Half-Orc with Racial Heritage (Kobold) and Tail Terror?


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 443 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>

Bizbag wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
Quote:

Well, even a toothless creature can bite.

It's the mouth that make it happen.

I don't know if I've ever seen a toothless creature with a bite attack. Care to link one?
Google "birds".
OK, so teeth or a beak.

Or mandibles (spiders, insects).

Dark Archive

Armor of the Pit doesn't require any body parts that humans or half orc/elfs don't have, in the benefit text of game mechanics. Ignoring the fluff of the feat. The kobold tail slap feat mentions that you have to do it with your tail, in the benefit text of game mechanics. The comparison you are drawing between the two is weak and not helping your arguement beyond looking like complaining for complaining's sake because people are telling you something you don't want to hear.

Having a tail is not a flavor feature, espcially when you want to be attacking with it. Just like having 4 arms or 2 heads isn't a flavor feature.


Well, at any rate, some sort of sharp jaw-based anatomy is required for a bite (they do need to do piercing and slashing damage somehow). What was the point of asking, BBT?


First point. The racial heritage feat language is clear. It lets the character take 'tail slap'.

Second point. Does the feat 'racial heritage' give the character a tail? That's unclear. Being partly Kobold could give a little tail to the character. It might not. This part of the feat chain isn't clear.

Third point. Do you have to have a tail to take 'tail slap'. RAW the feat has the prerequisite "+! attack, be a kobold". The implicit having a tail requirement is assumed in the "be a kobold" part. Clearly you have to have a tail to be a Tail Terror.

The way I read it, the alternate racial heritage lets you take any ridiculous hybrid feat you want, and it makes you some kind of tail having orc mutant. It doesn't explicitly say you grow a tail for being part kobold.

1 Be an Orc = no tail (no question)
2 Be an Orc with Kobold blood = tail? I think it could, many of the cross blood traits talk about "having characteristics of the parent race"
3 Be a Kobold = Tail (no question)


Torbyne wrote:
But mechanically you have paid the same resources as a Kobold for the same benefit (ignore my previous question about D4/D6 for the moment) Would you also argue that Racial Heritage (Tiefling) wouldnt let you take Armor Of The Pit as humans dont normally have scaly skin and gain no benefit from the feat? Or Expanded Fiendish Resistance as the first line reads "You gain extra fiendish resistances." and you dont have any existing resistances before this feat?

Actually I don't believe you can take Racial Heritage (Tiefling) as Tieflings are not Humanoid, they are outsiders.


Methabroax wrote:

First point. The racial heritage feat language is clear. It lets the character take 'tail slap'.

Second point. Does the feat 'racial heritage' give the character a tail? That's unclear. Being partly Kobold could give a little tail to the character. It might not. This part of the feat chain isn't clear.

Third point. Do you have to have a tail to take 'tail slap'. RAW the feat has the prerequisite "+! attack, be a kobold". The implicit having a tail requirement is assumed in the "be a kobold" part. Clearly you have to have a tail to be a Tail Terror.

The way I read it, the alternate racial heritage lets you take any ridiculous hybrid feat you want, and it makes you some kind of tail having orc mutant. It doesn't explicitly say you grow a tail for being part kobold.

1 Be an Orc = no tail (no question)
2 Be an Orc with Kobold blood = tail? I think it could, many of the cross blood traits talk about "having characteristics of the parent race"
3 Be a Kobold = Tail (no question)

Personally I think the combination of a Half Orc with Kobald blood interesting, personally though I would allow the tail for the same reasons Half-Orcs can have tusks, the mixed blood generates unusual features.

I don't feel a tail to be overpowering, especially since he is only going to get a 1d4 (or even 1d6) attack using 2 feats. After all he could get the Bite attack (which is better) for only 1 feat.

Heck, I would probably just reskin the bite as a tail slap if he wanted it that bad.

EDIT: Not even a feat to get the bite attack, as it's a racial trait option.


With the feat Racial Heritage you gain the same creature sub type as the species, you dont suffer only 1/2 or 1/4 of a bane or ranger's favored enemy bonus on the character sheet you are now just as much a member of your heritage race as you are of your human(ish) race. But this in no way allows your character to look anything like your mixed heritage? Going beyond the tail issue, a Human with Racial Heritage (Catfolk) could not have any fur or cat like ears? Not even looking for a bonus for having them, you would be a Catfolk but not look anything like them? But you could take Catfolk Exemplar as a feat, then gain Aspect of the Beast and have huge (D6) claws. but they would be on completely normal, human looking, arms?


