|
Lesser Beast Totem:
While raging, the barbarian gains two claw attacks. These attacks are considered primary attacks and are made at the barbarian’s full base attack bonus. The claws deal 1d6 points of slashing damage (1d4 if Small) plus the barbarian’s Strength modifier.
Does a Barbarian wielding a reach weapon threaten adjacent with her claws with this power? Are they still a primary attack if you're holding your polearm in your main hand?
Lesser Beast Totem:
While raging, the barbarian gains two claw attacks. These attacks are considered primary attacks and are made at the barbarian’s full base attack bonus. The claws deal 1d6 points of slashing damage (1d4 if Small) plus the barbarian’s Strength modifier.Does a Barbarian wielding a reach weapon threaten adjacent with her claws with this power? Are they still a primary attack if you're holding your polearm in your main hand?
No.
The reason is, if you are using a reach weapon (polearm) then it is a two-handed weapon. Therefore, you don't threaten at close range because both of your hands are wielding your weapon.
Now, if you have not attacked with the weapon this round, you could release it with one hand and attack with those claws, but then, you do not threaten at range.
It get's a little stranger if you're using say a whip. A whip is a reach weapon, but it's one handed. However, you can't AoO with it, but you could AoO with your free hand claw.
That brings us to your last question, anytime you mix natural and manufactured weapons, all natural weapons become secondary attacks, and take the secondary attack penalty to your attack bonus.
Where is it said that the claws have to be on the hands?
The only other place they could be would be on his feet. However, since he doesn't have the monk's ability to make attacks with his feet, they wouldn't do him any good down there. :)
Not to mention it would make a mess of his boots of springing and striding. :)
|
|
No.The reason is, if you are using a reach weapon (polearm) then it is a two-handed weapon. Therefore, you don't threaten at close range because both of your hands are wielding your weapon.
Now, if you have not attacked with the weapon this round, you could release it with one hand and attack with those claws, but then, you do not threaten at range.
Good to know. I think if I actually tried that tactic I'd be on the receiving end of ye old thrown rulebook.
Good to know. I think if I actually tried that tactic I'd be on the receiving end of ye old thrown rulebook.
No.The reason is, if you are using a reach weapon (polearm) then it is a two-handed weapon. Therefore, you don't threaten at close range because both of your hands are wielding your weapon.
Now, if you have not attacked with the weapon this round, you could release it with one hand and attack with those claws, but then, you do not threaten at range.
LOL
It's valid, you're giving up your reach for a close in threatening. Your best bet, if you want to threaten up close and at range is to get armor spikes, or play a monk and use a reach weapon. Both give you threatening at range and up close.
Armor spikes threaten automatically, without needing free hands. A monk can attack with any part of his body.
|
Where is it said that the claws have to be on the hands?The only other place they could be would be on his feet. However, since he doesn't have the monk's ability to make attacks with his feet, they wouldn't do him any good down there. :)
Not to mention it would make a mess of his boots of springing and striding. :)
So, bite attacks are useless for nonmonks because they lack the ability to attack with their mouth?
If a character has a natural attack, he is able to use it for attacks.
Where is it said that the claws have to be on the hands?The only other place they could be would be on his feet. However, since he doesn't have the monk's ability to make attacks with his feet, they wouldn't do him any good down there. :)
Not to mention it would make a mess of his boots of springing and striding. :)
So, bite attacks are useless for nonmonks because they lack the ability to attack with their mouth?
If a character has a natural attack, he is able to use it for attacks.
That was a joke, thus the smiley face.
If your GM allows you to put the claws on your feet and attack with them, go for it. However, I wouldn't. Not to mention you'd need to get your boots custom made.