Insectile creatures and MWF? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Insectile creatures and MWF? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Thaumaturgist
08-12-07, 07:13 AM Here's something I've been wondering about...

The insectile creature template in Savage Species grows four additional arms. But is said not to grant you any additional attacks.

Can I still slap the multiweapon fighting tree on him and thus generate extra attacks?

Thanks for reading :)

Thaum
Unholy_King
08-12-07, 01:32 PM The arms are physically incapable for fighting, so it would not work.

Multiweapon fighting assumes the multiple arms work in the first place, it doesn't magical animate them.
Mahali Audran
08-13-07, 12:55 PM The arms are physically incapable for fighting, so it would not work.
That is incorrect. The Insectile template does not say they are incapable of fighting it mearly points out that having more arms does not automatically mean more attacks.
Unholy_King
08-13-07, 01:06 PM Originally Posted by Savage Species

Attacks:Despite have six arms, insectile creatures gain no addition attacks.

Either way, its the same thing. No extra attacks. I assume the other arms are used as part of their climb speed.
EjoThims
08-13-07, 02:10 PM No extra attacks.

This is correct.

Insectile templated creatures have the same attacks as non-insectile creatures of the same kind since the template specifically states that they get no extra attacks despite having the extra arms.

So an insectile human has two arms with which to attack despite having six arms on their body.

An insetile marilith(sp?) has six arms with which to attack and ten arms on their body.
Thaumaturgist
08-13-07, 02:13 PM Mahali is quite correct. They do not say that they're incapable of fighting, just that they won't grant any additional attacks.

And the MWF feat tree grants attacks... a tree which he qualifies for. The feat prerequisite line doesn't say "Must be able of two or more off-hand attacks." It says "Three or more hands". Which he has :P

Oh yeah, feats aren't some magical animation, they're based on training. But I assume you know that. One would be able to train to use their extra arms in combat.. logically, right?

Can you back that assumption up with RAW? Does it say that the arms can only be used for climbing?

Also
Multiweapon fighting assumes the multiple arms work in the first place, it doesn't magical animate them.

Underlining is mine. Anyways, first you implied that the arms aren't working. But now they're a part of the climb speed? That means they are usable, right? Just a thought.

Also, I would like to apologize if I come off as harsh or insulting. It's not intended.
EjoThims
08-13-07, 02:38 PM And the MWF feat tree grants attacks.

Wrong.

The MWF tree only reduces the penalties of fighting with more than two hands, just as TWF only reduces the penalties of TWF fighting.

Sure... The insectile creature can take the feat, since he meets the prereqs...

He just won't gain anything from it.
Thaumaturgist
08-13-07, 03:02 PM Err.. You're wrong.

You're talking about the single feat "Multiweapon fighting".

The MWF tree consists of the improved, greater and perfect versions as well.
These three grant off-hand attacks.

So.. Basically, until he gets perfect multiweapon fighting, he would not get the first set off-hand attacks.
tarkin
08-13-07, 03:19 PM 1. Savage Species is a 3.0 book. In fact it is a 3.0 book that has the stuff used to create Pun Pun. Stop and think about that before just letting people take things from it.

2. The MWF feats do appear to be met, using the existing wording, and they do in fact grant additional attacks.

3. The template specifically says they gain no attacks.

In addition it does say the creature gains a climb speed.

In other words, it really gives you LEGS, not arms.

4. The Level adjustment of the template is +2. Considering it gives you Darkvision, Tremorsense, Wide vision, climb speed, +4 to Dex and +2 to Wisdom, that +2 looks fair to me without also adding in a qualification for MWF, making it Rogue's best template (+4 to dex, darkvision, climb speed AND 4 new sneak attacks for just a feat? Worth at least +3)

Conclusion:

In my conversion from 3.0 to 3.5, I would trade out the word arms and replace it with the word legs.

