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


Rules Questions

51 to 100 of 1,170 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
PatientWolf wrote:
Well said! A tail isn't just fluff if it is implicitly required for a mechanical effect.

Ooh! It's that invisible ink only certain posters can see again!

What does the invisible ink say in the prerequisites of Tail Terror? Since I can only see real rules, I can't read the invisible rules like you can. The feat says it requires a tail, then?

Fluffffffff.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Don't forget, you have to have "quick reflexes" for your Improved Initiative to function.


Doomed Hero wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefit

Having 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?

The problem is that you can't spend a feat to get something it doesn't give you. Whether or not paying a feat is a fair price is irrelevant; the feat grants you the ability to qualify for items and effects that depend on your race type, and makes no mention of exterior physical features. The game's rules are about what they permit, not what they forbid, so the RAW is that you do not gain physical qualities like tails. Any features you do have are house rules - potentially GOOD and FUN house rules, but house rules nonetheless.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Morphling wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Well said! A tail isn't just fluff if it is implicitly required for a mechanical effect.

Ooh! It's that invisible ink only certain posters can see again!

What does the invisible ink say in the prerequisites of Tail Terror? Since I can only see real rules, I can't read the invisible rules like you can. The feat says it requires a tail, then?

Fluffffffff.

So you don't need a tail to make a tail slap then? You can use a metaphysical phantom tail?


Bizbag wrote:
the feat grants you the ability to qualify for items and effects that depend on your race type, and makes no mention of exterior physical features.

Understanding is so close, it's within your grasp.


Bizbag wrote:


The problem is that you can't spend a feat to get something it doesn't give you. Whether or not paying a feat is a fair price is irrelevant; the feat grants you the ability to qualify for items and effects that depend on your race type, and makes no mention of exterior physical features. The game's rules are about what they permit, not what they forbid, so the RAW is that you do not gain physical qualities like tails. Any features you do have are house rules - potentially GOOD and FUN house rules, but house rules nonetheless.

So you don't need a tail to make a tail slap then? You can use a metaphysical phantom tail?

You're purporting to make a RAW argument, when a RAI argument fits your premises better.

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
The Morphling wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Well said! A tail isn't just fluff if it is implicitly required for a mechanical effect.

Ooh! It's that invisible ink only certain posters can see again!

What does the invisible ink say in the prerequisites of Tail Terror? Since I can only see real rules, I can't read the invisible rules like you can. The feat says it requires a tail, then?

Fluffffffff.

So we are now down to arguing that now this feat doesn't even require a tail? That is about the most ludicrous thing I have ever heard.

So imagine your player's characters, one of whom is a kobold, gets captured. In the process of trying to completely disarm the party the bad guys cut off the kobold's tail. Are you telling me that as a GM you would rule this kobold could still use it's TAIL slap since the tail is just fluff anyway?!?


The argument is that the feat grants a tail slap. Hence the name, Tail Terror. If you have a tail slap, that would indicate you have a tail.

Note that the rules don't let you cut off a vanara's tail, either, so I don't know why you would even start bringing up circumstantial stuff under the GM's purview.


RJGrady wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
the feat grants you the ability to qualify for items and effects that depend on your race type, and makes no mention of exterior physical features.
Understanding is so close, it's within your grasp.

Stop being so flippant.

If it makes no mention of exterior physical characteristics, it does not grant them.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Is this, and the other thread, just everyone disagreeing with one poster?

I am just trying to see where everyone stands.


blackbloodtroll wrote:

Is this, and the other thread, just everyone disagreeing with one poster?

I am just trying to see where everyone stands.

Allowing for hyperbole, yes. It's just that in the other thread, everyone was disagreeing with me, and in this thread, everyone is disagreeing with Kryptik. I would say there is an evident lack of consensus.

Bizbag wrote:


Stop being so flippant.

But then I would lose all my class features!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
RJGrady wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:

Is this, and the other thread, just everyone disagreeing with one poster?

I am just trying to see where everyone stands.

Allowing for hyperbole, yes. It's just that in the other thread, everyone was disagreeing with me, and in this thread, everyone is disagreeing with Kryptik. I would say there is an evident lack of consensus.

I got lost, so just want to know the current state of the thread.


Fair enough!


