I've seen a couple of the other threads here that deal with getting the maximum number of natural attacks, but that's not really what I'm after.
I'm trying to put together a build that uses a core race (probably Half-Orc for the various ways to get a bite attack) and which has a sufficient number of natural attacks. So, in other words, I'm not trying to create some monstrosity with tentacles and four arms. I would like people's opinions on the best build with that in mind.
My current thought is to start with two levels of Ranger to grab Aspect of the Beast for the pair of claw attacks. After that, I was considering adding at least one level of Barbarian and at least 3ish of Rogue for the sneak attack.
Are there any suggestions (feats, level progression, etc) for such a build that'll keep it effective for as long as possible. It'll never be used above 15th level, so beyond that is of no interest to me.
|
I would suggest either going barbarian, or Alchemist. Alchemist 2 gives you access to Feral Mutagen. You can take the vivisectionist archetype which is very good for melee, as well as another archetype or two. One of my favorite combinations is Vivisectionist/Internal Alchemist/Chirurgeon. You can add levels of Barbarian on top as well, if you want.
If this is for a home game, you may want to ask your GM if you can, instead of having a worthless class ability for Master Chymist, be allowed to apply the bonus damage that would have gone to bombs to your sneeak attack progression. I know it doesn't apply normally, but I've had a few GMs here on the boards allow me to switch it over.
|
With the fully enchant capable Tail Blade, a Ratfolk makes a great natural weapon fighter.
Tailblade: A tailblade is a small, sharp knife designed
to be strapped to the tip of a wielder’s tail. It takes a
full-round action to strap on or remove a tailblade. The
wearer can loosely attach the tailblade (without strapping
it securely in place) as a move action, but using a loosely
attached tailblade gives the wielder a –4 penalty on all
attack rolls made with the weapon, and other creatures
get a +4 bonus on disarm combat maneuver checks to
disarm the tailblade. A ratfolk wielding a tailblade can
make a tail attack, adding its Strength modifier to the
tailblade’s damage. Ratfolk are considered proficient with
such attacks and can apply feats or effects appropriate to
natural attacks to tail attacks made with a tailblade. If
used as part of a full attack action, attacks with a tailblade
are considered secondary attacks.
|
|
If we're going ARG, there's also the Catfolk, with Claw Blades, although they're expensive.
Claw Blades: These subtle blades can only be used by catfolk with the cat’s claws racial trait. Bought in a set of five, they fit over the wearer’s claws on one hand. The blades grant the wearer a +1 enhancement bonus on claw attack rolls with that hand and change the weapon type from a natural weapon to a light slashing weapon. Catfolk with the cat’s claws racial trait are proficient with this weapon. The claw blades can be enhanced like a masterwork weapon for the normal costs. The listed cost of the item is for one set of five claws for one hand.
This lets you get iterative attacks with your claw attacks if you have the cat's claws racial trait, and lets you enhance them at a more reasonable price.
I like the Ratfolk better than the catfolk due to the fact that the ratfolk can get the two claws, the tailblade and then take the adopted trait to get tusked off of the orcs for 4 natural attacks at level 1.
Remember that the claw blades change it from a natural attack into a light slashing weapon instead.
|
The man requested core races, folks. None of those really qualify.
A straight Half-Orc Barbarian with the Tusked Trait and and the Beast Totem Rage Powers is indeed probably the way to go.
If you want to tack on even more attacks, you can grab Improved Unarmed Strike, TWF, the Brawler Rage power, and Multiattack and you can, by 6th level, have 6 attacks per turn at +4/+4/+4/+4/+4/-1 (not counting Str Mod or AoMF), and be well on your way to Pounce as well. Half of them will only add 1/2 Str mod to damage...but it's still a nice trick, and a fun build.
But even staying away from that, you can be a very effective Barbarian with Natural Weapons alone, really.
If you want to dip on these builds (which I probably wouldn't), Vivisectionist Alchemist is likely the way to go. Another +6 Strength and a size-up on demand plus Sneak Attack is pretty cool. You'll need Int 12, but it's workable.
If we're going ARG, there's also the Catfolk, with Claw Blades, although they're expensive.
This lets you get iterative attacks with your claw attacks if you have the cat's claws racial trait, and lets you enhance them at a more reasonable price.Claw Blades: These subtle blades can only be used by catfolk with the cat’s claws racial trait. Bought in a set of five, they fit over the wearer’s claws on one hand. The blades grant the wearer a +1 enhancement bonus on claw attack rolls with that hand and change the weapon type from a natural weapon to a light slashing weapon. Catfolk with the cat’s claws racial trait are proficient with this weapon. The claw blades can be enhanced like a masterwork weapon for the normal costs. The listed cost of the item is for one set of five claws for one hand.
You are only enhancing 1 claw so "reasonable price" might not be true. If you are running a character with multiple natural attacks the amulet is a much better value.
Melee Druid, Beastmorph Vivisectionist Alchemist, and synthesist Summoner are the best ways to have a decent amount of natural attacks.
While I'm sure the Ratfolk and Catfolk make good natural weapon fighters, I'm not sure I want to move that far away from core.
