So I recently made a character who multiclassed between alchemist and barbarian who focused primarily of two-weapon fighting. I was only planning to go 6 alchemist because I really cherished some of those later rage powers the barbarian gets, such as pounce and come and get me. That left me with 3 discoveries. Spontaneous healing seemed like a good choice when paired with a barbarian with DR. Currently we are level 3, and I am 1 Wild Rager/ 2 Ragechemist (old save dc and plans to pump will).
But then I thought about and saw the vestigial arm discovery, and a lightbulb went off in my head. By level 7, I could have 2 vestigial arms, as well as 2 normal arms, and I can wield 2 Great Axes. I can use one of the great axes in 2 of my hands, and the other great axe in my other 2 hands.
Would this effectively allow me to fight using Two-weapon fighting as well as Two-handed fighting at the same time? If my understanding is correct, then you still only have 1 main hand, and the other 3 are all considered off-hand. So whatever great axe you use in your main hand would use 1.5 Str since you are using it in 2 hands, and your other great axe would use full strength (since it is halved due to off-hand, but adding .5 due to using 2 hands to wield). This changes to 1.5 Str in offhand with the Double Slice Feat. Not only this, but using power attack in this fashion would increase the damage by .5 for both the main and off-hand great axes due to both using 2 hands, but the off-hand great axe would then lose the .5 due to it being in the off-hand. This would effectively make power attack a lot more feasible with two-weapon fighting.
Is my understanding of this interaction correct?
I think the official ruling is ‘that doesn’t work, because hands of effort FAQ.’ Also, Sean k.reynolds wrote: The intent is that you have an extra arm for holding stuff, not to turn you into a double-greatsword-wielding maniac.
No, but you could still dual-wield while having a tower shield and a hand free for a potion/wand/climbing.
Lelomenia wrote: I think the official ruling is ‘that doesn’t work, because hands of effort FAQ.’ Also, Sean k.reynolds wrote: The intent is that you have an extra arm for holding stuff, not to turn you into a double-greatsword-wielding maniac. Is there a link to that FAQ that I can see?
The FAQ is this. When you wield a two-handed wepaon, you can't make off-hand attacks, period. You could have a million hands, doesn't do jack.
What Lelomenia quoted is from a forum post, and not relevant for RAW (obviously, as it talks about intent, i.e. RAI).
Derklord wrote: The FAQ is this. When you wield a two-handed wepaon, you can't make off-hand attacks, period. You could have a million hands, doesn't do jack.
What Lelomenia quoted is from a forum post, and not relevant for RAW (obviously, as it talks about intent, i.e. RAI).
The reason given is that your offhand is being used to equip a two handed weapon and thus cannot be used to attack with as an offhand attack. It doesn't address if the person has 3 or more limbs.
I thought there was a rule/errata/faq that said something along the lines of you cannot wield two two-handed weapons (or at the very least that you didn't get the +50% on str/ power attack damage for using a weapon two handed) but I cannot find any links.
Joey Cote wrote: The reason given is that your offhand is being used to equip a two handed weapon and thus cannot be used to attack with as an offhand attack. The reason given doesn't make sense if used literally, because armor spikes never need hands anyway (a double amputee could use them just fine). Which is why the FAQ is generally descriped as "methaphorical hands" or "hands of effort". Under the presumption that the FAQ actually does something, the only possible interpretation is that the limitation is not a physical one, but a technicality.
There's also this FAQ that everyone seems to have forgotten about.
Alchemist, Tentacle/Vestigial Arm: What does "extra attacks" mean for these discoveries?
It means "extra," as in "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery."
For example, if you're low-level alchemist who uses two-weapon fighting, you can normally make two attacks per round (one with each weapon). If you take the tentacle discovery, on your turn you can make
* two weapon attacks but no tentacle attack,
* a weapon attack with your left hand plus a secondary tentacle attack, or
* a weapon attack with your right hand plus a secondary tentacle attack.
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a tentacle attack on the same turn because the tentacle discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round." This language is calling out that the tentacle is not a standard natural weapon and doesn't follow the standard rules for using natural weapons (which would normally allow you to make the natural weapon attack in addition to your other attacks).
Likewise, if you instead took the vestigial arm discovery and put a weapon in that arm's hand, on your turn you can make
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your right hand,
* a weapon attack with your right hand and one with your vestigial arm, or
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your vestigial arm,
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial hand weapon attack on the same turn because the vestigial arm discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round."
The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs: the text of both discoveries says they do not give you any extra attacks per round, whether used as natural weapons, wielding manufactured weapons, or adding natural weapons to a limb that didn't originally have natural weapons.
