The Totemist Handbook

[McPoyo]

Or manticore belt, which gets multiple attacks as a standard action, applying precision damage to each at a higher damage die.

[Triskavanski]

:/

I see its jedi mind tricks..


Well jedi mind tricks don't work.

The belt is a volley, you don't get precision dice.
The arms meld with your own. You only get a total of 4 claw attacks.

[Brainpiercing]

The belt is a volley, you don't get precision dice.

I would tend to disagree. You get one attack roll per spine, and can attack several targets. Compare that to other volleys such as Manyshot. I grant you that the nerf-bat created some volleys that actually required multiple attack rolls, such as the master-thrower trick.

The arms meld with your own. You only get a total of 4 claw attacks.

That is likely correct, since there is no firm RAW to even say anything else. As I've said repeatedly, it is wise to just apply common sense to natural weapon, because by any other method you will get iffy results.

[McPoyo]

The belt isn't a volley, it requires one attack roll per projectile, and on top of that doesn't call out the lack of allowed precision damage like other volley attacks.

The chimera mask has one decent thing, and a whole bunch of bad. Just shaping it gives you immunity to flanking, which can be pretty useful. However, unless your dm uses a bunch of rogues or other sneak attacking creatures, there's other, more useful, melds to occupy that meld-slot.

And you should never bind two of it's three binds, and the third is better replicated by other melds. Crown meld: you screw yourself over. Get an extra move action and essentially stagger yourself in the next round? What? Soul Meld: omfg when you get access to this, you could afford to have a portable hole full of belts of battle even on npc wealth! Get an extra standard action in return for losing your entire next round. How is that remotely good? How does that make you not screw yourself royally? On top of that, you have to invest a full complement of essentia (not doable until high levels) to not treat everything like it's a secondary attack or worse!

The totem chakra is the only one that doesn't screw you entirely, but the natural attacks it grants would be better with Girallon's Arms, due to power attack multiplicity and essentia improvement, or Manticore belt due to action economy and essentia improvements. Which would also free up the head for more innately better melds.

[Triskavanski]

As a standard action, you can snap your tail to loose a volley of
spikes equal to the number of points of essentia you invest in
your manticore belt.

How is it not a volley when it specifically says it is a volley?
Flaming ray or something like that, 3rd level cleric spell. You get an attack roll for each ray, can attack multiple targets.. is a volley.

I'll give you that it does attack multiple times as a standard action. But this isn't actually even a natural attack.

Bite: The creature attacks with its mouth, dealing piercing
slashing, and bludgeoning damage.
Claw or Talon: The creature rips with a sharp appendage, dealing
piercing and slashing damage.
Gore: The creature spears the opponent with an antler, horn, or
similar appendage, dealing piercing damage.
Slap or Slam: The creature batters opponents with an appendage,
dealing bludgeoning damage.
Sting: The creature stabs with a stinger, dealing piercing damage.
Sting attacks usually deal damage from poison in addition to
hit point damage.
Tentacle: The creature flails at opponents with a powerful tentacle,
dealing bludgeoning (and sometimes slashing) damage.

The tail never mentions its a natural attack, natural attack: spike doesn't appear on the list. Thus it isn't enhanced by things that enhance natural attacks.

And power attack multiplicity? Already have that with dread carpiece. +2 damage, for 1 point lost.
Need enhancement bonus? Amulet of natural attacks. Enhancement bonuses don't stack.

This isn't about debating the other two parts of the chimera meld, ony the totem part.

[McPoyo]

One more attack per round is what I meant with multiplicity.

[bearsarebrown]

How is it not a volley when it specifically says it is a volley?

It's using the real definition of the word, not the DnD term. Because a volley is defined as multiple attacks with a single attack roll.

[Brainpiercing]

How is it not a volley when it specifically says it is a volley?

It's using the real definition of the word, not the DnD term. Because a volley is defined as multiple attacks with a single attack roll.

That's the explanation I was looking for.

However, as has been said before, the definition of Volley in D&D terms was weakened. It's not a defintion in the core rules, either.

As to the natural weapon problem: It's undefined. A GM has to allow it, I guess.  I must say a spine shooting totemist, especially when it add some Swift Hunter or other source of precision damage, or is backed by a Bard, is a very formidable combatant. But centering a build a build around it really only works if you're going to enhance the spines as natural weapons. So basically this is just a GM dependancy - we know we can't always avoid them.

