At the best, said fighter is -4 to attack with a 1d4 bodypart, and it will be a natural attack which he cannot use simultaneously with weapon attacks.
Unarmed attacks are not natural weapons.
At the best, said fighter is -4 to attack with a 1d4 bodypart, and it will be a natural attack which he cannot use simultaneously with weapon attacks.
Why? Dm fiat?
|
At the best, said fighter is -4 to attack with a 1d4 bodypart, and it will be a natural attack which he cannot use simultaneously with weapon attacks.Why? Dm fiat?
1) Improvised weapon penalty (oh, and you'll be eating an AoO as well). 2) You cannot combine natural attacks and weapon attacks (unless you have class tricks around it; see last page of discussion).
|
At the best, said fighter is -4 to attack with a 1d4 bodypart, and it will be a natural attack which he cannot use simultaneously with weapon attacks.Why? Dm fiat?
Here's a better point for you, instead of us continuously pointing to rules showing you how we see it working why don't you show US a rule on why you think it works the way you say it does.
Now before you answer remember this, it's a game not real life so the way it works in the real world has nothing to do with how it works in the game.
The only thing that matters is the game rules written in black and white.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
1) Improvised weapon penalty (oh, and you'll be eating an AoO as well). 2) You cannot combine natural attacks and weapon attacks (unless you have class tricks around it; see last page of discussion).At the best, said fighter is -4 to attack with a 1d4 bodypart, and it will be a natural attack which he cannot use simultaneously with weapon attacks.Why? Dm fiat?
Actually you can combine natural attacks and weapon attacks (as long as they are not with the same limb), BUT(!!), as I've been saying, unarmed strikes (meaning any unarmed attack that is not a natural weapon) count as weapon attacks. Period.
Look, the base rules on unarmed combat are quite clear:
1. ANY character can make a punch, kick, or headbutt unarmed attack.
2. Monks can also make elbow and knee unarmed attacks.
Also, probably:
3. Only monks can make unarmed attacks when both hands are occupied. I assume this is for balance reasons.
Also, maybe:
4. Monks cannot benefit from their unarmed strike rules when it comes to headbutts.
1) Improvised weapon penalty (oh, and you'll be eating an AoO as well). 2) You cannot combine natural attacks and weapon attacks (unless you have class tricks around it; see last page of discussion).At the best, said fighter is -4 to attack with a 1d4 bodypart, and it will be a natural attack which he cannot use simultaneously with weapon attacks.Why? Dm fiat?
Uhm, what's this? You can very well do that. You take a -5 penalty on all natural attacks though. I don't at all get what you're talking about.
Here's a better point for you, instead of us continuously pointing to rules showing you how we see it working why don't you show US a rule on why you think it works the way you say it does.
Now before you answer remember this, it's a game not real life so the way it works in the real world has nothing to do with how it works in the game.
The only thing that matters is the game rules written in black and white.
The rules however are NOT written in black and white on this. They're rather vague with regards to how they work.
It does say that the monk specifically can attack with his hands full. It does NOT however say that he is the only one that can do this.
Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
Attacks of Opportunity: Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes, nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.
-This is for people without the feat and that aren't monks (otherwise they wouldn't be getting whacks of opportunity So yes.. ANYONE can use a punch kick or headbutt.
Its kind of weird to say that you can't headbut or kick because you're carrying something. That sort of oddity does happen in the rules on occasion, but in this case such absurdity is only weakly implied by the special attention it got in the monk section.
|
|
The rules however are NOT written in black and white on this. They're rather vague with regards to how they work.
It does say that the monk specifically can attack with his hands full. It does NOT however say that he is the only one that can do this.
If class A says you can do X, and classes B, C, and D don't say you can do X, most GMs are going to conclude those classes don't get to do X.
GM: "Because God hates you."
|
|
Here's a better point for you, instead of us continuously pointing to rules showing you how we see it working why don't you show US a rule on why you think it works the way you say it does.
Now before you answer remember this, it's a game not real life so the way it works in the real world has nothing to do with how it works in the game.
The only thing that matters is the game rules written in black and white.The rules however are NOT written in black and white on this. They're rather vague with regards to how they work.
