it's not allowed as you used both to attack
It isn't allowed as your limb was used to attack with the great sword. Essentially the "effort" was expended with the great sword attack.
It would however work with a single handed weapon (attacks up to BAB allowed) and then the claw attack with the opposite hand as a secondary natural attack, as the limb wasn't used.
You're out of luck as you've used the limbs associated with the natural attacks using a weapon. As such, no natural attacks. Now nothing is stopping you from using manufactured weapons, just not ones that use your hands. So you could make two unarmed kicks [they count as manufactured] and two claws or use a boulder helmet and armor spikes along with two claws.
yes
I'm not sure why you'd want to but yes.
|
check out the paragraph just above Multiple Attacks as well as that section. Unfortunately the answer is no. Nice try though.
http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/combat.html
They are pretty firm on the "have to spend a full round action" to get more than one attack a round.. which would take out the move action for your intimidate. Though I could see you doing a non attack standard action.
cjtSparhawk is wrong about everything he's said, the swift action attack from hurtful goes outside the full attack sequence and the one doesn't stop the other, nor do you need to do a full attack to use hurtful. A full attack is only needed when you are making attacks because of BAB or 2WF. You're completely allowed to do move to intimidate, swift to attack, standard to attack or do whatever you want.
|
|
So you are saying no secondary attack at all?
I think this would come under the "or for some special reason" part of the full attack action.
I am sure there are other feats to get around this limitation in some fashion, and the feat description will specifically state it. Just don't know them offhand.
Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
Straight from the PRD.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You find a feat that directly overrides this by all means go for it.. just no such text within the two feats in question.
Basically its their catch all for all other types of attacks. If you think otherwise go with your own interpretation, but its not mine..
Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
Straight from the PRD.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You find a feat that directly overrides this by all means go for it.. just no such text within the two feats in question.
Basically its their catch all for all other types of attacks. If you think otherwise go with your own interpretation, but its not mine..
Nor is yours the rule.
Straight from the Monster Codex.
Hurtful (Combat)
You know how to add injury to insult.
Prerequisites: Str 13, Power Attack.
Benefit: When you successfully demoralize an opponent within your melee reach with an Intimidate check, you can make a single melee attack against that creature as a swift action. If your attack fails to damage the target, its shaken condition from being demoralized immediately ends.
It says you can make an attack as a swift action, so you can make an attack as a swift action.
|
|
Nor is yours the rule.Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
Straight from the PRD.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You find a feat that directly overrides this by all means go for it.. just no such text within the two feats in question.
Basically its their catch all for all other types of attacks. If you think otherwise go with your own interpretation, but its not mine..
And neither is yours... hence the FAQ request.
|
|
lets say a ranged touch attack spell like scorching ray at caster level three granting three simultaneous attacks.As you are making a ranged touch attack as part of the spell, this case would not work.
Note that they state the attack specifically as part of the Ranged Touch Attack Spells and AOOs FAQ:
But burning hands, magic missile and the like would work since you don't make an attack as part of the spell.
And neither is yours... hence the FAQ request.Nor is yours the rule.Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
Straight from the PRD.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You find a feat that directly overrides this by all means go for it.. just no such text within the two feats in question.
Basically its their catch all for all other types of attacks. If you think otherwise go with your own interpretation, but its not mine..
Mine is the rules
cjtSparhawk, your games don't allow attacks of opportunity either then?
Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
Straight from the PRD.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You find a feat that directly overrides this by all means go for it.. just no such text within the two feats in question.
Basically its their catch all for all other types of attacks. If you think otherwise go with your own interpretation, but its not mine..
According to your interpretation you cannot make AOOs unless you full attack. Thus your interpretation is wrong.
AOOS can happen during your turn, which is 'the regular round'. So the contention that you can only get one attack unless you full attack is demonstrably false.
The use of Hurtful to gain an extra attack is just as much 'outside the regular round' as any AOO is.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
AoO's happen outside of your round, even when they happen during your round.AOOS can happen during your turn, which is 'the regular round'. So the contention that you can only get one attack unless you full attack is demonstrably false.
The use of Hurtful to gain an extra attack is just as much 'outside the regular round' as any AOO is.
this is why we can't have nice things.
|
If you had 6 BAB, you can attack with a Greatsword at +6, then let go and attack with a Claw at +1. But you can't attack with the Greatsword twice (once at +6, once at +1) and then make a Claw attack at +1.
