Prehensile Hair skill use


Rules Questions

51 to 96 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

mdt wrote:

Sorry to rock your boat Abraham, but you guys missed the big thing.

EVERYONE can have a natural attack now.

Eldritch Heritage

No apologizes needed

myself wrote:


So we actually have a majority of classes -- and this doesn't take into account natural weapons of animal companions, mounts, familiars, eidolons or the like -- several of which have slight variations on the normal rules or(should have been a comma here) specific feats, magical items, curse (lycanthropy for example) or the like.

See I included those sorts of things -- I simply didn't list them out.


Gignere wrote:
What if the witch uses a range attack + the hair? Would the hair be considered primary or secondary in that? Or would you rule you can't mix range attacks with secondary attacks? What happens when the Witch have a high enough BAB to shoot a bow then attack with the hair?

Near as I can tell the ranged attack would be normal with the hair at BAB-5. But I could be wrong.


Gignere wrote:
What if the witch uses a range attack + the hair? Would the hair be considered primary or secondary in that? Or would you rule you can't mix range attacks with secondary attacks? What happens when the Witch have a high enough BAB to shoot a bow then attack with the hair?

PRD:

"You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack."

It doesn't mention ranged attacks, so simply. You can't.
Ranged only, melee+NA, NA only, those are your options if you have NAs.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Poor Wandering One wrote:
Gignere wrote:
What if the witch uses a range attack + the hair? Would the hair be considered primary or secondary in that? Or would you rule you can't mix range attacks with secondary attacks? What happens when the Witch have a high enough BAB to shoot a bow then attack with the hair?
Near as I can tell the ranged attack would be normal with the hair at BAB-5. But I could be wrong.

If you're making a full attack, then yeah, the bow would be normal, and the hair BAB - 5. If you had TWF or MWF it should drop to a -2 to all attacks.


Allia Thren wrote:
Gignere wrote:
What if the witch uses a range attack + the hair? Would the hair be considered primary or secondary in that? Or would you rule you can't mix range attacks with secondary attacks? What happens when the Witch have a high enough BAB to shoot a bow then attack with the hair?

PRD:

"You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack."

It doesn't mention ranged attacks, so simply. You can't.
Ranged only, melee+NA, NA only, those are your options if you have NAs.

Thought I was wrong. Thank you.


TWF won't change the -5 penalty on secondary natural weapons. Multiattack will, but you need 3 natural attacks to qualify for that.

I can see that a ranged weapon and a natural attack could work together if it makes sense. Shooting someone and biting him seems weird really. Slapping him with 10ft long hair or a tail could make sense.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Allia Thren wrote:

TWF won't change the -5 penalty on secondary natural weapons. Multiattack will, but you need 3 natural attacks to qualify for that.

I can see that a ranged weapon and a natural attack could work together if it makes sense. Shooting someone and biting him seems weird really. Slapping him with 10ft long hair or a tail could make sense.

I could see it being against two different targets. I'm gonna shoot the guy 30 feet away in front of me, and I'm going to hair whip the guy 10 feet away diagonally.

Contributor

Abraham spalding wrote:
Unfortunately the wording of these abilities is -- quite frankly horrendous. Especially with the number of exceptions they bring with them (that are now being turned back around into the normal rules here).

Examples, please?


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Unfortunately the wording of these abilities is -- quite frankly horrendous. Especially with the number of exceptions they bring with them (that are now being turned back around into the normal rules here).
Examples, please?

Animal fury for one. Is it a primary natural attack with some odd grapple bonuses or is it something else? Does it get 1.5 str damage is it is the only attack a barbarian makes that round? Can you take feats like Improved natural attack, multiattack, or Eldrich claws based, in part in the case of multiattack, on this?

Lesser beast totem is another. Are these primary natural attacks? Can you take feats like Improved natural attack, multiattack, or Eldrich claws based, in part in the case of multiattack, on this?

There are probably more but these were off the top of my head.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Unfortunately the wording of these abilities is -- quite frankly horrendous. Especially with the number of exceptions they bring with them (that are now being turned back around into the normal rules here).
Examples, please?

I can point out a couple.

