Natural Attacks are exceptions, as implied by Jason's post from the thread.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think you can TWF with unarmmed strike. Isn't consider to be 1 weapon now that way you can strike any part of your body and still apply the amulte of might fist. I think it was faq to be 1 weapon. the only way to TWF emulate with is with flurry of blows.
You can. This was clarified in a FAQ
Sean talks about the intent here.
Based on this line in SKR's post above, no.
The intent was to prevent you from making a full attack sequence with your natural attacks and a bunch of unarmed strikes by specifically defining your undefined unarmed strikes as conveniently different limbs than your natural attacks. Which is exactly what you're trying to do
You can claw/claw/bite or unarmed strike/claw/bite or unarmed strike/unarmed strike/bite.
Sean talks about the intent here.
Based on what I'm reading here it almost sounds like the implicaiton is that you wouldn't get unarmed strikes at all, but would get Claw/Claw/Bite. Is that really the case?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yep.
|
Ok, now I am officially confused.Sean talks about the intent here.Based on what I'm reading here it almost sounds like the implicaiton is that you wouldn't get unarmed strikes at all, but would get Claw/Claw/Bite. Is that really the case?
I think a lot of people are confused, hence the half dozen specific questions (like this thread) being posed recently.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Unarmed Strike doesn't work with natural attacks because you can't just claim that unarmed strike, which uses your whole body, used a specific body part. Natural attacks confuse this a bit, since they sort of are defining specific body parts, but they still use up your body's attacks.
So!
You have one possible unarmed attack a round, because you have only one attack from base attack bonus. And because you aren't using TWF. This isn't one kick. It's not one punch. It's not one headbutt. And it's definitely not one pelvic thrust. It's just unarmed strike. It's important to get that distinction right. There's no punch. It's an unarmed strike.
So you make an unarmed strike, flavored as a kick. Now you think, I'll claw this guy, since he's still alive. But you can't do that, since your body, aka your unarmed strike, just attacked. And you can't repeat attacks, which is what you would be doing if you tried to claw, since that's part of your body.
I have no clue if that makes sense to anyone else, but it's how I keep it straight in my mind. Basically...Natural Attacks and Unarmed Strikes use up the same 'weapon', so they count against each other.
Just think about that for a while, preferably over a nice scotch, and eventually it'll make sense.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
That's what the scotch is for.
More seriously, you can see hints of it in the monk's section, where it talks about how you can't mix natural attacks in.
It fits with the intent as stated, and other parts of the paragraph are just repeating rules from elsewhere as well. It is certainly possible that that line is in reference to the intent, just like how the bit about substituting for Sunder is in reference to the fact that sunder can be done on any attack (as I'm sure people remember that debate).
I must admit I often avoid combining natural attacks and manufactured attacks simply because the rules on how they should work are unclear. It would've actually been better if they just said you can't use both in one round. Would've made things more simple, even if more limiting.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I must admit I often avoid combining natural attacks and manufactured attacks simply because the rules on how they should work are unclear. It would've actually been better if they just said you can't use both in one round. Would've made things more simple, even if more limiting.
Actually, it would have been better if unarmed strikes were just a type of natural attack. ;)
I must admit I often avoid combining natural attacks and manufactured attacks simply because the rules on how they should work are unclear. It would've actually been better if they just said you can't use both in one round. Would've made things more simple, even if more limiting.Actually, it would have been better if unarmed strikes were just a type of natural attack. ;)
Oh, I like it. Can this be FAQ?
Another 1000+ thread? :)Oh, I like it. Can this be FAQ?I must admit I often avoid combining natural attacks and manufactured attacks simply because the rules on how they should work are unclear. It would've actually been better if they just said you can't use both in one round. Would've made things more simple, even if more limiting.Actually, it would have been better if unarmed strikes were just a type of natural attack. ;)
Just sneak it in, apparently half of those 1000 post accuse you guys of making up secret rules anyways.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All the FAQ says is that you have to use a different limb for each attack when combining natural and unarmed strikes. What they don't want you to do is kick someone then try to claw or talon with your feet. That way it mimics the mechanics of natural and manufactured weapons.
I see nothing that legally prevents the attack sequence in the OP. In fact, I'll give him one better. Make that Fighter/Monk a Kobold and get the Tail Terror feat on top of all that.
Now he legally has a full attack sequence using different limbs for each one:
1. unarmed (left leg)
2. unarmed (right leg)
3. claw (left hand)
4. claw (right hand)
5. bite (head)
6. slap (tail)
Note that he cannot do this as a Flurry without Feral Combat Training, but by level 5 he could pick that up and use all 6 attacks in a Flurry, legally.
