| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've seen some confusion on Discords and Reddit about whether the language was cleared up enough in Player Core to demonstrate what you can and can't do with multiple hands, given the post-playtest note that they were going to make them more capable.
Below I've pulled what I think are all the relevant pieces of text throughout the book. I think the overall strongest conclusion is that active hands only restrict you to actions/using items that explicitly demand that you "wield" them. If it doesn't say "wield" you can use them in inactive hands. This includes climbing, free hands for manuevers, and all of the non-weapon or shield items that say "usage held in 1[2] hand." I did do a ctrl-F for "wield" and verified that every single reference is only to weapons or shields. Nothing says you wield any other form of equipment. See "Wielding Items" below noting that some other items will only require being held to use. That's actually all of them that aren't weapons/shields.
It's very strong for Skitermanders, Kasatha, Barathu, Contemplatives, and anyone else who starts with or can get extra hands with feats. Makes two handing weapons and still being able to do Battle Medicine, grapple/trip/shove, administer spell amps, cast spell gems/chips, hold a comm link for Akashic Download, etc all much easier.
Disagree with my interpretation? Please discuss. I expect any balance issues between ancestries will stop being relevant when Tech Core drops with cyber arm augmentations so that everyone can get in on this.
wield You are wielding a weapon or shield whenever you are holding it in the number of active hands needed to use it effectively. 235
active hands Multi-armed characters can only designate one pair of hands as your active hands. You can only wield items in your active hands. See Switch Hands.
Switch Hands [one-action] (specialty basic action) You designate a pair of limbs as your active hands. You can only have one pair of hands designated as your active hands at a time. 254
You have four arms, which allows you to wield and hold up to four hands’ worth of weapons and equipment. At any time, one pair of hands is designated as your active hands. You can change this designation from one pair of hands to another by taking the Switch Hands action, which is a single action. You can wield items only with your active hands. For more information on playing characters with more than two hands, see page 254.
(Skittermander text is identical except six hands.)
WIELDING ITEMS
Some abilities require you to wield an item, typically a weapon. You’re wielding an item any time you’re holding it in the number of hands needed to use it effectively. When wielding an item, you’re not just carrying it around—you’re ready to use it. Other abilities might require you to be wearing the item, holding it, or simply to have it.
Multi-Armed Characters: Characters that have more than two hands, like kasathas, can hold more items and weapons than typically expected. Performing actions with multiple pairs of arms concurrently is a challenge and can’t be done without intensive training. You must designate a pair of hands as your active hands. You can change this designation from one pair of hands to another by taking the Switch Hands action. Some feats can adjust your skill with multiple hands. You can only attack with weapons wielded in your active hands.
Disagree with my interpretation? Please discuss.
I don't disagree. The 'active hands' rules are all consistent with the restriction being specifically for wielding items, not holding items or using inactive hands for other things that hands are used for.
I can see people questioning the game balance for using combat maneuvers with inactive hands. But the rules don't give that restriction. That is houserule territory under the currently printed rules.
The only thing I would disagree with is this:
I did do a ctrl-F for "wield" and verified that every single reference is only to weapons or shields. Nothing says you wield any other form of equipment.
Not necessarily currently in Starfinder, but for the future.
There are non-weapon, non-shield items in Pathfinder that are listed as being wielded, such as a Wand of Shardstorm. So such things may show up in Starfinder in the future as well.
Yes, I wouldn't be surprised to see future items specify wield (if we get "staves" that aren't actually weapons, for example) or tech/magical artifacts that are powerful but not weapons, wielding would make sense as a requirement. The rules do acknowledge that things other than weapons and shields can have a wielding requirement. Right now, though, nothing else in Player Core does.
Another thing to consider that I only just realized in thinking about this a bit: Importing classes and abilities from Pathfinder.
I expect that GMs are going to have to make judgement calls on things coming from Pathfinder because the Pathfinder expectations are that characters only have two hands and the classes and abilities are written with that expectation in mind.
So does a Thaumaturge need to be holding an implement in an active hand in order to use its abilities? Does a Swashbuckler need to have one of their active hands empty in order to get the increased +2 benefit from Extravagant Parry?
Those are questions that the rules don't currently cover. There aren't any rules saying that these things can't be used with inactive hands, but that also feels like it is because of game expectations and baseline rather than something actually designed to work that way.
If I was to argue against allowing an idle free hand to be used with Extravagant Parry it would be for balance concerns.
A Kasatha Swashbuckler could take Dual-Weapon Warrior archetype to get Double Slice. Then they can make two Strikes at full bonus, then Extravagant Parry with the +2 bonus - which is the same bonus as using Twin Parry, but with the additional benefit of gaining Panache any time an enemy misses.
That is mechanically better than any Pathfinder character can do with only two hands.
* An empty-hand Swashbuckler can make two Strikes and Extravagant Parry for the +2 bonus with Panache, but the second Strike is at second attack MAP.
* A Swashbuckler with Dual-Weapon Warrior can use Double Slice to make the two Strikes with full bonus, but they are either:
** using Extravagant Parry for only a +1 bonus and the opportunity to gain Panache or
** they are using Twin Parry instead to get the +2 bonus but have no opportunity to gain Panache for it.
-----
I would hope that there's guidance about this in the GM Core, but..to be honest, I think the more we expect a lot of very intense and detailed guidance about issues like this, the more we're going to be disappointed. I think it's very likely that the GM Core entry will be more "loose guidelines how to have fun" than "detailed list of different assumptions and how to translate them".
I am expecting the same. More loose guidelines rather than hard and fast detailed rules for every Pathfinder mechanic that exists.
