Multiple Attacks x4


Rules Discussion


So Rangers and Monks can get 4 attack actions in one round with Flurry or Rapid shot, do these attacks go:

-0, -5, -10, -10

or

-0, -0, -5, -10


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The first one.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Doesn't with flurry the first one go -0, -0 provided you flurry for your first attack?


2 people marked this as a favorite.

It's 0, -5, -5, -10. The abilities in question state that you apply MAP normally, as opposed to something like Double Slice that clarifies you don't apply the MAP increase until after both attacks.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

No no, the ranger attack routine goes -2/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2. :P

...Seriously, though, that is a thing rangers can do...


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I was pretty sure the monk goes -0, -5, -10, -10.


Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

-0, -5, -10, -10 is correct when the first two attacks are made with normal MAP.


Is the ranger's weapon a finess weapon therefore it should be 0,-4,-8,-8.?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
swimfish wrote:

Is the ranger's weapon a finess weapon therefore it should be 0,-4,-8,-8.?

Agile, not finesse.


Rangers with Flurry (hunter's edge) and Twin Takedown would be 0, -2, -4, -4 with Agile weapons against their prey iiuc making rangers the best class for multiple attacks.

Grand Lodge

MaxAstro wrote:

No no, the ranger attack routine goes -2/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2. :P

...Seriously, though, that is a thing rangers can do...

I mean, sure, at level 18.

But I think you’re forgetting haste, still one of the best buff spells in the game, which you should be getting every combat at that level. So that would be -2/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2/-2 :)


Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?


bobrossw wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?

Sure.

p156 wrote:

FLURRY OF BLOWS [one-action]

FLOURISH MONK
Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature,
combine their damage for the purpose of resistances and
weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes
normally.
As it has the flourish trait, you can use Flurry of
Blows only once per turn.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
bobrossw wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?

Why would there need to be an official ruling? the abilities are clear and your GM is wrong, and is using it as an excuse to add a probably terrible "fumble" system

Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature, combine their damage for the purpose of resistances and weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes normally.

It's not even remotely confusing.

0, -5, -10, -10


Vlorax wrote:
bobrossw wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?

Why would there need to be an official ruling? the abilities are clear and your GM is wrong, and is using it as an excuse to add a probably terrible "fumble" system

Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature, combine their damage for the purpose of resistances and weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes normally.

It's not even remotely confusing.

0, -5, -10, -10

With most of a monk's stances your attacks would be -0/-4/-8/-8 because those attacks are agile.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Same for the ranger's Twin Takedown
0,-4,-8,-8 (assuming agile)

"You swiftly attack your hunted prey with both weapons. Make two Strikes against your hunted prey, one with each of the required weapons. If both hit the same hunted prey, combine their damage for the purpose of its resistances and weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to each Strike normally."

And rogues Twin Feint
0,-4,-8,-8 (assuming agile)
"You make a dazzling series of attacks with both weapons, using the first attack to throw your foe offguard against a second attack at a different angle. Make one Strike with each of your two melee weapons, both against the same target. The target is automatically flat-footed against the second attack. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes normally."

Fighter's is a bit better.
0,0,-8,-8 (assuming agile)

"You lash out at your foe with both weapons. Make two Strikes, one with each of your two melee weapons, each using your current multiple attack penalty. Both Strikes must have the same target. If the second Strike is made with a weapon that doesn’t have the agile trait, it takes a –2 penalty.

If both attacks hit, combine their damage, and then add any other applicable effects from both weapons. You add any precision damage only once, to the attack of your choice. Combine the damage from both Strikes and apply resistances and weaknesses only once. This counts as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty."


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Lost Omens Subscriber

yes and if you add on haste it's 0,-5,-10,-10,-10 :3

bobrossw wrote:
Sorry to resurrect this post. My GM seems to still believe it's -0,-0,-5,-10 despite multiple posts to the contrary. Wouldn't bother me much except it's the reason he's houseruling in a fairly punitive fumble system on attacks, arguing that two attacks per round for monks/rangers is plenty. I'm wondering if someone can direct me to an official ruling somewhere?

you know if he thinks -0,-0,-5,-10 is too much you should just tell him to house rule it to the above instead of making a fumble system XD

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Multiple Attacks x4 All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.