[Triskavanski]

One of the big things though to watch out for is that you start trying to push something like that though and suddenly there is a TPK as the Min/Maxing DM does the same thing with his manticores. All six of them.

Or when i start throwing Feral Gorrillan or what ever you use to get the 6 claw attacks with 4 arms. Cause the draconic creature.. Doesn't work. They say use which ever is higher.

[McPoyo]

Normal manticores do that to begin with, I fail to see the problem.

[Triskavanski]

Well if you use the whole jedi-mind trick that the volley isn't a volley because its a real volley and not a fake real volley.

Course I know thats not the point of min-maxing, it has no concern of what evil the DM can do to you when you use a enough jedi-mind tricks.

[bearsarebrown]

If the DM wants to be evil he can be evil. Building characters that can do more damage is not something that ruins a story. Building characters who can change the world on a whim and can solve every encounter with a standard action ruin stories.

[Bigtuna]

Im not sure i get the Chakra thing right.
If I take dip into totemist - say 2 lvls for some extra arms/attacks with a Garillion bound to totem chakra - I get 2 extra attacks with my brand new arms rigth?
But if i want to bind a soulmeld to the totem chakra i have to bind to another Chakra? (It's the wording on page 51 in the book if there should be doubt).
So am i binding the Garillion to the totemist chakra AND the "arms" location/chakra - it's just taking up a magic item location?

And let's say i later take the feat Open lesser Chakra:Arms - does this give me the Rend ability when Totem chakra is bound to the arms?
And if i only took 2 lvl's of Totemist can i make more Chakra binds with that feat?
How about the spell:" Open Chakra" and the power: "Open Chakra, Psionic" is it just the location or do i get another Chakra bind?

Damn this class seems interesting - but also very very confusing....

[Sinfire Titan]

Im not sure i get the Chakra thing right.
If I take dip into totemist - say 2 lvls for some extra arms/attacks with a Garillion bound to totem chakra - I get 2 extra attacks with my brand new arms rigth?
But if i want to bind a soulmeld to the totem chakra i have to bind to another Chakra? (It's the wording on page 51 in the book if there should be doubt).
So am i binding the Garillion to the totemist chakra AND the "arms" location/chakra - it's just taking up a magic item location?

And let's say i later take the feat Open lesser Chakra:Arms - does this give me the Rend ability when Totem chakra is bound to the arms?
And if i only took 2 lvl's of Totemist can i make more Chakra binds with that feat?
How about the spell:" Open Chakra" and the power: "Open Chakra, Psionic" is it just the location or do i get another Chakra bind?

Damn this class seems interesting - but also very very confusing....

For the first, no. It needs to be shaped on a different one (your Arms slot), but you can bind it to only the Totem.

For the second, the Open Chakra feats only grant the ability to bind soulmelds to that chakra, it doesn't confer the abilities for binding a soulmeld to that chakra (unless you actually bind it).

Incarnum as a whole is confusing. The worst part is lack of errata.

[Brainpiercing]

For the second, the Open Chakra feats only grant the ability to bind soulmelds to that chakra, it doesn't confer the abilities for binding a soulmeld to that chakra (unless you actually bind it).

Incarnum as a whole is confusing. The worst part is lack of errata.

For consistency's sake I would let the feats act like the Spells: Allow you to open AND bind to the chakra, i.e. providing the bind with the open chakra. I believe the spells are worded to enable this, whereas the feats - which have horrible level requirements anyway, are rather more poorly worded.

[Ithamar]

Just to confirm, the 4 claw attacks from Landshark Boots are all primary, correct?  So no penalties on the attack roll and full STR to damage?

Having a discussion with another DM about it and he is trying to rule that the hand claws are primary but the feet claws are secondary.

[Bigtuna]

[Ithamar]

Yeah, I'm pretty much pestering the DM with questions regarding every meld I plan on shaping.

Thankfully we're starting at ECL 6, and I'm playing a goliath.  With their STR boost and their racial ability that treats every jump as if they had a running start, hitting that jump check shouldn't be an issue really.  Plus putting essentia into Landshark Boots gives you a decent bonus to jump checks as it is.  I think this guy's jump modifier will be like +24 or so at the level we're starting at.

[McPoyo]

Minor correction: 5 foot horizontal is DC 5, or DC 10 without a running start. 5 foot vertical is 20.

[Bigtuna]

"Minor correction: 5 foot horizontal is DC 5, or DC 10 without a running start. 5 foot vertical is 20."

Yes - and Landshark boots is a high jump - so DC 20. What's the correction?