Multiweapon Fighting (Combat Feat)

[HangarFlying]

Kasathas get 1 primary and 3 off-hand attacks. While these attacks don't have to be made with the literal hands, the number of off-hand attacks is predicated upon the number of natural arms/hands the creature has. (For those rediculous examples that are based upon "humanoids with no arms": a) that wouldn't be a reasonable expectation for a playable character, b) humanoids, as a creature type, do have arms—two of them to be exact—so the human fighter who lost both arms in a tragic armor smithing accident can still make 1 primary and 1 off-hand attack).

And for the record, go ahead and let your players using Kasatha's MWF with two greatswords—its inferior to a longsword, x3 shortsword (or any 1H/x3 lt. combination).

[The Genie]

I thought he said he was doing unarmed. If he gets weapon finesse and if they allow 3rd party dreamscarepress has deadly agility in their PoW book for Dex to damage with any finesseable weapon.

[Thomas Long 175]

Long story short, no written rule will ever say that you get extra attacks for having multiple arms.

People will talk about implications in multiweapon fighting, show monsters, etc.

But brass tax, there will never be a rule shown that explicitly gives extra manufactured attacks for any number of extra arms, natural ones or otherwise. The core rule book allows for one extra attack with a second weapon and that's the closest you'll ever get for an actual rule.

[kestral287]

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Long story short, no written rule will ever say that you get extra attacks for having multiple arms.

People will talk about implications in multiweapon fighting, show monsters, etc.

But brass tax, there will never be a rule shown that explicitly gives extra manufactured attacks for any number of extra arms, natural ones or otherwise. The core rule book allows for one extra attack with a second weapon and that's the closest you'll ever get for an actual rule.

Out of curiosity-- could you find the exact text where the core book says that and quote it here? I work primarily off the SRD, and I actually can't find anything to that effect, so I'm curious.

I have found language discussing your off-hand, and a 'second' weapon with Two-Weapon Fighting... but Multiweapon Fighting replaces Two Weapon Fighting and is explicitly different in a way that that 'second' is not applicable here.

To quote that text:

Quote:

Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.

So if you wield a second weapon you get one extra attack. Sure. We have a rule for that... in something that Multiweapon Fighting is explicitly modifying.

So, besides that note, and working out of the actual book instead of the SRD, what text do we have that says you can get one extra attack for a second weapon and that's it?

[Komoda]

Every creature has a number of attacks that is based on its primary attack limbs. Of course this isn't written in stone, but it appears that the game is based off of this.

Core PCs each have two possible attacks (baring feats etc.) as they each have two arms (baring feats etc.).

Those attacks can be switched out for many other parts of the body. The main hand could be a head butt. The off hand could be a kick.

A marilith has 6 arms. It has six attacks. If it attacked with five arms, it could head butt.

It stands to reason (not written in stone) that creatures with four arms get four attacks. It is true there are special rules for special arms. These are pointed out with those special arms, such as the alchemist can get.

If a creature can use manufactured weapons and has the class skills to gain iterative attacks, then that creature can make multiple attacks. It would only gain one extra attack per feat in the Improved Two-Weapon Fighting tree, not one for each additional arm.

I personally think it is a little overpowered and would not likely allow it in my game. That doesn't meant that it fails to follow the logic of the game.

[ElementalXX]

Yeah i didnt read that faq, i guess my interpreations of the usefulness of multiweapon fighting was not correct.

You have no understood my point when i was citing monsters, they do have multiple attacks, but i was just showing how they were built because it seems confusing in the discussion as it seems like all monsters cited make deliberate use of multiweapon fighting.

Now it has been said monsters can and sometimes break raw. Maybe those specific monsters break raw, nobody can be sure.

I cant show a rule that "a creature has only one offhand attack" because it doesnt exist. However i can see the situation in which a creature has an undetermined number of offhand attacks.

-Now lets assume monsters dont break raw

-Lets assume a PC can have multiple offhand attacks.

Assuming this we can have the following.

