Hello, my group is starting a Strange Aeons campaign soon and I thought it would be fun to play a "freaky" character.
So far, I've thought of doing a 2 level dip in Alchemist for an extra arm ;P
Are there any other classes I should look into?
opps, doubled post, deleting...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.
oohhhh, this is great! Might do this. :)
it stacks with venomblade.
-nagaji only. ether be a nagaji or human\half-elf\half-orc with racial heritage (nagaji).
focus on two weapon fighting and on the 'spit venom' tree chain (5 feats in it) getting the aoe+tanglefoot+acid (the blind, and bleed later on, are nice but these have a save) is super effective as you can target an area with an enemy who get hit with everything when he start his turn in that area (which is kinda unavoidable unless he ready to move away once you spit).
unprepared enemies will get stuck and ether need to range you or waste their turn getting unstuck. which when you can spit as move or swift action is kind of a big deal. you can attack while they need to manage.
besides, a four-armed fighter spitting sticky-blinding acid at his enemies is as freaky as one can get...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
For this build take any outsider(native) race you like. Go with Mutated Defender Vigilante with a two level dip in Alchemist of whatever archetype grabs ur fancy. Use up ur 1 discovery and 2 feats to get 2 vestigial arms and a tentacle. Use ur first vigilante talent to take Malleable Flesh. This will let you take on any aspects or form you chose from any outsider as disguise self works only with creatures of the same Type as you. Use ur next four talents to replace ur hands with more tentacles. Throw on any other evolutions u like after that.
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.oohhhh, this is great! Might do this. :)
Hmmm, I just realized this will incur a lot of penalties.
Need to increase those to hit bonuses somehow... :(
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.
From what I can tell, this isn't legal. The mutation warrior only gets a single mutagen discovery, so tops out at 3 arms.
I’m pretty sure Paizo has put the ban hammer to two weapon fighting with 2-handed weapons at least as far as gaining the extra damage from using it in two hands anyways(Titan Mauler Barbarian can dual-wield 2-handed weapons but the only count as 1-handed for bonus damage I believe) There is an FAQ about it regarding armor spikes “ Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon?
No.
Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks.” but I believe there is also some blog posts or something that negates doing this with 4 arms too but my search-fu is insufficient to find the relevant info right now. I would definitely check up on this if I were u before bringing it up with ur GM.
Four normal arms probably work*, but Vestigial Arms doesn't. The Armor Spike FAQ says that you can't TWF with a two-handed weapon plus another weapon (for a two-handed creature), and thus TWFing with a two-anded weapon and another weapon via Vestigial Arm would grant you +1 attacks over what you can do without the discovery, and the rules therein don't allow that.
*) Under the assumption that they actually have more than one "off-hand" for rule purposes, as e.g. the Kasatha description implies. The rules aren't exactly clear and consistent on that, though.
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.From what I can tell, this isn't legal. The mutation warrior only gets a single mutagen discovery, so tops out at 3 arms.
the arm is not a mutagen discovery
Four normal arms probably work*, but Vestigial Arms doesn't. The Armor Spike FAQ says that you can't TWF with a two-handed weapon plus another weapon (for a two-handed creature), and thus TWFing with a two-anded weapon and another weapon via Vestigial Arm would grant you +1 attacks over what you can do without the discovery, and the rules therein don't allow that.
*) Under the assumption that they actually have more than one "off-hand" for rule purposes, as e.g. the Kasatha description implies. The rules aren't exactly clear and consistent on that, though.
that FAQ was talking about trying to use the same arm that held the two handed weapon then use it for the armor spike on it as well. which will lead to using the same arm for two different weapons at the same round.
my idea is using the extra arm to be able to hold the greatsword. you do not get more attacks then you normally would if you held a long sword in each and each hand hold and operate no more then one weapon at a time.
that FAQ was talking about trying to use the same arm that held the two handed weapon then use it for the armor spike on it as well. which will lead to using the same arm for two different weapons at the same round.
Armor spikes don't use an arm. The FAQ has nothing to do with actual body parts. If you need proof, the blade boot undubiously is seperate from any arm, and yet uses the term "off-hand".
my idea is using the extra arm to be able to hold the greatsword. you do not get more attacks then you normally would if you held a long sword in each and each hand hold and operate no more then one weapon at a time.
No, your idea is to use the extra arm to attack with the greatsword (alongside a regular arm). And what the character could do with a different weapon is irrelevant, they're using a greatsword and thus the discovery looks at how many attacks you get with that without the extra arm.
The character attacking without the vestigial arm gets one attack (before BAB, Haste etc.). This means the character with vestigial arm also only gets one attack. Getting a second attack would be more than the situation without the discovery, and that's forbidden.
