Does the Racial Heritage feat, combined with a feat that improves an inherent feature (claws, poison, etc) grant you that feature?


Rules Questions

951 to 1,000 of 1,170 << first < prev | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | next > last >>

@PatientWolf, so you're saying that even though they have a tail, it just hangs there, limp, unable to do anything? I mean.. a Kobolds Tail is purely cosmetic... until you take the feat that grants it a mechanical advantage.

A Catfolks claws are purely cosmetic, unless they take the Cat Claws racial trait. A Grippli's tongue is cosmentic, unless you take the "Agile Tongue". A half-orcs tusks are cosmetic unless they take the "Toothy" trait. A Kitsune's tail is purely cosmetic unless you take "Magic Tail", Ratfolks claws are cosmetic unless you take "Sharp Claw".

Saying a Kobold/Aasimar's tail is purely cosmetic is fine. It's when they qualify for and take Tail Terror, that it becomes a mechanical benefit.


PatientWolf wrote:
el cuervo wrote:

This was my point exactly. Though again, I will say that per aasimar race rules, ONLY HUMANS are capable of producing "full-blooded" aasimar. Any other race that produces an aasimar produces essentially a HALF-aasimar (with stats the same as a full blooded "human" aasimar, other than Size adjustments). I can produce the relevant text if anyone needs me to.

This means that a Kobold-Aasimar is actually half kobold, appears as a kobold, has a tail, and does not even need any other feats to take Tail Terror. But again, I beg the question, if you want a Tail Slap attack and want Tail Terror, why not just play as a **** kobold instead of complicating things so unnecessarily?

That isn't correct. That is exactly why they say that differences are purely cosmetic. Precisely because taking a kobold-Aasimar does NOT qualify you for kobold only feats. Taking a halfling-Aasimar does NOT qualify you for halfling feats. That is like saying all races except human get a Scion of trait built in without giving up Celestial as a language. That is a rip off for human aasimars.

Well I was mistaken anyway, since it says humanoid and not human. However, I think you're wrong about the tail being cosmetic preventing the aasimar-kobold from taking Tail Terror. It's as cosmetic as a regular kobold with a tail or as a witch's hair before they get Prehensile Hair.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Wow, this is astonishing.

I had no idea Tail Terror inspired so much passion and enthusiasm.

If there was only some way we could harness this energy for something productive.


PatientWolf wrote:
el cuervo wrote:

This was my point exactly. Though again, I will say that per aasimar race rules, ONLY HUMANS are capable of producing "full-blooded" aasimar. Any other race that produces an aasimar produces essentially a HALF-aasimar (with stats the same as a full blooded "human" aasimar, other than Size adjustments). I can produce the relevant text if anyone needs me to.

This means that a Kobold-Aasimar is actually half kobold, appears as a kobold, has a tail, and does not even need any other feats to take Tail Terror. But again, I beg the question, if you want a Tail Slap attack and want Tail Terror, why not just play as a **** kobold instead of complicating things so unnecessarily?

That isn't correct. That is exactly why they say that differences are purely cosmetic. Precisely because taking a kobold-Aasimar does NOT qualify you for kobold only feats. Taking a halfling-Aasimar does NOT qualify you for halfling feats. That is like saying all races except human get a Scion of trait built in without giving up Celestial as a language. That is a rip off for human aasimars.

I disagree. The tail you get from being a Kobold-Aasimar would quality you for Tail Terror.

BUT...

Scion of Humanity would cause you to lose the tail. It is pretty clear that SoH causes you to look completely human, thus no tail.


Kryptik wrote:

Wow, this is astonishing.

I had no idea Tail Terror inspired so much passion and enthusiasm.

If there was only some way we could harness this energy for something productive.

We are, we are keeping the PDT in bewildered amusement. A happy design team is a good design team ;)

Shadow Lodge

Neonpeekaboo wrote:

@PatientWolf, so you're saying that even though they have a tail, it just hangs there, limp, unable to do anything? I mean.. a Kobolds Tail is purely cosmetic... until you take the feat that grants it a mechanical advantage.

A Catfolks claws are purely cosmetic, unless they take the Cat Claws racial trait. A Grippli's tongue is cosmentic, unless you take the "Agile Tongue". A half-orcs tusks are cosmetic unless they take the "Toothy" trait. A Kitsune's tail is purely cosmetic unless you take "Magic Tail", Ratfolks claws are cosmetic unless you take "Sharp Claw".

