|
The one thing I don't understand though is why its absolutely necessary for a feat to say 'you grew a tail' and you can't you know.. Say your human had a tail from day one?IF your human has a tail from day 1, then you can utilize this feat. I'm not aware of a RAW way to have one, but regardless, it would cost you something - an alternate racial trait, or another feat, or a trait, or something. The presumption that Tail Terror automatically grants a tail where one never previously existed is the one that RJGrady has been so insistent on and which I find to be ludicrous.
Why should it /cost/ me something?
Should it cost me something to have red hair? To have pierced ears? To have one ear? To have Hetero-chromatic eyes?
I mean, I agree that the feat doesn't 'grow' a tail upon taking tail terror. However, Its possible one could develop methods to mimic the same effects at their ancestral race, such as using a pony tail, or perhaps having been born with a tail from the start. Humans /do/ after all have a tail bone.
The presumption that Tail Terror automatically grants a tail where one never previously existed is the one that RJGrady has been so insistent on and which I find to be ludicrous.It presumes it. I guess if you didn't previously have one, it would grant it. But I would tend to believe you would take this feat if you felt your character should have a tail.
I would love to hear your explanation with this is so much more ludicrous than suddenly learning how to stretch your tongue ten feet and disarm weapons with it.
Do you believe that the difference between "You can make a tail slap attack with your tail." and " You have a prehensile tongue with a range of 10 feet." is purely semantics?
There are minor differences, but nothing that mechanically impacts the feats.
Compare to other feats that use the word 'your' such as Greater Whip Mastery "You are so quick with your whip that you never drop it due to a failed disarm or trip combat maneuver attempt."Does the inclusion of the word 'your' in these feats grant you equipment? (Granting equipment is presumably a cheaper effect than granting additional appendages.)
It doesn't matter. This isn't one of those feats, and tails are not equipment.
Reconcile this with a character that gains two bite attacks not being able to use both without having two mouths.
Neither kobolds nor humans have a tail-related Trait. Therefore, the feat grants a human the same benefit as a kobold. There is no way to have two bite attacks if you have only one mouth. However, there is a way to have one tail slap if you have a tail... which you have, because Tail Terror says so.
Edit: Cite specific examples also of Racial Heritage granting you any cosmetic or mechanical benefit other than the ability to gain access to traits (as in the game mechanic known as Traits), feats, and be affected by spells and magic items as a member of that race, etc.
Angelic Flesh (Aasimar)
Your skin shines like burnished metal.Prerequisites: Angelic Blood, aasimar.
Distinguish this from Racial Heritage (Mythic).
I'm not sure what you mean, but one thing Racial Heritage (Mythic) won't let you do is grow a kobold tail, since that's not a trait.
|
|
Yes, wonderful. You bolded Tailess Primates.
However Anatomically speaking, its rather hard to mate with lizards. However, someway somehow, one of the character's ancestors managed to do it.They mated with a kobold. Or perhaps you got bit by a radioactive kobold and you're now Lizard Man.
Whatever the case, you're not completely human. So that Vestigial tail that other humans could get? Well,why can't it be a full blown tail for you?
|
|
Well is there any codified mechanically allowance in the rules to determine any physical cosmetic characteristics beyond height, weight, age and gender?
If you are a kobold.. Are you somehow mechanically barred from taking White haired Witch or the Prehensile hair hex?
EDIT:
I just want to reiterate that no, I don't think the feat Racial Heritage 'grows' you a tail, I think your human should be born with it. As a GM I'd enforce taking the feat at level 1, like birth related feats should be taken at.
EDIT 2:
Other races without hair..
Tengu, Gippli, Nagaji, Strix, Vishkanya, Wayangs, Svirfneblin
This thread only makes me glad I am a GM, and can enforce common sense, or rather what should be common sense.
|
|
I just want to reiterate that no, I don't think the feat Racial Heritage 'grows' you a tail, I think your human should be born with it. As a GM I'd enforce taking the feat at level 1, like birth related feats should be taken at.A Half-Orc only gets one general feat at level 1. He wouldn't be able to take both Racial Heritage and Tail Terror if Tail Terror must also be taken at level 1.
Never said tail terror needed to be taken at level 1.
Only Racial Heritage. A Kobold could take TT at a later level.
And of course after taking RH, you'd have to specify in your character description you had a tail to be able to take tail terror.
