| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Hey guys,
I'm wondering if anyone can point me to any text that talks about a limit of natural attacks per limb - as in, you can't have 4 claw attacks if you only have two arms.
Specifically, I have a player who is currently a level 5 Barbarian with the lesser beast totem rage power (which grants two d6 primary claw attacks when raging), who is about to become a Brightness Seeker. The Brightness Seeker has an ability that can grant two d6 claw attacks and a d6 bite.
This means one of two things: either she has 5 primary natural attacks, including 4 claws (despite only having two arms), or she has a useless rage power. My gut tells me that you can't have more than one claw attack per arm, as I've never seen a monster with that kind of attack routine, but I can't actually find this in text.
If I'm right, I plan on refunding the rage power and allowing her to select a different one, while still allowing her buy rage powers that require lesser beast totem as a prerequisite. Does that sound reasonable?
Thanks,
Chris
My understanding is one attack per limb. If you have 2 claws and then you gain 2 claw attacks from another ability you still only have 2 claw attacks. You need 4 arms to get 4 claw attacks.
My understanding is one attack per limb. If you have 2 claws and then you gain 2 claw attacks from another ability you still only have 2 claw attacks. You need 4 arms to get 4 claw attacks.
That's what I'm thinking, too, but if possible I'd like some text to point to. Maybe it's one of those things that nobody bothered to write down because it seemed obvious?
I think the nearest you will get is Claws - Eidolon
"Claws (Ex): An eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks. These attacks are primary attacks. The claws deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). The eidolon must have the limbs evolution to take this evolution. This evolution can only be applied to the limbs (legs) evolution once This evolution can be selected more than once, but the eidolon must possess an equal number of the limbs evolution."
One limb - one attack. It's really that simple.
There's one exception that I'm aware of: Ultimate Combat has the feat Feral Combat Training - that allows you to use a natural attack for the purpose of flurrying. (So a level 6 monk with a natural bite attack could spend a ki-point to do 3 full-BAB bites and one more at -5.)
While I do not remember a rule limiting a natural weapon to a single attack, I know there is a rule specifying how to get more than one attack: Iterative Attacks.
I don't think there is a rule specifically limiting natural weapons because ALL weapons of any kind are limited to one attack as default by the game system unless you have magic, or a high BAB or some feat that allows more than one.
The game allows one attack per weapon as a basis for the combat system.
Hint: legs are limbs, too. Or do cats not get to use their claw attacks at all?
Cats have 2 claw attacks. I don't think hind limbs are not considered natural weapons.
While I do not remember a rule limiting a natural weapon to a single attack, I know there is a rule specifying how to get more than one attack: Iterative Attacks.
I don't think there is a rule specifically limiting natural weapons because ALL weapons of any kind are limited to one attack as default by the game system unless you have magic, or a high BAB or some feat that allows more than one.
The game allows one attack per weapon as a basis for the combat system.
You do not get iterative attacks with natural weapons. With natural weapons you get 1 attack per limb that can make an attack at full BAB. If you attack with a weapon and natural attacks all natural attacks are considered secondary attacks (-5 BAB / 1/2 Str damage).
Hint: legs are limbs, too. Or do cats not get to use their claw attacks at all?
I think natural attacks with rear limbs are specifically "talons" - some dinosaurs, for example, have two claws and two talon attacks.
I think David has the closest thing to a text example - good find, by the way! I guess it really is one of those things that is just assumed rather than spelled out. I know in 3.5 we used to see a lot of "if you already have a claw attack, use the one with the highest damage" text, and sometimes you'd get a size boost, but I don't recall seeing anything like that in PF.
Thanks for the replies, gang!
EDIT: I'm thinking I'll either offer the option to repurchase her rage power, or allow her claws to upgrade her claws a size when she's raging. I suspect she'll choose the latter, but I shouldn't assume. The prestige class fits so perfectly for her character concept that I want it to feel worthwhile.
|
Actually, there IS a precedent for getting more than one attack with a single Natural Weapon:
An eidolon gains Multiattack as a bonus feat if it has 3 or more natural attacks and does not already have that feat. If it does not have the requisite 3 or more natural attacks (or it is reduced to less than 3 attacks), the eidolon instead gains a second attack with one of its natural weapons, albeit at a –5 penalty. If the eidolon later gains 3 or more natural attacks, it loses this additional attack and instead gains Multiattack.
