Humans don't have Tails normally, why should we all of a sudden give them Tails now,Because they spent a feat on it, which gives them the characteristics of another race, one of which is a tail.
Why is this so hard to grasp?
Take feat = count as other race for feat qualification.
Take feat requiring tail = count as having tail = get tail.
Except the Feat in question makes no mention of granting a limb. You gain a Tail Attack, but the Tail Attack requires, you know, a Tail. The same way a Wing Attack requires a Wing, Claw Attacks requiring a Claw or Hand/Foot, depending on creature type, Bite attacks requiring a Jaw (or something akin to a Jaw, like Mandibles), etc.
There are other abilities that specifically mention granting a limb; Vestigial Arm Discovery is one of them. Not to mention Eidolon Evolutions or other monstrosities who gain attacks with limbs that they currently possess. They even spell out what these limbs are eligible to make attacks with, as well as other limitations.
The point is that the feat allows you do something with a limb you already have. Since you do not have that limb, you cannot make that attack.
So why not, I'll play your game. I'll allow the feat combination, but until a Tail limb is grown/created, you have no access to a Tail Attack. Because you have no Tail to make the attack with. Just like how I'll give Pigs a Wing Attack, but since they don't have Wing limbs, they can't make Wing Attacks.
**EDIT** But if you have access to say, Monstrous Physique I, and transform into a creature that has a Tail limb, then by all means, it's possible to make Tail Attacks. But a Human, Half-Elf, and Half-Orc have no tails. Therefore, no credible limb to carry out the attack.
It doesn't have to. There are a ton of racial characteristics. To list them all would be silly.
Instead, Racial Heritage just says "you count as X race for the purpose of racial feats".
It's the same as the Half-Elf and Half-Orc ability to count as both their parent races. It's why a Half-Orc can take Tusked, even though a Half Orc doesn't necessarily have large protruding teeth. It's assumed that a Half-orc that takes Tusked has them, or grows them at the time the feat is taken.
There isn't anyone arguing that a half-orc can't take Tusked at 5th level because they don't have big enough teeth beforehand.
Racial Heritage covers a broad scope of traits, and it's wording is clear. You count as your parent race for feats. Whatever (non mechanical) characteristics you might need to qualify for a feat, you are assumed to have.
When you take Racial Heritage, you and your GM decide what that means in terms of appearance. You might as "would it be ok for this character's kobold heritage to grant them a tail, a scaly back, and slitted eyes". Most GMs would probably be fine with that, especially if they knew that you wanted to take Tail Terror at a later point.
There isn't anything overpowered about investing 2 feats in a 1d6 natural attack.
It doesn't have to. There are a ton of racial characteristics. To list them all would be silly.
Instead, Racial Heritage just says "you count as X race for the purpose of racial feats".
It's the same as the Half-Elf and Half-Orc ability to count as both their parent races. It's why a Half-Orc can take Tusked, even though a Half Orc doesn't necessarily have large protruding teeth. It's assumed that a Half-orc that takes Tusked has them, or grows them at the time the feat is taken.
There isn't anyone arguing that a half-orc can't take Tusked at 5th level because they don't have big enough teeth beforehand.
Racial Heritage covers a broad scope of traits, and it's wording is clear. You count as your parent race for feats. Whatever (non mechanical) characteristics you might need to qualify for a feat, you are assumed to have.
When you take Racial Heritage, you and your GM decide what that means in terms of appearance. You might as "would it be ok for this character's kobold heritage to grant them a tail, a scaly back, and slitted eyes". Most GMs would probably be fine with that, especially if they knew that you wanted to take Tail Terror at a later point.
There isn't anything overpowered about investing 2 feats in a 1d6 natural attack.
Do you understand that this takes you out of RAW? RAW is rules as written not rules as you and your GM agree upon. I'm not saying you have to play RAW or that I play RAW but we are discussing RAW. Or at least I'm trying too. I have never said this was broken or overpowered or shouldn't be allowed. My position is simply neither feat gives you a tail, as written, and you cannot make a tail attack without a tail.
