| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Another player was looking into working with catfolk's natural weapons and, using HeroLab, came up with a way to have 4 1d8 claw attacks at full BAB.
His plan is to make a catfolk fighter with the Cat's Claws alternate racial trait (2 primary attack claws, 1d4 damage), Catfolk Exemplar racial feat with Sharp Claws manifestation (claw attacks are now 1d6, allows Aspect of the Beast feat w/o prereqs), Aspect of the Beast feat (grow 2 more primary attack claws, now also 1d6 damage), and finally Improved Natural Attack (increases all 4 claws to 1d8 damage).
Is this build legitimate, as HeroLab seems to suggest? The only related info I was able to find from an official source was here, suggesting that additional bite attacks can't be stacked, but not whether the same is true with claws. Anyone able to find something else in the rules/errata/FAQ?
He needs arms for that second pair of claws. Aspect of the beast doesnt grow claws on creatures that already have claws.
He needs arms for that second pair of claws. Aspect of the beast doesnt grow claws on creatures that already have claws.
His response was that cats can have claws on more than two limbs. Also that Aspect of the Beast does not say how or where, or that there cannot be existing claws.
You can't stack natural attacks like that. It's in the natural attack rules. Further, the devs have clarified that for bipedal creatures, talons go on the feet. Catfolk are more folk than cat, as they aren't quadrupedal.
You can't stack natural attacks like that. It's in the natural attack rules. Further, the devs have clarified that for bipedal creatures, talons go on the feet. Catfolk are more folk than cat, as they aren't quadrupedal.
This was my assumption, but I couldn't find an official statement either way. Could you direct me to this dev clarification? It seems to be exactly the info I was looking for.
Now, if he was an Alchemist he could do it.
Also, think about this: Even if he DID have claws on his feet...how would he use them?
Even assuming he didn't wear boots, what's he going to do, make an Acrobatics check at DC: Nope every time he attacks to avoid falling flat on his ass?
|
He needs arms for that second pair of claws. Aspect of the beast doesnt grow claws on creatures that already have claws.His response was that cats can have claws on more than two limbs. Also that Aspect of the Beast does not say how or where, or that there cannot be existing claws.Nope. Claws are on arms. Claw-like things on feet are talons.
Have you ever seen a cat?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yes, I have two. And last I checked, cats aren't catfolk. ;)
Clarification #1 that talons go on the feet of bipedal creatures (aka: catfolk)
Clarification #2 that talons go on the feet, not claws.
From the combat chapter,
Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks).
You need multiple limbs to get multiple natural attacks. Having two claws on one limb (as ridiculous as that is) will only give you one attack, since you need additional limbs.
Heck, the using a claw attack precludes you from using the same limb from a manufactured weapon too.
More info here, but it's a bit more dense than the other posts.
Hope that helps!
I have the scratches to attest to that.
Yes, I have two. And last I checked, cats aren't catfolk. ;)
Clarification #1 that talons go on the feet of bipedal creatures (aka: catfolk)
Clarification #2 that talons go on the feet, not claws.
From the combat chapter,
Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks).You need multiple limbs to get multiple natural attacks. Having two claws on one limb (as ridiculous as that is) will only give you one attack, since you need additional limbs.
Heck, the using a claw attack precludes you from using the same limb from a manufactured weapon too.
More info here, but it's a bit more dense than the other posts.
Hope that helps!
It helps very much, Cheapy, thank you! Clarification #2 is precisely what I was looking for. And the other links were enlightening as well. I had hoped common sense would be enough to rule out the 4 clawed catfight but my fellow player insisted that since HeroLab allowed it, it must be legitimate in Pathfinder. I'm pleased to see that my interpretation agrees with James Jacobs (and the rest of you who were nice enough to respond).
No problem. Just remember that it's your game, and you get to decide what gets let into your games. Even the lead design of Pathfinder says you shouldn't judge content based on who puts it out.
|
Clarification #2 that talons go on the feet, not claws.
Guys...........only birds have Talons, cats are not birds!
Truth is Cats have claws on their forepaws and hindpaws and they are retractable unlike Canines!
