Multiattack is a Monster Feat from the Bestiary, so being able to take it is subject to DM discretion. In my opinion, PCs should NOT be allowed to take the multiattack feat as it makes combining natural attacks and manufactured weapon attacks more powerful than they would be otherwise...
More importantly...
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.
The precedence set here is that the multiattack feat requires a class which specializes in natural attacks to attain 10th level in order to qualify for it. I'm pretty sure this knowledge should convince most GMs that this is a sufficiently powerful feat that players should not be allowed access to without great consideration.
|
Multiattack is a Monster Feat from the Bestiary, so being able to take it is subject to DM discretion. In my opinion, PCs should NOT be allowed to take the multiattack feat as it makes combining natural attacks and manufactured weapon attacks more powerful than they would be otherwise...
Absolutely wrong. To disallow bestiary feats would be a houserule.
Read the Bestiary:
Monster Feats:
Most of the following feats apply specifically to monsters,
although some player characters might qualify for them
(particularly Craft Construct).
Multiattack is a Monster Feat from the Bestiary, so being able to take it is subject to DM discretion. In my opinion, PCs should NOT be allowed to take the multiattack feat as it makes combining natural attacks and manufactured weapon attacks more powerful than they would be otherwise...Absolutely wrong. To disallow bestiary feats would be a houserule.
Read the Bestiary:
Monster Feats:
Most of the following feats apply specifically to monsters,
although some player characters might qualify for them
(particularly Craft Construct).
Every group I have ever played in has had the discussion of monster feats at some point and to this day, none have allowed them. Maybe it's just my groups, but the title "Monster Feats" just seems to point these away from player characters. Though it does not explicitly say they can take them, and what you cited indicates that at least some should be available...
I do, however, think this is very dangerous... A 10th level Beast Morph Vivisectionist Alchemist can have ~+18/+18/+18 claw, claw, bite, all against flat footed AC with a +2 bonus. If you allow him to take multiattack he can utilize armor spikes for an attack routine of +18/+16/+16/+16/+13 with Spikes, Claw, Claw, Bite, Spikes. As it is, AMY's damage is straight up outrageous - allowing multiattack is only going to make that worse since all three natural attacks would be at ~+16 instead of +13 making them almost certain to hit flat foot AC - 2...
Even PFS players can take those feats. It causes no balance issues.
Your groups are using houserules.
Hmm, PFS allows monster feats...?? Here I thought PFS was even more restrictive than we were, haha. Well then it's a house rule, but it's one that I'm content to continue using. I don't see the monster feats as necessary to be allowed - there are already LOADS of feats available to PCs.
Even PFS players can take those feats. It causes no balance issues.
Your groups are using houserules.
Yes, PFS players can take feats from the bestiary, BUT only if they appear in another legal source. None of the feats from the bestiary are legal in PFS unless they are grant by another legal source (such as a ranger's combat style).
Animal Companions: ankylosaurus, aurochs, brachiosaurus, dire bat, dire rat, dolphin, elasmosaurus, electric eel, elephant/mastodon, frog, goblin dog, hyena, monitor lizard, moray eel, octopus, orca, pteranodon, rhinoceros, roc, squid, stegosaurus, triceratops, and tyrannosaurus; Familiars: all familiars listed on pages 131–133; Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source. Other: all creatures in this book are legal for polymorph effects (including a druid's wild shape ability) within the boundaries of each spell or ability's parameters.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 2
Animal Companions: allosaurus, arsinoitherium, baboon, compsognathus, gar, glyptodon, hippopotamus, manta ray, megaloceros, megatherium, parasaurolophus, ram, giant snapping turtle, stingray, tylosaurus; Familiars: compsognathus, snapping turtle; Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source; Other: all creatures in this book are legal for polymorph effects (including a druid's wild shape ability) within the boundaries of each spell or ability's parameters.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Bestiary 3
Animal Companions (p. 311): antelope, archelon, axe beak, baluchitherium, basilosaurus, dimetrodon, elk, giant chameleon, giant gecko, giant vulture, iguanodon, kangaroo, megalania, pachycephalosaurus, spinosaurus, thylacine; Familiars: all familiars listed on pages 112-113; Feats: none of the feats are legal for play for PCs, animal companions, or familiars unless specifically granted by another legal source; Other: all creatures in this book are legal for polymorph effects (including a druid's wild shape ability) within the boundaries of each spell or ability's parameters.
Core still allows the feats.
What do you mean by that?