Why wouldn't the heritage feat grant you a tail? You are part kobold. Koblolds have tails.


Clectabled wrote:
Methabroax wrote:

First point. The racial heritage feat language is clear. It lets the character take 'tail slap'.

Second point. Does the feat 'racial heritage' give the character a tail? That's unclear. Being partly Kobold could give a little tail to the character. It might not. This part of the feat chain isn't clear.

Third point. Do you have to have a tail to take 'tail slap'. RAW the feat has the prerequisite "+! attack, be a kobold". The implicit having a tail requirement is assumed in the "be a kobold" part. Clearly you have to have a tail to be a Tail Terror.

The way I read it, the alternate racial heritage lets you take any ridiculous hybrid feat you want, and it makes you some kind of tail having orc mutant. It doesn't explicitly say you grow a tail for being part kobold.

1 Be an Orc = no tail (no question)
2 Be an Orc with Kobold blood = tail? I think it could, many of the cross blood traits talk about "having characteristics of the parent race"
3 Be a Kobold = Tail (no question)

Personally I think the combination of a Half Orc with Kobald blood interesting, personally though I would allow the tail for the same reasons Half-Orcs can have tusks, the mixed blood generates unusual features.

I don't feel a tail to be overpowering, especially since he is only going to get a 1d4 (or even 1d6) attack using 2 feats. After all he could get the Bite attack (which is better) for only 1 feat.

Heck, I would probably just reskin the bite as a tail slap if he wanted it that bad.

EDIT: Not even a feat to get the bite attack, as it's a racial trait option.

I think the half orc in question already have the bite. And most likely also claws ( pehaps from barbarian beast tootem) and now want natural attack nr 4.

But i am guessing here;)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
RJGrady wrote:
Why wouldn't the heritage feat grant you a tail? You are part kobold. Koblolds have tails.

Same reason the Tusked trait doesn't grant you a mouth?


Cap. Darling wrote:


I think the half orc in question already have the bite. And most likely also claws ( pehaps from barbarian beast tootem) and now want natural attack nr 4.

But i am guessing here;)

Yeah, i am looking at a Half-orc with a bite, two claws and a tail slap. The idea is a feral, bestial ranger and aside from a fourth attack with half str, the tail is very thematic to the concept. its not like i want to mix in vestigial arms or shenanigans with martial versatility and martial arts styles or anything... honest, just freebooter ranger with maybe some fighter mixed in if the campaign ends up going very civilized.


I keep thinking of someone taking Racial Heritage in the middle of a campaign. Do they just grow a tail?

I would think clearly the strict RAW is no tail, no tail slap. Yes you can take the feat but without a tail it is moot. Similar to taking Weapon Focus (Bastard Sword) and then not having a bastard sword.

As to RAI, who can say. I don't read anything in the feats to suggest you would gain a tail from this combo. Racial Heritage mentions blood of non-human ancestors flows in your veins but says nothing about taking on the physical appearance of the non-human in question. Tail Terror says you can make a tail slap with your tail. I don't see where you get the tail. Clearly some disagreement here.

At a table, I'd probably allow it. I tend to play a little fast and loose with the rules (home game, not PFS) and it doesn't seem overpowered. I know pileing on natural attacks can get pretty powerful but I don't have a problem with PCs being really good at something into which they have put a lot of resources.

So really did not add a lot (or anything). The safest bet is no, obviously. But talk to your GM (assuming home game or at least regular game), any reasonable GM should allow their players to break some rules! (Smiley Emoticon)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

In the case of racial heritage... can someone explain to me, how a species that procreates with eggs, could ever mingle with a species that bears live young.... if you GM allows you to take heritage kobold, then he might as well rule that you are born with a tail, because clearly, neither of you care about any of the realities of it.

On the subjects of orc's and teeth feats, there is something that might help.

It was rules that an orc, with a racial bite attack from traits, could take the feat that gave him a bite attack because he qualifies for it. however, unless he grew a second mouth somewhere, the feat would do nothing. the same logic applies here. Unless you grow a tail, a tail attack does nothing, even if you have it, even if you qualify for it.


There is another point of consideration:

Racial Heritage (Mythic) is required to gain actual racial traits from your 'other half', such as darkvision.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

I fall in the camp of "it's entirely possible to qualify for feats that don't do you any good." A barbarian can take Quicken Spell (no prereqs) but she's just wasted a feat slot.

Using that precedent, using Racial Heritage to meet the prerequisites for another feat doesn't guarantee that said feat has any utlity.

So I come down on the side of no tail=no tail slap.

