|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
So you're saying its better to pretend that there isn't a rules issue and use justifications and arguments that are spurious at best, game-breaking at worst, to cover up the problems.
No, I'm saying that there is no rules issue and the only 'problem' is that some people are 'pretending' (to themselves) otherwise.
Given a choice between a clear / obvious answer and an illogical / "stupid" answer, some have inexplicably chosen to believe that Paizo must have meant the one which makes no sense... and therefore a house rule or correction is required.
Everyone else looks at the same possibilities and concludes, 'ah, Paizo obviously meant the obvious'.
This is how human communication works. You take the information communicated to you and try to find the most logical intended meaning. To instead deliberately ignore a logical meaning in favor of an illogical one throws the entire basis of shared understanding out the window.
|
Please show in pathfinder where it says humans have opposable thumbs and what mechanical benefit they provide?
But you can't because they don't. "Human" rules elements instead have "hands" rules elements that allow them to interact with other rules elements that are defined to interact with "hands" rules elements.
So yes, the first statement is true in Pathfinder, humans don't have mechanically relevant thumbs.
<sarcasm>Yes, because the 'has hands'/'has graspers' rule is 100% defined.</sarcasm>
Instead of saying 'has opposable thumb' he should have said 'has hands with the capability to wield items'. Which is a similar concept, one that has a direct parallel in Pathfinder. And almost certainly what he is talking about.
So how about instead of being too literal and arguing against what he isn't apparently arguing... give an honest response argument that acknowledges what he said AND what he most likely meant.
Except if you make the alterations you suggest, then the point he is trying to make disappears because the rules exceptions he claims don't exist for humans does exist (i.e. all humanoids in pathfinder have hands barring specific exception because there is a rule that says they do).
So either way his argument, both literal and your alterative, is wrong based on the rules of Pathfinder.
Please quote the rule that says how many hands a human has.
|
|
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Please quote the rule that says how many hands a human has.
Based on the Height & Weight table human males are 5'9" tall on average and females 5'4" tall. Assuming equal distribution of the sexes that would come out to humans averaging 5' 6.5" tall.
One hand is 4 inches.
Ergo, humans have, on average, 16.625 hands.
This is clearly the only possible meaning you could have intended. Unfortunately, it indicates a major rules problem. With 16 hands (rules specify rounding down), a human could make an extraordinary number of attacks per round. This is clearly unbalanced compared to monsters in the Bestiaries - which seldom get more than 4 attacks. Paizo has done a terrible job with the rules and should immediately produce a correction indicating that humans have some fewer number of hands. Possibly 3.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Baby, I'm all hands...
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A humanoid usually has two arms, two legs, and one head, or a human-like torso, arms, and a head.
Physical Description: The physical characteristics of humans are as varied as the world's climes. From the dark-skinned tribesmen of the southern continents to the pale and barbaric raiders of the northern lands, humans possess a wide variety of skin colors, body types, and facial features. Generally speaking, humans' skin color assumes a darker hue the closer to the equator they live. At the same time, bone structure, hair color and texture, eye color, and a host of facial and bodily phenotypic characteristics vary immensely from one locale to another. Cheekbones may be high or broad, noses aquiline or flat, and lips full or thin; eyes range wildly in hue, some deep set in their sockets, and others with full epicanthic folds. Appearance is hardly random, of course, and familial, tribal, or national commonalities often allow the knowledgeable to identify a human's place of origin on sight, or at least to hazard a good guess. Humans' origins are also indicated through their traditional styles of bodily decoration, not only in the clothing or jewelry worn, but also in elaborate hairstyles, piercing, tattooing, and even scarification.
Holy Crap!!! You are right - per the rules, Humans and Humanoids don't even have hands... The rules for humanoids in general just list a pair of arms. and humans as a subsection of humanoids do not have a rules exception granting them hands.
I know what you are thinking... the Wondrous Items section refers to the body slots a humanoid possesses.... but I checked - it isn't explicit. It says "It's possible for a creature with a humanoid-shaped body to wear as many as 15 magic items at the same time. However, each of those items must be worn on (or over) a particular part of the body, known as a “slot.” But unless the individual creature type or subtype indicates that that they actually granted each of the slots, it would be against RAW to assume. You are free to make a house rule in your home games that humans have hands though...
