| 104 people marked this as FAQ candidate. Staff response: no reply required. 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is to settle once and for all the shenaniganery found in this thread.
The claim is that the Racial Heritage feat, combined with a feat that improves an inherent feature of the other "parent" race, grants you that feature. So Tail Terror grants you a tail, or Sleep Venom grants you a Vishkanya's poison, etc.
Please FAQ, so that we may put this to rest.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I can't think of anyone who has claimed Racial Heritage can grant you a feature in that way. A tail is not a feature (at least, kobolds don't have it as one). I don't think Sleep Venom works because it doesn't grant a mechanically complete ability.
The exemplars I think need to be looked at individually and collectively are:
Agile Tongue (even humans have a tongue)
Tail Terror (neither kobolds nor humans have a tail slap, but kobolds are described as normally having tails)
Sharp Claws (seems to unambiguously grant claws, despite some descriptive text)
My argument is that these all work, because you qualify for them, and adding the feature, trait, or attack listed doesn't result in any rules funkiness whatsoever.
I like how you immediately contradict yourself, twice.
"I can't think of anyone who has claimed Racial Heritage can grant you a feature in that way. A tail is not a feature (at least, kobolds don't have it as one)", then "kobolds are described as normally having tails."
But more importantly, "I can't think of anyone who has claimed Racial Heritage can grant you a feature in that way", and then "My argument is that these all work."
Those are all separate points.
- Racial Heritage does not grant you a racial feature. For instance, it does not grant you a vishkanya's venom or a kitsune's shapechanging.
- A tail is not a kobold racial feature.
- I think by the RAW, all of those feats work, because you have the prerequisites and the abilities work when played exactly as written.
RJ, would you let an Awakened Turtle Sorcerer use the UMD skill? I mean, clearly you get the skill right? Never mind you're a turtle and can't manipulate the wand/scroll. But, you say, a lack of opposable thumbs is not a racial drawback, so it must work.
Stay on target. Start another thread for wand-wielding quadrupeds if you want.
Except it's the same line of reasoning. I can see by your silence that you wouldn't, so perhaps I've made some headway. :P
I don't think asking you to stay on the original topic is "silence".
The question has already been posed in the OP. So far as I know, there is no restriction against trying to reason using examples.
What does casting Awaken on a turtle, and trying to get it to use wands have to do with Racial Heritage?
Racial Heritage/Tail Terror: trying to get a benefit which is incompatible with the "parent" form.
Turtle UMD: Trying to get a benefit which is incompatible with the "parent" form.
Hmm......I can see it.
Don't think they can be combined enough to make one FAQ though, might want to make a separate thread?
What does casting Awaken on a turtle, and trying to get it to use wands have to do with Racial Heritage?
It is a question of what is fluff and what is mechanics. Some believe that having a tail is just fluff and you can give one to whomever you want. They then argue that hands and feet (and hair) are also fluff not tied to any mechanics. Therefore someone taking a feat that grants a tail attack does not require a "tail" to make the attack. The question then follows would something without hands (such as an awakened animal) be able to manipulate objects.
I'm not asking the Devs about the turtle thing, because the answer, IMO, is obvious.
The question to be FAQ'd is stated and clarified in the OP.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I believe that if you're willing to put two feats into it, then why not let it work?
Anyone see potential abuse?
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
It abuses my sanity. :P
I'm not asking the Devs about the turtle thing, because the answer, IMO, is obvious.
The question to be FAQ'd is stated and clarified in the OP.
Whats's the obvious answer? I'd say no.
That means that Racial Heritage and Tail Terror doesn't work, by how closely related you said they were.
I believe that if you're willing to put two feats into it, then why not it work?
aAnyone see potential abuse?
The question is one of RAW. Do the feats themselves grant you a tail? It is perfectly reasonable for a DM to allow the combination, I just don't see RAW support for it.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My guess is that since Tail Terror lets you actually do something with that tail, when you take Racial Heritage to be able to take Tail Terror, you receive the listed benefit, a tail attack.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A) This is not a case of the feat modifying a trait.. Tail is not a trait it is a no rules bearing part of descriptive fluff. It gives them a tail attack. The problem here is If Kobalds get a tail as a trait then every race with a tail needs to have it too and it opens the door to a what is descriptive fluff and what is rules. If descriptive fluff is rules then many races are lacking in multiple limbs because with the kobold as the bases here <It has a tail because it's fluff says it does> It makes there be some need of a list of what body parts each race does and does not have. The FAQ can't actually change rules so they have to work with whats there.