It does say that the monk specifically can attack with his hands full. It does NOT however say that he is the only one that can do this.
Unarmed Attacks: Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
Attacks of Opportunity: Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes, nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.
-This is for people without the feat and that aren't monks (otherwise they wouldn't be getting whacks of opportunity So yes.. ANYONE can use a punch kick or headbutt.
Its kind of weird to say that you can't headbut or kick because you're carrying something. That sort of oddity does happen in the rules on occasion, but in this case such absurdity is only weakly implied by the special attention it got in the monk section.
Which is the main reason I dislike the Monk class so much. It is composed of nothing but exceptions to the rules which gives more questions then answers and causes topics like this.
Anyway, the basic understanding I've always had is that the rules are, by default, exclusive rules. Meaning that if it is not written as something you CAN do then you simply cannot do it unless the GM allows it.
Looking at it like this prevents questions like, for example having a pure Barbarian doing spell research to get a barbarian only version of Meteor Swarm. The rules do not say he can't but it's pretty much a given that he shouldn't be able too.
Now, we have drifted REALLY, REALLY far from the initial question so can we get back to the Feral Combat feat and hammer that out?
(stuff)
The feat simply allows you to use natural attacks as part of a flurry of blows actions.
If class A says you can do X, and classes B, C, and D don't say you can do X, most GMs are going to conclude those classes don't get to do X.
Anyway, the basic understanding I've always had is that the rules are, by default, exclusive rules. Meaning that if it is not written as something you CAN do then you simply cannot do it unless the GM allows it.
Looking at it like this prevents questions like, for example having a pure Barbarian doing spell research to get a barbarian only version of Meteor Swarm. The rules do not say he can't but it's pretty much a given that he shouldn't be able too.
-Which is normally right, and what i used to think, until someone pointed out the section about unarmed strikes including kicks and headbutts. That conclusion is good, and in the absence of anything black and white is what i would go with, but the unarmed strike rules in black and white say that you can kick and headbutt. Interpretation looses to black and white.
|
2) You cannot combine natural attacks and weapon attacks (unless you have class tricks around it; see last page of discussion).
Wrong, and there are standard rules for doing so, -5 attack penalty and 1/2 str. There are also feats for mitigating the -5 attack penalty.
Natural Attacks
Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon). These attacks fall into one of two categories, primary and secondary attacks. Primary attacks are made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and add the creature’s full Strength bonus on damage rolls. Secondary attacks are made using the creature’s base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. If a creature has only one natural attack, it is always made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and adds 1-1/2 times the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one. If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type.
Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently, such as Dragons, which always receive 1-1/2 times their Strength bonus on damage rolls with their bite attack. These exceptions are noted in the creature’s description.
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 available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type.
Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do. See Table: Natural Attacks by Size for typical damage values for natural attacks by creature size.
The bold section describes using natural weapons as a secondary attack.
Any other [non-monk] PC can already twf and attack main hand/off hand/ claw/claw/ bite.Not unless they have four arms.
CRB, p182:
"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. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword."
doh! i actually new that and went typing away half a sleep lol
wow this was a good thread that derailed :(
If a fighter can kick and elbo with IuS should be another thread as it has nothing to do with feral combat training.
Like most threads most people will NEVER sway from there opinion even with overwhelming evidence or with good reasoning. Even IF a paizo staff member posts a ruling or does official errata people will STILL disagree. Basically, "well thats stupid cause it proves me wrong so i will just invoke rule o and do it my way anyway."
It's because of this that James Jacobs probably doesn't reply as much as he used too, and i honestly don't blame him! When people want a ruling it's hardly ever what they really want. What they really want is a staff member to come in and say "you were right" and fan there ego.
After so many posts from other players, you just can't agree with the censuses,if you seriously can't make a call on your own, then just hold a vote among players and the GM. Does it really matter who is actually right as long as everyone agrees to it and the game moves on?
