Why can't I put rake on a quadruped eidolon?


Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Many evolutions, such as rake and pounce are limited to the base quadruped form. Why is that? Why can't I take the serpent form, add a quartet of legs, and then take rake and/or pounce?

I find that other evolutions are similarly limited (even though I could buy other evolutions that logically should allow them).

Lantern Lodge

I know that this is not RAW or by no means official, but you could think about it this way.

If you start with a serpent and add legs they would be more like the legs of a salamander (the animal not magical creature) and could you see a salamander raking or pouncing? I can't really, they may have legs but they are shorter and not as strong as those of a dog or large cat, which is what I see the quadruped as.

Take this how you want but this is how I see it as.


Santiago Mendez wrote:

I know that this is not RAW or by no means official, but you could think about it this way.

If you start with a serpent and add legs they would be more like the legs of a salamander (the animal not magical creature) and could you see a salamander raking or pouncing? I can't really, they may have legs but they are shorter and not as strong as those of a dog or large cat, which is what I see the quadruped as.

Take this how you want but this is how I see it as.

I'm sorry, that doesn't follow through, for at least two reasons:

First, Eidolons can specifically look like whatever you want them to look like.

Second, a crocodile is a quadruped and would NOT be made with the serpentine base form, as they cannot climb and that's an inherent ability to that form. They are built along the same general lines as a salamander (legs to the side of the body, not underneath it; shorter legs in proportion to body size; etc), but as they are quadrupeds they would be allowed to rake.

The base form system in general just doesn't work very well, IMO.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Santiago Mendez wrote:
If you start with a serpent and add legs they would be more like the legs of a salamander (the animal not magical creature) and could you see a salamander raking or pouncing? I can't really, they may have legs but they are shorter and not as strong as those of a dog or large cat, which is what I see the quadruped as.

My eidolon wants to have a word with you. :P


Ravingdork wrote:
Santiago Mendez wrote:
If you start with a serpent and add legs they would be more like the legs of a salamander (the animal not magical creature) and could you see a salamander raking or pouncing? I can't really, they may have legs but they are shorter and not as strong as those of a dog or large cat, which is what I see the quadruped as.
My eidolon wants to have a word with you. :P

Huge serpentine with 4 legs and 6 tentacles? That thing looks scary.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
ChrisRevocateur wrote:
That thing looks scary.

As a 15th-level eidolon I would certainly hope so! She emphasizes special attack forms rather than raw damage potential. I'm particularly fond of her rock/tree throwing ability.

Evolutions: biteF, claws, climbF, constrict (tail slap), grab (tail slap), improved damage (tail slap), large (huge), limbs (legs) (2), reach (tail slap), tailF, tail slapF, trip

Click here for her stat full block.


i agree with you completely...there should be ways for all eidolons to take any evolution, then you can really do what you want to. The base forms should be just that, some solid ground for you to construct your idea from.

Scarab Sages

I personally would prefer a base form to create from & that would allow for more choice in form like a gelatinous cube idea


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Ceefood wrote:
I personally would prefer a base form to create from & that would allow for more choice in form like a gelatinous cube idea

Or a flying eyeball with naught but a slam attack.

Lantern Lodge

As I stated, it was not RAW or official, just how I thought about the base forms. I never said that what I said was the way it was, just how I see the base forms being applied with different evolutions.

Also Crocs and Alligators both can climb, though not commonly (since food comes to the water). They have been known to climb trees to get to food that tried to get away.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Santiago Mendez wrote:
[Crocs and alligators] have been known to climb trees to get to food that tried to get away.

I would like to see that.


Santiago Mendez wrote:
Also Crocs and Alligators both can climb, though not commonly (since food comes to the water). They have been known to climb trees to get to food that tried to get away.

Not adults, they havn't. They weigh too much. Juvenile alligators have been known to climb trees very rarely, and adults will "climb" over low fences, but nothing that would even come in the same galaxy as close to justifying a climb speed equal to their land speed.