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.From what I can tell, this isn't legal. The mutation warrior only gets a single mutagen discovery, so tops out at 3 arms.the arm is not a mutagen discovery
Can you walk me through the build then
What I am seeing is you take fighter as a class, mutation warrior as an archetype, to get a vestigial arm you use a mutagen discovery which you get one (and only one) at 7th level.
Or are you using a different build?
|
mutant fighter taking the arm discovery twice and going two-weapon fighting with 2 greatswords.From what I can tell, this isn't legal. The mutation warrior only gets a single mutagen discovery, so tops out at 3 arms.the arm is not a mutagen discovery
Can you walk me through the build then
What I am seeing is you take fighter as a class, mutation warrior as an archetype, to get a vestigial arm you use a mutagen discovery which you get one (and only one) at 7th level.
Or are you using a different build?
Where are you seeing that they only ever get a single discovery?
Mutagen Discovery (Su)At 7th level and every 4 levels thereafter, the mutation warrior can choose one of the following alchemist discoveries to augment his abilities: feral mutagen, grand mutagen, greater mutagen, infuse mutagen, nauseating flesh, preserve organs, rag doll mutagen, spontaneous healing, tentacle, vestigial arm, wings. The mutagen warrior uses his fighter level as his effective alchemist level for the purpose of these discoveries.
This ability replaces armor training 2, 3, 4, and armor mastery.
1 extra arm at 7th, 2nd extra arm at 11th (maybe earlier if they can take an extra discovery feat)
that FAQ was talking about trying to use the same arm that held the two handed weapon then use it for the armor spike on it as well. which will lead to using the same arm for two different weapons at the same round.Armor spikes don't use an arm. The FAQ has nothing to do with actual body parts. If you need proof, the blade boot undubiously is seperate from any arm, and yet uses the term "off-hand".
my idea is using the extra arm to be able to hold the greatsword. you do not get more attacks then you normally would if you held a long sword in each and each hand hold and operate no more then one weapon at a time.No, your idea is to use the extra arm to attack with the greatsword (alongside a regular arm). And what the character could do with a different weapon is irrelevant, they're using a greatsword and thus the discovery looks at how many attacks you get with that without the extra arm.
The character attacking without the vestigial arm gets one attack (before BAB, Haste etc.). This means the character with vestigial arm also only gets one attack. Getting a second attack would be more than the situation without the discovery, and that's forbidden.
a character using two weapon fighting attack twice in a round. once with the weapon he hold in his main hand once with the weapon he hold in his off hand . only difference here is that he uses the extra arm to wield a bigger weapon. he doesn't get more attacks then anyone else using two weapon fighting. and the arm helping him wield more is exactly what it is for.
two handed weapon need two hands to wield them, two handed attack with a greatsword or two handed attack with a longsword make the same amount of attacks. only difference is one can't normally wield a two handed greatsword for his size with only one hand. the extra arm allow it to be so. it doesn't add any more attacks then someone else who uses two weapon fighting would get. it just allow to wield a bigger weapon.
replace holding two greatswords with holding two longswords -with two hands on each sword, and tell me why that should not be working?
a character using two weapon fighting attack twice in a round.
You are once again talking about a different situation that is of no relevance, because the discovery checks for the character and situation in question.
The important part here is the specific limitaiton of the discovery. A race with three natural arms could, e.g. under the effects of Lesser Beast Totem, TWF with two longswords and make a claw attack. A human with the Vestigial Arm discovery (and the Rage Power) cannot do that, as emphasised by this FAQ, even though the character could TWF with unarmed strikes, boot blades, or armor spikes, and make claw attacks! The character could TWF with unarmed strikes using kicks, and add two claw attacks, for four total attack, and yet as per the FAQ they cannot attakc with two swords and a claw, even though that's only three attacks. This means the "attack count" that the discovery checks must be specifically for the weapons actually used, meaning it checks "could you make the exact attack routine with those weapons without Vestigial Arm". And for that, when it comes to two-handing weapons in a TWF; the answer is "no".
two handed weapon need two hands to wield them, two handed attack with a greatsword or two handed attack with a longsword make the same amount of attacks.
Yes, you can't two-hand a longsword and TWF with it, either, be it with or without Vestigial Arm. It's not the two-handedness of the attack that's the issue, but whether you use one or two hands to attack with it.
That last sentence is supposed to say "It's not the two-handedness of the weapon that's the issue, but whether you use one or two hands to attack with it."