When i post questions i don't post to expect an answer. I post questions to see others opinions and to help me reach my own conclusion. Sometimes i admit i'm wrong, sometimes posters sway me with evidence or make a good enough case, sometimes players post rules or text i couldn't find and the question resolves itself. I think if everyone aimed for this then everyone would be a lot less stressed and your games would be more fun. I know many strive to play according to hard-core raw, and the rules section SHOULD be raw or what can be scrounged to support RAI-if there just isn't a clear answer. But, sometimes there really is no clear cut black and white, there's a LOT of grey!
In the end the game rules were written by ordinary human beings just like every other GM and player out there. There rules and interpretations are not infallible and no more "special" then everyone else's house rules or interpretations. SO while you should strive for RAW in the rules section you should not hold your breath until you get a clear "official" ruling. In the end you should always be prepared to make your own judgment call. How you decide to run your own game is simply- THE RIGHT WAY.
Rant over now lets role some dice!
now with that over with that over with the thread thus far, pertaining to the topic at hand is this.
Feral combat training player consensus.
1) The natural attack can be used in a FoB as if it were a monk weapon.
2) The natural attack can be made in addition to a flurry like any other
player with TWF can within the limits of using manufactured weapons
and natural weapons.
3) The natural weapon can be used with BOTH 1&2
The following will be examples of each corresponding ruling of a monk using his FOB. For this example I will not figure in any other feats, abilities, effects, or even ability scores just to keep it simple.
level 1 monk using FoB with a BITE selected as his Feral Combat Training.
For ruling #1
-1 ATCK+full STR / -1 ATCK+full STR
ATCK= improved unarmed strike, monk weapon, or Feral BITE.
For ruling #2
-1 ATCK+full STR / -1 ATCK+full STR/ -6 Feral BITE+1/2 STR
ATCK= improved unarmed strike or monk weapon.
For ruling #3
-1 ATCK+full STR / -1 ATCK+full STR/ -6 Feral BITE+1/2 STR
ATCK= improved unarmed strike, monk weapon, or Feral bite.
Now IMO how feral combat training,FoB, and all the other rules that apply are worded that there is not enough definitive evidence that makes ANY of them the clear right one. I hate to state RAI either as im against RAI. No one really can speak for the designer but the designer himself. RAI really should be RAYII (rules as you interprete it.
All the above rulings seem to be within RAW so it boils down to which ruling the GM wishes to use in his game. #3 seems to be the least limited and most powerful. I don't feel #3 is going to break the game or make monks the most powerful class however. From the numerous threads about monks i think monks are one class that GM's should be less strict in making rulings against them anyways. It seems to make sense if a monk had a natural attack and trained to use that attack in his fighting style then he could fully use it in whatever style he wanted...
In the lower levels or with multi-classing a natural attack might be nice but will fall behind in damage compared to the monks unarmed strike damage at later levels. Ofc if the natural attack can poison or do some other attack then it might be more worth it in the long hual. There's other niche circumstances too where it could still be useful at later levels such as overcoming curtain damage reductions. And there's always fluff to.
my werebear monk NPC who can flurry is not a min/maxed character but it looks cool to work in them claws. Plus a flurrying wearbear will eventually grab you lol.
|
|
wow this was a good thread that derailed :(Heh. Most of them do.
Like most threads most people will NEVER sway from there opinion even with overwhelming evidence or with good reasoning. Even IF a paizo staff member posts a ruling or does official errata people will STILL disagree. Basically, "well thats stupid cause it won't let me strut my souless character across a battlefield of carnage nine-tenths as well as I want!."
(Fixed, for what-they-really-mean-to-say.)
I built a by-the-book 20pt PFS DEX-based samurai(cavalier) that, when his string gets pulled and he's set-spinning after about 7th level, will I-TWF to out-DPR just about every weirdo ultra-munchkin multi-attacking wildshape or mutagen or beast totem build I've ever seen posted on these forums -- with or without monk levels and generous helpings of rule fabrications, misreadings or out-right cheating. But I have vast amounts of fun at low level trying to get his horse into impossible situations because it's the only thing that can do damage prior to the "good stuff" coming online. Contributing to fights was an important aspect of the build, but I actually toned it down considerably for roleplaying flavor and not wanting to "solo" mods (I initially had fighter3:weapon master + Gloves of Dueling tossed in for uber carnage).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
wow this was a good thread that derailed :(Heh. Most of them do.Like most threads most people will NEVER sway from there opinion even with overwhelming evidence or with good reasoning. Even IF a paizo staff member posts a ruling or does official errata people will STILL disagree. Basically, "well thats stupid cause it won't let me strut my souless character across a battlefield of carnage nine-tenths as well as I want!."(Fixed, for what-they-really-mean-to-say.)
