|
I have a question about this feat...
Suppose I have a monster with a bite/claw/claw routine of 1d6/1d4/1d4 damage.
I want to raise my claw damage dice. Does it make the damage stats look like this:
1d6/1d6/1d6
or like this?
1d6/1d6/1d4
Essentially what I'm asking is does the feat raies the damage dice of a form of attacks (ie all claws) or just one of them (my right claw)?
both claws become a d6
All natural attacks of a given kind are effected.
Does the Eidolon evolution of the same name work the same way as the feat?
And secondly does the evolution stack with the feat?
The evolution effecting all attacks of a kind is heavily debated currently.
Yes, they stack.
So, taking this Feat for a Tiger's claws would affect not only the two front paws (used for normal attacks) but also the two rear claws (used for rake attacks)?
Seems pretty sick. But I'll take it.
I believe that INA would work for a tiger's rake damage but not for an eidolon's rake damage. The tiger entry in the Bestiary lists the rake as "2 claws". The eidolon's Rake evolution specifically spells out how the attacks work and what damage they do but never clearly says that they are "claw attacks". In fact, it refers to them as "rake attacks".
This seems like a potential point of confusion since there is no "Rake" entry on the table of natural attacks by size. Therefore it seems like a judgement call what type(s) of damage the "rake attacks" should do. I'd say they do bludgeoning and slashing just like claw attacks, especially since the evolution mentions that the eidolon "grows dangerous claws on its feet".
I guess I'm being intentionally stubborn here by resisting the implication that the eidolon's rake attacks are in fact claw attacks, but I feel that since the rules don't actually say they are many DMs would tend to rule they aren't. I wonder why the eidolon Rake and Grab evolutions don't just grant the eidolon the Rake and Grab universal monster abilities. It would make adjudicating eidolons a bit easier. Then again, it would also make eidolons slightly more powerful, so maybe it was an intentional separation.