Choose another humanoid race. You count as both human and that race for any effects related to race
What effects are related to race?
Do you understand that this takes you out of RAW? RAW is rules as written not rules as you and your GM agree upon. I'm not saying you have to play RAW or that I play RAW but we are discussing RAW. Or at least I'm trying too. I have never said this was broken or overpowered or shouldn't be allowed. My position is simply neither feat gives you a tail, as written, and you cannot make a tail attack without a tail.It doesn't have to. There are a ton of racial characteristics. To list them all would be silly.
Instead, Racial Heritage just says "you count as X race for the purpose of racial feats".
It's the same as the Half-Elf and Half-Orc ability to count as both their parent races. It's why a Half-Orc can take Tusked, even though a Half Orc doesn't necessarily have large protruding teeth. It's assumed that a Half-orc that takes Tusked has them, or grows them at the time the feat is taken.
There isn't anyone arguing that a half-orc can't take Tusked at 5th level because they don't have big enough teeth beforehand.
Racial Heritage covers a broad scope of traits, and it's wording is clear. You count as your parent race for feats. Whatever (non mechanical) characteristics you might need to qualify for a feat, you are assumed to have.
When you take Racial Heritage, you and your GM decide You might as "would it be ok for this character's kobold heritage to grant them a tail, a scaly back, and slitted eyes". Most GMs would probably be fine with that, especially if they knew that you wanted to take Tail Terror at a later point.
There isn't anything overpowered about investing 2 feats in a 1d6 natural attack.
Did you read the rest of the sentence?
I'm talking about appearance. A cosmetic effect that has no mechanical benefit. Of no more consequence than skin color or handedness. A holdover from a draconic ancestry because of a feat you invested specifically for this purpose.
You invested a character resource in preparation to spend another character resource, just to be able to have a tail. Why the hell shouldn't you be allowed to get one?
Show me the RAW governing a character's appearance.
If it was me, I would agree with the other posters in that Racial Heritage does not grant you the racial traits of your parent race, so if you don't have something that the feat modifies, the feat essentially gives you no benefit.
For example:
There is no, "I have a tail" racial trait for kobolds, and if there is, it isn't required to take Tail Terror. So if your human has Racial Heritage (kobold) and you aim to take Tail Terror, then you better tell me in your character's description that your human has a tail. As long as he does, its fine by me.
For the Sleep Venom feat, however, the feat specifically modifies a racial trait; the vishkanya venom. It doesn't say that you gain the ability to actually create that venom; it just modifies something you already have. So no, the feat doesn't grant you the ability to create vishkanya venom.
Now, if you selected the Mythic Racial Heritage feat, you could pick the vishkanya's Toxic racial trait and if you chose to take Sleep Venom, you'd be fine and get the feat's benefit because now you have the trait that the feat modifies.
If it was me, I would agree with the other posters in that Racial Heritage does not grant you the racial traits of your parent race, so if you don't have something that the feat modifies, the feat essentially gives you no benefit.
For example:
There is no, "I have a tail" racial trait for kobolds, and if there is, it isn't required to take Tail Terror. So if your human has Racial Heritage (kobold) and you aim to take Tail Terror, then you better tell me in your character's description that your human has a tail. As long as he does, its fine by me.
For the Sleep Venom feat, however, the feat specifically modifies a racial trait; the vishkanya venom. It doesn't say that you gain the ability to actually create that venom; it just modifies something you already have. So no, the feat doesn't grant you the ability to create vishkanya venom.
Now, if you selected the Mythic Racial Heritage feat, you could pick the vishkanya's Toxic racial trait and if you chose to take Sleep Venom, you'd be fine and get the feat's benefit because now you have the trait that the feat modifies.
