PFS-legal natural attack upgrades

[Patrick Harris @ SD]

Okay, playing Tengu, want to improve bite attack.

My understanding is that I can't take Improved Natural Attack, on account of that coming from the Bestiary.

Are there any other sources for this feat? I can't find any, so I'm guessing no.

Are there any other options except Blood Beak, which I can't take until 5? It doesn't have to be a feat; I'll settle for some kind of equipment that helps, but I can't find any of that either.

If the answer to all of these is no, then I would have to ask: Mike and/or Mark, have you considered opening up some (or even just the one) of the Bestiary feats now that a race with natural attacks is a default option?

[Caderyn]

Ranger level 2 Natural weapon combat style is a legal source that opens the feat to you, any other questions?

Natural Weapon
If the Ranger selects natural weapon style, he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat:

Aspect of the Beast, Improved Natural Weapon, Rending Claws, and Weapon Focus.

•At 6th level, he adds Eldritch Claws and Vital Strike to the list.
•At 10th level, he adds Multiattack and Improved Vital Strike to the list.

[Patrick Harris @ SD]

Hmm, okay. That would certainly work ... but it's a two-level dip to take the bite attack from a 1d3 to a 1d6. (Or a 1d6 to a 1d8, once I took Bloody Beak.) Doesn't necessarily seem ideal.

[Alexander_Damocles]

Ranger + Sorc dip --> Dragon Disciple? Its an option at least, right?

[Branding Opportunity]

If you want to do more damage with your beak attack, increasing the damage dice is an inefficient way of going about it. You're much better off increasing the "+" bonuses to the attack, increasing its crit threat range, or adding extra dice to it (such as with precision attacks).

[BigNorseWolf]

Scroll of strong jaw

Amulet of mighty fists: adding something like acid to add a whole new D6 increases the damage by quite a bit.

[Max Sharpe]

Add Fire! Then you can cook your food as you eat it! (Yes, I know fire is the most common resistance.)

[Patrick Harris @ SD]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Amulet of mighty fists: adding something like acid to add a whole new D6 increases the damage by quite a bit.

Oh ho! Now we're cookin'. For some reason I thought AoMF didn't work with natural attacks. Thanks. :)

[Jiggy]

If you're DEX-based, you could make that an Agile AoMF instead, adding your DEX mod to damage instead of a d6.

[El Baron de los Banditos]

Patrick Harris @ SD wrote:

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Amulet of mighty fists: adding something like acid to add a whole new D6 increases the damage by quite a bit.

Oh ho! Now we're cookin'. For some reason I thought AoMF didn't work with natural attacks. Thanks. :)

It's actually the precise reason as to why the damned thing is so expensive. Imagine dragons with Vicious AoMF's.

[Victor Zajic]

Does d3 really size up to d6 in pathfinder? I don't understand pathfinders take on size increases to damage dice at all.

[Macon Bacon, Esquire]

Victor Zajic wrote:

Does d3 really size up to d6 in pathfinder? I don't understand pathfinders take on size increases to damage dice at all.

Here's the table from the PRD.

[Mark Moreland]

Macon Bacon, Esquire wrote:

Victor Zajic wrote:

Does d3 really size up to d6 in pathfinder? I don't understand pathfinders take on size increases to damage dice at all.

Here's the table from the PRD.

The appropriate table for scaling a bite attack is the natural attacks by size table in the Bestiary (here).

[Jiggy]

You actually have to scroll up a fair bit from that link.

[Odea]

Less-scrolling link to natural attacks by size.

[Patrick Harris @ SD]

So INA would only take me from 1d3 to 1d4? That's not even worth a feat, let alone a two-level dip to get it. Maybe after Bloody Beak, but still.

[Lab_Rat]

Most of the time it won't be worth the feat. Natural weapons scale differently. The best scaling is when your starting damage is 1d8 or 2d8, as these will scale up to 2d6 and 4d6. That 2d8 bump is the best, yielding you an extra 5 damage per attack (average).

[Some Random Dood]

Patrick Harris @ SD wrote:

So INA would only take me from 1d3 to 1d4? That's not even worth a feat, let alone a two-level dip to get it. Maybe after Bloody Beak, but still.