A GM who wanted to be mean could allow the tail, but then rule that since "half-orc with tail" is so rare, no normal found armor will fit you and all your armor has to be custom made using the price increases for "odd shape." Have fun waiting 6 months for that smith to make your full plate.

Dark Archive

1 person marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
Why wouldn't the heritage feat grant you a tail? You are part kobold. Koblolds have tails.

Does the heritage feat make you small sized? Kobolds are small sized.


Clectabled wrote:
Methabroax wrote:

First point. The racial heritage feat language is clear. It lets the character take 'tail slap'.

Second point. Does the feat 'racial heritage' give the character a tail? That's unclear. Being partly Kobold could give a little tail to the character. It might not. This part of the feat chain isn't clear.

Third point. Do you have to have a tail to take 'tail slap'. RAW the feat has the prerequisite "+! attack, be a kobold". The implicit having a tail requirement is assumed in the "be a kobold" part. Clearly you have to have a tail to be a Tail Terror.

The way I read it, the alternate racial heritage lets you take any ridiculous hybrid feat you want, and it makes you some kind of tail having orc mutant. It doesn't explicitly say you grow a tail for being part kobold.

1 Be an Orc = no tail (no question)
2 Be an Orc with Kobold blood = tail? I think it could, many of the cross blood traits talk about "having characteristics of the parent race"
3 Be a Kobold = Tail (no question)

Personally I think the combination of a Half Orc with Kobald blood interesting, personally though I would allow the tail for the same reasons Half-Orcs can have tusks, the mixed blood generates unusual features.

I don't feel a tail to be overpowering, especially since he is only going to get a 1d4 (or even 1d6) attack using 2 feats. After all he could get the Bite attack (which is better) for only 1 feat.

Heck, I would probably just reskin the bite as a tail slap if he wanted it that bad.

EDIT: Not even a feat to get the bite attack, as it's a racial trait option.

Very much this ^. My thoughts exactly as i was reading. If you have a tail from kobold blood, which i feel due to lack of text for initial kobold blood feat, would be on your or DM. However, if you do NOT have a tail... you can not slap with it.


Diekssus wrote:

In the case of racial heritage... can someone explain to me, how a species that procreates with eggs, could ever mingle with a species that bears live young.... if you GM allows you to take heritage kobold, then he might as well rule that you are born with a tail, because clearly, neither of you care about any of the realities of it.

On the subjects of orc's and teeth feats, there is something that might help.

It was rules that an orc, with a racial bite attack from traits, could take the feat that gave him a bite attack because he qualifies for it. however, unless he grew a second mouth somewhere, the feat would do nothing. the same logic applies here. Unless you grow a tail, a tail attack does nothing, even if you have it, even if you qualify for it.

The game actually has a very strong precedent going back many editions that reptiles and mammals can interbreed and produce viable offspring. Reference: Half-Dragon anything. Its such a popular back story that there is a whole class dedicated to being a part reptile-mammal (Dragon Disciple/Dragon Bloodline) I would also like to point out that it doesnt have to be the "old fashioned way". How many entries in the Beastiary make mention of "created by insane wizard for insane wizard wars/giggles in the days of yore" The RP of it is the easy part for me. Since Kobold are so closly related to Dragons (especially if you ask a Kobold about it) the Racial Heritage Kobold could be a in rules way of saying you are actually 1/64th Dragon.

I see what people are saying about this specific feat refering to a pre-existing tail where as most of the gain natural attack type feats say gain or grow but the issue for me now is that this arguement assumes that while you count as a full fledged member of a race for all perks and penalties, i am hearing that you can in no way look anything like your other heritage species.

Possibly opens up the door for a sleeper agent NPC in campaigns though: Racial Heritage Urdefhan, no one would ever have a way of knowing you are actually raised by and considered one of them, secretly working with them to plot the destruction of the sun, unless they hit you with a bane weapon and have an in game way of noting that it procs on you... I might actually use this. Purpose bred spies :)


Durngrun Stonebreaker wrote:

I keep thinking of someone taking Racial Heritage in the middle of a campaign. Do they just grow a tail?

I would think clearly the strict RAW is no tail, no tail slap. Yes you can take the feat but without a tail it is moot. Similar to taking Weapon Focus (Bastard Sword) and then not having a bastard sword.

As to RAI, who can say. I don't read anything in the feats to suggest you would gain a tail from this combo. Racial Heritage mentions blood of non-human ancestors flows in your veins but says nothing about taking on the physical appearance of the non-human in question. Tail Terror says you can make a tail slap with your tail. I don't see where you get the tail. Clearly some disagreement here.

