5 sneak attacks at level 3: Can I do this?


Rules Questions

1 to 50 of 87 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

So suppose I make a ninja, and choose a race that can give me a couple claw attacks - Catfolk, Tiefling, or Tengu, for example. Now take the Adopted trait for the Half-Orc Tusked race trait to get a bite attack (or use the bite attack that comes for free with the Tengu).

At level 1: Take the Multiattack feat.
At level 2: Take the Unarmed Combat Training ninja trick to gain Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat.
At level 3: Take the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.

Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?

And unarmed strikes count as light, so they're only at -2 each thanks to Two-Weapon Fighting. Using the unarmed strikes with the natural attacks makes all the natural attacks count as secondary, but thanks to Multiattack they're still only at -2. And if I'm flanking or the opponent is denied their DEX bonus to AC via being blinded or stunned or whatever, do I get my 2d6 sneak attack bonus damage on each attack?

Furthermore, when I get to level 8, my BAB hits +6, so do I get *another* attack with my foot that can get sneak attack damage (now at +4d6)? And yet another if I take Improved Two Weapon Fighting? (If so, I'll probably be taking Improved Two Weapon Feint shortly thereafter).

I know this might not be the best way to do this build (ninjas probably want Weapon Finesse pretty early), but do the rules work the way I've described?


If you do a full attack action and all attacks qualify for sneak attack, then I don't see a problem. Yes it works.


Yes, all that will work.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Well, you can't get the Half-Orc's bite attack with the adopted trait. That's an old issue differentiating racial traits and race traits.

But you can spend a Ki point for an extra attack when full rounding.

Dark Archive

Tengu Ninja can indeed rock out the unarmed / natural sneak attacks.

If he takes Flurry of Stars as his first ninja trick, Rapid Shot as his first feat, and blows another ki point for an extra attack, he can also unleash five shuriken (at -4 to hit) as a full attack action. It might eat up all his ki for the day, at that level, but if someone is flat-footed (and susceptible to sneak attack, and has a relatively low flat-footed AC, and no DR...), it can be an impressive chunk of damage.

Granted, that's a whole lot of 'ifs' that need to line up for that to happen...


Well, provided that the GM allows you to grow tusks just because you were adopted by orcs and/or half-orcs. I know I wouldn't as that is something that is innate in a race and, for instance, a tengu which does not possess teeth would not grow teeth because its adoptive parents have them.

Improved Unarmed Strike does not give you additional attacks. It simply makes any unarmed attacks you make not provide AoO and deal lethal damage. Natural attacks are not the same as unarmed attacks and so IUS does nothing for them. Otherwise a 1st level Monk would have as many attacks as the player could list body parts (2 Fists, 2 Elbows, 2 Feet, 2 Knees, Headbutt, etc.).

If you use two-weapon fighting, then it only gives you a bonus if you use two weapons, allowing you to strike with your main weapon at full BAB, the off-hand weapon at -2 (provided it is light), and take any other natural attacks as secondary attacks.

For example, a Tengu with both Bite and Claw attacks (you don't need any traits from other races for this, just give up Swordtrained) then you would have 2 Claw attacks and a Bite attack. Carry two weapons and use Two-Weapon fighting and you would have Primary weapon, Off-hand weapon, Bite because the arms where the claw attacks are located are busy wielding weapons.

Silver Crusade

I just played my first session with my tiefling rogue with the Maw or Claw (claw) alternate racial trait and the Tusked race trait accessed via Adopted. I don't know that adding in IUS to get two additional attacks will work because technically your "hands" for Two Weapon Fighting are taken up by your claw attacks. Also, if this is for PFS, Multi-attack is not a legal feat for PCs to take.


Haskol wrote:
for instance, a tengu which does not possess teeth would not grow teeth because its adoptive parents have them.

Tengu is actually the one race where you don't need the trait, since they have a bite attack already. I think you could make an argument that a Tiefling was physically shaped by his upbringing, maybe less so for a catfolk.

