Grillon's Blessing? Wielding.

[D4saken1]

I know you cannot use say primary hand weapons and claw attacks in the same round.

But would the arms be able to use say daggers or swords and all attack with weapons versus claws?

I saw no clear definition and it does stay clawed fingers with opposable thumbs.

[tuesdayscoming]

Well, the text of the spell does specifically mention that you can use the extra arms to use a two-handed weapon and a shield simultaneously. The implication is that you can do with these arms what you could with natural arms, bearing in mind the DC19 Will save to avoid that pesky -2.

I don't see anything saying you can't use your new arms to wield more one-handed weapons simultaneously. As a DM, personally, I would allow it – but do keep in mind the nasty penalties you would take for multi-weapon fighting without the feat of that name.

[herrhauptmann]

Well, the text of the spell does specifically mention that you can use the extra arms to use a two-handed weapon and a shield simultaneously. The implication is that you can do with these arms what you could with natural arms, bearing in mind the DC19 Will save to avoid that pesky -2.

I don't see anything saying you can't use your new arms to wield more one-handed weapons simultaneously. As a DM, personally, I would allow it – but do keep in mind the nasty penalties you would take for multi-weapon fighting without the feat of that name.

Just do TWF with a pair of greatswords or spiked chains. No need for multiweapon fighting, especially if your DM thinks a normal human shouldn't be able to take multiweapon, even if he's regularly the target of girallons blessing.
Might want to snag doublehit though. Getting AOO'd by two spiked chains with 1.5*str might be a little nasty.

[Crinias]

For the love of all that is holy, do not allow this without some sort of penalty.

Take it from a DM who knows about this: at level 10 one of my players, a Scout/Mystic Ranger Swift Hunter with Shooting Star substitution levels, fully buffed with the power of a thousand buffs, a Chronocharm of the Horizon Walker, Haste (and even, to my eternal regret, Dragonfire Inspiration), and wielding 2 bows, managed to hit with 8 arrows of horrible cheese and dealt more than 300 points of damage in the first round to a very resilient NPC who had more than 100 hp...

Insanity.

Honestly, you could even argue that, since it doesn't say anything to the contrary, the arms are independent from your normal ones, so they get an independent attack each round, such as moving and then attacking twice, once with your original arms and then the other pair.

No, honestly, it could work if you add actual rules to it, but they have to cover everything that is important. But you MUST add some sort of penalty, otherwise you're just inviting disaster.

[Greenish]

Well, the text of the spell does specifically mention that you can use the extra arms to use a two-handed weapon and a shield simultaneously. The implication is that you can do with these arms what you could with natural arms, bearing in mind the DC19 Will save to avoid that pesky -2.

I don't see anything saying you can't use your new arms to wield more one-handed weapons simultaneously. As a DM, personally, I would allow it – but do keep in mind the nasty penalties you would take for multi-weapon fighting without the feat of that name.You're thinking of Arms of the Nage, a magic item from SS. I think OP means Girallon's Blessing, the spell from SpC.

[tuesdayscoming]

For the love of all that is holy, do not allow this without some sort of penalty.

Take it from a DM who knows about this: at level 10 one of my players, a Scout/Mystic Ranger Swift Hunter with Shooting Star substitution levels, fully buffed with the power of a thousand buffs, a Chronocharm of the Horizon Walker, Haste (and even, to my eternal regret, Dragonfire Inspiration), and wielding 2 bows, managed to hit with 8 arrows of horrible cheese and dealt more than 300 points of damage in the first round to a very resilient NPC who had more than 100 hp...

Insanity.

Honestly, you could even argue that, since it doesn't say anything to the contrary, the arms are independent from your normal ones, so they get an independent attack each round, such as moving and then attacking twice, once with your original arms and then the other pair.

No, honestly, it could work if you add actual rules to it, but they have to cover everything that is important. But you MUST add some sort of penalty, otherwise you're just inviting disaster.

There is already a significant penalty in place for these types of shenanigans:


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.

As to the character you reference: undoubtedly, wielding an extra set of weapons is a nice buff - but it seems like they were likely not as powerful as the other array of buffs the character had up. Absent those, the extra arms would likely just be 'meh' without mitigating the penalties quoted above.