Yeah, no, not everyone is disagreeing with me. It's about 50/50, with a slight edge to the non-mutant side.


Bizbag wrote:
Doomed Hero wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefit

Having 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?

The problem is that you can't spend a feat to get something it doesn't give you. Whether or not paying a feat is a fair price is irrelevant; the feat grants you the ability to qualify for items and effects that depend on your race type, and makes no mention of exterior physical features. The game's rules are about what they permit, not what they forbid, so the RAW is that you do not gain physical qualities like tails. Any features you do have are house rules - potentially GOOD and FUN house rules, but house rules nonetheless.

Bolded the relevant part of your post for you.

There are a lot of different races, with a lot of different characteristics. To list all the things Racial Heritage might give would be silly. Instead, you just count as having whatever characteristic you might need when qualifying for racial feats of your parent race. You get to decide which physical characteristics your Racial Heritage gives you.

It is no different than the Half-Orc and Half-Elf abilities to qualify as both their parent races. When you take Racial Heritage Kobold, what that means is that you are suddenly effectively a kobold with respect to kobold specific feats and items.

Not all creatures with Racial Heritage Kobold would have a tail, but one with Tail Terror certainly does, even if it means they suddenly grow a tail when they didn't have one before.

Really, that's nowhere near as weird as some of the other thing that happen in this game from time to time (I'm looking at you, Vestigal Arm)


Would a Kobold with Tail Terror still be able to use his Tail natural attack if his tail has been cut off? There's no mechanical requirement explicitly stated that you "need" a particular physical feature so, by that logic, the Kobold can have his tail amputated but can still twerk for 1d4 damage. If that makes sense, then of course a Human with Racial Heritage(Kobold) can still utilize Tail Terror, despite not having a tail. But it makes sense, you may also want to reconsider having dumped Wisdom.


There's a general guideline that feats do exactly what they state and nothing else. Interpreting the Racial Heritage feat to allow you to grow, or even have, a tail is letting the feat do far more than what it actually says that it does. By that interpretation, a PC who takes Racial Heritage (Vrolikai demon) should be allowed to have multiple weapon-wielding limbs and thereby qualify for Multiweapon Fighting.

The fact is that intended requirements, for better or worse, are not always written as clear mechanics. Take the Witch 'Cackle' FAQ that was issued a few months ago: Since it was a supernatural ability, many people assumed that there were no 'components' to the ability; the FAQ, however, stated that the ability's description that you must cackle loudly was a requirement to use the ability.

I would argue that even though Tail Terror does not state "Requirement: Tail or tail-like appendage", the so-called fluff implies that a tail is absolutely required to use it.

So no tail? No Tail Terror - and neither Tail Terror nor Racial Heritage states it lets you grow a tail.

That's my reading of RAW - and even if it's FAQed otherwise, it'll be how I run it at my table. Doing otherwise is just... silly, in my opinion.


Xaratherus wrote:
There's a general guideline that feats do exactly what they state and nothing else.

There's also a general guideline that abilities have only the limitations of what's listed. At issue is the feat Tail Terror, which does state you can perform a tail slap. In my view, that's what it states and nothing else. There is no rule that says, "By the way, even if you have Tail Terror, it doesn't work, because humans don't have tails." Tail Terror is what makes Tail Terror work; it says you attack with your tail.


If Tail Terror does not have a requirement of Tail or Tail-like appendage, then I'd probably allow it to be used with Twerking. After all, we frequently refer to "chasing tail" and similar expressions for humans and I think it could be argued that a "twerk-attack" could be described as a "tail terror".

After all, if you look up tail in the dictionary, you'll see that it doesn't even require an appendage.

Dictionary.com wrote:
Tail: (noun) the hindmost part of an animal, especially that forming a distinct, flexible appendage to the trunk.


If you're being followed by a gun in a trenchcoat, you can pick him up and use him to deliver a tail slap.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hmm, I think for this instance with the tail thing, if you're going by RAW you don't gain a tail. The effects of "Tail Terror" mere enhance an attack that you don't have.

The text "You can make a tail slap attack with your tail" means you need a tail to begin with. The feat does not say "You gain a tail that you can make tail slap attacks with."

