Are there any feats that let you treat tentacles as arms that can be used to wield weapons, a la Prehensile Tail for tails? Alternatively, are there any arm grafts that can add to my total number of arms, either by adding an arm without replacing anything or by replacing a tentacle?
[RPG] Are there any feats that let you treat tentacles as arms, or arm grafts that can add arms
dnd-3.5efeatsnatural-weapon
Related Solutions
There are no rules regarding over-sized weapons and using more than two arms. Normal over-sized weapon penalties apply.
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
The rest of this answer assumed multiple greatsword (or other two handed weapons).
You cannot use the Two-Weapon fighting feats if you are using more than two arms. You need to use the Multi-weapon fighting feats. If you were fighting with two greatswords, one of them with be primary, the other offhand. Likewise, if you had sixarms, two for the weapons would be offhand, and so on. You will always have one primary weapon.
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.
Stealing the table from this answer you would make your all your attacks at -4 regardless of if they were off-hand or primary: Table: Multi-Weapon Fighting Penalties
Circumstances Primary Hand Off Hand
Normal penalties –6 –10
Off-hand weapon is light –4 –8
Multi-Weapon Fighting feat –4 –4
Off-hand weapon is light and
Multi-Weapon Fighting feat -2 –2
I have found no rule which changes the damage modifier (*1.5) from high strength.
Likewise, power attack applies to all attacks as described, there are no special rules for using more than one two handed weapon. The primary great sword would get +3 per -1 penalty. The off hand greatsword would get +1.5 per -1 (rounded down, so +1, +3, +4, +6, etc. ) Emphasis all mine.
BONUS HOUSERULE: I would not allow a creature to use a weapon who's category was more than two handed, as per the normal rules. However there are items in 3.5 that required more than two hands to use ( I think it was the scissor sword ) and had better stats. I would also allow a creature with more than two hands to substitue the Multi-WF feat in place of the T-WF for classes with bonus feats, such as ranger.
Have a look at the Gythka and Scissors Sword, which are four handed and six-handed weapons from Savage Species (I know, not pathfinder) on page 45.
If you have those feats, you can definitely use a ranged weapon at least up to 4 size categories larger than you
Which would be Colossal for a Medium creature.
The rules behind this are kind of weird. Basically, it is unclear if projectile weapons requiring two hands to be used are considered two handed weapons or not. Fortunately, this ends up being irrelevant to your question. Either projectile weapons have a handedness corresponding to the number of hands they require to be used, or projectile weapons have no handedness. If projectile weapons have no handedness you can actually use any size of projectile weapon you wish, taking a -2 penalty to hit for every category away from your category the weapon's size is, since the rule prohibiting the use of excessively oversized or undersized weapons applies only to weapons with a handedness (weapons whose handedness is not light, one-handed, or two-handed don't change). If projectile weapons have a handedness, then these feats, which do not specify anywhere that they only apply to melee weapons, certainly apply to ranged weapons as well.
So, in any case, a character that has the listed feats or similar abilities can definitely use ranged weapons as if the feats affected their use, though the feats may not in fact do anything, in which case anyone could use such weapons by default. I've not had a GM choose the later interpretation once the situation was explained (people have thus far invariably favored the former, in my experience), but either is valid by the RAW.
Note that if you are using a firearm the handedness of the weapon doesn't change regardless of size, which used to mean that the rules explicitly allowed you to use a firearm of any size, but this has been FAQ-errataed to disallow the use of oversized weapons "just like non-firearms".
Further explanation:
Here's the most explicit rule that bans weapon use outside of normal handednesses (from the weapons section of the CRB but also found in the 'normal' section of e.g. Titan Technique):
The measure of how much effort it takes to use a weapon (whether the weapon is designated as a light, one-handed, or two-handed weapon for a particular wielder) is altered by one step for each size category of difference between the wielder's size and the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed. For example, a Small creature would wield a Medium one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon. If a weapon's designation would be changed to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration, the creature can't wield the weapon at all.
