When attacking with two weapons (and having the two weapon fighting feat), is the secondary natural attack (say a tengu's bite) just made at minus five when full attacking?
|
Ayupp, unless you have the Multiattack feat (then it's at -2)
Correct! But... You need 3 or more natural attacks in order to qualify for Multiattack... I have not done the math, but I would expect that combining TWF with a full complement of 3 or more natural attacks would be less than ideal (unless you had conditional modifiers to boost your to hit chance - like flanking or Favoured Enemy etc).
Also keep in mind that if you are counting 'Claws' as your Natural Attacks you may not be able to use them in conjunction with weapons as they both occupy "the hand" slot...
Take a level in Monk, then your claw attacks become unarmed strikes and probably do more damage. Take the Feral Combat Training feat and your bite/beak attacks get incorporated in the multiweapon/multiattack, too. The penalties drop to -2.
No your claw attacks don't "become" unarmed strikes because of monk. And it would be bad if it did, you cannot use US as a natural attack.
FCT just allows you to use the NA in a flurry as if it were a monk weapon.
Neither of your suggestions help a character who is attempting to get more attacks by TWFing and stacking natural attacks. Monks use Flurry, which cannot be combined with TWFing and is prohibited from being combined with NAs. IUS is a weapon, not a NA.
As a tengu you can qualify for multi attack by taking the racial ability to get claws & bite.
|
|
Well, synth summoner can get 3 natural attacks ridiculously easy while maintaining the use of his hands (quad base form, put the claws on the hind legs+bite, done). Pretty nice low level build would be nija(scout) 4 synth 1, and just watch those sneak attacks fly on a pounce. Not sure what else does though.Ayupp, unless you have the Multiattack feat (then it's at -2)Correct! But... You need 3 or more natural attacks in order to qualify for Multiattack... I have not done the math, but I would expect that combining TWF with a full complement of 3 or more natural attacks would be less than ideal (unless you had conditional modifiers to boost your to hit chance - like flanking or Favoured Enemy etc).
Also keep in mind that if you are counting 'Claws' as your Natural Attacks you may not be able to use them in conjunction with weapons as they both occupy "the hand" slot...
There is a FAQ somewhere that may bungle that idea - something about claws having to be on hand slots, where as Talons occupy foot slots.
But that is neither here nor there - there are a few ways to get 3 or more natural attacks by level 2. I was just putting the prerequisites for Multiattack out there in the event the OP thinking of building a standard TWF half-Orc with the toothy trait and using Multiattack to basically get 3 attacks all at BAB -2.
I have a Tiefling Paladin (Divine Hunter) who I intend to eventually take into 3 or 4 levels of Zen Archer (-1 BAB and a few HP for a LOT of saves and archery goodness).
I'm also thinking I'll drop a feat on the Tiefling ability to bite, and then take the Multiattack (2x claw, bite) and invest in a few AoMF (Element) amulets. That way, when my archer is forced into Melee, he'll do kick/kick/claw/claw/bite all at Melee/Melee-5/melee-2/melee-2/melee-2. Basically, I want people to really regret getting into HTH with my archer. :) Nice thing is, my tail can hold my bow. :)
There is a FAQ somewhere that may bungle that idea - something about claws having to be on hand slots, where as Talons occupy foot slots.There is; claws are hands for the purpose of holding weapons, so you may not use your natural claw attack if you are using it for a weapon. I couldn't find it either, but I remember reading it.
Even if they didn't, good luck convincing your GM how you plan on attacking with your feet and arms at the same time.
Monk's can use any part of their body. Kick, Kick (same leg), Bite, Claw, Claw.
good luck convincing your GM how you plan on attacking with your feet and arms at the same time.
Martial arts styles that utilize both hand strikes and kicks must baffle these GMs to no end.
I neglected to exclude Monks from that post because I was speaking in specific and not in general (well, I was trying to, anyway).
Doesn't the Monk class cover such martial arts styles? Isn't that the point?
The Monk adds the ability to headbutt, elbow, and knee people. Regular unarmed strikes can still be either punches or kicks.
Even in the example of the Weapon/Weapon/Talon/Talon character, it works just fine, because they don't happen SIMULTANEOUSLY.
All of these attacks are made in succession. Hence why it takes 6 seconds to whip it all out.
What I'm saying is that there's no logical reason why you can't attack with both your feet and your arms unless you go out of the way to make combat sound really goofy.
Well, see my post above this one. The Monk adds the ability to kick, implying it wasn't there before: "A monks's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees and feet."
It's possible there was an FAQ that I am unaware that changed this, but as I'm reading it, kicks are something Monks add, not one of the defaults.
Ahem.
"Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:
Attacks of Opportunity: Attacking unarmed provokes an attack of opportunity from the character you attack, provided she is armed. The attack of opportunity comes before your attack. An unarmed attack does not provoke attacks of opportunity from other foes, nor does it provoke an attack of opportunity from an unarmed foe.
An unarmed character can't take attacks of opportunity (but see "Armed" Unarmed Attacks, below)."
Combat section on unarmed attacks.
Also, by that logic since the text mentions fists, a normal person can't punch. Just sayin'. =)
|
|
I just did the DPR calculations on my PFS Natural Weapon Ranger (bite, claw, claw), and introducing Unarmed Strike + Dragon Style + Dragon Ferocity at level 11 (by taking level 11 as Unarmed Fighter) adds almost 30% to his DPR.
Full-Attack looks like;
UAS @ BAB 11/6/1
Bite/Claw/Claw @ BAB 9/9/9
In theory I could invest feats into TWF & ITWF but I'd need to pump my DEX and to be honest I think it would not help my DPR (seeing as the resources required to fund the DEX upgrade would detract from my STR).