I can't help but notice the remastered Aldori Duelist's Aldori Parry ability specifically says it only grants the greater bonus to AC if your other hand or hands are free, which would seem to indicate that having extra arms is not intended to circumvent requirements for Pathfinder mechanics like that (Which is very relevant with Skittermanders and a handful of Kasatha characters in PFS now)
I think it's actually kind of awesome that this requires a lot of very specific combinations of feats, ancestry, and class options to come together and make for an evocative fantasy. This is not some generically powerful must-take combination, which makes it feel like it's GOOD that it's useful.
And on the other hand, I absolutely dislike it. Because it does indeed require those very specific combinations of feats, ancestry, and class.
It reminds me too much of PF1 style powergaming. 'No, you don't want to play a Catfolk Magus. Their stat boosts aren't aligned well enough and they don't get anything useful from their racial abilities to justify it. Play an Elf or Human.'
'No, if you want to play a Swashbuckler in Starfinder2e you will need to play Kasatha or Skittermander or pay for at least one synthetic extra arm augmentation. That way you can Double Slice with two weapons while still having a free hand for Extravagant Parry.'
Basically, 'no, change your character concept to match the game mechanics better. Optimize harder, noob.' I can't stand that.
I would like to point out that a level 4 4-armed character can, both RAW and RAI,
for 400 credits (2 grenades + 2 reusable shells),
Switch arms -> throw grenade -> throw grenade -> Switch arms back on the next round, for 6d8 (~27) AoE. That's kind of insane.
For comparison, an area burst weapon does 2d10 (~11), costs 1000 credits, and has bulk 2. 6d8 AoE is in the ballpark of a rank 4 spell slot.
This works once per day, or once per combat if you get more grenades (twice per combat as a skittermander). 400 credits at level 4 is already a modest price, and in SFS you'll find use-it-or-lose-it grenades as you explore on top of what you bought.
Compare this to pulling the same trick as a 2-armed character. Unless you are a caster going around unarmed, you would need to start combat with the 2 grenades in your only hands and hope that the enemies are nicely grouped up on round 1, throw them and switch to a two-hander. Or maybe one grenade occupying one of your two hands (which translates to a reduced damage as you need to trade your 2-hander weapon for a 1-hander) so that you can swap gun for grenade -> throw -> throw -> swap back next round.
4-handed characters can just have the two frags on standby waiting for the perfect opportunity.
Given this (which again, is plain RAW and not flexing any obscure rule or interpretation), I think that it puts in perspective grappling or drinking a serum with an inactive hand as a powerful, but still less insane ability.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
'No, if you want to play a Swashbuckler in Starfinder2e you will need to play Kasatha or Skittermander or pay for at least one synthetic extra arm augmentation. That way you can Double Slice with two weapons while still having a free hand for Extravagant Parry.'
Basically, 'no, change your character concept to match the game mechanics better. Optimize harder, noob.' I can't stand that.
You just came up with an extremely optimized combo and then complained that you need to cherry-pick your ancestry very carefully or it won't work.
This is the same argument as the many PF builds that simply don't work unless you're a human or ancient elf, so that you can squeeze in an extra class feat or two. If your build is so tight that you MUST have 1 extra class feat than normal or it won't work, it's an optimized build, and it is not meant to work with all options available for ancestry / equipment etc.
You just came up with an extremely optimized combo and then complained that you need to cherry-pick your ancestry very carefully or it won't work.'No, if you want to play a Swashbuckler in Starfinder2e you will need to play Kasatha or Skittermander or pay for at least one synthetic extra arm augmentation. That way you can Double Slice with two weapons while still having a free hand for Extravagant Parry.'
Basically, 'no, change your character concept to match the game mechanics better. Optimize harder, noob.' I can't stand that.
One: That's kinda the point. I don't like the idea that 'extremely optimized' even exists no matter what ancestries/classes/feats/equipment are cherry-picked for the build. If one player can optimize, then all the other players feel pressured to optimize just as much in order to keep up. And that limits choices.
And yes, that is an attitude that I have from playing Pathfinder1e. I had to stop playing my Catfolk Skald because Skald couldn't be optimized hard enough to be playable in that group. And I couldn't change to Catfolk Magus because Catfolk is not an ancestry suitable for building a Magus with.
Two: Not quite. I came up with an extremely optimized combo that not only requires cherry-picked ancestry options, but also requires combining the expectations of Starfinder rules regarding the number of hands on a character with the Pathfinder expectations of the number of hands a character has and the wording of the rules in Pathfinder feats that result from that expectation.
This is only a problem that is only possible when you try to combine the core game mechanics rules of both Pathfinder and Starfinder.
Which, I will point out, we still don't have official guidance on how to do that rules combining yet. Anything that we do right now is completely subject to our own interpretations. The entire point that I am making here is that the lack of rules text stating that "Pathfinder feats that involve needing a free hand only function when that free hand is an active hand" is not evidence of that restriction not being intended or not being necessary. When we get the guidance for importing Pathfinder content into Starfinder, it very well may have that bit of rules text.
And yes, that is an attitude that I have from playing Pathfinder1e. I had to stop playing my Catfolk Skald because Skald couldn't be optimized hard enough to be playable in that group. And I couldn't change to Catfolk Magus because Catfolk is not an ancestry suitable for building a Magus with.
And thankfully PF2/SF2 are not PF1. The gap between a character optimized to the extreme and one that is just for fun is small now. Maybe 20%.
(note: this is given the same level of competence _from the player_. Of course players that do nothing other than hit a monster 3 times without moving - I'm sure you know at least one - perform a lot worse than skilled players, and that's by design).