Haskol wrote:
Improved Unarmed Strike does not give you additional attacks. It simply makes any unarmed attacks you make not provide AoO and deal lethal damage. Natural attacks are not the same as unarmed attacks and so IUS does nothing for them. Otherwise a 1st level Monk would have as many attacks as the player could list body parts (2 Fists, 2 Elbows, 2 Feet, 2 Knees, Headbutt, etc.).

So you're saying that unarmed kicks behave inherently differently than attacks with weapons? I'm not trying to get "extra" attacks with IUS here, just my normal iterative attacks (which are separate from natural attacks). So you're saying that even though I could use an iterative attack with, say, a boot blade, on top of my natural attacks, I can't use an unarmed kick?

Haskol wrote:
If you use two-weapon fighting, then it only gives you a bonus if you use two weapons, allowing you to strike with your main weapon at full BAB, the off-hand weapon at -2 (provided it is light), and take any other natural attacks as secondary attacks.

You've got a mistake here - the main weapon is also at -2.


You've got at all correct except one possible snag: some DMs do not allow monster feats to be taken by PCs.


Okay, I guess I needed to read everything a bit more carefully in future. I misunderstood.

I suppose it does work, although RAW Two-Weapon Fighting is for two weapons (or a double weapon) wielded in your hands instead of gaining an off-hand kick or other unarmed strike. A blade boot would allow for you to gain an off-hand attack for use with an unarmed strike as your primary attack.

So on reflection, I would say it works, but as a Rogue with an already low BAB and the penalties associated with attacking with this build, there will be a lot of whiffing enemies.


MartianInvasion wrote:
Haskol wrote:
for instance, a tengu which does not possess teeth would not grow teeth because its adoptive parents have them.

Tengu is actually the one race where you don't need the trait, since they have a bite attack already. I think you could make an argument that a Tiefling was physically shaped by his upbringing, maybe less so for a catfolk.

The adopted race trait never allow you to take a racial trait.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Blackstorm wrote:
MartianInvasion wrote:
Haskol wrote:
for instance, a tengu which does not possess teeth would not grow teeth because its adoptive parents have them.

Tengu is actually the one race where you don't need the trait, since they have a bite attack already. I think you could make an argument that a Tiefling was physically shaped by his upbringing, maybe less so for a catfolk.

The adopted race trait never allow you to take a racial trait.

Tusked is a Race Trait, not a Racial Trait. By RAW, Adopted (Half-Orc) allows you to take it and gain a bite attack.


Flaming Duck wrote:

Well, you can't get the Half-Orc's bite attack with the adopted trait. That's an old issue differentiating racial traits and race traits.

But you can spend a Ki point for an extra attack when full rounding.

Unfortunately, for my utter detest for half-orc raised catfolk (I have seen way too many threads about them in this forum section), he was not talking about the racial trait.

Instead, he was talking about the Tusked trait from Orcs of Golarion. Yeah, it is confusing. I am fairly sure OoG came before the advanced race guide which gave them a racial trait for this. So the whole thing is a web of printing issues.

So this is technically a legal combination. Not that I am arguing that it should be legal. I just do not like the idea that anyone can just learn the art of having teeth the size of daggers. I generally advise GM's to ignore this combo due to cheese.

Heck, ignore the trait entirely, even for half-orcs. It is somewhat poorly written (again, I think OoG was written before a time where natural attack builds were a thing), so it actually makes the bite hit at -5 even if you are just using natural attacks. The bite from the racial trait is just generally better overall. Heck, those penalties are not stated to come from being secondary, so I do not think multiattack can even help it.

You could argue against that idea with 'common sense'.....but again, if you are using that, how did you let people learn how to grow daggers out of their mouth?

Dark Archive

lemeres wrote:

Unfortunately, for my utter detest for half-orc raised catfolk (I have seen way too many threads about them in this forum section), he was not talking about the racial trait.

Instead, he was talking about the Tusked trait from Orcs of Golarion. Yeah, it is confusing.

Ah, how do I love that they recycled the word 'trait' to mean something completely different, rather than attempt something like 'characteristic' or 'feature' or 'quality.'