Now, here are the facts:

1. Multiweapon fighting nor two weapon fighting give extra attacks, they reduce penalties.

2. A creature normally has an unlimited number of offhand attacks .

But ElementalXX! Lets "assume" the number of attacks depend on the number of hands.

Then we have

3. A creature´s number of offhand attacks is limited by the number hands it has.

Given this its also necessary that

4. A creature always treats one of his hands as his main hand.

Or else a commoner can make 3 attacks

::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
The implications of this means that

1. If a creature loses a hand for any reason then he loses his off hand attack
2. If a creature loses all of his hands he doesnt have a main hand, nor he has an offhand

Given you can make unarmed attacks with any part of your body. It will be a contradiction if a creature doesnt have hands attacks with his foot.

More over, Druids that transform into animals that dont have hands (or paws) cant attack. The thing is assuming what you have proposed implies problems in other parts of the game. For this reason i believe is better to assume that a PC has a main hand attack or offhand attack.

[ElementalXX]

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

[wraithstrike]

kestral287 wrote:

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Long story short, no written rule will ever say that you get extra attacks for having multiple arms.

People will talk about implications in multiweapon fighting, show monsters, etc.

But brass tax, there will never be a rule shown that explicitly gives extra manufactured attacks for any number of extra arms, natural ones or otherwise. The core rule book allows for one extra attack with a second weapon and that's the closest you'll ever get for an actual rule.

Out of curiosity-- could you find the exact text where the core book says that and quote it here? I work primarily off the SRD, and I actually can't find anything to that effect, so I'm curious.

I have found language discussing your off-hand, and a 'second' weapon with Two-Weapon Fighting... but Multiweapon Fighting replaces Two Weapon Fighting and is explicitly different in a way that that 'second' is not applicable here.

To quote that text:

Quote:

Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.

So if you wield a second weapon you get one extra attack. Sure. We have a rule for that... in something that Multiweapon Fighting is explicitly modifying.

So, besides that note, and working out of the actual book instead of the SRD, what text do we have that says you can get one extra attack for a second weapon and that's it?

Two weapon fighting(not the feat) allows you to use one off hand attack but with a big penalty.

TWF(the feat) just makes the penalties smaller. The other feats in the feat tree actually give additional off hand attacks.

I will now quote the TWF section.

combat chapter wrote:

Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.

[wraithstrike]

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Long story short, no written rule will ever say that you get extra attacks for having multiple arms.

This is correct, so if you(general statement) are a RAW guy then you will have to go back and edit a few monsters, even those with the multi-attack special ability. Otherwise you play the RAI game.

[Thomas Long 175]

wraithstrike wrote:

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Long story short, no written rule will ever say that you get extra attacks for having multiple arms.

This is correct, so if you(general statement) are a RAW guy then you will have to go back and edit a few monsters, even those with the multi-attack special ability. Otherwise you play the RAI game.

Generally I just don't include them in any of my games for this explicit reason. Technically their attack sequences are wrong.

As for the person who asked where it specified only for the second weapon. Its found in the combat area of core where it goes over the rules of Two weapon fighting, rather than the feat.

Two Weapon Fighting

Two Weapon Fighting wrote:

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.

Edit: Wraith you beat me to it. :P Fancy seeing you in this thread. It's been a while since we had this argument. Like 5 days now?

[Onyxlion]

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

Ug stupid internet eating my posts. Yeah these things can lead to silliness but I feel we need them in order to show the faults of the system. We can't make the system better until we know what needs to be fixed.

I even admited in my thread 26 punches it was a silly and slightly broken more than once.

[kestral287]

Not having arms is pretty blatantly a corner-case that the rules are not designed for. If you create a situation that's extremely unlikely to come up, then yes, the rules can get weird. Talk to your GM about things that the rules are blatantly not intended to account for. But you also can't wield a weapon in two hands with one arm, despite that not being explicitly written into the rules. Is that surprising? Is that a problem with the rules, or is it a pretty obvious circumstance that we would expect people to understand?