At a table, I'd probably allow it. I tend to play a little fast and loose with the rules (home game, not PFS) and it doesn't seem overpowered. I know pileing on natural attacks can get pretty powerful but I don't have a problem with PCs being really good at something into which they have put a lot of resources.

So really did not add a lot (or anything). The safest bet is no, obviously. But talk to your GM (assuming home game or at least regular game), any reasonable GM should allow their players to break some rules! (Smiley Emoticon)

Another good point. But that seems to be a fault with the feat itself, maybe it should only be available at 1st level? As is, you can go most of your life being a full human and immune to all racial penalties until you hit that point and *boom* you are part giant now and subject to a lot of Dwarven Ranger hate. Tail or no, RAW or RAI, that is something that should be planned out with a GM ahead of time.

Its also a thing where some items are coded to only work for specific races, it seems cheap to only take the feat to gain the heritage after you know you will have access to an item like that but, RAW, thats a valid use of the feat.

Grand Lodge

Just to muddy the waters, some humans in the real world are born with tails : Tail Wikipedia

Don't know about half-orcs though!


The thing is, kobold's don't "have" a "tail" in the sense of anything that grants a slapping ability. Tail Terror grants that. Tail Terror doesn't have anything under Special that says, "Must already have tail," it grants the ability to slap with your tail.

I don't think you can take Tail Terror and claim not to have a tail. But if you take the feat, you have a tail. I would not allow you to grow a tail mid campaign without some kind of magical effect occurring. But if you wanted to start with this feat, or you started with the kobold heritage feat and said you had a tail, all is good.

Dark Archive

Torbyne wrote:
This arguement assumes that while you count as a full fledged member of a race for all perks and penalties

Racial Heritage in no way shape or form lets you count as a full fledged member of the race for all perks and penalties. You don't get a natural armor bonus for racial heritage kobold, you don't get the ability penalties and bonuses, and you don't change your size to small. You also don't get a tail. Racial heritage gives you a very specific game effect that in no ways extends beyond what it actually says, RAW-wise, no matter how much sense it might make to you.

While it could be a very reasonable house-rule to allow racial heritage kobols pcs to take tail terror, since most other natural attack feats say you get what you need to make the attack, a house-rule is needed to allow it.


RJGrady wrote:

The thing is, kobold's don't "have" a "tail" in the sense of anything that grants a slapping ability. Tail Terror grants that. Tail Terror doesn't have anything under Special that says, "Must already have tail," it grants the ability to slap with your tail.

I don't think you can take Tail Terror and claim not to have a tail. But if you take the feat, you have a tail. I would not allow you to grow a tail mid campaign without some kind of magical effect occurring. But if you wanted to start with this feat, or you started with the kobold heritage feat and said you had a tail, all is good.

Martial Weapon Proficiency (longsword) doesn't have anything under "Special" that says, "Must already have a hand", but I'm confident that taking it doesn't make someone sprout a hand.

Note that feats and abilities that grant bite attacks require you to have sufficient heads to make such attacks per repeated developer clarification. Ditto claws and limbs.


The idea that your Racial Heritage (kobold) character lacks a tail is not a rule. If a character has Racial Heritage (kobold) and Tail Terror, obviously they do have a tail.

What you are saying is like saying someone with Dex 8 can't take Improved Initiative because they don't already have "quick reflexes."


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Quote:

Rakshasa

The idea that your Racial Heritage (kobold) character lacks a tail is not a rule.

By your reasoning, the idea that my human fighter lacks six arms is not a rule.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I am thinking more and more that there needs to be a clarification on the feat, as to if your character displays any physical signs of the heritage. as written there is nothing to support that but it *seems* like it should. I just dont think they ever thought of a situation like this where you could take a fluff thing like having a non functioning tail or horns or winglets or whatever and find just the feat to bump that up to something mechanically useful.

In any event i am coming around to RAW not supporting the combination but i think it was somewhat the intent to allow this kind of thing, how else can we portray our beautiful and tragic and unique little snowflakes? Wont some developer please think of the snowflakes!?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
blahpers wrote:
Quote:

Rakshasa

The idea that your Racial Heritage (kobold) character lacks a tail is not a rule.

By your reasoning, the idea that my human fighter lacks six arms is not a rule.

If you can find a feat with the prerequisite "human" that says, "You use your six arms to attack," and the feat is called You Attack People With the Six Arms You Have, then I have absolutely no problem with saying your human has six arms.

If you can find a feat with the prerequisite, "Have six arms," then your standard human wouldn't qualify.

If you can find a feat that has as a prerequisite, "Has a tail," then a normal human clearly cannot take it until they acquire a tail in some way.