Even after blood beak, it wouldn't be worth it. INA would only give you an average of +1 damage to your beak. As other have mentioned, it would be much better to add more dice to each attack with weapon properties. There are 2 items I know of that can improve and give weapon properties to bite (3 if you also have claws). They are, Amulet of Mighty Fists, Bodywrap of Mighty Strikes and Deliquescent Gloves (these only affect claws though).

[BigPo]

Or you can just pump your + damage with a high str, rage, mutagen, or other consumables. It doesn't really matter if you roll 1d4 or 2d6 when you're adding 25 to each ;)

[Seraphimpunk]

sneak attack with twf and your beak . thatll do more good than improved natural attack...

[SCPRedMage]

Caderyn wrote:

Ranger level 2 Natural weapon combat style is a legal source that opens the feat to you, any other questions?

I've seen this (and a similar statement in regards to Improved Natural Armor w/ animal companions), but I've yet to find an official source for it. Seeing as my Order of the Paw's wolf would LOVE to have both feats, I'd really love to have confirmation of this, particularly since I've found a number of older posts that refer to the Additional Resources page explicitly banning feats from the Bestiary (which it no longer does, but doesn't explicitly allow, either)...

[Nefreet]

My 5th level Tengu Rogue has no trouble murdering things with his 9d6 sneak attack from his claw/claw/bite, power attack, and (soon) those Deliquescent Gloves. Sure, his base damage might only be d3, but really, they're just for flavor. Even w/o sneak attack I'm doing 1d3+7 with each hit, and all 3 attacks are at my full attack bonus.

[Cao Phen]

Cloak of the Manta Ray gives you a 1d6 Sting at full BAB, just giving you some ideas =).

[Dennis Baker]

Seraphimpunk wrote:

sneak attack with twf and your beak . thatll do more good than improved natural attack...

Actually TWF + Beak is going to be terrible damage wise, at least from the beak. As soon as you add in manufactured weapons the attack bonus on the beak takes a -5 penalty. Add on the -2 penalty for TWF and the beak attack is rarely going to hit regardless.

[Caderyn]

SCPRedMage wrote:

Caderyn wrote:

Ranger level 2 Natural weapon combat style is a legal source that opens the feat to you, any other questions?

I've seen this (and a similar statement in regards to Improved Natural Armor w/ animal companions), but I've yet to find an official source for it. Seeing as my Order of the Paw's wolf would LOVE to have both feats, I'd really love to have confirmation of this, particularly since I've found a number of older posts that refer to the Additional Resources page explicitly banning feats from the Bestiary (which it no longer does, but doesn't explicitly allow, either)...

It comes from the additional resources

Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary

"Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source."

What this means is that as long as you have non bestiary source providing you an option to take the bestiary feat you and only you may take it. This means Natural weapon rangers which are a legal weapon style may take Improved Natural attack.

For Animal companions, they get the following list of feats from the Core Rulebook which provide them with the legal source they require to take those beastiary feats listed,

"Animal Feats
Animal companions can select from the following feats: Acrobatic, Agile Maneuvers, Armor Proficiency (light, medium, and heavy), Athletic, Blind-Fight, Combat Reflexes, Diehard, Dodge, Endurance, Great Fortitude, Improved Bull Rush, Improved Initiative, Improved Natural Armor, Improved Natural Attack, Improved Overrun, Intimidating Prowess, Iron Will, Lightning Reflexes, Mobility, Power Attack, Run, Skill Focus, Spring Attack, Stealthy, Toughness, Weapon Finesse, and Weapon Focus. Animal companions with an Intelligence of 3 or higher can select any feat they are physically capable of using. GMs might expand this list to include feats from other sources."

[Jiggy]

Caderyn wrote:

"Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source."

What this means is that as long as you have non bestiary source providing you an option to take the bestiary feat you and only you may take it. This means Natural weapon rangers which are a legal weapon style may take Improved Natural attack.