Angelic Flesh (Aasimar)
Your skin shines like burnished metal.
Prerequisites: Angelic Blood, aasimar.You can't take Racial Heritage(Aasimar). Aasimar are native outsiders; Racial Heritage only works for humanoid races.
Oops! So, instead,
Catfolk Exemplar (Catfolk)
Your feline traits are more defined and prominent than those of other members of your race.
Prerequisite: Catfolk.Benefit: You can take the Aspect of the Beast feat even if you do not meet the normal prerequisites. Furthermore, your catlike nature manifests in one of the following ways. You choose the manifestation when you take this feat, and cannot change it later.
Enhanced Senses (Ex): If you have low-light vision, you gain the scent catfolk racial trait. If you have the scent racial trait, you gain low-light vision.
Fast Sprinter (Ex): You gain a 10-foot racial bonus to your speed when using the charge, run, or withdraw actions. If you have the sprinter racial trait, your racial bonus to speed when using the charge, run, or withdraw action increases to a 20-foot bonus.
Sharp Claws (Ex): If you do not have the cat's claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation from the Aspect of the Beast feat, you gain the cat's claws racial trait. If you have either the cat's claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation, your claw damage increases to 1d6.
Sharp claws.
Sharp claws.
Catfolk Exemplar (Catfolk)
Your feline traits are more defined and prominent than those of other members of your race.
Prerequisite: Catfolk.Benefit: You can take the Aspect of the Beast feat even if you do not meet the normal prerequisites. Furthermore, your catlike nature manifests in one of the following ways. You choose the manifestation when you take this feat, and cannot change it later.
Sharp Claws (Ex): If you do not have the cat's claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation from the Aspect of the Beast feat, you gain the cat's claws racial trait. If you have either the cat's claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation, your claw damage increases to 1d6.
Physical Description: In general, catfolk are lithe and slender, standing midway between dwarves and humans in stature. ... They manipulate objects as easily as any other humanoid, but their fingers terminate in small, sharp, retractable claws. These claws are typically not powerful enough to be used as weapons, but some members of the species—either by quirk of birth or from years of honing—can use them with deadly effect.
Cat's Claws: Some catfolk have stronger and more developed claws than other members of their race, and can use them to make attacks. Catfolk with this racial trait have a pair of claws they can use as natural weapons. These claws are primary attacks that deal 1d4 points of damage. This racial trait replaces natural hunter.
This is pretty much the exact same situation as the Kobold Tail Terror. Catfolk, all of them, already have claws. Sharp Claws just augments that.
YMMV. I wouldn't treat it any differently.
Cat's claws states outright that they "have a pair of claws." Sharp Claws states you gain the cat's claws trait. Ergo, a human with Racial Heritage (catfolk) and Catfolk Exemplar (sharp claws) has sharp claws. There is no ambiguity whatsoever in that case.
Cat's claws states outright that they "have a pair of claws." Sharp Claws states you gain the cat's claws trait. Ergo, a human with Racial Heritage (catfolk) and Catfolk Exemplar (sharp claws) has sharp claws. There is no ambiguity whatsoever in that case.
Catfolk already have claws, they're just insufficient to make a claw attack with. Cat's Claws changes that. Just like Kobolds all already have tails, they're just insufficient to make tail attacks with. Tail Terror changes that.
Hence, YMMV.
*shrug*
|
Can a human take Racial Heritage(Grippli), and then take the Agile Tongue feat?
Agile Tongue (Grippli)
Your long pink tongue is capable of manipulating small items and even stealing objects.
Prerequisites: Grippli.
Benefit: You have a prehensile tongue with a range of 10 feet. You can pick up items weighing no more than 5 pounds, make Sleight of Hand checks, perform the steal or disarm combat maneuvers, or make melee touch attacks with your tongue.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
But what he's saying is that HUMANS don't have claws. But a Human with Racial Ancestry (Catfolk) could take another Feat which then gives him claws (and it's even written that way- if you don't have claws, you get claws).
The appearance of a species is completely fluff, and fluff is mutable. A kobold could have a tail or not have a tail, that's a decision the player makes when he decides his characters' appearance. Tail Terror was written with the assumption of a tailed kobold, but by strictest RAW, a tail is not a requirement.
And since a Human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is part kobold, I see no reason why a 1/4 kobold can't be said to have a tail- it's character fluff, plain and simple.