Disallowing the feats is still a houserule.Core still allows the feats.What do you mean by that?
For a home game? Sure. But I was only talking about PFS.
Core still allows the feats.
So, you consider the Bestiary core?
What other books are core? Where are they listed?
And the wording 'although some player characters might qualify for them (particularly Craft Construct).' fits with both these.
Really? So, a character that has a Natural Bite Attack couldn't take Improved Natural Attack (Bite)? That absolutely sounds as though a player would qualify.
Also, look at the requirements for Craft Construct, that one that is specifically mentioned as being feasible for players.
Prerequisites: Caster level 5th, Craft Magic Arms and Armor, Craft Wondrous Item.
That is extremely easy for a PC to qualify for. That's probably why it is mentioned as being likely for a PC to qualify for it. That doesn't mean the others are impossible, it just means that the PC's need to qualify for them.
Multi-attack at ranger 10th with the natural attack style indicates as much.
Seeing as the ranger's combat style feats have a 'bypass prerequisites' deal fit into them, I don't see how that indicates a regular character couldn't take multiattack if they did meet the prerequisites. If you wanted to argue that, you could also say a regular character couldn't take Pinpoint Targeting or Shot on the Run unless they were an Archery Style Ranger at 10th level.
At 10th level, he adds Pinpoint Targeting and Shot on the Run to the list.
I can't see how the Natural Attack Style of Rangers have any bearing on whether or not PC's can take monster feats.
Edit: Not to sound argumentative or anything, but that assessment just sounds off to me. But maybe that's just me. And there's possibility for alternate interpretation... I guess. Just not on those grounds, imo.
That is... entirely not the point. You're right, a 10th level character couldn't take it. But others who do meet the prerequisites still can.
So... I guess I can try to lay this out again for you. The Ranger's Combat Style allows them to bypass prereqs. That still does not prevent other characters from taking them if they do meet those prereqs.
Hence, trying to say that (and I'm paraphrasing) "because Multiattack can be part of a Ranger's class feature, it can't be taken by other PCs" is silly and definitely not a valid argument. That's the point I was making.
For that, I can't really answer definitively.
Personally, I don't think you would need to have the prerequisites all the time to qualify for taking it. I would argue it as being sort of similar to Fly, in the fact that you can't put points into it unless you can fly... but it is noted that if you have a reliable means of flying, you can indeed put points into it.
But, that's my own interpretation, and I don't know any rules that would support it or not. Additionally, the argument could be made that, if you have less than 3 attacks at some point, the feat stops functioning until you do. So, unless you can reliably get those 3 or more attacks pretty often, it might not work too well (say, wielding a weapon and trying to bite at -2. Unless you also have claws, I don't think it would be functioning, so the bite would be -5. If you did have 2 claws though, then it would just be -2).
Also... I feel like I came across as an a&~~##@ in my last post here... Sorry about that.
And racial features for tieflings, orcs, tengu and god knows what.
But more importantly - do you have to permanently have an ability to take feats relating to it?
There's been dev comments that the fly spell is sufficient to learn the fly skill, and that doesn't last long.
And if you have to be able to use an ability all day long to get feats relating to it, you can't get Ability focus on something like Fireball 5/day as a spell-like. Only abilities whos combined uses lasts for 24 hours
How do other pcs get it? How do I get 3 natural attacks permanently on my base form to qualify?
A changeling or catfolk or all those other races that get claws could have been raised by orcs, taking the adopted trait to get a bite attack.
I even think (but I'm not sure) that a tengu can gain both, claws and a bite.
|
And racial features for tieflings, orcs, tengu and god knows what.
But more importantly - do you have to permanently have an ability to take feats relating to it?
There's been dev comments that the fly spell is sufficient to learn the fly skill, and that doesn't last long.
And if you have to be able to use an ability all day long to get feats relating to it, you can't get Ability focus on something like Fireball 5/day as a spell-like. Only abilities whos combined uses lasts for 24 hours
The Fly skill is a bit of a special case;
Requirement
You cannot take this skill without a natural means of flight or gliding. Creatures can also take ranks in Fly if they possess a reliable means of flying every day (either through a spell or other magical manner, such as a druid’s wild shape ability).
It's more liberal than "24+ hours"; just being able to do it every day.
Without that specific "every day" clause, I'd go for the "24+ hours" rule though. Which is unfortunate for Beast Totem barbarians, I guess.