Sorry, but a legal option simply referencing a Bestiary feat does not qualify as "specifically granted by another legal source". The feat itself needs to appear in a legal source and be included in Additional Resources as being legal. Just because the fighting style is legal doesn't necessarily mean every feat option it lists is also legal.

[BigNorseWolf]

Natural Weapon: If the ranger selects natural weapon style, he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat: Aspect of the Beast, Improved Natural Weapon, Rending Claws, and Weapon Focus. At 6th level, he adds Eldritch Fangs and Vital Strike to the list. At 10th level, he adds Multiattack and Improved Vital Strike to the list.

I don't see how that can be granted any more specifically than that.

[Jiggy]

BigNorseWolf wrote:

Natural Weapon: If the ranger selects natural weapon style, he can choose from the following list whenever he gains a combat style feat: Aspect of the Beast, Improved Natural Weapon, Rending Claws, and Weapon Focus. At 6th level, he adds Eldritch Fangs and Vital Strike to the list. At 10th level, he adds Multiattack and Improved Vital Strike to the list.

I don't see how that can be granted any more specifically than that.

By having the feat in question actually appear in the book, and having Additional Resources say something like "all feats on pages XXX are legal for play".

Books referencing things don't make them legal. Additional Resources saying "X is legal" makes them legal.

[Kyle Baird]

Hey Jigs, Natural Weapon rangers get access to INW.

[Jiggy]

Kyle Baird wrote:

Hey Jigs, Natural Weapon rangers get access to INW.

Are you telling me it appears in a source whose AddRes entry lists it as legal, or are you telling me I'm wrong about how this all works?

[WalterGM]

I have a natural weapon barbarian/DD, and although my die size has never broken a d8 (barb gore), it's never been a problem. You get disgusting fast when you stack 3 or 4 primary natural attacks, and beef your strength. If you are going to level dip, 2 in barbarian would likely be better than ranger.

Pick up the gore rage power (lesser fiend totem?), a static +4 str/con buff for a majority of your fights, then make that amulet of mighty fists a +1 furious. It adds up fast. And don't worry about running out of rage rounds -- my character is now level 13, and with only 4 levels of barbarian, I've never run out.

Something like a barb 2/rogue X or barb 2/ninja X would be pretty strong. We have a ninja/urban barbarian and he does pretty decently. Something about sneak attacking with a two handed weapon then vanishing is all kinds of tasty.

[Eric Clingenpeel]

Jiggy wrote:

Kyle Baird wrote:

Hey Jigs, Natural Weapon rangers get access to INW.

Are you telling me it appears in a source whose AddRes entry lists it as legal, or are you telling me I'm wrong about how this all works?

I won't put words in Kyle's mouth, but I'm telling you you're wrong about how it all works.

If a PFS legal class or archetype says you can pick from X feats and lists a Bestiary feat, then that feat is "specifically granted by another legal source". You'll never find a Bestiary feat written out in another legal source, why would they? It is already in the Bestiary, they just have to reference it.

[Jiggy]

Eric Clingenpeel wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Kyle Baird wrote:

Hey Jigs, Natural Weapon rangers get access to INW.

Are you telling me it appears in a source whose AddRes entry lists it as legal, or are you telling me I'm wrong about how this all works?

I won't put words in Kyle's mouth, but I'm telling you you're wrong about how it all works.

If a PFS legal class or archetype says you can pick from X feats and lists a Bestiary feat, then that feat is "specifically granted by another legal source". You'll never find a Bestiary feat written out in another legal source, why would they? It is already in the Bestiary, they just have to reference it.

Well, I could be wrong. My next thought, though, is "Are any Bestiary feats categorized as Combat feats? If so, all such feats are legal by virtue of the Core fighter." Is that true? Is there a difference between a fighter bonus feat and a ranger bonus feat?

[Cheapy]

Awesome Blow (Combat), Multiattack (Combat), Multiweapon Fighting (Combat).

[Cheapy]

The main point of (Combat) is explained here:

Quote:

Combat Feats

Any feat designated as a combat feat can be selected as a fighter's bonus feat. This designation does not restrict characters of other classes from selecting these feats, assuming that they meet the prerequisites.

