| 41 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Answered in the FAQ. 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Bubble bubble boi -- oh wait, wrong incantation.
Hey all,
There has been a lot of discussions in the past few months about whether or not one can put claws on the feet of bipedal creatures, specifically the standard races.
The primary question is as follows (this is the one you should FAQ): Can claws gained through abilities be placed on the feet for bipedal races?
Secondary question (that would be nice to be answered in the same FAQ entry): What are talons meant to be used for?
Arguments for and against the primary question:
- Claws can't be placed on the feet of bipedal creatures:
- The monster master himself, Daigle affirms this.
- Bipedal creatures from the Bestiary (I) have talons on their feet, not claws. Except for the giant eagle, which is probably a mistake.
- Claws can be placed on the feet of bipedal creatures:
- The rules don't actually explicitly state that talons go on the feet and claws go on the hands for bipedal creatures.
Please hit the FAQ button so we can finally get to the bottom of this :) You'll get 10 XP for doing so.
Try not to turn this into a 1,000 post thread before we hear an answer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
FAQ'ed.
Hey, look at that! I leveled up!
Try not to turn this into a 1,000 post thread before we hear an answer.
But we can still turn it into a 1,000 post thread after we hear an answer, right?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What if we can, through manipulation of the space-time continuum, turn this into a 1,000-post thread at the exact same moment we hear an answer?
Challenge accepted.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
FAQ'ed.
Hey, look at that! I leveled up!
Try not to turn this into a 1,000 post thread before we hear an answer.But we can still turn it into a 1,000 post thread after we hear an answer, right?
I believe that's the way these things work, yes.
Claws (Ex): An eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks. These attacks are primary attacks. The claws deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). The eidolon must have the limbs evolution to take this evolution. This evolution can only be applied to the limbs (legs) evolution once. This evolution can be selected more than once, but the eidolon must possess an equal number of the limbs evolution.
Bold by me.
An eidolon can be bipedal and have claws on its feet. There is no talon evolution.Is there a difference between claws and talons in Pathfinder? IRL, they are pretty much the same except one is on birds.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I thought this had been resolved already...
FAQ'd
...or is it FAQed???
FAQ'ed?
We should start a thread about this.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You dawg, I heard that you asked about FAQs, so I FAQ'ed your FAQ'd FAQ so you can...
...eh, never mind.
Claws (Ex): An eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at the end of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks. These attacks are primary attacks. The claws deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). The eidolon must have the limbs evolution to take this evolution. This evolution can only be applied to the limbs (legs) evolution once. This evolution can be selected more than once, but the eidolon must possess an equal number of the limbs evolution.Bold by me.
An eidolon can be bipedal and have claws on its feet. There is no talon evolution.
Definitely a good find, however the Eidolon doesn't always follow the same rule as everyone else does. For example, the rake and constrict evolutions are different from how everyone else uses those abilities.
A big cat has claws on each foot; 4 claws altogether. But it only lists 2 Claw natural attacks in its stat block. The other two are represented by the Rake special ability in which the rear claws are only brought into play if you're grappling or pouncing the opponent. That's how "claws on the feat" work. So, if you want to take claws on your feat, go ahead, with the understanding that you won't be able to utilize them unless you have the Rake ability and are pouncing/grappling someone.
Speaking from a design standpoint, I think the intent of allowing you to take Claws on limbs(legs) was for a quadruped to use the front-most legs as Claw attacks, not as a way for a biped to get claws on both limbs (arms) and limbs (legs).
Ah, but one of the main reasons for this entire argument is that barbarians with the beast totem get a set of claws. Greater Beast Totem also grants pounce. So should a barbarian get up to 4 claw attacks at once by level 10?
Also, I suppose that the quadraped eidolons could use the claws on the back legs too since they are the ones that can pounce from level 1. It makes sense from the perspective of comparing them to tigers (who are prime examples of powerful quadrapeds), but this all hardly matters for our argument since we are talking about bipeds. Admittedly, nothing is stopping you from giving a biped eidolon extra legs to do similar results. So the rules were overly simple since so much could be done.
I will refrain from using an eidolon as an example because a PC is not an eidolon. Those have special rules unique to them.
The Kobold Race flavor text in the ARG says that Kobolds have "noticeable claws on their hands and feet". (Yes, it's flavor text, not a rule, but that's as close to printed word as we have, hence the need for FAQ on the topic). The Kobold's parent race, the dragon, does not have 2 sets of claw attacks no matter the size. A dragon has claw/claw/bite/tail/wing/wing. One could also argue that the Kobold's true parent race, which would seem to be the Lizardfolk, also has claw attacks (but also not on the feet).