Are you implying that, by a certain interpretation of the rules, these arms would allow a character to attack using two separate actions in a single turn? That is to say, that the arms would get their own standard action? Because I see nothing in the spell that could reasonably lead a reader to believe that.

edit:


You're thinking of Arms of the Nage, a magic item from SS. I think OP means Girallon's Blessing, the spell from SpC.

Nah, I was reading the Savage Species version of the spell. Reading the Spell Compendium version, though, the only restriction seems to be that you cannot use the claws as natural weapons in the same round that you use a manufactured weapon. As such, I would again say that using them for Multiweapon Fighting, with the above-quoted penalties, would absolutely be fair game.

[Deophaun]

Are you implying that, by a certain interpretation of the rules, these arms would allow a character to attack using two separate actions in a single turn? That is to say, that the arms would get their own standard action? Because I see nothing in the spell that could reasonably lead a reader to believe that.
Seems to me that the character's bows had splitting enhancements. 2 attacks from BAB, one from Haste, and one from TWF via Girallon's Blessing. Without GB, the character would have only done 225 points of damage to the NPC that had over 100 HP. Clearly, it made all the difference.

[herrhauptmann]

For the love of all that is holy, do not allow this without some sort of penalty.

Take it from a DM who knows about this: at level 10 one of my players, a Scout/Mystic Ranger Swift Hunter with Shooting Star substitution levels, fully buffed with the power of a thousand buffs, a Chronocharm of the Horizon Walker, Haste (and even, to my eternal regret, Dragonfire Inspiration), and wielding 2 bows, managed to hit with 8 arrows of horrible cheese and dealt more than 300 points of damage in the first round to a very resilient NPC who had more than 100 hp...

Which buffs? Did they all actually stack? What were these cheese arrows, and why did you allow them if they were so cheesey?
How much of the PC's damage was skirmish? Did he roll all 6's?


Also, 100 HP? Isn't that a little low for an enemy that isn't a minion in a level 10 game? A ranger with 14 con and average rolls has 68 HP at level 10. Barbarians would have 90 pre-rage, rogues: 57. (14 con for each)
Except that enemies tend to have MORE hitpoints than the party members, partly because they're higher level, and partly because they need it to last more than a round when they outnumbered 4 to 1.

It sounds more like you made a mistake, either in allowing certain things, or in encounter design.
It happens to all DMs at some point. At least your mistake didn't result in a TPK.


Honestly, you could even argue that, since it doesn't say anything to the contrary, the arms are independent from your normal ones, so they get an independent attack each round, such as moving and then attacking twice, once with your original arms and then the other pair.

My left arm is independent of my right (beyond the fact that both are attached to my torso at symmetrical points). Does that mean I get a full action with my left arm and one with my right, just like you described with someones normal and GB arms?
"Because it doesn't say you can't" is a horrible reason to allow something. It's probably why that archer did so much damage in one attack.

[AsteriskAmp]

For the love of all that is holy, do not allow this without some sort of penalty.

Take it from a DM who knows about this: at level 10 one of my players, a Scout/Mystic Ranger Swift Hunter with Shooting Star substitution levels, fully buffed with the power of a thousand buffs, a Chronocharm of the Horizon Walker, Haste (and even, to my eternal regret, Dragonfire Inspiration), and wielding 2 bows, managed to hit with 8 arrows of horrible cheese and dealt more than 300 points of damage in the first round to a very resilient NPC who had more than 100 hp...

Insanity.
Lack of DR monsters on a party with a character dead set on making numerous attacks seem problematic; also, it would depend on the type of dragonfire inspiration, most monsters get immunity or reduced damage from cold or fire; stuff like sonic on the other hand would be just ridiculous.

Also, starting distance seems to be a problem seeing as he got skirmish off without the opposition being able to do anything about a bowman like reducing visibility.

Honestly, you could even argue that, since it doesn't say anything to the contrary, the arms are independent from your normal ones, so they get an independent attack each round, such as moving and then attacking twice, once with your original arms and then the other pair.Being part of an attack is reasonable, but giving each set a mind of its own (which would let casters cast twice) seems to be a magical versatile version of schism.

To me the spell allows melee and ranged to replicate a monk class feature partway; a Monk class feature often called Flurry of Misses. Unless each set of arms get an action of their own (in which case it would be the arcane version of schism), the penalties are even worse than a bad class feature and the spell seems not exactly game breaking.