Is there anything a Druid can transform into that lacks both limbs and natural attacks? Natural attacks are explicitly outside this conversation since they follow different rules, and my search of the SRD showed no animals that lack limbs and natural attacks, though I could have easily missed something (there are a lot of fish in particular and I got lazy). So... a Druid that transforms into animals that don't have hands or paws can't use manufactured weapons and has to use their natural attacks instead. Isn't that the point of Wild Shape?

But really. We do have rules for this. The rules we have are for Two-Weapon Fighting, and it gives you one additional attack with your one off-hand. Multiweapon Fighting modifies /those rules/ (the only rules I'm aware of dictating your number of attacks with multiple manufactured weapons). So this is pretty obvious once you sit down and read the rules.

There's no "assuming" that you're limited in off-hand attacks by your number of hands. We have it explicitly in writing that characters can make a single attack with their off-hand. There is no off-foot or off-head, it is explicitly off-hand, and it is explicitly holding and using a weapon in that hand that grants the extra attack. That's all RAW. There is no rule, anywhere that I am aware of, about using a kick to grant an extra attack. If I am wrong, please quote the rule.

The only real question is that that RAW is under a section that Multiweapon Fighting is modifying, so it becomes a question of whether you read that section literally and ignore that Multiweapon Fighting is modifying it (in a less than blatantly clear way, admittedly), or you read that section and then Multiweapon Fighting and look at all the examples we're given and then draw the logical conclusion.

[Bandw2]

are you even capable in-RAW to lose arms?

[ElementalXX]

kestral287 wrote:

The rules we have are for Two-Weapon Fighting, and it gives you one additional attack with your one off-hand.

No it doesnt, this has already been clarified ,you can always make offhand attacks at -6/-10. The feat lessens this penalties

kestral287 wrote:

There's no "assuming" that you're limited in off-hand attacks by your number of hands. We have it explicitly in writing that characters can make a single attack with their off-hand. There is no off-foot or off-head, it is explicitly off-hand, and it is explicitly holding and using a weapon in that hand that grants the extra attack. That's all RAW. There is no rule, anywhere that I am aware of, about using a kick to grant an extra attack. If I am wrong, please quote the rule.

"Off hand" is a game term, you dont have to attack with you hand to make an off hand attack.

Blade boots can do offhand attacks
Armor spikes can do offhand attacks
And unarmed attacks, which can be done with any part of your body.

All of the above can also be your "main hand" attack

[ElementalXX]

Bandw2 wrote:

are you even capable in-RAW to lose arms?

An arm can be cut. Now if its a metaphorical arm as in a game term, i wouldnt even know how to interpret it. It would be incredibly vague.

[wraithstrike]

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

Long story short, no written rule will ever say that you get extra attacks for having multiple arms.

This is correct, so if you(general statement) are a RAW guy then you will have to go back and edit a few monsters, even those with the multi-attack special ability. Otherwise you play the RAI game.

Generally I just don't include them in any of my games for this explicit reason. Technically their attack sequences are wrong.

As for the person who asked where it specified only for the second weapon. Its found in the combat area of core where it goes over the rules of Two weapon fighting, rather than the feat.

Two Weapon Fighting

Two Weapon Fighting wrote:

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a –6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a –10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways. First, if your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. An unarmed strike is always considered light. Second, the Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.

Edit: Wraith you beat me to it. :P Fancy seeing you in this thread. It's been a while since we had this argument. Like 5 days now?

I don't remember. LOL

I thought he was asking for a limit on the number of extra attacks. Well either way between the two of us he should have an answer. :)

[wraithstrike]

Onyxlion wrote:

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

Ug stupid internet eating my posts. Yeah these things can lead to silliness but I feel we need them in order to show the faults of the system. We can't make the system better until we know what needs to be fixed.

I even admited in my thread 26 punches it was a silly and slightly broken more than once.

I tried to find a reason it would not work when you first brought it up. I was about to use the TWF argument, but then I remembered the maralith and xill before I even began to type. I then tried to find a limit on the number of arms an eidolon could have. So now I will just put a cap on arms the eidolon can use in a fight if anyone tries this. Most likely I will put a cap on the max number of attacks the eidolon can make, if anyone tries something like this.