Saying a Kobold/Aasimar's tail is purely cosmetic is fine. It's when they qualify for and take Tail Terror, that it becomes a mechanical benefit.

All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized. Show me in the rules that distinction other than your opinion. I have in previous posts outlined my evidence for suggesting the contrary. Where is your evidence that those are purely cosmetic.

You are singling out Kobold because a Kobold tail or a Grippli tongue simply because for those races they are not very useful without a feat. However, not being useful does not equate to purely cosmetic. Tails in general for other creatures are NOT purely cosmetic. Wings in general are not purely cosmetic. Arms and Legs in general are not purely cosmetic. There may be instances of races where those appendages are just not commonly useful but that doesn't mean that they can be declared simply cosmetic.

So I ask again for you to provide the evidence of that being the case. Not assertions. Not hypotheticals. Actual evidence.


Kryptik wrote:

Wow, this is astonishing.

I had no idea Tail Terror inspired so much passion and enthusiasm.

If there was only some way we could harness this energy for something productive.

Noooooooooooooooooooo joke. This has been crazy-sauce.


Charender wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
el cuervo wrote:

This was my point exactly. Though again, I will say that per aasimar race rules, ONLY HUMANS are capable of producing "full-blooded" aasimar. Any other race that produces an aasimar produces essentially a HALF-aasimar (with stats the same as a full blooded "human" aasimar, other than Size adjustments). I can produce the relevant text if anyone needs me to.

This means that a Kobold-Aasimar is actually half kobold, appears as a kobold, has a tail, and does not even need any other feats to take Tail Terror. But again, I beg the question, if you want a Tail Slap attack and want Tail Terror, why not just play as a **** kobold instead of complicating things so unnecessarily?

That isn't correct. That is exactly why they say that differences are purely cosmetic. Precisely because taking a kobold-Aasimar does NOT qualify you for kobold only feats. Taking a halfling-Aasimar does NOT qualify you for halfling feats. That is like saying all races except human get a Scion of trait built in without giving up Celestial as a language. That is a rip off for human aasimars.

I disagree. The tail you get from being a Kobold-Aasimar would quality you for Tail Terror.

BUT...

Scion of Humanity would cause you to lose the tail. It is pretty clear that SoH causes you to look completely human, thus no tail.

It is a case of two specific rules that both apply and counter each other. So this is why we have GMs really. I like the Scion of Scaly-Kind idea, or alternatively, schrodinger's tail!!

Shadow Lodge

el cuervo wrote:
Well I was mistaken anyway, since it says humanoid and not human. However, I think you're wrong about the tail being cosmetic preventing the aasimar-kobold from taking Tail Terror. It's as cosmetic as a regular kobold with a tail or as a witch's hair before they get Prehensile Hair.

I've already addressed the hair argument earlier.


PatientWolf wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:

@PatientWolf, so you're saying that even though they have a tail, it just hangs there, limp, unable to do anything? I mean.. a Kobolds Tail is purely cosmetic... until you take the feat that grants it a mechanical advantage.

A Catfolks claws are purely cosmetic, unless they take the Cat Claws racial trait. A Grippli's tongue is cosmentic, unless you take the "Agile Tongue". A half-orcs tusks are cosmetic unless they take the "Toothy" trait. A Kitsune's tail is purely cosmetic unless you take "Magic Tail", Ratfolks claws are cosmetic unless you take "Sharp Claw".

Saying a Kobold/Aasimar's tail is purely cosmetic is fine. It's when they qualify for and take Tail Terror, that it becomes a mechanical benefit.

All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized. Show me in the rules that distinction other than your opinion. I have in previous posts outlined my evidence for suggesting the contrary. Where is your evidence that those are purely cosmetic.

You are singling out Kobold because a Kobold tail or a Grippli tongue simply because for those races they are not very useful without a feat. However, not being useful does not equate to purely cosmetic. Tails in general for other creatures are NOT purely cosmetic. Wings in general are not purely cosmetic. Arms and Legs in general are not purely cosmetic. There may be instances of races where those appendages are just not commonly useful but that doesn't mean that they can be declared simply cosmetic.

So I ask again for you to provide the evidence of that being the case. Not assertions. Not hypotheticals. Actual evidence.