" they cannot attack with two swords and a claw" - again that is because you can't use the SAME hand for both a weapon and claw attack at once!.
look it's simple, if you use your hand to attack with a weapon they won't let you use it for another weapon\natural attack (unless were talking dropping and using lower bab extra attack) because that hand is set up for one thing. that is the whole point of the faq and why an attack with a different limb does work.
a free limb can still attack, see the boot and legs you listed. this is to prevent wielding \ attacking with the SAME limb for two different attacks at once.
here you do not have that. you are using different limbs to use different weapons and all the while you need to make sure you attack the SAME amount of times as per anyone using two weapon fighting and no more because of the discovery limits.
so limit one (from the faq) - using the same limb for more then one kind of weapon\natural weapon doesn't exist.
limit two (from the discovery) - attacking more then the amount you can also doesn't exist.
this works for the same reason the extra boot \leg attacks in the faq work. it uses a different limb to 'wield' the attack.
" they cannot attack with two swords and a claw" - again that is because you can't use the SAME hand for both a weapon and claw attack at once!.
What? No! The topic is a creature with three hands that wants to make three attacks, the only thing that prevents them from attacking with two swords and a claw is the "the arm does not give the alchemist any extra attacks" line.
Did you even click the link? It seems like you're talking about a completely different topic than what's addressed in the FAQ I linked!
well yes. that one is not allowed because he get an attack more then a two handed person would get. which the discovery is not allowing.
and if the discovery didn't say that he can't have extra attacks for the extra limbs he would have been ok with it.
now with this build he doesn't get an extra attack more then someone who wield two weapons. so that limitation is off. and the only thing that might have held him is the limit of using the same hand for more then one thing which again is not the issue here.
3 arms using two weapons and a claw is weapon\weapon\claw = 3 attacks. since if he didn't had the extra limb he could have only done two attacks he can't take all 3
but 4 arms doing greatsword\greatsword is not more attacks then 2 arms doing longsword\longsword.
the discovery and the FAQ only limit the number of attacks!
it care not what you wield with the hands. look at the faq he can be wielding 3 weapons, one in each hand. as long as he only attack with two it is fine with the discovery.
the discovery and the FAQ only limit the number of attacks!
This is a gross oversimplification. As I have already shown in my third to last post, the FAQ only makes sense if it doesn't simply check the total number of possible attacks, but rather checks how you actually attack.
The FAQ is only correct if it checks the exact situation with an without the extra arm. The situation without the arm (that you attack with a weapon in two hands) is that you only get one attack, and thus the situation with the arm is that you only get one attack.
it care not what you wield with the hands. look at the faq he can be wielding 3 weapons, one in each hand. as long as he only attack with two it is fine with the discovery.
It does care whether or not you attack with the hands. Are you claiming when you attack with a greatsword that you aren't using both hands for the attack? The Discovery, the Vestigial Arm FAQ, and the Armor Spikes FAQ all care about what happens when you use a hand to attack with it, holding a weapon without attacking with it is a completely irrelevant situation.
" A human with the Vestigial Arm discovery (and the Rage Power) cannot do that, as emphasised by this FAQ, even though the character could TWF with unarmed strikes, boot blades, or armor spikes, and make claw attacks! "
no that is plain wrong!
one can not use stuff like armor spikes and the claw of the same hand at the same time (did not look at boot blades or stuff like monks unarmed attack that is a different limb altogether and another mess by itself) it's plain from this FAQ
that hand that is used for armor pikes is used. and can not be used for other stuff like a claw attack so in the faq about the discovery the fact he can't take 3 attacks is because without the extra hand he couldn't make 2 weapons attack and a claw attack at once with the same limbs.
all them builds using two weapon fighting and claws and such pick a different limb to use each.
im not saying im not using both hands, im saying i do but the discovery doesn't care as long as i do not get MORE attacks. if you wiled a shield in one of the hands you gain the shield bonus even if the other two attack. same here. the USE of the extra hand is it's purpose if you negate even that you take out the meaning of having an extra hand.
the discovery say, you get an extra hand to use as long as you do not attack more then you could without said hand. you are adding unwritten intent into this that the limb uses per turn is also limited to be like before but that clearly isn't what is written.
notice that the FAQ is separated into two, the first (with the natural attack talk) is about the tentacle discovery (which work a bit like the extra arm in the number of attacks) and the 2nd about the extra arm. in that the FAQ example is about 3 weapons:
"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."
this make it simple to see. since you can not use the same limb for both claw attack and weapon attack when you add an arm you get only that amount of attacks.
saying that since without the extra arm you couldn't both use a two handed weapon and something else (since you lack the arms) so with it you still can't is like saying you also couldn't hold 3 weapons, but that is just wrong by the sheer example used in the faq.
no that is plain wrong!
one can not use stuff like armor spikes and the claw of the same hand at the same time (did not look at boot blades or stuff like monks unarmed attack that is a different limb altogether and another mess by itself) it's plain from this FAQ
Do you lack the ability to read, or do you just refuse to read my posts? I honestly can't to phrase this any more polite at this point.