So 'how much effort it takes to use a weapon' is defined to be its handedness and handedness is explicitly limited to three valid options: light, one handed, or two handed. When we upsize or downsize a weapon, we change its handedness one step and if our end result would be something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed than the weapon can't be used. Of the feats listed, Golaith Grip, Titan Technique, Lighten Weapon, and Titan Slayer all reduce the handedness modification for certain oversized weapons so that you could choose a suitable oversized weapon so that its handedness would be the handedness of a similar weapon of the appropriate size. If ranged weapons have a handedness (which must be light, one-handed, or two-handed, remember) then the feats would result in the handedness for an oversized weapon being an element of the set (light, one-handed, two-handed), so in this case ranged weapons benefit from the feats.
The fiasco with the handedness of firearms seems to lend credence to this interpretation as the designers, in their FAQ errata of the terrible, terrible firearm handedness rule stated:
Just like with non-firearms, a creature cannot wield a weapon that’s far too big or small for it.
Rather than 'just like with melee weapons'.
It could instead be argued that, while they may require one or two hands to be used to wield them, projectile weapons don't have a handedness, for example the CRB says:
Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons: This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon's size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
Since these designations, in this viewpoint, only apply to melee weapons, ranged weapons have no handedness at all! When a game entity lacks a property and a rule tells you to modify that property, you ignore that modification. For example, if you cast Bear's Endurance on a Zombie the spell works just fine (i.e. the Zombie can be a valid target and the spell will come into effect normally) but the Zombie's Constitution score does not change.
If this is the case, then the handedness of projectile weapons can't change when you increase their size. You can certainly still get projectile weapons in different sizes-- the rules explicitly call out that every weapon has a size-- and you still take an accuracy penalty from that other rule:
Inappropriately Sized Weapons: A creature can't make optimum use of a weapon that isn't properly sized for it. A cumulative –2 penalty applies on attack rolls for each size category of difference between the size of its intended wielder and the size of its actual wielder. If the creature isn't proficient with the weapon, a –4 nonproficiency penalty also applies.
but since the handedness doesn't "[change] to something other than light, one-handed, or two-handed by this alteration" you aren't barred from using it regardless of the size. This, obviously, would also render your feats useless with regard to projectile weapons (since there's no handedness to reduce, either).
Despite the weirdness of this perspective, the rules do tend to go out of their way to call out the handedness of ranged weapons when relevant to Two-Weapon fighting in a manner that would seem to lend credence to this interpretation:
Thrown Weapons: The same rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or shuriken as a light weapons when used in this manner, and treat a bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon.
The "Treat x as y" language seems to strongly imply, but doesn't necessarily mean, that these thrown weapons at least don't have a handedness. Certainly the bola in particular never gives itself a handedness-compatible requirement in its description, despite the general rule that ranged weapons ought to do so. This would seem to indicate that at least some ranged weapons have no handedness, but the results of accepting that implication are extremely problematic (an Atomie, for example, could dual-wield Colossal Repeating Heavy Crossbows for example). Similar wording is used when describing how crossbows interact with Two-Weapon Fighting.
It's probably worth noting that the 'treat x as if it were a y' language doesn't always mean that x is not a y in practice as well as theory; for an example, the Forge domain variant channeling reads in part:
you may repair damage to metal objects and metal constructs as if they were creatures
While we all know that constructs, metal or otherwise, are creatures anyways.
Regardless of which of the two RAW-valid positions your group plays by (it's the first one. No one uses the second one. It only comes up when people start trying to argue why these feats and similar things don't work and put their feet in their mouths, but in that context it comes up quite a lot), a character that has any of these feats can wield a projectile weapon at least as large as if that projectile weapon were a two-handed melee weapon.
Extra notes from experience:
- If you get yourself too big of too good of a gun (e.g. my favorite, the X-Laser) your damage will literally be off the charts. Specifically this chart. This is a bad thing because the rules don't say anything about what happens there and there is no way to resolve it as the rules explicitly require you to take actions that you can't take, so my recommendation is not to do it.