Still, long before Paizo, 'level' meant either character level, class level or spell level, and 'evil' can mean your alignment, an aura that a neutral cleric of an evil god might have, a spell descriptor, a creature subtype or just be a generic word meaning 'not nice,' and let's not even get into 'divine,' which can refer to a spell cast by an atheist adept or non-theist ranger, or 'profane' or 'unholy' or 'desecrate' which is something sacred or holy or consecrated to a god you don't like. :/


Set wrote:
lemeres wrote:

Unfortunately, for my utter detest for half-orc raised catfolk (I have seen way too many threads about them in this forum section), he was not talking about the racial trait.

Instead, he was talking about the Tusked trait from Orcs of Golarion. Yeah, it is confusing.

Ah, how do I love that they recycled the word 'trait' to mean something completely different, rather than attempt something like 'characteristic' or 'feature' or 'quality.'

Still, long before Paizo, 'level' meant either character level, class level or spell level, and 'evil' can mean your alignment, an aura that a neutral cleric of an evil god might have, a spell descriptor, a creature subtype or just be a generic word meaning 'not nice,' and let's not even get into 'divine,' which can refer to a spell cast by an atheist adept or non-theist ranger, or 'profane' or 'unholy' or 'desecrate' which is something sacred or holy or consecrated to a god you don't like. :/

I leveled and gained a new level after going down a level and beating the evil evil that was casting evil. Also, did your beastmaster finally take the beastmaster feat, and did the other guy's brawler multiclass into brawler after grabbing brawling armor?

#Yo Dawg#Inception#stop throwing tomatoes at me#I realize hashtags of overused memes are horrible

But yes, some of these things could use some cleaning up, particularly the early ones since (as I discussed with Tusked) they were written before the rules on various things were hammered out.


Yeah, sorry, I didn't really mean for this thread to be about the use of Tusked. There's other ways to gain 3 natural attacks, like being a Tengu with Claw Attack, being a race like Tiefling or Half-Orc that has a bite attack racial trait and dipping two levels of Ranger for Aspect of the Beast, or heck, being a Kobold with Dragonmaw and Tailed Terror that dips one level of White-Haired Witch - the classic bite/tail/hair combo.


Haskol wrote:


I suppose it does work, although RAW Two-Weapon Fighting is for two weapons (or a double weapon) wielded in your hands instead of gaining an off-hand kick or other unarmed strike. A blade boot would allow for you to gain an off-hand attack for use with an unarmed strike as your primary attack.

RAW, Two Weapon Fighting isn't just for two weapons wielded in your hands necessarily. Flurry of Blows is just a scaling Two Weapon Fighting. Improved Unarmed Strike lets you use a lot more than just your hands to fight. Elbows, knees, feet, fists, headbutts, you name it.

How mixing natural and normal attacks work is that you make your attacks as normal, so two weapon fighting with the -2 penalty for each, then the natural attacks at -5.

I think you may of meant RAI, but seeing how the Monk's flurry of blows functions, I'm finding that a hard case to support.

Grand Lodge

lemeres wrote:
Flaming Duck wrote:

Well, you can't get the Half-Orc's bite attack with the adopted trait. That's an old issue differentiating racial traits and race traits.

But you can spend a Ki point for an extra attack when full rounding.

Unfortunately, for my utter detest for half-orc raised catfolk (I have seen way too many threads about them in this forum section), he was not talking about the racial trait.

Instead, he was talking about the Tusked trait from Orcs of Golarion. Yeah, it is confusing. I am fairly sure OoG came before the advanced race guide which gave them a racial trait for this. So the whole thing is a web of printing issues.

So this is technically a legal combination. Not that I am arguing that it should be legal. I just do not like the idea that anyone can just learn the art of having teeth the size of daggers. I generally advise GM's to ignore this combo due to cheese.

Heck, ignore the trait entirely, even for half-orcs. It is somewhat poorly written (again, I think OoG was written before a time where natural attack builds were a thing), so it actually makes the bite hit at -5 even if you are just using natural attacks. The bite from the racial trait is just generally better overall. Heck, those penalties are not stated to come from being secondary, so I do not think multiattack can even help it.

You could argue against that idea with 'common sense'.....but again, if you are using that, how did you let people learn how to grow daggers out of their mouth?