[wraithstrike]

Bandw2 wrote:

are you even capable in-RAW to lose arms?

The regeneration spell exist to allow you to grow limbs back, but I do agree that it is a very rare thing.

I read a monster within the past month that could rip your arms off, but I don't remember if it was a Bestiary 4 monster or 3pp.

[bookrat]

wraithstrike wrote:

Onyxlion wrote:

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

Ug stupid internet eating my posts. Yeah these things can lead to silliness but I feel we need them in order to show the faults of the system. We can't make the system better until we know what needs to be fixed.

I even admited in my thread 26 punches it was a silly and slightly broken more than once.

I tried to find a reason it would not work when you first brought it up. I was about to use the TWF argument, but then I remembered the maralith and xill before I even began to type. I then tried to find a limit on the number of arms an eidolon could have. So now I will just put a cap on arms the eidolon can use in a fight if anyone tries this. Most likely I will put a cap on the max number of attacks the eidolon can make, if anyone tries something like this.

Don't eidolons already have a max number of attacks? It's right in their stat block.

[Thomas Long 175]

bookrat wrote:

Don't eidolons already have a max number of attacks? It's right in their stat block.

Eidolon one specifies natural attacks.

[bookrat]

Thomas Long 175 wrote:

bookrat wrote:

Don't eidolons already have a max number of attacks? It's right in their stat block.

Eidolon one specifies natural attacks.

Ah. Very true.

[kestral287]

ElementalXX wrote:

kestral287 wrote:

The rules we have are for Two-Weapon Fighting, and it gives you one additional attack with your one off-hand.

No it doesnt, this has already been clarified ,you can always make offhand attacks at -6/-10. The feat lessens this penalties

I should clarify, in that the section I was quoting was labeled Two-Weapon Fighting but is, on the SRD, listed under their Combat rules. The TWF feat doesn't have all of the same language (hence why the section I quoted calls out the TWF feat in particular). My apologies for not being clear.

ElementalXX wrote:

"Off hand" is a game term, you dont have to attack with you hand to make an off hand attack.

Blade boots can do offhand attacks
Armor spikes can do offhand attacks
And unarmed attacks, which can be done with any part of your body.

All of the above can also be your "main hand" attack

This is entirely true, and I believe I referenced that in an earlier post. But the language specifically calls one "one extra" attack and a "second" weapon. it's very clear in that regard. The general rule is one main-hand attack, one off-hand attack. As you yourself are saying, using a kick or a headbutt or a shoulder-check is replacing one of those hands, not in addition to it. Simple enough then. You can't get extra attacks off a kick because you still only have one off-hand, even if that off-hand is your foot (Or, to clarify, you can, but not in addition to the one from the actual hand. You're capped at two, but who cares what part of your body you make them with). If you did lose an arm, I'm sure you and your GM could have a fun discussion about TWF with an arm and a leg... but that's getting right back into corner cases instead of dealing with the general case in front of us, which is pretty much a waste of time. We have general rules provided via that section of the Combat rules, a section labeled Two-Weapon Fighting.

Multiweapon Fighting then explicitly modifies the Two-Weapon Fighting rules to account for additional off-hands. That's all it does, is provide a case of specific rules to trump the general rules.

[Onyxlion]

wraithstrike wrote:

Onyxlion wrote:

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

Ug stupid internet eating my posts. Yeah these things can lead to silliness but I feel we need them in order to show the faults of the system. We can't make the system better until we know what needs to be fixed.

I even admited in my thread 26 punches it was a silly and slightly broken more than once.

I tried to find a reason it would not work when you first brought it up. I was about to use the TWF argument, but then I remembered the maralith and xill before I even began to type. I then tried to find a limit on the number of arms an eidolon could have. So now I will just put a cap on arms the eidolon can use in a fight if anyone tries this. Most likely I will put a cap on the max number of attacks the eidolon can make, if anyone tries something like this.