I think I'm going to use a Half-Orc with the Tusked trait and the following level progression:
Barbarian 1
Ranger 1 (Shapeshifter, Skirmisher)
Ranger 2 (Aspect of the beast for claws)
Barbarian 2 (Takedown rage power)
Ranger 3 (Form of the Bear)
Rogue 1-4 (Thug)
then some combination of ranger/barbarian levels after that.
Does this look reasonable? I don't really see a barbarian archetype that catches my fancy.
I'd naturally pick up power attack at level 1, but not entirely sure of the best route to take for feats after that. I don't have many to choose, so I want to make the most of them. Perhaps I could even put Fighter levels in towards the end to pick up extras if needed. Any suggestions?
EDIT: I was distracted writing this and didn't see any of the posts starting with DMW.
The main reasons I see to go with Aspect of the Beast, is: A) You really want to play a Ranger more than a Barbarian, and B) You REALLY want to have a DIFFERENT Barbarian Totem (besides Beast Totem), although that doesn't seem to be the case for the OP...
Otherwise, I would recommend NOT going with Ranger: Aspect of the Beast (for Claws), but just taking the Barbarian Beast Totem chain (which grants Nat Armor, Claws, and eventually Pounce: which is a good thing to have if you have multiple Nat Attacks).
Speaking of other Barbarian Totems, you can also take Barbarian Fiend Totem to gain a Gore (Horn) attack (it does more damage than Bite), which you can combine with Bite/Claw/Claw, or just drop the Bite, saving a Feat/RagePower/RacialAbility.
Also keep in mind that Animal Fury, a no-Level-PreReq Rage Power gives you a Bite attack and also lets you make a free Bite attack while Grappling (which gives you a +2 CMB bonus if the Bite succeeds). Note that although the text 'assumes' you are using it in a certain way, it DOES 'give you a Bite attack' meaning you can use it any way a Bite attack normally would be (single Attack actions, Cleaves, AoOs, etc), although the Bite only functions while you are Raging. That's an easy way to get a Bite attack WITHOUT being a Half-Orc.
|
|
Also keep in mind that Animal Fury, a no-Level-PreReq Rage Power gives you a Bite attack and also lets you make a free Bite attack while Grappling (which gives you a +2 CMB bonus if the Bite succeeds). Note that although the text 'assumes' you are using it in a certain way, it DOES 'give you a Bite attack' meaning you can use it any way a Bite attack normally would be (single Attack actions, Cleaves, AoOs, etc), although the Bite only functions while you are Raging. That's an easy way to get a Bite attack WITHOUT being a Half-Orc.
Animal Fury is a secondary attack, though. Which really sucks if going pure Natural Attacks. Less of a problem with something like the IUS/NA build I suggest above, however.
Bite attacks are Primary, not Secondary, unless otherwise specified... which the ability doesn't do,
it just says: "While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack." i.e. normal rules for Bite apply.
It does describe one way to use the Bite attack, in combo with your normal fully attack,
and just like the normal rules for all Nat Weapons, they are treated as secondary when doing that even if they are actually Primary.
If you aren't adding the Bite attack on top of a normal iterative Full Attack, you should treat it as primary.
That goes for if you are Full Attacking with only Nat Weapons, or making an Attack action, Cleaving, etc.
EDIT: I would definitely agree that the text could be written in a less confusing manner, but the fact remains that nothing actually contradicts the standard rules, e.g. Bite=Primary, or prevents you from using said Bite attack in any other way Bite attacks can normally be used.
|
|
Bite attacks are Primary, not Secondary, unless otherwise specified... which the ability doesn't do,
it just says: "While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack." i.e. normal rules for Bite apply.
It does describe one way to use the Bite attack, in combo with your normal fully attack,
and just like the normal rules for all Nat Weapons, they are treated as secondary when doing that even if they are actually Primary.
If you aren't adding the Bite attack on top of a normal iterative Full Attack, you should treat it as primary.
That goes for if you are Full Attacking with only Nat Weapons, or making an Attack action, Cleaving, etc.
This is incorrect. The full text of the power is as follows:
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.
The specific (that this attack is at -5 and only adds 1/2 Str mod) does indeed supersede the general (that bites are primary). The only condition is 'When making a Full attack', no mention is made of weapons (which would imply a restatement of a general rule), and even that condition isn't listed in the reduced damage. It is simply always a secondary attack...albeit one with special grapple-based effects.
Bite attacks are Primary, not Secondary, unless otherwise specified... which the ability doesn't do,
it just says: "While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack." i.e. normal rules for Bite apply.
It does describe one way to use the Bite attack, in combo with your normal fully attack,
and just like the normal rules for all Nat Weapons, they are treated as secondary when doing that even if they are actually Primary.
If you aren't adding the Bite attack on top of a normal iterative Full Attack, you should treat it as primary.
