If i make a char with only claw attanks is there a way to get more then 2 claws attanks base off BAB or feats.
You do not receive additional Natural Attacks for a high base attack bonus.
The Haste spell would grant you one additional claw attack when you full attack.
I'm unaware of any feats that grant iterative natural attacks.
If i make a char with only claw attanks is there a way to get more then 2 claws attanks base off BAB or feats.You do not receive additional Natural Attacks for a high base attack bonus.
The Haste spell would grant you one additional claw attack when you full attack.
I'm unaware of any feats that grant iterative natural attacks.
Technically you could do it with TWF, you'd get your normal BAB attack routine and then the off hand attacks followed by your natural attacks being considered secondary with the -5 to hit. The stipulation being no weapon used by the limb you want to make the claw attacks with.
You're making a trade off when you use two natural attacks vs iterative attacks. All natural attacks that are primary (like claws) are made at full BAB.
Let's say you have a 5 BAB, and an 18 str. Using claws you'd have a +9/+9 to attack, and using TWF you'd have +7/+7, and using a sword and shield you'd have a +9. Obviously, claws win.
If you have a 10 BAB, Using claws you'd have a +14/+14, and using TWF you'd have a +12/+12, and using a sword and shield you'd have a +14/+9. Again, claws win.
If you have a 15 BAB, using claws, you'd have a +19/+19, and using TWF you'd have a +17/+17, and using a sword and shield you'd have a +19/+14+/+9. Now we have a tossup. It becomes more situational. If you are fighting low AC mooks, then the 3 iterative attacks are better. If it's a high AC opponent, you're better off with the claws.
In other words, the Natural Attack vs Iterative is almost always going to fall into the 'Claws usually better' balance. The issue is, of course, that you can enchant a sword a lot cheaper than an amulet of mighty fists, and you can for the price of a +1 AoMF buy 2 +1 weapons. So, basically, it's really a trade off of better chances to hit vs versatility.
A creature with natural attacks can instead attack with unarmed strikes or weapons, either solely or in conjunction with natural attacks.
- if they don't possess Imp. Unarmed Strike unarmed strikes will provoke AoO's.
- TWF penalties will usually apply, unless you only attack once in a round.
- these attacks will go off your BAB and you can apply iterative attacks.
This may not be too relevant but if these are feral creatures have you considered
Pounce (Ex) When a creature with this special attack
makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake
attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).
Format: pounce; Location: Special Attacks.
Rake (Ex) A creature with this special attack gains
extra natural attacks under certain conditions, typically
when it grapples its foe. In addition to the options
available to all grapplers, a monster with the rake ability
gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only
against a grappled foe. The bonus and damage caused by
these attacks is included in the creature’s description. A
monster with the rake ability must begin its turn already
grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and
rake in the same turn.
Format: rake (2 claws +8, 1d4+2); Location: Special
Attacks
Rend (Ex) If it hits with two or more natural attacks in
1 round, a creature with the rend special attack can cause
tremendous damage by latching onto the opponent’s body
and tearing f lesh. This attack deals an additional amount
of damage, but no more than once per round. The type
of attacks that must hit and the additional damage are
included in the creature’s description. The additional
damage is usually equal to the damage caused by one of
the attacks plus 1-1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus.
Format: rend (2 claws, 1d8+9); Location: Special Attacks.
I know these are not feats (may be in apg but not sure) but you are talking about monsters. :)
This may not be too relevant but if these are feral creatures have you considered
Pounce (Ex) When a creature with this special attack
makes a charge, it can make a full attack (including rake
attacks if the creature also has the rake ability).
Format: pounce; Location: Special Attacks.Rake (Ex) A creature with this special attack gains
extra natural attacks under certain conditions, typically
when it grapples its foe. In addition to the options
available to all grapplers, a monster with the rake ability
gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only
against a grappled foe. The bonus and damage caused by
these attacks is included in the creature’s description. A
monster with the rake ability must begin its turn already
grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and
rake in the same turn.
Format: rake (2 claws +8, 1d4+2); Location: Special
AttacksRend (Ex) If it hits with two or more natural attacks in
1 round, a creature with the rend special attack can cause
tremendous damage by latching onto the opponent’s body
and tearing f lesh. This attack deals an additional amount
of damage, but no more than once per round. The type
of attacks that must hit and the additional damage are
included in the creature’s description. The additional
damage is usually equal to the damage caused by one of
the attacks plus 1-1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus.
Format: rend (2 claws, 1d8+9); Location: Special Attacks.I know these are not feats (may be in apg but not sure) but you are talking about monsters. :)
I'm pretty sure he said feral ppl not creatures.