Remember that these two discoveries do not have any level requirements, and therefore are not especially powerful; permanently adding additional attacks per round is beyond the scope of a discovery available to 2nd-level alchemists.
If you were to try and TWF with 2 greatswords, that would be more attacks than you would be able to make before the discoveries, since you would only be able to attack with one greatsword prior to the discoveries. Therefore you couldn't attack with two greatswords after the discoveries.
I wasn’t forgetting it, but the vestigial arm FAQ doesn’t really touch two handed weapons. You could make two attacks with two arms, now you are only making two attacks with four arms, what’s the problem? In context with the many topical dev forum posts, it plugs up some munchkinny holes (“sure two handed people only have two hands of effort, but that clearly doesn’t apply to my alchemist!”), but I think the basic answer is ‘per faq, you have two hands of effort, and the first great sword swing takes both.’
Derklord wrote: Joey Cote wrote: The reason given is that your offhand is being used to equip a two handed weapon and thus cannot be used to attack with as an offhand attack. The reason given doesn't make sense if used literally, because armor spikes never need hands anyway (a double amputee could use them just fine). Which is why the FAQ is generally descriped as "methaphorical hands" or "hands of effort". Under the presumption that the FAQ actually does something, the only possible interpretation is that the limitation is not a physical one, but a technicality. I disagree because armor spikes say,
Armor spikes deal extra piercing damage (see “spiked armor” on Table: Weapons) on a successful grapple attack. The spikes count as a martial weapon. If you are not proficient with them, you take a –4 penalty on grapple checks when you try to use them. You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case. (You can’t also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.)
Which indicates if you use them to strike, you need hand free to do so. As if you are doing a forearm bash. No, you don't use your hand, but you need an limb free to strike with. And in Pathfinder we strike with hands (excluding natural attacks and unarmed attacks, which armor spikes are not).
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
willuwontu wrote: There's also this FAQ that everyone seems to have forgotten about.
Alchemist, Tentacle/Vestigial Arm: What does "extra attacks" mean for these discoveries?
It means "extra," as in "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery."
For example, if you're low-level alchemist who uses two-weapon fighting, you can normally make two attacks per round (one with each weapon). If you take the tentacle discovery, on your turn you can make
* two weapon attacks but no tentacle attack,
* a weapon attack with your left hand plus a secondary tentacle attack, or
* a weapon attack with your right hand plus a secondary tentacle attack.
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a tentacle attack on the same turn because the tentacle discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round." This language is calling out that the tentacle is not a standard natural weapon and doesn't follow the standard rules for using natural weapons (which would normally allow you to make the natural weapon attack in addition to your other attacks).
Likewise, if you instead took the vestigial arm discovery and put a weapon in that arm's hand, on your turn you can make
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your right hand,
* a weapon attack with your right hand and one with your vestigial arm, or
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your vestigial arm,
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial hand weapon attack on the same turn because the vestigial arm discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round."
The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs: the text of both discoveries says they do not give you any
...
I don't agree with your interpretation. Swinging two two handed weapons isn't any additional attacks, which is all that FAQ talks about. It is giving potentially more powerful attacks, but not more. In the spirit of the FAQ, not making the alchemist more powerful in melee, that might be true. But just using the vestigial limb to hold a light weapon, and using a two handed weapon in your primary hands, would also make the alchemist more effective in melee, and that seems to be allowed. Even using a two handed weapon and a shield would also make the alchemist more effective, and it seems pretty unlikely that FAQ was intended to prevent that.
Derklord wrote: The FAQ is this. When you wield a two-handed wepaon, you can't make off-hand attacks, period. You could have a million hands, doesn't do jack.
What Lelomenia quoted is from a forum post, and not relevant for RAW (obviously, as it talks about intent, i.e. RAI).
Im not sure I can agree with that statement based on the FAQ, as well as knowing the Titan Mauler archetype exists with Jotungrip. They are certainly wielding two-handed weapons in 1 hand, and this is effectively doing the same thing I am, except at a larger penalty, as well as missing out on potentially an increase to strength. I would then think that the armor spikes could have been a technicality, but maybe a technicality specific towards armor spikes.
Joey Cote wrote: willuwontu wrote: There's also this FAQ that everyone seems to have forgotten about.
Alchemist, Tentacle/Vestigial Arm: What does "extra attacks" mean for these discoveries?
It means "extra," as in "more than you would be able to make if you didn't have that discovery."
For example, if you're low-level alchemist who uses two-weapon fighting, you can normally make two attacks per round (one with each weapon). If you take the tentacle discovery, on your turn you can make
* two weapon attacks but no tentacle attack,
* a weapon attack with your left hand plus a secondary tentacle attack, or
* a weapon attack with your right hand plus a secondary tentacle attack.
