1. The Eidolon Evolution says that you can have claws on your Limbs (Legs) and ONLY on you Limbs (legs) [in that instance]. Thus a bipedal Eidolon has claws on their feet that they may attack with. Do you agree?
No. The rules assume you need legs to stand on.
It does not have 4 Claws - RAW.
Special Attacks pounce, rake (2 claws +7, 1d4+5)
It has 4 claws, raw. It USES two on a normal attack and needs to use rake to use all four claws.
1) What says you can put claws on your feet?
2) Why does a lion need rake? Why not full attack with all 4 claws and the bite?
1. The Eidolon Evolution says that you can have claws on its Limbs (Legs) and ONLY on its Limbs (legs) [in that instance]. Thus a bipedal Eidolon has Claws on their feet that they may attack with. Do you agree?
2. Because a Lion does not have 4 claws on their stat sheet? Because that is how a Lion is formatted? That is a design choice that I cannot answer. We can see that it is possible to have claws on your feet though, from the Eidolon.
A lion has 4 limbs, but only 2 Claws. It does not have 4 Claws - RAW. The word "Claws" only refers to an attack form (Claws), not the actual physical makeup/description of a Lion.
Edit: You caught me mid-edit so i just wanted to be sure you saw the rest of it.
No. The rules assume you need legs to stand on.
Cite that for me in the rules please. If this were true then why can you kick? That logic is flawed and is not reflected in the RAW. I would like to see specifically says you need to maintain any kind of balance to attack.
Special Attacks pounce, rake (2 claws +7, 1d4+5)
It has 4 claws, raw. It USES two on a normal attack and needs to use rake to use all four claws.
No, it has 2 Claws and Rake. Not all quadrupeds have Rake, why does a Manticore not have Rake? It has 4 claws too and the body of a Lion.
1. The Eidolon Evolution says that you can have claws on its Limbs (Legs) and ONLY on its Limbs (legs) [in that instance]. Thus a bipedal Eidolon has Claws on their feet that they may attack with. Do you agree?
No, here's why
The Eidolon Evolution says that THE EIDOLON can have claws on its Limbs (Legs)
It is not only on its legs in this instance. The rules do not assume that its a bipedal eidolon that's getting the claws, nor do the rules assume that a bipedal eidolon can't get more limbs (legs)
2. Because a Lion does not have 4 claws on their stat sheet?
There ARE four claws on their stat sheet. The two it usually uses and the two it can only use when it rakes. This is not available for contention.
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 free 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.
No. The rules assume you need legs to stand on.
Cite that for me in the rules please. If this were true then why can you kick? That logic is flawed and is not reflected in the RAW. I would like to see specifically says you need to maintain any kind of balance to attack.
It is reflected in the raw.Its just not spelled out for you because the rules are largely not written for PC's to have monstrous accoutrements and its supposed to be self evident.
A lion/tiger/dragon/whatever has 4 clawed legs. ------something happens----> they only get 2 claw attacks. This is the basic pattern for MOST monsters. Why is it such a wild leap to conclude that that "something happens is "you're busy standing on your legs"
No, it has 2 Claws and Rake. Not all quadrupeds have Rake, why does a Manticore not have Rake? It has 4 claws too and the body of a Lion.
Because its stuck standing on its clawed legs and without rake its no good at jumping up on people to take advantage of it
Claws (Ex)
An eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks. These attacks are primary attacks. The claws deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). The eidolon must have the limbs evolution to take this evolution. This evolution can only be applied to the limbs (legs) evolution once. This evolution can be selected more than once, but the eidolon must possess an equal number of the limbs evolution.
This power states that the claws evolution can be applied to any set of limbs: "pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs".
This power also states that claws can be applied to the legs. "This evolution can only be applied to the limbs (legs) evolution once."
This means a bipedal eidolon can have claws on its feet, please note the lack of text prohibiting bipedal eidolons from using claws in this way.
If a bipedal eidolon can Kick (twice with TWF), then why can't it use the claws on each of its feet?
This means a bipedal eidolon can have claws on its feet, please note the lack of text prohibiting bipedal eidolons from using claws in this way.