Exactly, how I see it. Won't give you the vishkanya venom, as you were suppose to get that in step 2 when you picked your race. In step 6 (or step 10 in srd) is when you select your physical appearance, which comes after picking up feats.
Do you understand that this takes you out of RAW? RAW is rules as written not rules as you and your GM agree upon. I'm not saying you have to play RAW or that I play RAW but we are discussing RAW. Or at least I'm trying too. I have never said this was broken or overpowered or shouldn't be allowed. My position is simply neither feat gives you a tail, as written, and you cannot make a tail attack without a tail.It doesn't have to. There are a ton of racial characteristics. To list them all would be silly.
Instead, Racial Heritage just says "you count as X race for the purpose of racial feats".
It's the same as the Half-Elf and Half-Orc ability to count as both their parent races. It's why a Half-Orc can take Tusked, even though a Half Orc doesn't necessarily have large protruding teeth. It's assumed that a Half-orc that takes Tusked has them, or grows them at the time the feat is taken.
There isn't anyone arguing that a half-orc can't take Tusked at 5th level because they don't have big enough teeth beforehand.
Racial Heritage covers a broad scope of traits, and it's wording is clear. You count as your parent race for feats. Whatever (non mechanical) characteristics you might need to qualify for a feat, you are assumed to have.
When you take Racial Heritage, you and your GM decide You might as "would it be ok for this character's kobold heritage to grant them a tail, a scaly back, and slitted eyes". Most GMs would probably be fine with that, especially if they knew that you wanted to take Tail Terror at a later point.
There isn't anything overpowered about investing 2 feats in a 1d6 natural attack.
Did you read the rest of the sentence?
I'm talking about appearance. A cosmetic effect that has no mechanical benefit. Of no more consequence than skin color or handedness. A holdover from a draconic ancestry because of a...
By RAW: do humans have tails?
By RAW: do kobolds have tails?
If it was me, I would agree with the other posters in that Racial Heritage does not grant you the racial traits of your parent race, so if you don't have something that the feat modifies, the feat essentially gives you no benefit.
For example:
There is no, "I have a tail" racial trait for kobolds, and if there is, it isn't required to take Tail Terror. So if your human has Racial Heritage (kobold) and you aim to take Tail Terror, then you better tell me in your character's description that your human has a tail. As long as he does, its fine by me.
For the Sleep Venom feat, however, the feat specifically modifies a racial trait; the vishkanya venom. It doesn't say that you gain the ability to actually create that venom; it just modifies something you already have. So no, the feat doesn't grant you the ability to create vishkanya venom.
Now, if you selected the Mythic Racial Heritage feat, you could pick the vishkanya's Toxic racial trait and if you chose to take Sleep Venom, you'd be fine and get the feat's benefit because now you have the trait that the feat modifies.
But at the same time we're assuming that Humans have a universal physiology; 2 legs, 2 arms, a head (with eyes, nose, and mouth/jaw), and a torso.
And I'm not even arguing that they can't take the feat. Sure, they can take the feat; by RAW, they meet the requirements to take the feat.
But the feat does nothing because they have no eligible limb to execute the Tail Attack. No Tail = No Tail Attack, just like how no Mouth/Jaw/Mandible/Whatever = No Bite Attack.
@ Doomed Hero: Let's examine that again; the Tusked Trait/Feat grants those who qualify a Bite Attack. Since the Half-Orc/Human has a mouth to apply a Bite Attack to, they can make a Bite Attack, so the feat's benefits are applicable; because there is physiology that allows it.
The Tail Terror feat grants those who qualify a Tail Attack. Since the Human has no Tail to apply the Tail Attack to, they can't make a Tail Attack, so the feat's benefits aren't applicable; because there is no physiology that allows it.
Notice how both scenarios involve the same mechanics, but they have one key difference; physiological application. The former is applicable because there is a limb that the attack can be carried out with; the latter is not applicable because there is no limb that the attack can be carried out with.