The funny part to me was when I ran some numbers on the damage it came up mediocre. I have some 2h weapon guys and a lance guy that blows it out of the water.

[wraithstrike]

Onyxlion wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Onyxlion wrote:

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

Ug stupid internet eating my posts. Yeah these things can lead to silliness but I feel we need them in order to show the faults of the system. We can't make the system better until we know what needs to be fixed.

I even admited in my thread 26 punches it was a silly and slightly broken more than once.

I tried to find a reason it would not work when you first brought it up. I was about to use the TWF argument, but then I remembered the maralith and xill before I even began to type. I then tried to find a limit on the number of arms an eidolon could have. So now I will just put a cap on arms the eidolon can use in a fight if anyone tries this. Most likely I will put a cap on the max number of attacks the eidolon can make, if anyone tries something like this.

It can probably do decent damage if you push the strength really high. I donations see how it can get that many attacks and not do well.

The funny part to me was when I ran some numbers on the damage it came up mediocre. I have some 2h weapon guys and a lance guy that blows it out of the water.

[Yondu]

Hi,
For me, MWF is only to reduce the penalties of fighting with several weapons.
The wording is the kasatha entry is you have one primary hand and 3 off hands, like a 2 handed person has one primary and one off hand.
As Written in the FAQ, you can wield several weapons and split your regular (class) attack between the weapons or decide to attack with all of them and have the standard penalties.
The Rule book indicate that you can do an additional attack with your off hand if you carry a weapon or you want to make a unarmed strike with it.
The Rule book assume that every PC should have only 2 hands so you can do one additionnal attack because you only have 1 off hand.
My point of view is as a Kasatha has 3 off hands he can do 3 additionnal attacks if he want as additional attack is linked to off hands not to off head or off legs or off whatever other....
The Rule book state that you have a number of attack linked to you BAB plus one per off-hand in full attack so for a FA Kasatha with 4 weapons at first level, there is 4 attacks.

[voska66]

By RAW the Kasatha has 1 primary attack and 3 secondary attacks. They get this via the Multi-Armed racial trait. It says right in the race that they get an attack with all of their hands.

"Multi-Armed: A kasatha has four arms. 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."

Mulitweapon fighting does not grant you any extra attacks. It just reduces the penalties when you have 3 or more attacks.

[Chris Lambertz]

Removed some posts. This kind of bickering is pretty counter productive. Also, inferring that other posters will be "removed" or banned from our community is inappropriate. Flag and move on please.

[Scott Wilhelm]

He-Who-Must-Not-Be-Named wrote:

Well the base I was going to use was Monk 2/ Sacred Fist x

Using only Unarmed strikes as his weapons. Given he has four hands, he is doing more attacks without flurry then he is with flurry.

Also given that TwF allows you that second attack on a standard attack not a full attack you could in theory at least make all four attacks each round, with the proper penalties of course. So four armed monk throwing out four punches each round is cool.

Yes the Example Kasatha is a monk and it does not state he gets multiple attacks in his combat section, though it does state up his unarmed attack it doesn't proclude multiple attacks. Remember, this is a Monk and the person writing it up likely wrote it as a monk class (Focused on Flurry). This could be a simple oversight, this does not prohibit multiarm fighting.

2 levels in Monk Master of Many Styles Archetype would be just enough to get Snake Fang, which could easily give you 5 more attacks/round in the form of attacks of opportunity. Especially considering that you are only dipping 2 levels and won't be developing Flurry. And now, you can wear armor. I extra recommend you look at Snake Fang and MOMS.

I'm not familiar with Sacred Fist. If their unarmed strike damage progresses as if you were gaining levels in Monk, then there is little need for my suggestion of Feral Mutagen, Feral Combat Training, and Improved Natural Weapon. Are you by any chance referring to the 3.5 Prestige Class that combines Cleric and Monk from like what, Complete Divine? I played one once.

Do consider Hamatula Strike and Armor Spikes. Also consider Sneak Attacks and Dirty Tricks Your increase in damage will be huge, multiplied by all those attacks from all those arms.