I have already proven that the FAQ doesn't talk about physical limbs when it says "off-hand". Armor spikes do not use your arm! And with that, literally your entire post is based on a faulty premise.
did not look at boot blades
So you did not look at the evidence that destroys your entire argument. With this admission, you have disqualified yourself from the discussion. We're done here. I have presented hard evidence, while you do the equivalent of sticking your fingers in your ears and saying "la la la I can't hear you".
you are in fact wrong.
armor spikes ,when used to attack, do use a hand. it is in the faq i linked. let me bring you the words you seem to miss:
" Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon?
No.
Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks.
oh wow! armor spikes work like gauntlet when used to attack and use your hand? what was it i kept telling you?!?
bladed boots, as i mentioned, are on an different limb and thous should have nothing to do with counting how many weapons one use the same limb to attack with. which is why i ignored it. (but see the balance issue below)
also your point is , the faq only listed two attacks and not three even though the person in the example could have gone for more attacks if he wore bladed boots is not realy a proof as:
A. they are such an obscure weapon from a side book that i don't think not mentioning them is a proof of any intent.
and
B. since they also use the off hand rules (i guess for balance reasons) they are going straight into the same category of other off hands weapons that can't be used when the hands are full. (like the mentioned armor spikes and armed gauntlet)
also you did notice that part where the reason why they can't be used is that the hands are used for something else. meaning if they waren't it is ok, yes?
zza ni, please. You once said to me that you "tend to ether skip important words", so please, stop this behaviour of telling me I was wrong when you didn't properly read and understand my posts and the involved rules. When I'm wrong about soemthing, I will admit it, as you have seen in the past. But nothing you have said in this thread has shown even the tiniest bit of my arguments to be faulty.
If you don't understand something, ask - I'm really friendly if you don't go around breaking the basic etiquette of discussion. That means making sound arguments, accepting evidence, and not commiting fallacies.
Assuming ignorance rather than malice or sheer stubbornness, I'll make one more attempt at explaining things.
• That armor spikes mention "off-hand" is no proof of a physical hand being used when when blade boots do so, too.
• Armor spikes can be put on armor that doesn't cover the arms (like a breastplate that's "Covering only the torso"), this means they cannot possibly use an arm to attack.
• That the blade boot is obscure is irrelevant, because unarmed strikes with non-arm body parts are in the CRB and have the exact same issue.
• The "same limb" rule is not relevant for anything in this thread. Absolutely nothing I said, or that the FAQs (or the discovery description) said is because of that rule.
My argument that "The character could TWF with unarmed strikes using kicks, and add two claw attacks, for four total attack, and yet as per the FAQ they cannot attack with two swords and a claw, even though that's only three attacks." is sound. You can make a human character that attacks with 2 claws and e.g. to unarmed strikes (without high BAB etc.). That same character can still not use three hands including the one from Vestigial Arm in the same turn to attack, as the FAQ indisputably says. The only explanation for this behaviour is that the discovery checks your exact attacks with two hands, and only allows for an attack with the third hand if the character without the hand could make another attack with a hand. And the armor spike FAQ prevents the character in question from doing that.
your proof mix stuff up:
"The important part here is the specific limitaiton of the discovery. A race with three natural arms could, e.g. under the effects of Lesser Beast Totem, TWF with two longswords and make a claw attack. A human with the Vestigial Arm discovery (and the Rage Power) cannot do that, as emphasised by this FAQ, even though the character could TWF with unarmed strikes, boot blades, or armor spikes, and make claw attacks! The character could TWF with unarmed strikes using kicks, and add two claw attacks, for four total attack, and yet as per the FAQ they cannot attack with two swords and a claw, even though that's only three attacks."
that bolded part about two weapons and a claw (as i mentioned above) was in the first part of the faq that DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THE EXTRA ARM DICOVERY AT ALL. it also didn't say anything about 2 attacks and a claw but 2 attacks and a tentacle, because it first talked about the tentacle discovery, which like the extra arm is limiting the amount of attacks the alchemist make.
-note that the discovery faq said "you can normally make two attacks per round (one with each weapon). " as in - it didn't go into every way you can add attacks to this and was only talking about a normal guy only fighting with two hands.
asking 'why didn't they count other ways he could have added attacks' is mute as the same way can be done to both side of the equation.
