RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
Nothing requires the ranger to pick multi-attack for their bonus feat. It's on the list though for rangers that DO have multiple natural attacks (and technically for secondary natural attacks - since if you have a bite and 2 claws, they're all primary attacks, for example.)
However, if, say a wyvern took ranger levels, it could take multi-attack and get the benefits to its wing buffets.
Well, the "natural weapon" path is also designed for creatures with natural weapons, that is monsters with class levels. Your example of the half-orc with a bite attack doesn't happen to apply as bite and claw attacks are both primary and therefore don't take the penalties mitigated by multiattack.
Well I gotta say that sucks, a class for monsters in the apg. I am sorry that is just stupid. These classes should be applicable to players. I can't believe the people at pazio would intentionally screw up a specialization that bad. I am forced to think this is an oversight.
Actually, though I'm not using the APG at the moment, this style was one of the key nice new things for me, as a player. It's the Advanced Player's Guide after all, and one thing players tend to move on to is playing non-standard races.
I played a Lizardfolk some time back (starting with three racial levels), and a natural weapon style would have been wonderful for her. Wyvern is a more DM/extreme-PC style, but there are plenty of playable races with natural weapons.
Please note that it is a class variant and is therefore meant to be non-standard. Applying a non-standard class to a non-standard character race is very logical.
|
Please note that it is a class variant and is therefore meant to be non-standard. Applying a non-standard class to a non-standard character race is very logical.
+1
If you want to play a pseudodragon, shapeshifter ranger looks like a really good option, making them more dangerous than they would normally seem...
"Oh, it's just a pseudodragon..." Last words of an adventuring party.
Besides, as you found, they added the feat to give a standard PC natural weapons so they could play this sort of bestial class if they wanted. What's the problem if it gives more benefit to an actual feral beast than a person acting like a feral beast?
I disagree, I really don't think a class should be build around having some non-standard race or being a monster. If this is how it is intended it is extremely poor design.Well I gotta say that sucks, a class for monsters in the apg. I am sorry that is just stupid. These classes should be applicable to players. I can't believe the people at pazio would intentionally screw up a specialization that bad. I am forced to think this is an oversight.Actually, though I'm not using the APG at the moment, this style was one of the key nice new things for me, as a player. It's the Advanced Player's Guide after all, and one thing players tend to move on to is playing non-standard races.
I played a Lizardfolk some time back (starting with three racial levels), and a natural weapon style would have been wonderful for her. Wyvern is a more DM/extreme-PC style, but there are plenty of playable races with natural weapons.
It would be poor design for the feat not to be an option. If you don't benefit from it you don't have to take it, but if you could benefit from it not having that feat as part of this variant would feel odd.
I disagree, I really don't think a class should be build around having some non-standard race or being a monster. If this is how it is intended it is extremely poor design.
I can accept that. It would still be useful for multi-class Druids, Barbarians (Animal Fury rage power), and any class that can cast a polymorph spell.
In all the games in all the groups I've had in the last two years there hasn't been a single one that didn't have at least one monster player character.
This class variant belongs just fine.
Having one option on a list that works with the theme of the class, is usable by certain half-orcs and several multi-class combos, but doesn't work for everybody, is not bad design. It's not your only choice for a bonus feat, if it's not optimal for your build then don't take it, it's there for builds where it is optimal.
I love that their are varients that are suitable for monsters. When I dm I hate using the monsters straight out of the book because they would be the same every time, and rather underpowered at that. So I often give them class levels. This varient is perfect for that.
Infact, many of these varients are perfect for making npc's out of. That bandit attacking you is not just a fighter, hes a free hand fighter. That troll stalking you in the forest isn't just a ranger, hes a natural weapon ranger.
Would Multiattack be applicable if a Natural Weapon Ranger chose to mix Iterative (Manuf. Weapon/Unarmed Strike) attacks with a Natural Attack, which is treated as a Secondary Attack even if it normally was Primary?
That seems like a way any NW Ranger could use Multiattack, if it works...?
Would Multiattack be applicable if a Natural Weapon Ranger chose to mix Iterative (Manuf. Weapon/Unarmed Strike) attacks with a Natural Attack, which is treated as a Secondary Attack even if it normally was Primary?
That seems like a way any NW Ranger could use Multiattack, if it works...?
I was going to point that out, but you beat me to it. A half-orc ranger could easily have a bite/claw/sword attack routine.
That`s what I thought...