Lets look more broadly - this can;t be right... raw needs to have given us an indication that humans have hands...
if you look on to the section about animals and which items they can have there is a distinction made between bipeds with hands and those with claws or paws... those with claws/paws do not get the "hands" slot of wondrous items available to them (or the shield or the head slot)... does this mean that if you are a race that has claws (or a Beast Totem Barbarian, etc), you not only DO NOT get the hands slopt, but that you also lose the head and shield slot as well? Oh NO this is getting worse and worse...
The rules are incomplete!!!! What shall I do!!??!?! WHAT SHALL I DO!?!?!?
[/sarcasm]
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just don't rule that humans have hands in PFS, since that's not strictly raw.
But if we don't know how many hands a human has the how many "Metaphysical Hands of Effort" do humans have?
Crap maybe they can't dual wield at all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
But if we don't know how many hands a human has the how many "Metaphysical Hands of Effort" do humans have?
Crap maybe they can't dual wield at all.
No, no, no, creatures have two metaphysical hands no matter how many hands they have.
I would show you where it says this in the rules, but luckily for me this particular rule is unwritten.
Reading all the posts, I still need a clarification : If I use the arm of an adamantine golem to bash the head of a Stoneskin'd Magician, does it count as Adamantine or not ..... ????
No, because it's not an adamantine weapon. It's the arm of an adamantine golem, and by weight, mostly NOT adamantine.
It doesn't share any of the properties of adamantine (hardness, hp, etc), either. IT's a golem's arm.
==Aelryinth
But if we don't know how many hands a human has the how many "Metaphysical Hands of Effort" do humans have?
Crap maybe they can't dual wield at all.
No, no, no, creatures have two metaphysical hands no matter how many hands they have.
I would show you where it says this in the rules, but luckily for me this particular rule is unwritten.
Careful that way will lead to a very silly place. Like Camelot only worse.
|
Reading all the posts, I still need a clarification : If I use the arm of an adamantine golem to bash the head of a Stoneskin'd Magician, does it count as Adamantine or not ..... ????
No, because it's not an adamantine weapon. It's the arm of an adamantine golem, and by weight, mostly NOT adamantine.
It doesn't share any of the properties of adamantine (hardness, hp, etc), either. IT's a golem's arm.
==Aelryinth
So this is in the same regards as i couldn't pick up a severed human arm that has an adamantine gauntlet and Adamantine full plate still attached to it and use that to bypass DR Adamantine. Right?
so i can take the individual pieces of adamantine full plate and use them as an improvised weapon to bypass DR but once i put a person in that full plate and start swinging that person around as an improvised weapon it no longer counts as adamantine for bypassing DR even though the striking surface and what you are actually getting hit with has not changed at all.(Apart from there being MORE weight and force behind the blows. , that is ...exactly. Because a silver tea set, a mithril BP and an adamantine crowbar are all made of special materials and are objects that can be made into improvised weapons.
A human fighter in adamantine armor is a mostly flesh and bone weapon with some metal wrapped around him. He's not an adamantine weapon by ANY stretch of the imagination.
==Aelryinth
Just want to make sure I'm getting your logic correct because it actually does not make any logical sense.
That is absolutely correct. The arm is not made of adamantine. You would have to equip the gauntlet as a proper weapon to wield it properly. A limp arm wearing armor and a gauntlet is very different then a worn gauntlet.
If you can't differentiate between the two conditions 'logically', hey, house rule it. I don't care.
You might as well argue that hitting someone with a severed arm is an unarmed attack. Eesh.
==Aelryinth
That is absolutely correct. The arm is not made of adamantine. You would have to equip the gauntlet as a proper weapon to wield it properly. A limp arm wearing armor and a gauntlet is very different then a worn gauntlet.
If you can't differentiate between the two conditions 'logically', hey, house rule it. I don't care.
You might as well argue that hitting someone with a severed arm is an unarmed attack. Eesh.
==Aelryinth
So we need to "logically" differentiate between using an adamantine skillet as an improvised weapon vs using a body part clad in armor as one. But not between golem naming conventions and other creatures naming conventions?