Animal Fury wrote:


Animal Fury (Ex): While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus –5. If the bite hits, it deals 1d4 points of damage (assuming the barbarian is Medium; 1d3 points of damage if Small) plus half the barbarian's Strength modifier. A barbarian can make a bite attack as part of the action to maintain or break free from a grapple. This attack is resolved before the grapple check is made. If the bite attack hits, any grapple checks made by the barbarian against the target this round are at a +2 bonus.

Gives the barbarian a bite attack, but it's non-standard damage for bite for a medium creature. Rather than follow the normal rules for natural attacks, it's hard-coded to be at BAB - 5. It's also got an exception bit about grapples.

Nails wrote:


Nails (Ex): The witch's nails are long and sharp, and count as natural weapons that deal 1d3 points of damage (1d2 for a Small witch). These attacks are secondary attacks. If trimmed, the witch's nails regrow to their normal size in 1d4 days.

Exception to the rules for natural attacks, in that natural attacks are normally treated as primary if they are the only natural attack you have.

Toothy wrote:


Toothy: Some Half-orcs’ vestigial tusks are massive and sharp, granting a bite attack. This is a primary natural attack that deals 1d4 points of piercing damage. This racial trait replaces the orc ferocity racial trait.

Follows normal rules for natural attacks (primary bite) but exception for damage die.

Sorcerer bloodline claws however, follow all the standard rules for natural attacks and size and damage, while adding bloodline bonuses at higher levels.

It would seem to be better if things that grant natural attacks just said 'This is a natural attack that does <dmg> and follows all natural attack rules' rather than trying to put all the primary/secondary rules in to the power and assuming they'll only be used as secondary attacks.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Another...

Razortusk - Advanced Player's Guide wrote:


Your powerful jaws and steely teeth are deadly enough to give you a bite attack.
Prerequisite: Half-orc.
Benefit: You can make a bite attack for 1d4 points of damage, plus your Strength modifier. You're considered proficient in this attack and can apply feats or effects appropriate to natural attacks to it. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite is considered a secondary attack and is made at your full base attack bonus –5, and adds half your Strength modifier to damage.

Another situation of trying to put the rules for natural attacks into everything, rather than one place. Exception for size on damage die. Other than that though, it follows core rules for natural attacks.

Dark Archive

mdt wrote:

Another...

Razortusk - Advanced Player's Guide wrote:


Your powerful jaws and steely teeth are deadly enough to give you a bite attack.
Prerequisite: Half-orc.
Benefit: You can make a bite attack for 1d4 points of damage, plus your Strength modifier. You're considered proficient in this attack and can apply feats or effects appropriate to natural attacks to it. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite is considered a secondary attack and is made at your full base attack bonus –5, and adds half your Strength modifier to damage.
Another situation of trying to put the rules for natural attacks into everything, rather than one place. Exception for size on damage die. Other than that though, it follows core rules for natural attacks.

No it doesn't it makes a bite attack a secondary attack during a full attack action even if it's mixed with other natural attacks or the only attack used.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:
Unfortunately the wording of these abilities is -- quite frankly horrendous. Especially with the number of exceptions they bring with them (that are now being turned back around into the normal rules here).
Examples, please?

Well I'm not the one doing this professionally (I do realize that) but in my opinion prehensile hair is a prime example. If it was simply stated it was a natural attack instead of going into detail about it being a secondary natural attack and then spelling out the penalties and what not for using it there would have been less confusion on what to do if it was your only natural attack (which of course it would be primary in such a case).

Animal Fury from the core rule book is another example I would site -- rather than going into detail in the rage power of the exact penalties for use simply saying it was a natural bite attack would have clear up how it interacts with other natural attacks and melee attacks without using up a lot of extra verbage (perhaps giving a reference to the natural attack rules could have been done).

Alchemist is where I would go next -- the tentacle discovery is where I would like to start: It specifies it doesn't grant extra attacks... but it does provide a natural attack. Well natural attacks can be taken along side manufactured weapon attacks with a full attack -- is that the case or not with the tentacle?

The vestigial arm is one I really like -- but with the current wording it is confusing about how it would interact with the multiattack feat.

A place I would consider 'rough' but necessarily ill written would be the master chemists mutagenic form. Just how different can it look? Does it still detect as the alchemists original race... is it a polymorph sort of effect, etc.