-Also note the lack of text allowing the eidolon's claws to be used that way. Eidolon's have a wide variety of forms. Again, i beleive the text is there to keep the eidelon from haveing 10 pairs of legs and 10 pairs of claws.
You can't two weapon fight with natural attacks.
A lion/tiger/dragon/whatever has 4 clawed legs. ------something happens----> they only get 2 claw attacks. This is the basic pattern for MOST monsters. Why is it such a wild leap to conclude that that "something happens is "you're busy standing on your legs"
You can't two weapon fight with natural attacks.
This is not the case. You can TWF with two manufactured weapons and use a Bite or foot claw.
However, this has no impact our our discussion. If you had 2 claws on your feet and a greataxe then your statblock would say
Great Axe, 2 Claws
Also note the lack of text allowing the eidolon's claws to be used that way.
Then, is your opinion that a natural attack form on the feet cannot be used by a bipedal creature?
What about the Deinonychus? It has talons (on the feet), two to be exact, that can be used while it attacks from a standing position. It is bipedal.
Also, in your interpretation, a character cannot kick or use a bladed boot while they are standing?
Certainly two kicks or two bladed boots would be out of the question in your interpretation.
so can we twf with armor spikes and a main weapon, while weilding a small sheild, and make multiple primary, multiple off hand (armor spikes) a bite,a gore, a headbutt, 2 foot claws, the other hand (not "off hand") claw, 2 elbow blade strikes, and 2 knee spike strikes
1. No shield attack, unless it's a buckler
2. I don't think you'd get a gore, a bite and a headbutt, you'd have to pick one attack for the head.3. elbows and knees are still part of the arm and leg limbs, so no unless you specifically got a natural attack that made those its own attack somehow.
4. everything else looks fine, but you'll be taking a -5 to all your natural attacks for wielding a manufactured weapons and using them in conjunction with natural attacks.
5. Is this not what the new Barbarian totem builds are based off?
Barbarian with a gore, claws, pounce, armor spikes and add some bladed boots or Improved Unarmed Strike?
Great Axe, 2 Claws
That you CAN do... if you have extra arms. What you cannot do is use the rules for manufactured weapons with your feet.
Also note the lack of text allowing the eidolon's claws to be used that way.
Then, is your opinion that a natural attack form on the feet cannot be used by a bipedal creature?
HOW many times do i need to say YES to this? Is it really that hard to beleive? Seriously, i've told you this over and over. Accept that it really really really really is my opinion and move on please.
It does not specifically say that a bipedal form can make use of the claws. There are lots of ways to put eidolons together that wouldn't make any sense
What about the Deinonychus? It has talons (on the feet), two to be exact, that can be used while it attacks from a standing position. It is bipedal.
It has talons, not claws, and is an exception to the rule because it is specifically called out as such in the stat block. You do not have such a stat block for your hypothetical eidelon or barbarian.
Also, in your interpretation, a character cannot kick or use a bladed boot while they are standing?
Characters with attacks work on different rules than natural attacks. I would let someone get in one kick with a bladed boot but not two, and even then if they only had one other weapon. There's no rules for double offhand fighting.
Certainly two kicks or two bladed boots would be out of the question in your interpretation.
Yes, unless someone was using regular two weapon fighting with two weapons and simply defined them as being the two on his feet. Rule of cool i would allow this, helium sucking munchkinism to get yourself more attacks i would not allow this.
Now, i feel i'm getting slighted here.
1) I have to answer the same question over and over
2) You are skipping the majority of my points. If you don't answer them, i don't see the point in continuing.
A) A lion/tiger/dragon/whatever has 4 clawed legs. ------something happens----> they only get 2 claw attacks. This is the basic pattern for MOST monsters. Why is it such a wild leap to conclude that that "something happens is "you're busy standing on your legs"
B) What ability specifically allows A pc to grow claws on your feet?
Now, i feel i'm getting slighted here.1) I have to answer the same question over and over
2) You are skipping the majority of my points. If you don't answer them, i don't see the point in continuing.
A) A lion/tiger/dragon/whatever has 4 clawed legs. ------something happens----> they only get 2 claw attacks. This is the basic pattern for MOST monsters. Why is it such a wild leap to conclude that that "something happens is "you're busy standing on your legs"
B) What ability specifically allows A pc to grow claws on your feet?
