Armor Spikes- the universal solution?

[whatisitgoodfor]

Who says they can't.

The next thing you're going to say is that a PsiWar using bite of the wolf has to use one of his hands to make an off-hand attack with the bite.

The greatsword slash followed by a shoulder ram is exactly how I pictured using the sword and spike TWF.

Another good one is to use B. Sword and shield fighting, then use your armor spikes as an off-hand attack. You get TWF and shield use.

--------------
Sorry to hijack this thread, but here is a question that I had a while back and never got an answer to.

If you have a Ratling Psi-War with Tail Spike proficiency, manifested bite and claw powers, armor spikes, and blade boots, he has 1 primary attack, and 5 off-hand attacks available.

Is there any combination of feats and/or house rules that would allow that character to use all of his off-hand attacks? (please note that this is a character, and as such doesn't get to use the monster attack method.)

 

[CRGreathouse]

(please note that this is a character, and as such doesn't get to use the monster attack method.)

Why? Multiattack doesn't say "Monsters only", but "3 or nmore natural weapons."

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

Which can lead to some arguments over what constitutes a natural weapon.

The bite and claws may or may not, since the character wasn't born with them.

The tail spikes certainly don't, since you can't make an unarmed attack with just the tail.

The Blade boots are also questionable, since an unarmed strike can possibly come from the feet, but if you allow it on those grounds, then any PC should be able to get the feats since an unarmed strike can come from three different sources.

Anyway, I don't know if a PC can take the feats, and I've been arguing the point with another DM for several weeks.

****************
Wow, take a look at this: http://www.rpgcosmos.com/psiclar.cfm

Hmm, should BRC's statment be taken to include all of this?

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

You'll notice that for the "Bite" attacks they had to make a special exception. This further supports the idea that ALL light weapons, unless noted otherwise, require one hand to wield. You don't get free attacks with your feet, head, shoulders, or any other body part.

You folks are way off in Rule Zero land here, but I'm glad you're having fun at least.

 

[whatisitgoodfor]

Yeah, but the reasoning that BRC used to justify allowing the extra attack from bite can be applied to the others.

At the very least, a ratling's tail spikes should qualify as an extra hand. As to whether or not having a weapon on your shoulder/boot/helmet should qualify, *shrugs*.

 

[Kyamsil]

I see no problem with allowing the armor spikes to be used as an off hand attack while having your hands full (be it two handed weapons, weapon & shield or whatever)... but, I must say that to be balanced, perhaps a feat on this "spikey" way of fighting is due.

First, consider that armor spikes provoke attacks of opportunity (it's almost the same as unarmed attack)

Then add the feat:

Spiked Armor Fighting
You are trained to make full use of your nasty spiked armor in combat.
Prerequisites: Base Attack +3; Martial Weapon Prof (Armor Spikes); Ambidextery;
Benefit: You can use armor spikes as a light weapon in combat to make one off-hand attack per round without provoking attacks of opportunity even if your hands are full (you use your knees, elbows or whatever). If you have your hands full you cannot benefit from Ambidexterity in your attack rolls.

Any comments?

 

[Xahn'Tyr]

Does it actually say anything about Spikes provoking an AoO? I could not find it and if it doesn't say, well I don't see why they would. That's not a default quality of a light weapon or anything.

As for what makes sense, that has nothing to do with the rules as written which is all that I'm talkin about here.

 

[Kyamsil]

Sorry about the misunderstanding, I was not saying that they provoke AoO as they are, I proposed making it so to balance them.

 

[Hejdun]

Munchkin land

You need a hand free to use armor spikes. Anything otherwise would be rediculous, and munchy. If you allow that, then let me play a character can wields a mercurial greatsword in his hands, one in his teeth, one in each foot, and can attack with all 4 of them. Would you allow that? And it is simply illogical to say that the character hits the enemy with his shoulder, that would provoke an AoO. It's not like you can simply step up right next to them and ram them with a shoulder, you'd be entering their space, and similar attacks (grappling) provoke an AoO. I always imagined that they attacked with some part of their arm, MAYBE leg. But shoulder? Nah.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Re: Munchkin land

But shoulder? Nah.

But... the picture...

Ahem. Anyway, I agree with you... I suggested the AoO for entering their space earlier.

-Hyp.