But Tail Terror has no such prerequisite. Having the feat Tail Terror is synonymous with having a tail with which to attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Victor Zajic wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
Why wouldn't the heritage feat grant you a tail? You are part kobold. Koblolds have tails.
Does the heritage feat make you small sized? Kobolds are small sized.

This is probably the best, most poignant post in this thread and it's a shame it hasn't gotten more attention. Just because kobolds have certain features, and you "have the blood of" a kobold, doesn't mean you necessarily inherit all the features of a kobold. If you did, you'd just be a kobold. And if you don't inherit all their kobold features, how do you determine which you do or do not inherit? Where do you draw the line?

RAW, Tail Terror does nothing for a half-orc, kobold heritage or no. Your GM might give it to you, though, to talk to them about it.

RJGrady wrote:
If you can find a feat with the prerequisite "human" that says, "You use your six arms to attack," and the feat is called You Attack People With the Six Arms You Have, then I have absolutely no problem with saying your human has six arms.

You've got to be kidding me.


Where do you draw the line? I think you draw it between the RAW on one side, and non-rules on the other. Racial Heritage says you qualify. Tail Terror says you gain a tail attack. The end. The prerequisite of having a tail trait in place is completely made up; Tail Terror says you attack people with your tail. So, you have one.

Racial Heritage (kobold) doesn't make you Small. But Tail Terror does give you a tail attack. That's the RAW. If you would prefer, as GM, not to have tailed half-orcs slapping people, that's your prerogative. But that's not the RAW.


RAW, it gives you a tail attack, but it does not give you a tail, just as a feat that gives you a bite attack does not give you a head--you must already have one. You have no support at all from RAW.


blackbloodtroll wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
Why wouldn't the heritage feat grant you a tail? You are part kobold. Koblolds have tails.
Same reason the Tusked trait doesn't grant you a mouth?

Difference being that every PC race has a mouth, but not every PC race has a tail.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
RJGrady wrote:

Where do you draw the line? I think you draw it between the RAW on one side, and non-rules on the other. Racial Heritage says you qualify. Tail Terror says you gain a tail attack. The end. The prerequisite of having a tail trait in place is completely made up; Tail Terror says you attack people with your tail. So, you have one.

Racial Heritage (kobold) doesn't make you Small. But Tail Terror does give you a tail attack. That's the RAW. If you would prefer, as GM, not to have tailed half-orcs slapping people, that's your prerogative. But that's not the RAW.

So by the same token, one would take the Gnome feat to change out his racial spells, even though he doesn't actually have any to begin with?

Unless your an Alchemist that grew a tail or something else like that, this feat for the Half Orc does not give you a tail to slap around with. If you had a tail and took the feat, you would, but you don't have a tail, so you don't.

Perhaps the Half Orc can get a mechanical tail made, one that is a part of the fancy armor he has. He would then be able to make use of the feat.


blahpers wrote:
RAW, it gives you a tail attack, but it does not give you a tail, just as a feat that gives you a bite attack does not give you a head--you must already have one. You have no support at all from RAW.

So for you all they'd need is a hat of disguise right? Take a form with a tail and the feat would allow an attack? Or the character is a druid and changes into an animal with a tail? LOL Killer bunny with a fluffy puff ball tail of doom!

Cap. Darling wrote:

I think there was some one asking for a FAQ. About if you could get a tail by going that way or if the heritage feat wouldent give you a tail.

But if your GM is good with your half orc getting a tail then i think you should get a medium one. But by RAW you get a secondary natural attack doing 1d4.

To those saying it stays d4 no matter the size, would a druid changed into a Diminutive mouse would still have a tail slap of 1d4?

Myself, I'd say if you spent 2 feats to get the attack you shouldn't have to jump through any more hoops. Let the damage shift with size. RAW is iffy enough that it seems useless to try to argue it one way or the other.


A hat of disguise does not grant you additional appendages. It only makes you look like something else.

A greater hat of disguise...hmm. Alter self is a polymorph, and that allows use of the form's natural attacks, so I'd tentatively say yes.

It isn't about whether you "paid enough" in feats. It's simply what the rules provide for. It really doesn't matter to me from a balance perspective; I don't care much about that sort of thing.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
graystone wrote:


Cap. Darling wrote:

I think there was some one asking for a FAQ. About if you could get a tail by going that way or if the heritage feat wouldent give you a tail.

But if your GM is good with your half orc getting a tail then i think you should get a medium one. But by RAW you get a secondary natural attack doing 1d4.