1) You have yet to answer it satisfactorally. Saying that there are a lot of exceptions to the rule isn't making your case very concrete.
2)
A) A lion has 4 clawed legs, but is not statted out with 4 claws. This is due to a design choice. You cite this again, this seems to be the pattern Paizo is following for quadrupeds. But I say to you (again) we're not talking about a quadruped. We're talking about a biped.
Your devil example is more convincing, but it does not have 4 claws attacks either, but it does have claws on its feet. Why is that? I don't know, perhaps to limit the amount of attacks of a creature due to balancing reasons? Why doesn't every dragon in every age category have wing attacks or a tail slap? Doesn't this boil down to a design choice?
Further, a Basilisk has 8 legs and a tail (a 7.5 foot long tail), but only has a bite attack - the horror! Not every creature with a tail has a tail slap either.
This is not a pattern for *most* monsters, it is instead how Paizo is interpreting monsters into the game system. We know this because bipedal monsters with claws on their feet that were known to use them as primary weapons (see: Dinosaurs) have those natural attacks in place.
With the implementation of the Eidolon can see that Paizo is not beholden to keeping this "rule" which you suggest exists. *Gasp* my eidolon is in the shape of a dinosaur!
B) Does the Claws ability state you grow your claws from your hands? I think it's pretty inventive of a player to come up with this idea as it's not one I would have thought up.
What we should be talking about is that gaining multiple instances of the same power/class ability never stack unless noted.
A creature with Evasion twice, does not have double evasion or improved evasion.
A) A lion has 4 clawed legs, but is not statted out with 4 claws. This is due to a design choice. You cite this again, this seems to be the pattern Paizo is following for quadrupeds. But I say to you (again) we're not talking about a quadruped. We're talking about a biped.
-Who is even LESS able to use footclaws.
Your devil example is more convincing, but it does not have 4 claws attacks either, but it does have claws on its feet. Why is that? I don't know, perhaps to limit the amount of attacks of a creature due to balancing reasons?
Which would be another reason to tell the barbarian no on the footclaws.
Why doesn't every dragon in every age category have wing attacks or a tail slap? Doesn't this boil down to a design choice?
They're not big enough to use them effectively.
This is not a pattern for *most* monsters, it is instead how Paizo is interpreting monsters into the game system. We know this because bipedal monsters with claws on their feet that were known to use them as primary weapons (see: Dinosaurs) have those natural attacks in place.
it is in fact the pattern for most monsters because i can get 5 examples to your 1.
With the implementation of the Eidolon can see that Paizo is not beholden to keeping this "rule" which you suggest exists. *Gasp* my eidolon is in the shape of a dinosaur!
You don't actually gain any advantage for picking the shape of your Eidolon. ALso circular.. you're assuming the Eidolon can do this to prove that the Eidolon can do this.
B) Does the Claws ability state you grow your claws from your hands? I think it's pretty inventive of a player to come up with this idea as it's not one I would have thought up.
-The pattern for usable natural attacks is usually claws on the hands talons on the feet. I can go through the monster manual if you want me to but i think you know I'm right there.
You say inventive, i say cheesey. I realize there are blurry lines between the two. If you want to be pedantic, you can say that since the claws don't state WHAT body part they're growing out of for sorcerers and barbarians, they could grow out of the stomach, allowing you to claw claw longsword shortsword bladed boot bladed boot spiked armor unarmed attack headbutt.
What we should be talking about is that gaining multiple instances of the same power/class ability never stack unless noted.
A creature with Evasion twice, does not have double evasion or improved evasion.
Intellect devourer (4 claws) -Didn't this thing used to float in the air? Or am i thinking of the skeletal platypus...
<phineas&ferb>... it's just a platypus... they don't do much </phineas&ferb>
B) Does the Claws ability state you grow your claws from your hands? I think it's pretty inventive of a player to come up with this idea as it's not one I would have thought up.-The pattern for usable natural attacks is usually claws on the hands talons on the feet. I can go through the monster manual if you want me to but i think you know I'm right there.
You say inventive, i say cheesey. I realize...