So, you don't differentiate from something made completely out of adamantine, and a limp and rotting piece of severed flesh and bone that happens to be wrapped in some armor.
Well, hey, good for you, then.
But if it works, make sure you give anyone using IUS and dressed in adamantine armor DR/Adamantine punch. Y'know, cause apparently just wearing the armor is enough to bypass DR.
==Aelryinth
Depending on context yes and no. And A gauntlet is doubtful 100% adamantine either.
Well until they figure out the science of nonstick coating, you're just stuck with something wildly expensive like an Adamantine Skillet.
They work for dwarves!
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok... I think I've got it now...
Lets see if I have this straight... If I have a 3 lb Adamantium light pick - it will count as Adamantium when overcoming DR/Adamantium and bypass hardness. Even if it has a wooden haft - the vast majority of the weapon is pure adamantium - so it is fine.
However, if I choose to take a 6 lb Steel ball and weld it to the back side of that same Adamantium pick, it is now an improvised weapon that is made mostly of steel and therefore can no longer penetrate DR/Adamantium or bypass hardness.
I am so glad I understand the rules now, Aelryinth. It makes so much more sense now that you have shared with us how pathfinder works.
Depending on context yes and no. And A gauntlet is doubtful 100% adamantine either.
A gauntlet will be either 100% adamantine, like most chain gauntlets are, worn over leather gloves, or adamantine worn atop leather for defensive purposes, so also 100% adamantine armor as far as that goes.
But since adamantine armor does not automatically qualify as an adamantine weapon...
Seriously, do you expect a severed arm to ignore the hardness of an iron door and rip it to shreds? To pound through a brick wall with it? To impale the side of a building if you throw the gauntlet at it?
Because that's what is being recommended here. Just take the example to its normal extreme of use. I find the idea that a severed arm could do damage to an iron golem or smash down a sealed vault just because there's a gauntlet on it HILARIOUS.
==Aelryinth
|
But if it works, make sure you give anyone using IUS and dressed in adamantine armor DR/Adamantine punch. Y'know, cause apparently just wearing the armor is enough to bypass DR.
Everyone I've ever played with does that. It's one of the secondary advantages of paying all that $ for adamantine armor. (Except you don't need IUS as that gauntlet is a weapon.)
|
|
Depending on context yes and no. And A gauntlet is doubtful 100% adamantine either.A gauntlet will be either 100% adamantine, like most chain gauntlets are, worn over leather gloves, or adamantine worn atop leather for defensive purposes, so also 100% adamantine armor as far as that goes.
But since adamantine armor does not automatically qualify as an adamantine weapon...
Wait. Now gauntlets aren't weapons?
What are they doing at the top of the bloody weapons table then?
These Paizo people and their erroneous rules! We need a new house rule that things on the weapons table are weapons.
...Seriously, do you expect a severed arm to ignore the hardness of an iron door and rip it to shreds?...
==Aelryinth
Rip it to shreds? Of Course not. Gauntlets do bludgeoning damage - not Slashing or piercing...
Also, a severed arm with an adamantine gauntlet would be an improvised light hammer that does 1d3 or 1d4 plus strength modifier damage. Without any special feats, the most a Level 1 PC could ever do against the door is 9 damage. per strike... it would take 7-9 rounds of constant hitting before you would do enough damage to allow you to get through it. Conversely, a person with average strength would take nearly 30 rounds before he managed to get through the door.
Hardly ripping it to shreds
wait! a gauntlet that is not being wielded as a gauntlet is still a weapon?!
Dang! you mean I can THROW THE GAUNTLET and it is still a weapon? I can shoot it and its still a weapon?! I can inflate a water balloon inside it and wave it around and it's still a proper weapon?
I had no idea. I guess there's no rules against it. In one minute I could tear apart an iron door with a dead man's armored arm. How wonderful!
==Aelryinth
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
wait! a gauntlet that is not being wielded as a gauntlet is still a weapon?!
Dang! you mean I can THROW THE GAUNTLET and it is still a weapon? ...
I had no idea. I guess there's no rules against it.
==Aelryinth
here... let me help you out:
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/throw-anything-combat---finalThrow Anything (Combat)
You are used to throwing things you have on hand.