[Scott Wilhelm]

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

[Scott Wilhelm]

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

When we're talking about 4-armed PCs, we are pretty deep into homespun territory, and incursions from PFS players are rare.

If I ever have a DM allow me to create a ThriKreen Fighter/Psychic Warrior with Multiweapon and Oversized 2-Weapon, so I could wield 4 Earthbreaker hammers, that would just make me think he was running a VERY high-powered campaign indeed, and I shudder to think what he would think is fair game to throw at us.

But what is Fate for if not to tempt?

[Scott Wilhelm]

wraithstrike wrote:

Bandw2 wrote:

are you even capable in-RAW to lose arms?

The regeneration spell exist to allow you to grow limbs back, but I do agree that it is a very rare thing.

I read a monster within the past month that could rip your arms off, but I don't remember if it was a Bestiary 4 monster or 3pp.

There are 3rd party rules for losing limbs. And there is a 3rd party class, the Butcher, that specializes in dismembering opponents. I wouldn't want to play with those rules, and I certainly wouldn't allow them in my campaign.

[wraithstrike]

ElementalXX wrote:

Now for something totally different my opinion:

-I dont think having a race who gets multiple attacks is balanced this early.
-But I do thin is silly a multiarmed creature dont have multiple attacks from a thematic point of view.
-I dont think the intent of the devs was to create an unbalanced race
-I do think seomthing went off in the development phase of this race, considering all the options that gives you apendices, hands, or whatever always have a clause of not giving you extra attacks, but this is the only one that doesnt

The 4 armed race much like the stryx is a PC race but still requires GM approval unlike the common PC races so I see it as a "allow at your own discretion" type thing. That is why it does not have to be balanced as much against the common races, much like the drow noble.

[wraithstrike]

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

[Scott Wilhelm]

Onyxlion wrote:

The funny part to me was when I ran some numbers on the damage it came up mediocre. I have some 2h weapon guys and a lance guy that blows it out of the water.

A build that depends on racking up damage from multiple attacks vs. one that makes single big attacks is a classic dilemma. Multiple attacks multiplies bonuses from Power Attack and Strength, but it also multiplies Damage Reduction.

Meanwhile your Half Orc Fighter with a Greatsword and Furious Focus can still take Great Cleave and Surprise Followthrough, and that can give you a whole mess of attacks.

Still, I have to say that a multilimb, multiattack build can do a terrifying amount of damage. Some of the ideas I shared on this thread can lead to DPRs that are just shocking.

[Scott Wilhelm]

wraithstrike wrote:

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

Cool!

Would that work in PFS? If I had a Fighter/Alchemist with 2 Weapon, and I cast Alter Self on myself to turn into a Kasatha, would my 2 Weapon Feat be replaced by Multiweapon, allowing me to pick up a Shorsword and a small hammer to go with my Earthbreaker and Klar?

[Scott Wilhelm]

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

Cool!

Would that work in PFS? If I had a Fighter/Alchemist with 2 Weapon, and I cast Alter Self on myself to turn into a Kasatha, would my 2 Weapon Feat be replaced by Multiweapon, allowing me to pick up a Shorsword and a small hammer to go with my Earthbreaker and Klar?

It occurs to me that even if it didn't, you might combine Feral Mutagen with Alter Self and turn into a Clawed Kasatha, and if your character had FCT and INW, well, that would be pretty scary, and a Wand of Alter Self + Feral Mutagen could be a lot cheaper than a Wand of Monstrous Physique.

[Onyxlion]

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Onyxlion wrote:

The funny part to me was when I ran some numbers on the damage it came up mediocre. I have some 2h weapon guys and a lance guy that blows it out of the water.

A build that depends on racking up damage from multiple attacks vs. one that makes single big attacks is a classic dilemma. Multiple attacks multiplies bonuses from Power Attack and Strength, but it also multiplies Damage Reduction.