At no point am I saying that the character cannot take the feat; it just doesn't do anything because there is no other ability that allows it.
I'll also explain your example further: so if I am an armless Alchemist with no Jaw, (a few explosive reactions can do a lot to a person...), and take the Feral Mutagen, because I gain 2 Claw Attacks and a Bite Attack, I automatically grow a Jaw and 2 Arms to make these attacks?
By your logic, you do! I get 2 Claws Attacks + 1 Bite Attack from the Discovery, therefore I get the limbs that go with them!
Except, you know, there is no rule that says when you gain a natural attack, you also get the limb associated with that attack. If anything, a more intelligent rule would be that you have to have the limb associated with the ability in order to qualify for that ability, but that doesn't need to apply, because the rule is if you don't have the limb, you can't make the attack, period.
Choose another humanoid race. You count as both human and that race for any effects related to raceWhat effects are related to race?
physiology... physiology is an effect related to race. having a partially kobold physiology might grant one a tail, or stryx physiology might grant one wings that aren't quite up to the task of supporting flight, or orc heritage might grant one stronger masticular muscles (but not the awareness or skill to use them to make a bite attack).
so if I am an armless Alchemist with no Jaw, (a few explosive reactions can do a lot to a person...), and take the Feral Mutagen, because I gain 2 Claw Attacks and a Bite Attack, I automatically grow a Jaw and 2 Arms to make these attacks?
yes... you do. it's a mutagen. it literally mutates your physical form. your arms and jaw grow back until the mutagen wears off.
Choose another humanoid race. You count as both human and that race for any effects related to raceWhat effects are related to race?physiology... physiology is an effect related to race. having a partially kobold physiology might grant one a tail, or stryx physiology might grant one wings that aren't quite up to the task of supporting flight, or orc heritage might grant one stronger masticular muscles (but not the awareness or skill to use them to make a bite attack).
so if I am an armless Alchemist with no Jaw, (a few explosive reactions can do a lot to a person...), and take the Feral Mutagen, because I gain 2 Claw Attacks and a Bite Attack, I automatically grow a Jaw and 2 Arms to make these attacks?yes... you do. it's a mutagen. it literally mutates your physical form. your arms and jaw grow back until the mutagen wears off.
Except there are abilities that explicitly state you grow those limbs (Vestigial Arm), versus abilities that grant you Natural Attacks. It comes out and says that you mutate those extra limbs.
Reviewing the RAW for Feral Mutagen:
Whenever the alchemist imbibes a mutagen, he gains two claw attacks and a bite attack. These are primary attacks and are made using the alchemist’s full base attack bonus. The claw attacks deal 1d6 points of damage (1d4 if the alchemist is Small) and the bite attack deals 1d8 points of damage (1d6 if the alchemist is Small). While the mutagen is in effect, the alchemist gains a +2 competence bonus on Intimidate skill checks.
Nowhere in the Benefit does it state you grow limbs, whereas other abilities that do such an effect, says they do. All it says is that you gain Two Claw Attacks + One Bite Attack. To carry out these attacks, you need functional limbs. Having no Arms or Jaw to chomp with, how can you bite? How can you grab or claw at anything with no arms?
Tie your arms behind your back and try to punch somebody with your fist (or even better yet, try to claw them with your fingernails). That's practically what it's like when you're trying to perform an action and lack the required limb to do so.
Now let's go back to our current argument, with Tail Terror and Tails. I have no tail; so I can make a Tail Attack with a limb that does not exist?
Except there are abilities that explicitly state you grow those limbs (Vestigial Arm), versus abilities that grant you Natural Attacks. It comes out and says that you mutate those extra limbs.
an extra limb that can manipulate things is a prehensile tail. no one said you got a prehensile tail. that Vestigial Arm has the mechanical benefit of being able to wield a weapon, draw items for you, etc. the tail has none of those mechanical benefits. also, as someone already pointed out, some humans have tails. they are usually underdeveloped, but that is without the aid of mixed ancestry.
skipping the feral mutagen bit because i agree that it is off topic.