{snicker snicker}
a gauntlet attached to a severed arm would definitely be "on hand"
minor correction, oddman: I didn't say gauntlet on an arm. I said a 'gauntlet'. So, I can basically wad up a chain gauntlet, which is just a bunch of chain links in the form of a glove you anchor to a leather glove, throw it, and it punches through 19 points of hardness. Rinse and repeat, take down that iron door.
Wootie. how wonderful.
==Aelryinth
Can I have it back now.
You might as well argue that hitting someone with a severed arm is an unarmed attack.Don't be ridiculous.
An unarmed attack is when you hit someone with a person who has had their arms removed.
I stand corrected. Obviously you must disarm someone before using a proper unarmed attack.
So, hitting someone with someone who has two arms is actually multi-weapon fighting, right? I'm getting quite the rules education today. Or would that just be armed combat?
==Aelryinth
Now who is making up rules?
Please provide a link to these, so called "chain gauntlets" you are referencing.
I only see gauntlet, spiked gauntlet and locked gauntlet in the list of weapons.
The only illustration for any of these shows a series of layered metal plates.
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&a mp;ie=UTF-8#q=picture%20of%20chain%20gauntlet
Okay. I throw a bunch of chain rings against a wall, and it punches 19 pts of Hardness. Woot!
==Aelryinth
You might as well argue that hitting someone with a severed arm is an unarmed attack.Don't be ridiculous.
An unarmed attack is when you hit someone with a person who has had their arms removed.
I stand corrected. Obviously you must disarm someone before using a proper unarmed attack.
So, hitting someone with someone who has two arms is actually multi-weapon fighting, right? I'm getting quite the rules education today. Or would that just be armed combat?
==Aelryinth
YAY!!! We are making progress!!!!
Improvised Weapons
Sometimes objects not crafted to be weapons nonetheless see use in combat. Because such objects are not designed for this use, any creature that uses an improvised weapon in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls made with that object. To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match. An improvised weapon scores a threat on a natural roll of 20 and deals double damage on a critical hit. An improvised thrown weapon has a range increment of 10 feet
https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&a mp;ie=UTF-8#q=picture%20of%20chain%20gauntlet
Okay. I throw a bunch of chain rings against a wall, and it punches 19 pts of Hardness. Woot!
==Aelryinth
Hmmmm.... Ok... And Here is a link for you
Now we have both exchanged examples of hand wear that does not exist in the game per the rules... Was this a bonding ritual? Are we kin now?
Yessss, even better. I throw a wad of chain rings in the form of a human hand at an object 30 feet away, deal d3+ Str dmg, ignore 19 pts of DR and bypass DR/Adamantium.
Yessss.
===Aelryinth
Are you trying to tell me chain gauntlets don't exist in the game?
Because they'd be the gauntlets that are included with any standard set of chain mail, you know.
Just gauntlets, you're trying to make it seem as if they don't exist, now? And the only style of gauntlets is the ones that come with full plate? Because that's even more incredulous.
==Aelryinth
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It sounds like you are trying to make real world assumptions and inject them into a game with stat-block based rules.... This is kind of ironic. It's like the twist ending nobody was expecting
|
|
Are you trying to tell me chain gauntlets don't exist in the game?
Because they'd be the gauntlets that are included with any standard set of chain mail, you know.
Just gauntlets, you're trying to make it seem as if they don't exist, now? And the only style of gauntlets is the ones that come with full plate? Because that's even more incredulous.
==Aelryinth
Everything i have been referencing is in regards to Full Plate and The Plate Gauntlets that come with full plate and/or the gauntlets that are on the weapon table. You came up with Chain gauntlets all on your own..
Now Chain gauntlets do exist but there are no rules for them in the rule books so we clearly cannot use them according to you and your previous statements.
Now ... We use an Adamantine Chain Shirt or Adamantine Chain Mail (same concept, chain links and all) as an improvised weapon to beat a creature with that has DR adamantine, are we able to get past its DR? now we use the same thing as an improvised thrown weapon against the same creature. Do we get through its DR?
Same thing in regards to hardness. What happens?
My bet is it gets past DR and gets past Hardness because Adamantine rules say so.