B)Paizo has already decided that your armored body parts are a hand and thus cannot be used for off hand attacks when wielding a two handed sword so its not a stretch for the turtle has a wand in his mouth. Plus familiars with UMD and wands was been a thing for a long time. The problem is if some familiars have 'hands' and some do not some familiars become a much much better choice.
You can cry common sense you want but common sense does not apply to a rules set and often times has no place in one either what with all the common sense every spell in the history of ever ignores... A good deal of the equipment too. Common sense is what a GM gets to determine for his campaign when the rules get stupid. Is this little RAW loophole stupid ? Probably and if you don't like it by all means disallow it.. But you cant really say for sure one way or another what the RAW is because if tail terror can't grant me a tail attack <Because as it stands by RAW a tail is not a thing that exists in the rules weather or not the feat grants one doesn't matter.> Should I be able to get the tongue lash from a gripli, the venom spitting of a Nagaji, or a tengus wings etc. etc.
I like how you immediately contradict yourself, twice.
"I can't think of anyone who has claimed Racial Heritage can grant you a feature in that way. A tail is not a feature (at least, kobolds don't have it as one)", then "kobolds are described as normally having tails."
But more importantly, "I can't think of anyone who has claimed Racial Heritage can grant you a feature in that way", and then "My argument is that these all work."
He's not contradicting anything.. *described* is not the same as *having*.
In example I have been described as having Jedi Mind tricks. I do not in fact have psychic abilities.Go to any PSRD and go to the ARG kobold. Its description, where it is described, <which more often is moderately Golarion specific.> says tails as well as strong jaws and sharp claws. This is what is described. Then go down to its race block where the rules parts live. No claws, no bite, no tail attack. This is what it has.
*Offtopic
UMD has no physical prerequisites.
Using wands has two prerequisites:
To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area.
My dog uses his snout to open doors, catch objects etc. On my table this is enough to 'pass for a hand' . Pointing in the direction of a target is not a problem so yes, an awaken dog with the UMD skill can use a wand. Same for a turtle. Sure the awaken animal cannot use a wand and bite/speak etc. at the same time ..
-edit-
Forget everything i wrote. I forget the spell trigger activation methode and the command word. My players had luck in the past :)
|
*Offtopic
UMD has no physical prerequisites.
Using wands has two prerequisites:
To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area.My dog uses his snout to open doors, catch objects etc. On my table this is enough to 'pass for a hand' . Pointing in the direction of a target is not a problem so yes, an awaken dog with the UMD skill can use a wand. Same for a turtle. Sure the awaken animal cannot use a wand and bite/speak etc. at the same time ..
Won't work.
Activation: Wands use the spell trigger activation method, so casting a spell from a wand is usually a standard action that doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity. (If the spell being cast has a longer casting time than 1 action, however, it takes that long to cast the spell from a wand.) []To activate a wand, a character must hold it in hand (or whatever passes for a hand, for nonhumanoid creatures) and point it in the general direction of the target or area.[/b] A wand may be used while grappling or while swallowed whole.
But the spell trigger activation method has his set of requisites too:
Spell Trigger: Spell trigger activation is similar to spell completion, but it's even simpler. No gestures or spell finishing is needed, just a special knowledge of spellcasting that an appropriate character would know, and a single word that must be spoken. Spell trigger items can be used by anyone whose class can cast the corresponding spell. This is the case even for a character who can't actually cast spells, such as a 3rd-level paladin. The user must still determine what spell is stored in the item before she can activate it. Activating a spell trigger item is a standard action and does not provoke attacks of opportunity.
You need to be able to speak to use the wand.
Your initial post is worded poorly and will probably be ignored due to being unclear. You should have a clear and explicit question (which should also probably be bolded) for the Dev team to focus on.