That goes for if you are Full Attacking with only Nat Weapons, or making an Attack action, Cleaving, etc.This is incorrect. The full text of the power is as follows:
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.The specific (that this attack is at -5 and only adds 1/2 Str mod) does indeed supersede the general (that bites are primary). The only condition is 'When making a Full attack', no mention is made of weapons (which would imply a restatement of a general rule), and even that condition isn't listed in the reduced damage. It is simply always a secondary attack...albeit one with special grapple-based effects.
So, the bite is neither Primary nor Secondary and can only be used in full attacks or as part of maintaining or breaking a grapple?
If you want to supersede a classification as Primary, you say 'this is a Secondary attack'. That's alot less word count.
I don't see any reason to treat it as Secondary when making single Attack actions, Cleaves, etc.
There's nothing saying you can't do things with the granted Bite attack that you normally can do with Bite attacks.
Regardless, it's badly written no matter what intent you want to read into it.
Part of that is probably due to Paizo not expecting all PC players to be familiar with Natural Attack rules.
I'm pretty sure I've already hit FAQ on this multiple previous times, so I will save my index finger the effort this time.
/shrug
Shfish - That's basically the other option I was considering though the weapon specialization wouldn't come in until 9th level. With the build posted, I get less feats (but two rogue talents) and 2d6 sneak attack instead. Of course, I also give up 1 BAB. It *sounds* more fun to take the rogue levels, but I'm still not sure.
Quandry - You're basically right - the build started in my mind as a ranger build and to maximize natural attacks I was considering a barbarian dip for the lesser fiend totem rage power. It kind of morphed over time and I hadn't gone back to consider those choices. The one thing that nags at me is that for full barbarians, they will only get the benefit of rage powers *while raging*, which should be most of the time in combat, but not always. Using tusked and aspect of the beast, I have all three attacks all the time. Of course, maybe I'm giving up too much to get that. The other big benefit (in my mind) is that by taking at least some ranger levels, I'll also have a favoured enemy and can eventually take another at level 11 at +4. I certainly agree, however, that the all-barbarian beast totem would probably be another solid choice for the requirements I put forward.
Another secondary consideration for the build will be that its fun to play at all levels rather than "waiting around" for certainly abilities to kick in. Of course, this is rather subjective but there you have it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Animal Fury is formated as a primary natural attack in the GMG sheet for human cannibal. That's verbatim evidence for me. I've always interpreted the ability's text as a legacy tidbit that no longer really knows the big picture. PCs afterall weren't supposed to be able to use natural attacks to such a degree, but then APG, different race books and a plethora of other things happened and nowadays there's a lot more text about the issue.
Anyhow, we have a native outsider(built before any of the race books came out) barbarian2/ranger11, that has an attack routine of bite/claw/claw/gore. I realise that having two natural attacks tied to one "limb"(head) is a bit problematic, but Bestiary gargoyles at least set a precedent. Anyhow, he started as a natural weapon style ranger(Spirit, I think) and took Aspect of the Beast for the claws. Then two levels of barbarian for the rage power ability. After that it's been really easy to just keep taking Extra Rage power feats to get new attack types. Rage makes the attacks pack a whallop, but since he can't use a shield and gets the ubiquitous -2 AC, it's a world of pain for him often. Then again, he never gets disarmed, can eat his way out of monsters' guts, has a variety of natural weapon enhancing spells thanks to APG and gets a double serving of favored enemy boni thanks to the huge number attacks, so he's fine.
Now that no more natural attacks are really possible(without going alchemist or witch or something else really ridiculous), his combat strenght might slowly start to wane, but he's still a raging ranger with good favored enemy picks and a tendency to unearth amazing magic weapons.
So yeah, a focus on tooth and nail combat is viable, it's just very conflicted, since the frontloaded nature of these characters sets you up for disappointment later when just about everyone is packing dr/notyourdamagetype, massive offensive ability and high HP totals.
For PFS, this kind of character might be perfect. She'll always be waxing thanks to the "low" level cap.
I agree that animal fury should be treated as a primary attack when not used in conjunction with a manufactured weapon.
Try going straight half-orc barbarian and work your way up the beast totem tree. At level 10 you will be pouncing opponents with your claws. Pick an archetype that fits your playstyle and rend foes to pieces :)
I'd go beast totem barbarian too: if you see that you need even more damage, a couple of levels of martial artist (or maybe 4 to get weapon specialization) will let you easily take feral combat training and dragon style feats. I had to take a step back from this build because my barbarian was way too powerful for my game.
EDIT: it goes without saying but the first thing you put on your amulet of mighty fist should be the furious property (remember you don't need to make it +1 first).
|
|
Animal Fury is formated as a primary natural attack in the GMG sheet for human cannibal. That's verbatim evidence for me. I've always interpreted the ability's text as a legacy tidbit that no longer really knows the big picture. PCs afterall weren't supposed to be able to use natural attacks to such a degree, but then APG, different race books and a plethora of other things happened and nowadays there's a lot more text about the issue.
Okay, you've convinced me. That's not what the wording says, but that seems a clear demonstration of intent, is balanced, and the wording is deeply messed up in the first place, so it's more than good enough for me.
See, people do sometimes admit they were wrong in internet discussions. We're not actually wasting our lives having these arguments...;)