This would be conclusive but the line from the d20pfsrd does not appear on the PRD.Bestiary page 299:
A few very powerful monsters are vulnerable only to epic weapons — that is, magic weapons with at least a +6 enhancement bonus. Such creatures’ natural weapons are also treated as epic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.d20 SRD:
An adamantine golem’s natural weapons are treated as epic for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction.Read the PRD quotation immediately before it again. It says that creatures with DR/Epic (like Adamantine golems) treat their natural weapon attacks as epic weapons for overcoming damage reduction.
Thus, the line from d20psfrd is simply applying the standard rule from the PRD to the Adamantine golem specifically.
I was wrong.
It appears that due to treating their slam attack which is a natural weapon as an epic weapon which makes it a +6 weapon an adamantite golem does punch DR adamantite. My apologies for my error directly after being posted links that I even responded to.
As for the additional way of punching DR/Epic in the mythic adventures handbook, I believe at worst an adamantite golems attacks would count as both a +6 weapon and an effective +6 weapon as it reads to me as an addition not a change.
Thanks for the clarification.
I didn't come up with chain gauntlets on my own. I came up with a different style of gauntlets. You're the one making artificial distinctions. Gauntlets are gauntlets.
What YOU are trying to do is say that because someone or something is wearing adamantine armor, they get to punch Adamantine DR and ignore 19 points of hardness, i.e. that adamantine armor is a weapon.
I ran with your example and showed you how dumb it was, by the rules. and you're trying now to draw lines saying when it would and wouldn't work.
And the rules do point out that plating a weapon in adamantine is not going to work, any more then it works with silver and cold iron.
So, the question was, an arm, clad in adamantine armor, count as an adamatine weapon?
No, because plating a weapon (the arm) in adamantine doesn't make it an adamantine weapon.
If you take off the gauntlet and wear it, it's an adamantine weapon (i.e. actively wielded as designed). If you take it off the hand and wield it by itself, its an adamatine improvised weapon (and an extremely poor one, since it's not rigid enough to be used as any kind of solid weapon). If you take off the armor pieces and wad them around your fist to improvise them, it's an adamantine weapon.
But just like adamantine armor doesn't grant DR Punch, an arm wrapped in it won't, either. It'll just break and shatter and shred itself while the leather straps snap and it breaks apart. Very very poorly plating something in adamantine is not the same as having an adamantine weapon.
It seems like you all are trying to argue that as long as ANY kind of adamantine is present, it counts as an adamantine weapon. Which is definitely not in the rules. and you're contriving a situation up that can't be sustained or backed by rules to see how far you can take it.
An arm covered in armor is mostly flesh and bone, not armor. It doesn't work.
==Aelryinth
What if I plate the arm in Adamantine weapon blanch?
I can't believe this thread is still raging.
so... if you are wearing a pathfinder game-issued adamantine gauntlet on your hand (that, per upthread discussion, we have decided to house rule that you do in fact have), you can punch the iron door and bypass the hardness... because you are wielding the gauntlet as it is designed.
yes?
can you hammer fist it?
can you knife hand strike it?
can you ridge hand strike it?
can you spear hand strike it?
can you palm strike it?
how about a leopard punch?
Or does the game not dictate the exact real world mechanics of unarmed striking with your fist?
I ask, because while trying to wield a severed limb that has an adamantine gauntlet on it - it might be hard to deliver a standard jabbing punch - but it wouldn't be hard to improvise a decent hammer fist or even a knife hand strike with it.
Either way - that iron door is going down!
so... if you are wearing a pathfinder game-issued adamantine gauntlet on your hand (that, per upthread discussion, we have decided to house rule that you do in fact have), you can punch the iron door and bypass the hardness... because you are wielding the gauntlet as it is designed.
yes?can you hammer fist it?
can you knife hand strike it?
can you ridge hand strike it?
can you spear hand strike it?
can you palm strike it?
how about a leopard punch?
Yes, yes, yes, yes, probably (if the gauntlet extends far enough), I don't know what leopard punch is.
I don't know what leopard punch is.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't believe this thread is still raging.
Believe it.
I intend to refer people to this thread in the future when the topic of unbelievable arguments comes up.