The "pattern" that they've designed most monsters by is irrelevant. I don't care if there isn't a single biped with tentacles, that doesn't make tentacles illegal on a biped eidolon, or on any bipedal creature with a "gain a tentacle" ability.
You won't see many bipeds with gore attacks, either. Does that mean gore is something bipeds are actually not allowed to have? No. For that to be true, there would have to be actual rules text saying "bipedal creatures cannot have a gore attack."
The fact is, the eidolon's rules text is the only text that says where you're allowed to have claws, and it specifically says "you're allowed to apply this to legs once." NO OTHER TEXT LIMITS WHICH LIMBS MAY HAVE CLAWS ON THEM. So by the actual rules, you're absolutely allowed to have two claws on a biped's feet, both in the case of the Eidolon and in the case of a human barbarian.
The "pattern" that they've designed most monsters by is irrelevant. I don't care if there isn't a single biped with tentacles, that doesn't make tentacles illegal on a biped eidolon, or on any bipedal creature with a "gain a tentacle" ability.You won't see many bipeds with gore attacks, either. Does that mean gore is something bipeds are actually not allowed to have? No. For that to be true, there would have to be actual rules text saying "bipedal creatures cannot have a gore attack."
The fact is, the eidolon's rules text is the only text that says where you're allowed to have claws, and it specifically says "you're allowed to apply this to legs once." NO OTHER TEXT LIMITS WHICH LIMBS MAY HAVE CLAWS ON THEM. So by the actual rules, you're absolutely allowed to have two claws on a biped's feet, both in the case of the Eidolon and in the case of a human barbarian.
Honestly I would say that if you want to base your argument on something the rules for the Eidolon are not the thing the base it on.
The pounce rules for the Eidolon and the Bestiary are different (Free rake attacks). As are the Rend rules, one rend vs many rends. Eidolons can't heal hit points, monsters technically can. Eidolons can technically not heal ability score damage......ever. Monsters can. All I'm saying is that the eidolon has so many loopholes in the way that it is written that you can't use it as a rule set for anything other than the eidolon.
Hell, as a summoned monster the Eidolon doesn't have the benefit of augment summoning, but summoned monsters do.
they could grow out of the stomach, allowing you to claw claw longsword shortsword bladed boot bladed boot spiked armor unarmed attack headbutt.
Eh... I don't suppose you or Name Violation like to consider the actual rules regarding multiple attacks when coming up with these examples?
Getting Unarmed Attack (Headbutt), Bladed Boot, Bladed Boot, Spiked Armor (which can't be combined with other Offhands)
Natural Attack:
Body is not a Limb.
Regular Attacks:
Armor Spikes cant be used with another offhand, so cross that off your list.
Which leaves us with: Long Sword, Short Sword, Bladed Boot, Bladed Boot, Unarmed Strike (Headbutt) and two natural claw attacks at -5 (if stomach was a limb.)
Of course this will require a character of at least level 11 to pull off.
|
they could grow out of the stomach, allowing you to claw claw longsword shortsword bladed boot bladed boot spiked armor unarmed attack headbutt.Eh... I don't suppose you or Name Violation like to consider the actual rules regarding multiple attacks when coming up with these examples?
Getting Unarmed Attack (Headbutt), Bladed Boot, Bladed Boot, Spiked Armor (which can't be combined with other Offhands)
Natural Attack:
Body is not a Limb.Regular Attacks:
Armor Spikes cant be used with another offhand, so cross that off your list.Which leaves us with: Long Sword, Short Sword, Bladed Boot, Bladed Boot, Unarmed Strike (Headbutt) and two natural claw attacks at -5 (if stomach was a limb.)
Of course this will require a character of at least level 11 to pull off.
obviously you missed the sarcasm in my text.
also RAW you can TWF with armor spikes and a 2 handed weapon. Its stupid, but its legal.