An Adamantine/Cold Iron/etc Bastard Sword or Scimitar which you 2-Hand for Attack Actions/AoO´s/Cleaves, while switching to 1-Hand it in combo with your Claw + Bite when Full Attacking seems more than reasonable to me.
Is there a Natural Attack equivalent to Double Slice?
Also, with Improved Unarmed Strike (via Feat or Monk level), you can use ALL of your Natural Attacks as Secondary Attacks on top of your Iterative Attack / Flurry with Unarmed Strike (and Unarmed Strike benefits from the same Amulet of Mighty Fists that affects your Claws and Bite). That might even work well multiclassing with Rogue...
Troll less please.
Alcheismt 2 = 3 natural full BAB attacks + 4STR +2 nat Armor for 20 minutes per mutagen , which you can brew again with 1 hour after combat no daily limit.
18 levels of shaeshift ranger
Enjoy
Is there any reason someone cannot take Aspect of the Beast 4 times to gain all the abilitys. The feat does not state that at can only be taken once (or twice for that matter)?
Is there any reason someone cannot take Aspect of the Beast 4 times to gain all the abilitys. The feat does not state that at can only be taken once (or twice for that matter)?
nothing at all only that you need wildshape as a pre-requiste and shapeshifter ranger does not quailfy, only druid.
Is there any reason someone cannot take Aspect of the Beast 4 times to gain all the abilitys. The feat does not state that at can only be taken once (or twice for that matter)?nothing at all only that you need wildshape as a pre-requiste and shapeshifter ranger does not quailfy, only druid.
READ THE SPECIAL! SHAPESHIFTER RANGER CAN TAKE IT & IF THEY HAVE THE NATURAL WEAPON STYLE IT IS ON THEIR BONUS FEAT LIST!
Not trolling asking a legitimate question. Be less of a jerk please.
I disagree, you keep stating it was poor design, etc. because you didnt like it for whatever reason. Some people will like it, myself included. If one of my players wants to be a monstrous PC and decides to go this route, more power to him.
Its an option, if you dont like it, ban it from your game. No need to try and snipe and say its "poor design".
READ THE SPECIAL! SHAPESHIFTER RANGER CAN TAKE IT & IF THEY HAVE THE NATURAL WEAPON STYLE IT IS ON THEIR BONUS FEAT LIST!Is there any reason someone cannot take Aspect of the Beast 4 times to gain all the abilitys. The feat does not state that at can only be taken once (or twice for that matter)?nothing at all only that you need wildshape as a pre-requiste and shapeshifter ranger does not quailfy, only druid.
But I do not think you can take this feat multiple times. Normally, if a feat can be taken multiple times, it says so in the 'Special' part of the feat description.
e.g.: Expanded Arcana says under Special: You can gain Expanded Arcana multiple times (Advanced Player's Guide page 159)
nothing at all only that you need wildshape as a pre-requiste and shapeshifter ranger does not quailfy, only druid.
or a Druid multi-classed character :)
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Next ? Can a ranger take a Style Feat as a non-ranger bonus feat (AKA feat gained every 3 levels) w/ out all the Prerequisite. Too me the CRB & APB are open to interpretation
30ft darkvision
2 x 1d4 claws
running jump with no move
+2 inititive +2 survival
umm who in there right mind would spend 4 combat style feats on this vs the other available feats ?
Next ? Can a ranger take a Style Feat as a non-ranger bonus feat (AKA feat gained every 3 levels) w/ out all the Prerequisite. Too me the CRB & APB are open to interpretation
No, "he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat"
where is the open to interpretation seem pretty open and shut to me
otherwise it would have been written
"he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a feat"
If you are human you can take the Racial Heritage feat from the APG and then you are eligible for Half-Orc feats which would allow you to take the Razor Tusk feat from the APG. So your human ranger can get a claw, claw, bite at level two.
could also do this with teifling
or 2 levels of achemsit although the alchemist's natural attacks are alot better at 1d6 claws and 1d8 bite
Only down side to the alchemist's feral mutagen is that it isn't permanent.
could also do this with teiflingor 2 levels of achemsit although the alchemist's natural attacks are alot better at 1d6 claws and 1d8 bite
would last 20 minutes and you can brew another after combat spending 1 hour to do it, no daily limit
Next ? Can a ranger take a Style Feat as a non-ranger bonus feat (AKA feat gained every 3 levels) w/ out all the Prerequisite. Too me the CRB & APB are open to interpretationNo, "he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat"
where is the open to interpretation seem pretty open and shut to me
otherwise it would have been written
"he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a feat"
Last line in the APB Ranger New Combat Styles. "The ranger can choose feats from his selected combat style even if he does not have the normal prerequisites." "he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat" does not say anything about other feats.