Now let's go back to our current argument, with Tail Terror and Tails. I have no tail; so I can make a Tail Attack with a limb that does not exist?
your tail comes from your kobold heritage. kobolds have tails, you are a kobold for effects related to race (physiology is a race related effect), so you have a tail. again you could have a tail as a human without racial heritage. just be born with a tail. pathfinder doesn't have rules for everything. and most of the rules aren't meant to be as final as you seem to want them to be.
Except there are abilities that explicitly state you grow those limbs (Vestigial Arm), versus abilities that grant you Natural Attacks. It comes out and says that you mutate those extra limbs.an extra limb that can manipulate things is a prehensile tail. no one said you got a prehensile tail. that Vestigial Arm has the mechanical benefit of being able to wield a weapon, draw items for you, etc. the tail has none of those mechanical benefits. also, as someone already pointed out, some humans have tails. they are usually underdeveloped, but that is without the aid of mixed ancestry.
skipping the feral mutagen bit because i agree that it is off topic.
Now let's go back to our current argument, with Tail Terror and Tails. I have no tail; so I can make a Tail Attack with a limb that does not exist?your tail comes from your kobold heritage. kobolds have tails, you are a kobold for effects related to race (physiology is a race related effect), so you have a tail. again you could have a tail as a human without racial heritage. just be born with a tail. pathfinder doesn't have rules for everything. and most of the rules aren't meant to be as final as you seem to want them to be.
The Feral Mutagen discussion has relevance, because it is basically the same argument; Feral Mutagen does not grant limbs, it never says it did, and you're proposing it does for some unlisted, inane "reason". It's the same exact arguments being made for the Tail Terror feat.
Just because I am part Kobold does not mean I adapt their features. There is no language in Racial Heritage that says you gain physiological features of that race.
The blood of a non-human ancestor flows in your veins.
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 benefit makes no mention of you gaining physiology of the creature. The descriptive text only notes that you have the blood of a non-human ancestor. Nowhere does it state you gain limbs or anything. So what in the rules gets you from "Human" to "Human with Kobold Blood and a Tail"? Am I missing some random houserule that we're making up just so the munchkins get their way? Because that's the only other explanation that's seemingly plausible.
@Torbyne: Except there are no rules that says it happens; since there are no rules that says it happens, it doesn't happen. Period. If you want to have rules that say they happen, then fine; but that's not in the book. We're arguing what's in the book, not what's in some random houseruled game. Since your rules of Mutagen "abuse" is not in the book, it's not an official rule, therefore is something not up for discussion.
You're also comparing a Dragon Disciple, which specifically calls out that the character in question generates Wing Limbs (and a Fly Speed with those wings no less!) as a Standard Action at a certain level of taking the class, in comparison to a (somewhat) Feat Chain that, at no point in time, says creatures grow limbs.
Do you even understand what the issue is or am I just wasting energy trying to explain something that will only receive stubbornness from being a munchkin?
If there is no coffee cup on the table, and I want to have coffee in a coffee cup, do I just create a coffee cup out of thin air? Turns out that by your logic, you can. And you just did, except instead of it being a coffee cup, it's a tail. Because coherence works that way.
Well, I give up arguing after this post. I've lost too many brain cells; any further posting will only cause me to turn into a munchkin just like them.
the words "for example" always imply "but not limited to" unless otherwise specified. what do you think "and so on" means? it certainly doesn't mean that the preceding list is complete. why wouldn't physiology be includded in "any effects related to race"?
the words "for example" always imply "but not limited to" unless otherwise specified. what do you think "and so on" means? it certainly doesn't mean that the preceding list is complete. why wouldn't physiology be includded in "any effects related to race"?
I will break my previous statement to argue this, as this is separate from the original topic.