'(man with 2 arms and a tentacle)#attacks = (man with two arms)#attacks.'
adding '+1 attack with a kick' for example won't change the fact both side will increase in the same amount.
'(man with 2 arms and a tentacle that also kick)#attacks = (man with two arms that also kick)#attacks.'
so there was no reason to list all the ways one can add it anymore then asking 'but he could have been hasted!'
"The only explanation for this behaviour" is simply that there is no need to list all the ways one can add attacks as it will be added to both sides of this equation and only be a redundantly long list.
The faq talked about a 'normal' attacking person and all your examples were not normal additions. asking why they weren't talked about in the faq and basing a whole theory around it can be just answered with
-'it ain't normal!' (and also redundant, as explained)
now into specific points (which may or may not mean anything by now)
---------------
• That armor spikes mention "off-hand" is no proof of a physical hand being used when when blade boots do so, too.
• Armor spikes can be put on armor that doesn't cover the arms (like a breastplate that's "Covering only the torso"), this means they cannot possibly use an arm to attack.
let's face the main thing here. armor spikes and the boots were set of as 'off hand'.
-and yes they use a hand as per the faq "as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks."
as i said it was most likely for balance, to prevent some1 from just buying two blade boots and be able to multi-weapon with the equivalent of gaining talons. it physically shouldn't use a hand. but the devs forced it to do so (you might say they force you to use a hand to guide it or whatever). it was set that way on purpose.
and since there are rules to using your off hand in two weapon fighting and there is a faq calling out that using an off hand prevent one from using a two handed weapon since "off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks" that was enough to balance that.
-it shouldn't take a hand. but the rules were made so it does. stinks but that's just that.
-
and again, this doesn't invalidate the first point which was:
'they didn't need to list all the ways you can add and attacks as it will add to both cases and just make the list longer and baffle people. they were talking about a normal guy who only uses weapons in each hand'
-------------------------
• That the blade boot is obscure is irrelevant, because unarmed strikes with non-arm body parts are in the CRB and have the exact same issue.
unarmed strike using other body types would be the same ether way so there really isn't any reason to add them to that faq.
think about it as an equation:
'2 armed man make attacks = 3 armed man make attacks'
adding unarmed strike won't change it, it will be:
'2 armed man that add a kick makes attacks = 3 armed man that add a kick make attacks'
same as if the character had a gore attack. that is an extra attack that can be added without changing the result of needing the attacks made with the hands to be the same amount. a character with two weapons that add a kick will still attack the same in the faq with just adding the kick after it resolve the two attacks he get from his hands. the faq didn't need to go around counting ALL the ways you can add attacks to one's full round action. only those that he gain from using his hands. as the whole point of it is to show how adding the extra hand didn't give him more attacks.
-------------------------
• The "same limb" rule is not relevant for anything in this thread. Absolutely nothing I said, or that the FAQs (or the discovery description) said is because of that rule.
the whole point of counting how many attacks he can make with his hands in the faq is built on the same limb rule. without it he could have said i can use, say a claw and two weapon fight with two hands, so that's three etc.
Also it came up from the armor spikes\boots you put as an example and i had to point out that they can not be used because they were forced ruled to use a hand (see above).
------------------------------------
point is. the discovery faq is very straight out.
it give an example of a man using a weapon in each hand count that as two attacks he can make (and didn't go into all the other ways he can add attacks. as if there are, then it can be done to both 2 and 3 armed men after all and the amount increase at the same level) and explain that now that the man has 3 arms while he can hold more weapons he can only make the same amount of attacks.
my point was that extra arm allow holding more weapons (3 one handed ones) is the same as holding more weapons (two weapons, one of which takes two hands). you end up holding one more weapon. and the amount of attacks is still the same.
|
|
I'm of the mind "if you have 2 swords and enough hands to hold them, you can twf"
You'll take all the applicable penalties, and pretty sure you only get str on main hand and half str on off hand, but you can swing 2 great swords with 4 arms
You could also normally fight with 2 longsword, one in each hand. If for some reason you wanna get 2 vestigial arms and put 2 hands on both, you can do that too
It took me some time to find it but I found the thread I was thinking of in my earlier post that I remembered invalidating two weapon fighting with a weapon in two hands. This is the thread that prompted the armor spikes FAQ and Sean K Reynolds weighs in to clarify the FAQ.
https://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pxa3&page=11?Is-this-TWF-combination-lega l#547
(Sorry I can’t get links to work from my phone you’ll have to copy/paste the link)
This is a long thread and the developers weigh in on the issue on pages 10 and 11.
For those who don’t want to check out the thread here are a few relevant quotes from Sean K Reynolds.