A kobold's tail is not even "not very useful without a feat." It is only able to be used by you to describe things that have no impact on the game. You are not allowed to use the tail to any effect without first taking the feat. You cant even use it to hold open a door for someone wihtout a houserule allowing it to be a functional limb before the feat. Tail Terror even points out that you only have a "tail slot" for use with tail weapons after you take the feat. I dont see how it is anything other than cosmetic.


PatientWolf wrote:
el cuervo wrote:
Well I was mistaken anyway, since it says humanoid and not human. However, I think you're wrong about the tail being cosmetic preventing the aasimar-kobold from taking Tail Terror. It's as cosmetic as a regular kobold with a tail or as a witch's hair before they get Prehensile Hair.
I've already addressed the hair argument earlier.

What part of hair isn't cosmetic? What causes it to become mechanical? Likewise, what part of a kobold's tail isn't cosmetic? What causes it to become mechanical? Tattoos are cosmetic until you take the Varisian Tattoo trait.

Finally, if a kobold-aasimar could take Tail Terror (RAW, we have determined they can't because they don't qualify as kobold for purposes of meeting the prerequisites), and that kobold-aasimar has a tail, what is different about THAT tail (since they look just like kobold and for all intents and purposes are indistinguishable from a kobold), that makes it cosmetic?

There are many things in the game that are cosmetic until you take a feat or trait that makes them otherwise, and we have already established this as fact in this very thread. You're wrong, a thousand times.


PatientWolf wrote:
All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized.

A Kobold tail, whether by being a kobold, or an Kobold/Aasimar is that exactly that. It's an existing appendage that cant do anything other than wag until you take the feat.

Shadow Lodge

Torbyne wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:

@PatientWolf, so you're saying that even though they have a tail, it just hangs there, limp, unable to do anything? I mean.. a Kobolds Tail is purely cosmetic... until you take the feat that grants it a mechanical advantage.

A Catfolks claws are purely cosmetic, unless they take the Cat Claws racial trait. A Grippli's tongue is cosmentic, unless you take the "Agile Tongue". A half-orcs tusks are cosmetic unless they take the "Toothy" trait. A Kitsune's tail is purely cosmetic unless you take "Magic Tail", Ratfolks claws are cosmetic unless you take "Sharp Claw".

Saying a Kobold/Aasimar's tail is purely cosmetic is fine. It's when they qualify for and take Tail Terror, that it becomes a mechanical benefit.

All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized. Show me in the rules that distinction other than your opinion. I have in previous posts outlined my evidence for suggesting the contrary. Where is your evidence that those are purely cosmetic.

You are singling out Kobold because a Kobold tail or a Grippli tongue simply because for those races they are not very useful without a feat. However, not being useful does not equate to purely cosmetic. Tails in general for other creatures are NOT purely cosmetic. Wings in general are not purely cosmetic. Arms and Legs in general are not purely cosmetic. There may be instances of races where those appendages are just not commonly useful but that doesn't mean that they can be declared simply cosmetic.

So I ask again for you to provide the evidence of that being the case. Not assertions. Not hypotheticals. Actual evidence.

A kobold's tail is not even "not very useful without a feat." It is only able to be used by you to describe things that have no impact on the game. You are not allowed to use the tail to any effect without first taking the feat. You cant even use it to hold open a door for...

Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
Kryptik wrote:

Wow, this is astonishing.

I had no idea Tail Terror inspired so much passion and enthusiasm.

If there was only some way we could harness this energy for something productive.

Noooooooooooooooooooo joke. This has been crazy-sauce.

Some of us couldn't give a kobold's backside about Tail Terror. This is just something to hold off boredom at work for me.

Shadow Lodge

Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized.
A Kobold tail, whether by being a kobold, or an Kobold/Aasimar is that exactly that. It's an existing appendage that cant do anything other than wag until you take the feat.

Nope, you can stick a tail attachment on it and use it as a primary weapon attack just like wielding a sword or any other weapon. With the tail terror you get to use it as a secondary natural attack. So one single primary attack with an attachment and no Tail Terror OR a secondary natural attack with or without an attachment with Tail Terror for two attacks/ round.

Shadow Lodge

Charender wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
Kryptik wrote:

Wow, this is astonishing.

I had no idea Tail Terror inspired so much passion and enthusiasm.

If there was only some way we could harness this energy for something productive.

Noooooooooooooooooooo joke. This has been crazy-sauce.
Some of us couldn't give a kobold's backside about Tail Terror. This is just something to hold off boredom at work for me.