To me, I read it as the template really gives you legs, not arms. It specifically prevents the arms from being used to attack, and I would respect that prohibition, even with the use of MWF feat chain. Otherwise, it is abusive for Rogues to take.
rampant
08-13-07, 03:38 PM The template specifies that you gain no new attacks. One could argue that the template allows you to use the arms for other purposes, casting, using items, stuff like that, via the multi-tasking feat. In addition one could argue that the arms allow you to augment your existing attacks, by allowing you to weild two two-handed weapons, or even using all six on a modified greatsword (see the weapons section in SS for rules on this modification). For a total of 3.5 times your str mod to damage.
EjoThims
08-13-07, 03:39 PM Err.. You're wrong.

You're talking about the single feat "Multiweapon fighting".

The MWF tree consists of the improved, greater and perfect versions as well.
These three grant off-hand attacks.

So.. Basically, until he gets perfect multiweapon fighting, he would not get the first set off-hand attacks.

Whoops, thought he said just feat. It works then, yes.

Interestingly enough, MWF gets him no attacks with each new off-hand, IMWF gets him one attack with each new off-hand (since it grants 'one extra'), GMWF gets him three with each off-hand with each new off-hand ('up to three'), and PWF gets him as many attacks as his main-hand can make, even with haste, flurry, or any other bonuses(The character can make as many attacks with each extra weapon as with his or her primary weapon).

1. Savage Species is a 3.0 book. In fact it is a 3.0 book that has the stuff used to create Pun Pun. Stop and think about that before just letting people take things from it.

Nothing in Savage Species is needed for Pun-Pun, which, by the way, can now be done by any class or race without an intelligence penalty at 1st level.

As well, SS material is largely still lacking an update, so is perfectly fine to use in 3.5 games.

Hmmm... Insectile Thri-Keen... Since you're taking the feats anyway...
tarkin
08-13-07, 03:43 PM I may be wrong about Pun Pun using Savage Species, but every Pun Pun build I have seen REQUIRES you to use 3.0 rules with 3.5 stuff to get his abusiveness.

Hence proving the following statement you made to be not that smart:

As well, SS material is largely still lacking an update, so is perfectly fine to use in 3.5 games.

Is just a LAUGHABLE to claim. There is no rule that says that, it is just your house rule. Certain of the Faerun books says it is OK to use it once the DM looks them over. But that is as close to what you wrote that you can get. There is nothing whatsoever in any of the core rules (which is where they would have written it if it was true)

You disagree? Page number and book please. I can wait.

3.0 stuff is NOT fine to use in any game.

How it is treated will depend upon your game;

Strict: not allowed without extreme special circumstances.

Loose: DM will look it over and consider accepting it.

Power Game: DM will probably let it in, but may insist on doing the minimal changes, such as fixing DR stuff.

Anything Goes Game: DM will let it in without even looking at it.

One prime example of this is the Gloves of the Master Strategist. It is a 3.0 item that duplicates Gloves of Storing but also has True Strike. It sells for less than 4,000 gp in the 3.0 book that gave it to us.

3.5 Glove of storing however costs 10,000, not the 3.0 price of 2,200 gp. Only a real fool is going to say it is fine to use the Gloves of Master Strategist as is because it has not been updated.
Thaumaturgist
08-13-07, 04:10 PM Is just a LAUGHABLE to claim. There is no rule that says that, it is just your house rule. Certain of the Faerun books says it is OK to use it once the DM looks them over. But that is as close to what you wrote that you can get. There is nothing whatsoever in any of the core rules (which is where they would have written it if it was true)

It's not a laughable claim.
There's no rule that says otherwise really. If you find one, please show me.
And yes, I know I'm going by "Oh I can do it because it doesn't say I can't". But so are you.

Okay, so certain 3.0 FR books says that they're okay to use in a 3.5 game? O.o Weird.

3.0 might not be fine to use in any of your games. Why should you impose such restrictions on us?

Not to mention, if it hasn't been updated/errata'ed and if it hasn't been reprinted. It can still be used. Provided that it's updated to cope with the 3.5 system (like converting dmg reduction etc)

Also, Tarkin, An honest question... Have you ever climbed? Do you know that your hands are equally important in climbing as your feet are?
Oh, one other thing. I know you're thinking of spiderclimb, where you're using your feet to climb. It doesn't say Spiderclimb(Ex) You can climb walls as per the spiderclimb spell etc etc. Or like a spider climbs, using his feet. This is not a spider. The hands stay.