“By putting two hands on your 1H or 2H weapon, you're giving up any extra attacks you'd get if you were using a 1H weapon and using two-weapon fighting. Doesn't matter if you're trying to make punches, kicks, headbutts, knees, or whatever, the game is giving you a choice:
• fully commit to one attack with two hands for extra damage, or
• make an extra attack with TWF at the cost of not getting the extra damage from using two hands on one attack.”
“ What was the reason for the 'no' to armour spikes?
Because the game has an unwritten rule which essentially states the following:
• A 1st-level standard-race PC can either make one melee attack without TWF or you can make two melee attacks with TWF.
• The most damage you can do without TWF is using a 1H or 2H weapon in two hands for x1.5 Str damage, and the most damage you can do with TWF is x1 in the main hand and x.5 in the off-hand (for a total of x1.5 Str added to your weapons), so optimally you're getting no more that x1.5 Str no matter which attack mode you choose.
• While the game doesn't explicitly limit your attacks to "hands," that's the basic assumption, and you shouldn't be able to pile on additional attacks per round just because you can think up additional or alternative body parts to attack with.
• Because if one character uses 2H weapon and is NOT allowed to make an additional attack with armor spikes or a metal gauntlet because his hands are occupied by his 2H weapon, and a different character uses a 2H weapon and IS allowed to make an additional attack with a metal boot because he's not using his hand, that second character is gaining a game mechanics advantage simply by changing the flavorful description of his extra attack's origin from, and that is not good game design.”
“As I suspected this invalidates a lot of "classic" builds and quite a few guides will have to be updated.
Well, it might invalidate it for a few levels, but once your character gets an iterative attack, the "attack once with a 2H weapon, attack again with my iterative attack using armor spikes or whatever" technique is perfectly valid under the rules.
Sangalor wrote:
What happens if you have double slice and thus get 2xStr damage per round?
Double Slice has a mechanical cost (you have to pay a feat for it), so that's not just flavor giving you better mechanical results.
Sangalor wrote:
I guess this also means not only armor spikes but also off-hand attacks with unarmed strikes (knee-kicks etc.) in combination with a 2H weapon are out, because that would net you 2xStr damage (1.5xStr damage from main-hand, 0.5xStr damage from off-hand) or even 2.5xStr damage in the case of a monk two-handing a temple sword and attacking with unarmed strike in a flurry (which is like TWF and full Str bonus applies)?
Yes (barring monks, who break the rules in their own ways).”
I hope this helps put this issue to bed(again).
Sorry the formatting is bad I really advise checking out the thread these quotes are from. In case I messed up the thread address here is the title of the thread.
Is this TWF combination legal?
thx Trokarr.
I'v read that thread before, it is why i said the developers forced the boot and armor spike to work with an off hand even though it physically stinks
-for balance reasons.
it help explain my minor point of why the boot and armor spikes (and unarmed attack not by a monk) shouldn't even be considered.
Even without it the overall statement of 'they talked about a normal guy only using weapons in his hands, without looking into other ways to add more attacks that would end the same way anyway' still stands.
-saying i can also add x attack to my full attack would be true to both 2-armed man and 3-armed\tentacled man after all.
So trying draw a conclusion from the lack of such is mute ether way.
---------------
'Is this TWF combination legal?'
i think it is.
yes the 4 armed two-greatsword guy is outputting damage compared to a normal balanced person, but like the above example from the thread of 'double slice', he paid for it with two discoveries. (and probably also the feats that needed to be taken to offset the penalties)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Back to the original post of suggesting fun and "freaky" builds:
I once made and unchained barbarian/occultist (Locatha) wo was once a spiritual leader of his tribe until he was hit on the head by a falling anchor and lost most of his memories.
He took the Hookfighter feat to fight with the anchor as an oversized Grappling Hook.
It was pretty funny having him round around swinging that anchor :D
To Zza Ni
If you want to use TWF and wield 2 weapons in four hands (greatswords, longswords, whatever) and ONLY get the combined 1.5x strength bonus intended then I don’t see any significant issue with it, it’s mostly aesthetics at that point. If you are arguing that you should get 1.5x strength for your main hand and 0.5x strength (or more) with your off hand attack then you are trying to gain a mechanical benefit beyond the intent of fighting with two weapons and that is exactly what the armor spikes FAQ was trying to address and what Sean K Reynolds clearly stated is against the intent of the rules.
what? no i didn't say that.
all i said that if it seem unbalanced that he wield two greatsowrds (compared to a normal man who can only wield one) you need to remember that this ability was paid for and it resemble what they wrote in the thread about how double slice seemed unbalanced compared to a guy who uses two weapons but only get half str for off hand. and the answer was
-it was paid for (with the feat).
