[PFS] Multiple arms and two weapon fighting

[Gronka]

So I was toying with making an unchained summoner, and had a question.

My idea is to make an eidolon with 4 arms that wields a one handed sword on each side two handed (probably like your basic long sword or scimitar). If I take double slice and two weapon fighting, would each weapon deal 1.5 x Str?

I know I will probably have to overcome the penalties to hit for not using a light weapon. I'm more just wondering about how damage is handled.

[BigNorseWolf]

You've left the rules and are into dm's call territory, which is a bad place for a central character concept to be in pfs

[Belafon]

Uh oh.

The good news is that I'm going to bed soon. The bad news is that as soon as Andy reads this he and I will debate "Two-weapon fighting vs. Multiweapon fighting" for about a dozen posts.

Also, flagged for movement to the rules forum.

[Gronka]

I kind of figured it would be a vague area. I'm not too worried about if it will work in each individual game, just if there has been any kind of ruling on this or a certain way the rules should be interpreted.

[BigNorseWolf]

Gronka wrote:

I kind of figured it would be a vague area. I'm not too worried about if it will work in each individual game, just if there has been any kind of ruling on this or a certain way the rules should be interpreted.

You can legitimately hit

-It doesn't work at all
-Strength and a half on both
-Strength and a half on one strength on the other
-Strength on one half strength on the other

Which is pretty much a page of attack routines for table variation and a big headache for the dm to work out ahead of time. Avoid will robinson.

[Nefreet]

Nothing beyond your traditional two-armed humanoid is very well defined in Pathfinder. In many instances, it appears the rules themselves vary depending on the critter.

There are naturally multi-armed humanoids, such as the Kasatha.
There are vestigial arms, for the Alchemist.
There are extra limbs, for the Eidolon.

Plus probably a few more options I can't think of right now. I definitely suggest avoiding any sort of multi-weapon fighting monstrosity. Stick with natural attacks, or standard weapon options.

And flagged for the Rules Questions Forum as well. Maybe the substantial number of questions similar to this will eventually culminate in an FAQ some day.

[Andrew Christian]

Kevin Willis wrote:

Uh oh.

The good news is that I'm going to bed soon. The bad news is that as soon as Andy reads this he and I will debate "Two-weapon fighting vs. Multiweapon fighting" for about a dozen posts.

Also, flagged for movement to the rules forum.

Chuckle, do we really need to debate it again, or just find the link from the last discussion.

[Leathert]

Interesting sidenote. Kasatha is a race (not PFS-legal) of four-handed humanoids, they have one main hand hand and three off-hands. I might go with that, but I have not compared this to other multi-armed intelligent creatures to see if they handle it totally differently.

[MadScientistWorking]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

You've left the rules and are into dm's call territory, which is a bad place for a central character concept to be in pfs

Ive heard people argue that because the feat says hand and not hands it won't work.

[thaX]

Two Handed Weapons needs a Main Hand to wield, a character only ever has One Main Hand.

If you were able to get a GM to let you do it, or do one Two Handed weapon and another weapon in an off hand, then the damage would be the same as TWF, 1.0 str mod for the "Main" hand, .5 for the off.

Yes, this is an oft argued point that is complete with gnashing of teeth and great gesturing all around.

[James Risner]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

You've left the rules and are into dm's call territory, which is a bad place for a central character concept to be in pfs

There is no RAW to use, so you will have table variance that will decimate your whole character concept.

No only will this suck, it will eat 10-15 minutes of every game where a GM says "how are you getting that damage?"

None of your other players will appreciate the delay, and you will not appreciate the task of explaining.

[Gronka]

thaX wrote:

Two Handed Weapons needs a Main Hand to wield, a character only ever has One Main Hand.

If you were able to get a GM to let you do it, or do one Two Handed weapon and another weapon in an off hand, then the damage would be the same as TWF, 1.0 str mod for the "Main" hand, .5 for the off.

Yes, this is an oft argued point that is complete with gnashing of teeth and great gesturing all around.

In the rules for two handed weapons it doesn't say anything about needing a main hand to wield it. It just says two hands are needed.