I am no advocate of the swing/swing/claw/ bite/gore/headbutt/armor spike, jump, kick, kick
its fricken rediculous to even imagine.
seriously, try and think about how this would work in practicllity. you looks like a disturbed mentally handicapped person if you try and fight like this
I am no advocate of the swing/swing/claw/ bite/gore/headbutt/armor spike, jump, kick, kick
its fricken rediculous to even imagine.
seriously, try and think about how this would work in practicllity. you looks like a disturbed mentally handicapped person if you try and fight like this
Aah the crazy Rodriguez fighting style. I remember it well. (Kidding)
It seems ridiculous.
also RAW you can TWF with armor spikes and a 2 handed weapon. Its stupid, but its legal.I am no advocate of the swing/swing/claw/ bite/gore/headbutt/armor spike, jump, kick, kick
its fricken rediculous to even imagine.
seriously, try and think about how this would work in practicllity. you looks like a disturbed mentally handicapped person if you try and fight like this
Wow, that's impractical! But teleportation is a-ok! Look the game system works this way, its not in any way optimal to fight in this way. its underpowered and you'll have a hard time keeping your attacks enchanted and your DPS up, but its possible to perform.
What you feel about the RAW is not really for this part of the forum, we're concerned what is or is not possible through the rules.
I happen like the TWF with a 2hander and Armor spikes personally. If you want that extra penalty to hit, power to you. Then again, I houserule Armor Spikes to 1d4, but that is also beside the point.
Which leaves us with: Long Sword, Short Sword, Bladed Boot, Bladed Boot, Unarmed Strike (Headbutt) and two natural claw attacks at -5 (if stomach was a limb.)
Of course this will require a character of at least level 11 to pull off.
Can you point me to any raw that says claws need a limb?
Why does it require level 11? You do realize there are no limits on the number of attacks that can be made on a PC like there are on an eidelon right?
Why does it require level 11? You do realize there are no limits on the number of attacks that can be made on a PC like there are on an eidelon right?
You will not be able to have enough iterative attacks before then... you know... how attacks work.
You will not be able to have enough iterative attacks before then... you know... how attacks work.
Why does it require level 11? You do realize there are no limits on the number of attacks that can be made on a PC like there are on an eidelon right?
This is completely NOT how natural attacks interact with manufactured weapons and high base attack bonuses. I think i'm starting to understand why you didn't see the problem here...
Your base attack bonus has nothing to do with how many natural weapons you can use. If you allowed clawed feat, an attack routine would be
2 handed weapon (with all iterative attacks) AND both feet.
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.
So an 11th level fighter with two claws on their feet would have
Longsword, longsword, longsword, short-sword, Left claw foot Right claw foot- natural weapons ADD attacks when the limb is empty, they're not just an alternative to attacks
Did the bladed boot make it into pathfinder?
So an 11th level fighter with two claws on their feet would haveLongsword (1), longsword (2), longsword (3), short-sword (4), Left claw foot (NA: 1) Right claw foot (NA: 2)- natural weapons ADD attacks when the limb is empty, they're not just an alternative to attacks
That's what I said in a previous last post... If you choose to use your extra attacks in that way, you won't get any bladed boots or anything else.
[Responding to BNW's example]
Which leaves us with: Long Sword (1), Short Sword (2), Bladed Boot (3), Bladed Boot (4), Unarmed Strike (Headbutt) [requires higher than level 11, hence at least level 11] and two natural claw attacks (NA 1 & 2) at -5 (if stomach was a limb.)Of course this will require a character of at least level 11 to pull off.
But thanks for assuming my incompetence and citing the Natural attack rules... even though I've been saying that for the whole discussion. Hint: you cant use a bladed boot and a foot claw, but thanks for changing the discussion.
Parenthetical Notation added by Stynkk
Please cite me this rule. I cannot find it in any rulebook.Also please explain why you think it should be illegal for people to kick other people in Pathfinder.
Agreed. Let's see some evidence.
Agreed. Let's see some evidence.
Show me evidence that a sorcerer's claws need a limb. Not everything is spelled out in the rules.
the general rule is you cant make foot claw attacks (re:most 4 clawed creatures stat blocks)Please cite me this rule. I cannot find it in any rulebook.
Also please explain why you think it should be illegal for people to kick other people in Pathfinder.
I have no problem with a kick IN PLACE OF an attack, i have a problem with a kick being IN ADDITION TO your other attacks.
I have no problem with a kick IN PLACE OF an attack, i have a problem with a kick being IN ADDITION TO your other attacks.