The Harpy, from Bestiary 1, is an avian bipedal creature with talons, which we assume are on her feet due to also wielding a 2-handed weapon. There are currently no playable races or Paizo rulebooks that give avian-based player character races access to talons. If there were, I would say that Tengu and Strix, at the least, should qualify for these attacks.
The Deinonycus, from Bestiary 2, is an avian bipedal creature with both claws (on the arm/wing) and talons (on the feet). Since it's a dinosaur, it would have evolutionary significance with more modern avian based races. (We cannot limit this just to B1 because you conveniently have a reference from it's author. Sorry, Cheapy, but we must stretch this argument across all printed Paizo products).
The original reason for restricting it to Bestiary I was that, much like how the Core Rulebook sets the precedent for future core non-Bestiary books, so too does the Bestiary I set the precedent for future Bestiary books. There's more likely to be mistakes in future Bestiaries than the first one.
However, I'm not going to really argue one way or the other here. Explaining the eidolon thing and why I restricted my initial post, yea. But not argue either way.
I'm fine with either way it'd go, and we've already passed the 'yea, it's going to be answered eventually' threshold. So, why bother? :)
Hey, Cheapy, how about some thread intertextuality from you discussion about the mixing of claws and unarmed strikes (kicks). Your evidence
We see Sean here trying to explain how this works.
(Emphasis his)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 if they do not want you combining your claws with unarmed strikes 'conveniently done using a different limb', even though they explicitlysay that legs can be used for them, then why can we place claws on those same legs just because they do not explcitly say we can't?
That's an opinion, not a quantifiable fact. But we both digress. To preclude this becoming a post count, I will refrain from my normal long-windedness and simply remark that you didn't include the "Ask JJ" quote in your OP.
In the grand scheme of things, differentiating claws and talons is actually really a balance thing. It's a big enough deal that two claw attacks are treated identically each round. Races that can get claw attacks, automatically add two new attacks by taking that race trait. Weapon Focus, Improved Critical, Improved Natural Attack, Weapon Specialization, etc. all now impact two weapons, in addition to other possible attack methods a creature may have.
If you allow claws to be added (generally) to feet as well, you double an already quality bonus yet again. Now you have four attacks that can be improved by the same stuff. Beyond that, with two claws, if you used a weapon to take advantage of higher BAB, you're not only reducing the effectiveness of your claws greatly (making them secondary), but you're likely at least cutting them in half by wielding a one-handed weapon. If claws also go on your feet, who wouldn't drop one claw attack to get full iteratives and still be able to take on 3 natural attacks (albeit secondary ones) on top of that, all of which benefit from the same feats?
That just seems like a bit much to me. If you keep claws and talons separate, it seems to me like things would be much more balanced.
The balance issue is hogwash. You're telling me it's legal for a Kobold to get claw/claw/bite/tail but he can't have claw/claw/talon/talon simply because he only has to spend half as many feats? To make the most of that build, he's still going to have to take twice as many types of feats to optimize it. So, from a min/max perspective, yes, it is powerful at low level. But by level 12, if you really crunch numbers, the Fighter with a 2-hander still outdamages him in melee combat. By a lot.
I don't want 4 claw attacks. I agree, THAT inclusion would unbalance the game. There is no precedent for it. Even the iconic almighty dragon doesn't have claw x 4.
I want talon mechanics. Give me a Harpy race. Publish a Strix of Golarion companion and add it there. Perhaps a Tengu racial feat. Include it into the UMR via the next Bestiary entry. Plenty of ways to do it without me having to dip into the Race Builder.
Make it 1d3 for medium races, so it doesn't tip the scales.
I would also want it limited to avian based races, or any other that would make sense as well. Yes, that would still make Tengu the go-to race for a natural attacker, but it's not like their natural weapons start out amazing on the damage charts.
I think you misread what I posted. When did I say somebody couldn't have claw/claw/talon/talon?
I said a character shouldn't be able to get claw/claw/claw/claw by simply putting claws on his/her feet. That's where you'd run into balance problems. The point was to demonstrate perhaps some reasoning behind the idea that claws go on hands while talons go on feet (and that you shouldn't be able to intermix them).
In that case I agree. But currently the only way to get "talons" is to get claws on your feet. I'd be ok with treating them as a separate entity for feat spending, etc...
If we're going to agree to call them talons, then call them talons. It's just a re-skin. We can still use existing claw mechanics, but make the players re-take feats and call them "talons". Getting claw x 4 is a no-no. You don't have claw x 4. You have claw x 2 and talon x 2.