I built a by-the-book 20pt PFS DEX-based samurai(cavalier) that, when his string gets pulled and he's set-spinning after about 7th level, will I-TWF to out-DPR just about every weirdo ultra-munchkin multi-attacking wildshape or mutagen or beast totem build I've ever seen posted on these forums -- with or without monk levels and generous helpings of rule fabrications, misreadings or out-right cheating. But I have vast amounts of fun at low level trying to get his horse into impossible situations because it's the only thing that can do damage prior to the "good stuff" coming online. Contributing to fights was an important aspect of the build, but I actually toned it down considerably for roleplaying flavor and not wanting to "solo" mods (I initially had fighter3:weapon master + Gloves of Dueling tossed in for uber carnage).
You do make a lot of assumptions about how people play their games, don't ya? I'm sorry to say buddy, but if I wanted to make an uber-character, I'd make a caster.
In any stance, I still cannot believe that people are thinking that someone with FoB and paying a two feat cost, to add two lousy claws in their FoB at -5 with 1/2 strength is thinking it's OMG broken. If you do the math, you'll see it ain't.
Of course, things can get crazy with 2 more natural attacks the cost of 2 extra feats, plus 2 extra feats for Dragon Stance. But at the cost of 6 feats, finding a DM that would allow someone to play a race with FOUR natural attacks and a VERY decent strength (or DEX) score. I still can't see it as overpowered.
|
|
But at the cost of 6 feats, finding a DM that would allow someone to play a race with FOUR natural attacks and a VERY...
Already available, PFS legal, and it's a class, not a race. You'll have access to 4 natural attacks by level 4. You can give some of those attacks special abilities that proc per hit.
Wait a few extra levels and wildshaped druids also enter the table, with bears and velociraptors.
But at the cost of 6 feats, finding a DM that would allow someone to play a race with FOUR natural attacks and a VERY...Already available, PFS legal, and it's a class, not a race. You'll have access to 4 natural attacks by level 4. You can give some of those attacks special abilities that proc per hit.
Wait a few extra levels and wildshaped druids also enter the table, with bears and velociraptors.
Well, then you would have to multiclass and wait several levels to get Weapon Focus (natural 1), Feral Combat and Weapon Focus (natural 2), Feral Combat and then go to the Dragon Style.
And it would severely hurt your FoB progresion, still don't see it as OP. If you make a build, it will be better to analize.Best one I've seen so far is the Barbarian/Monk, but it's still hard to pull off.
You do make a lot of assumptions about how people play their games, don't ya?Oh, gosh, no; I just read the forums. :-P
Ok, granted. I retract my statement, it makes sense.
|
|
Well, then you would have to multiclass and wait several levels to get Weapon Focus (natural 1), Feral Combat and Weapon Focus (natural 2), Feral Combat and then go to the Dragon Style.
And it would severely hurt your FoB progresion, still don't see it as OP. If you make a build, it will be better to analize.
Best one I've seen so far is the Barbarian/Monk, but it's still hard to pull off.
No, not really overpowered, and there is a cost. Mostly only worth it if you have a single natural attack form with special abilities. Even then, your looking at a minimum of 7'th level to even start (6 BAB required for feral combat and your first level of monk is +0)
At 7'th level your only going to flurry for 3 attacks. Potentially a decrease in total attacks. So, again, unless you have a natural attack that does something special, not worth it.
The one I like to show as being worthwhile would be a synthesist with multiple evolutions sunk into his bite attack:
1d8 + Poison + free trip + reach.
It's pretty specific, but becomes worth it, especially if you've already dipped into monk for the saves and wisdom bonus. At the cost of 1 natural attack and a decreased hit chance on your iterative, you gain the ability to reach out and touch someone multiple times with your best attack.
|
|
Well, then you would have to multiclass and wait several levels to get Weapon Focus (natural 1), Feral Combat and Weapon Focus (natural 2), Feral Combat and then go to the Dragon Style.