Add to that a barbarian raging with the Lesser fiend totem rage power and you gain a gore attack.
would last 20 minutes and you can brew another after combat spending 1 hour to do it, no daily limit
yeah its previously been shown in other threads barb1/alch 2 is pretty broketastic as a one shot I think we worked out you could get up to an average of 40-50dmg per round.
|
|
Next ? Can a ranger take a Style Feat as a non-ranger bonus feat (AKA feat gained every 3 levels) w/ out all the Prerequisite. Too me the CRB & APB are open to interpretationNo, "he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat"
where is the open to interpretation seem pretty open and shut to me
otherwise it would have been written
"he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a feat"
With Aspect of the Beast, in particular, it appears he can...
"A ranger who selects the natural weapon combat style can take this feat without having to meet the prerequisites (even if he does not select Aspect of the Beast as a bonus feat)."
Last line in the APB Ranger New Combat Styles. "The ranger can choose feats from his selected combat style even if he does not have the normal prerequisites." "he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat" does not say anything about other feats.
your right it says nothing about other feats becuase they have nothing to do with this class ability ;)
and lets be clear this is a class ability that specific lets you choose from a pool of feats ..... whenever he gains a COMBAT STYLE FEAT.
and when does he gain these ?
2nd
6th
10th
14th
18th
you get 5 , and thats it, there is no grey area.
|
|
I'd be willing to bet that it was the intent that Aspect of the Beast be allowed to be taken multiple times, selecting a different option each time (even though the feat description is missing the obligatory tagline). The way it's written it might just as easily be four different feats written around a theme, instead of one with four possible selections. Also, it's really not overpowered in the least...
Next ? Can a ranger take a Style Feat as a non-ranger bonus feat (AKA feat gained every 3 levels) w/ out all the Prerequisite. Too me the CRB & APB are open to interpretationNo, "he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat"
where is the open to interpretation seem pretty open and shut to me
otherwise it would have been written
"he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a feat"With Aspect of the Beast, in particular, it appears he can...
"A ranger who selects the natural weapon combat style can take this feat without having to meet the prerequisites (even if he does not select Aspect of the Beast as a bonus feat)."
seperate issue, it has its own special rule but and again I'd say WHY would you waste 4 feats on aspect of the beast ?
the discussion seem to be getting mixed up
1)
Aspect of the Beast
Can be taken with a normal feat or combat feat if you have natural style combat
2)
Can Aspect of the Beast be taken multiple times ?
arguable but so woefully underpowered for the cost of 4 feats, sure knock yourself out
3)
can you use normal feats to take combat style feats
No.
|
|
3)
can you use normal feats to take combat style feats
No.
Can you use normal feats to take combat style feats? Absolutely, yes! Provided you meet the prerequisites.
Aspect of the Beast is an exception to this rule, because it says so.
However, anyone can take a feat off the combat style list any time they get a feat. They just don't get the advantage of not needing the prerequisites.
|
|
I would never waste the feats taking Aspect of the Beast multiple times, but as a gamemaster I wouldn't stop a player from doing so if he wanted to (for style reasons, I suppose).
The RAW don't allow for it, and it seems like a waste of feats to me, but I wouldn't prohibit a player from taking an underpowered feat multiple times (although I would explain why I didn't think it was a good idea).
Can you use normal feats to take combat style feats? Absolutely, yes! Provided you meet the prerequisites.
3)
can you use normal feats to take combat style feats
No.
in which case your not using the benefit of the combat style class ability to take them without prerequites
honestly thats like saying you can take fighter bonus feats using normal feats if you meet the prerequites... ummm yeah was there ever any doubt ?
lets make the statement nice and clear
you cannot use a normal feat to take a combat style feat you do not meet the prerequites for.
would you agree with that ?
|
Nothing requires the ranger to pick multi-attack for their bonus feat. It's on the list though for rangers that DO have multiple natural attacks (and technically for secondary natural attacks - since if you have a bite and 2 claws, they're all primary attacks, for example.)
I was looking at a half-orc barbarian with a bite and two claw attacks and was considering a 1st level dip into Ranger for this reason. I found that though a bite attack is primary, when you add claw attacks the bite attack becomes secondary. This is a good reason for a half-orc (standard player race) to take multi-attack.