The feats affect improves a feature that the character doesn't have. Normally you wouldn't be able to get it, but in this instance, you can. But that doesn't change that it does nothing for you.
Or in any case, that's how I see it.

The whole Fuff vs. Rules thing is kind of a side thing with no real answer since that's really a matter of opinion.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Valdenshi wrote:

Hmm, I think for this instance with the tail thing, if you're going by RAW you don't gain a tail. The effects of "Tail Terror" mere enhance an attack that you don't have.

The text "You can make a tail slap attack with your tail" means you need a tail to begin with. The feat does not say "You gain a tail that you can make tail slap attacks with."

The feats affect improves a feature that the character doesn't have. Normally you wouldn't be able to get it, but in this instance, you can. But that doesn't change that it does nothing for you.
Or in any case, that's how I see it.

The whole Fuff vs. Rules thing is kind of a side thing with no real answer since that's really a matter of opinion.

This yo. It doesn't just say "You gain a tail slap", it says "You can make a tail slap attack with your tail". No tail, nothing to make tail slap attack with, wasted ability. Something would need to grant you the limb (in this case, a tail) for you to do anything with it. It'd be like an Eidolon taking 6 Claw evolutions with only 4 limbs.


So, let's say for the sake of argument that it's important that kobolds are described as having tails and humans aren't. It is then equally important that Tail Terror says you have strengthened your tail. If you take Tail Terror, you have a tail. You can squint at it all you like, but it clearly says you have strengthened your tail. It's not some hypothetical tail. When it says you can make a tail slap with your tail, the tail in question is the one you strengthened.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
So, let's say for the sake of argument that it's important that kobolds are described as having tails and humans aren't. It is then equally important that Tail Terror says you have strengthened your tail. If you take Tail Terror, you have a tail. You can squint at it all you like, but it clearly says you have strengthened your tail. It's not some hypothetical tail. When it says you can make a tail slap with your tail, the tail in question is the one you strengthened.

But you don't have a tail, so the feat does nothing. You have strengthened a thing which you do not have, which seems fairly masturbatory really...

You would need another source to actually provide you with a tail before this feat could do anything; the other alternative is that all you need to do if you want extra legs and arms is say "Yeah, I'm a four armed human. I also have a tail. I'll be taking Multi-Weapon Fighting now."


Ssalarn wrote:


But you don't have a tail, so the feat does nothing. You have strengthened a thing which you do not have, which seems fairly REDACTED really...

How do you figure? The feat doesn't say, "Should you happen to have a tail, you strengthen." No, it says your tail is strengthened. The tail that is yours, you have strengthened, so that your tail is strengthened.

Quote:


You would need another source to actually provide you with a tail before this feat could do anything; the other alternative is that all you need to do if you want extra legs and arms is say "Yeah, I'm a four armed human. I also have a tail. I'll be taking Multi-Weapon Fighting now."

No, you would take a feat called "Four Armed Human With a Tail" that says you have four arms and a slapping tail. Attacking with four arms is an actual trait. As is a tail slap. Which a kobold does not have.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

1 person marked this as a favorite.

So then, by that assertion, if I took Racial Heritage: Kitsune, and took the Realistic Likeness feat, I automatically gain a racial change shape ability. After all, having change shape isn't a requirement of the feat, and the feat says whenever I use it something happens, so obviously I have it. Or if I take Racial Heritage Changeling and the Mother's Gift feat and choose the Hag Claws manifestation, then I gain a pair of claws. After all, it says I get a +1 bonus to attacks and damage with my claws, and the feat doesn't say I have to have claws, so it must give me claws.

Ooh, or I can take Racial Heritage: Vanara and the Tree Hanger feat! It says I can hang from sturdy objects by my tail, which means it gives me a tail.

That's ridiculous. Taking a feat that affects something you don't have doesn't give you that thing.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
So, let's say for the sake of argument that it's important that kobolds are described as having tails and humans aren't. It is then equally important that Tail Terror says you have strengthened your tail. If you take Tail Terror, you have a tail. You can squint at it all you like, but it clearly says you have strengthened your tail. It's not some hypothetical tail. When it says you can make a tail slap with your tail, the tail in question is the one you strengthened.

The feat was written for kobolds.

Kobolds have tails.
The "your tail" is referring to the kobold's tail.