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a tentacle attack on the same turn because the tentacle discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round." This language is calling out that the tentacle is not a standard natural weapon and doesn't follow the standard rules for using natural weapons (which would normally allow you to make the natural weapon attack in addition to your other attacks).
Likewise, if you instead took the vestigial arm discovery and put a weapon in that arm's hand, on your turn you can make
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your right hand,
* a weapon attack with your right hand and one with your vestigial arm, or
* a weapon attack with your left hand and one with your vestigial arm,
At no time can you make a left hand weapon attack, a right hand weapon attack, and a vestigial hand weapon attack on the same turn because the vestigial arm discovery says it "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round."
The exact same restrictions would apply if your race had claws or you had some other ability to add claws to your limbs: the text of both discoveries
... Currently I am in complete agreement with you with that interpretation.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Sūmokichien wrote: Im not sure I can agree with that statement based on the FAQ, as well as knowing the Titan Mauler archetype exists with Jotungrip. While using Jötungrip, the weapon "is treated as one-handed when determining the effect of Power Attack, Strength bonus to damage, and the like." This means that you also treat it as one-handed for TWF and hands involved, and your off-hand (both real and methaphorical) is still free.
Yes, that FAQ is weird and not really clear because it doesn't explain itself, but it's still there.
Joey Cote wrote: I disagree because armor spikes say, (...) You can also make a regular melee attack (or off-hand attack) with the spikes, and they count as a light weapon in this case (...)
Which indicates if you use them to strike, you need hand free to do so. As if you are doing a forearm bash. No, you don't use your hand, but you need an limb free to strike with. And in Pathfinder we strike with hands (excluding natural attacks and unarmed attacks, which armor spikes are not).
Objectively wrong. Boot blade says "You can use a blade boot as an off-hand weapon.", which proves beyond any doubt that you can make an off-hand attack without any physical hand involved. There is nothign in the armor spike description that says you need a free hand.
Joey Cote wrote: Swinging two two handed weapons isn't any additional attacks Not for the number of attack rolls, but for the "hands of effort" thing, it is.
Basically, you have two units of attack per round, each hand involved in an attack spends one unit. You can use them for two individual attacks (TWF), or combine them for one two-handed attack. Vestigial Arm never grants additional units of attack. You might recognise the system from how you can combine your standard action and move action into a full round action.
Normally, you can't TWF a two-handed and a one-handed weapon. With vestigial arm, you can't either, because doign so would be an additional attakc compared to the normal state.
Joey Cote wrote: I don't agree with your interpretation. Swinging two two handed weapons isn't any additional attacks, which is all that FAQ talks about. It is giving potentially more powerful attacks, but not more. In the spirit of the FAQ, not making the alchemist more powerful in melee, that might be true. But just using the vestigial limb to hold a light weapon, and using a two handed weapon in your primary hands, would also make the alchemist more effective in melee, and that seems to be allowed. Even using a two handed weapon and a shield would also make the alchemist more effective, and it seems pretty unlikely that FAQ was intended to prevent that. Feel free to disagree with my interpretation, just show the support for yours. Now show me how you can twf with two two-handed weapons prior to the vestigial arm discoveries as a human.
If you can't twf with them prior to the discovery, then you are gaining more attacks and therefore cannot twf per vestigial arm's clause.
Wielding shields in the hand has always been allowed, it's making attacks that's sometimes disallowed.
Joey Cote wrote: Objectively wrong. Boot blade says "You can use a blade boot as an off-hand weapon.", which proves beyond any doubt that you can make an off-hand attack without any physical hand involved. There is nothign in the armor spike description that says you need a free hand.
Armor spikes also says "(You can’t also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.)" And by "free hand" I mean you had a hand that was not used to attack that round or was using a shield. And the rules for the to boot knife are a classic example of specific rule overriding a general.
Joey Cote wrote: Swinging two two handed weapons isn't any additional attacks Not for the number of attack rolls, but for the "hands of effort" thing, it is.
Basically, you have two units of attack per round, each hand involved in an attack spends one unit. You can use them for two individual attacks (TWF), or combine them for one two-handed attack. Vestigial Arm never grants additional units of attack. You might recognise the system from how you can combine your standard action and move action into a full round action.
Normally, you can't TWF a two-handed and a one-handed weapon. With vestigial... Where does it talk anything about "hands of effort" in the FAQ. All it talks about is not giving additional attacks. It's extremely specific in how it works, both in combination of a tentacle and the extra arm. But I am not going to argue this any more.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Quote: Where does it talk anything about "hands of effort" in the FAQ. It doesn't. That's why it's called an "unwritten rule".