Not that I'm arguing against anyone, I actually LIKE your idea of bumping up a size category. Just pointing out that there IS a precedent for this :)
EDIT: Looks like Animal Companions get it, too.
Animal Companions, Multiattack
An animal companion gains Multiattack as a bonus feat if it has three or more natural attacks and does not already have that feat. If it does not have the requisite three or more natural attacks, the animal companion instead gains a second attack with its primary natural weapon, albeit at a –5 penalty.
Natural attacks are ruled on CRB page 182. Creatures do not receive additional attacks for natural weapons due to high BAB.
In the event that a creature uses manufactured weaponry with natural weapons, a limb can only contribute to one attack form -- if a 6th-level barbarian has two claws and a longsword and a greatsword in his inventory, his attack options include: Two claws, or Longsword +6/1 and a claw, or Greatsword +6/1.
Summoners and animal companions are specific situations that allow for a limb to have more than one natural attack. This specific case does not change all general cases any more than one person wielding a longsword to deal 1d8 damage makes all attacks made by anybody deal 1d8 damage.
As such, the effects of his abilities overlap and do not stack.
I certainly agree with allowing your Barbarian player to retrain the Rage power, but I'm not sure that the unrelated~ ability should allow him to qualify for higher-level rage powers. As you know, Rage powers go in chains where the top-tiers are the most powerful; by allowing him to short-circuit the base rage power, he has an increased access to capstone rage powers. So, it seems that one path may make the Barbarian weaker than intended, and the other more powerful than intended. I suggest you weigh that when making the decision.
I think this is one of those "the rules don't need to say you fall prone when you go unconscious" kind of things
Why can't the barb put claws on his feet? Then he can 6/1 with greatsword and claw 2x. Add a bite attack and he can 6/1 with greatsword and claw x2 and bite.
Because the game is, oddly enough, written by bilaterally symmetric bipeds, and assumes bilaterally sysmetric bipedal characters unless otherwise stated. At the very least, the character needs one leg to stand on while attacking with the other.
Shrug if a monk can flurry while his hands are full anybody else can kick rapidly twice as part of a small hop.
A monk can flurry with full hands specifically because the rules say that monks are allowed to do that.
A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full.
If this were the standard rule there would be no need to mention it.
There is even a precedence Eidolons can get claws on their feet even biped ones.
They need to be grappling or use the rake ability to use them though
there is no RAW that says claws can not be on feet, and that if you have them you somehow cant use them.
Rake (Ex) A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks under certain conditions, typically when it grapples its foe. In addition to the options available to all grapplers, a monster with the rake ability gains two free claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. The bonus and damage caused by these attacks is included in the creature's description. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn already grappling to use its rake—it can't begin a grapple and rake in the same turn.
Format: rake (2 claws +8, 1d4+2); Location: Special Attacks.
Now why on earth would this ability be neccesary, at all, if you can attack with claws on your feet? By your reading of the rules this ability does nothing, and the lion should be able to have 5 attacks all the time.
While they should have stipulated in the book they did not stipulate. and since eidolon can be made with claws on 4 limbs it is enough to justify that a barbarian gets clawed feet. He gets 5 attacks.
What does the edilion ability rake do in your opinion?
Rake (Ex): An eidolon grows dangerous claws on its feet, allowing it to make 2 rake attacks on foes it is grappling. These attacks are primary attacks. The eidolon receives these additional attacks each time it succeeds on a grapple check against the target. These rake attacks deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). This evolution is only available to eidolons of the quadruped base form. This evolution counts as one natural attack toward te eidolon's maximum. The summoner must be at least 4th level before selecting this evolution.
-Why can't the edilion use the attacks all the time?
now he cant wear boots and he cant wear gloves
My turn. Show me a rule that says that.
Houserule it in you game if you want.
Its not a house rule. Its a neccesary implication from the existence of rake as an ability.
Just for the record... anyone can kick. Let's clear that up right now. Just like anyone can use a Bladed Boot weapon. So, logically anyone that had foot claws, could make an attack with them.
Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following [...]
Without any rules restrictions on which limb(s) the claw power spawns from, its up to the GM to determine the location.
I will note that most creatures with hind claws (in description and flavor) do not actually have 4 claw attacks.
please read before you post.
Convo over. I don't need your insults.