Same here. I am trying not to do anything constructive on a Friday afternoon :D


PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:

@PatientWolf, so you're saying that even though they have a tail, it just hangs there, limp, unable to do anything? I mean.. a Kobolds Tail is purely cosmetic... until you take the feat that grants it a mechanical advantage.

A Catfolks claws are purely cosmetic, unless they take the Cat Claws racial trait. A Grippli's tongue is cosmentic, unless you take the "Agile Tongue". A half-orcs tusks are cosmetic unless they take the "Toothy" trait. A Kitsune's tail is purely cosmetic unless you take "Magic Tail", Ratfolks claws are cosmetic unless you take "Sharp Claw".

Saying a Kobold/Aasimar's tail is purely cosmetic is fine. It's when they qualify for and take Tail Terror, that it becomes a mechanical benefit.

All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized. Show me in the rules that distinction other than your opinion. I have in previous posts outlined my evidence for suggesting the contrary. Where is your evidence that those are purely cosmetic.

You are singling out Kobold because a Kobold tail or a Grippli tongue simply because for those races they are not very useful without a feat. However, not being useful does not equate to purely cosmetic. Tails in general for other creatures are NOT purely cosmetic. Wings in general are not purely cosmetic. Arms and Legs in general are not purely cosmetic. There may be instances of races where those appendages are just not commonly useful but that doesn't mean that they can be declared simply cosmetic.

So I ask again for you to provide the evidence of that being the case. Not assertions. Not hypotheticals. Actual evidence.

A kobold's tail is not even "not very useful without a feat." It is only able to be used by you to describe things that have no impact on the game. You are not allowed to use the tail to any effect without first taking the feat. You cant even use it to
...

This is an interesting notion but a big crux from before is the exact wording of strengthening a tail to the point of it being useable vice growing a tail. Under that same wording, your tail is not strong enough to even swing with non proficiency without the feat.


PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.


Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D

Shadow Lodge

Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

You are right. You can use it as a primary weapon attack if you have an attachment on it.

Shadow Lodge

Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D

Entirely different because Catfolk don't have a weapon attachment for their claws. If they get an item that allows claw attacks they most certainly can.


Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D

LoL

Shadow Lodge

Torbyne wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:

@PatientWolf, so you're saying that even though they have a tail, it just hangs there, limp, unable to do anything? I mean.. a Kobolds Tail is purely cosmetic... until you take the feat that grants it a mechanical advantage.

A Catfolks claws are purely cosmetic, unless they take the Cat Claws racial trait. A Grippli's tongue is cosmentic, unless you take the "Agile Tongue". A half-orcs tusks are cosmetic unless they take the "Toothy" trait. A Kitsune's tail is purely cosmetic unless you take "Magic Tail", Ratfolks claws are cosmetic unless you take "Sharp Claw".

Saying a Kobold/Aasimar's tail is purely cosmetic is fine. It's when they qualify for and take Tail Terror, that it becomes a mechanical benefit.

All you are doing is pointing to feats that utilize existing appendages and claiming that those appendages are cosmetic until utilized. Show me in the rules that distinction other than your opinion. I have in previous posts outlined my evidence for suggesting the contrary. Where is your evidence that those are purely cosmetic.

You are singling out Kobold because a Kobold tail or a Grippli tongue simply because for those races they are not very useful without a feat. However, not being useful does not equate to purely cosmetic. Tails in general for other creatures are NOT purely cosmetic. Wings in general are not purely cosmetic. Arms and Legs in general are not purely cosmetic. There may be instances of races where those appendages are just not commonly useful but that doesn't mean that they can be declared simply cosmetic.

So I ask again for you to provide the evidence of that being the case. Not assertions. Not hypotheticals. Actual evidence.

A kobold's tail is not even "not very useful without a feat." It is only able to be used by you to describe things that have no impact on the game. You are not allowed to use the tail to any effect without first taking the
...

No, you your tail is not strong enough to do damage on its own without the feat. However, you can still put an attachment on it and use that attachment as a regular old weapon instead of a secondary tail slap attack.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Yes, feed the thread.

Feeeeeed it.

*drawing closer to 1k posts*

Shadow Lodge

Kryptik wrote:

Yes, feed the thread.

Feeeeeed it.

*drawing closer to 1k posts*

I'm working on it. I tried to give it a boost with some lewd implications about a grippli tongue but it just didn't catch on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

And to think I declared this thread dead over 100 posts ago.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D
Entirely different because Catfolk don't have a weapon attachment for their claws. If they get an item that allows claw attacks they most certainly can.

umm... pst. pst.