Humans (and half-elves and half-orcs) do not have tails.
Racial Hertiage does not make you a kobold.

You cannot attack with a tail you do not have.


Ssalarn wrote:

So then, by that assertion, if I took Racial Heritage: Kitsune, and took the Realistic Likeness feat, I automatically gain a racial change shape ability.

No.

Quote:


After all, having change shape isn't a requirement of the feat, and the feat says whenever I use it something happens, so obviously I have it.

No.

Quote:


Or if I take Racial Heritage Changeling and the Mother's Gift feat and choose the Hag Claws manifestation, then I gain a pair of claws. After all, it says I get a +1 bonus to attacks and damage with my claws, and the feat doesn't say I have to have claws, so it must give me claws.

Nope. Potentially useful for a psychic warrior or a druid, I guess.

Quote:


Ooh, or I can take Racial Heritage: Vanara and the Tree Hanger feat! It says I can hang from sturdy objects by my tail, which means it gives me a tail.

Yes. Yes, you can.

Quote:


That's ridiculous. Taking a feat that affects something you don't have doesn't give you that thing.

So, Tail Terror does nothing for kobolds?


Aren't there a number of feats that actually list Claws or other natural weapons as prerequisites in order to take the feat. The lack of such prerequisite on this feat seems to indicate that it doesn't actually require an explicit tail.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

Caedwyr wrote:
Aren't there a number of feats that actually list Claws or other natural weapons as prerequisites in order to take the feat. The lack of such prerequisite on this feat seems to indicate that it doesn't actually require an explicit tail.

I just included 3 feats from the same book that grant improvements to limbs or abilities without actually listing those limbs or abilities as prerequisites. I'm certain I could find more. The lack of prerequisite is indicative of nothing more than that the author expected anyone with the ability to take the feat to have the requisite "equipment" to utilize it. It in no way implies that the ability grants limbs the character wouldn't otherwise have.

Paizo Employee Organized Play Developer

RJGrady wrote:

So, Tail Terror does nothing for kobolds?

Kobolds are specifically described as having tails.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ssalarn wrote:
RJGrady wrote:

So, Tail Terror does nothing for kobolds?

Kobolds are specifically described as having tails.

And so are characters with Tail Terror. So where does that leave us?

The Exchange Owner - D20 Hobbies

RJGrady wrote:
Those are all separate points.

They are not separate, you just apparently want to have your cake and eat it too.


I'm sorry my points aren't clear to you.


Ugh, how many of these threads do I have to click "ignore" on before this trollfest stops? *click*


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
The PRD wrote:

Prerequisites

Some feats have prerequisites. Your character must have the indicated ability score, class feature, feat, skill, base attack bonus, or other quality designated in order to select or use that feat. A character can gain a feat at the same level at which he gains the prerequisite.

A character can't use a feat if he loses a prerequisite, but he does not lose the feat itself. If, at a later time, he regains the lost prerequisite, he immediately regains full use of the feat that prerequisite enables.

Most of the time this comes into play when something along the lines of level drain takes away the spellcasting ability of a class, but not the associated feat the character took, or more often when a character loses a virtual feat. Note, however, there are quite a few places where a character can take up a feat that is useless to them. Take the spell focus feat. No prerequisites, so anyone can take it. If you never take a spellcasting class, it is completely useless. Same with Spell penetration.

the PRD wrote:
While some feats are more useful to certain types of characters than others, and many of them have special prerequisites that must be met before they are selected, as a general rule feats represent abilities outside of the normal scope of your character's race and class.
the PRD wrote:
Many of them alter or enhance class abilities or soften class restrictions, while others might apply bonuses to your statistics or grant you the ability to take actions otherwise prohibited to you.

These two phrases (taken from the same paragraph, even) are the heart of this discussion. Certainly racial Heritage (Kobold) would allow you to take Tail Terror, and the second seems to imply that it would allow actual use. However, it is in the benefit section of Tail Terror that its non-use becomes implicit (not explicit). It allows the character to use his tail to make a tail attack. It does NOT allow one to grow a tail, regrow a lost tail, etc. In a similar manner Draconic Heritage does not allow you to spontaneously grow scales before they take on the color and some of the resistances of a chromatic dragon. If some other effect (a curse, side effect, wish, whatever) causes the feat holder to grow scales, a tail, or whatever is needed, then by all means they should be allowed to use the feat they (most likely pointlessly) bought. One might want to adjust damage for size first.

