Concerning Multiple Arms and Iterative Attacks

[Bickerstaff]

Okay, so if a level 6 character with full BAB has 4 arms, and a light weapon in each of them (and Multiweapon Fighting), what kind of iterative attacks is he looking at? My first guess is he's got two from iteratives, and then 3 off-hand attacks (i.e. +4/+4/+4/+4/-1). Is this correct, or is it otherwise?

Bonus round: if the same character has 4 secondary, natural attacks with Multiattack (that don't interfere with his hands, such as tentacles or wings) in addition to the arms mentioned above, what does the full attack look like? Again, my first guess is +4/+4/+4/+4/+4/+4/+4/+4/-1, but I'm not certain.

Extra bonus round: is there any reason to take TWF if you have Multiweapon Fighting?

edit: added note about Multiattack back in.

[Slithery D]

I'm pretty sure your first paragraph is right, your second paragraph would only be correct if you also had the Multiattack feat. Without it you take a -5, not -2, on natural attacks.

I'm not sure you can take TWF in addition to Multiweapon Fighting.

[Bickerstaff]

I'm pretty sure your first paragraph is right, your second paragraph would only be correct if you also had the Multiattack feat. Without it you take a -5, not -2, on natural attacks.

I'm not sure you can take TWF in addition to Multiweapon Fighting.

That's my bad. I had a note about Multiattack in there, but it got lost in editing. I'll go put it back now.

The only reason I ask about TWF in addition to MWF is that MWF lessens penalties while TWF gives an extra attack (and lessens penalties, but I'm sure the penalty-lessening doesn't stack).

edit: while I was putting the note about Multiattack back in, I realised that I had also made the iterative attack at the end a +1 instead of -1 so I fixed that too.

[grarrrg]

Okay, so if a level 6 character with full BAB has 4 arms, and a light weapon in each of them (and Multiweapon Fighting),(i.e. +4/+4/+4/+4/-1).

Correct.


Bonus round: if the same character has 4 secondary, natural attacks with Multiattack... Again, my first guess is +4/+4/+4/+4/+4/+4/+4/+4/-1, but I'm not certain.

Again, correct.
Note that all Off-hand/Secondary attacks only get 1/2 STR to damage.
The Double Slice (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/double-slice-combat---final) feat boosts off-hands to full STR to damage (although a strict reading of RAW prevents you from taking/using it with Multiweapon Fighting).
I know of nothing to boost Secondaries to full STR.


Extra bonus round: is there any reason to take TWF if you have Multiweapon Fighting?

You can never take both as they are effectively the same feat.
Multiweapon Fighting Feat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/multiweapon-fighting-combat):
"Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms."
So you cannot take Two-weapon fighting feat if you have 3+ arms.
By RAW you can never take Improved TWF as you don't have TWF as a pre-req.


The only reason I ask about TWF in addition to MWF is that MWF lessens penalties while TWF gives an extra attack (and lessens penalties, but I'm sure the penalty-lessening doesn't stack).

Technically the TWF Feat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/two-weapon-fighting-combat---final) doesn't give any extra attacks either. You can always TWF, even without the feat.
The _base_ penalties for TWF are -6/-10
The Feat reduces these penalties to -4/-4
If all Off-hands are Light then the penalties are further reduced to -2/-2

edit: sleep...sleep helps...

[Sayt]

Actually, Ranger 6 gets you ITWF without TWF.

[Bickerstaff]

You can never take both as they are effectively the same feat.
Multiweapon Fighting Feat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/multiweapon-fighting-combat):
"Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms."
So you cannot take Two-weapon fighting feat if you have 3+ arms.
By RAW you can never take Improved TWF as you don't have TWF as a pre-req.

Hmm. If MWF replaces TWF for creatures with more than two arms, wouldn't that mean it is replaced as a pre-req as well (for things like Double-Slice)?



Technically the TWF Feat (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/two-weapon-fighting-combat---final) doesn't give any extra attacks either. You can always TWF, even without the feat.


My bad, I was thinking of the others in the TWF line that grant additional attacks with the off-hand.



The _base_ penalties for TWF are -6/-10
The Feat reduces these penalties to -4/-4
If all Off-hands are Light then the penalties are further reduced to -2/-2

And actually, now that I reread Multiweapon fighting, it lacks the "light weapons reduce penalties" clause that TWF feat does. So by RAW you'd have to take -4/-4 penalties regardless of what weapons you use...unless I missed something.

Well, by RAW, the base penalties for TWF while wielding a light weapon in the off-hand are -4/-8, and since MWF reduces these penalties by -2/-6 respectively, it should reduce the penalties to -2/-2.

edit: I should mention that the table found on the TWF page that is referenced above is not specific to the TWF feat; it just shows the penalties for fighting with two weapons (including with an off-hand light weapon)

[grarrrg]

Hmm. If MWF replaces TWF for creatures with more than two arms, wouldn't that mean it is replaced as a pre-req as well (for things like Double-Slice)?

That you'll have to ask your DM, as I don't think it is common enough for Paizo to give a firm answer.
Most DM's should be OK with it though.
Just realize that if it DOES count as TWF that Imp-TWF still probably only gives you +1 attack, as there is no Imp-MWF.


Well, by RAW, the base penalties for TWF while wielding a light weapon in the off-hand are -4/-8, and since MWF reduces these penalties by -2/-6 respectively, it should reduce the penalties to -2/-2.

Derp. The Light Weapon clause is under the "normal" part of the TWF feat...I should get more sleep, I hear sleep helps the brain stuff things.

[Chaosvii7]

According to RAW, yes, MWF is meant to replace TWF in every written instance that would apply to a character with 3 or more limbs. That means that the prerequisite feat for ITWF becomes MWF. Also, rereading ITWF, it is very possible that it would be intended that you get multiple attacks with it. The original wording states that "In addition to the standard single attack you get with an offhand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a -5 penalty", meaning that one could interpret that with MWF every hand you use for a weapon would get two attacks per hand, because you with MWF you get an offhand weapon attack with ALL of your applicable spare appendages, instead of just one.

[Bickerstaff]

That you'll have to ask your DM, as I don't think it is common enough for Paizo to give a firm answer.
Most DM's should be OK with it though.
Just realize that if it DOES count as TWF that Imp-TWF still probably only gives you +1 attack, as there is no Imp-MWF.

Derp. The Light Weapon clause is under the "normal" part of the TWF feat...I should get more sleep, I hear sleep helps the brain stuff things.

You've been a great deal of help! Just being able to discuss things like this helps me to figure out how this stuff works.



According to RAW, yes, MWF is meant to replace TWF in every written instance that would apply to a character with 3 or more limbs. That means that the prerequisite feat for ITWF becomes MWF. Also, rereading ITWF, it is very possible that it would be intended that you get multiple attacks with it. The original wording states that "In addition to the standard single attack you get with an offhand weapon, you get a second attack with it, albeit at a -5 penalty", meaning that one could interpret that with MWF every hand you use for a weapon would get two attacks per hand, because you with MWF you get an offhand weapon attack with ALL of your applicable spare appendages, instead of just one.

Good to know! I had a feeling that MWF completely replaced TWF, but wasn't quite sure.


Welp, I think I have everything I need. Thanks to everyone who responded; you were collectively very helpful!