From the Core Rulebook:
Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon

[Ridiculon]

welcome to thaX

[Gronka]

James Risner wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

You've left the rules and are into dm's call territory, which is a bad place for a central character concept to be in pfs

There is no RAW to use, so you will have table variance that will decimate your whole character concept.

No only will this suck, it will eat 10-15 minutes of every game where a GM says "how are you getting that damage?"

None of your other players will appreciate the delay, and you will not appreciate the task of explaining.

I will make it a point to ask before the game starts. If the GM says no, the eidolon can always carry a shield or have a bow out. I'm really not too worried about if it works or not, as far as game play goes. I was more wondering if there has been any clear interpretation of the rules that I can cite.

[Azothath]

unchained wrote:

Base Forms

Each eidolon has one of three base forms that determines its starting size, speed, AC, attacks, and ability scores.

All natural attacks are made using the eidolon's full base attack bonus unless otherwise noted (such as in the case of secondary attacks). An eidolon's attacks add the eidolon's Strength modifier to the damage rolls, unless the eidolon has only one attack, in which case the attack adds 1-1/2 times the eidolon's Strength modifier.

Alternatively, any one of these base forms can be used to make a Small eidolon. If the eidolon is Small, it gains a +2 bonus to Dexterity. It takes a –4 penalty to Strength and a –2 penalty to Constitution. It also has a +1 size bonus to AC and on attack rolls, a –1 penalty on combat maneuver checks and to CMD, a +2 bonus on Fly checks, and a +4 bonus on Stealth checks. Reduce the damage of all of its attacks by one step (for example, 1d6 becomes 1d4, and 1d4 becomes 1d3). If this choice is made, the eidolon can be made Medium whenever the summoner can change the eidolon's evolution pool (which causes it to lose these modifiers for being Small). Likewise, a Medium eidolon can be made Small whenever the summoner can change the eidolon's evolution pool.
Biped

Starting Statistics: Size Medium; Speed 30 ft.; AC +2 natural armor; Saves Fort (good), Ref (poor), Will (good); Attack 2 claws (1d4); Ability Scores Str 16, Dex 12, Con 13, Int 7, Wis 10, Cha 11.
...

2 point evolution

Limbs (Ex): The eidolon grows an additional pair of limbs. These limbs can take one of two forms. They can be made into legs, complete with feet. Each pair of legs increases the eidolon's base speed by 10 feet. Alternatively, they can be made into arms, complete with hands. The eidolon does not gain any additional natural attacks for an additional pair of arms, but it can take other evolutions that add additional attacks (such as claws or slam). Arms that have hands can be used to wield weapons, if the eidolon is proficient. This evolution can be selected more than once.

Weapon Training (Ex): The eidolon learns to use a weapon, gaining Simple Weapon Proficiency as a bonus feat. If 2 additional evolution points are spent, it gains proficiency with all martial weapons as well.

so it looks like it takes 4 evolution points from the get go which requires an Unc Summoner 5th level.

[wraithstrike]

Gronka wrote:

James Risner wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

You've left the rules and are into dm's call territory, which is a bad place for a central character concept to be in pfs

There is no RAW to use, so you will have table variance that will decimate your whole character concept.

No only will this suck, it will eat 10-15 minutes of every game where a GM says "how are you getting that damage?"

None of your other players will appreciate the delay, and you will not appreciate the task of explaining.

I will make it a point to ask before the game starts. If the GM says no, the eidolon can always carry a shield or have a bow out. I'm really not too worried about if it works or not, as far as game play goes. I was more wondering if there has been any clear interpretation of the rules that I can cite.

There have been a few debates, but the counter to the GM's "why" will depend on his reasoning as to for how it does not work. Later, after about 12 hours most likely I can try to find some quotes for you if you dont find them by searching.

[Gronka]

Azata gets weapon proficiency for free, so I really only need limbs once, which I could do at level 2. I am probably not going to do that right from the get-go, though. I would rather have a small eidolon to sneak around for a few levels.

[Azothath]

I would take the buffed out xill as the main example. It's been in the system for a long time. Notice the +3 dmg from the Str:17 on the attacks. Multiweapon Mastery(Ex) so it's beyond Multiweapon and it reads like it.

Multiweapon Fighting, Bestiary 1 wrote:

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

so if you have more than 2 arms... you get Multiweapon Fighting.