And yes, you would give them this and that, And I might give them this and that, your point being?

The whole multiweapon system is broken and abusive, especially for sneak-attackers.

Did I get everything now? >_>
EjoThims
08-13-07, 04:22 PM There is no rule that says that, it is just your house rule.

It's actually the official WotC stance that non-updated 3.0 material is valid for 3.5.

And the only 3.0 material Pun-Pun needs is Manipulate Form from the Sarrukh, which has not yet been updated.

And, as always, everything relies on DM Fiat, so invoking it is pretty poor form.

You Dm could rule that Halflings aren't allowed to be rogues if s/he wanted to.
risner
08-13-07, 10:19 PM Can I still slap the multiweapon fighting tree on him and thus generate extra attacks?

No
Thaumaturgist
08-14-07, 02:40 AM Would you care to elaborate that?
Unholy_King
08-14-07, 04:02 AM Multiweapon Fighting [General]

Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.
Normal

A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands.(It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.

Improved Multiweapon Fighting [General]

In addition to the single extra attack a creature gets with each extra weapon from Multiweapon Fighting, it gets a second attack with each extra weapon, albeit at a -5 penalty.
Normal

With only Multiweapon Fighting, a creater can only get a single attack with each extra weapon.

Greater Multiweapon Fighting [General]

The creature may make up to three extra attacks with each extra offhand weapon it wields, albeit at a -10 penalty on the third attack with each weapon.

The MWF tree assumes that the extra hands can all make off-hand attacks. Sure, you can get the feat with the Insectile Template, but it will act exactly the same as the Two-weapon Fighting feat since your extra arms grant no addition off-hand attacks.
Thaumaturgist
08-14-07, 11:30 AM Multiweapon Fighting [General]

Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.

Normal:
A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands.(It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.

Improved Multiweapon Fighting [General]

In addition to the single extra attack a creature gets with each extra weapon from Multiweapon Fighting, it gets a second attack with each extra weapon, albeit at a -5 penalty.

Normal:
With only Multiweapon Fighting, a creature can only get a single attack with each extra weapon.

Greater Multiweapon Fighting [General]

The creature may make up to three extra attacks with each extra offhand weapon it wields, albeit at a -10 penalty on the third attack with each weapon.

Well, okay, the Improved version assumes you have a first off-hand attack.
It's like "in addition to the attack you don't have, you get a new attack at a -5 penalty". Stupid but true.

As you so cleverly pointed out with your underlining on the GMWF, it can make up to three attacks with each weapon i wield in each off hand.

Now, without feats I can't attack with the off-hands. But I can still wield weapons in 'em, I just can't attack with them until I have the proper feats.

PERFECT MULTIWEAPON FIGHTING [EPIC]
Prerequisite: Dex 25, three or more hands, Greater Multiweapon Fighting, Multiweapon Fighting.

Benefit: The character can make as many attacks with each extra weapon as with his or her primary weapon, using the same base attack bonus. The character still takes the normal penalties for fighting with two weapons.

Normal: A creature without this feat can make only one attack per round with each extra weapon (or two attacks per round with each weapon if it has Multiweapon Fighting, or three attacks per round with each extra weapon if it has Greater Multiweapon Fighting). Each attack after the first extra attack has a cumulative -5 penalty.

Special: This feat replaces the Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.

This one is selfexplaining really...
pres_man
08-14-07, 12:17 PM 1. Savage Species is a 3.0 book. In fact it is a 3.0 book that has the stuff used to create Pun Pun. Stop and think about that before just letting people take things from it.
SS is more of a 3.25 book. It has aspects of both 3.5 and 3rd editions.
Unholy_King
08-14-07, 02:01 PM As you so cleverly pointed out with your underlining on the GMWF, it can make up to three attacks with each weapon i wield in each off hand.