This isn't to say that the combination can't still be abused. One could conceive of a druid with said feat combo shapechanging into a dog and claiming a tail slap attack off that. Not that there aren't more effective manners of getting a tail slap. Better yet, changing into a mouse with a 1d4 tail slap due to lack of damage scaling. ...

...

Can't get the thunder-mouse thought out of my head now...

Anyway, it seems to me that any sort of comprehensive ruling on this would be far too clunky and wordy as there are all sorts of ways it could potentially be abused, but only with a few very specific conditions, or a vast re-write making some of the feats require (race) physiology and some just the race, with those requiring the physiology completely unavailable to those with Racial Heritage. Alternately, make a house rule that fits your game. You want people who paid the cost to get the effect automatically, great! You want them to only have it situationslly, cool! You want them to have to pay for some heritage awakening ritual that leaves them with a non-standard body so they can use it any time they want, o for it! You want the combintion to have no effect what-so-ever, Grand! Just make sure you let your players know before they make the character. As both a GM and a player, I hate finding these things out after the fact.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Can a race that naturally has no skin, but has a hypothetical feat/trait that lets them count racially as an Aasimar, take the Angelic Flesh feat? Yes. But would they benefit from the bonuses it provides, as it states your skin takes on one of a selection of different metallic properties that grant specific bonuses? That's the nature of the question here. Tail Terror references "your" tail, on the presumption that the taker of the feat is a Kobold and all Kobolds naturally have tails. But what if the Kobold loses its tail? Can it still use its Tail attack since the feat doesn't have a mechanical prerequisite of having a tail? If you answer "no", then it stands to reason that if a Human also doesn't have a tail, said Human also can't make a Tail attack, despite having the Tail Terror feat. If your Human does have a tail, how did he get it? Was he born with it? Did it sprout, along with some scales, when he took Racial Heritage (Kobold)? Or did it sprout when he took Tail Terror? If Tail Terror causes you to grow a tail if you don't already have one, would it cause a Kobold who has lost their tail to regenerate one?

Mind, I don't necessarily see a problem with a Human being born a little bit scaly and with a tail just as I don't mind a Human being born with somewhat pointed ears because they have a bit of Elf blood in them. But it seems very odd that a Human is born looking completely Human, then suddenly at level 1 or 3 or 5 or whatever they wake up one morning and their ears are notably more "leaf-shaped" than they were the previous night or scales or a tail or what not. It makes sense that a Human is born with pointed ears, despite being born of two Human parents, and later probes his family tree and finds out that his great, great, great grandmother was actually an Elf and decides to do some conscious and deliberate introspection to really focus on that aspect of his heritage, discovering that he can take advantage of it in ways that other humans can't (both those that are pure-blood Human and those who never became aware of their Elven heritage). Basically, I object to the concept of the Schrodinger's Tail that was in a quantum state of both existing and not existing until you take the Tail Terror feat in which case it was there all along and just no one noticed or mentioned it for whatever reason.


Kryptik wrote:
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.

No.. Our arguement is you get the nagaji venom because they gain it as a feat.. No ones said anything about the sleep venom because it modifies a thing that exists and doesnt give you a thing you dont have as tail terror does.


PatientWolf wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefit

Having 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.

And if this is thrue the feat should have requires a tail in the requirements and having a tail has to be a thing that every races is then yes or no'd on.


But how would you meet the prerequisite of having a tail?


Ssalarn wrote:
RJGrady wrote:

So, Tail Terror does nothing for kobolds?

Kobolds are specifically described as having tails.

Not in the rules.

Shadow Lodge

VargrBoartusk wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Bizbag wrote:
Quote:
and as long as it didn't have any mechanical benefit

Having 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.
And if this is thrue the feat should have requires a tail in the requirements and having a tail has to be a thing that every races is then yes or no'd on.

The requirement for a tail is in the descriptive text. "You can make a tail slap WITH YOUR TAIL."