A section in ultimate magic that could bear clearing up would be the synthesis -- exactly what can target the combined eidolon summoner? How combined are they? The summoner gets temporary hit points equal to the eidolon -- does the eidolon still have its own hit point pool that can be depleted through area of effect spells (such as fireball)? Can the combined eidolon/summoner wear armor -- and to what effect if the summoner does?

Qing Gong monk -- does he give up all his slow fall or just some (rules point to just some) and can he give up future increments of slow fall for more abilities if the loss is incremental? The list of abilities seems to suggest so with it landing on every level that slow fall is increased but it isn't specific.

Overall I think the larger context of the problem is over explaining some abilities (animal fury and prehensile hair are examples of this) and under explaining more complex less common abilities (such as vestigial arm). After all we have rules for natural attacks and they are easy to find and follow -- there aren't a lot of rules for extra limbs however beyond the multiattack feat.


mdt wrote:

Another...

Razortusk - Advanced Player's Guide wrote:


Your powerful jaws and steely teeth are deadly enough to give you a bite attack.
Prerequisite: Half-orc.
Benefit: You can make a bite attack for 1d4 points of damage, plus your Strength modifier. You're considered proficient in this attack and can apply feats or effects appropriate to natural attacks to it. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite is considered a secondary attack and is made at your full base attack bonus –5, and adds half your Strength modifier to damage.
Another situation of trying to put the rules for natural attacks into everything, rather than one place. Exception for size on damage die. Other than that though, it follows core rules for natural attacks.

There is also the full attack does not mean the same thing as full attack using only natural weapons issue. This feat and other things like animial fury include the "If used as part of a full attack action" line that disagrees with the natural attack rules. Someone with multiple natural attacks would not treat this bite as secondary. At least that seems to be the case.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:
mdt wrote:

Another...

Razortusk - Advanced Player's Guide wrote:


Your powerful jaws and steely teeth are deadly enough to give you a bite attack.
Prerequisite: Half-orc.
Benefit: You can make a bite attack for 1d4 points of damage, plus your Strength modifier. You're considered proficient in this attack and can apply feats or effects appropriate to natural attacks to it. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite is considered a secondary attack and is made at your full base attack bonus –5, and adds half your Strength modifier to damage.
Another situation of trying to put the rules for natural attacks into everything, rather than one place. Exception for size on damage die. Other than that though, it follows core rules for natural attacks.
No it doesn't it makes a bite attack a secondary attack during a full attack action even if it's mixed with other natural attacks or the only attack used.

Ahh, good point. *le sigh* see, even the ones that look straight forward are full of exception handling.

Contributor

7 people marked this as a favorite.

I'd argue that animal fury is just using redundant language so the player doesn't need to look up the rules for natural attacks in the Bestiary. Odds are, your barbarian is still using weapons, and the bite is just part of the attack routine. Thus, even though it's a primary natural attack, it uses the normal manuf+natural rule where you make your normal attacks with your manuf weapons, and add in the natural weapon... at a -5 penalty.

UMR: "Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type."

mdt wrote:


It would seem to be better if things that grant natural attacks just said 'This is a natural attack that does <dmg> and follows all natural attack rules' rather than trying to put all the primary/secondary rules in to the power and assuming they'll only be used as secondary attacks.

I agree that would be better. Unfortunately, we didn't do that in the Core Rulebook (partly because the Bestiary wasn't done yet, and partly because we didn't want to refer players to the Bestiary), and when people model a new ability, they usually base it on the existing presentation of a similar ability, which means you're going to get this language weirdness.

So, short answer: if something gives you a natural attack, it gives you a natural attack (whether that's primary or secondary is built into the attack, just as a claw or bite is always primary and a tentacle or hoof is always secondary), and your chosen attack sequence may change whether you use your full BAB or use the –5 for it being in addition to manufactured weapons or other primary attacks.

Trust me, guys, I agree that there are SO many things in the Core Rulebook that could be written more clearly and more forward-looking, and using that imperfect wording in later products (because it's the "standard" wording) doesn't make things any clearer. The most important goal I set for myself was to look at all the text going into the Beginner Box, especially if it came from the Core Rulebook, and rewrite it so it was clearer and simpler. The game is complex... too damn complex, and fancy writing usually doesn't add clarity. I'm pretty sure if I rewrote the Core Rulebook, it would be clearer and about 32 pages shorter.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

May I suggest then that an FAQ explaining what you just posted would solve a lot of issues? This part in particular :

SKR wrote:


So, short answer: if something gives you a natural attack, it gives you a natural attack (whether that's primary or secondary is built into the attack, just as a claw or bite is always primary and a tentacle or hoof is always secondary), and your chosen attack sequence may change whether you use your full BAB or use the –5 for it being in addition to manufactured weapons or other primary attacks.