Now, without feats I can't attack with the off-hands. But I can still wield weapons in 'em, I just can't attack with them until I have the proper feats.

Incorrect.

You extra arms can indeed hold weapons, but they cannot wield weapons.

There's a large difference. Just because you hold a shortsword in each hand, your not considered wielding them until you attack with both of them. If you just attack with one, your wielding it and holding the other, thereby not incurring any TWF penalties.

In order for the feats to work, you must be wielding the weapons.

The creature may make up to three extra attacks with each extra offhand weapon it wields, albeit at a -10 penalty on the third attack with each weapon.
Thaumaturgist
08-14-07, 03:08 PM Incorrect.

You extra arms can indeed hold weapons, but they cannot wield weapons.

There's a large difference. Just because you hold a shortsword in each hand, your not considered wielding them until you attack with both of them. If you just attack with one, your wielding it and holding the other, thereby not incurring any TWF penalties.

In order for the feats to work, you must be wielding the weapons.

Okay, as English isn't my native language, I decided to check the translation of the word "wield".
And "wield" translates into the handling of the weapon, not the usage of it.

So, as long as you're holding a weapon properly, you're wielding it, but not necessarily using it.

TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a �6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a �10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way.

So, by this, wielding does not necessarily imply fighting/attacking.

I also think it's a shame that the book doesn't mention if you get penalized if you wield two weapons, but only attack with one.

But hey, one could look at the double weapons... You can use the second end to attack with, and thus incurring TWF penalties. But if you aren't attacking with the second end, you don't incur any TWF penalties.

This could be considered for using two separate weapons as well, yes?

Oh, btw, where does it say that you're just "holding" a weapon when you're not attacking with it?
EjoThims
08-14-07, 06:01 PM You don't have to make attacks or even be able to make attacks to wield a weapon in an off-hand.

By the wording of the feat you are actually granted attacks with off-hands, regardless of if you already had those attacks.

The one real argument to this would be saying that the extra arms don't count as 'off-hands' because they can't normally make attacks.