And it's broken. Badly.
I say just give the option to fight as a clawed creature or as TWF. If you choose the first option you get your two attacks at full BAB. If you choose the second option to get more attacks then you take all the penalties of fighting with two weapons and have to take TWF to counter them.
I totally missed the ppl in his second post my bad :)
in which case i would build those ppl as monks and just assume the unarmed damage is actually claw damage.
It basicly comes down to if they have hit dice not levels those monster abilities will add 2 more claw attacks to them (and make them scary). If they are leveled then monk would be the easy way out of the problem
1) If these "Feral Ppl" are guys youre throwing against your PC's, i see no issue with giving them the 'Rend' ability.
2) If you dont like 'Rend', then tweak their build a little bit and give them 4 arms instead of 2. To balance (if this makes them too powerful), treat the 2nd pair of arms as "secondary attacks" at a lower attack bonus.
OR...
3) Youre the DM (?). give these ppl 4 attacks and say the second 2 are clawed feet. Every attack they make is similar to a charge, have them make their jump check, then role 4 attacks (2 hand claws, 2 feet claws [talons i guess?]) with the 2nd set at a lower attack bonus.
You dont have to break the rules, but if ur running the game, feel free to get creative with what you through at your players. the rules are more like polite guidelines anyway. =D
I'm pretty sure he said feral ppl not creatures.
And it's broken. Badly.
It's not broken badly, it's really conditional. We always thought it was pretty powerful until we ended up at the higher levels and realized just how iffy it was. It's nice then too, but not even close to being broken. When looking at the ECL cost you can't just consider the sweet spot, you have to look at the entire effectiveness over the length of the game 1st-20th. It isn't worth a caster level at 20th (where you lose a 9th level spell slot) and at the appropriate gear it isn't even worth more than 2 levels to a fighter at 20th level. It might be better for some, than others, but that is the game in general so it is to be expected.
It's actually balanced, but front loaded, which is why people always complain it is "broken."
I'm pretty sure he said feral ppl not creatures.
And it's broken. Badly.
It's not broken badly, it's really conditional. We always thought it was pretty powerful until we ended up at the higher levels and realized just how iffy it was. It's nice then too, but not even close to being broken. When looking at the ECL cost you can't just consider the sweet spot, you have to look at the entire effectiveness over the length of the game 1st-20th. It isn't worth a caster level at 20th (where you lose a 9th level spell slot) and at the appropriate gear it isn't even worth more than 2 levels to a fighter at 20th level. It might be better for some, than others, but that is the game in general so it is to be expected.
It's actually balanced, but front loaded, which is why people always complain it is "broken."
Man, that's the first time you've said something i don't agree with. We're talking about the Feral template, yeah? The one that for a +1 lvl adjustment gave you: Pounce; 2 claw attacks at 1d8!!; Rend; Darkvision; Damage Reduction AND fast healing that scaled with your lvl!!!
For +1 LA? That's balanced...
I'm pretty sure he said feral ppl not creatures.
And it's broken. Badly.
It's not broken badly, it's really conditional. We always thought it was pretty powerful until we ended up at the higher levels and realized just how iffy it was. It's nice then too, but not even close to being broken. When looking at the ECL cost you can't just consider the sweet spot, you have to look at the entire effectiveness over the length of the game 1st-20th. It isn't worth a caster level at 20th (where you lose a 9th level spell slot) and at the appropriate gear it isn't even worth more than 2 levels to a fighter at 20th level. It might be better for some, than others, but that is the game in general so it is to be expected.
It's actually balanced, but front loaded, which is why people always complain it is "broken."
Man, that's the first time you've said something i don't agree with. We're talking about the Feral template, yeah? The one that for a +1 lvl adjustment gave you: Pounce; 2 claw attacks at 1d8!!; Rend; Darkvision; Damage Reduction AND fast healing that scaled with your lvl!!!
For +1 LA? That's balanced...
It is if you don't take a snap shot of it for the first 10 levels. Over 20 levels it is almost a waste of a level :(
It's a matter of seeing the forest instead of the trees. Even if the game you (not you in particular, a general sense) play is normally going to end at 12th level for whatever reason, the game is balanced on a 20th level progression. By chopping that progression off early, things will be become more and more unbalanced. By giving a template something that is "front loaded" it screws with the perception of it making it "seem" powerful even though down the road it doesn't actually mean all that much.