On the other hand there are people that love the flavor of orcs teaching their adopted little 'uns how to bite people regardless of how big their teeth are. It's only a d4 so it makes sense vs other bite attacks that are already naturally bigger (tiefling/tengu).


I believe that Kobolds can get both a tail attack and a bite attack. Duel wield on top of that and you have 4 attacks.

I do believe Flaming Duck is correct and you cannot trait into getting tusks.

As far as I know there are no race traits that grant a natural weapon. there are racial traits that do, but racial traits are not "traits." A racial trait is part of the block of abilities a race gets.

For example dwarves have a set of racial traits. They get some ability scores, some bonus languages, and quite an attractive smattering of other things. Now in the dwarf entry in the advanced race guide they are given some options for switching out some of their racial traits for some other racial traits.

Dwarves also have some race traits. At character creation everyone gets to pick two traits if that set of rules is being used. A pc could pick adopted and pick a race trait for a race that is not their own. However they would be unable to pick any of the racial traits, as racial traits are not actually "traits."


MartianInvasion wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?

I'm pretty sure no kicks, unless you are a monk.

Grand Lodge

Ciaran Barnes wrote:
MartianInvasion wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?
I'm pretty sure no kicks, unless you are a monk.

That's just silly.

Everyone can kick, or headbutt.

Even without the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.


@Mahtobedis: Tusked is a trait of the "get two of them at character creation" sense, in the Orc race category, not the "things that would make more sense if we called them racial features but we called them racial traits instead" sense. So, technically, you can take it with the adopted trait.

@Ciaran Barnes: it has been clarified that unarmed strikes are your entire body, not just your fists, regardless of whether one is a monk or not. For instance, this FAQ.

Silver Crusade

So I know this isn't anywhere near official, but I put this character into HeroLab and it's only giving 1 unarmed strike, even with TWF. So take from that what you will.

Grand Lodge

Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So I know this isn't anywhere near official, but I put this character into HeroLab and it's only giving 1 unarmed strike, even with TWF. So take from that what you will.

Then Hero Labs is yet again in error.

Silver Crusade

Jeff Merola wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So I know this isn't anywhere near official, but I put this character into HeroLab and it's only giving 1 unarmed strike, even with TWF. So take from that what you will.
Then Hero Labs is yet again in error.

I think it also had the wrong damage for the unarmed strike, so it was all kinds of messed up.

Silver Crusade

Bigdaddyjug wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:
Bigdaddyjug wrote:
So I know this isn't anywhere near official, but I put this character into HeroLab and it's only giving 1 unarmed strike, even with TWF. So take from that what you will.
Then Hero Labs is yet again in error.
I think it also had the wrong damage for the unarmed strike as wells, so it was all kinds of messed up.


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
MartianInvasion wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?
I'm pretty sure no kicks, unless you are a monk.

This FAQ would be more clear if the mentions of monk were removed from it. A monk's Unarmed Strike class feature allows him to make kick attacks, among other things, while his hands are full. Why does this appear under monk instead of general rules for unarmed strike. Yes, I am inferring that mention of it here implies others cannot do it. Inference is part of deciphering rules, correct?


Some GMs may not allow you to take Multiattack, but this isn't RAW; it's a GM preference because some people assume feats in the Bestiary are reserved for monsters only (not true, but *shrug*).

That being said, PFS does restrict Bestiary feats. It is still possible for PCs to take Multiattack, but it has to be available through some other means. For instance, natural weapon Rangers have the option of taking Multiattack once they get to 10th level.

And yes, kick/kick/bite/claw/claw is a legal attack combination. It was discussed in the Vestigial Arms FAQ thread quite a bit.

Sczarni

fretgod99 wrote:
And yes, kick/kick/bite/claw/claw is a legal attack combination. It was discussed in the Vestigial Arms FAQ thread quite a bit.

This is worth repeating.

Grand Lodge

Ciaran Barnes wrote:


Why does this appear under monk instead of general rules for unarmed strike.

Because the FAQs aren't expertly categorized and sorted.

The same reason

Quote:

Shocking Grasp: Do I get the +3 on the attack roll if I'm delivering the spell with something other than a touch attack, such as a natural weapon?