But the definition of 'off-hand' only lists it as the weaker hand and says it takes penalties if making attacks.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thaumaturgist 08-12-07, 07:13 AM	Here's something I've been wondering about... The insectile creature template in Savage Species grows four additional arms. But is said not to grant you any additional attacks. Can I still slap the multiweapon fighting tree on him and thus generate extra attacks? Thanks for reading :) Thaum
Unholy_King 08-12-07, 01:32 PM	The arms are physically incapable for fighting, so it would not work. Multiweapon fighting assumes the multiple arms work in the first place, it doesn't magical animate them.
Mahali Audran 08-13-07, 12:55 PM	The arms are physically incapable for fighting, so it would not work. That is incorrect. The Insectile template does not say they are incapable of fighting it mearly points out that having more arms does not automatically mean more attacks.
Unholy_King 08-13-07, 01:06 PM	Originally Posted by Savage Species Attacks:Despite have six arms, insectile creatures gain no addition attacks. Either way, its the same thing. No extra attacks. I assume the other arms are used as part of their climb speed.
EjoThims 08-13-07, 02:10 PM	No extra attacks. This is correct. Insectile templated creatures have the same attacks as non-insectile creatures of the same kind since the template specifically states that they get no extra attacks despite having the extra arms. So an insectile human has two arms with which to attack despite having six arms on their body. An insetile marilith(sp?) has six arms with which to attack and ten arms on their body.
Thaumaturgist 08-13-07, 02:13 PM	Mahali is quite correct. They do not say that they're incapable of fighting, just that they won't grant any additional attacks. And the MWF feat tree grants attacks... a tree which he qualifies for. The feat prerequisite line doesn't say "Must be able of two or more off-hand attacks." It says "Three or more hands". Which he has :P Oh yeah, feats aren't some magical animation, they're based on training. But I assume you know that. One would be able to train to use their extra arms in combat.. logically, right? Can you back that assumption up with RAW? Does it say that the arms can only be used for climbing? Also Multiweapon fighting assumes the multiple arms work in the first place, it doesn't magical animate them. Underlining is mine. Anyways, first you implied that the arms aren't working. But now they're a part of the climb speed? That means they are usable, right? Just a thought. Also, I would like to apologize if I come off as harsh or insulting. It's not intended.
EjoThims 08-13-07, 02:38 PM	And the MWF feat tree grants attacks. Wrong. The MWF tree only reduces the penalties of fighting with more than two hands, just as TWF only reduces the penalties of TWF fighting. Sure... The insectile creature can take the feat, since he meets the prereqs... He just won't gain anything from it.
Thaumaturgist 08-13-07, 03:02 PM	Err.. You're wrong. You're talking about the single feat "Multiweapon fighting". The MWF tree consists of the improved, greater and perfect versions as well. These three grant off-hand attacks. So.. Basically, until he gets perfect multiweapon fighting, he would not get the first set off-hand attacks.
tarkin 08-13-07, 03:19 PM	1. Savage Species is a 3.0 book. In fact it is a 3.0 book that has the stuff used to create Pun Pun. Stop and think about that before just letting people take things from it. 2. The MWF feats do appear to be met, using the existing wording, and they do in fact grant additional attacks. 3. The template specifically says they gain no attacks. In addition it does say the creature gains a climb speed. In other words, it really gives you LEGS, not arms. 4. The Level adjustment of the template is +2. Considering it gives you Darkvision, Tremorsense, Wide vision, climb speed, +4 to Dex and +2 to Wisdom, that +2 looks fair to me without also adding in a qualification for MWF, making it Rogue's best template (+4 to dex, darkvision, climb speed AND 4 new sneak attacks for just a feat? Worth at least +3) Conclusion: In my conversion from 3.0 to 3.5, I would trade out the word arms and replace it with the word legs. To me, I read it as the template really gives you legs, not arms. It specifically prevents the arms from being used to attack, and I would respect that prohibition, even with the use of MWF feat chain. Otherwise, it is abusive for Rogues to take.
rampant 08-13-07, 03:38 PM	The template specifies that you gain no new attacks. One could argue that the template allows you to use the arms for other purposes, casting, using items, stuff like that, via the multi-tasking feat. In addition one could argue that the arms allow you to augment your existing attacks, by allowing you to weild two two-handed weapons, or even using all six on a modified greatsword (see the weapons section in SS for rules on this modification). For a total of 3.5 times your str mod to damage.