[Cheapy]

I currently have no position on this, but I think it's worth pointing out that there's a bit of a difference between having an ability that says "You can choose (Combat) feats as bonus feats." and "You can choose improved natural attack." One gives a general list of feats that will continue to grow, the other gives a specific example.

Quote:

Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source

Given the above text, this may mean that fighters are not able to select the feats found under the Monster Feat chapter of the bestiaries as the feats are not specifically granted, but rather generally granted.

[kinevon]

Cheapy wrote:

I currently have no position on this, but I think it's worth pointing out that there's a bit of a difference between having an ability that says "You can choose (Combat) feats as bonus feats." and "You can choose improved natural attack." One gives a general list of feats that will continue to grow, the other gives a specific example.

Quote:

Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source

Given the above text, this may mean that fighters are not able to select the feats found under the Monster Feat chapter of the bestiaries as the feats are not specifically granted, but rather generally granted.

Fighters only get access to legal feats that are COmbat feats as bonus feats,but, since it doesn't specifically list the Bestiary Combat feats, they are not available to Fighters as bonus feats, in general.

Natural Weapon Rangers and Animal Companions get access to any Bestiary feats specifically called out as options in their write-ups. The same would hold true for any other specifically mentioned Bestiary feat in a legal class/AC/Familiar/archetype/whatever lists feat X, Y or Z from the Bestiary as an option, it is specifically being allowed, so is a legal option, as long as the feat itself is not specifically disallowed.

[BigNorseWolf]

Jiggy wrote:

By having the feat in question actually appear in the book, and having Additional Resources say something like "all feats on pages XXX are legal for play".

Books referencing things don't make them legal. Additional Resources saying "X is legal" makes them legal.

Additional resources gives access to the natural weapon fighting style.

The natural weapon fighting style gives access to improved natural weapon.

They're not going to reprint something when you should already have it. You need a mechanism for making it legal, not a reprint of it.

[Bbauzh ap Aghauzh]

kinevon wrote:

Cheapy wrote:

I currently have no position on this, but I think it's worth pointing out that there's a bit of a difference between having an ability that says "You can choose (Combat) feats as bonus feats." and "You can choose improved natural attack." One gives a general list of feats that will continue to grow, the other gives a specific example.

Quote:

Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source

Given the above text, this may mean that fighters are not able to select the feats found under the Monster Feat chapter of the bestiaries as the feats are not specifically granted, but rather generally granted.

Fighters only get access to legal feats that are COmbat feats as bonus feats,but, since it doesn't specifically list the Bestiary Combat feats, they are not available to Fighters as bonus feats, in general.

Natural Weapon Rangers and Animal Companions get access to any Bestiary feats specifically called out as options in their write-ups. The same would hold true for any other specifically mentioned Bestiary feat in a legal class/AC/Familiar/archetype/whatever lists feat X, Y or Z from the Bestiary as an option, it is specifically being allowed, so is a legal option, as long as the feat itself is not specifically disallowed.

I'm with Kinevon on this one.

The feat doesn't need to be reproduced in its entirety in another source, be declared as legal, to then be taken legally. Another source just needs to call out the feat, specifically, as legal.

The general (combat) feats for fighters does not specifically call out the Bestiary (combat) feats, therefore a fighter could not take those feats (unless those feats are very specifically called out as legal for the fighter in some resource).

The Ranger archetype that specifically allows those feats, is a source that legalizes those feats.

[Mystic Lemur]

Just to play Devil's Advocate, why would the Additional Resources page specifically call out those feats as not being legal for animal companions if the Core Rulebook simply overrode it by virtue of a list?

It seems to be a case of "specific trumps general" where the general is the list of feats available to animal companions and Natural Attack rangers, but the Additional Resources specifically says no. Other people seem to see it the other way around...

[Jiggy]

What other entries from Additional Resources use the "not unless granted by another legal source" functionality, and how are those other legal sources set up in those cases?

[Justin Riddler]

The Deliquescent Gloves (UE) are far more worth it than getting extra acid damage from the Amulet of Mighty Fists... cheaper in the long-run too as you'll want to make that amulet greater than just a +1 or +2.