And it would severely hurt your FoB progresion, still don't see it as OP. If you make a build, it will be better to analize.
Best one I've seen so far is the Barbarian/Monk, but it's still hard to pull off.No, not really overpowered, and there is a cost. Mostly only worth it if you have a single natural attack form with special abilities. Even then, your looking at a minimum of 7'th level to even start (6 BAB required for feral combat and your first level of monk is +0)
At 7'th level your only going to flurry for 3 attacks. Potentially a decrease in total attacks. So, again, unless you have a natural attack that does something special, not worth it.
The one I like to show as being worthwhile would be a synthesist with multiple evolutions sunk into his bite attack:
1d8 + Poison + free trip + reach.
It's pretty specific, but becomes worth it, especially if you've already dipped into monk for the saves and wisdom bonus. At the cost of 1 natural attack and a decreased hit chance on your iterative, you gain the ability to reach out and touch someone multiple times with your best attack.
Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
|
|
Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
I had the level wrong ( I was thinking eldritch claws ).
My example was for a 6 synthesist / 1 monk. With a 6 BAB, you'll only get 3 attacks from your FoB. Until there is a final ruling on how Feral Combat + FoB works, I'm sticking to the feat adding a single natural attack to the list of weapons allowed.
There is no increase in damage dice when FoB is used on natural weapons. If your claws deals 1d4 that's what your stuck with. Feral combat on a pure monk is probably worthless.
Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
I had the level wrong ( I was thinking eldritch claws ).
My example was for a 6 synthesist / 1 monk. With a 6 BAB, you'll only get 3 attacks from your FoB. Until there is a final ruling on how Feral Combat + FoB works, I'm sticking to the feat adding a single natural attack to the list of weapons allowed.
There is no increase in damage dice when FoB is used on natural weapons. If your claws deals 1d4 that's what your stuck with. Feral combat on a pure monk is probably worthless .
And that's the main reason why it probably doesn't work like that.
Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
I had the level wrong ( I was thinking eldritch claws ).
My example was for a 6 synthesist / 1 monk. With a 6 BAB, you'll only get 3 attacks from your FoB. Until there is a final ruling on how Feral Combat + FoB works, I'm sticking to the feat adding a single natural attack to the list of weapons allowed.
There is no increase in damage dice when FoB is used on natural weapons. If your claws deals 1d4 that's what your stuck with. Feral combat on a pure monk is probably worthless.
Ohhhh what's this? :) I thought that if I had only one lvl monk then I would never ever gain more then 2 flurry of blows attacks unless I took more monk lvls. So If I have one lvl monk and then lets say 19 lvls of fighter would I then get the same amount of attacks as a lvl 20 monk when I flurry? :)
I thought that if I had only one lvl monk then I would never ever gain more then 2 flurry of blows attacks unless I took more monk lvls.
You don't get more flurry attacks if you don't have the monk levels.
Flurry of Blows (Ex): "Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack..."
One additional attack as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.
So if you have a BAB of 6, you get three attacks during a flurry. (2 iterative 'main-hand' attacks and the one extra 'off-hand' attack. Though none of them are really off hand if the monk is fighting unarmed, and all get full strength because it's flurry)
|
|
Ohhhh what's this? :) I thought that if I had only one lvl monk then I would never ever gain more then 2 flurry of blows attacks unless I took more monk lvls. So If I have one lvl monk and then lets say 19 lvls of fighter would I then get the same amount of attacks as a lvl 20 monk when I flurry? :)
No, your not getting the free usage of improved two-weapon fighting and greater two-weapon fighting. Your iterative would continue based on you BAB.
I would also argue that a character who actually has the two-weapon fighting chain would be able to use it.
|
|
Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
I had the level wrong ( I was thinking eldritch claws ).
My example was for a 6 synthesist / 1 monk. With a 6 BAB, you'll only get 3 attacks from your FoB. Until there is a final ruling on how Feral Combat + FoB works, I'm sticking to the feat adding a single natural attack to the list of weapons allowed.