Meanwhile your Half Orc Fighter with a Greatsword and Furious Focus can still take Great Cleave and Surprise Followthrough, and that can give you a whole mess of attacks.

Still, I have to say that a multilimb, multiattack build can do a terrifying amount of damage. Some of the ideas I shared on this thread can lead to DPRs that are just shocking.

From my own testing I find multiple attack builds suffer greatly compared to big swing hits. The half strength hurts, monk full strength makes it manageable but shoehorns monk/equivalent into the build. This leads to it being favoured to precision damage and that brings it's own problems. You just have to work more to get something easy for the 2h or lance guy.

[Bob Bob Bob]

No idea if this is PFS legal, but there's always Thunder and Fang to use an Earthbreaker 1-handed.

[Scott Wilhelm]

I'm pretty sure that Thunder and Fang is PFS legal, but your post, BobX3, prompted me to look it up again and notice something super cool.

Thunder and Fang no only lets you treat an Earthbreaker as a 1 handed weapon, but it also lets you treat a Klar as a light weapon! Even if you didn't want to take 11 levels in Fighter with the 2 weapon Archetype, the OP's Kasatha could take Thunder and Fang, put an Earthbreaker in 1 hand and 3 Klar's in the other, since Klars are treated as light weapons in the hands of someone who knows Thunder and Fang.

He only gets the Shield bonus to his AC for 1 of the Klars, but the Bashing enchantment on a +1 shield only costs 3000gp, turning the bashing damage from 1d6 to 2d6, and that is before they get enchanted as weapons! Plus if he learns Shield Slam, he can get a free Bull Rush with every bash, 3-4/round! If he takes Greater Bull Rush, that's a great, big Attack of Opportunity party he throws. If he gets Paired Opportunist, say via 1 level in Cavalier or 3 levels in Inquisitor, he gets the AoO's, too. That's a pretty low-budget way to get 8 very powerful attacks/round, to say nothing of having a battlefield positioning build into the bargain.

In addition, he has the door open for variety like he might not have if he only had 1 big weapon. He can make 1 of his weapons Cold Iron, one Aadamantine, make the Earthbreaker alchemal silver. He can make one of them Flaming, another Corrosive, one of them Ghost Touch. Earthbreakers are Bludgeoning. Klars are piercing. He could use a short sword in 1 hand for Slashing. One hand could be holding a Spear or light hammer for throwing. This could be a very diversified fighter.

[wraithstrike]

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

Cool!

Would that work in PFS? If I had a Fighter/Alchemist with 2 Weapon, and I cast Alter Self on myself to turn into a Kasatha, would my 2 Weapon Feat be replaced by Multiweapon, allowing me to pick up a Shorsword and a small hammer to go with my Earthbreaker and Klar?

I don't know think TWF changes into a new feat and I dont think the devs thought this far ahead when they made that race humanoid. It is a good FAQ question. For now I would not try it in PFS.

[kestral287]

Your feat wouldn't magically change into another feat because of Alter Self. It'd still be Two-Weapon Fighting. You should get the two extra off-hand attacks... but with the usual huge penalties.

[master4sword]

wraithstrike wrote:

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

Alter Self (like every other polymorph spell) also explicitly calls out what abilities you can get from using the spell, and Multi-Armed isn't on that list, so if you Alter Self into a Kasatha, the two arms would be aesthetic, just like you wouldn't get their Defensive Training, Desert Runner, etc. So if you want four arms to attack with, you'll just have to be an actual Kasatha, rather than someone morphed into one.

[wraithstrike]

master4sword wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

Alter Self (like every other polymorph spell) also explicitly calls out what abilities you can get from using the spell, and Multi-Armed isn't on that list, so if you Alter Self into a Kasatha, the two arms would be aesthetic, just like you wouldn't get their Defensive Training, Desert Runner, etc. So if you want four arms to attack with, you'll just have to be an actual Kasatha, rather than someone morphed into one.

Is multilimbed a racial trait like darkvision is or is it a side affect of the form which you do get according to alter self? I would check myself but I am not home and I hate looking up information on my phone.