But what he's saying is that HUMANS don't have claws. But a Human with Racial Ancestry (Catfolk) could take another Feat which then gives him claws (and it's even written that way- if you don't have claws, you get claws).
The appearance of a species is completely fluff, and fluff is mutable. A kobold could have a tail or not have a tail, that's a decision the player makes when he decides his characters' appearance. Tail Terror was written with the assumption of a tailed kobold, but by strictest RAW, a tail is not a requirement.
And since a Human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is part kobold, I see no reason why a 1/4 kobold can't be said to have a tail- it's character fluff, plain and simple.
That's the point of this discussion, though. The feat doesn't say, "You didn't have claws, but now you do."
The feat says, essentially, Catfolk already have claws, but they're not effective enough to be weapons; yours now are.
The question is whether that gives claws or augments them, just like the question is whether Tail Terror grants a tail or augments one.
I understand what he's trying to argue. It's the exact same thing he's been arguing. I simply disagree. It is precisely the same argument, just with a different race and feat.
And if that's the route you want to adjudicate it, go for it. There's not really a clear answer here, hence the discussion. You should probably follow along with Espy by requiring that the character note the existence of a tail or claws or whatever at creation. I might be swayed by that in a home game, but I'm going to say absolutely not if a human PC shows up out of the blue at level 7 with a new tail.
|
|
I'd also like to point out that Humans have finger nails. And finger nails can scratch to the point of drawing blood.
Course.. One thing that could happen.. Is that if something is tailless, the tail slap could potentially be a very.. Robust rump. (Btw, I'll warn you with this link.)
But honestly, I still wonder about Prehensile Hair, White Haired Witch and Strangling hair.
Would Kobolds, Tengu, Gippli, Nagaji, Strix, Vishkanya, Wayangs, Svirfneblin, or any other race that fails to mention they do have some sort of body hair be unable to take them? I noticed some people say things like to have a tail, the RH feat isn't enough, you'd need another or a trait or something. Would the same happen here?
Does fur count as hair?
lol - I am not convinced espy that the developers intended twerking to be a valid combat manuever.
]That's the point of this discussion, though. The feat doesn't say, "You didn't have claws, but now you do."
Correct. It says, "you have claws." I am quoting.
Sharp Claws (Ex): If you do not have the cat's claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation from the Aspect of the Beast feat, you gain the cat's claws racial trait. If you have either the cat's claws racial trait or the claws of the beast manifestation, your claw damage increases to 1d6.
Cat's Claws: Some catfolk have stronger and more developed claws than other members of their race, and can use them to make attacks. Catfolk with this racial trait have a pair of claws they can use as natural weapons. These claws are primary attacks that deal 1d4 points of damage. This racial trait replaces natural hunter.
Relevance quoted.
Other things you can do:
Spit Venom (Combat, Nagaji)
You have mastered the nagaji warrior technique of spitting venom into your opponent's eyes.
Prerequisites: Nagaji.
Benefit: As a full-round action, you can spit poison up to 10 feet as a ranged touch attack. If you hit, the target must make a successful Fortitude save or be blinded for 1d6 rounds. The DC of this save is equal to 10 + 1/2 your total Hit Dice + your Constitution modifier. You can use this ability once per day plus one additional time per day for every three Hit Dice you have.Sharpclaw (Combat, Ratfolk)
Your nails are large and strong.
Prerequisites: Ratfolk.
Benefit: You gain two claw attacks. These are primary natural attacks that deal 1d4 points of damage.Tengu Wings (Tengu)
You can grow wings that allow you to fly.
Prerequisites: Character level 5th, tengu.
Benefit: Once per day, you can sprout a pair of giant black crow's wings, granting you a fly speed of 30 feet (average maneuverability). This spell-like ability otherwise functions as beast shape I (though you do not gain any other benefits of that spell) with a caster level equal to your level.
So, are you stating that the Racial Heritage (kobold) feat causes you to grow a tail, or that the Tail Terror feat causes you to grow a tail?
Pardon me if this was already asked.
Neither. I am just stating that a character with Tail Terror definitely has a tail. As I mentioned earlier, Racial Heritage is silent one whether you might or might not grow a cosmetic tail.
I doubt it.
|
So the Tail terror feat does not cause there to be a tail. And the Racial Heritage (kobold) feat does not cause there to be a tail. So, per RAW, neither of these feats cause a tail to exist.