Note also that once weaved with unarmed strikes, all natural attacks are secondary and don't gain full STR bonus to damage.
Now, this is great at low levels, but is seriously outclassed by getting magical weapons, bonuses, and items. Not to mention monster progression. Such is the nature of natural attacks.
Using things like charge/pounce/rend mechanics, monk style feats for bleeds, power attack for extra damage, Agile AoMF, etc...he can stay on par with his bretheren, but the feat taxes and cost of the items to stay that way is pretty heavy. So it's fairly balanced, especially considering his monk path cuts down his BAB to 75%.
(Sorry for long-windedness, this is a concept I've built, tested, and perfected. It's dear to my heart. And RAW legal.)
You don't specify limbs when you use unarmed strike.
This is made clear in this FAQ :)
Therefore, a creature's unarmed strike is its entire body, and a magic fang (or similar spell) cast on a creature's unarmed strike affects all unarmed strikes the creature makes.
Doesn't Feral Combat Training only work with one of your natural attacks, each time you take it?
To do that you'd have to have Weapon Focus in Claws, Bite, and Slap in addition to FCT in Claws, Bite, and Slap.
Also, I believe FCT training doesn't mean you get to do all of your flurry attacks in addition to natural weapon attacks. It lets you do natural attacks as a part of your Flurry. At level 5, a Monk is limited to two attacks in his/her Flurry, whether s/he has FCT or not.
Because you can't TWF with the same weapon. Unarmed Strike is the exception to this. (And Monks!)
Doesn't Feral Combat Training only work with one of your natural attacks, each time you take it?
To do that you'd have to have Weapon Focus in Claws, Bite, and Slap in addition to FCT in Claws, Bite, and Slap.
Also, I believe FCT training doesn't mean you get to do all of your flurry attacks in addition to natural weapon attacks. It lets you do natural attacks as a part of your Flurry. At level 5, a Monk is limited to two attacks in his/her Flurry, whether s/he has FCT or not.
Ahh, yeah, you're right. Good call. So, he wouldn't get to flurry with the attacks, but everything else is RAW legal.
The entire post I linked to above was about someone trying to do nearly the exact same thing that you're trying to do, and Sean has many posts in there on why it doesn't work...
Not sure why you're ignoring that, unless you're trying to drive home a distinction between what the words (may) say and what the Pathfinder Design Team intended...
If this is the intention then It is certainly hard to see just reading the book.Unarmed Strike doesn't work with natural attacks because you can't just claim that unarmed strike, which uses your whole body, used a specific body part. Natural attacks confuse this a bit, since they sort of are defining specific body parts, but they still use up your body's attacks.
So!
You have one possible unarmed attack a round, because you have only one attack from base attack bonus. And because you aren't using TWF. This isn't one kick. It's not one punch. It's not one headbutt. And it's definitely not one pelvic thrust. It's just unarmed strike. It's important to get that distinction right. There's no punch. It's an unarmed strike.
So you make an unarmed strike, flavored as a kick. Now you think, I'll claw this guy, since he's still alive. But you can't do that, since your body, aka your unarmed strike, just attacked. And you can't repeat attacks, which is what you would be doing if you tried to claw, since that's part of your body.
I have no clue if that makes sense to anyone else, but it's how I keep it straight in my mind. Basically...Natural Attacks and Unarmed Strikes use up the same 'weapon', so they count against each other.
Just think about that for a while, preferably over a nice scotch, and eventually it'll make sense.
Thank you for making that exceptionally clear and easy to understand.
|
As people said, you can; but until you get iteratives Claw / Claw / Bite is "generally better". A tengu Monk 1 can do this same attack routine, for the record; with far less investment and not a single one of their feats used.
If only multi-attack were PFS legal, sigh :).
Oh, and throw in a level of witch to the tail terror and get the hair attacking too!
Because you can't TWF with the same weapon. Unarmed Strike is the exception to this. (And Monks!)
Which is why my example had Monk levels.
Basically...Natural Attacks and Unarmed Strikes use up the same 'weapon', so they count against each other.
Err, no they don't. In fact, the CRB has rules specifically for weaving UAS and Natural Attacks.
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.
So, no longsword and spiked glove, no longsword and claw, no longsword and elbow. They're all on the same limb. However, you could TWF and use a longsword in your left hand, and your right claw. As long as you take the appropriate penalties.
The silliness of the legality actually comes in when you factor in the fact that there are no limits on number of natural weapon attacks, and combine that with two-weapon fighting using Unarmed Strikes and Monk levels. Normally this would be balanced by the penalties involved, but as long as you take the appropriate feats to reduce the penalties and boost your attack and damage, this is a viable, legal build.