So we're getting to the heart of the problem. You don't like off-hand attacks. Even though its perfectly rules legal to gain a kick attack using Two Weapon Fighting.
|
|
I have no problem with a kick IN PLACE OF an attack, i have a problem with a kick being IN ADDITION TO your other attacks.So we're getting to the heart of the problem. You don't like off-hand attacks. Even though its perfectly rules legal to gain a kick attack using Two Weapon Fighting.
how are you trying to kick with both feet.? you arent hovering there. Do you have to make a jump check?
can you fall?
I have no problem with a kick IN PLACE OF an attack, i have a problem with a kick being IN ADDITION TO your other attacks.So we're getting to the heart of the problem. You don't like off-hand attacks.
I have no problem with offhand attacks. What i have a problem with is the redefinition of every part of ones body into a separate "hand" so you can make an "offhand" attack by spinning your head around and swatting at a monster with your left hand right hand left foot right foot left elbow right elbow left knee right knee left foot right foot teeth horns, tusks, and toss in ears just for fun (they're dangerous and pointy on an elf)
I also don't like backing the devs into a corner where they have to spell absolutely everything out in legalese just to avoid this sort of nonsense.
Do you even KNOW what a pounce is? Are you making assumptions because you want to have more attacks? You can put claws on your bipedal eidolons feet as much as you like, he can't make attacks with them. When a cat pounces all four feet leave the ground, and hit the target (unless it's a REALLY small target, like a mouse...) at roughly the same time. The cat latches on and rakes with all four claws and digs in with his fangs, which is why the big cats in pathfinder get to hit with everything on a pounce. When the Barbarian gets pounce, having foot-claws might let him do the same thing, and he will get it, with greater beast totem. I know, I built this character myself...
In the meantime, walking, just like normal, requires feet. Cats don't get attacks with their back legs, and neither do barbarians.
WALKING is a continuous process of not falling down. Literally, you fall forward with each motion and catch yourself before impact, preventing you, one hopes, from landing on your face.
D20 rules systems are built around exceptions, not around explicit permissions. Having Power Attack does not allow you to fly. It doesn't SAY it doesn't allow you to fly, but we do not assume it does just because it it doesn't say you can't. Further: When you gain a class feature you already have, you do not gain it again. Where allowed, you gain further facility (Uncanny Dodge, Ki, Evasion, Channel Energy, Animal Companions) but do not gain a second instance. This prevents characters from having two animal companions, and two pools of channel energy in the game. Exceptions, not explicit instructions. Do not be obtuse on purpose.
The Fenrir has it right.
This is WHY spells like Girallon's Blessing didn't make it into Pathfinder.
how are you trying to kick with both feet.? you arent hovering there. Do you have to make a jump check?
can you fall?
By lifting one leg up and kicking, then lifting the other and kicking. This is not a drop kick, nor is it rocket science. I can personally use both my feet in this manner in six seconds, i'm not really in the best shape.
No you don't have to jump, no you can't fall (we'll you could if you were horribly coordinated) but that would make you a poor hero.
The rules for Unarmed Attacks state you can kick (presumably more than once!) and you don't even have to do a headstand.
I have no problem with a kick IN PLACE OF an attack, i have a problem with a kick being IN ADDITION TO your other attacks.So we're getting to the heart of the problem. You don't like off-hand attacks. Even though its perfectly rules legal to gain a kick attack using Two Weapon Fighting.
So, are you saying that you want to use two weapon fighting with 2 weapons, and then make a kick attack as well to bypass the fact that you would only be allowed to swing with your axes once? Did you also not want to take penalties for this, or do more than subdual damage with the kick?
So, are you saying that you want to use two weapon fighting with 2 weapons, and then make a kick attack as well to bypass the fact that you would only be allowed to swing with your axes once? Did you also not want to take penalties for this, or do more than subdual damage with the kick?
No, you would not gain any additional attacks beyond than one off-handed attack all characters gain when employing Two Weapon Fighting.*
If you had two axes you would choose: Two Axes, Two Unarmed Attacks, One Axe & One Unarmed Attack.
You take penalties to this attack (Non-lethal Damage, AoO) just a you would with any other Unarmed Attack.**
Thanks for asking, I hope that clears up my stance for you.