"Claw Blades: These subtle blades can only be used by catfolk with the cat's claws racial trait. Bought in a set of five, they fit over the wearer's claws on one hand. The blades grant the wearer a +1 enhancement bonus on claw attack rolls with that hand and change the weapon type from a natural weapon to a light slashing weapon. Catfolk with the cat's claws racial trait are proficient with this weapon. The claw blades can be enhanced like a masterwork weapon for the normal costs. The listed cost of the item is for one set of five claws for one hand. "

;)


PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D
Entirely different because Catfolk don't have a weapon attachment for their claws. If they get an item that allows claw attacks they most certainly can.

Even if they had blade-tipped claw attatchments, it would then grant them one armed attack with that claw.. unless they had two-weapon fighting as well.

The feat/trait is what grants them natural attacks.

A Kobold without Tail Terror cannot use his tail to attack, because it isn't strong enough without the feat.


Quick, someone come up with another doomed corner case!


PatientWolf wrote:
No, you your tail is not strong enough to do damage on its own without the feat. However, you can still put an attachment on it and use that attachment as a regular old weapon instead of a secondary tail slap attack.

First, you ignored my post (conveniently).

Second -- if your tail isn't strong enough to make a 1d6 bludgeoning attack WITHOUT the feat, then how exactly do you expect to attach an object which presumably makes your tail heavier and make an attack with it in that manner? And remind me again, if you can attach an object to the tail without the Tail Terror feat, how the tail is simply cosmetic in nature?

Or are you suggesting the tail is in fact a viable limb? In which case, it isn't cosmetic. Are you saying that we can also make an unarmed attack with the tail?

You are contradicting yourself, dude. Slow your roll.


Compare the claw blades of a Catfolk to this one for Kobold's

"Kobold Tail Attachments: A kobold with the Tail Terror feat (see below) can slip this device over the tip of his tail to augment his natural attack. Each tail attachment provides just enough weight, balance, and striking power to increase the damage of his tail slap. It takes a full-round action to slip on a kobold tail attachment, and the kobold gains a +4 bonus against disarm attempts made to remove his tail attachment. "

Based on the first sentence telling you when you can use the tail blades i would assume you could not "slip this device over the tip of his tail to augment his natural attack" if you do not yet have that natural attack.

Both weapon types state a requirement beyond proficiency before you can use them.


PatientWolf wrote:
Kryptik wrote:

Yes, feed the thread.

Feeeeeed it.

*drawing closer to 1k posts*

I'm working on it. I tried to give it a boost with some lewd implications about a grippli tongue but it just didn't catch on.

Yeah, but I dont think it should count, seeing as we've shifted the topic three steps to the left.

Shadow Lodge

Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D
Entirely different because Catfolk don't have a weapon attachment for their claws. If they get an item that allows claw attacks they most certainly can.

Even if they had blade-tipped claw attatchments, it would then grant them one armed attack with that claw.. unless they had two-weapon fighting as well.

The feat/trait is what grants them natural attacks.

A Kobold without Tail Terror cannot use his tail to attack, because it isn't strong enough without the feat.

Yep a catfolk with blade tipped claw attachments would get one armed attack. A kobold with a tail attachment gets one armed attack. Basically Tail Terror allows him to two weapon fight with his tail. A kobold fighter who takes weapon proficiency with Tail Attachments, Weapon Focus Tail Attachments, Weapon Spec Tail attachments, can make all his primary attacks with his tail attachments without ever taking Tail Terror. All Tail Terror allows is a secondary attack and automatic proficiency.


Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Kryptik wrote:

Yes, feed the thread.

Feeeeeed it.

*drawing closer to 1k posts*

I'm working on it. I tried to give it a boost with some lewd implications about a grippli tongue but it just didn't catch on.
Yeah, but I dont think it should count, seeing as we've shifted the topic three steps to the left.

Well we have shifted a step away from Racial Heritage and onto tails in general.

No takers on my hypothetical Lillend-Aasimar with a serpent tail? Just cut out the middle man and be medium sized tailed PC?


Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Kryptik wrote:

Yes, feed the thread.

Feeeeeed it.

*drawing closer to 1k posts*

I'm working on it. I tried to give it a boost with some lewd implications about a grippli tongue but it just didn't catch on.
Yeah, but I dont think it should count, seeing as we've shifted the topic three steps to the left.