- You can safely make any weapon that deals 4d6 or less damage at medium size any size up to Colossal, which conveniently covers all melee weapons (the most damaging I'm aware of is the Chainsaw which deals 3d6 which converts to 3d8 which hits the very maximum value on the table for d8s), but several of the weapons in the technology guide have base damages higher than that. Be extra-careful with Rocket Launchers, which break the table at 'Huge'.
- Oversized technological firearms, while less game-breaking than vanilla full casters, are very blatantly game breaking and you should make sure your making the right character for your group's desired power level before doing this, as being able to hide your power by making e.g. bad spell prep choices is not a luxury you have.
- Unless you're using firearms, be really careful about that -2 per size category attack penalty. That can really add up, especially when you're taking another -5 or so for range. Consider investing in True Strike.
- Regardless of whether you use firearms or not, strongly consider gaining access to Named Bullet if at all feasible. Your investment in damage via your oversized weapon will be redoubled by the free critical hit, and the ability to hit touch AC makes up for the accuracy problems you may be facing if you don't choose to use firearms.
Related Topic
- [RPG] What’s the difference between Realistic Likeness and Disguise Self
- [RPG] Can a kitsune’s tail be prehensile
- [RPG] Does a character need to add Weapon Specialization bonus damage when shooting a needle full of medicine at an ally
- [RPG] Do creatures with multiple arms (4+) get to make a standard attack with each pair
Best Answer
There are no feats that I'm aware of in official or officially licensed products that specifically allow one or more tentacles to be treated like hands for the purposes of wielding weapons. In fact, only a (ahem) handful of feats broach the topic of tentacles—the most interesting likely being the feat Extended Reach (Savage Species 34). In short, feats are not really your go-to here.
To compensate, I can point you to the gloves of man (Savage Species 57) (42,000 gp; 0 lbs.), the description of which, in part, says, "These magic gloves provide humanoid fingers and thumbs for the wearer. Any creature may wear them, provided the creature has tentacles or paws over which to slip them. While wearing the gloves, the creature may manipulate items as if it had fully functional hands." Expensive? Certainly. Nonetheless, despite not being a feat, the gloves do exactly what the question desires.
Wielding weapons with tentacles
Savage Species on Creating an Anthropomorphic Animals says, "An anthropomorphic animal has the natural attacks of the base creature, but it can also use weapons if it did not have hands already," then it continues, saying, "If the base creature has more than two limbs, the anthropomorphic animal has the same number, but two of them become feet. Thus, an octopus-man, for example, would have only six natural attacks rather than eight" (215). I'm not entirely sure how much to read into this description: Savage Species may assume that an anthropomorphic octopus can use its tentacles to wield weapons, that an anthropomorphic octopus has two humanlike legs and six humanlike arms yet retains somehow the tentacle natural attacks tied to those now humanlike arms, or something else entirely. What does seem clear is that there's at least an argument to be made that the game thinks tentacles are already weapon-wielding limbs and that there's no need to take a feat to make them so.
There's also the example of the tako (Oriental Adventures 193), an aberration that has 7 arms according to its stat block but has "eight supple tentacles" in its description. Each of a tako's arms or tentacles or whatever is capable of wielding a weapon.
(Further, the Advanced Dungeons & Dragons, 2nd Edition illustration of the tako shows the creature clearly armed with a variety of weapons rather than just brandishing one.) So talk to the DM and confirm first that there's even a need for a tentacle to be changed by a game element so that it's capable of wielding a weapon as there's a decent argument in favor of there not being such a need.
(By the way, the goal may be to meet the Multiweapon Fighting feat's prerequisite that includes "three or more hands" (Monster Manual 304). If that's the case, urge the DM take into consideration both the Improved Multiweapon Fighting and Greater Multiweapon Fighting feats' prerequisites that include—instead of the earlier feat's hands—"three or more arms" (Savage Species 36 and 35, respectively, and emphasis mine). I know, right?)
Acquiring additional manipulative and semimanipulative limbs
This list is alphabetical. If in a hurry, as they have the most potential for PC use, skip to the sections on Fiendish Grafts and Undead Grafts, paying particular attention to the latter.