The problem with that argument is that there is no baseline intent to draw from it. Genetic alterations can be so minute that it has little to no effect at all, and the feat doesn't elaborate on this. If there was some FAQ or Dev input that says "Anatomy is included in effects regarding Racial Heritage feat," then I'd concede. But that hasn't been produced yet.
Another thing is that the subjects the feat refers to are "effects." At what point does physiology become an effect? RAW evidence suggests when it's produced from a feat, class feature, or some sort of Extraordinary, Supernatural, or Spell-Like Ability.
Is it safe to say that doing so is an Extraordinary ability if it's something naturally born to the creature? Of course. But is it listed as such? Not really.
To be honest, one of the better starting points would be to read the race's Physical Description.
The physical characteristics of humans are as varied as the world's climes. From the dark-skinned tribesmen of the southern continents to the pale and barbaric raiders of the northern lands, humans possess a wide variety of skin colors, body types, and facial features. Generally speaking, humans' skin color assumes a darker hue the closer to the equator they live. At the same time, bone structure, hair color and texture, eye color, and a host of facial and bodily phenotypic characteristics vary immensely from one locale to another. Cheekbones may be high or broad, noses aquiline or flat, and lips full or thin; eyes range wildly in hue, some deep set in their sockets, and others with full epicanthic folds. Appearance is hardly random, of course, and familial, tribal, or national commonalities often allow the knowledgeable to identify a human's place of origin on sight, or at least to hazard a good guess. Humans' origins are also indicated through their traditional styles of bodily decoration, not only in the clothing or jewelry worn, but also in elaborate hairstyles, piercing, tattooing, and even scarification.
As we can tell, although the initial bolded part suggests that humans could grow tails, the second bolded part lists the intent of what the first part includes, in that changes include skin color, hair color and style/texture, eye color and placement, etc.
At least I can finally understand the other side; that's always the most frustrating part. Simultaneously, it still bears to note that although it may seem like Humans could possess tails (given the appropriate region, of course), would they still be considered Human, or something more (and therefore the Physical Description of Humans themselves aren't applicable)?
"You count as both human and that race for any effects related to race."
The feat doesn't allow for certain "effects" to be ignored at the behest of the player, does it? If you picked kobold, you'll trigger favorite enemy bonuses with kobold-hating rangers as well as human-hating rangers. All appropriate effects apply.
Now, are physical characteristics an effect of race? Let's run with that.
If you pick kobold, you have no scales (human) as well as scales (kobold), you have no tail (human) as well as a tail (kobold), you are medium sized (human) as well as small sized (kobold). Etcetera.
What, did you think you could ignore the "effects" of being human? You count as both, remember.
Why would some "effects" be mandatory and some optional? I think we can all agree that the feat certainly doesn't imply that.
There is no mention at all that physical characteristics are a pick-and-mix drawn from two races. All "effects" apply, and to consider physical characteristics as an "effect", you'll run into serious trouble, because certain physical characteristics are obviously mutually exclusive.
Just checking in, this still hasn't been resolved yet? No official statements?
eh, on that same token being a human doesnt force you to have every skin tone and hair color and eye shape at the same time.
No, you chose one from the pools of available characteristics for the race.
Being human and Kobold would force you to decide between all cosmetic effects available to you
The availability of a tail is not a cosmetic option to be decided upon. Humans don't have them, kobolds do have them. So if "tailedness" is an effect of race, you suffer the "tailedness" effect of both races when taking the feat, causing you to have no tail and to have a tail at the same time.
The size bit though is off limits, being a race trait listed out for Kobolds and all.
Aren't racial traits an "effect" of being of a certain race? I don't see the feat excluding any kind of effect. If some aspects (such as physical characteristics) are arbitrarily dragged in by the hair, kicking and screaming, to be counted as an "effect" of race, why not drag them all?
If a certain reading of a rule can only work when you apply it inconsistently, it's probably an incorrect reading.
If having a tail or not is an effect, you have one and you don't have one at the same time.