There is no increase in damage dice when FoB is used on natural weapons. If your claws deals 1d4 that's what your stuck with. Feral combat on a pure monk is probably worthless.
And you are still wrong.
The way FoB works is it grants you 1 additional attack at Monk1. No matter what interpretation it goes by it is a net increase in the number of attacks per round the character can do. Your base number of attacks is controlled by your BaB, this power just adds 1 more to that number of attacks.
There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too.
1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).
Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
I had the level wrong ( I was thinking eldritch claws ).
My example was for a 6 synthesist / 1 monk. With a 6 BAB, you'll only get 3 attacks from your FoB. Until there is a final ruling on how Feral Combat + FoB works, I'm sticking to the feat adding a single natural attack to the list of weapons allowed.
There is no increase in damage dice when FoB is used on natural weapons. If your claws deals 1d4 that's what your stuck with. Feral combat on a pure monk is probably worthless.
And you are still wrong.
The way FoB works is it grants you 1 additional attack at Monk1. No matter what interpretation it goes by it is a net increase in the number of attacks per round the character can do. Your base number of attacks is controlled by your BaB, this power just adds 1 more to that number of attacks.
There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too.
1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).
But it's not an EFFECT, I think they are refering to Magic and stuff.
|
|
But it's not an EFFECT, I think they are refering to Magic and stuff.Well this is just incorrect on so many different levels.
First the only BaB requirement for Feral Combat is +1 (for weapon focus).
Second at your expected flurry level (7th) you should be getting at least 4-6 attacks in that flurry not just 3. (depending on the final ruling on how natural attacks work with FoB)
Third it's ALWAYS going to be a flat increase in damage going this route (Better attack bonus, larger damage dice and more attacks will always grant more damage).
I had the level wrong ( I was thinking eldritch claws ).
My example was for a 6 synthesist / 1 monk. With a 6 BAB, you'll only get 3 attacks from your FoB. Until there is a final ruling on how Feral Combat + FoB works, I'm sticking to the feat adding a single natural attack to the list of weapons allowed.
There is no increase in damage dice when FoB is used on natural weapons. If your claws deals 1d4 that's what your stuck with. Feral combat on a pure monk is probably worthless.
And you are still wrong.
The way FoB works is it grants you 1 additional attack at Monk1. No matter what interpretation it goes by it is a net increase in the number of attacks per round the character can do. Your base number of attacks is controlled by your BaB, this power just adds 1 more to that number of attacks.
There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too.
1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).
If they intended that they would have said magical effect but they didn't, as it is now anything that improves unarmed strikes improves natural attacks. The monk ability is an effect that improves unarmed strikes.
|
|
Feral Attack is not being used as an unarmed strike. it is being used as a monk weapon. What feral combat is doing is adding the natural attack to the monks weapon list. It would be treated in the same manner as a monk using FoB with a Sai or Quarterstaff. FoB does not raise the damage on monk weapons, it won't raise the damage on natural attacks.
The monks increase in damage of unarmed attacks is not an effect. It's a permanent change to the base die used, similar in nature to a permanent boost to an ability score due to character level.
|
|
And you are still wrong.
The way FoB works is it grants you 1 additional attack at Monk1. No matter what interpretation it goes by it is a net increase in the number of attacks per round the character can do. Your base number of attacks is controlled by your BaB, this power just adds 1 more to that number of attacks.
With a BAB of 6, 3 attacks is your standard 2 iterative + 1 from the free usage of two-weapon fighting. The real bonus from FoB is not the extra attacks or the BAB, I could have received those simply by taking the two-weapon feat chain via fighter or ranger levels. It is the full str bonus to all attacks and the explicit ability to use all body parts for your attack chain, even when your hands are otherwise occupied.
|
|
There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too.
1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).
Get your GM's permission ahead of time before taking Monster feats with a PC (or their "outsider" side-kick).
|
|
Feral Attack is not being used as an unarmed strike. it is being used as a monk weapon. What feral combat is doing is adding the natural attack to the monks weapon list. It would be treated in the same manner as a monk using FoB with a Sai or Quarterstaff. FoB does not raise the damage on monk weapons, it won't raise the damage on natural attacks.