Yes. The +3 bonus is not dependent on using a melee touch attack to deliver the jolt. For example, a magus using spellstrike to deliver shocking grasp through his weapon would get the +3 bonus on the attack roll.

is under the CRB FAQ when the magus isn't in the CRB and a question such as this should be in the UM FAQ


Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
MartianInvasion wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?
I'm pretty sure no kicks, unless you are a monk.
This FAQ would be more clear if the mentions of monk were removed from it. A monk's Unarmed Strike class feature allows him to make kick attacks, among other things, while his hands are full. Why does this appear under monk instead of general rules for unarmed strike. Yes, I am inferring that mention of it here implies others cannot do it. Inference is part of deciphering rules, correct?

Kicks (and headbutts) as unarmed strikes are specifically called out in the core rule book. In combat the very first section under standard actions is attack. Second attack listed is unarmed attacks. If you haven't read the combat section in core rule book, I highly recommend it. Even with a decent grip on the rules and having read it more than once, I have found answers to my questions in there.


Haven't read it in depth in years, but I see now that you are right. It seems the some of the details listed in the monk's Unarmed Strike class feature is ambiguous information.


Oops yeah, I meant to say "if you haven't read the combat section in the core rule book *recently*..." Sorry about that!


Joe loves Rules wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:
MartianInvasion wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?
I'm pretty sure no kicks, unless you are a monk.
This FAQ would be more clear if the mentions of monk were removed from it. A monk's Unarmed Strike class feature allows him to make kick attacks, among other things, while his hands are full. Why does this appear under monk instead of general rules for unarmed strike. Yes, I am inferring that mention of it here implies others cannot do it. Inference is part of deciphering rules, correct?
Kicks (and headbutts) as unarmed strikes are specifically called out in the core rule book. In combat the very first section under standard actions is attack. Second attack listed is unarmed attacks. If you haven't read the combat section in core rule book, I highly recommend it. Even with a decent grip on the rules and having read it more than once, I have found answers to my questions in there.

Yeah, monks can be a bit weird, particularly since they were around when the core rule book was first released.

You see, due to the lack of support for unarmed strikes at the time (you can pry my brawling armor from my cold dead abs), the assumption was that the only people really making much use out of unarmed strikes would be monks. So putting the little forgettable side rules which, at the time, were the core of the class together with the class made sense (remember when monks didn't even have the cestus and temple sword?). This insured that people just going straight to the class wouldn't miss those bits, even if it ended up a bit redundant and made some confusion because it made it out to be a special thing for monks.

Of course, Paizo has somewhat gone beyond that assumption and just works around the idea that you can look up the background info yourself, since things are fairly established.

Of course, some of these details might be slightly wrong, since they are extrapolated from looking back at things. Forgive any mistakes (or not; I can learn things even if you aren't too nice about it, I suppose)


The monk's AC Bonus is the same way. It says that the untyped bonus is added to AC and CMD, but untyped bonus to AC are automatically added to CMD!


Jeff Merola wrote:


The adopted race trait never allow you to take a racial trait.
Tusked is a Race Trait, not a Racial Trait. By RAW, Adopted (Half-Orc) allows you to take it and gain a bite attack.

Hmm. I can't find the tusked trait among traits. Can you tell me where it ?

Grand Lodge

claudekennilol wrote:
Ciaran Barnes wrote:


Why does this appear under monk instead of general rules for unarmed strike.

Because the FAQs aren't expertly categorized and sorted.

The same reason

Quote:

Shocking Grasp: Do I get the +3 on the attack roll if I'm delivering the spell with something other than a touch attack, such as a natural weapon?

Yes. The +3 bonus is not dependent on using a melee touch attack to deliver the jolt. For example, a magus using spellstrike to deliver shocking grasp through his weapon would get the +3 bonus on the attack roll.
is under the CRB FAQ when the magus isn't in the CRB and a question such as this should be in the UM FAQ

That also applies to other characters delivering touch attack charges through unarmed strikes and natural weapons, so it's perfectly fine that it's in the CRB FAQ. They added the magus line to stop people from saying 'They made an FAQ where it said you can deliver it through a touch attack for the +3, but didn't mention spellstrike, therefore no bonus on spellstrike.' You have to know some of the grognards around here would say exactly that too.