Clearly, if you've shifted away from a square I threaten with my tail, I should get an AoO tail attack right?


PatientWolf wrote:
Yep a catfolk with blade tipped claw attachments would get one armed attack. A kobold with a tail attachment gets one armed attack. Basically Tail Terror allows him to two weapon fight with his tail. A kobold fighter who takes weapon proficiency with Tail Attachments, Weapon Focus Tail Attachments, Weapon Spec Tail attachments, can make all his primary attacks with his tail attachments without ever taking Tail Terror. All Tail Terror allows is a secondary attack and automatic proficiency.

That is so far from mechanically accurate, I cant even.

Fighter w/TWF = Primary Attack, Off-Hand Attack (NO Natural attack, ie. Tail) Fighter with with TWF, AND TT? Main hand -2, Off Hand -2, Tail -5. (Assuming using a light-offhand).


Kryptik wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Kryptik wrote:

Yes, feed the thread.

Feeeeeed it.

*drawing closer to 1k posts*

I'm working on it. I tried to give it a boost with some lewd implications about a grippli tongue but it just didn't catch on.
Yeah, but I dont think it should count, seeing as we've shifted the topic three steps to the left.
Clearly, if you've shifted away from a square I threaten with my tail, I should get an AoO tail attack right?

Yes, but only if you have Tail Terror and a tail with which to use it. ;)

Shadow Lodge

Torbyne wrote:

Compare the claw blades of a Catfolk to this one for Kobold's

"Kobold Tail Attachments: A kobold with the Tail Terror feat (see below) can slip this device over the tip of his tail to augment his natural attack. Each tail attachment provides just enough weight, balance, and striking power to increase the damage of his tail slap. It takes a full-round action to slip on a kobold tail attachment, and the kobold gains a +4 bonus against disarm attempts made to remove his tail attachment. "

Based on the first sentence telling you when you can use the tail blades i would assume you could not "slip this device over the tip of his tail to augment his natural attack" if you do not yet have that natural attack.

Both weapon types state a requirement beyond proficiency before you can use them.

I stand corrected on that one. It also says it increases the damage of tail slap and without Tail Terror there is no tail slap.

However, that still doesn't make tails on Kobolds simply cosmetic as if there were a magic item that was made to go on a tail a Kobold could wear it. Just because they can't use them to attack or do anything that requires strength doesn't mean they are just fluff until you take a feat. In going off on this tangent we got away from the fact that you still have provided no evidence for that assertion.

Shadow Lodge

Torbyne wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D
Entirely different because Catfolk don't have a weapon attachment for their claws. If they get an item that allows claw attacks they most certainly can.

Even if they had blade-tipped claw attatchments, it would then grant them one armed attack with that claw.. unless they had two-weapon fighting as well.

The feat/trait is what grants them natural attacks.

A Kobold without Tail Terror cannot use his tail to attack, because it isn't strong enough without the feat.

Yep a catfolk with blade tipped claw attachments would get one armed attack. A kobold with a tail attachment gets one armed attack. Basically Tail Terror allows him to two weapon fight with his tail. A kobold fighter who takes weapon proficiency with Tail Attachments, Weapon Focus Tail Attachments, Weapon Spec Tail attachments, can make all his primary attacks with his tail attachments without ever taking Tail Terror. All Tail Terror allows is a secondary attack and automatic proficiency.
Neither Claw Blades or Tail Attachments have independant proficiencies, you are only proficient and only able to use them if you meet the trait or feat requirement, prior to that you can not even use them with a -4 penalty.

Already conceded that point. When I am wrong I do admit it. You are absolutely right about not using Tail Attachments without the Tail Terror feat.

Back to the main topic now?


PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:

Compare the claw blades of a Catfolk to this one for Kobold's

"Kobold Tail Attachments: A kobold with the Tail Terror feat (see below) can slip this device over the tip of his tail to augment his natural attack. Each tail attachment provides just enough weight, balance, and striking power to increase the damage of his tail slap. It takes a full-round action to slip on a kobold tail attachment, and the kobold gains a +4 bonus against disarm attempts made to remove his tail attachment. "

Based on the first sentence telling you when you can use the tail blades i would assume you could not "slip this device over the tip of his tail to augment his natural attack" if you do not yet have that natural attack.

Both weapon types state a requirement beyond proficiency before you can use them.