*Unless you have Improved, Greater Two Weapon Fighting
** Unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike
Then why do you have a problem with a bipedal creature having attacks with the appendages at the end of its lower limbs (ie, claws on its feet)?
Because they will be made in addition to the weapons its holding in its hands. Either a big two handed weapon or two smaller weapons
-Edit: if someone is making a walking eye with two legs and no arms or something i wouldn't have a problem with it (but i might recommend they see someone)
So, are you saying that you want to use two weapon fighting with 2 weapons, and then make a kick attack as well to bypass the fact that you would only be allowed to swing with your axes once? Did you also not want to take penalties for this, or do more than subdual damage with the kick?No, you would not gain any additional attacks beyond than one off-handed attack all characters gain when employing Two Weapon Fighting.*
If you had two axes you would choose: Two Axes, Two Unarmed Attacks, One Axe & One Unarmed Attack.
You take penalties to this attack (Non-lethal Damage, AoO) just a you would with any other Unarmed Attack.**
Thanks for asking, I hope that clears up my stance for you.
*Unless you have Improved, Greater Two Weapon Fighting
** Unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike
Seems to make sense.
Because they will be made in addition to the weapons its holding in its hands. Either a big two handed weapon or two smaller weapons
But you're fine with a Gore/Tail Slap/Wings or Bite Attack in addition. Got it.
But you're fine with a Gore/Tail Slap/Wings or Bite Attack in addition. Got it.
Gore or bite (they both use the head, they count as the same limb and can't be used together)-brings an existing limb that you're not using anyway into the routine- i consider you to be using your legs already to stand on.
Tail is an additional limb
Tentacle is an additional limb
Wings are an additional limb (and my encounter with a swan will fully testify to it being the equivalent of a punch) But unless you specifically have a wing attack having the extra limb is not liscense to get an extra attack.
Claws are supposed to go on the hands: That is the intent. they're supposed to be REPLACING an existing attack, not adding an additional one.
Claws are supposed to go on the hands: That is the intent. they're supposed to be REPLACING an existing attack, not adding an additional one.
I'll admit I was baiting you a bit, and I'm a bit sorry for that. I apologize.
But you do bring up something interesting here. Claws are supposed to replace an existing attack. I see where you're going, the claws replace the Unarmed Attack for your limbs that now have the claws. I'll buy that.
What I'm not buying is that claws are expressly intended to go on the hands. In all of the examples you've provided (except the devil) the claws are on creatures Leg Limbs. So there's precident that the claws can go on the legs (beyond the eidolon).
I know we're not gaining ground either way, but let's go back to hypothetical situations here:
If you could have claws on your feet (I'll be the first one to admit that it is open to interpretation) - let's just say it was a crazy day and they clarified that a PC could have claws on their feet - if that was possible, would you not conceed the point that you could use them to make an attack while standing? I don't imagine this process being much different than a Kick.
Gore or bite (they both use the head, they count as the same limb and can't be used together)False.
I'll admit I thought you might be mistaken on this Fozbek, but I see the Gargoyle and Catoblepas are a few examples of Bite + Gore
|
|
how are you trying to kick with both feet.? you arent hovering there. Do you have to make a jump check?
can you fall?
By lifting one leg up and kicking, then lifting the other and kicking. This is not a drop kick, nor is it rocket science. I can personally use both my feet in this manner in six seconds, i'm not really in the best shape.
No you don't have to jump, no you can't fall (we'll you could if you were horribly coordinated) but that would make you a poor hero.
The rules for Unarmed Attacks state you can kick (presumably more than once!) and you don't even have to do a headstand.
so do that while swinging a sword, and presumably "windmilling" with your other hand, and biting... Doesnt it seem awkward? do you really think its a combat stratagem that remotely works on anyone over the age of 8?
you may wanna mute it, if you combine the 2 of them, thats how i'm picturing you wanting to have characters fight
Fozz: don't add to what i say and argue against it. Not happening. The claws that PC's get are supposed to replace attacks, NOT add to them.
But you do bring up something interesting here. Claws are supposed to replace an existing attack. I see where you're going, the claws replace the Unarmed Attack for your limbs that now have the claws. I'll buy that.