---
As for the "can PCs take Bestiary feats?" matter, I read that as "GMs are encouraged to think about allowing these feats as a house rule", not "DISallowing these feats would be a house rule".
On topic:
As far as I understand you can learn feats for which you qualify by magic means or such. But you lose access to them as long as you don't have the prerequisites.
So (in games where multiattack is allowed) a dragon blooded sorcerer with a bite attack could learn multiattack but would loose the feat as long as he doesn't have his claws.
Same with learning feats that require a wis of 13 which you only qualify for with a headband of wisdom (or however the wis item is called) for example. You'd have the feat as long as your wis is 13. If you take off the magic item you can't use the feat untill you once more have sufficient wis.
As for the "can PCs take Bestiary feats?" matter, I read that as "GMs are encouraged to think about allowing these feats as a house rule", not "DISallowing these feats would be a house rule".
This is how we do it - Specific monster feats are available on DM approval.
As I pointed out previously, certain builds already get GREAT mileage out of combining manufactured attacks with natural attacks. Allowing them access to multiattack would make them significantly more effective. With that in mind, I would make this call on a case by case basis. If the natural attack style character has dedicated a similar amount of his resources to being effective with natural attacks to a manufactured weapon user and the natural weapons guy is being out classed, then I would let them take multiattack to help bring them up to snuff. If however, someone tried to show up with a 5+ natural attack pouncing, rending build and was already ahead of the curve, you can bet your pretty penny I'm not going to let him have multiattack just because "it's core" if he's going to make other players feel less significant.
Is that a house rule - yes. Is it the right thing to do - yes.
And racial features for tieflings, orcs, tengu and god knows what.
But more importantly - do you have to permanently have an ability to take feats relating to it?
There's been dev comments that the fly spell is sufficient to learn the fly skill, and that doesn't last long.
And if you have to be able to use an ability all day long to get feats relating to it, you can't get Ability focus on something like Fireball 5/day as a spell-like. Only abilities whos combined uses lasts for 24 hours
The Fly skill is a bit of a special case;
Requirement
You cannot take this skill without a natural means of flight or gliding. Creatures can also take ranks in Fly if they possess a reliable means of flying every day (either through a spell or other magical manner, such as a druid’s wild shape ability).
It's more liberal than "24+ hours"; just being able to do it every day.
Without that specific "every day" clause, I'd go for the "24+ hours" rule though. Which is unfortunate for Beast Totem barbarians, I guess.
But where is the 24 hour clause? The closest thing I've found is that enhancement bonuses from items to ability scores turn permanent while using the item after 24 hours of use, but I've seen nothing relating to feats and similar.
I follow the "reliable method" approach. If a character has a reliable means of getting the pre-reqs for a "monster feat" they can take it.
|
|
But where is the 24 hour clause? The closest thing I've found is that enhancement bonuses from items to ability scores turn permanent while using the item after 24 hours of use, but I've seen nothing relating to feats and similar.
The point I was trying to make is that Fly has a specific rule, not that it's an example of a general rule. I'm not sure there IS a general rule on this.
Personally, I'm pretty skeptical about learning feats if you can only satisfy the prerequisites through external (item) stat boosts and such.
The whole point of feats is to make things "more powerful than they would be otherwise", Shirley?Multiattack is a Monster Feat from the Bestiary, so being able to take it is subject to DM discretion. In my opinion, PCs should NOT be allowed to take the multiattack feat as it makes combining natural attacks and manufactured weapon attacks more powerful than they would be otherwise...
Yes, for Monsters - It's a monster feat. I'm just saying that if it were meant primarily for players, they'd have put it into the Core Rulebook, not the Bestiary. As I said previously, I'd allow my weakest character to take it, but not my strongest character.
A natural attacks beastmorph vivisectionist alchemist wearing armor spikes with haste up... At 10th level he already gets 6 (+20/+20/+15/+15/+15/+15) attacks on a pounce with greater invisibility at 6d6 sneak attack per attack... He doesn't need to decrease the penalty to his 3 natural attacks from -5 to -2. It's just unnecessary. If you allow it at your table, don't be surprised when someone shows up and does ~300 points of damage in one round, because that's what AM ALCHEMIST can do. For reference, 300 points one shots creatures of CR 14 quite easily. That creature is supposed to be an epic encounter for 5 characters of 10th level, and AM ALCHEMIST one shot it first round, with his +12 initiative modifier...
Take it with a grain of salt, cuz it's just my opinion, but be smart about what you allow/consider.