Shadow Lodge

My feeling is that it is set up the way it is for balance. Each base for unlocks a certain set of theoretically balanced class features.


0gre wrote:
My feeling is that it is set up the way it is for balance. Each base for unlocks a certain set of theoretically balanced class features.

I disagree; the serpentine form basically gets the shaft. No free limbs, so they have to buy more expensive attacks rather than cheap pairs of claws. And their "free" evolutions only add up to 4 points' worth rather than 5 for quadrupeds and bipeds, and two of those are pretty crappy (tail -- +2 on balance checks, woo-hoo; tail slap -- worse than a pair of claws).

Constrict could be nice, but it's no match for Pounce and Rake IMO.


I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.

But if I go quadruped and describe it as serpentine, I can't get constrict.


Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.

I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.

Dark Archive

Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.

The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.


Draeke Raefel wrote:


The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.

Pounce! Rake! Constrict! And every attack in that routine is poisoned!

MY CREATURES WILL DISPLACE NATURE'S SORRY ATTEMPTS AT EVOLUTION IN EVERY ECOLOGY! AND THEN I WILL RULE THE WORLD!

Take that, Runelord of Social Injustice, you blathering ninny- hammer!


Draeke Raefel wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.
The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.

especially once it went huge

Shadow Lodge

hogarth wrote:
0gre wrote:
My feeling is that it is set up the way it is for balance. Each base for unlocks a certain set of theoretically balanced class features.

I disagree; the serpentine form basically gets the shaft. No free limbs, so they have to buy more expensive attacks rather than cheap pairs of claws. And their "free" evolutions only add up to 4 points' worth rather than 5 for quadrupeds and bipeds, and two of those are pretty crappy (tail -- +2 on balance checks, woo-hoo; tail slap -- worse than a pair of claws).

Constrict could be nice, but it's no match for Pounce and Rake IMO.

Er... wasn't trying to claim they were actually balanced. Just floating my theory for the design decision here.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Caineach wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.
The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.
especially once it went huge

If it is simply a matter of balance why not simply make them exclusive? It would be as easy as saying "if you have X ability, you can't get Y or Z ability."

At least then my serpentine quadruped would get to choose between constrict or pounce/rake.

Dark Archive

Ravingdork wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.
The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.
especially once it went huge

If it is simply a matter of balance why not simply make them exclusive? It would be as easy as saying "if you have X ability, you can't get Y or Z ability."

At least then my serpentine quadruped would get to choose between constrict or pounce/rake.

I'd assume consistency. Rake and Pounce are exclusively quadrupedal abilities in the Bestiary, whereas Constrict is exclusive to serpentine enemies.


Draeke Raefel wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.
The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.
especially once it went huge

If it is simply a matter of balance why not simply make them exclusive? It would be as easy as saying "if you have X ability, you can't get Y or Z ability."

At least then my serpentine quadruped would get to choose between constrict or pounce/rake.

I'd assume consistency. Rake and Pounce are exclusively quadrupedal abilities in the Bestiary, whereas Constrict is exclusive to serpentine enemies.

Because they've just been ridiculously consistent with the Bestiary rules when applying them to the eidolon.....

Dark Archive

MaverickWolf wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.
The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.
especially once it went huge

If it is simply a matter of balance why not simply make them exclusive? It would be as easy as saying "if you have X ability, you can't get Y or Z ability."

At least then my serpentine quadruped would get to choose between constrict or pounce/rake.

I'd assume consistency. Rake and Pounce are exclusively quadrupedal abilities in the Bestiary, whereas Constrict is exclusive to serpentine enemies.
Because they've just been ridiculously consistent with the Bestiary rules when applying them to the eidolon.....

50% consistent is better than 0% consistent... I think...