Blackstorm wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:


The adopted race trait never allow you to take a racial trait.

Tusked is a Race Trait, not a Racial Trait. By RAW, Adopted (Half-Orc) allows you to take it and gain a bite attack.

Hmm. I can't find the tusked trait among traits. Can you tell me where it ?

Orcs of Golarion.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Joe loves Rules wrote:
Kicks (and headbutts) as unarmed strikes are specifically called out in the core rule book. In combat the very first section under standard actions is attack. Second attack listed is unarmed attacks. If you haven't read the combat section in core rule book, I highly recommend it. Even with a decent grip on the rules and having read it more than once, I have found answers to my questions in there.

Which is why this whole thread seemed screwy to me from the very beginning. I mean, what far-flung stretch could allow a guy to read in two *extra* kick actions every round, just because he read that monks' unarmed attacks could include kicks?

MartianInvader wrote:
Now my reading of Improved Unarmed Strike is that you can use it for kicks. So does this mean I now have 5 attacks: Claw, claw, bite, kick, kick?

This is what I mean. Yes, you can use your improved unarmed strike for kicks. But no, that does not mean that you get two *extra* kicks every combat round, even if you somehow got the multiattack feat.

PRD wrote:
An unarmed strike is an attack such as a punch or a kick

Nowhere does it suggest that kicks are *in addition* to the normal combat round mechanics. A monk gets "flurry of blows" for 2 attacks through level 7, then 4 attacks at level 8, and so on. It doesn't say those attacks are just from his hands, and that he can get *extra* attacks when he uses his feet to kick.

PRD wrote:
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon

Simply put, each of the attacks allowed via flurry of blows, or normally through high BAB and iterative attacks for unarmed strikes, can be a punch, kick, head butt or (presumably) elbow jab or knee bash, but it doesn't mean he gets all those in addition to the listed number of attacks.

Now, I can wrap my head around him getting a bite attack in addition to the listed attack routine, with some funky half-orc tusks or Tengu beak or similar. But it is not consistent with RAW to count a guy's legs as "additional limbs" allowing additional attacks through multiattack, when those legs are already subsumed under the provisions for unarmed attacks and flurry of blows.

The only way to get 5 attacks is at 8th level, with a 4-attack flurry and a bonus bite.

Sczarni

I don't mean to call you out, Wheldrake, but much of what you said is incorrect.

To start with the last line of your post, you cannot combine natural attacks with a Flurry of Blows. This restriction can be found within the text of the ability.

But, more generally, natural attacks may be combined with any weapon attacks (including unarmed strikes) so long as no single attack uses the same limb.

It has been clarified by Developers before that a 1st level Tengu can indeed use its 3 natural attacks (Claw/Claw/Bite) in conjunction with two manufactured weapon attacks (Kick/Kick, or Armor Spikes/Boulder Helmet, etc.) for a total of 5 attacks. The attack penalties, assuming the character has Two-Weapon Fighting, would be -2/-2 for the manufactured weapon attacks, and -5/-5/-5 for the natural attacks. If the character were to later pick up Multiattack, these penalties would all be reduced to -2.

Combining attacks in this way, which has been specifically clarified by Developers, does not constitute "extra" attacks.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Nefreet wrote:
But, more generally, natural attacks may be combined with any weapon attacks (including unarmed strikes) so long as no single attack uses the same limb.

I understand that, but the natural or unarmed attacks do not grant you any *additional* attacks, they merely allow you to burn one of your normal attacks and substitute a kick, head butt, claw or whatever.

Nefreet wrote:
It has been clarified by Developers before that a 1st level Tengu can indeed use its 3 natural attacks (Claw/Claw/Bite) in conjunction with two manufactured weapon attacks (Kick/Kick, or Armor Spikes/Boulder Helmet, etc.) for a total of 5 attacks.

This is the part that stuns and shocks me, because it doesn't appear to conform to RAW as we know it. link, please?

Grand Lodge

How does it not confirm to any RAW as we know it? You two-weapon fight to get Kick/Kick, and you're explicitly allowed to throw in Natural Attacks with manufactured ones.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Jeff Merola wrote:
How does it not confirm to any RAW as we know it? You two-weapon fight to get Kick/Kick, and you're explicitly allowed to throw in Natural Attacks with manufactured ones.