Let me take a different tack here. Suppose your Human with racial heritage: kobold is subjected to baleful polymorph and turned into a toad. Baleful polymorph says: "It still retains its class and level (or HD), as well as all benefits deriving therefrom (such as base attack bonus, base save bonuses, and hit points). It retains any class features (other than spellcasting) that aren't extraordinary, supernatural, or spell-like abilities."

By the arguments that a tail isn't a requirement for Tail Terror or that the feat provides one the character would still be able to use tail slap while polymorphed into a freaking toad.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
RJGrady wrote:
Xaratherus wrote:
There's a general guideline that feats do exactly what they state and nothing else.
There's also a general guideline that abilities have only the limitations of what's listed. At issue is the feat Tail Terror, which does state you can perform a tail slap. In my view, that's what it states and nothing else. There is no rule that says, "By the way, even if you have Tail Terror, it doesn't work, because humans don't have tails." Tail Terror is what makes Tail Terror work; it says you attack with your tail.

Does the text say, "Tail Terror gives you a tail"? No.

You're reading the phrase "your tail" to be equivalent to "You can make a tail slap with [the tail that this feat grants to you]." That isn't stated, or (in my opinion) even implied.

If you had a feat that said, "You may make a second attack with your longsword..." do you assume that simply because you took the feat you are magically granted a longsword at all times? Because to me, that's the same argument - the fact that one is a body part while the other is a separate object is irrelevant; it's all based on the assumption that when the feat says "...your tail..." that it's also granting you the necessary weapon to make the attack.

VargrBoartusk wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
RJGrady wrote:

So, Tail Terror does nothing for kobolds?

Kobolds are specifically described as having tails.
Not in the rules.
Kobold wrote:
Physical Description: Kobolds are small, bipedal reptilian humanoids. Most stand around 3 feet tall and weigh about 35 pounds. They have powerful jaws for creatures of their size and noticeable claws on their hands and feet. Often kobolds' faces are curiously devoid of expression, as they favor showing their emotions by simply swishing their tails. Kobolds' thick hides vary in color, and most have scales that match the hue of one of the varieties of chromatic dragons, with red scales being predominant. A few kobolds, however, have more exotic colors such as orange or yellow, which in some tribes raises or lowers an individual's status in the eyes of his fellows.

The race text of every race provides the basic parameters and restrictions of the appearance of a character of that race.


Xaratherus wrote:
RJGrady wrote:
Xaratherus wrote:
There's a general guideline that feats do exactly what they state and nothing else.
There's also a general guideline that abilities have only the limitations of what's listed. At issue is the feat Tail Terror, which does state you can perform a tail slap. In my view, that's what it states and nothing else. There is no rule that says, "By the way, even if you have Tail Terror, it doesn't work, because humans don't have tails." Tail Terror is what makes Tail Terror work; it says you attack with your tail.

Does the text say, "Tail Terror gives you a tail"? No.

You're reading the phrase "your tail" to be equivalent to "You can make a tail slap with [the tail that this feat grants to you]." That isn't stated, or (in my opinion) even implied.

If you had a feat that said, "You may make a second attack with your longsword..." do you assume that simply because you took the feat you are magically granted a longsword at all times? Because to me, that's the same argument - the fact that one is a body part while the other is a separate object is irrelevant; it's all based on the assumption that when the feat says "...your tail..." that it's also granting you the necessary weapon to make the attack.

VargrBoartusk wrote:
Ssalarn wrote:
RJGrady wrote:

So, Tail Terror does nothing for kobolds?

Kobolds are specifically described as having tails.
Not in the rules.
Kobold wrote:
Physical Description: Kobolds are small, bipedal reptilian humanoids. Most stand around 3 feet tall and weigh about 35 pounds. They have powerful jaws for creatures of their size and noticeable claws on their hands and feet. Often kobolds' faces are curiously devoid of expression, as they favor showing their emotions by simply swishing their tails. Kobolds' thick hides vary in color, and most have scales that match the hue of one of
...

This is descriptive fluff. It means nothing. If this were rules and it did mean things many races would be missing arms legs and heads because they are not mentioned.