I stand corrected on that one. It also says it increases the damage of tail slap and without Tail Terror there is no tail slap.

However, that still doesn't make tails on Kobolds simply cosmetic as if there were a magic item that was made to go on a tail a Kobold could wear it. Just because they can't use them to attack or do anything that requires strength doesn't mean they are just fluff until you take a feat. In going off on this tangent we got away from the fact that you still have provided no evidence for that assertion.

But is there an item slot for tails aside from Tail Attachments? i thought the magic item list includes the only 12 legal places to employ magic items? Tail Attachements are a specific execption to that general rule but you cant base other items off one specific execption granted by a feat, yeah?


PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Torbyne wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Wrong, it does not say you don't have a tail slot before taking the feat. It only says you can augment the tail slap with them and are proficient. They can, however, be used non-proficiently without the Tail Terror feat.

Thsi statement explains where you're having trouble seeing our side of the arguement. Yout cant use your tail as a secondary natural attack unless you have the Tail Terror Feat.

Unless you're saying a Catfolk can have two claw attacks without the trait, and just be used as if "non-proficient". Which you cant.

whoo, beat you by 10 seconds :D
Entirely different because Catfolk don't have a weapon attachment for their claws. If they get an item that allows claw attacks they most certainly can.

Even if they had blade-tipped claw attatchments, it would then grant them one armed attack with that claw.. unless they had two-weapon fighting as well.

The feat/trait is what grants them natural attacks.

A Kobold without Tail Terror cannot use his tail to attack, because it isn't strong enough without the feat.

Yep a catfolk with blade tipped claw attachments would get one armed attack. A kobold with a tail attachment gets one armed attack. Basically Tail Terror allows him to two weapon fight with his tail. A kobold fighter who takes weapon proficiency with Tail Attachments, Weapon Focus Tail Attachments, Weapon Spec Tail attachments, can make all his primary attacks with his tail attachments without ever taking Tail Terror. All Tail Terror allows is a secondary attack and automatic proficiency.
Neither Claw Blades or Tail Attachments have independant proficiencies, you are only proficient and only able to use them if you meet the trait or feat requirement, prior to that you can not even use them with a -4 penalty.
Already conceded that point. When I am wrong...

Yup, deleted that post after i saw your response.


I'm fairly certain the main topic has been settled. A Tail is cosmetic until modified by a feat. A Kobold/Aasimar has a tail (Because they look like Kobolds.. who have tails), and it's a purely cosmetic tail, until they qualify/take the feat that changes it.


Neonpeekaboo wrote:
I'm fairly certain the main topic has been settled. A Tail is cosmetic until modified by a feat. A Kobold/Aasimar has a tail (Because they look like Kobolds.. who have tails), and it's a purely cosmetic tail, until they qualify/take the feat that changes it.

Agreed, but without house rules(Like a Scion of Kobolddom trait), you still cannot get the combo to work.

For the Kobold/Aasimar to get Tail terror, they need to count as a Kobold. To do that, they have to take Scion of Humanity to quality for Racial Heritage. Scion of Humanity specifically says that you have the appearance of a Human. Specifically....

Scion of Sumanity wrote:


Scion of Humanity Some aasimars' heavenly ancestry is extremely distant. An aasimar with this racial trait counts as an outsider (native) and a humanoid (human) for any effect related to race, including feat prerequisites and spells that affect humanoids. She can pass for human without using the Disguise skill. This racial trait replaces the Celestial language and alters the native subtype.

That means that Scion of Humanity gives you the appearance of a Human. No kobold appearance means no tail.


I can't believe I'll lose my bet that this thread can't reach 1.000 posts. =_='

Even a designer made an answer and now you're arguing about a half-kobold that can or can't take a kobold feat to use his tail.

Damn you guys! You're greedy, really greedy!

Spoiler:

One problem could be the fact it's a companion book that tried to tie the concept of aasimar, who usually can take scion of humanity to be more "human", with other races without giving giving them this possibility*.

Here's what I hear: You want a mi-celestial mi-kobold to take a trait to make you more human, to take a feat to make you more kobold, to take a kobold feat. Nobody's common sense tingling ?

But let's pretend I don't care:


The designer(s) didn't seem to be aware of that kind of situation, aka a racial feature without any direct mechanical advantage that can be used as an invisible prerequisite for a feat.