The original question is really irrelevant if he's only getting 4 claws, since he need not use the same limb for two claws. A biped can have 4 claws, two on its feet and two on its hands, as is made clear with the rules text for eidolon claws. Unless both abilities say "you grow claws on your hands/arms," he can go ahead and just have one pair be on his feet.
Yes, it is awkward to visualize, but there is precedent for allowing feet/legs to have claw attacks.
Also, there is no text to back up a RAW ruling that a limb cannot have multiple attacks on it. There are limitations on the eidolon's claw evolution, but those specific rules do not apply to anything except eidolons or summoners who get their claws from that evolution. You'll be exercising rule zero if you rule against multiple natural attacks on the same limb, unless there's text I'm unaware of that prevents this.
You will, however, have to give up one natural attack with that limb per weapon attack you make with that limb. So for instance if you had four claws all on your right hand, and you made an attack with a weapon using that hand, you'd only get three of your claws.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, it is awkward to visualize, but there is precedent for allowing feet/legs to have claw attacks.
This is somewhat circular, since you have to rule that the edilions claws allow you to do this in the absence of other limbs without the rake ability. I think the rake abilities very existence argues against being able to do this. Rake would not be an ability, at all, if back legs were attacks by default.
There is also precident that claws on the back legs don't work from
Lions/every big cat: They do have claws on their back legs. The full attack doesn't list them.
Tigers: Same
Bears: Oh my
Dragons: they can use claw claw bite wing wing... but not their back claws... and they could theoretically be flying (making it easier for them to do so than a human) why is that?
Cat: claws on feet, only has bite claw claw
Cheetah claws on feet, only has bite claw claw
Chimera: 2 claws (and three heads) back legs not used
Bone devil: 2 claws
Pit fiend: 2 claws.
Some monsters (do so, but they're specifically called out as a weapon and are usually talons, not claws.
Velociraptor- talons
Intellect devourer (4 claws) -Didn't this thing used to float in the air? Or am i thinking of the skeletal platypus...
Just my opinion, but I think referring to a horribly muddy and unclear base class (summoner) won't help making anything more clear.
On another opinion note, I am pretty sure RAI did not intend for
'foot claws', I can because RAW does not very specifically in the letter forbid me to do so gets to be a very old and tiresome argument, claws on feet is not the standard.
As to the OP, I'd go with with the damage increase on the claws while raging, it seems a fair solution.
If you guys like that, you will love this.
The reading for pounce in the monster manual says.
Pounce (Ex)
When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).
So, if you have an eidolon with 4 claws and rake, do you get the 4 claws and the rake attack or just 2 claws and a rake.
Also the rake ability mentions that the eidolon grows the talons to do this, not that he needs the claws as a pre-requisite. Making the Rake a 2 point evolution ability, 4 if you count the points already sunk into the legs.
This turns the rend ability into a minimum of a 3 point evolution, 5 if you count the initial pair of limbs.
Consider this a +1 to fact that involving the mechanics of the eidolon in regards to a completely different class ability is rather inane. The eidolon is an exception to the rules on multiple fronts and in no way should be used as a basis or proving ground for another class mechanic.
However I also have no real RAW that I can find saying the claws need to be on your arms. Maybe it is detailed more in the books, but the pfsrd didn't mention anything of the sort. Given that, I would be hard pressed to say "no" by RAW. Basically this combination would allow for a full attack of 4 claws and a bite if the player chose to put 2 claws on arms and then 2 claws on legs. As someone mentioned the game is based around a biped creature type and intent might be the arms, but the rules don't make the distinction at this time (maybe a FAQ will be created in the future).
My post about the Eidolon is not about the rake ability it is the wording in the claw ability that allows Eidolons to get claws on their feet once and only once. Since there is no additional wording this means per RAW a Biped can get claws on their feet and attack with them.
So if a Biped Eidolon can do it why would a Barbarian, a better fighter then an Eidolon (based on BAB), not be able to fight with claws on his feet?
This is what i mean by circular. CAN a biped eidolon do it? I don't think that they can.
I think the reason that the claws rule can only be taken for legs once is to prevent someone from having a clawed centipede with lightning fast movement AND the maximum number of attacks; in other words, to keep the limbs (arm) evolution relevant.