the thread was referring to getting a benefit from picking an item whose flavor was different from a normal one. but not paying for it with a feat. so you had an imbalance where two guys with the same feats would get different benefit by what each pick as weapons.
if this 4 armed man doesn't get something like double slice he would get full str only for one hand and all other hands are off hands (like a kasata) which get half str.
so main hand and off hand greatsword will get 1.5 str and two off hand get 0.5+0.5 = 1.0 str for damage. and again it's NOT out of balance since unlike a normal person it was paid for (with the discoveries).
the armor spikes and boots had to be fixed since they created an imbalance without paying for it.
|
|
if this 4 armed man doesn't get something like double slice he would get full str only for one hand and all other hands are off hands (like a kasata) which get half str.
so main hand and off hand greatsword will get 1.5 str and two off hand get 0.5+0.5 = 1.0 str for damage. and again it's NOT out of balance since unlike a normal person it was paid for (with the discoveries).
This is where I disagree.
Double slice wold let them have 1x str mod on offhand weapon, in addition to 1x on main weapon.
You're paying for bigger weapon dice with the discoveries, but you don't get .5 str mod per hand. Pretty sure that's not a thing for any 4 armed creature.
You only get .5 str for being in off hand, not per off hand.
So what about a Kasatha who pays no cost in feats or class features for their extra arms? Do they get the bonus damage that you think is balanced or are they denied it because they are born with their extra arms? It doesn’t make any logical sense that a race born with extra arms can make less use out of them than a character that acquired a pair of purposefully limited vestigial arms that they gained later in life. On the other hand if a Kasatha does get this extra damage at no cost then that is hardly fair or balanced either.
if this 4 armed man doesn't get something like double slice he would get full str only for one hand and all other hands are off hands (like a kasata) which get half str.
so main hand and off hand greatsword will get 1.5 str and two off hand get 0.5+0.5 = 1.0 str for damage. and again it's NOT out of balance since unlike a normal person it was paid for (with the discoveries).This is where I disagree.
Double slice wold let them have 1x str mod on offhand weapon, in addition to 1x on main weapon.
You're paying for bigger weapon dice with the discoveries, but you don't get .5 str mod per hand. Pretty sure that's not a thing for any 4 armed creature.
You only get .5 str for being in off hand, not per off hand.
the part you quoted was me talking about him WITHOUT double slice. which is why off hand is +0.5 str and main hand is +1.0 str.
so:main-hand + off-hand is 1.5 (1.0+0.5)
and
off-hand + off-hand is 1.0 (0.5+0.5).
------
Kasata has one main hand and 3 off hands. so one at full str and 3 at half.
and using 2 handed weapon then would depend on which hands are used.
and again, all this is WITHOUT talking about what double slice change.
Zza ni you said this “Kasata has one main hand and 3 off hands. so one at full str and 3 at half.
and using 2 handed weapon then would depend on which hands are used.” My response is this: Which hands are used? What does this mean? They only have 4 just like your vestigial arm character so they would use all of them in EXACTLY the same configuration as the vestigial arm character. So I’ll ask the question again. Does the Kasatha that pays no cost in feats or class features for their 4 arms, wielding two 2-handed weapons in the same way as your vestigial arm character deal the same damage? Yes or no?
You also gave this damage calculation “main-hand + off-hand is 1.5 (1.0+0.5)
and
off-hand + off-hand is 1.0 (0.5+0.5).” And you state that this is all without the Double Slice feat. So I ask you: what if your vestigial arm character DOES take the Double Slice feat? Are you saying that they would then deal 1.0x strength damage PER HAND for a total of 4.0x strength while Two Weapon Fighting?
Also if this vestigial arm character takes power attack I assume you would expect that they deal the additional damage for wielding a weapon in two hands with both 2-handed weapons?
To Zza ni
After some thought it occurred to me that you may have thought that I meant the Kasatha in my example was ALSO an alchemist with 2 vestigial arms and then would have 6 arms to choose from. That is not the case. I was asking if a Kasatha with JUST his natural 4 arms would deal the same damage as your character with 4 arms via the vestigial arm discovery.