Perhaps, but "throw in" does not mean "get additional attacks", except as provided for by TWF.

Let's suppose your BAB is 6, so your full attack is normally +6/+1. You could take +6 with a sword and +1 with a kick, but the kick doesn't give you an *extra* attack.
Add in TWF, with an unarmed or natural attack as the off-hand component. You'll get +4 (+6-2) and -1 (+1-2) with the sword and +4 (+6-2) with the kick, claw or whatever natural attack you have.
Add in improved TWF gives you a second off-hand attack at -1 (+1-2).

Assuming you could also bite, I see 5 attacks being possible as early as BAB +6, not at 1st level.

Is this the sequence y'all are on about? Because I don't see how you can get all that before your BAB reaches +6.

Seriously, I'm not trying to contradict all of y'all, just understand where the "5 attacks at level 1 Tengu" comes from.

Grand Lodge

A level 1 character can use TWF to kick twice at level one. Natural Weapons are not off-hand attacks. They are completely separate from your BAB granted attacks, and you can always use all of your natural weapons on a full attack (granted that said limb didn't use a manufactured weapon with it that round).

Edit: From the Universal Monster Rules:

Quote:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Jeff Merola wrote:

A level 1 character can use TWF to kick twice at level one. Natural Weapons are not off-hand attacks. They are completely separate from your BAB granted attacks, and you can always use all of your natural weapons on a full attack (granted that said limb didn't use a manufactured weapon with it that round).

Edit: From the Universal Monster Rules:

Quote:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.

These quotes seem to confirm what I have been saying:

1) The first quote confirms, from the FAQ, that a 1st level character can make two kicks (or other unarmed attacks) using TWF, but *not* in addition to other attacks.
2) The "universal monster rules" state that you can combine natural and weapon attacks, but that you must "forgo one natural attack for each weapon".

None of these quotes suggest that any given character can kick twice *in addition* to other attacks, be they weapons, unarmed or natural attacks.

Silver Crusade

I'm kind of on the fence about this as well. Another thread recentlty came to the conclusion that two-weapon fighting required the use of two hands. So, if you're two-weapon fighting, even if you're not using your hands to do it (boot blade, armor spikes, boulder helm), how can you still use your hands to make another type of attack?

I can completely understand if you have a bite, gore, talons or tentacles that you could attack with two weapons (one in each hand), and then get all of your natural attacks as secondary. I just don't agree with taking two unarmed strikes and then taking natural attacks tat require the use of the hands.


Wheldrake wrote:
Jeff Merola wrote:

A level 1 character can use TWF to kick twice at level one. Natural Weapons are not off-hand attacks. They are completely separate from your BAB granted attacks, and you can always use all of your natural weapons on a full attack (granted that said limb didn't use a manufactured weapon with it that round).

Edit: From the Universal Monster Rules:

Quote:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.

These quotes seem to confirm what I have been saying:

1) The first quote confirms, from the FAQ, that a 1st level character can make two kicks (or other unarmed attacks) using TWF, but *not* in addition to other attacks.
2) The "universal monster rules" state that you can combine natural and weapon attacks, but that you must "forgo one natural attack for each weapon".

None of these quotes suggest that any given character can kick twice *in addition* to other attacks, be they weapons, unarmed or natural attacks.

I had a much more rude thing written, but the I realized that I was being an asshat.

So instead I am gona try to be helpful because natural attacks can be very confusing.

Let's start with some emphasis.

Quote:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.

So unless the natural attack is using that limb to use the weapon no it does not lose the natural attack or vice versa.

For example if I have a levle 6 barbarian with Animal fury rage power(gives a bite attack.) My attack routine will be 6/1(what ever weapon I am using) and 1 (bite) Numbers just take BAB into account and the -5 that natural attacks take when used in this way.

From what I have read you are seeing the kicks as extra attacks. This is not the case, the natural attacks are the extra ones and they always behave in this way, with the single exception of using only natural attacks.