So, the tail must preexist for the Tail Terror feat to be used with it?
What causes the tail in the Half-orc to begin with?
Losing a tail somehow is a specific event that affects someone with Tail Terror the same whether they are a kobold or a human with Racial Heritage. I'm not sure of the exact meaning you intend.
You seem to be looking for something that cause a tail to sprout, and I don't think that's a thing. The only way for Tail Terror to "grow" a tail is if the character is specified as not having a tail before, and then taking the feat and saying they have one. I can't say whether any given GM would allow that, but it doesn't break the RAW.
What causes the tail in the Half-orc to begin with?
"Being part kobold," I guess.
Again, the decision of what your character looks like is completely irrelevant by RAW. The player has a great deal of latitude in this area, and it is an essential part of the character creation process.
Given the large number of species that can interbreed with humans, and thus pass on recessive traits to their offspring (a fact integral to the Sorcerer class), one could easily play a human with a wide variety of fantastical traits. These have no bearing on mechanics, a human is a human.
However, in some individuals, these traits are not recessive, and can have mechanical bearing. Traits, feats, and even class abilities (the Sorcerer, again) can reflect this.
Racial Heritage is one of these, allowing someone to be part-kobold in a mechanical way, as opposed to mere fluff. Therefore, there is no rules impediment here. A player wishes their character to be part-kobold, and takes feats to make that a mechanically distinct choice.
All stop.
While it may make more sense for some for such feats to have a "1st level only" requirement, similar to Fey Foundling, there are some reasons why they do not need to be (or perhaps should not be):
First, Pathfinder is often played in a fantastical magical world. Exposure to strange magic or radiation could cause a mutation in a character, greatly changing them.
Second, perhaps it took time for a trait to fully develop in a character; the potential was always there, but until it manifested, it was useless.
Third, there is a sharp limit on how many feats a character gains, and there may be other, more necessary feats competing for one's attention. As a result, it makes more sense from a design standpoint to allow characters to achieve useful feats when they feel they can, instead of forcing someone to make decisions at low levels (where the impact is the greatest).
So are humans the only ones allowed to add extra body parts? Can my dwarf have a tail? If tails are unimportant fluff, why does the Kobold description mention tails? Shouldn't that be up to the player? Can I remove limbs without it affecting me mechanically? If I want to play a leg less human, does it change my base speed?
So are humans the only ones allowed to add extra body parts? Can my dwarf have a tail? If tails are unimportant fluff, why does the Kobold description mention tails? Shouldn't that be up to the player? Can I remove limbs without it affecting me mechanically? If I want to play a leg less human, does it change my base speed?
There really aren't rules for any of that. But you ask interesting questions!
I'm in my phone, so I won't bother quoting. The sentence before "You have claws that can be used as natural attacks" is, basically, "All catfolk have claws, but yours are special because you took this feat". Hence the disagreement.
|
|
Kobolds have tails mentioned in their description so you know what in the vex you're looking at. Otherwise everything would be "You see a thing, carrying a thing. wearing a thing. What do you do?"
Like TunfiskeMad pointed out, mouths aren't mentioned in human description.
Mostly because this is a basic run down of what you are generally looking at. A Normal human looks like X. It doesn't mention what a human that is part kobold looks like.
If the word Tail in a racial description (Rather than the characters') is important for having Tail Terror, would not having the word Hair be equally important for White Haired Witch, Prehensile hair and Strangling hair?
Did you know that in the description of Ratfolk there is no mention of the word Hair? Same thing with all the races I mentioned before and even something like a Kitsune. I guess those races are barred from using those things on account of their lack of hair.
|
|
"Being part kobold," I guess.Show us where the Racial Heritage feat makes any mention of a change in physical appearance, or physical traits. It only mentions blood, as in genetics, in my reading. This is not a half-X template nor a human-offshoot race like aasimar, tieflings, fetchlings, or the aboleth-aquatic-human race whose name escapes me; not enough to cause drastic physical alterations like the growing of an entire extra appendage.
Well.. considering that a Ranger can identify you as being part kobold just by sight..
And who's to say how much difference one person could have physically compared to another?
|
|
There are people like this And this( A little disturbing)Yes, but something tells me she wouldn't be able to take a feat for a horn attack with that.
Well, something also tells me she's a level 1 commoner too. But could have a little teifling in her. Not even they can make gore attacks with their horns until they take another feat.