Just to stop the arguments, both on the boards, in PFS, and in games? I would assume that you still use the specified damage (since that can be unique by 'creature')? So Animal Fury and Toothy are still 1d4, despite a bite of a medium creature normally being 1d6?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Sean K Reynolds wrote:

I'd argue that animal fury is just using redundant language so the player doesn't need to look up the rules for natural attacks in the Bestiary. Odds are, your barbarian is still using weapons, and the bite is just part of the attack routine. Thus, even though it's a primary natural attack, it uses the normal manuf+natural rule where you make your normal attacks with your manuf weapons, and add in the natural weapon... at a -5 penalty.

That's how I treat it, but as you can see from this thread itself, a strict reading of RAW that is not how the ability works, due to the duplication of rules that are incomplete.


Sean K Reynolds wrote:

I'd argue that animal fury is just using redundant language so the player doesn't need to look up the rules for natural attacks in the Bestiary. Odds are, your barbarian is still using weapons, and the bite is just part of the attack routine. Thus, even though it's a primary natural attack, it uses the normal manuf+natural rule where you make your normal attacks with your manuf weapons, and add in the natural weapon... at a -5 penalty.

UMR: "Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type."

mdt wrote:


It would seem to be better if things that grant natural attacks just said 'This is a natural attack that does <dmg> and follows all natural attack rules' rather than trying to put all the primary/secondary rules in to the power and assuming they'll only be used as secondary attacks.

I agree that would be better. Unfortunately, we didn't do that in the Core Rulebook (partly because the Bestiary wasn't done yet, and partly because we didn't want to refer players to the Bestiary), and when people model a new ability, they usually base it on the existing presentation of a similar ability, which means you're going to get this language weirdness.

So, short answer: if something gives you a natural attack, it gives you a natural attack (whether that's primary or secondary is built into the attack, just as a claw or bite is always primary and a tentacle or hoof is always secondary), and your chosen attack sequence may change whether you use your full BAB or use the –5 for it being in addition to manufactured weapons or other primary attacks.

Trust me, guys, I agree that there are SO many things in the Core Rulebook that could be written more...

THANK YOU! Simply the statement that animial fury et al are actually natural attacks is very helpful.

My only remaining question is if one can take feats with "natural weapon" or "natural attack" as a requirement if one has lesser beast totem sorcerer claws or other powers that grant a natural attack.

Thank you again.


Poor Wandering One wrote:

My only remaining question is if one can take feats with "natural weapon" or "natural attack" as a requirement if one has lesser beast totem sorcerer claws or other powers that grant a natural attack.

Thank you again.

I think there was a thread a few days ago, where one of the devs stated that the rage power claws for example aren't enough to take Eldrich claws, since they're only active for a very limited time per day.

The same argument would most likely apply to the sorcerer claws.

I'll see if I find the post


He also said that it was an off the cuff ruling. Checking to see if things have soildified.


Poor Wandering One wrote:

He also said that it was an off the cuff ruling. Checking to see if things have soildified.

YOu're right, now that you mention it, he did say he has to investigate further. So nevermind my answer :)

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Battles Case Subscriber; Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
LazarX wrote:
Track Encumbrance.

Oh yes, isn't that what Hero Lab is for? I know what she's carrying and what is on her horse down to the ounce! :-D

Contributor

mdt wrote:
Just to stop the arguments, both on the boards, in PFS, and in games? I would assume that you still use the specified damage (since that can be unique by 'creature')? So Animal Fury and Toothy are still 1d4, despite a bite of a medium creature normally being 1d6?

Yes, because a humanoid's bite is much weaker (in terms of size and strength) than the bite of a typical Medium predator.