Well, the text of the spell does specifically mention that you can use the extra arms to use a two-handed weapon and a shield simultaneously. The implication is that you can do with these arms what you could with natural arms, bearing in mind the DC19 Will save to avoid that pesky -2.

I don't see anything saying you can't use your new arms to wield more one-handed weapons simultaneously. As a DM, personally, I would allow it – but do keep in mind the nasty penalties you would take for multi-weapon fighting without the feat of that name.I think that's the Savage Species version, the SpC version is a lot more lenient.

Though the penalties are still incurred.

Nah, I was reading the Savage Species version of the spell. Reading the Spell Compendium version, though, the only restriction seems to be that you cannot use the claws as natural weapons in the same round that you use a manufactured weapon. As such, I would again say that using them for Multiweapon Fighting, with the above-quoted penalties, would absolutely be fair game.It still is fantastic if you make numerous attacks and have a way of reducing the penalties.

My left arm is independent of my right (beyond the fact that both are attached to my torso at symmetrical points). Does that mean I get a full action with my left arm and one with my right, just like you described with someones normal and GB arms?
"Because it doesn't say you can't" is a horrible reason to allow something. It's probably why that archer did so much damage in one attack.If you have two bows and get a full round action and are using Multiweapon Fighting without the feat, one would assume you get both sets of bows to be used as part of it. It's a single action, it just makes use of both sets.

[herrhauptmann]

If you have two bows and get a full round action and are using Multiweapon Fighting without the feat, one would assume you get both sets of bows to be used as part of it. It's a single action, it just makes use of both sets.
I know, it was sarcasm.

I wonder though, could you do an Invisible Spell Girallons Blessing so you can dual wield your dual wield (http://v.cdn.nuklearpower.com/comics/8-bit-theater/090127.png)? Or at least start on that path?

[AsteriskAmp]

I know, it was sarcasm.

I wonder though, could you do an Invisible Spell Girallons Blessing so you can dual wield your dual wield (http://v.cdn.nuklearpower.com/comics/8-bit-theater/090127.png)? Or at least start on that path?Nowhere does it say it gives you 2 extra arms, merely adding a set, so I don't see anything preventing recasting, allowing for potentially infinite sets through persisting and extending and repeating.

Play around the definition of what original meant and you could have all of them as primary and only one set as secondary.

You could have more arms than a hecatonkoire.

Also, blue with sarcasm helps greatly.

[herrhauptmann]

Nowhere does it say it gives you 2 extra arms, merely adding a set, so I don't see anything preventing recasting, allowing for potentially infinite sets through persisting and extending and repeating.

"Adding a set." So casting on someone with 4 arms already, results in 8 arms with a single casting?




Play around the definition of what original meant and you could have all of them as primary and only one set as secondary.

You could have more arms than a hecatonkoire.

I'm not sure what you mean with the bolded part.
Haven't played Final Fantasy in a LONG time. Does it have more arms than a marilith?


Also, blue with sarcasm helps greatly.
Or use context. It's not an infallible method, but that one looked pretty obvious to me.

[AsteriskAmp]

"Adding a set." So casting on someone with 4 arms already, results in 8 arms with a single casting?

You give the subject an additional pair of arms. Each of its arms—new and old—ends in a clawed hand with fingers and an opposable thumb. The creature's original arms (if any) are its primary arms, and new limbs are secondary limbs (if the subject had no arms, the arms created by the spell are its primary arms).You can add an endless number of arms since it doesn't make the subject have a fixed number but merely adds them. This means you have 2, you now have 4; you have 4, you now have 6, and so on.

I'm not sure what you mean with the bolded part.
Haven't played Final Fantasy in a LONG time. Does it have more arms than a marilith?If you consider the original number to be the number at the moment of casting it would mean that suddenly the previous four become all primary and the new set secondary. After a long line of casting; the 100 you have on you are primary and the new 2 are secondary.

It can have arbitrarily as much arms as you want. #ofcastings*2 +2 arms. As long as it isn't infinite you can have that many.

Or use context. It's not an infallible method, but that one looked pretty obvious to me.The ability to recognize sarcasm from context in the internet is lost after reading any one thread on the topic of monks.