No, they're really supposed to be replacing a weapon a weapon on a PC. There are rules for how a sword interacts with a bite but not for how a sword interacts with a head butt as an offhand weapon, nor are there rules for a dragon working a hip check or side kick (unarmed strike) into his attack routine.
What I'm not buying is that claws are expressly intended to go on the hands. In all of the examples you've provided (except the devil) the claws are on creatures Leg Limbs. So there's precident that the claws can go on the legs (beyond the eidolon
The claws are THERE but note that they're not used to attack except on the intellect devourer.
If you could have claws on your feet (I'll be the first one to admit that it is open to interpretation) - let's just say it was a crazy day and they clarified that a PC could have claws on their feet - if that was possible, would you not conceed the point that you could use them to make an attack while standing? I don't imagine this process being much different than a Kick.
-You can make them while standing: i have no problem with that: its essentially flavor text for what would normally be an existing claw/claw routine. If you want a weretiger doing Capoeira that's fine.
What i don't agree with is the cheese of getting two additional attacks over the person putting them on their hands. Should you really be able to make the claw ability that much more powerful by a simple change of address? Should that fiat completely alter how the ability works for the default assumption of putting claws on the hands?
so do that while swinging a sword, and presumably "windmilling" with your other hand, and biting... Doesnt it seem awkward? do you really think its a combat stratagem that remotely works on anyone over the age of 8?
Not sure how many times I have said this, but Pathfinder is not a simulation of real life. Can you shoot 8 arrows in 6 seconds? And have them all hit their target dealing massive damage. No you cant. Please cease with the pathfinder to life comparisons.
|
|
Not sure how many times I have said this, but Pathfinder is not a simulation of real life. Can you shoot 8 arrows in 6 seconds? And have them all hit their target dealing massive damage. No you cant. Please cease with the pathfinder to life comparisons.so do that while swinging a sword, and presumably "windmilling" with your other hand, and biting... Doesnt it seem awkward? do you really think its a combat stratagem that remotely works on anyone over the age of 8?
i"m not, i'm compairing it to cartoon/action movie physics, which pathfinder is a decent simulation of. and the concept just seems rediculous IMHO
but short of a response from the devs I believe we have to agree to disagree, since we both seem rather adamant about our interpritations
but short of a response from the devs I believe we have to agree to disagree, since we both seem rather adamant about our interpritations
You seem nice enough, but you can "windmill" and bite and stab someone with a spiked boot while twirling with your tail slap in pathfinder. Its all legal, all fits nicely within the game rules as they are constructed.
If you want to argue it should not be legal, that's different.
So then you have a problem with the million attacks that a dragon has? Or just PCs?
What i don't agree with is the cheese of getting two additional attacks over the person putting them on their hands. Should you really be able to make the claw ability that much more powerful by a simple change of address? Should that fiat completely alter how the ability works for the default assumption of putting claws on the hands?
Thanks for that, Ok I agree with your concern that putting them on the feet might be unbalancing, however, I'd like to see more data. If you use any attack other than a natural weapon with these foot claws, they're coming off at -5 with half STR. That seems rather weak to me.
|
|
but short of a response from the devs I believe we have to agree to disagree, since we both seem rather adamant about our interpritationsYou seem nice enough, but you can "windmill" and bite and stab someone with a spiked boot while twirling with your tail slap in pathfinder. Its all legal, all fits nicely within the game rules as they are constructed.
If you want to argue it should not be legal, that's different.
So then you have a problem with the million attacks that a dragon has? Or just PCs?
Oh, i'm fine with weapon/claw/bite/tail/tentacle attack routines on PCs, its mainly the claws on feet thing i find silly.
If had characters with said attack parrern before (half dragon centuar with feats to use wing and tail attacks)
bite/claw/claw/hoof/hoof/wing/wing/tail attacks, all at level 5. but he still had his hind legs to stand on
its just a humanoid standing, kicking both feet, swinging a weapon, clawing, biting, seems like too much.
its the foot claws that ug me.
its the foot claws that ug me.
I am willing to admit that the jury is out on the legality of foot claws, but there is evidence for both sides.
Nice catch on the gore/bite
What was i thinking that the devs said didn't work? Tusks?