|
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I have now seen three ways for a Half-Orc character to acquire a Bite Attack.
1) Toothy Alternate Racial Ability Trait from APG. Primary natural attack that deals 1d4 piercing.
2) Razortusk Feat from APG.
3) Tusked Trait from Orcs of Golarion.
Don't all these pretty much give you the same thing? A 1d4 bite attack?
So if that is the case why would you choose the Feat over the Trait or Racial Ability Trait?
Thoughts?
|
I have now seen three ways for a Half-Orc character to acquire a Bite Attack.
1) Toothy Alternate Racial Ability Trait from APG. Primary natural attack that deals 1d4 piercing.
2) Razortusk Feat from APG.
3) Tusked Trait from Orcs of Golarion.
Don't all these pretty much give you the same thing? A 1d4 bite attack?
So if that is the case why would you choose the Feat over the Trait or Racial Ability Trait?
Thoughts?
You may want to keep the Orc ferocity. For the traits, either your GM may not play with traits, or you may want to use them for something else.
what if you take all 3? (I know, they do not stack) :P
By the way, don't forget if this H-Orc is a Barbarian with the Animal Fury, then you have 4 ways to get a bite attack.
I don't mind more than one way to get a minor extra attack like that.
Having multiple traits do the same thing is useful from the point of not being able to take more than one trait from the same subgroup
When I read the title of this post I thought it was about a cool new Pathfinder cereal or something. "half orc bites....now with marshmallows!"
My biggest issue is the fact that a trait is supposed to be "half a feat" and yet this trait does exactly what a feat does.
When I read the title of this post I thought it was about a cool new Pathfinder cereal or something. "half orc bites....now with marshmallows!"
This was my hope also, either that or some cool porn.
My biggest issue is the fact that a trait is supposed to be "half a feat" and yet this trait does exactly what a feat does.In other words, either the trait is twice as strong as it should be, the feat is 1/2 as strong as it should be, or they're both hovering in the middle somewhere.
Yup. If the trait were "This bite attack is always treated as secondary" or had a reach of 0 feet then I would be fine with it. As it stands though not so much.
Yup. If the trait were "This bite attack is always treated as secondary" or had a reach of 0 feet then I would be fine with it. As it stands though not so much.My biggest issue is the fact that a trait is supposed to be "half a feat" and yet this trait does exactly what a feat does.In other words, either the trait is twice as strong as it should be, the feat is 1/2 as strong as it should be, or they're both hovering in the middle somewhere.
I think the feat should just be a d6 bite, wouldn't change much and it makes it worth taking