"Being part kobold," I guess.Show us where the Racial Heritage feat makes any mention of a change in physical appearance, or physical traits. It only mentions blood, as in genetics, in my reading. This is not a half-X template nor a human-offshoot race like aasimar, tieflings, fetchlings, or the aboleth-aquatic-human race whose name escapes me; not enough to cause drastic physical alterations like the growing of an entire extra appendage.
Explain to me why I have to. Tail Terror says you have a tail. Agile Tongue says you have a ten foot long prehensile pink tongue. Fox Shape says you can turn into a fox. There are feats that modify traits you might not have, so those won't work. But Tail Terror grants you the trait. In fact, kobolds do not have a trait related to their tail.
|
To clarify to some of the new posters of this thread.
The original question has been answered repeatedly and now has a post FAQ'ed by three people.
The main jist of the conversation is that one is a Half-Orc taking the Racial Heritage feat to enable the ability to take Kobold Feats/Traits (Not racial abilities that are also called traits)/etc.
The Kobold racial Feat that is in question is Tail Terror. This would normally give a Kobold a Tail Slap for 1d4 points of damage.
The question in essence was if one could take this feat and assume that the Half-Orc would suddenly have a tail to use the ability that the feat confers.
The answer, under some dispute by a couple of posters here, is no. You don't have a tail before you took the feat, you don't have one to use with it and a tail doesn't come into being simple because one has some Kobold hereditary background.
I have offered the counter example of the feat Blugeoner not automatically giving you a club or equivalent to use with that feat. Granted, a club is easier to obtain than a tail out your backside, but the example is a valid one to compare to the original question.
I am amazed that since my last post, at least 45 posts have been proffered still going in the same circle and offering more examples that get nick picked into obscurity. (The Grippli tongue issue is amusing) I must give kudos to RJGrady for keeping this thread alive when it should have been dead long ago. (What is up with you changing your avatar?)
I shall summarize thusly.
Tail Terror.
Do you have a tail?
If yes, then you gain a tail slap.
This is madness. But I have a solution.
Go Here. FAQ it as hard as you can. Tell your friends, your friends' friends, and the pizza delivery man.
Let us be rid of this.
I must give kudos to RJGrady for keeping this thread alive when it should have been dead long ago.
I'm trying to only reply to objections I think I can address. So I can't really take all the credit for keeping this alive. There are some people really putting for the effort, here.
(What is up with you changing your avatar?)
My most recent avatar happened to be the choice of several people I have been in discussions with lately. So, I changed it to something used by one other person.
Who immediately replied to the first thing I posted after that...
Hoping for some FAQ love. While I stand by my interpretation of the RAW, I'm certainly open to the Paizo folks saying that Racial Heritage was definitely not supposed to be used for morphological shenanigans.
I'm not waffling, and I don't see how it adds very much to the discussion to repeat what I have already said. I'll summarize, for clarity's sake:
1. If you have Tail Terror, you have a tail.
2. If you have Racial Heritage, the rules do not say whether you can have a kobold tail or not.
So, it may be that you have a tail, and then gain Tail Terror, and learn to attack with it. Or it may be that you take both feats and you have always had a slapping tail. Or it may be that you originally did not have a tail, but for whatever reason, you took Tail Terror, and did indeed "sprout" a tail. Given that Racial Heritage is completely vague about how you acquired your heritage in the first place, and entirely silent on cosmetics, any of those things can be true. And as I stated in the post you directly replied to, it does not break any rules to grow a tail upon acquiring Tail Terror.
That's my opinion and I have limited interest in rehashing how I came to it.
To clarify to some of the new posters of this thread.
The original question has been answered repeatedly and now has a post FAQ'ed by three people.
The main jist of the conversation is that one is a Half-Orc taking the Racial Heritage feat to enable the ability to take Kobold Feats/Traits (Not racial abilities that are also called traits)/etc.
The Kobold racial Feat that is in question is Tail Terror. This would normally give a Kobold a Tail Slap for 1d4 points of damage.
The question in essence was if one could take this feat and assume that the Half-Orc would suddenly have a tail to use the ability that the feat confers.
The answer, under some dispute by a couple of posters here, is no. You don't have a tail before you took the feat, you don't have one to use with it and a tail doesn't come into being simple because one has some Kobold hereditary background.