If having a tail or not isn't an effect, you don't get one from the feat.
Either way, it doesn't work.
Racial traits were ruled out by PDT weighing in a while ago, or so i thought, likewise the mythic racial heritage allows for choosing a racial trait (that's how its improved over regular heritage that the rest of us schmucks have to deal with). The question is down to a tail being an effect of race or not and within the reach of regular RH or not. Since it is not a listing under racial traits, a negative verdict for RH would also bar mythic RH from allowing a tail. Though if your heritage came from a race with a full on tail slap from the get go than that would be a racial trait and fair game for the mythic feat.
As far as choosing between a tail or not, just as humans have to choose to have a hair color or be bald, having the heritage would mean you now decide between your race descriptions for your appearance since you get to decide your own appearance from within the variables open to you. you now have the choice of appearance between a butt (from your human side) or a tail (from your not human side).
Technically, all creatures that eat, breath, and sleep have rears. But that's semantics.
Except at what point does the Racial Heritage feat say you pick and choose what effects you do and don't have on your person? They all apply, period. You're considered both for all intents and purposes, and that's the ruling you're forced to go with since the other, more conservative ruling, doesn't allow limbs to grow for no reason at all.
If we wanted to be more realistic about it, instead of leaving it up to player choice, why not leave it up to chance and genetics? I'm sure some Humans who are currently bald due to genetics would much rather choose to have long, flowing hair. Except, in life, which this game is most identical to assimilate with, it's not a choice; it's something that person has to suffer with for the rest of their life.
But I'll keep it simple and more upbeat, and stay within the game rules, and say it's a singular choice from a pool of options from the player's imagination that the GM either approves or doesn't approve.
Though I must say, choosing for things to work when it's convenient for your case, but when things are brought up that are not convenient for your case, it's ignored; That's the definition of a munchkin right there.
Not only are you caught red handed in being a munchkin about this, but the ironic part is you didn't even realize you were being a munchkin about this (or were blinded by pride to acknowledge it).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
No one here has bothered to ask how exactly both kobold and orc got mixed into a human heritage. There's a dirty joke in here somewhere.
|
Asked and answered. Half-Orc counts both as a Human and Orc as far as choices go for feats and other things, just as Racial Heritage does with the race chosen for it. (Kobold, for this)
It comes down to a simple answer.
Tail Terror gives the character a Tail Slap. Whether or not the character has the tail to perform the Tail Slap with depends on the race that takes the feat, not the other way around.
Kobolds have a tail.
Humans do not have a tail.
Half-Elves do not have a tail.
Half-Orcs do not have a tail.
quote from a movie.
"Why are you being so obtuse?"
"What did you call me?"
"Obtuse. Is it on purpose?"
End quote.
This whole discussion reminds me of this quote from The Shawshank Redemption.
Just checking in, this still hasn't been resolved yet? No official statements?
Nope. 65 FAQ flags, and not a peep.
Though to be fair, the PDT usually must reach a consensus, which could take a little while.
But still, I am hoping for a swift resolution, no matter which way it goes.
Just checking in, this still hasn't been resolved yet? No official statements?Nope. 65 FAQ flags, and not a peep.
Though to be fair, the PDT usually must reach a consensus, which could take a little while.
But still, I am hoping for a swift resolution, no matter which way it goes.
I agree. I usually have a strong opinion on what I feel is "correct", but I am more often interested in just having an official answer. In general I find the answers from PDT to make enough sense even when they contradict my desired answer that I just accept them. Though occasionally I don't like the results enough to house rule differently, like the ruling that SLA counted as being able to cast spells and gave access to item crafting feats, early entry to some prestiege classes, and everyone and their mother picking up Arcane Strike.