Therefore logically Catfolk can have claws on both their feet and hands!
Just to add to what Cheapy said...
my fellow player insisted that since HeroLab allowed it, it must be legitimate in PathfinderNever ever accept this argument. While HeroLab tries, there are plenty of examples of things it doesn't get quite right, and it should never be used as a rules reference.
I would say, rather, that it can be used as a rules reference but never as the final say. But it means the same thing.
@CrazyGnomes - You should report it as a bug here, and it'll go onto their list of things to fix.
Firstly, let me specify that Cheapy's references are not official rules changes, FAQ's, or Errata. They are developer opinions on RAI. Put whatever weight on those that you will. There's not a darn thing in RAW that prevents you from putting claws on feet if your DM allows it.
Secondly, let me specify that you can't take the feat Aspect of the Beast twice to get two instances of Sharp Claws. You can take the feat twice, but you have to choose a different manifestation each time.
There is some weirdness because the feat originates from another feat, Catfolk Exemplar, but in no way does that feat say that you can override the rules of Aspect of the Beast in that respect.
If you read the wording on Catfolk Exemplar, it says simply that you can take the feat Aspect of the Beast without meeting the prerequisite. So, technically, by taking Catfolk Exemplar and choosing Sharp Claws, you are taking Aspect of the Beast with the claw manifestation. Aspect of the Beast does not allow you to take the same manifestation twice, and neither does Catfolk Exemplar.
Somewhere along the lines, Hero Lab missed this distinction. It's an easy confusion even outside that database, because of the way Catfolk Exemplar and Aspect of the Beast hold hands.
Clarification #2 that talons go on the feet, not claws.Guys...........only birds have Talons, cats are not birds!
Truth is Cats have claws on their forepaws and hindpaws and they are retractable unlike Canines!
Therefore logically Catfolk can have claws on both their feet and hands!
Logically Catfolk are not cats; they are humanoids who happen to have some cat features. You're trying to hard to apply real world to a game.
|
|
Logically Catfolk are not cats; they are humanoids who happen to have some cat features. You're trying to hard to apply real world to a game.Clarification #2 that talons go on the feet, not claws.Guys...........only birds have Talons, cats are not birds!
Truth is Cats have claws on their forepaws and hindpaws and they are retractable unlike Canines!
Therefore logically Catfolk can have claws on both their feet and hands!
Trying too hard eh? Look at any picture of a Catfolk in any Pathfinder source, then look at their feet.......umm Hello they have claws on them and they look far sharper than the claws on their hands!
I'm just saying....
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
There's a precedent about legally adding claws to legs: eidolons.
IMO, What real-life cats do or don't do with their limbs is rather irrelevant, anyway. Actually, being a catfolk is also irrelevant if you're using the Aspect of the Beast to get the claws because even human rangers can qualify for the feat, and all humans, (whether bipeds or quadrupeds!?!?), have rather harmless nails both on their toes and fingers. ;-)
This is not to say that I like the idea of a PC getting 4 full bab natural attacks early on, especially if the devs have said that's not how it's supposed to work.
There's also precedent that the Eidolons routinely break the rules everyone else follows :)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So we do all realize that there's no real difference between a "Claw" and a "Talon" in real life, except that we normally only use the latter when referring to birds, right?
Talon is derived from Latin by way of French, while Claw is from a Germanic root.
ie: They're the same thing.
If Pathfinder wants to make 'Claw' and 'Talon' distinct from one another, they can. However, nothing in the RAW has shown that they have done so, and currently there is nothing in the RAW preventing claws from appearing on feet.
RAI, however, has been clearly shown on these boards, so you "can," but whether you "should" is going to be up to the GM.
Even if he DID have claws on his feet...how would he use them?
Even assuming he didn't wear boots, what's he going to do, make an Acrobatics check at DC: Nope every time he attacks to avoid falling flat on his ass?
|
|
No problem. Just remember that it's your game, and you get to decide what gets let into your games. Even the lead design of Pathfinder says you shouldn't judge content based on who puts it out.
Most intelligent and reasonable thing I have heard anyone post in a long time.