Draeke Raefel wrote:
MaverickWolf wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Caineach wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Slacker2010 wrote:
Disciple of Sakura wrote:
I'd be inclined to say that dragon-ish creatures should be based on a serpentine form, and they most definitely would make sense being capable of things like raking or pouncing. *Shrug* Just go quadruped and claim your critter looks serpentine.
I agree with "Discipe of Sakura", if you want Constrict then you cant have pounce. Most likely there is a reason they separated some of these abilities.
The reason is probably called "balance". Can you imagine a creature able to Rake and Constrict with a successful grapple check? It would be hideously broken.
especially once it went huge

If it is simply a matter of balance why not simply make them exclusive? It would be as easy as saying "if you have X ability, you can't get Y or Z ability."

At least then my serpentine quadruped would get to choose between constrict or pounce/rake.

I'd assume consistency. Rake and Pounce are exclusively quadrupedal abilities in the Bestiary, whereas Constrict is exclusive to serpentine enemies.
Because they've just been ridiculously consistent with the Bestiary rules when applying them to the eidolon.....
50% consistent is better than 0% consistent... I think...

Not really. A complete lack of consistency with the existing rules would at least rule out trying to pretend other rules are in place for the purpose of consistency. Lack of consistency would at least make the class consistent within itself, instead of keeping track of which rules work as normal, and which ones don't. The summoner has some awesome flavor, but the number of rules exceptions is asinine, especially when the arguments of 'this is how the rules for this ability works' get brought up.


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber

Actually, it would be even easier to say the eidolon had to be a quadruped in order to get the pounce/rake ability, rather than having to be of the qudruped base form.

Dark Archive

Ravingdork wrote:
Actually, it would be even easier to say the eidolon had to be a quadruped in order to get the pounce/rake ability, rather than having to be of the qudruped base form.

I agree. Though that would make the serpentine form pretty insane as it would be the only one capable of attaining all 3 evolutions( pounce/rake/constrict )


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Draeke Raefel wrote:
Ravingdork wrote:
Actually, it would be even easier to say the eidolon had to be a quadruped in order to get the pounce/rake ability, rather than having to be of the qudruped base form.
I agree. Though that would make the serpentine form pretty insane as it would be the only one capable of attaining all 3 evolutions( pounce/rake/constrict )

Isn't considered by many to be the weakest of the three forms anyways?


Draeke Raefel wrote:


I'd assume consistency. Rake and Pounce are exclusively quadrupedal abilities in the Bestiary, whereas Constrict is exclusive to serpentine enemies.

Meet my friend the behir. It's going to blow your mind...!

Dark Archive

hogarth wrote:
Draeke Raefel wrote:


I'd assume consistency. Rake and Pounce are exclusively quadrupedal abilities in the Bestiary, whereas Constrict is exclusive to serpentine enemies.
Meet my friend the behir. It's going to blow your mind...!

BAAAAAAAAAAAH!!!!!

Spoiler:
Explosive Runes!


And for Pounce, there's the Hydra. In the bestiary, Hydras are depicted with no legs at all and have serpentine traits (20 ft. land speed, can't be tripped, etc).


Pathfinder Maps, Pawns Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Charter Superscriber
Zurai wrote:
And for Pounce, there's the Hydra. In the bestiary, Hydras are depicted with no legs at all and have serpentine traits (20 ft. land speed, can't be tripped, etc).

I really, really hate that you can't take bite more than once either. totally destroys any hydra/cerberus/ettin like concepts.


Ravingdork wrote:
Zurai wrote:
And for Pounce, there's the Hydra. In the bestiary, Hydras are depicted with no legs at all and have serpentine traits (20 ft. land speed, can't be tripped, etc).
I really, really hate that you can't take bite more than once either. totally destroys any hydra/cerberus/ettin like concepts.

That was one of the first things I noticed.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest / Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest / Why can't I put rake on a quadruped eidolon? All Messageboards
Recent threads in Advanced Player's Guide Playtest: Final Playtest