Perfectly justifiable, since attacking with foot claws is entirely different than attacking with hand claws, because of the physiology involved.
In that case I agree. But currently the only way to get "talons" is to get claws on your feet. I'd be ok with treating them as a separate entity for feat spending, etc...
If we're going to agree to call them talons, then call them talons. It's just a re-skin. We can still use existing claw mechanics, but make the players re-take feats and call them "talons". Getting claw x 4 is a no-no. You don't have claw x 4. You have claw x 2 and talon x 2.
Perfectly justifiable, since attacking with foot claws is entirely different than attacking with hand claws, because of the physiology involved.
Done and done. Problem solved. *wipes hands*
XP shall be rewarded upon the answering of the FAQ. I'll have my people commune with your people.
Placing claws on your hands in not specifically forbidden or allowed either.
And that bring something to mind. There is a flaw with this question. Should not the question read, Are you allowed to place claws on your hands or your feet since neither is explicitly called out.
It is strongly implied by precedent though. The fact that many monster descriptions do not include "and he had finely manicured hands but toe nails that could cut out your throat," I am going to assume the hands. Our counter argument is based largely off of precedent. Try fighting us there for impact.
Design Manager
|
What is the purpose of this question? What are conclusion(s) are you trying to reach by getting a FAQ ruling on this? Has the "off-hand attacks and shield spikes" FAQ and followup posts cleared up the rules intent relating to this question?
If I have a Tengu with the Claws racial trait, and I gain a pair of claws from another source like Alchemist Mutagen, Barbarian Rage Power, Shapeshifter Ranger archetype, etc., can I make 4 claw attacks by assigning a set of claws to my feet?
Is I think what Cheapy was getting at, or at least the most pertinent portion of the question remaining, though I imagine this still comes back to the "bipedal creatures have two "hands"" portion of the design philosophy, yes?
What is the purpose of this question? What are conclusion(s) are you trying to reach by getting a FAQ ruling on this? Has the "off-hand attacks and shield spikes" FAQ and followup posts cleared up the rules intent relating to this question?
Some people apparently want to put claws on their feets so they can:
A) have 4 claw attacks
B) or, even better, have 2 claws with their feets and use their hands for weapon/weapons.
So instead of Great sword and Armor Spikes we now have Great Sword (hands) and Claws (feets).
I think Cheapy just want these people to get a Big Fat no from the PDT. I know I would very much like that. ;-)
And while you are at it errata the giant eagle, it is listed as having claw attacks instead of talons.
I would say Strix are a good example of wanting to do this. They are flighted, and drawn as having talons on their feet like a bird.
It would make sense to let them put talons on their feat if they get claws, and then they can attack while hovering over someone.
However, I am unsure if that's legally allowed, despite it being visually and logically intuitive.
What is the purpose of this question? What are conclusion(s) are you trying to reach by getting a FAQ ruling on this? Has the "off-hand attacks and shield spikes" FAQ and followup posts cleared up the rules intent relating to this question?
My original purpose for this thread is to see if PC races can have claws on their feet, or if they are restricted to hands only.
With the proliferation of natural attacks these days, this question comes up fairly frequently. Usually due to a PC having five natural attacks by level 2: bite, 2 hand claws, 2 feet claws.
Usually the evidence I linked above is enough, but an official word would be nice.
My question had nothing to do with armored spike, but I'll review those FAQs as they relate to this. Part of my question was also due to wanting to understand the (possibly hidden) rules behind natural attacks.
What is the purpose of this question? What are conclusion(s) are you trying to reach by getting a FAQ ruling on this? Has the "off-hand attacks and shield spikes" FAQ and followup posts cleared up the rules intent relating to this question?
I'd personally like it to be spelled out that talons are attacks made with feet and do not preclude two handed weapons.
If that is already spelled out somewhere, disregard this.
And as an aside, while I definitely do have a preference for which way this will go, my goal wasn't to use the PDT as a giant hammer, but rather to better understand the game. In a sense, I don't particularly care which way it goes, I just want to be able to help people understand the game better. Which is true for most of the FAQs I post.
|
What is the purpose of this question? What are conclusion(s) are you trying to reach by getting a FAQ ruling on this? Has the "off-hand attacks and shield spikes" FAQ and followup posts cleared up the rules intent relating to this question?
I think this was just posted in the wrong thread, although I am unsure as to what thread it was intended for. Off-hand attacks and shield spikes obviously have no relation to whether or not claws can go on one's feet, or natural attacks in general.
|
Design Manager
|
What is the purpose of this question? What are conclusion(s) are you trying to reach by getting a FAQ ruling on this? Has the "off-hand attacks and shield spikes" FAQ and followup posts cleared up the rules intent relating to this question?I think this was just posted in the wrong thread, although I am unsure as to what thread it was intended for. Off-hand attacks and shield spikes obviously have no relation to whether or not claws can go on one's feet, or natural attacks in general.