Dark Archive

To settle the argument once and for all;

when it is the only attack used the natural attack counts as a primary attack (full BAB, 1.5 str), if it is the only one you have and the specific wording doesn't override the general rule.

for example, the animal fury rage power states:
"if used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarians full base attack bonus -5. if the bite hits, it deals 1d4 points of damage ... plus half the barbarians strength modifier"

as you can see, the specific wording of the ability in question is that, IF used as part of a full attack, it counts as a secondary attack regardless of what other attacks are used but ONLY if used in a full attack, the ability also always uses only half str for damage, as it states in the next sentence. I would assume that the other abilities function the same way, with damage being as stated, regardless of general rules, and the -5 from secondary attack always and only applying on a full attack

also, the bonus to grapples only applies if: you are already engaged in a grapple and you hit with the special bite attack action

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Allia Thren wrote:
LazarX wrote:

BTW to the OP whose concern was his Str 7 Min-Maxer.... I only have two words...

Track Encumbrance.

A few two word words for you:

Bag (of) Holding
Handy Haversack
Pack Mule
Team Mates

But yes, str means 23 lbs is max to remain unencumbered. Enforce it if she goes above.

Reply to that.

In my world...

MagicMart is Closed
Back Packs
Mules don't like dungeons

And someone who can't carry their own weight is going to be a problem.

Add sword, and your armor, and even with nothing else you're going to be pushing that 23 lbs awfully quick.

Dark Archive

Sean K Reynolds wrote:
mdt wrote:
Just to stop the arguments, both on the boards, in PFS, and in games? I would assume that you still use the specified damage (since that can be unique by 'creature')? So Animal Fury and Toothy are still 1d4, despite a bite of a medium creature normally being 1d6?
Yes, because a humanoid's bite is much weaker (in terms of size and strength) than the bite of a typical Medium predator.

So the Alchemists 1D8 Bite attack and 1D6 Claw attack from Feral Mutagen is incorrect or does the mutagen make them that much more animal like?

Also I'm a bit confused on the balance aspect of the feats that grant Natural Attacks. They all cost the same (1 feat or using a feat to get the class specific bonus) but give wildly varying values.

Razortusk gives you a single secondary attack, and so does Prehensile hair and Lesser Fiend Totem. But Aspect of the beast gives you 2 primary attacks (claws) and so does Lesser beast totem.
Then you have Feral mutagen giving you 3 primary attacks at higher dice values (1D8& 1D6) then all the rest.

All of these have do the same thing (grant a natural attack) but all cost exactly the same (1 feat) and all have wildly different mechanics written all over them.
Trying to understand the valuation of these examples makes it really hard to understand just what a PC natural attack should be and how much it's worth.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


Also I'm a bit confused on the balance aspect of the feats that grant Natural Attacks. They all cost the same (1 feat or using a feat to get the class specific bonus) but give wildly varying values.

That's what SKR was saying earlier. It's a natural attack, and it follows the primary/secondary/NA with weapons rules. All the crunch in the various abilities was attempts to encapsulate a page worth of NA rules into a paragraph, and it basically just made things confusing.

You take the damage die given by the ability, but everything else follows the NA rules from the Bestiary. The only odd one is witch hair, which is considered a secondary NA (unless it's the only one you have, in which case you can use it as a primary attack if you only attack with it).

So....

Feral Mutagen Bite : Primary Bite Attack (boosted Damage 1d8, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Feral Mutagen Claws : Primary Claw Attack (boosted Damage 1d6, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Razortusk : Primary Bite Attack (reduced damage 1d4, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Aspect of the Beast : Primary Claw Attack (secondary if used with weapons)
Lesser beast Totem : Same as Aspect of Beast.


mdt wrote:


Feral Mutagen Bite : Primary Bite Attack (boosted Damage 1d8, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Feral Mutagen Claws : Primary Claw Attack (boosted Damage 1d6, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Razortusk : Primary Bite Attack (reduced damage 1d4, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Aspect of the Beast : Primary Claw Attack (secondary if used with weapons)
Lesser beast Totem : Same as Aspect of Beast.

Animal fury: same as Razortusk plus the odd graple bonus?


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Poor Wandering One wrote:
mdt wrote:


Feral Mutagen Bite : Primary Bite Attack (boosted Damage 1d8, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Feral Mutagen Claws : Primary Claw Attack (boosted Damage 1d6, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Razortusk : Primary Bite Attack (reduced damage 1d4, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Aspect of the Beast : Primary Claw Attack (secondary if used with weapons)
Lesser beast Totem : Same as Aspect of Beast.
Animal fury: same as Razortusk plus the odd graple bonus?