Believe me, we understand how you feel. A bunch of us argued these very same things almost a decade ago, back when Sean K. Reynolds was still Paizo's biggest rock star and Mark Moreland was fending off armor spikes questions, back when FAQ requests were being marked "answered in the FAQ" because Paizo didn't know how to computer good so things were only getting resolved via forum posts. Every single time a designer has added to the conversation, it's been "PCs get two metaphorical hands of effort, vestigial arms/armor spikes/bladed boots aren't supposed to give you any sort of offensive advantage in attack economy, period". They could have come up with a way to present this definitively and unambiguously, but Paizo's rules committee is famously hesitant to issue definitive rulings on stuff like this, so here we are.
With enough forum research, it quickly becomes obvious what Paizo intended to be possible with Vestigial Arm. Still, every so often, another intrepid player picks up Ultimate Magic skims through d20pfsrd.com and thinks they've struck Machamp-level gold, and we start yet another Vestigial Arm thread. And without the context of the original several thousand posts on the subject, they make all the same "but it's the same number of attacks!" arguments and get just as indignant when veterans of the Vestigial Arm Wars complain about our old wounds aching again.
Bottom line:
* If you're playing in PFS, let it go, man, it's gone.
* If you're playing at your own table, play it however you want--if everybody at the table is having fun, it's no more or less "right" than how anybody else is playing.
---
As an aside:
Quote: You might recognise the system from how you can combine your standard action and move action into a full round action. Technically this is not quite right. You can take either a full-round action or both a standard action and a move action during a normal turn, but that doesn't mean a full-round action equals a standard action plus a move action. The distinction rarely matters, but if you somehow end up with an extra move and an extra standard in the same turn, you still can't make two full-round actions. Pathfinder math is weird.
Great summary Blaphers. One thing you did miss though is that with iterative attacks, you can 'change grip' during your turn to have one attack with the 2 handed weapon and then one with the blade boot. But at the end of your turn you must choose your final grip, which affects what weapons you threaten with for AOOs. You cannot simultaneously threaten with the longspear and blade boot as that is 3 hands of effort but can use both during your turn. Also a monk and brawler specifically can threaten with unarmed attacks with their hands full.
Joey Cote wrote: And the rules for the to boot knife are a classic example of specific rule overriding a general. Irrelevant, your statement of "in Pathfinder we strike with hands (excluding natural attacks and unarmed attacks, which armor spikes are not)." is proven false by the Blade Boot.
Joey Cote wrote: Where does it talk anything about "hands of effort" in the FAQ. All it talks about is not giving additional attacks. It's extremely specific in how it works, both in combination of a tentacle and the extra arm. There's a reason I previously wrote "the FAQ is generally descriped as" - exactly because it's not an official term. It's the underlying concept of both FAQs, and while while neither FAQ spells it out explicitly, it's existence is mandatory for having the FAQs (especially the Armor Spikes one) make sense.
Hugo Rune wrote: One thing you did miss though is that with iterative attacks, you can 'change grip' during your turn to have one attack with the 2 handed weapon and then one with the blade boot. RAW, no, Blade Boot can only make off-hand attacks. Otherwise, yes, the FAQs in question only apply to off-hand attacks, and even if you use multiple weapons, your regular iterative attacks plus those mady via Haste et al. aren't off-hand attacks.
Which alse means that you can indeed use two vestigaial arms to wield two two-handed weapons and make attacks with both of them in the same round, just not via the TWF rules but by spending iterative or other bonus attacks. Which isn't what the OP asked for, and thus not helpful.
More relevant, this makes another statement by Hugo Rune false:
Hugo Rune wrote: Armor spikes also says "(You can’t also make an attack with armor spikes if you have already made an attack with another off-hand weapon, and vice versa.)" And by "free hand" I mean you had a hand that was not used to attack that round or was using a shield. A 6th level Fighter can make their full BAB attack with a greatsword and their iterative attack with Armor Spikes (or vice versa), no problem. With Haste, the Fighter could make the full BAB attack with the greatsword, remove the hand from it (a free action), make the iterative attack with a Spiked Gauntlet, and then make the Haste attack with Armor Spikes.
It's just that the second you make an attack with a weapon wielded in two hands, you're prohibited from making off-hand attack for that round (and vice versa).
Thanks for the correction on the blade boot, not sure I wrote the armour spikes bit you quoted though. I agree with your summary
Ah, sorry, I mixed up the names. Yes, the 4th quote in my last post is by Joey Cote, and the line is supposed to say "More relevant, this makes another statement by Joey Cote false".
Recent threads in Rules Questions
|