I have offered the counter example of the feat Blugeoner not automatically giving you a club or equivalent to use with that feat. Granted, a club is easier to obtain than a tail out your backside, but the example is a valid one to compare to the original question.
I am amazed that since my last post, at least 45 posts have been proffered still going in the same circle and offering more examples that get nick picked into obscurity. (The Grippli tongue issue is amusing) I must give kudos to RJGrady for keeping this thread alive when it should have been dead long ago. (What is up with you changing your avatar?)
I shall summarize thusly.
Tail Terror.
Do you have a tail?
If yes, then you gain a tail slap.
And people pointed out flaws in your argument just like you pointed out flaws in their thus the conversation continues.. Your summary is as incorrect now as it has been as stated every time and as it will be till someone official makes a statement one way or the other.
|
|
I have responded to the supposed flaw in my example in another post.
One, every character has a Bludgeoning weapon, unarmed strike. Two, the game gives out extra free Bludgeoning weapons (see club). As such, I don't see your point. Since every character can have a free weapon to use with the feat you ask about, you seem to agree that you should get a tail with tail terror.He also seems to be ignoring me completely. I guess he has nothing to counter the Feat of Bludgeoner not automatically giving one a Bludgeoning weapon.
Anyone else believe that Bludgeoner would give a character a free Bludgeoning weapon?
First, the feat specifies weapons, your hands are only considered lethal weapons in the case of gaining another feat (through taking it or being a Monk) and can be used as either or without penalty already without Blungeoner.
Second, the tail wouldn't cost anything either if it somehow magically grows from the taking of a simple feat. Just because a club is little or no cost to the character, that doesn't mean the character automatically has one when he takes the Blungeoner feat.
That is my comparison. To use the feat, you need the club/Mace/quarterstaff or equivelant. Same with this feat. To use a tail, you need a tail. Humans do not have tails.
It was ignored or lost in the overall discussion of this seemingly simple Q & A.
Need club or equivalent to use Blugeoneer feat. Need tail to use Tail Terror feat. Not sure why that isn't a good comparison.
Because Tail Terror says you do have a tail.
Because weapons aren't body parts.
Because the descriptive text of Bludgeoner indicates you use "any weapon" whereas the descriptive text of Tail Terror says you have strengthened your tail, meaning that the benefit section refers to a different category of things.
Because feats similar to Bludgeoner involve weapons, whereas feats like Tail Terror usually indicate you gain the body part and it's associated feature, so the most natural reading in each case would be "weapon wielded is wielded in this way" and "you have this physical quality."
Because Tail Terror is a racial feat and Bludgeoner is a Combat feat.
Because Tail Terror grants a natural weapon attack and Bludgeoner modifies certain combat options.
Virtually the only thing Budgeoner and Tail Terror have in common is that they are feats and involve the use of the word "your."
I have responded to the supposed flaw in my example in another post.
** spoiler omitted **
It was ignored or lost in the overall discussion of this seemingly simple Q & A.
Need club or equivalent to use Blugeoneer feat. Need tail to use Tail Terror feat. Not sure why that isn't a good comparison.
Hey, so can I cut off a kobold's tail (say my thrice removed cousin's) and use that for my tail slap, then? I've got the blood in me to know how to swing it, I'll just staple it to my backside and ignore all this RAW nonsense about not "having" a "tail"! :D
It's not broken and in a game where Tengu can /sprout wings/ when they feel like it, I don't see why someone can't grow a tail overnight or just say they were born with one if they were planning it. But hey, play your games how you like.
Personally, I don't think that physical attributes such as tails, teeth, hair, etc should NEED written rules. It's a roleplaying game. Until the teeth do bite damage, they don't need rules. My Aasimar can have bright golden fluffy wings if I say she does, doesn't mean it impacts the game or needs rules UNLESS I get a feat for it. If you want to "buy" your characters looks with a point pool or something, play something like M&M where you can buy all the tails you want.
Hey, so can I cut off a kobold's tail (say my thrice removed cousin's) and use that for my tail slap, then? I've got the blood in me to know how to swing it, I'll just staple it to my backside and ignore all this RAW nonsense about not "having" a "tail"! :D
I'm thinking mullet and rat-tail, myself. WA-POW!!
Regardless of the benefits or drawbacks of the feat ...
Regardless of wether it is broken or overpowered...
Regardless of the silliness or cheese...
Humans don't have tails, you need a tail to make a tail attack, and neither feat grows a tail.