Using a Move action to Intimidate and then Hurtful to make an attack at a Swift action is not part of making a Full Attack action. You are categorically not allowed to make a Full Attack action if you do this (because you don't have your Move action, obviously).
If you had 6 BAB, you can attack with a Greatsword at +6, then let go and attack with a Claw at +1. But you can't attack with the Greatsword twice (once at +6, once at +1) and then make a Claw attack at +1.
i'm not actually sure this is kosher.
If you had 6 BAB, you can attack with a Greatsword at +6, then let go and attack with a Claw at +1. But you can't attack with the Greatsword twice (once at +6, once at +1) and then make a Claw attack at +1.i'm not actually sure this is kosher.
It's not, you can't make an iterative attack with your natural attack, and once you've swung once with the greatsword you have used that limb and can't natural attack with it.
|
|
It's the same thing as a Greatsword +6, Armor Spikes +1 attack routine. You're not getting extra attacks, you're just switching which weapon you're using. The "hands worth of effort" and "limbs can only make one attack" stuff is specifically only for TWF and natural attacks. If you're not using TWF, and you're not trying to add natural attacks to your normal attack routine, you'll NEVER run into that problem.
And on second thought, you might be right about that. This is why I generally don't play anything that has claw attacks.
It's the same thing as a Greatsword +6, Armor Spikes +1 attack routine. You're not getting extra attacks, you're just switching which weapon you're using. The "hands worth of effort" and "limbs can only make one attack" stuff is specifically only for TWF and natural attacks. If you're not using TWF, and you're not trying to add natural attacks to your normal attack routine, you'll NEVER run into that problem.And on second thought, you might be right about that. This is why I generally don't play anything that has claw attacks.
yeah... natural attacks don't make iteratives.
...unless you have an Animal Companion with Multiattack or Feral Combat Training on a character with iterative attacks.
;) hah, sorry. I'm just playing devil's advocate for humor reasons.
...unless you have an Animal Companion with Multiattack or Feral Combat Training on a character with iterative attacks.
;) hah, sorry. I'm just playing devil's advocate for humor reasons.
The animal companion still isn't making iterative attacks, it just gets an extra attack
Its an additional attack at -5. Pretty much an iterative.
Its an additional attack at -5. Pretty much an iterative.
isn't it -2 with multiattack, or did i get it's name mixed up again?
|
|
Mine is the rulesAnd neither is yours... hence the FAQ request.Nor is yours the rule.Sparhawk is incorrect. Intimidating glare/hurtful absolutely lets you get an extra attack on top of your standard action attack. The multiple attacks combat section is specifically talking about the interaction between BAB and full attack/standard actions (see multiple attacks in combat:full attack). If you can get attacks outside of this interaction, as is the case with hurtful, full attack is irrelevant.
*edit*
"for some special reason" is referring to abilities that increase your number of attacks such as multiple limbs on a marilith or being under the effect of a haste spell. It isn't relevant to the discussion above.
Straight from the PRD.
Full Attack
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
You find a feat that directly overrides this by all means go for it.. just no such text within the two feats in question.
Basically its their catch all for all other types of attacks. If you think otherwise go with your own interpretation, but its not mine..
ok..I *Might* be wrong. Give me some links to where the above full attack text gets overridden, and convince me...
I agree, that the provided text is out of context.
|
|
Nobody is asking about Full Attacks. Full Attacks are completely irrelevant to this discussion. The only thing being asked is "Can I Intimidate as a Move action (using things like the Intimidating Glare Rage Power) and then make a Swift action attack from Hurtful, and then make a Standard action attack?" and the answer to that is categorically yes.
Standard: Attack then
Move: Intimidating Glare then
Swift: Hurtful attack
OR
Move: Intimidating Glare then
Swift: Hurtful attack then
Standard: Attack
Every part of either of these sets of actions is completely legit and acceptable, RAW and RAI. No FAQ is needed, no designer needs to clarify. It's the same thing as using Enforcer + Hurtful to get two attacks off of a Standard + Swift action, which is also not a Full Attack.
ok..I *Might* be wrong. Give me some links to where the above full attack text gets overridden, and convince me...
The part where the feat tells you what action is required.
Specific trumps general.