Yep. I'm fine with specific class abilities adding on bonuses to the core NA rules. Similar to how Sorcerer Bloodline abilities gain bonus effects at higher levels.

This makes it much simpler, you just have to remember the damage die and any bonus abilities granted by the class/feat/etc, but the core interactions between natural attacks, whether they are primary or secondary, etc, are all based off the Bestiary rules (which is how I was running it in my games anyway).


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

Vaguely relevant Prehensile Hair question I have no idea of the actual answer to: any idea what type of damage Prehensile Hair should do when used as a weapon?

Justifications can be made for several types...

Hair Whip = Slashing
Tentacle Hair = Bludgeoning
Anime style impalement even makes something of a case for potential impalement... = Piercing

Tentacles, which it seems it could be equivalent to, certainly are typed as all three.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

I'd say all three, depending on how you attack.

Tentacles are, however, bludgeoning (per universal monster rules). The only attack that is coded as all 3 is bite.

Dark Archive

mdt wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:


Also I'm a bit confused on the balance aspect of the feats that grant Natural Attacks. They all cost the same (1 feat or using a feat to get the class specific bonus) but give wildly varying values.

That's what SKR was saying earlier. It's a natural attack, and it follows the primary/secondary/NA with weapons rules. All the crunch in the various abilities was attempts to encapsulate a page worth of NA rules into a paragraph, and it basically just made things confusing.

You take the damage die given by the ability, but everything else follows the NA rules from the Bestiary. The only odd one is witch hair, which is considered a secondary NA (unless it's the only one you have, in which case you can use it as a primary attack if you only attack with it).

So....

Feral Mutagen Bite : Primary Bite Attack (boosted Damage 1d8, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Feral Mutagen Claws : Primary Claw Attack (boosted Damage 1d6, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Razortusk : Primary Bite Attack (reduced damage 1d4, secondary if used with weapon attacks)
Aspect of the Beast : Primary Claw Attack (secondary if used with weapons)
Lesser beast Totem : Same as Aspect of Beast.

No problem understanding how to use them, that wasn't my question.

I probably should have stated my question better, I meant it more for understanding the guidelines used to assign values to these abilities.

1 feat can give you at base before anything else either an increase in damage of as little as 1 pts (1D3 hair whip 1/2 strength mod) to as high as 40+ ((1D8 +1D6 +1D6 +str*3)*2 crit).
Add to that it can either give you 1,2 or 3 extra attacks a round makes it really hard to judge whether something is within design level limits.

For someone trying to understand the Design Philosophy or at least get an idea of what they intended by RAI, this degree of variation makes it hard to judge intent.


This is just my take but I would default to bludgeoning but be pretty open to the player talking me out of it.


mdt wrote:

I'd say all three, depending on how you attack.

Tentacles are, however, bludgeoning (per universal monster rules). The only attack that is coded as all 3 is bite.

Is the table on pfsrd.com incorrect then?

It definately has Hoof, Tentacle, and Wing listed as all three (the same as Bite).


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

1 feat can give you at base before anything else either an increase in damage of as little as 1 pts (1D3 hair whip 1/2 strength mod) to as high as 40+ ((1D8 +1D6 +1D6 +str*3)*2 crit).

Add to that it can either give you 1,2 or 3 extra attacks a round makes it really hard to judge whether something is within design level limits.

Well,

Your issue is that you are calling them all Feats. They aren't. There's a feat, a racial trait, and class abilities. Note that the powerful ones tend to be class abilities (especially Feral Mutagen, which is the really powerful one). Class abilities are not lego bricks, they aren't interchangeable, nor do they equate to feats.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
KrispyXIV wrote:
mdt wrote:

I'd say all three, depending on how you attack.

Tentacles are, however, bludgeoning (per universal monster rules). The only attack that is coded as all 3 is bite.

Is the table on pfsrd.com incorrect then?

It definately has Hoof, Tentacle, and Wing listed as all three (the same as Bite).

I would say it is, as the official Paizo table (which matches what's in the bestiary) has them listed as Bludgeoning.

Paizo PRD : Universal Monster Rules


mdt wrote:
KrispyXIV wrote:
mdt wrote:

I'd say all three, depending on how you attack.