EjoThims 08-13-07, 03:39 PM	Err.. You're wrong. You're talking about the single feat "Multiweapon fighting". The MWF tree consists of the improved, greater and perfect versions as well. These three grant off-hand attacks. So.. Basically, until he gets perfect multiweapon fighting, he would not get the first set off-hand attacks. Whoops, thought he said just feat. It works then, yes. Interestingly enough, MWF gets him no attacks with each new off-hand, IMWF gets him one attack with each new off-hand (since it grants 'one extra'), GMWF gets him three with each off-hand with each new off-hand ('up to three'), and PWF gets him as many attacks as his main-hand can make, even with haste, flurry, or any other bonuses(The character can make as many attacks with each extra weapon as with his or her primary weapon). 1. Savage Species is a 3.0 book. In fact it is a 3.0 book that has the stuff used to create Pun Pun. Stop and think about that before just letting people take things from it. Nothing in Savage Species is needed for Pun-Pun, which, by the way, can now be done by any class or race without an intelligence penalty at 1st level. As well, SS material is largely still lacking an update, so is perfectly fine to use in 3.5 games. Hmmm... Insectile Thri-Keen... Since you're taking the feats anyway...
tarkin 08-13-07, 03:43 PM	I may be wrong about Pun Pun using Savage Species, but every Pun Pun build I have seen REQUIRES you to use 3.0 rules with 3.5 stuff to get his abusiveness. Hence proving the following statement you made to be not that smart: As well, SS material is largely still lacking an update, so is perfectly fine to use in 3.5 games. Is just a LAUGHABLE to claim. There is no rule that says that, it is just your house rule. Certain of the Faerun books says it is OK to use it once the DM looks them over. But that is as close to what you wrote that you can get. There is nothing whatsoever in any of the core rules (which is where they would have written it if it was true) You disagree? Page number and book please. I can wait. 3.0 stuff is NOT fine to use in any game. How it is treated will depend upon your game; Strict: not allowed without extreme special circumstances. Loose: DM will look it over and consider accepting it. Power Game: DM will probably let it in, but may insist on doing the minimal changes, such as fixing DR stuff. Anything Goes Game: DM will let it in without even looking at it. One prime example of this is the Gloves of the Master Strategist. It is a 3.0 item that duplicates Gloves of Storing but also has True Strike. It sells for less than 4,000 gp in the 3.0 book that gave it to us. 3.5 Glove of storing however costs 10,000, not the 3.0 price of 2,200 gp. Only a real fool is going to say it is fine to use the Gloves of Master Strategist as is because it has not been updated.
Thaumaturgist 08-13-07, 04:10 PM	Is just a LAUGHABLE to claim. There is no rule that says that, it is just your house rule. Certain of the Faerun books says it is OK to use it once the DM looks them over. But that is as close to what you wrote that you can get. There is nothing whatsoever in any of the core rules (which is where they would have written it if it was true) It's not a laughable claim. There's no rule that says otherwise really. If you find one, please show me. And yes, I know I'm going by "Oh I can do it because it doesn't say I can't". But so are you. Okay, so certain 3.0 FR books says that they're okay to use in a 3.5 game? O.o Weird. 3.0 might not be fine to use in any of your games. Why should you impose such restrictions on us? Not to mention, if it hasn't been updated/errata'ed and if it hasn't been reprinted. It can still be used. Provided that it's updated to cope with the 3.5 system (like converting dmg reduction etc) Also, Tarkin, An honest question... Have you ever climbed? Do you know that your hands are equally important in climbing as your feet are? Oh, one other thing. I know you're thinking of spiderclimb, where you're using your feet to climb. It doesn't say Spiderclimb(Ex) You can climb walls as per the spiderclimb spell etc etc. Or like a spider climbs, using his feet. This is not a spider. The hands stay. And yes, you would give them this and that, And I might give them this and that, your point being? The whole multiweapon system is broken and abusive, especially for sneak-attackers. Did I get everything now? >_>
EjoThims 08-13-07, 04:22 PM	There is no rule that says that, it is just your house rule. It's actually the official WotC stance that non-updated 3.0 material is valid for 3.5. And the only 3.0 material Pun-Pun needs is Manipulate Form from the Sarrukh, which has not yet been updated. And, as always, everything relies on DM Fiat, so invoking it is pretty poor form. You Dm could rule that Halflings aren't allowed to be rogues if s/he wanted to.
risner 08-13-07, 10:19 PM	Can I still slap the multiweapon fighting tree on him and thus generate extra attacks? No
Thaumaturgist 08-14-07, 02:40 AM	Would you care to elaborate that?
Unholy_King 08-14-07, 04:02 AM	Multiweapon Fighting [General] Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands. Normal A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands.(It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting. Improved Multiweapon Fighting [General] In addition to the single extra attack a creature gets with each extra weapon from Multiweapon Fighting, it gets a second attack with each extra weapon, albeit at a -5 penalty. Normal With only Multiweapon Fighting, a creater can only get a single attack with each extra weapon. Greater Multiweapon Fighting [General] The creature may make up to three extra attacks with each extra offhand weapon it wields, albeit at a -10 penalty on the third attack with each weapon. The MWF tree assumes that the extra hands can all make off-hand attacks. Sure, you can get the feat with the Insectile Template, but it will act exactly the same as the Two-weapon Fighting feat since your extra arms grant no addition off-hand attacks.