Aboleth Grafts: These are almost always incredibly impractical and unsuited for PCs. Aboleth grafts first appeared in the Fiend Folio (208) and were updated to the 3.5 revision by Lord of Madness (215). The Fiend Folio holds the only one of interest here, the aboleth tentacle (FF 208) (50,000 gp; graft) that "typically replaces an arm or forelimb on the grafted creature, though sometimes it is attached just above a forelimb or below an arm." (As the aboleth graft skum tail (ibid.) (6,000 gp; graft) doesn't grant a tail attack, a creature must already have a tail attack to turn the skum tail graft into a manipulator with the feat Prehensile Tail (Serpent Kingdoms 147); getting a tail attack is beyond this question's already prodigious scope.)
However, an aboleth graft that's applied to a creature not created by an aboleth (e.g. a skum (Monster Manual 228)) "dries up and withers over the course of 1d4+1 days, falling off at the end of this period" (LoM 215). The 7th-level Clr spell regenerate [conj] (Player's Handbook 270) can restore the body part the aboleth graft replaced (if any), but even that spell can't restore the aboleth graft itself. (A high-level druid that possesses the feat Aberration Wild Shape (LoM 178) or another creature capable of spending its time constantly in the shape of a skum possibly could—with the DM's permission—probably indefinitely delay its aboleth grafts drying up, withering, and falling off, but that's an enormous, complicated, and precarious investment of resources.)
Fiendish Grafts: A nonevil-aligned creature that's considering a fiendish graft should be aware that for it a fiendish graft's drawbacks are significant. Anyway, the Fiend Folio on Acquiring a Fiendish Graft, in part, says, "Certain magical devices have been discovered that enfold a creature, remove one of its limbs,… and replace the limb with a fiendish graft…" (209), but whether this horrific event also occurs when a fiendish graft is attached conventionally—like, for example, by an O-so-benevolent terrestrial creator—is unstated. None of the fiendish grafts say one way or the other whether they replace or supplement existing body parts, no matter how unusual or disturbing the outcome the latter may be. (Yes, I'm looking at you, fiendish ear (210) (2,500 gp; 0 lbs.), and especially at you, fiendish jaw (210) (2,000 gp; graft), you weirdo.) Ask the DM.
Illithid Grafts: Lord of Madness and Underdark present additional illithid grafts (216 and 77, respectively) that supplement those found in the Fiend Folio (212–13). Possessing even one illithid graft causes the creature to suffer a −4 penalty on Will saving throws against mind-affecting effects and psionic powers. That said, the only one of interest is the illithid graft rending claw (FF 212–13) (5,000 gp; graft) that is specifically a manipulator (albeit a poor one for fine work) and that does not say specifically that it replaces a limb. However, it is "actually an entire arm—overlong for the grafted creature’s height (typically reaching all the way to the floor) and powerfully muscled," so it might take a few beers to convince the DM that a PC can have, like, nine of them or whatever. (The two tentacle illithid grafts from Underdark are each specifically "grafted to a… recipient in place of its own arm or forelimb" (77). Are one or more of a specific creature's tentacles also its forelimbs? Ask the DM.)
Undead Grafts: Libris Mortis updates for the 3.5 revision the undead grafts that appeared originally in the Fiend Folio (214). The Fiend Folio on Undead Grafts says that "undead grafts are formed of nonliving flesh attached to a still-living body" (ibid.) but, like Libris Mortis, mentions no general rule that says an undead graft replaces an appropriate part rather than the creature simply getting more parts. In fact, the implication is the opposite: a creature gets more parts unless the specific undead graft says it replaces a part. Compare: The undead graft mummified eye (LM 80) (50,000 gp; graft), in part, says, "This hard, round orb fits into a humanoid creature’s empty eye socket," and the undead graft vampire fangs (ibid.) (25,000 gp; graft), in part, says, "This set of sharp teeth replaces the creature’s existing teeth," while the undead graft ghostly arm (ibid.) (6,000 gp; 0 lbs.) says
Thus, apparently, for instance, a creature can get any number of these gray, incorporeal arms and gain that many incorporeal touch attacks as secondary natural weapons. (For a creature that possesses the extraordinary ability sneak attack like a rogue, this in particular is a pretty sweet deal!) (Other limbs, of course, have different specific rules on how they're used.)