Of course a bipedal Eidolon can do it. Here are the entire set of restrictions on the Claws evolution:
And again your example is assuming your conclussion. You can attack with all four claws on your feet because.... you can attack with all four claws on your feet. RAW i agree you can make a case for it, but i don't think that its RAI since the VAST majority of clawed critters are assumined to be standing on SOMETHING or flying. The claws on legs rule appears to be for eiddolons with multiple legs.
If it doesn't hold for the Eidolon then it doesn't hold for the barbarian even IF he can decide that claws come in on his feet.
Of course a bipedal Eidolon can do it. Here are the entire set of restrictions on the Claws evolution:And again your example is assuming your conclussion. You can attack with all four claws on your feet because.... you can attack with all four claws on your feet. RAW i agree you can make a case for it, but i don't think that its RAI since the VAST majority of clawed critters are assumined to be standing on SOMETHING or flying. The claws on legs rule appears to be for eiddolons with multiple legs.
The problem of your argument BNW is that most of the creatures statted out in the bestiary are quaruped with claws on the front legs. Its how they were statted out
We're talking about bipeds with claws on the feet. Different case all together. Without any restrictions in the language guiding players to which limbs the claws powers appear on, we as players can only assume that feet is a valid target.
The only RAW wording for a biped with claws on the feet comes from the eidolon, which is why so many are citing it.
We're talking about bipeds with claws on the feet. Without any restrictions in the language guiding players to which limbs the claws appear on, we as players can only assume that feet is a valid target.
Its not the only assumption, its the assumption that gives people more power.. hence its the assumption that will be clung too.
The problem of your argument BNW is that most of the creatures statted out in the bestiary are quaruped with claws on the front legs.
But the devils were not. Besides, shouldn't it be easier for a quadraped? any cat can jump on something and rake with the back legs, but humans need years of training to throw a decent kick
The only RAW wording for claws on the feet comes from the eidolon, which is why so many are citing it.
A creature which can have multiple sets of legs, so its iffy.
But the devils were not. Besides, shouldn't it be easier for a quadraped? any cat can jump on something and rake with the back legs, but humans need years of training to throw a decent kick.
This may be the case in real life, but in Pathfinder an untrained PC can throw a kick as an Unarmed Strike without any further penalty.
But the devils were not. Besides, shouldn't it be easier for a quadraped? any cat can jump on something and rake with the back legs, but humans need years of training to throw a decent kick.This may be the case in real life, but in Pathfinder an untrained PC can throw a kick as an Unarmed Strike without any further penalty.
So why isn't the peasant's attack routine head punch punch kick kick ?
-the ability to throw an unarmed strike with any part of your body is technically a function of being a MONK with improved unarmed strike. The feat itself technically does not grant that ability.
But the devils were not. Besides, shouldn't it be easier for a quadraped? any cat can jump on something and rake with the back legs, but humans need years of training to throw a decent kick.This may be the case in real life, but in Pathfinder an untrained PC can throw a kick as an Unarmed Strike without any further penalty.
Just an attack of opportunity and nonlethal damage, no real penalties there
So why isn't the peasant's attack routine head punch punch kick kick ?
-the ability to throw an unarmed strike with any part of your body is technically a function of being a MONK with improved unarmed strike. The feat itself technically does not grant that ability.
First:
A natural attack is not the same as an Unarmed attack. A peasant could head butt or punch or punch or kick or kick. If they have BAB of +6 then two attacks and if TWF then two attacks. Just like any PC.
Just because you have limbs doesn't mean you have a natural attack from said limbs.
Second:
Again to quote from the Combat Chapter:
Attack
Making an attack is a standard action.Melee Attacks
With a normal melee weapon, you can strike any opponent within 5 feet. (Opponents within 5 feet are considered adjacent to you.) Some melee weapons have reach, as indicated in their descriptions. With a typical reach weapon, you can strike opponents 10 feet away, but you can't strike adjacent foes (those within 5 feet).Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following [gets into unarmed vs armed rules]
Making kicks or headbutts is not unique to the Monk class.
Just an attack of opportunity and nonlethal damage, no real penalties there
Which is the same penalty for making any form of Unarmed Attack... which was the point. You can make a kick without incurring any further penalty.
A natural attack is not the same as an Unarmed attack. A peasant could head butt or punch or punch or kick or kick. If they have BAB of +6 then two attacks and if TWF then two attacks. Just like any PC.
you're trying to work in one attack per limb, 5 weapon fighting with claws... regardless of the raw saying "don't do this" whenever the game has done it, that isn't how they did it.