Thaumaturgist 08-14-07, 11:30 AM	Multiweapon Fighting [General] Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands. Normal: A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands.(It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting. Improved Multiweapon Fighting [General] In addition to the single extra attack a creature gets with each extra weapon from Multiweapon Fighting, it gets a second attack with each extra weapon, albeit at a -5 penalty. Normal: With only Multiweapon Fighting, a creature can only get a single attack with each extra weapon. Greater Multiweapon Fighting [General] The creature may make up to three extra attacks with each extra offhand weapon it wields, albeit at a -10 penalty on the third attack with each weapon. Well, okay, the Improved version assumes you have a first off-hand attack. It's like "in addition to the attack you don't have, you get a new attack at a -5 penalty". Stupid but true. As you so cleverly pointed out with your underlining on the GMWF, it can make up to three attacks with each weapon i wield in each off hand. Now, without feats I can't attack with the off-hands. But I can still wield weapons in 'em, I just can't attack with them until I have the proper feats. PERFECT MULTIWEAPON FIGHTING [EPIC] Prerequisite: Dex 25, three or more hands, Greater Multiweapon Fighting, Multiweapon Fighting. Benefit: The character can make as many attacks with each extra weapon as with his or her primary weapon, using the same base attack bonus. The character still takes the normal penalties for fighting with two weapons. Normal: A creature without this feat can make only one attack per round with each extra weapon (or two attacks per round with each weapon if it has Multiweapon Fighting, or three attacks per round with each extra weapon if it has Greater Multiweapon Fighting). Each attack after the first extra attack has a cumulative -5 penalty. Special: This feat replaces the Perfect Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms. This one is selfexplaining really...
pres_man 08-14-07, 12:17 PM	1. Savage Species is a 3.0 book. In fact it is a 3.0 book that has the stuff used to create Pun Pun. Stop and think about that before just letting people take things from it. SS is more of a 3.25 book. It has aspects of both 3.5 and 3rd editions.
Unholy_King 08-14-07, 02:01 PM	As you so cleverly pointed out with your underlining on the GMWF, it can make up to three attacks with each weapon i wield in each off hand. Now, without feats I can't attack with the off-hands. But I can still wield weapons in 'em, I just can't attack with them until I have the proper feats. Incorrect. You extra arms can indeed hold weapons, but they cannot wield weapons. There's a large difference. Just because you hold a shortsword in each hand, your not considered wielding them until you attack with both of them. If you just attack with one, your wielding it and holding the other, thereby not incurring any TWF penalties. In order for the feats to work, you must be wielding the weapons. The creature may make up to three extra attacks with each extra offhand weapon it wields, albeit at a -10 penalty on the third attack with each weapon.
Thaumaturgist 08-14-07, 03:08 PM	Incorrect. You extra arms can indeed hold weapons, but they cannot wield weapons. There's a large difference. Just because you hold a shortsword in each hand, your not considered wielding them until you attack with both of them. If you just attack with one, your wielding it and holding the other, thereby not incurring any TWF penalties. In order for the feats to work, you must be wielding the weapons. Okay, as English isn't my native language, I decided to check the translation of the word "wield". And "wield" translates into the handling of the weapon, not the usage of it. So, as long as you're holding a weapon properly, you're wielding it, but not necessarily using it. TWO-WEAPON FIGHTING If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a �6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a �10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. So, by this, wielding does not necessarily imply fighting/attacking. I also think it's a shame that the book doesn't mention if you get penalized if you wield two weapons, but only attack with one. But hey, one could look at the double weapons... You can use the second end to attack with, and thus incurring TWF penalties. But if you aren't attacking with the second end, you don't incur any TWF penalties. This could be considered for using two separate weapons as well, yes? Oh, btw, where does it say that you're just "holding" a weapon when you're not attacking with it?
EjoThims 08-14-07, 06:01 PM	You don't have to make attacks or even be able to make attacks to wield a weapon in an off-hand. By the wording of the feat you are actually granted attacks with off-hands, regardless of if you already had those attacks. The one real argument to this would be saying that the extra arms don't count as 'off-hands' because they can't normally make attacks. But the definition of 'off-hand' only lists it as the weaker hand and says it takes penalties if making attacks.