Kobold wrote:

Standard Racial Traits

Ability Score Racial Traits: Kobolds are fast but weak. They gain +2 Dexterity, –4 Strength, and –2 Constitution.
Type: Kobolds are humanoids with the reptilian subtype.
Size: Kobolds are Small creatures and thus gain a +1 size bonus to their AC, a +1 size bonus on attack rolls, a –1 penalty on their combat maneuver checks and to Combat Maneuver Defense, and a +4 size bonus on Stealth checks.
Base Speed: Kobolds have a base speed of 30 feet.
Languages: Kobolds begin play speaking only Draconic. Kobolds with high Intelligence scores can choose from the following: Common, Dwarven, Gnome, and Undercommon. See the Linguistics skill page for more information about these languages.
Defense Racial Traits

Armor: Kobolds naturally scaly skin grants them a +1 natural armor bonus.
Feat and Skill Racial Traits

Crafty: Kobolds gain a +2 racial bonus on Craft (trapmaking), Perception, and Profession (miner) checks. Craft (trapmaking) and Stealth are always class skills for a kobold.
Senses Racial Traits

Darkvision: Kobolds can see perfectly in the dark up to 60 feet.
Weakness Racial Traits

Light Sensitivity: Kobolds lives in darkness have caused them to suffer from light sensitivity.

These are the rules for a kobold. Descriptive fluff is not a rule.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Doomed Hero wrote:

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.

You need grasping appendages and the capacity to speak to use a wand.

Turtles aren't famous for their ability to grasp something. An awakened octopus can use a wand, a turtle can't.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

Kobolds:

PRD wrote:

Kobold

This short, reptilian humanoid has scaled skin, a snout filled with tiny teeth, and a long tail.

Someone was saying that they don't have a tail?

- * -

PRD wrote:


Racial Heritage
The blood of a non-human ancestor flows in your veins.
Prerequisite: Human.
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.

Nothing about giving you a race body parts. You don't get the eyes of a dwarf and darkvision, you don't get the claws of a dragon and so on.

The Morphling wrote:

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.

Quote:
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.
PRD wrote:


Tail Terror (Combat)
You have strengthened your tail enough to make slap attacks with it.
Prerequisites: Base attack bonus +1, kobold.
Benefit: You can make a tail slap attack with your tail. This is a secondary natural attack that deals 1d4 points of bludgeoning damage. Furthermore, you can augment your tail slap attack with a kobold tail attachment. For the purpose of weapon feats, you are considered proficient with all kobold tail attachments.

Tail terror give a tail attack with your tail. None of the two feat give you a tail.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Bizbag wrote:
The Morphling wrote:
PatientWolf wrote:
Well said! A tail isn't just fluff if it is implicitly required for a mechanical effect.

Ooh! It's that invisible ink only certain posters can see again!

What does the invisible ink say in the prerequisites of Tail Terror? Since I can only see real rules, I can't read the invisible rules like you can. The feat says it requires a tail, then?

Fluffffffff.

So you don't need a tail to make a tail slap then? You can use a metaphysical phantom tail?

And it get the ghost touch ability, as it is a ghost.


Doesn't a human need to have some kobold blood (via another trait/feat) in order to select this feat. Couldn't that blood manifest as a tail or scales or some other non-standard characteristic. These features could even develop post-birth, maybe as a result of a traumatic experience, an exposure to magic, or even different foods and environment. There seems to be lots of roleplaying fodder here.

Shadow Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Interesting. The invisible ink has spread even into my own posts on this forum! People are quoting my post, then commenting that I said things I never typed! This is an epidemic!

The best part about this thread is the people who believe the other side can be argued down, as if it weren't a matter of interpretation. One of the more amusing elements of this forum, to be sure.

Dark Archive

For those saying that humans don't have arms and legs due to lack of description in the fluff text. They do not need to put it in the fluff text, since it is already called out by the creature type of Humanoid.

Quote:

Humanoid

A humanoid usually has two arms, two legs, and one head, or a human-like torso, arms, and a head. Humanoids have few or no supernatural or extraordinary abilities, but most can speak and usually have well-developed societies. They are usually Small or Medium (with the exception of giants). Every humanoid creature also has a specific subtype to match its race, such as human, giant, goblinoid, reptilian, or tengu.

The only time it would need to be called out in the description of the race, is when the humanoid race differs from this description.

51 to 100 of 1,170 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder RPG / 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.