[Scott Wilhelm]

kestral287 wrote:

Your feat wouldn't magically change into another feat because of Alter Self. It'd still be Two-Weapon Fighting. You should get the two extra off-hand attacks... but with the usual huge penalties.

I wouldn't normally think so, either. But the description of Multiweapon Fighting says

"Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms."

So, maybe that means that when you transform into a creature with more than 2 arms, your 2 weapon fighting feat transforms into Multiweapon Fighting. That is what that rule says, after all.

And what do these 2 feats do, anyway? They lessen the penalty for off hand attacks. Are they even different feats when you get right down to it?

But even if normally polymorphing from a 2 armed creature also transforms your 2 weapon feat into the multiweapon feat, if multiweapon is PFS Illegal, you wouldn't get is just because of that, maybe.

Just thought it was an interesting point to bring up.

[Scott Wilhelm]

wraithstrike wrote:

master4sword wrote:

wraithstrike wrote:

Scott Wilhelm wrote:

Wraithstrike wrote:

I do however think that with the Kashatara(probably spelled wrong) being available due to the "alter self" spell, it should be looked at and fixed either via errata or an FAQ. I prefer an FAQ since the intent is not hard to understand.

I'm skeptical that Alter Self is powerful enough to grant extra arms and thereby extra attacks. Pretty cool if it works.

To achieve that effect for my multiclass clawed Tengu melee character, I was thinking rather to get a Wand of Monstrous Physique and Polymorph into a 4-armed Sahaugin.

Alter self allows you to change into a humanoid. The monster in question qualifies. If you get the arms then you can use them.The spell does not have a clause on having a traditional humanoid shape.

Alter Self (like every other polymorph spell) also explicitly calls out what abilities you can get from using the spell, and Multi-Armed isn't on that list, so if you Alter Self into a Kasatha, the two arms would be aesthetic, just like you wouldn't get their Defensive Training, Desert Runner, etc. So if you want four arms to attack with, you'll just have to be an actual Kasatha, rather than someone morphed into one.

Is multilimbed a racial trait like darkvision is or is it a side affect of the form which you do get according to alter self? I would check myself but I am not home and I hate looking up information on my phone.

It doesn't make sense though that when you polymorph into a 4 armed gargoyle or sahaugin, you get 4 claw attacks, but when you polymorph into a kasatha, you don't get 4 weapon attacks, does it? Anyway, I was thinking of combining Alter Self with the Feral Mutagen Discovery, so in my Kasatha form, I would grow claws on my hands and get 4 claw attacks that way, so no problem.

[Mark Montgomery 980]

So reading Vestigial arm on the Pathfinder SRD it explicitly states if you put a weapon in that hand, you get an attack as part of an alchemists attack action.

So...

4 Arms, 4 weapons, 4 attacks?

[Archaeik]

Mark Montgomery 980 wrote:

So reading Vestigial arm on the Pathfinder SRD it explicitly states if you put a weapon in that hand, you get an attack as part of an alchemists attack action.

So...

4 Arms, 4 weapons, 4 attacks?

In the hopes that this was an actual misreading

Vestigial Arm wrote:

Benefit: The alchemist gains a new arm (left or right) on his torso. The arm is fully under his control and cannot be concealed except with magic or bulky clothing. The arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round, though the arm can wield a weapon and make attacks as part of the alchemist’s attack routine (using two-weapon fighting). The arm can manipulate or hold items as well as the alchemist’s original arms (for example, allowing the alchemist to use one hand to wield a weapon, another hand to hold a potion, and the third hand to throw a bomb). The arm has its own “hand” and “ring” magic item slots (though the alchemist can still only wear two rings and two hand magic items at a time).

Essentially the intent is: if you couldn't make that many attacks (including natural attacks) without the arms, you can't make any more than that with them.

[TheIronwolf]

though the arm can wield a weapon and make attacks as part of the alchemist’s attack routine (using two-weapon fighting)

This states that part of say a full attack action I would be able to attack with weapons in the vestigial arms hands...