To those saying it stays d4 no matter the size, would a druid changed into a Diminutive mouse would still have a tail slap of 1d4?

Myself, I'd say if you spent 2 feats to get the attack you shouldn't have to jump through any more hoops. Let the damage shift with size. RAW is iffy enough that it seems useless to try to argue it one way or the other.

I believe the point was that a secondary attack by the Med creature would make the damage 1d4, but I could be wrong.


thaX wrote:
RJGrady wrote:

Where do you draw the line? I think you draw it between the RAW on one side, and non-rules on the other. Racial Heritage says you qualify. Tail Terror says you gain a tail attack. The end. The prerequisite of having a tail trait in place is completely made up; Tail Terror says you attack people with your tail. So, you have one.

Racial Heritage (kobold) doesn't make you Small. But Tail Terror does give you a tail attack. That's the RAW. If you would prefer, as GM, not to have tailed half-orcs slapping people, that's your prerogative. But that's not the RAW.

So by the same token, one would take the Gnome feat to change out his racial spells, even though he doesn't actually have any to begin with?

Unless your an Alchemist that grew a tail or something else like that, this feat for the Half Orc does not give you a tail to slap around with. If you had a tail and took the feat, you would, but you don't have a tail, so you don't.

Perhaps the Half Orc can get a mechanical tail made, one that is a part of the fancy armor he has. He would then be able to make use of the feat.

I suppose the easiest way to go about that is just tuck a whip into the back of your pants, boom, tail attack. scorpion whip works too. spiked chain... maybe not so much. that one would just be silly.

on that thought:

New thought, Racial Heritage (Android) and play as a cyborg. ruin everyone's immersion in the high fantasy. Be a shotgun using Gunslinger and insist everyone needs to follow you if they want to live. no actual benefits that i can think of though.


On a serious note, if racial heritage does not allow any sign of the mixed heritage to show than how does a ranger know they have bonuses against you? It becomes an instant, see through any disguise, immediately know what you are even if you don't ability. That seems like it should make favored enemy a supernatural effect at least. Or is disguise supposed to make characters immune to favored enemy bonuses now?


thaX wrote:


So by the same token, one would take the Gnome feat to change out his racial spells, even though he doesn't actually have any to begin with?

He could, although unless he had the exact same spells, it would be useless.

Tail Terror still works, though.


blahpers wrote:

A hat of disguise does not grant you additional appendages. It only makes you look like something else.

A greater hat of disguise...hmm. Alter self is a polymorph, and that allows use of the form's natural attacks, so I'd tentatively say yes.

It isn't about whether you "paid enough" in feats. It's simply what the rules provide for. It really doesn't matter to me from a balance perspective; I don't care much about that sort of thing.

I'd meant the greater one.

Since it is FAR from clear cut what the RAW is, I went with "paid enough" to figure out what to do. I find it beyond silly that some could say that it's all about the tail being there before the feat is taken. As I pointed out, you end up with someone with a goat or bunny tail being able to use it even though it's only a few inches long. A creature growing a tail by taking the feat makes much more sense.

So if it's RAW, this is one of those 'ask your DM because it's not clear". If it's on that I'd do, I'd say sure, why not.


Torbyne wrote:
On a serious note, if racial heritage does not allow any sign of the mixed heritage to show than how does a ranger know they have bonuses against you? It becomes an instant, see through any disguise, immediately know what you are even if you don't ability. That seems like it should make favored enemy a supernatural effect at least. Or is disguise supposed to make characters immune to favored enemy bonuses now?

The bonus to attack/damage should be added in secret until the creature is identified. The question though, is "can the racial heritage be identified?" and/or "is there any change to the DC for that purpose?"

I suspect the answers are "yes" and "no" respectively, but the heritage should be the last piece of info capable of being obtained. (iow, you need to beat the DC, typically 5+CR since we're talking about PCs, by a good margin)

Dark Archive

RJGrady wrote:
thaX wrote:


So by the same token, one would take the Gnome feat to change out his racial spells, even though he doesn't actually have any to begin with?

He could, although unless he had the exact same spells, it would be useless.

Tail Terror still works, though.

You keep saying that, but you haven't answered the multitude of people who have made clear, logical arguements why you don't get a tail to make tail slaps with.

The devs have explicitly ruled that an ability that gives you a natural attack doesn't necessarily give you the limbs needed to make the attack.

Tail Terror explicitly mentions you have to have a tail to make the attack with.

Absolutely nothing in Racial Heritage or Tail Terror says you gain/grow a tail. There are many physical features of a Kobold that you don't get, like small size.