If a character with Racial Heritage takes a racial feat that presumes a body feature the character's base race wouldn't normally have (ie. a Human taking the Kobold Tail Terror feat), is it presumed that the character "grows" the body feature on the spot or would they have to pre-designate such things from character creation (the Human had a tail from birth, recognized his Kobold heritage, and took the Tail Terror feat to use his already extant tail)?
Isn't that question a little biased? Instead of if it works you're only asking how it works?
Exactly, Durngrun. The question is "do I get a tail," not "in what way do I get my tail?"
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Not sure why this is confusing. The Tail Terror feat states, "You can make a tail slap attack with your tail."
Do you have a tail? Then you can make a tail slap attack. Do you not have a tail? Then congratulations, you just wasted a feat.
To offer an example that does not depend on racial body features: Your GM tells you that you're playing in a setting where guns do not exist (and in fact black powder does not function). You take the Gunsmithing feat. The feat does not state that there has to be guns in the world in order to take it; however, since the GM has stated that the basic concept of guns is forbidden, you just wasted the feat - nothing says you can't take it, you just won't get any benefit from it.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is genetically descended from Kobolds, and can be presumed to have racial qualities that other humans do not possess.
In this instance, a tail. There's zero RAW ambiguity here - the OP is asking for FAQ because what he really wants is an errata.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is genetically descended from Kobolds, and can be presumed to have racial qualities that other humans do not possess.
In this instance, a tail. There's zero RAW ambiguity here - the OP is asking for FAQ because what he really wants is an errata.
I disagree. A feat should be assumed to do what it says it does and nothing more.
Benefit: Choose another humanoid race. You count as both human and that race for any effects related to race. For example, if you choose dwarf, you are considered both a human and a dwarf for the purpose of taking traits, feats, how spells and magic items affect you, and so on.
The feat does not state that you grow extra body parts because you happen to have the blood of another race. It might give you the capacity to have the Tail Terror feat; I'd let a character take it if they chose. But they wouldn't get any benefit from it unless they somehow found a way to actually have a tail.
A human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is genetically descended from Kobolds, and can be presumed to have racial qualities that other humans do not possess.
In this instance, a tail. There's zero RAW ambiguity here - the OP is asking for FAQ because what he really wants is an errata.
Do they have that tail before they take the Racial Heritage feat? Do they have that tail before they take the Tail Terror feat? Neither feat states either explicitly that you grow a tail, nor implicitly that you take on body features that members of your base race wouldn't normally have. Thus, the question is valid; did the player need to declare, on character creation, that his Human had a tail for some reason (later revealed to be that he "realized" his heritage by taking the Racial Heritage feat)? If not, does taking the Tail Terror feat cause said Human to spontaneously sprout a tail? Taking a feat doesn't guarantee the means to utilize it. Just because I take EWP(Bastard Sword) doesn't mean a bastard sword suddenly falls from the sky for me so it stands to reason that if the feat doesn't specify that, by some means, you generate a body feature capable of making the stated natural attack, you need to provide for the body feature by other means to take advantage of the feat.
This would, incidentally, apply to related things such as the Vishkaya feat to spit poison into someone's eyes. All vishkaya naturally secrete venom and the feat just gives you the skill of aiming a venomous loogie at someone's eyes. But what about for someone who doesn't naturally secrete venom? By what criteria do you determine whether a Human can secrete vishkaya venom? Could they do it before they took Racial Heritage? If not, did they "grow" venom glands in their mouth after they realized that biology made a mistake? If not, did the fact that they practiced spitting in peoples eyes cause them to grow said venom glands? And where in the rules would such clarification be found?...
Vishkaya venom is a racial trait that they get. Its down in the fancy rules block when you make one. A bastard sword is a thing in the equipment chapter with stats like any other weapon. Tail is not a racial trait that kobolds get. For all intents and purposes 'tail' or 'being tailed' does not exist as a thing. This is why in the feat requirements it doesn't say must you must have a tail. These things are not the same.
In addition claws and talons are the only things as of yet with actual required body location placement.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is genetically descended from Kobolds, and can be presumed to have racial qualities that other humans do not possess.
In this instance, a tail. There's zero RAW ambiguity here - the OP is asking for FAQ because what he really wants is an errata.