Tentacles are, however, bludgeoning (per universal monster rules). The only attack that is coded as all 3 is bite.

Is the table on pfsrd.com incorrect then?

It definately has Hoof, Tentacle, and Wing listed as all three (the same as Bite).

I would say it is, as the official Paizo table (which matches what's in the bestiary) has them listed as Bludgeoning.

Paizo PRD : Universal Monster Rules

Good to know! Thanks!


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
KrispyXIV wrote:


Good to know! Thanks!

Not to say there might not be some unique creatures that have non-bludgeoning for tentacles/hooves/wings. I could see a split hooved creature with metal hooves having slashing instead, or a winged brute with sharp edged feathers also having slash. But that would be an exception for that creature.

Dark Archive

mdt wrote:
Mathwei ap Niall wrote:

1 feat can give you at base before anything else either an increase in damage of as little as 1 pts (1D3 hair whip 1/2 strength mod) to as high as 40+ ((1D8 +1D6 +1D6 +str*3)*2 crit).

Add to that it can either give you 1,2 or 3 extra attacks a round makes it really hard to judge whether something is within design level limits.

Well,

Your issue is that you are calling them all Feats. They aren't. There's a feat, a racial trait, and class abilities. Note that the powerful ones tend to be class abilities (especially Feral Mutagen, which is the really powerful one). Class abilities are not lego bricks, they aren't interchangeable, nor do they equate to feats.

I actually only listed the ones that you can get by spending a feat to get and none of them require you to be of any specific race (razortusk is open because of the adopted trait).

Each one of them is open to multiple classes (except for the alchemist, it's the odd man out since everything it offers Natural Attack-wise is better then every other class/creature in the game) or can be gained with a level dip.


Also We have not gotten to the funniest use of the prehensile hair yet using it for strength checks to break open doors with your hair. Even sillier if the witch can use a crowbar in her hair to break open doors.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
doctor_wu wrote:
Also We have not gotten to the funniest use of the prehensile hair yet using it for strength checks to break open doors with your hair. Even sillier if the witch can use a crowbar in her hair to break open doors.

I don't see it as silly. The hair is a prehensile natural attack (prehensile means 'to grasp'). I can see the hair wrapping around a crowbar and wedging it in and jerking on it.

I always visualize this as Medusa from Marvel Comics.


mdt wrote:
doctor_wu wrote:
Also We have not gotten to the funniest use of the prehensile hair yet using it for strength checks to break open doors with your hair. Even sillier if the witch can use a crowbar in her hair to break open doors.

I don't see it as silly. The hair is a prehensile natural attack (prehensile means 'to grasp'). I can see the hair wrapping around a crowbar and wedging it in and jerking on it.

I always visualize this as Medusa from Marvel Comics.

Or probably the hair sliding through the different cracks all around the door and then yanking it free.


Yeah the hair would actually have a bit easier time since it can get into places to get a better grip than an actual hand could.


mdt wrote:
doctor_wu wrote:
Also We have not gotten to the funniest use of the prehensile hair yet using it for strength checks to break open doors with your hair. Even sillier if the witch can use a crowbar in her hair to break open doors.

I don't see it as silly. The hair is a prehensile natural attack (prehensile means 'to grasp'). I can see the hair wrapping around a crowbar and wedging it in and jerking on it.

I always visualize this as Medusa from Marvel Comics.

I actually visual the chick from mortal combat.


mdt wrote:
You take the damage die given by the ability, but everything else follows the NA rules from the Bestiary. The only odd one is witch hair, which is considered a secondary NA (unless it's the only one you have, in which case you can use it as a primary attack if you only attack with it).

... That DOES follow the rules for natural attacks. The prehensile hair attack is exactly the same as any other secondary attack. Like all secondary attacks, they can count as primary if you have no other natural attacks. Even when they count as primary, they still suffer the -5 attack and only get 1/2 STR on damage when you also use manufactured weapons or unarmed strikes, just like all natural attacks whether they're primary or secondary. If you have multiple natural attacks, then like all other secondary attacks, it counts as secondary always.

The only specific rules exception that prehensile hair has is that it uses a different strength score than the creature it's attached to. As far as primary/secondary is concerned, it follows the rules normally for a secondary attack.

51 to 96 of 96 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Prehensile Hair skill use All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.