Having a tail is not a fluff or flavor of a race. Kobolds have tails and humans and half orcs do not. Just like 2 heads on an Ettin is not just fluff/flavor, or a Marilith having 6 arms, or a dog having 4 legs and no arms.

Tail Terror giving you a tail is a reasonable house rule, but by RAW it doesn't give you a tail to attack with. There is no where to come inbetween RAW and anything when looking at a RAW issue.

Sovereign Court RPG Superstar 2011 Top 32

4 people marked this as a favorite.

There's a fairly large spectrum between "has no visible evidence whatsoever" and "has an entire extra appendage like a tail." A character with Racial Heritage (kobold) could easily have reptilian eyes or slightly scaled skin or other such markings. If you ask where we draw the line, I think drawing the line before granting additional limbs is perfectly reasonable. Cosmetic changes yes, added appendages no.

Saying "either you have a tail or absolutely no evidence of kobold heritage" is a false dichotomy.

Just because you meet the prereqs for a feat does not mean the feat has utility for you. Examples abound in the Core Rulebook alone. Taking Extend Spell on your barbarian doesn't suddenly grant spellcasting. Nor does taking Combat Casting. A fighter who takes Defensive Combat Training derives no benefit. You can take Agile Maneuvers or Weapon Finesse when your Dex is lower than your Str. And so forth. This just makes them poor feat choices, like taking a feat that improves your tail when you don't have one.


Torbyne wrote:

If i am a Half-Orc with this feat combo at level 3 is my Tail Slap a D4 as per the RAW or is it D6 as i am a medium sized creature and the natural attack would size up with me? Likewise, if i continue dragoning it up with feats and i get Draconic Paragon does my fly speed or maneuverability change at all? i think its yes to the first and no to the second since its only base speed that is normally affected by size. Some one poke holes in my thinking?

FYI, its all for a Freebooter, Natural Combat style, Toothy, Horc Ranger concept. Descended from a long line of adventurous adventurers.

@ Torbyne -- I'm curious, why don't you ask your GM to let you make up a new race using the ARG?

You could make a medium-sized humanoid (reptilian) and specifically include bite, claws and a tail and call them Greater Kobolds. They could be a throwback, or perhaps just have more draconic blood in them, making them larger and more powerful.

Just a suggestion.

Cheers!


Weren Wu Jen wrote:
Torbyne wrote:

If i am a Half-Orc with this feat combo at level 3 is my Tail Slap a D4 as per the RAW or is it D6 as i am a medium sized creature and the natural attack would size up with me? Likewise, if i continue dragoning it up with feats and i get Draconic Paragon does my fly speed or maneuverability change at all? i think its yes to the first and no to the second since its only base speed that is normally affected by size. Some one poke holes in my thinking?

FYI, its all for a Freebooter, Natural Combat style, Toothy, Horc Ranger concept. Descended from a long line of adventurous adventurers.

@ Torbyne -- I'm curious, why don't you ask your GM to let you make up a new race using the ARG?

You could make a medium-sized humanoid (reptilian) and specifically include bite, claws and a tail and call them Greater Kobolds. They could be a throwback, or perhaps just have more draconic blood in them, making them larger and more powerful.

Just a suggestion.

Cheers!

Why make one up when you have lizardfolk who already have claw/claw/bite and also tails?

The PRD says they only have one claw attack - but the stat block assumes they are holding a shield. It's perfectly rational that they have two claw attacks available if their hands are free.


Quote:
If i am a Half-Orc with this feat combo at level 3 is my Tail Slap a D4 as per the RAW or is it D6 as i am a medium sized creature and the natural attack would size up with me? Likewise, if i continue dragoning it up with feats and i get Draconic Paragon does my fly speed or maneuverability change at all? i think its yes to the first and no to the second since its only base speed that is normally affected by size. Some one poke holes in my thinking?

Technically, no. You get a natural attack that specifically deals 1d4, not a natural attack with damage based on your size.

Grand Lodge

Just go with a Tiefling with Racial heritage Kobold. (RAW Tieflings are Half Human by default and fall into the same FAQ as Half Orcs for Racial heritage.) Now you have a Tail to use for it, you can also take the Alt Racial trait for claws or bite attacks.


ryric wrote:

There's a fairly large spectrum between "has no visible evidence whatsoever" and "has an entire extra appendage like a tail." A character with Racial Heritage (kobold) could easily have reptilian eyes or slightly scaled skin or other such markings. If you ask where we draw the line, I think drawing the line before granting additional limbs is perfectly reasonable. Cosmetic changes yes, added appendages no.

That's a very reasonable idea, but it's not a rule.