Although one might think there'd be some issues with having a chunk of an undead creature cleaved to one's living form, undead grafts don't generally cause the creature problems. Narratively, there might be some issues (e.g. Whose arm was this?, How many innocent folks has this arm slain?, Is this arm evil, and, if it is, am I also evil?… that sort of thing), but, mechanically, having a mummy arm or whatever? No big deal.
Yuan-ti Grafts: Those that originally in the Fiend Folio (214–15) were updated to the 3.5 revision by Serpent Kingdoms (154), and includes this brief description: "Yuan-ti grafts are serpentine body parts that can be attached to the body of another corporeal creature," with other details explaining who attaches them (i.e. usually—surprise!—yuan-ti) and who gets them (i.e. usually—surprise!—yuan-ti allies) but not if such grafts generally replace or supplement existing parts. A creature suffers no particular drawbacks upon acquiring one or more yuan-ti grafts, but a creature that possesses at least one yuan-ti graft counts as a serpentfolk (5), a nonsubtype designation that nonetheless carries some weight (q.v. feats like Puff Torso (147), answers to this question).
Of interest is the serpent arm (154) (6,000 gp; graft) that's a "long, flexible arm [that] ends in a snake head." Because the arm has a mouth, a DM may allow it to wield a magic weapon that possesses the magic weapon special ability mouthpick (LoM 46) (+1 bonus; 0 lbs.), although a stricter DM may forbid it due to that magic weapon special ability's technical specifications. (The yuan-ti graft added tail (ibid.) (6,000 gp; graft), despite granting the creature the special attack constrict, still doesn't grant a proper tail attack (q.v. Aboleth Grafts, above).) (The serpent arm graft also might be susceptible as per this question.)
There are no new manipulative or semimanipulative limbs available as beholder grafts (FF 208–9), inevitable grafts (from the Dragon #315 article "Planescape: The Exiled Factions" 46 but fleshwarpers shouldn't get their hopes up as there are only two and they're both pointless and overpriced), maug grafts (FF 213–14 and acquiring them are narratively complicated anyway), pirate grafts (from the Dragon #318 article "X Marks the Spot: Setting Sail with Saber and Spell" 53–4), or silthilar grafts (LoM 215–16). Magic of Eberron includes deathless grafts (127–9), elemental grafts (129–34), and plant grafts (134–6), but these kinds of grafts—that, by the way, follow a much stricter and unified ruleset—offer neither new nor replacement limbs.
In addition to the aforementioned arms of the naga (SS 55) (56,000 gp; 8 lbs.), consider the spare hand (Magic Item Compendium 137) (12,000 gp; 0 lbs.) and using the Improving Magic Item rules (233) to pay 18,000 gp to add a spare hand to your spare hand and so on. With a successful Use Magic Device skill check to emulate a level 5 artificer's class feature infusions (DC 25), a wearer of a spare hand should be able to convince the hand that its been powered by a 3rd-level infusion à la Lidda expending turn attempts she doesn't have to activate the magic chalice (PH 86). Clear this with the DM, though, and make the DM aware that there could be significant fallout from saying yes (e.g. belt of the wide earth (204) (8,000 gp; 0 lbs.), vestments of ebonsilk (147) (5,000 gp; 1 lb.)).
Also, compare the spare hand with the replacement arm for good-aligned creatures, the arm of Nyr (Defenders of the Faith 26) (12,800 gp; 0 lbs.). This player suspects most DMs would balk at a player trying to add to his PC's arm of Nyr a second, third, or ninety-eighth arm of Nyr, but it may be worth an ask.
Note: The writer extends his heartfelt apologies to the biologists who read this answer and yelled at their screens, "Arms have suckers along their lengths while tentacles have suckers just on their ends!" By necessity, this answer uses game terms not biology terms.