Even Kobold tail didn't state you need a tail. Now, thank to a designer, you know that if you have a tail, it's OK, no problem, go ahead if you are/count as a kobold. What do you need anymore ?
Use your common sense as reminded for Godzilla's sake!

...Or let's go back to copy-paste the text about how cosmetic the tail can be, and use the same argument over and over like the 800 posts before a designer felt the need to state something more or less obvious to stop you walking round and round (Good use of this one ?). >.>

*As far as I know, because I'm not really into Companion books for this kind of stuff.

Shadow Lodge

Torbyne wrote:


But is there an item slot for tails aside from Tail Attachments? i thought the magic item list includes the only 12 legal places to employ magic items? Tail Attachements are a specific execption to that general rule but you cant base other items off one specific execption granted by a feat, yeah?

So even though it kobolds not being able to use their tails without a feat is a single specific case among creatures with tails it is acceptable for you to use that fact to support your argument that tails are just cosmetic but the fact that tail attachments exist indicating the existence of a slot is an unacceptable corner case for my argument that tails are not purely cosmetic. I find it very unconvincing when someone must resort to one logical fallacy after another to try and support their argument.


Charender wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
I'm fairly certain the main topic has been settled. A Tail is cosmetic until modified by a feat. A Kobold/Aasimar has a tail (Because they look like Kobolds.. who have tails), and it's a purely cosmetic tail, until they qualify/take the feat that changes it.

Agreed, but without house rules(Like a Scion of Kobolddom trait), you still cannot get the combo to work.

For the Kobold/Aasimar to get Tail terror, they need to count as a Kobold. To do that, they have to take Scion of Humanity to quality for Racial Heritage. Scion of Humanity specifically says that you have the appearance of a Human. Specifically....

Scion of Sumanity wrote:


Scion of Humanity Some aasimars' heavenly ancestry is extremely distant. An aasimar with this racial trait counts as an outsider (native) and a humanoid (human) for any effect related to race, including feat prerequisites and spells that affect humanoids. She can pass for human without using the Disguise skill. This racial trait replaces the Celestial language and alters the native subtype.
That means that Scion of Humanity gives you the appearance of a Human. No kobold appearance means no tail.

True, house rules for a would be needed.. I was just leading this off of "A non-human assamir would have access to "Sion of What-the-hell-ever".

Otherwise yeah, we're in complete agreement.

(And now hell freezes over)

Shadow Lodge

Charender wrote:
Neonpeekaboo wrote:
I'm fairly certain the main topic has been settled. A Tail is cosmetic until modified by a feat. A Kobold/Aasimar has a tail (Because they look like Kobolds.. who have tails), and it's a purely cosmetic tail, until they qualify/take the feat that changes it.

Agreed, but without house rules(Like a Scion of Kobolddom trait), you still cannot get the combo to work.

For the Kobold/Aasimar to get Tail terror, they need to count as a Kobold. To do that, they have to take Scion of Humanity to quality for Racial Heritage. Scion of Humanity specifically says that you have the appearance of a Human. Specifically....

Scion of Sumanity wrote:


Scion of Humanity Some aasimars' heavenly ancestry is extremely distant. An aasimar with this racial trait counts as an outsider (native) and a humanoid (human) for any effect related to race, including feat prerequisites and spells that affect humanoids. She can pass for human without using the Disguise skill. This racial trait replaces the Celestial language and alters the native subtype.
That means that Scion of Humanity gives you the appearance of a Human. No kobold appearance means no tail.

Yep you got it. No way to get this to work without a house rule. S'what I been saying all along.


HectorVivis wrote:
Stuff..

Actually the problem is that you cannot be a medium sized kobold. That is what is really wanted. A way to get a tail attack as a medium sized character. -4 strength and small size of kobolds really hurt tham as martial characters.

If there was a Kobold option that let you be medium sized with +2 strength and -2 dexterity over a normal kobold, this whole thread would be unecessary.


Agreement?! No, I need 4 more posts!!

NOOOOOOO

Shadow Lodge

Charender wrote:
HectorVivis wrote:
Stuff..
Actually the problem is that you cannot be a medium sized kobold. That is what is really wanted. A way to get a tail attack as a medium sized character. -4 strength and small size of kobolds really hurt tham as martial characters.

Exactly! That is exactly what they are trying to work around!

951 to 1,000 of 1,170 << first < prev | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Does the Racial Heritage feat, combined with a feat that improves an inherent feature (claws, poison, etc) grant you that feature? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.