I haven't played this guy yet, but I've planned his progression all the way to 12th... If a non-monk character can't use UAS for kicks/head buts/elbows/whatever my build is hosed... C'est la vie I guess... I'll hope to find something official to support kicking...
Though it would be pretty funny if you had to, say, make an Acrobatics check to avoid losing balance and falling over without IUS.
|
|
PC: "I kick him in the shin!"
DM: "Your foot fails to lift, as you don't have the proper training to kick things."
See, this is why, I feel, it should obvious to all.
Just saying.
I agree. But there are lots of obvious things that lead to debate - for example there was discussion sometime ago about whether or not a person could TWF with just UAS. The side that favoured against such a thing cited the Unarmed Strike being a single weapon.
It seemed obvious that such an opinion would be wrong, but when the argument was presented by a sharper mind than mine it sounded convincing.
@BizBag
I'd respond, but I stepped away to take a nap, and other people responded far better than I. :) So yay. :)
I agree. But there are lots of obvious things that lead to debate - for example there was discussion sometime ago about whether or not a person could TWF with just UAS. The side that favoured against such a thing cited the Unarmed Strike being a single weapon.It seemed obvious that such an opinion would be wrong, but when the argument was presented by a sharper mind than mine it sounded convincing.
Unarmed Strike is not a "punch only" thing, and there is absolutley no proof RAW to support that.
It is a silly made up restriction, pulled from nowhere, to needlessly restrict martial classes.
Even the damn commoner, can kick and headbutt.
What exactly are you responding in such anger to? The only person who suggested unarmed strikes might be restricted to punches, (except Monks) was me, and it was a question, not a dictum.
The reason I ask the question is because it's not pulled from nowhere. The rules do not specifically say that an Unarmed Strike must be a punch, but there's some places - two, actually - that suggest it strongly.
First is the aforementioned Monk ability, which specifies that it grants the Monk the ability to US with any body part, and therefore can do so with his hands full. Those sentences would be unnecessary if they applied to everyone. However, class descriptions are often explicit even when they are redundant, so that wouldn't do it on its own.
However, the entry under Gauntlet as a weapon states "This metal gloves lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. <etc>" It does not specify "unarmed strikes with your fists", and I find it highly unlikely that wearing a metal glove would allow you to deal lethal damage with your head. This says to me that the rules are assuming that unarmed strikes are punches. However, that doesn't rule out other attacks.
It's when these are combined that I am convinced. The rules are assuming an US is a punch, and specify that Monks have the special ability to not punch.
Yeah, monks are a bit funny when it comes to their wording. The problem is that the class both has to describe the abilities unique to monks as well as the basics of unarmed strikes since...well...who uses that feat other than as a prerequisite to other feats or maybe a reach user?
So when the monk class mentions a monk can use any part of their body, people are forced to ask "What? Other classes can't do that?" It is a reasonable reaction, if possibly misguided due to how most other rules are established. It might also be another problem of a grandfathered set of material from earlier editions, which always makes things slightly messy.
Right; the Gauntlet entry is similar . I wonder if anyone's tried to pull that one off on their GM - wearing a gauntlet makes your non-punch US lethal (e.g. In a grapple and you don't have IUS).
Gauntlet turns your Punches lethal.
Boot Blade turns your Kicks lethal.
Not seeing the issue.
I have a Tiefling Paladin (Divine Hunter) who I intend to eventually take into 3 or 4 levels of Zen Archer (-1 BAB and a few HP for a LOT of saves and archery goodness).
I'm also thinking I'll drop a feat on the Tiefling ability to bite, and then take the Multiattack (2x claw, bite) and invest in a few AoMF (Element) amulets. That way, when my archer is forced into Melee, he'll do kick/kick/claw/claw/bite all at Melee/Melee-5/melee-2/melee-2/melee-2. Basically, I want people to really regret getting into HTH with my archer. :) Nice thing is, my tail can hold my bow. :)
You know you cant flurry and also use natural attacks right? Even with feral combat training, according to the Faq all it does is let you use your natural weapons as part of a flurry, not in addition to it. Assuming just 1 level monk and the rest paladin, you'd have to be a 17th level character to kick/kick/claw/claw/bite.
Uhm,
No Kolo, as Nefreet says, no Flurry. Not even TWF.
Monk strikes are treated as manufactured weapons.
Natural Attacks can be combined with iterative attacks, but they are treated as secondary (half str, -5 from full BAB).
At level 8, a Paladin 4/Monk 4 would have a BAB of 7. Iterative attacks with the kick would be (Assuming 10 STR), 7/2 and then claw, claw, and bite would all be at 2. So, 7/2/2/2/2, hardly broken.
Uhm,
No Kolo, as Nefreet says, no Flurry. Not even TWF.Monk strikes are treated as manufactured weapons.
Natural Attacks can be combined with iterative attacks, but they are treated as secondary (half str, -5 from full BAB).At level 8, a Paladin 4/Monk 4 would have a BAB of 7. Iterative attacks with the kick would be (Assuming 10 STR), 7/2 and then claw, claw, and bite would all be at 2. So, 7/2/2/2/2, hardly broken.
Ah, fair enough. I misunderstood what you were attempting. Carry on.
It's not an issue, I'd just find it highly amusing if someone ever tried to argue a gauntlet's benefit applied to headbutts because it's text says you do lethal damage "with unarmed strikes." It'd be one of the sillier appeals to RAW to justify a VOCS.
Maybe the helmet? This kinds of brings up the point that a lot of the heavier armors come with gauntlets. Helmets might not be much of a stretch.
Would a helmet with big @$$ horns count as armor spikes or spiked gauntlets then? Well, there is that dwarven boulder helm, but I just generally look funny at builds that rely upon non-arm limbs.