Improved Grapple worked differently in 3.5 but I seem to remember Grab was ruled to qualify you for Improved Grapple. Since everything is changed in Pathfinder and who knows whatever dev differences in thought, would Grab qualify you for Improved Grapple or Greater Grapple?
Improved Grapple worked differently in 3.5 but I seem to remember Grab was ruled to qualify you for Improved Grapple. Since everything is changed in Pathfinder and who knows whatever dev differences in thought, would Grab qualify you for Improved Grapple or Greater Grapple?
Probably not. A species inclination for grabbing things is not the same as a learned skill for how to wrestle.
Norse is correct. There was never such a rule in 3.5.
The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7
The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7
Grab is a monster ability, not a feat, and has no requirements other than the creator wanting the monster to have it.
The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7Grab is a monster ability, not a feat, and has no requirements other than the creator wanting the monster to have it.
Maybe he means Greater Grapple. I hate feats like that: the second feat in the chain includes the same pre-requisites as an earlier feat in the chain while still needing that feat as a pre-req. I mean, wtf.
Maybe he means Greater Grapple. I hate feats like that: the second feat in the chain includes the same pre-requisites as an earlier feat in the chain while still needing that feat as a pre-req. I mean, wtf.The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7Grab is a monster ability, not a feat, and has no requirements other than the creator wanting the monster to have it.
I don't mind feat trees all that much as long as each feat is useful(one I would not mind taking). I don't like tax feats though.
To anyone who is not familiar with the term tax feat, it is a feat you would not take, but it is required to get the feat.
Example:Taking spell focus(conjuration) to get augment summoning.
Maybe he means Greater Grapple. I hate feats like that: the second feat in the chain includes the same pre-requisites as an earlier feat in the chain while still needing that feat as a pre-req. I mean, wtf.The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7Grab is a monster ability, not a feat, and has no requirements other than the creator wanting the monster to have it.I don't mind feat trees all that much as long as each feat is useful(one I would not mind taking). I don't like tax feats though.
To anyone who is not familiar with the term tax feat, it is a feat you would not take, but it is required to get the feat.
Example:Taking spell focus(conjuration) to get augment summoning.
I really wouldn't qualify spell focus conjuration as a feat tax for anyone except the summoner since there's a lot of good conjuration particularly at low level that require saves.
I really wouldn't qualify spell focus conjuration as a feat tax for anyone except the summoner since there's a lot of good conjuration particularly at low level that require saves.Maybe he means Greater Grapple. I hate feats like that: the second feat in the chain includes the same pre-requisites as an earlier feat in the chain while still needing that feat as a pre-req. I mean, wtf.The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7Grab is a monster ability, not a feat, and has no requirements other than the creator wanting the monster to have it.I don't mind feat trees all that much as long as each feat is useful(one I would not mind taking). I don't like tax feats though.
To anyone who is not familiar with the term tax feat, it is a feat you would not take, but it is required to get the feat.
Example:Taking spell focus(conjuration) to get augment summoning.
Very few of which he actually gets.
Very few of which he actually gets.I really wouldn't qualify spell focus conjuration as a feat tax for anyone except the summoner since there's a lot of good conjuration particularly at low level that require saves.Maybe he means Greater Grapple. I hate feats like that: the second feat in the chain includes the same pre-requisites as an earlier feat in the chain while still needing that feat as a pre-req. I mean, wtf.The big kicker is improved unarmed strike is still required for both. I had an unearthed arcana bear totem barbarian that was quite surprised at that at level 7Grab is a monster ability, not a feat, and has no requirements other than the creator wanting the monster to have it.I don't mind feat trees all that much as long as each feat is useful(one I would not mind taking). I don't like tax feats though.
To anyone who is not familiar with the term tax feat, it is a feat you would not take, but it is required to get the feat.
Example:Taking spell focus(conjuration) to get augment summoning.
That's why I still call it a tax for the summoner.