They posted it exactly where they intended to post it. They asked if that FAQ cleared up the rules intent, that intent being that there is an underlying assumption in the game that PC's have two "hands" worth of actions/ability.
|
Design Manager
|
For manufactured weapons, yes. Natural attacks break all those rules. The TWF/Armor Spikes FAQ had no bearing on Natural Attacks what-so-ever.
It was realted to limb availability in an attack sequence. Clearly the response to their question is "No, that FAQ does not properly clarify the issue here for us because of the fact that Natural attack sequences are not the same as TWF rules due to the fact that Natural Attacks follow their own attack routine rules separate from Manufactured Weapons. Natural Attacks also do not appear to fall under the "hands" design principal since there are numerous natural attacks that we know can be used in conjunction with THF, TWF, etc."
Their question wasn't in the wrong place or irrelevant, they just needed to know what further clarification was required and why.
After reflection, those FAQs don't clear it up for me. Although, the question the PDT posed makes me wonder if maybe you can't THF and make non hand based natural attacks...
|
Cheapy: I understand the Talon/Claw argument, but Talons and Claws are nearly identical on the natural attack table? They have the same damage progression. They are both primary attacks. The only difference is that Claws do Bludgeoning in addition to Slashing (no idea why). I mean Wikipedia on "Talon" states that it is a "sharp claw of an animal". Is there really any thematic or visual distinction?
For example, as a Tiefling Beastmorph Alchemist, if I use my Improved Beastform Mutagen to gain a bite and two claws (on my feet) and assume the features of a harpy (flight) along with my Tiefling claws on my hands. This seems like it meshes thematically and visually. Since you are flying, then your feet-claws would be free to attack.
Five natural attacks at level 6 at full BAB does seem a bit overpowered, though. I am unsure if it is more powerful than some of the cheese builds on here though. Maybe the addition to claws on the feet should be limited to only being able to be used while flying and maybe they become secondary attacks. This is a sensible set of limitations that still allows for natural attack fighters to continue to find avenues of progression once full BAB classes get more and more iterative attacks.
|
Official Rules Response
|
| 11 people marked this as a favorite. |
FAQ: http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fo#v5748eaic9rdk
Claws and Talons: If I gain claw attacks, can I put those claw attacks on my feet?
If you are a bipedal creature (roughly humanoid-shaped, with two arms and two legs), your claws must go on your hands; you can not assign them to any other limb or body part.
If you are a quadruped (or have more than four legs), you can have claws on your feet. If you have claws on all of your feet, normally you can't use all of those claw attacks on your turn unless you have a special ability such as pounce or rake.
Talons are much like claws, but go on a creature's feet, usually a bipedal creature (especially a flying bipedal creature such as a giant eagle or harpy). An ability that grants you claw attacks cannot be used as if they were talon attacks (in other words, you can't "re-skin" the ability's game mechanics so you can use it on a different limb).
Thanks guys! :)
I know this is an old post, and I'm intentionally dredging it up to make light of a rules conflict between the given FAQ clarification, and a recent eidolon form from Cohorts and Companions.
In the stated book, the new Avian eidolon base form has the following stat block:
Avian: Size Small/Medium (see below); Speed 30 ft., fly 30 ft. (good); AC +2 natural armor; Saves Fort (bad), Ref (good), Will (good); Attacks 2 claws (1d3); Ability Scores Str 12, Dex 16, Con 13, Int 7, Wis 10, Cha 11; Free Evolutions claws, flight, limbs (legs).
If you'll notice, the form has claws, but no arms.
This is in direct conflict with the above FAQ clarification. Should this base form have introduced a special evolution for talons? Or was this an oversight by the editors maybe?
Either way, I know that I'm going to rule them as talons in my home games, but it's something to address for PFS games and similar.
Nope, it's special rules for eidolon's claw evolution:
Claws (Ex): The eidolon has a pair of vicious claws at
the ends of its limbs, giving it two claw attacks. These
attacks are primary attacks. The claws deal 1d4 points of
damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). The eidolon must have
the limbs evolution to take this evolution. This evolution
can be selected more than once, up to the number of limbs
evolutions the eidolon possesses. This evolution can be
applied to any number of limbs (arms) evolutions, but
no more than one limbs (legs) evolution. Requirements:
Agathion, daemon, demon, devil, div, elemental, protean,
or psychopomp subtype