[Bbauzh ap Aghauzh]

Its order of operations, just like junior high algebra.

What comes first.

Creation
Source
Legality
Additional Source / Legality

Creation
I want to create a Tengu that uses its natural attacks and I want it to be better at natural attacks than a normal Tengu.

Source
Advanced Race Guide (gives info for Tengu, and Alternate Racial Trait that grants natural attacks).
Bestiary (gives several feats that improve Natural Attacks).

Legality
Additional Resources (Tengu and its alternate racial traits are legal in the ARG).
Bestiary (nothing in this book is legal for PCs, animal companions, et. al. unless made legal by another legal source)

Additional Source / Legality
Advanced Players Guide (Ranger taking Natural Weapon Style has access to some of the natural weapon feats from the Beastiary) / This grants legality of those feats as they are specifically called out in another source which is legal.

[Bbauzh ap Aghauzh]

Jiggy wrote:

What other entries from Additional Resources use the "not unless granted by another legal source" functionality, and how are those other legal sources set up in those cases?

The FAQ for animal companions/mounts for Paladins/Cavaliers/Rangers is set up as such.

You can access other animals that are otherwise illegal for those classes if another legal source grants you access to other animals.

[Jiggy]

Andrew Christian wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

What other entries from Additional Resources use the "not unless granted by another legal source" functionality, and how are those other legal sources set up in those cases?

The FAQ for animal companions/mounts for Paladins/Cavaliers/Rangers is set up as such.

You can access other animals that are otherwise illegal for those classes if another legal source grants you access to other animals.

Thanks! So to complete the example, what would be such a source, which grants other animal options to those classes?

[Sniggevert]

Jiggy wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

What other entries from Additional Resources use the "not unless granted by another legal source" functionality, and how are those other legal sources set up in those cases?

The FAQ for animal companions/mounts for Paladins/Cavaliers/Rangers is set up as such.

You can access other animals that are otherwise illegal for those classes if another legal source grants you access to other animals.

Thanks! So to complete the example, what would be such a source, which grants other animal options to those classes?

The infamous Beastmaster Cavalier from UC(I think is the source of it).

[Bbauzh ap Aghauzh]

Jiggy wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

What other entries from Additional Resources use the "not unless granted by another legal source" functionality, and how are those other legal sources set up in those cases?

The FAQ for animal companions/mounts for Paladins/Cavaliers/Rangers is set up as such.

You can access other animals that are otherwise illegal for those classes if another legal source grants you access to other animals.

Thanks! So to complete the example, what would be such a source, which grants other animal options to those classes?

Beast Rider archetype

Beast Master archetype
Falconer archetype

and I'm sure there are a few others.

[Bbauzh ap Aghauzh]

Lets try this another way Jiggy.

Additional Resources: Bestiary wrote:

Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source.

The word granted is used. Not offered or published in.

The archetypes grant access to other animals.

The Natural Weapon Style grants access to some Bestiary feats at certain levels.

[Jiggy]

Andrew Christian wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

Andrew Christian wrote:

Jiggy wrote:

What other entries from Additional Resources use the "not unless granted by another legal source" functionality, and how are those other legal sources set up in those cases?

The FAQ for animal companions/mounts for Paladins/Cavaliers/Rangers is set up as such.

You can access other animals that are otherwise illegal for those classes if another legal source grants you access to other animals.

Thanks! So to complete the example, what would be such a source, which grants other animal options to those classes?

Beast Rider archetype

Beast Master archetype
Falconer archetype

and I'm sure there are a few others.

Hrm, and it looks like AddRes doesn't specifically call out the mount options, just legalizes the archetypes.

Well, since I can't find the counterexamples that would almost definitely exist if my original understanding were correct, I guess I must've been wrong. Thanks for the info, Andy. :)

[Lab_Rat]

I think examples for the FAQ regarding expanding mounts would be:

Beast Rider FEAT
Mammoth Rider PRESTIGE CLASS

These two examples specifically state that they add animal companion types to your class list. The archetypes listed above are just examples of classes with expanded lists. They can not be used to expand the list of a different class.