Now as an example let's look at the simple skeleton stat block.
Link

Relevant part: Melee broken scimitar +0 (1d6), claw –3 (1d4+1) or 2 claws +2 (1d4+2)

As you see it gets to attack with it's skimitar and gets the claw attack on top of it, or just two claw attacks.(And gets the -5 on it wich makes using it's claws actually a lot better)


Pathfinder Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Bigger Club wrote:

Let's start with some emphasis.

Quote:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during thatattack, regardless of the attack's original type.

So unless the natural attack is using that limb to use the weapon no it does not lose the natural attack or vice versa.

For example if I have a levle 6 barbarian with Animal fury rage power(gives a bite attack.) My attack routine will be 6/1(what ever weapon I am using) and 1 (bite) Numbers just take BAB into account and the -5 that natural attacks take when used in this way.

I'm with you this far: you've got a full attack with +6/+1 (normal iterative routine) plus a natural bite attack.

But from what I read earlier in the thread, some folks want you to *also* get two *additional* kick attacks, for 5 attacks total. That's what I do not see supported in the quotes references above. Although, as I pointed out in a previous message, with improved TWF your biting barbarian would indeed have 5 attacks, but not before 6th level.

Quote:
From what I have read you are seeing the kicks as extra attacks. This is not the case, the natural attacks are the extra ones and they always behave in this way, with the single exception of using only natural attacks.

RAW, you can always *substitute* a different attack for a normal iterative attack (kick or whatever), but you don't get *extra* kicks. I understand the extra natural attack, like the orc bite or tengu beak. No problem.

Quote:

Now as an example let's look at the simple skeleton stat block.

Link
Relevant part: Melee broken scimitar +0 (1d6), claw –3 (1d4+1) or 2 claws +2 (1d4+2)
As you see it gets to attack with it's skimitar and gets the claw attack on top of it, or just two claw attacks.(And gets the -5 on it wich makes using it's claws actually a lot better)

Sure, the skeleton gets 2 attacks: weapon + claw or 2 x claw. But it doesn't *also* get any *extra* kick attacks, simply because it has 2 legs, which would seem to qualify as additional limbs.

I mean, if I follow the logic in the above thread, any bog-standard human 1st-lvl fighter can whack you with his sword & punch you with his fist (albeit with -4/-4 without TWF) and *also* kick you twice (at -4???). This is the only way I can interpret the argument that the clawed 1st lvl Tengu gets 5 attacks.


The logic is that the kicks are not natural attacks, but weapon attacks. You're making a main-hand(foot) weapon attack with kick 1, a TWF provided off-hand(foot) weapon attack with kick 2. Per TWF, these are at -2. Because your claw (hands) limbs and bite (head) limbs are unused in that series of attacks, you get to use those 3 natural attacks (at a -5 as they are treated as secondary attacks).

thus: -2 kick/-2 kick/-5 claw/-5 claw/-5 bite

This is different than what your human fighter example suggests because there the human is trying to use 4 'weapon' attacks (sword/punch/kick/kick).


Wheldrake I'm going to walk you through this slowly.

Two Weapon Fighting grants you an additional offhand attack to your normal one. You have improved unarmed strike thus allowing you to make kicks as your normal attacks.

At 1st level you have one attack to be made as a kick You have a second attack due to Two Weapon Fighting. This can be a kick due to improved unarmed strike.

So the Two Kicks are simply the one granted by your base attack bonus and Two weapon Fighting.

Now if you have any natural attacks, you can perform those after at a -5 penalty. So bite claw claw in the tengu's case.

The two kicks in question are the ones granted normally by your BAB and Two Weapon Fighting.

Sczarni

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Now replace the TWF human with a TWF tengu, and get rid of the barrel. The tengu can make two unarmed strikes per round (one with the left leg and one with the right leg), and gets to add his three natural attacks as secondary attacks. That's 5 attacks per round, total. Overall, that puts his attack bonuses at –2 kick/–2 kick/–5 bite/–5 claw/–5 claw. This is a legitimate attack routine.

Link

If you read the entire thread he further explains that these are not considered to be "extra" attacks.

1 to 50 of 87 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / 5 sneak attacks at level 3: Can I do this? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.