There's also no PC ability i'm aware of that says you can put the claws on your feet. The default is that claws= hands and talons= feet.
Making kicks or headbutts is not unique to the Monk class.
hmmm.. did they change that from 3.5?
Just an attack of opportunity and nonlethal damage, no real penalties there
Which is the same penalty for making any form of Unarmed Attack... which was the point. You can make a kick without incurring any further penalty.
you can make A kick as your one attack but you can't make 5 unarmed strikes with 5 limbs. Just because you HAVE it doesn't mean you're in a position to USE it.
you can make A kick as your one attack but you can't make 5 unarmed strikes with 5 limbs. Just because you HAVE it doesn't mean you're in a position to USE it.
Ah, i see our disconnect now. You can make 5 Natural Attacks with 5 limbs if you had them though. Unarmed Attack is does not function the same as a Natural attack (just clearing that up for those that are reading).
If a character had:
Bite, 4 Claws they could use all their natural attacks - at any time. Regardless of situation, regardless of where the claws were - on the feet, hands, etc. We know that they are all availabe at the same time because of the formatting.
If they were not to be used at the same time they would say Bite, 2 claws OR 2 claws (example).
A dragon can use Bite, 2 Claws, Wings, Tail Slap all while Prone on the ground. Just like you could use the claws on your feet if you're standing up. There are no qualifiers for when most natural attacks are active *.
*There are some attacks like Rend that do trigger off circumstance.
A natural attack is not the same as an Unarmed attack. A peasant could head butt or punch or punch or kick or kick. If they have BAB of +6 then two attacks and if TWF then two attacks. Just like any PC.you're trying to work in one attack per limb, 5 weapon fighting with claws... regardless of the raw saying "don't do this" whenever the game has done it, that isn't how they did it.
There's also no PC ability i'm aware of that says you can put the claws on your feet. The default is that claws= hands and talons= feet.
you can make A kick as your one attack but you can't make 5 unarmed strikes with 5 limbs. Just because you HAVE it doesn't mean you're in a position to USE it.
The bold part is your assumption of the implication. It isn't RAW, it is your opinion on what the intent is. We can't know intent as we didn't write the rules, and neither did you. Paizo left this open by not stating explicitly that the claws go on your arms for either of the abilities and having all natural claw weapons being defaulted to "primary." As long as the creature has a limb to put a claw that it gained from an ability that doesn't limit where it can go, RAW allows for it (until an FAQ or errata comes out). Basically it is sloppy wording on Paizos part that allows for it to happen. The ability says you get claws, it doesn't limit where they can be placed IE "Your hands grow claws etc" It is powerful, and I would expect an FAQ to limit it, but until then I wouldn't be comfortable saying RAW tells you it can't be done.
Ah, i see our disconnect now.
Its not a disconnect. Its the pattern demonstrating RAI in accord with common sense that assumes you're standing on something when you attack.
You can make 5 Natural Attacks with 5 limbs if you had them though.
A lion has 4 limbs and a bite.. it only makes 2 claws and a bite when it attacks. Why? We know it has claws on the back because thats what it uses to rake.
If a character had:Bite, 4 Claws they could use all their natural attacks - at any time.
1) What says you can put claws on your feet?
2) Why does a lion need rake? Why not full attack with all 4 claws and the bite?Regardless of situation, regardless of where the claws were - on the feet, hands, etc. We know that they are all availabe at the same time because of the formatting.
Formatting which does not exist for the hypothetical character.
1) What says you can put claws on your feet?
2) Why does a lion need rake? Why not full attack with all 4 claws and the bite?
1. The Eidolon Evolution says that you can have claws on its Limbs (Legs) and ONLY on its Limbs (legs) [in that instance]. Thus a bipedal Eidolon has Claws on their feet that they may attack with. Do you agree?
2. Because a Lion does not have 4 claws on their stat sheet? Because that is how a Lion is formatted? That is a design choice that I cannot answer. We can see that it is possible to have claws on your feet though, from the Eidolon.
A lion has 4 limbs, but only 2 Claws. It does not have 4 Claws - RAW. The word "Claws" only refers to an attack form (Claws), not the actual physical makeup/description of a Lion.