The monks increase in damage of unarmed attacks is not an effect. It's a permanent change to the base die used, similar in nature to a permanent boost to an ability score due to character level.
That's kind of the definition of an effect.
Have you read the feat at all?
It specifically states:
Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.
The addition to Flurry of blows is an add-on for when a monk decides to take this feat.
The point of this feat is simply to make sure that ANYTHING that augments unarmed strikes is applied to Natural attacks as well.
|
|
The point of this feat is simply to make sure that ANYTHING that augments unarmed strikes is applied to Natural attacks as well.
The point of Feral combat is to allow the monk to use a natural weapon in a FoB attack, something that is specifically barred to monks that do not have the feat.
Flurry of Blows (Ex)
A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.
I would also argue that this is not an effect because it does not modify an existing form of damage, i.e. it does not increase the die of damage by a set number of steps. (a level 1 monk does not get a 1 step increase in die, from 1d4 -> 1d6, ) The monk does 1d6 with his unarmed strikes regardless of what his original damage was. An important distinction when natural attacks can start with a higher damage die than 1d6, even at level 1.
This wording is much closer to being an effect:
Improved Natural Attack
Attacks made by one of this creature's natural attacks leave vicious wounds.
Prerequisite: Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: Choose one of the creature's natural attack forms (not an unarmed strike). The damage for this natural attack increases by one step on the following list, as if the creature's size had increased by one category. Damage dice increase as follows: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times. Each time it is taken, it applies to a different natural attack.
|
|
The point of this feat is simply to make sure that ANYTHING that augments unarmed strikes is applied to Natural attacks as well.
The point of Feral combat is to allow the monk to use a natural weapon in a FoB attack, something that is specifically barred to monks that do not have the feat.
Flurry of Blows (Ex)
A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.
I would also argue that this is not an effect because it does not modify an existing form of damage, i.e. it does not increase the die of damage by a set number of steps. (a level 1 monk does not get a 1 step increase in die, from 1d4 -> 1d6, ) The monk does 1d6 with his unarmed strikes regardless of what his original damage was. An important distinction when natural attacks can start with a higher damage die than 1d6, even at level 1.
This wording is much closer to being an effect:
Improved Natural Attack
Attacks made by one of this creature's natural attacks leave vicious wounds.
Prerequisite: Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: Choose one of the creature's natural attack forms (not an unarmed strike). The damage for this natural attack increases by one step on the following list, as if the creature's size had increased by one category. Damage dice increase as follows: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times. Each time it is taken, it applies to a different natural attack.
And I'm going to say it again, READ THE FEAT The entirety of the text of the feat is directed at using Unarmed feats and effects to improve natural attacks.
There is a single sentence of special case text at the very end that adds it into FoB.As for your idea of what the word effect means, well I'll just say you may need to look at that definition again.
|
|
There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too. 1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).Get your GM's permission ahead of time before taking Monster feats with a PC (or their "outsider" side-kick).
Quoting myself for the bump -- be advised that you're likely to be eventually shot down if you just try to sneak Improved Natural Attack into your build without having permission ahead of time.
Quoting myself for the bump -- be advised that you're likely to be eventually shot down if you just try to sneak Improved Natural Attack into your build without having permission ahead of time.There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too. 1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).Get your GM's permission ahead of time before taking Monster feats with a PC (or their "outsider" side-kick).
Hehe, you are a strict GM, aren't ya?
Well, it works like a charm for me. I didn't want it to be as powerful as Math says, so, it only adds the natural attacks as secondary attacks to the FoB. So, it's cool.
|
|
Quoting myself for the bump -- be advised that you're likely to be eventually shot down if you just try to sneak Improved Natural Attack into your build without having permission ahead of time.There IS an increase on damage die when you FoB with natural attacks. If you'll read the feat it specifically states any effect that applies to unarmed attacks applies to natural attacks. The monk has an effect that increase unarmed damage so it applies to natural attacks too. 1D4 becomes 1D6 at first level of monk and continues to increase as monk level increases (here's a hint, wear a monk's robe to get it to 1D8 and then Improved Natural Attack to get it to 2D6).Get your GM's permission ahead of time before taking Monster feats with a PC (or their "outsider" side-kick).