So can I take Racial Heritage: Strix and tell my GM that my human starts with physical qualities (wings) that normal humans don't have thus gaining a fly speed of 60' at character creation? If you can grow a tail due to this feat there is no reason you shouldn't be able to get wings.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
A sigh and a FAQ.
I see nothing in the feat that says you get physiological features of the race.
And FWIW, the Toxic ability of the vishkanyas is a racial trait, not a race trait, which is the clearly the 'trait' referred to in the Racial Heritage feat.
Cheapy, their argument was that the feat Sleep Venom gave you a venom, but it lacked any DC or frequency so it just didn't do anything mechanically.
So can I take Racial Heritage: Strix and tell my GM that my human starts with physical qualities (wings) that normal humans don't have thus gaining a fly speed of 60' at character creation? If you can grow a tail due to this feat there is no reason you shouldn't be able to get wings.A human with Racial Heritage (Kobold) is genetically descended from Kobolds, and can be presumed to have racial qualities that other humans do not possess.
In this instance, a tail. There's zero RAW ambiguity here - the OP is asking for FAQ because what he really wants is an errata.
Since the argument is that Racial Heritage (Kobold) could give you a tail with no mechanical benefits, Racial Heritage (Strix) could give you wings with no mechanical benefits. So just having wings would not enable you to fly, glide, or even slow your fall. But if there were a Strix racial feat that would give you the ability to fly, you would qualify for that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cheapy, their argument was that the feat Sleep Venom gave you a venom, but it lacked any DC or frequency so it just didn't do anything mechanically.
Which is far more complicated than it needs to be. The feat modifies your venom. You don't have venom, so the feat doesn't do anything, just like any other feat that modifies something you don't have.
Somehow getting Multiweapon Fighting as someone with 2 hands doesn't suddenly grant you a third hand, even if they count as having three hands through some weird feat.
I agree with you cheapy, but apparently many others don't, which is why I started the FAQ request.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Think of it like this-
Racial Heritage gives you characteristics of the chosen race. It effects your character's appearance in a manor of your choosing, according to the given heritage.
A human with Kobold heritage very well could have a tail. It just wouldn't do anything just like having a tail doesn't do anything for kobolds. Then, you take Tail Terror, and suddenly your useless tail isn't so useless.
The same can be said for absolutely any other racial feature. (Yes even stryx wings. If you want to spend your first 5 levels looking like a flightless bird so you can take improved wings later, go for it) It absolutely works by RAW. If you don't like it, house rule it.
As a side note, Awakened Turtles could definitely use UMD. Hands aren't neccessary.
Think of it like this-
Racial Heritage gives you characteristics of the chosen race. It effects your character's appearance in a manor of your choosing, according to the given heritage.
A human with Kobold heritage very well could have a tail. It just wouldn't do anything just like having a tail doesn't do anything for kobolds. Then, you take Tail Terror, and suddenly your useless tail isn't so useless.
The same can be said for absolutely any other racial feature. (Yes even stryx wings. If you want to spend your first 5 levels looking like a flightless bird so you can take improved wings later, go for it) It absolutely works by RAW. If you don't like it, house rule it.
Please show me in the Racial Heritage feat where it states that it allows you to choose alternative physical characteristics from your ancestral race.
(Hint: It doesn't say that anywhere)
A human with Racial Heritage does not get to choose to have scaled skin because he has Kobold blood in his family tree. Why? Because the feat does not state that anywhere. It says you can take certain specific traits and items that derive from that race. Allowing anything beyond that - like stating, "I'm human, but I have a tail hanging off my butt," is what is 'house rules' here.
Note that I probably would allow someone to do this - take a tail because they have Kobold blood - in my game if they came up with a sufficient backstory. But that doesn't make it RAW.
|
|
It's simple. The tail is fluff. There's no rules, anywhere, at all, about the tail. It's story and fluff, and is irrelevant to the rules. This is why we have a Game Master - to handle the stuff the rules doesn't need to cover.
The Tail Terror feat gives you a tail attack. This is rules. This is RAW terrritory. There's no ambiguity in the rules, once again. If you have this feat, you have a tail attack, plain and simple.
So can I take Racial Heritage: Strix and tell my GM that my human starts with physical qualities (wings) that normal humans don't have thus gaining a fly speed of 60' at character creation? If you can grow a tail due to this feat there is no reason you shouldn't be able to get wings.
