No? Then it doesn't benefit. END OF THE STORY.

Grand Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber; Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber
Tels wrote:
The rule is this: Maneuvers don't benefit.

Except when they do.

Quote:
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver.

Now, if you're going to tell me no, you do not use your unarmed strike to make the grapple check, I'm going to look at you funny, and move on. Because it seems bloody counterintuitive that you use a grapple check to deal unarmed strike damage but not an unarmed strike to grapple.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Tels wrote:
The rule is this: Maneuvers don't benefit.

Except when they do.

Quote:
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver.
Now, if you're going to tell me no, you do not use your unarmed strike to make the grapple check, I'm going to look at you funny, and move on. Because it seems bloody counterintuitive that you use a grapple check to deal unarmed strike damage but not an unarmed strike to grapple.

Not really. You apply your unarmed strike damage (or another weapon's damage if you use that) when you damage a foe after maintaining a grapple. That's not the same thing as starting a grapple. It's also not actually the same thing as maintaining a grapple.

You've already got them in a grapple and now you're applying some pressure or a joint lock or punching them in the face while you pin their arms down. None of that necessarily has anything to do with establishing a grapple.

But again, GMs are free to determine that UAS bonuses can apply to making grapple checks. It is discretionary to allow it. However, the default rules are that the bonuses do not apply. This was all laid out in the blog post.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.

OMG TOZ WHY DID YOU REVIVE THIS THREAD?!

In any case, it's been well-established (both in a prior FAQ Blog, and by the Design Team in this very thread) that grapple checks in fact do NOT utilize a weapon, even your unarmed strikes (and therefore don't benefit from weapon-specific bonuses such as Weapon Focus). I can dig up the links if you really need me to.

Scarab Sages

On the plus side, this means that a dragon that has an AoMF for its natural attacks will be less likely to swallow you whole.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Tels wrote:
The rule is this: Maneuvers don't benefit.

Except when they do.

Quote:
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver.
Now, if you're going to tell me no, you do not use your unarmed strike to make the grapple check, I'm going to look at you funny, and move on. Because it seems bloody counterintuitive that you use a grapple check to deal unarmed strike damage but not an unarmed strike to grapple.

You don't use an unarmed strike to make a grapple.


I think they should have ruled it works, at least for monks as their entire body is a weapon and the entire body benefits from aomf. Surely if you are unarmed you are using some part of your body to grapple?

Anyway, devs have made their decision, glad it doesn't effect any of my pcs but feel bad for the grapplers out there.


Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:

I think they should have ruled it works, at least for monks as their entire body is a weapon and the entire body benefits from aomf. Surely if you are unarmed you are using some part of your body to grapple?

Anyway, devs have made their decision, glad it doesn't effect any of my pcs but feel bad for the grapplers out there.

I wish they did as well, but I can see why they didn't. Grapple is already a really powerful maneuver as it is.

Grand Lodge RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Under A Bleeding Sun wrote:
I think they should have ruled it works, at least for monks as their entire body is a weapon and the entire body benefits from aomf. Surely if you are unarmed you are using some part of your body to grapple?

Shocking though it may be, you're actually not the first to think of that; in fact, it's even come up in this very thread, somewhere in these 7 pages. Go figure, eh?

/jadedness

Scarab Sages

Eh, you can get an untyped +8 to grapple by worshiping an empyreal lord and taking Final Embrace, Which stacks with the bonuses from Improved and Greater Grapple. An enhancement bonus from an AMoF on top of that is a little much.


Seriously people please stop... it doesn't work.. I don't wsnt to repeat myself another 40 timed...ill have to call my therapist.

Repeat after me permission based system. Nothing in the game gives permission to anything Involving amf to be used in a grapple.

301 to 326 of 326 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Amulet of Mighty Fists and Grappling: Can We Get An Answer? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.