Or... you just play a natural weapon ranger and just TAKE the Improved Natural Attacks anyway since the Archetype grants em to you.
Feel free to laugh at your GM since that makes it legal and no sneaking involved. :)|
|
Or watch the dm laugh as he tells you that archetype isn't available for play?
:/
Seriously though, there's no *forcing* a dm to accept something. And if you feel like you need to try, then there's something wrong at your table :p
Then the argument is null and void and doesn't matter.
We're strictly dealing with legal for play or not. If the archetype is there improved natural attacks are granted whether the DM likes it or not, if then we are dealing with house rule world and it doesn't matter.|
|
Or watch the dm laugh as he tells you that archetype isn't available for play?
:/
Seriously though, there's no *forcing* a dm to accept something. And if you feel like you need to try, then there's something wrong at your table :p
Then the argument is null and void and doesn't matter.
We're strictly dealing with legal for play or not. If the archetype is there improved natural attacks are granted whether the DM likes it or not, if then we are dealing with house rule world and it doesn't matter.
Even PFS "legal" play not all things from the books are legal. (see crafting, etc).
Outside of PFS, all games are home games and thus rule 0.
[I would also argue that this is not an effect because it does not modify an existing form of damage, i.e. it does not increase the die of damage by a set number of steps. (a level 1 monk does not get a 1 step increase in die, from 1d4 -> 1d6, ) The monk does 1d6 with his unarmed strikes regardless of what his original damage was. An important distinction when natural attacks can start with a higher damage die than 1d6, even at level 1.
Sorry to say but the bolded is wrong a Medium does 1d6 a small or large monk have their own damage all of which is two steps up from their base damage.
|
|
Sorry to say but the bolded is wrong a Medium does 1d6 a small or large monk have their own damage all of which is two steps up from their base damage.[I would also argue that this is not an effect because it does not modify an existing form of damage, i.e. it does not increase the die of damage by a set number of steps. (a level 1 monk does not get a 1 step increase in die, from 1d4 -> 1d6, ) The monk does 1d6 with his unarmed strikes regardless of what his original damage was. An important distinction when natural attacks can start with a higher damage die than 1d6, even at level 1.
I'm only using baselines, since size variables affect all attack forms equally. I can legally push a character to gargantuan size if I really want too. (Huge size is obtainable even in PFS without the use of magic)
|
|
Well, it works like a charm for me. I didn't want it to be as powerful as Math says, so, it only adds the natural attacks as secondary attacks to the FoB. So, it's cool.
Even when the character has 4+ natural attacks of the same type, with multiple modifiers that elevate the base die (which your arguing is changed by FoB)?
|
|
We are dealing with legal to play. However, this being the rules forum, not necessarily PFS legal to play. It's not the PFS forum, after all. A dm has no requirement to allow any books other than the two core books to be legal for play, outside of PFS. Just because it exists doesn't mean it's incorporated into the campaign. Even in PFS, dm's frequently have to make judgement calls about whether certain feats work certain ways or not. And that's not a house rule, either. According to the CRB, all you need to play is the CRB and the Bestiary. Adding anything to those two books (or removing either of them) would actually be a house rule, albeit one that most dm's have.
Rather than assume content is open, it is a much better rule of thumb to politely ask your dm what content you can access if (s)he doesn't bring it up first. Including feats from the bestiary. It's not a good idea to pull feats and features from books without verifying access to those books first. It can result in a lot of wasted time, and no character to play when the game starts.
On a side note, I don't see the damage values from the monk unarmed damage stacking onto natural attacks. It isn't an effect that is 2 dice increase, because the increase isn't formualic. There are gaps where you have to imply whether you're increasing the dice size or adding another die to the roll. Since the increase only goes through two iterations, it's not enough to ascertain whether the bump is cumulative, exponential, or other. That makes it a set value. It's not *increase this dice to this dice*. It's *this damage*.
Though if you want to argue for applying it, then you're setting your damage at that value, and that value would then override any INA bonus. So, ya know, whatever makes you happy :p