I play PFS.
Need an official ruling on how an Amulet of Mighty Fists with Furyborn would work on a druid who wild shapes into let's say a Dire Tiger.
Thanks
This isn't reamlyba pfs question. But it... works exactly as describes.
Most likely not since "Only melee weapons can have the fury-born ability."
From amf "Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks."
As I said it works.
From amf "Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks."
As I said it works.
It was my undestanding that restrictions overruled the Permission given like is the case with Bracers of armor and Brawling armor.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think your confusing what the restriction means. Uas are light melee weapons. Any weapon enchantment that can go on a light melee weapon or does not restrict it from applying to uas. This means furyborn works lead blades does not.
I think your confusing what the restriction means. Uas are light melee weapons. Any weapon enchantment that can go on a light melee weapon or does not restrict it from applying to uas. This means furyborn works lead blades does not.
It seems you are correct.
Of course, if you have Tiger Style or Boar Style, you could apply keen.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
I'd allow it at a PFS if I were the GM.
You may (I have no knowledge either of these are issues) have table variance:
- You may have a GM saying this is something that activates and can't be used while Wild Shaped because it isn't constant.
- You may have a GM saying it isn't a light weapon.
You will likely need to live with table variance, because this isn't something they are likely to want to spend the time to rule on for PFS.
Also, I'd personally recommend against it. Adding more things to my plate I need to remember when doing my turn is a bad bad thing in my book. If it isn't constant and static, I don't take the feature/item.
Of course, if you have Tiger Style or Boar Style, you could apply keen.
So in your game. The feats of the guy using the amulet decides what kind of magic can be put in to it?
Or do the item creater need the feat?
|
The bonus applies to the amulet you never have a separate bonus on each natural attack. The problem most people have is the fact that Furyborn says weapon because it is a weapon enchant. The AoMF is the weapon in this situation so damaging an opponent increases the enhancement bonus of the weapon which in this situation is the AoMF and never an individual attack.
Aye that's the official ruling I'm looking for is that if it works, and I have 3 attacks in a round (claw/claw/bite) and if each one does damage then by the end of this round it would be +3 and would bypass that level of DR.
There seems to be so much variation in interpretation among individuals that I was just wanting an official ruling one way or the other. Don't want to spend that much gold on something that is going to vary a lot from table to table.
Ok so it sounds like a Furyborn AOMF would require the wild shaping druid using it to keep track round to round which of his attacks damaged the creature. Those attacks would then get a cumulative +1 to hit and damage for each such damaging attack for each specific weapon eventually leading (if the creature is still alive) to DR reduction dependent on that weapons current enhancement bonus.
This is a very important gameplay distinction. Since for most such battle situations with high DR, high HP creatures, (excluding AOO, riposte, etc), it would take a minimum of 5 rounds of combat to achieve a +5 bonus and subsequent DR reduction. Compared to the other interpretation of the necklace increasing bonus per hit thus plus 5 being able to be obtained in a time frame dependent upon the number of actual natural attacks that do damage in a round.
Examples:
Most people's interpretation:
3 attacks dire tiger (Bite, Claw 1, Claw 2)
Round one: (B +0, C1 +0, C2 +0) Bite does damage. Claws miss
Round two: (B +1, C1 +0, C2 +0) Bite and both claws do damage.
Round 3: (B+2, C1 +1, C2 +1) Bite and first claw do damage. second claw does no damage
Round 4: (B+3, C1 +2, C2 +1) DR of Bite now can bypass cold iron/silver. Etc, Etc
Amulet getting bonus with each hit doing damage and equally distributed to each attack.
Round one: (B+0, C1 +0, C2 +0) 2 do damage
Round two: (B +2, C1 +2, C2 +2) 2 more do damage
Round three: (B +4, C1 +4, C2 +4) Now all three attacks very quickly get +4 to hit and damage plus ability to bypass cold iron/silver and adamantine.
The first battle example would take much too long to reach DR bypass than the second and to hit and damage would be much more, quickly.
For the increased cost of a AOMF, it seems like with Furyborn the advantage of buying it versus a regular weapon with the special ability is that it grants the ability be applied to each natural weapon you have in whatever form you have. Which I think is consistent with how it applies with other special abilities.
I see now that the second example goes far beyond the original intent of pricing for the AOMF. No where in Pathfinder that I know of, allows the effect of one weapon to be passed or added to the other weapon in the other hand. Which seriously lowers the probability that the second example is valid.
Sadly however, it makes Furyborn in a AOMF more than likely not worth the money spent. I would use it primarily to try to exchange a little delay on a boss, for the possibility of generating enough enhancement bonus to bypass DR. With a minimum of 3-5 rounds to accomplish this, the boss would likely be dead due to combined party action or have killed me by this time.
|
|
THe problem with your reading reyyvin is exactly the problem i mentioned above. The problem is your are reading weapon because its a weapon property. Therefore it is going to refer to weapon as a default. While natural attack are individual weapons the AoMF enhances all of them equally. Furthermore the bonus is applied to the amulet not the weapon itself in this specific case. The amulet is the weapon, enhancing all the natural attacks and therefor each natural attack will enhance the amulet, the weapon in this case, and grant that bonus to ALL natural weapons because that is exactly what the Amulet does.
The amulet is the weapon not the natural attack.
Taenia,
Thanks for your input. Do you have a source to verify that the bonus is applied to the entire amulet?
Thanks
|
|
No, what the amulet does is turn your attacks into weapons of the type specified by the amulet. It is not itself a weapon. Thus the furyborn would be applied separately to each attack. Get ready for a *lot* of bookkeeping.
(Now just visualize a natural attack barbarian with a Furyborn Courageous AoMF. Each natural attack is now adding half it's enhancement bonus to his strength, and they are all changing *ALL THE TIME*)
|
|
There is no other weapon in which it can be applied too. There is nothing in the rules that suggest you apply it to individual weapons because in this case the amulet is the weapon and by its nature applies its bonus to all natural attacks. You can't have a floating +1 or +2 apply to natural weapons without some kind of magic item or spell and in this case the magic item is the amulet.
The problem is that people read the weapon and can't understand that the Amulet is the weapon not the natural attack in this case because it is one of those niche items that the language doesn't take into account.
The Amulet of Mighty Fists is not a weapon. It is an amulet that enhances your natural weapons and unarmed strikes.
It is no more a weapon than an Amulet of Natural Armor is armor or even natural armor.