Don't get me wrong, I'm not saying it isn't good. Just that it isn't broken. It wasn't anything you couldn't do with a feat and class ability (unarmed strike with improved natural weapon: unarmed strike got appropriate damage, TWF/Flurry for two attacks, but the feats could be improved upon). Pounce became available through a few sources, the main of which was barbarian (I think) or other PrCs. What you are really paying for was fast healing as it was the only thing that wasn't outclassed as you leveled up. And even then at the later levels, it doesn't come into play that much as you are taking so much damage that you are either getting healed by another character or dying from the amount of damage when you were low on hit points. DR while again "nice" was largely moot at those levels, things are either doing so much damage or completely bypassing it (SP/SU/Energy attacks) that it doesn't matter. If anything it meant you weren't draining the party healers resources and FORCING them to have healing spells regularly to case on you for taking damage. It actually helped combat the 15 minute adventuring day at lower levels.
Hmmm... I have a few questions for the community on a related note to this thread. This is my first post on the message boards and I'm a little new to Pathfinder so I'll try not to sound too newbish. I recognize most of these questions are questions for my DM, but I'd like to hear your experienced opinions first.
I'm building an 'unarmed' Barbarian under the 'Brutal Pugilist' APG archetype, and I've run into a series of questions. I'm sure if I were a more experienced player I might be able to answer some of these, but as it stands, I turn to your guidance on these issues. Thanks in advance for any help you provide, I'll put the knowledge to good (or evil) use.
1. Does the 'Greater Brawler' Rage Power grant me 'Improved TWF' at 6th level and 'G TWF' when appropriate? If not, can I take 'Imp. TWF' without the 'TWF' prerequisite if I have the 'Greater Brawler' rage power?
2. If I take the 'Beast Totem' Rage Power, (granting me 2 claw attacks at my full BAB), is there any way, at any level, I could make any more than two attacks specifically using my claws? Can I attack with both claws as a standard action, or is a full round attack still required to strike with both? I recognize this has already kind of been answered already, but the explanations given are a little confusing to me, could somebody spell it out for an RPG newcomer such as the likes of I?
3. Assume I have taken 'Beast Totem' for the Claw attacks. Am I still considered unarmed for the purposes of making Attacks of Opportunity? Are both my hands considered 'free' for the purposes of not taking penalties to grapple checks? Am I considered 'unarmed', taking a -4 penalty on disarm checks? Because my hands are technically empty, do I still 'take' a weapon from an enemy on a successful disarm attempt? Are my hands considered empty for other reasons (spellcasting, combat or roleplaying) not discussed?
4. Assume I have taken 'Beast Totem'. Assume I then take the 'Animal Fury' Rage Power (granting me a secondary bite attack at -5 from BAB), and then take the 'Multi-Attack' feat (to reduce secondary penalties from -5, to -2). If I understand the rules correctly, my attack profile looks like this, [BAB(claw) / BAB(claw) / BAB-2(bite)]. Is there now any way, at any level, I could make any more than these three attacks now that I have the additional secondary attack and assuming I can take the 'Multi-Attack' feat?
5. Is it unreasonable for a Barbarian (any nonlawful) to have taken one level of Monk (any lawful)? Perhaps he took 1 level of Monk then became nonlawful? Cutting off the potential to take any more Monk levels, but keeping the benefits of that one level?
6. Assume one level of Monk and subsequent levels of Barbarian(WITHOUT the claws). If I'm using unarmed strikes (or monk weapons) can I still flurry as if I were a monk of my character level? If so, does the 'Flurry of Blows' ability still give me 'I. TWF' at 8th character level? If not, can I take 'I. TWF' without having taken 'TWF'?
7. Assume one level of Monk and subsequent levels of Barbarian(Without the claws). Do the monk's unarmed strike rules always apply to me, even with only one level of monk? As in, are unarmed strikes never considered secondary weapons for the purposes of applying Strength and 'Power Attack' bonuses to damage? (Effectively giving me the 'Double Slice' feat for unarmed attacks only). If I were to take 'Animal Fury', gaining a Bite attack, would this attack be considered an 'unarmed attack'? If so, would that make it a primary attack? (eliminating the -5 penalty, and allowing me to apply full strength and Power Attack bonuses)
8. Assume one level of Monk(Monk of the 4 winds)(granting 'Elemental Fists' feat [1d6 energy damage to unarmed strikes] at 1st level) and subsequent levels of Barbarian(WITH the claws and bite secondary attack). Do my claws and bite attacks get the benefit of the 'Elemental Fist' feat? What about other feats or abilities or items that modify unarmed strikes, would they apply to my claws, my bite?
9. Am I asking too many questions or playing too complicated a character?
10. Should I just give up and play a sword and board fighter?