And, I'm not IGNORING SKR and his intention on the post, but, like many on this forum, I stress that RAI is not the same as RAW. Until this is Errata'd or FAQ'd (unless I missed it, it's not an FAQ question...if it is, please link it) the RAW I linked above stands. At least at my table.
(Side note: It's funny I just noticed that sometimes I support RAI and sometimes I support RAW, depending on my personal take on the situation. I guess that's where interpretation and table variance originate from.)
Sean actually explains that quoted portion of the rules here:
And yes, the rules say that if you're using a manufactured weapon or unarmed strikes, you CAN use them in conjunction with natural attacks, "so long as a different limb is used for each attack."
The intent of that was to allow you wield a 1H weapon and make a secondary claw attack with your other hand, or to let you wield a 1H weapon and make a secondary bite attack with your mount, or to let you wield a 2H weapon and make a secondary bite attack with your mouth.
The intent was to prevent you from making a full attack sequence with your natural attacks and a bunch of unarmed strikes by specifically defining your undefined unarmed strikes as conveniently different limbs than your natural attacks. Which is exactly what you're trying to do.
So you absolutely can mix the two. It's just that natural attacks use up 'potential' unarmed attacks, and vice versa.
He even states that the thing preventing what you're trying to do is on page 182, the same page you got the quote from.
Granted, I don't quite see it in the rules as clearly as he does, so maybe he'll correct me. But, y'know...THF/Armored Spikes.
As people said, you can; but until you get iteratives Claw / Claw / Bite is "generally better". A tengu Monk 1 can do this same attack routine, for the record; with far less investment and not a single one of their feats used.
Wow. You're right. Although I'd still pick up TWF to lessen the kick penalties. I may have to alter my Kobold to a Tengu, since it builds better. I'd at least forego the cheese of Prehensile Hair.
Claw/Claw/Bite/Kick/Kick is still very respectable, and way less feat intensive to make work. Can dedicate all the feats to increasing massive damage and making the natural attacks magical/bleeding/rending/etc...
Sean actually explains that quoted portion of the rules here: quote deleted for brevity/repetition
Yep. Read it. He explains the RAI. It's still not RAW. And, I disagree with his mechanical theorycrafting anyways. Here's why:
Whenever you use natural weapons, your iterative attacks are not based off of a high BAB. It's based on how many limbs you have available for attacking (and you're still limited to one per limb). It says so right in the Natural attacks section, just above the paragraph where the "contested wording" is. It's both the beauty and boon of natural attacks.
So, let's say I have five limbs to attack with, as most normal, bipedal creatures would. A head (bite or gore), 2 x arms (claws), and 2 x legs (claws or talons, depending on your base race). That meets the RAW and RAI mechanics of natural attacks, yes?
Let's further say I have a head (headbutt) 2 x arms (fists), and 2 x legs (kicks), plus 5 attacks for high BAB/monk levels. That meets the RAW and RAI mechanics of unarmed attacks, yes?
Why, then, would I not be able to substitute in 2 unarmed attacks for kicks if I don't have claws or talons on my feet? I don't need a high BAB to make 2 unarmed attacks, per the unarmed mechanics above. I also meet the criteria of attacking with natural weapons, since I have two additional body parts that are capable of making an attack.
You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. 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).
Now, here's where I will have an allowance for a RAW vs. RAI argument. One might argue that to qualify for this paragraph, the limbs in question must possess natural attacks (such as claws or talons on the available feet). But it doesn't say that. It says "limb and body parts capable of making the attack", referring to the additional attack rolls as noted by the race or ability that grants such attacks.
Well, I have two levels in monk with a special ability that allows me to specify limb use during unarmed strikes. I have two legs free and capable of making an attack. So, by RAW, I qualify to use those as unarmed strikes.
Let me break this toy further. Weaving the mechanics is supported again:
Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks).
Whoops! Natural physical weapons (e.g. claws, teeth, beaks, talons) are listed as unarmed attacks that use natural attack mechanics! So if I could use natural unarmed weapons to attack by using natural attack mechanics, why couldn't I use OTHER natural unarmed strikes that a monk or anyone with IUS has available? Such as, kicks? Remember, I'm allowed to specify limb use as a monk with unarmed strikes. /giggle
If SKR wants to change his RAI to RAW, he has to FAQ it to say something like:
When using natural attacks in combination with unarmed strikes or manufactured weapons, the natural attacks are considered off-hand attacks for the purpose of attacks per round gained from high BAB.
(And to be fair to SKR, I'm not trying to get "a bunch" of UAS, just retain my starting two for being a first level ANYTHING.)