Bottom line: Racial Heritage gives you everything you need to qualify for Tail Terror, and Tail Terror gives you everything you need to make an attack with your tail. Tail Terror only doesn't work if you lack a tail; that a human with Racial Heritage (kobold) and the feat Tail Terror lacks a tail is just a presumption on your part. Humans don't normally have tails, but guess what? They aren't normally part kobold, either. I see zero difference between cosmetic "yellow eyes" and a cosmetic tail. I see nothing about the combination of feats Racial Heritage and Tail Terror that suggests you don't have a functional tail. Probably most humans with Racial Heritage (kobold) don't have tails, but the ones with Tail Terror obviously do. The feat is not Martial Weapon Proficiency (tail). The feat itself grants you the tail attack. A human with Racial Heritage (kobold) who doesn't have a tail fails to qualify for Tail Terror in the exact same way that a kobold who lacks a tail (freak trapmaking accident!) fails to qualify; because the player has decided their character is tail-less.


@Archaeik:

Yeah, that is kind of the big question for me now; can you even tell, short of magic, if someone has racial heritage? Even if they are allowed little scales, how do you know those are Kobold features and not Lizardman or Serpentfolk or any other flavored of scaled humanoid? The only rules i can find to support it is under knowledge, "For particularly rare monsters, such as the tarrasque, the DC of this check equals 15 + the monster's CR, or more." Since Racial Heritage is not a common feature and doesnt have a set way of expressing itself i would assume you count as an extremely rare creature. The feat just feels lacking in description as to how obvious your heritage is, i assume becuase it would normally be a RP issue to be decided at the table but there are now questions about its limits and how it can affect game mechanics. Heck, if you arent allowed any drastic or obvious signs of your heritage than i'd say the DC jumps to 20+ level but thats just another house rule patch.

(... If a ranger miss-IDs a creature and thinks they are his favored enemy do they get any combat bonueses? Do they think they get them and then think the enemy has extreme DR when they arent hitting very hard?)

@Ryric:

My problem with this is that it is still not a clear rule, its a table variation of "eyes? sure, you can even take the add XX feet to your darkvision feat if you'd like or gain +1 AC scales" and then at the next table they go back to "there is nothing in the feat that says you can have inhuman eyes, scales or claws." To me the tail is just as cosmetic as anything else until you pay the feat to use it. It seems like it should work but i do see, and even agree with, the coutner arguements about nothing stating you grow the tail, it was a bad assumption on my part.

My current position is there should be a line in the feat specifying what it allows as far as showing heritage. as written you have no outward signs at all and that seems wrong.

@Weren Wu Jen:

I actually did go through the race builder to first look at the concept and even with a moderate race point buy it seemed very over powered to cutomize a race for a specific build. Maybe this is just me but i have this concept of "fair and balanced" where i want to build something within the rules with as little personnel interpetation as possible (hence this thread asking the community's thoughts). If i used the race builder and came up with some monstrous natural attack beast i would feel guilty when i came up as over shadowing other characters in combat.

Flavour wise i really like the mixed heritage character too; i was going to go with a descendent of failed magical experiments that eventually evened out in a tailed orc/reptile hybrid a few generations later...


Drake Brimstone wrote:
Just go with a Tiefling with Racial heritage Kobold. (RAW Tieflings are Half Human by default and fall into the same FAQ as Half Orcs for Racial heritage.) Now you have a Tail to use for it, you can also take the Alt Racial trait for claws or bite attacks.

But they only have one type, Outsider (Native) and unlike Aasimar, i havent seen any alternate racial traits to give them humanoid (Human) so it isnt a valid build either. :\

Since Aasimar can be humanoids though, are they valid choices for Racial Heritage? Its very feat intensive but you end up with wings and wing slams... I'd still rather be more Beast than Archangel though.


Quote:
Bottom line: Racial Heritage gives you everything you need to qualify for Tail Terror

You keep saying that as though it were completely true, but that's what is being disputed. The blood of a non-human ancestor flows through your veins. You count as a kobold for feats. Neither says you grow a tail.

Tail terror lets you make an attack with your tail. Ordinarily, you have to be a kobold to take the feat, but you got in sideways. You don't have a tail, though. If you did, you'd have a tail slap. You never grew a tail, though.

Humans don't have tails. If you were an alternate race that has tails, more power, but you're just a human who took a feat. What if you took Racial Heritage at level 3? Do you suddenly sprout a tail? Do you sprout gills if you take the feat again at 5 and choose merfolk?

51 to 100 of 443 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Half-Orc with Racial Heritage (Kobold) and Tail Terror? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.