To Zza ni
After some thought it occurred to me that you may have thought that I meant the Kasatha in my example was ALSO an alchemist with 2 vestigial arms and then would have 6 arms to choose from. That is not the case. I was asking if a Kasatha with JUST his natural 4 arms would deal the same damage as your character with 4 arms via the vestigial arm discovery.
only if he wield two two-handed weapons.
a kasata can wield 4 weapons at once (and also pick the multi weapon fighting feat if he has enough dex). the alchemist has the same str as the kasata in his arms (remember the discovery say he can attack with his added arm instead of a normal arm. it still deal the same damage).the only difference is that the alchemist (or mutant warrior in my case) can not attack with the 4 armes more times each round then a 2 handed person with the same build can. and a kasata can. but if they make the same amount of attacks as the kasata the damage would be the same (as in the kasata limit his number of attacks to match).
in essence the two discoveries bring up the mutant warrior to be close to a kasata (if that kasata would fight with two two-handed weapons). a kasata is a 20 point build race for a reason.
they of course would also match if they limit themselves to two one-weapons and use the extra two hands for other stuff, like carrying a shield and casting spells\holding wands etc.
the only difference is that the alchemist (or mutant warrior in my case) can not attack with the 4 armes more times each round then a 2 handed person with the same build can. and a kasata can.
Absolutely not. There is no rule in the game that allows a kasatha (or any other creature with more than two hands) to make more attacks with manufactured weapons than other characters. The only rule that allows bonus attacks due to the number of manufactured weapons is the "two-weapon fighting" option on pg. 212 of the CRB, and there is no "three-weapon fighting", "four-weapon fighting" or similar rule option. The rule that 3.5 had was removed for Pathfinder.
And becasue it gets brought up every single f@~+ing time: No, the Multiweapon Fighting feat does not change that. It's effect only reduces penalties and doesn't even mention "attack", and the normal section is not rule text becasue no normal section ever is, as is described in the feat rules.
Also, no, stat blocks do not make rules, so don't even bother posing a creature that attacks with four weapons or something.
that bolded part about two weapons and a claw (as i mentioned above) was in the first part of the faq that DIDN'T TALK ABOUT THE EXTRA ARM DICOVERY AT ALL. it also didn't say anything about 2 attacks and a claw but 2 attacks and a tentacle, because it first talked about the tentacle discovery, which like the extra arm is limiting the amount of attacks the alchemist make.
- "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"
Do you not read this? The FAQ does mention claws, and does so in the paragraph about Vestigial Arm. You are objectively and quite frankly obviously wrong.
the 'exact same restrictions' mentioned are "does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round"
and this goes back to the same answer from above. the faq talk about a normal guy who only attack with his hands (they put up weapons. that added part would also include using claws instead of weapons, same shit) it does not talk about other ways to gain more attacks because that would not be a simple guy only attacking with his arms. and that would never end as you can keep adding more non simple way to add attacks. and asking why they didn't mentioned them all is cause they talked only about 'you can normally' do. and going into adding conclusions because the faq writer didn't want to go into every non normal way one can fight is just drawing the wrong conclusions from a very limited example.
- 'i'm talking about a case where 'you can normally only do this"
- oh that mean you can never do a 'rub-dub-dub' since you never mentioned it in what you can do,
- no i was just trying to make it simple by talking about what normaly happen, other not normal stuff might still have their own thing work properly as long as you stick to the rule im trying to let you understand which is the hand 'does not give the alchemist any extra attacks or actions per round' if without the hand you can get the same number of attacks you can also get them with the hand.
i also like how you completely disregarded the thread Trokarr brought which explain very well that the boot\armor spikes and non monk unamred extra attack all fall under off hand. (which again is what prevented using that hand for two weapon fighting), but again that is a side mentioned that is mute considering the whole point of the discovery faq not going into un-needed complicated examples.
basing you conclusion on the fact the faq didn't take into account other ways to get more attacks is off since the faq say very clearly they only taking an example of a normal simple case.
the simple conclusion is , they didn't want to complicate things too much so they picked a simple example (and said so) so they didn't go into every way you can add more attacks and count them all (again you can also bring haste into it as well and high bab etc).
-------------------------------------
as for no1 can make more then two weapon fighting attacks because the core rules for two weapon fighting is set in stone. let me point out something. while it might sound nice and air-tight in raw. it ignore many many many things:
- stat blocks, but you asked not to count them.
- the fact both multi weapon fighting feat and creature like the Kasata talk about off hands in plural.
but you might try and say, yes it has more hands but can only attack with two at once since two weapon fighting rules etc.
to which i get to the final point.
- if one can never attack with more then two weapons (no three weapon fighting, four or more) then what is the purpose of multi-weapon fighting feat? why make a feat that does nothing that two weapon fighting does anyway? and don't tell me 'there are many feats which work like others, it's just to give other similar options'. this feat specifically call out to count as two weapon fighting feat for other feats etc. which mean it HAS to do something else.
by your own account ,what does multi weapon fighting do that is different from two weapon fighting feat, if one can not use it to attack with more then two weapons at once? what is the unique benefit of such feat that the writer had to create it to begin with?