[Belafon]

Azothath wrote:

I would take the buffed out xill as the main example. It's been in the system for a long time. Notice the +3 dmg from the Str:17 on the attacks. Multiweapon Mastery(Ex) so it's beyond Multiweapon and it reads like it.

Multiweapon Fighting, Bestiary 1 wrote:

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

so if you have more than 2 arms... you get Multiweapon Fighting.

Note that the thread title indicates this is for PFS. Multiweapon Fighting is not a valid player choice in PFS.

[thaX]

Keep in mind that Eidolons automatically get Multiattack when they have enough limbs. This is for Natural Attacks, though, and the Manufactured weapons feat (Multiweapon fighting) is still not available in PFS and is a GM allowance (As is all bestiary feats) in a home campaign.

On the Main Hand issue, there is a Faq that explains the Main/Off hand particulars with weapon and Two Handed weapons needing Main/Off hand to wield.

Just keep in mind that most weapons rules normal factor is a person with two arms/hands to use. When you get more arms, it is going beyond the scope of what the core rules figure into it.

[wraithstrike]

Belafon wrote:

Azothath wrote:

I would take the buffed out xill as the main example. It's been in the system for a long time. Notice the +3 dmg from the Str:17 on the attacks. Multiweapon Mastery(Ex) so it's beyond Multiweapon and it reads like it.

Multiweapon Fighting, Bestiary 1 wrote:

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

so if you have more than 2 arms... you get Multiweapon Fighting.

Note that the thread title indicates this is for PFS. Multiweapon Fighting is not a valid player choice in PFS.

They are not allowed to use the monster feats. <-----Is that why?

[BigNorseWolf]

Gronka wrote:

I will make it a point to ask before the game starts. If the GM says no, the eidolon can always carry a shield or have a bow out. I'm really not too worried about if it works or not, as far as game play goes. I was more wondering if there has been any clear interpretation of the rules that I can cite.

The last thing i want while trying to sneak in one more read of a secnario is a migraine inducing question like that.

[Derek345]

I think the most common interpretation (perhaps not the most sane) is going to come down to

Benefit: Your penalties on attack rolls for fighting with two weapons are reduced. The penalty for your primary hand lessens by 2 and the one for your off hand lessens by 6.

Two weapon fighting, despite its name, doesn't function on two weapons. It functions on two hands which are being used independently instead of cooperatively. As such if you "two hand" one of your two weapons you're using hands (plural) on that weapon and TWF no longer applies to anything. The text of TWF does not say "primary hand(s)" or "off hand(s)". It is written in a way that does not leave it open to use with more than 2 hands total, one primary and one off.

Which is to say if you interpret it as a primary and off weapon your argument makes some sense, but TWF read strictly only functions when a weapon is wielded in a hand singular. Dual Slice has the same problem.

TWF supports a reading that attack bonuses are not applied to the weapon, but to the hand that wields it. I readily admit that this interpretation runs afoul of some many armed monster stat blocks, but PFS is rules strict and explicitly forbids the player use of the appropriate monster feats.

[Azothath]

Xill is a monster and I used that to show that the weapons were not being "two handed" to get 1.5*Str damage.
Since monster feats are not available to players, I don't think there's any way to create another primary hand attack.

Claws(1pt evo) gives a primary natural weapon attack.

Multiattack comes in at level 9 on the eidelon chart. This only lessens penalties on natural weapon secondary attacks.

hmmm... Humanoid comes with a primary hand and off hand. Creating extra limbs does not add to the primary hand(s), they are still all "off hands". You couldn't take Two Weapon Fighting twice as there's no 2nd primary hand to benefit (assuming the Feat is "per pair").

light, one handed, two handed weapons wrote:

Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only. An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.

One-Handed: A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or 1/2 his Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls.

Two-Handed: Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1-1/2 times the character's Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon (see FAQ at right for more information.)

The Str bonus is additive, primary = 1*, off hand, 0.5*, so primary + off = 1.5*Str dmg. I'm not sure but off + off would be 1*Str dmg and that's totally in the GM grey area. Off hand weapons are usually light and thus don't gain Str bonus from using two hands.

just a few posts behind thaX