Why would it give you a fly speed? I'd let you have wings, sure, but no game benefit (of any kind) until you take a feat that gives you a fly speed with your wings. Fluff is fluff.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My stance is that there are no rules governing what your character can look like- even if you take the race description as such, you are still left with deviations that can and do exist.
The rules do not say you can have a vestigial tail and scaly skin, but the rules also do not say you can have red hair, dark skin, and hazel eyes. None of which are mechanically distinct choices (other than perhaps a source of GM-ruled circumstance modifiers to social rolls).
Appearance is by and large left up to the player, and for a good reason.
Saying "the rules don't say your 1/16th kobold can have scaly skin" isn't a very strong argument. So let's get down to the real issue.
Feats do what they say they do, and nothing more. Racial Heritage says:
"you count as X for the purpose of taking traits, feats, how spells and magic items affect you, and so on."
By RAW, you can take any feat that you meet the prerequisites for. So the question isn't whether or not you can take Tail Terror as a Human, you totally can. The question is whether or not it does anything for you.
A GM can rule it does or it does not, but the rules do not prohibit the use of this particular feat. Arguments can be made for feats that modify or upgrade actual mechanical elements a character does not actually possess, such as poison, but in order for Racial Heritage (Kobold) to NOT qualify you for Tail Terror, Racial Heritage would need additional language, such as:
"...for the purpose of taking traits, feats, how spells and magic items affect you, and so on, unless it would be physically impossible to do so."
Think of it like this-
Racial Heritage gives you characteristics of the chosen race. It effects your character's appearance in a manor of your choosing, according to the given heritage.
A human with Kobold heritage very well could have a tail. It just wouldn't do anything just like having a tail doesn't do anything for kobolds. Then, you take Tail Terror, and suddenly your useless tail isn't so useless.
The same can be said for absolutely any other racial feature. (Yes even stryx wings. If you want to spend your first 5 levels looking like a flightless bird so you can take improved wings later, go for it) It absolutely works by RAW. If you don't like it, house rule it.
Please show me in the Racial Heritage feat where it states that it allows you to choose alternative physical characteristics from your ancestral race.
(Hint: It doesn't say that anywhere)
A human with Racial Heritage does not get to choose to have scaled skin because he has Kobold blood in his family tree. Why? Because the feat does not state that anywhere. It says you can take certain specific traits and items that derive from that race. Allowing anything beyond that - like stating, "I'm human, but I have a tail hanging off my butt," is what is 'house rules' here.
Note that I probably would allow someone to do this - take a tail because they have Kobold blood - in my game if they came up with a sufficient backstory. But that doesn't make it RAW.
Character appearance is pretty much entirely under a player's control. A player could say, "my character is an elf, but she has a light covering of fur" and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefit, it would just be another thing on the list of weird stuff players come up with for their character. They wouldn't even need to take a feat for it (though if they had racial heritage: cat folk it would make a lot more sense.
The RAW is that with Racial Heritage, you count as having all the chosen race's characteristics. You effectively are that race for the purposes of qualifying for race specific benefits. You can justify or explain that in game however you'd like.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefitHaving a tail becomes a mechanical benefit when you implicitly need to possess one to use Tail Terror.
While I don't object to customization, any player who excuses their tail as a nonmechanical benefit, then later uses it to their mechanical benefit, is a liar.
Or they spent a feat to gain access to a racial non-mechanical benefit, and then another feat to actually make it do something.
Seriously, what is the problem here?
|
|
and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefitHaving a tail becomes a mechanical benefit when you implicitly need to possess one to use Tail Terror.
While I don't object to customization, any player who excuses their tail as a nonmechanical benefit, then later uses it to their mechanical benefit, is a liar.
Well said! A tail isn't just fluff if it is implicitly required for a mechanical effect.
If a tail isn't just fluff, than when Tail Terror you have strengthened your tail, and when it says you use your tail to attack, that must not be fluff either. That reasoning just doesn't work. In fact, kobolds have no tail trait. Once you accept that, the problems just disappear.
Note also that a human with Tail Terror receives the same benefit as a kobold with the same feat: a tail slap. This isn't even an abuse or loophole.