I wont have a problem if PDT says that Racial Heritage grants physical changes to the possesors body and would allow them to select (and use) feats like Tail Terror, but I just don't think it's in line with what the feat is supposed to do. I mean, if you select Dwarf it doesn't grant you darvision eyes does it? It doesn't seem obvious, but having darkvision is a special physical quality of the eyes of certain races. If Racial Heritage wouldn't let you select that, why should it let you select to have a tail if you have Kobold heritage?
Eh, I dunno. I'd just like to see an official answer.
Edit: I also think Racial Heritage should be first level only selection, but whatever.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I give up arguing after this post. I've lost too many brain cells; any further posting will only cause me to turn into a munchkin just like them.
If you think two feats to gain a d4 tail attack is munchkiny.. Well.. Lets just say I'm pretty sure your safe on the metamorphosis into a denizen of Oz front.
Well.. Lets get stupid now.
Saying Racial Heritage doesn't affect you physical appearance, but effects related to race...
By Raw, a human rogue with face in the crowd becomes harder to detect in a group of eight ratfolk.
We also have reverse scooby-doo. The human, who looks so utterly blandly human, can disguise himself with no penalty if he took gnoll as his racial heritage, as a gnoll.
He could do the same for kobold, but there is a size difference issue. So a human who has reduce person can disguise himself as a kobold no problem after he's shrunk.
I do so wonder what other stupid effects are out there. Course, I guess the naysayers are going to go on about how RAW you have to have the physical appearance of what you're disguising yourself as, even though it doesn't say that.
|
Well, I give up arguing after this post. I've lost too many brain cells; any further posting will only cause me to turn into a munchkin just like them.If you think two feats to gain a d4 tail attack is munchkiny.. Well.. Lets just say I'm pretty sure your safe on the metamorphosis into a denizen of Oz front.
If the only ramification was that a human would get a d4 tail slap that wouln't be too bad. A Half-Orc with 20+ str with a tail wielding kobold tail weapons starts to get iffy. In addition that Half-Orc can now wield a reach weapon and still threatens his adjacent areas with his tail.
However, by arguing the feat either gives or tail or doesn't require one it causes much bigger issues. That leads to issues where that half-orc can be baleful polymorphed into a toad and still retain that tail slap attack and since the feat also says he can use tail weapons he gets to keep those too.
By going beyond the RAW with Racial Heritage and/or Tail Terror it opens up a whole slew of unintended consequences.
Well.. Lets get stupid now.
Saying Racial Heritage doesn't affect you physical appearance, but effects related to race...
By Raw, a human rogue with face in the crowd becomes harder to detect in a group of eight ratfolk.
We also have reverse scooby-doo. The human, who looks so utterly blandly human, can disguise himself with no penalty if he took gnoll as his racial heritage, as a gnoll.
He could do the same for kobold, but there is a size difference issue. So a human who has reduce person can disguise himself as a kobold no problem after he's shrunk.
I do so wonder what other stupid effects are out there. Course, I guess the naysayers are going to go on about how RAW you have to have the physical appearance of what you're disguising yourself as, even though it doesn't say that.
it does say that. If physical appearance isn't affected, your "apparent creature type" as referred to in Face in the Crowd, would be your actual race, and thus all those examples become invalid.
it does say that. If physical appearance isn't affected, your "apparent creature type" as referred to in Face in the Crowd, would be your actual race, and thus all those examples become invalid.Well.. Lets get stupid now.
Saying Racial Heritage doesn't affect you physical appearance, but effects related to race...
By Raw, a human rogue with face in the crowd becomes harder to detect in a group of eight ratfolk.
We also have reverse scooby-doo. The human, who looks so utterly blandly human, can disguise himself with no penalty if he took gnoll as his racial heritage, as a gnoll.
He could do the same for kobold, but there is a size difference issue. So a human who has reduce person can disguise himself as a kobold no problem after he's shrunk.
I do so wonder what other stupid effects are out there. Course, I guess the naysayers are going to go on about how RAW you have to have the physical appearance of what you're disguising yourself as, even though it doesn't say that.
*puts on some whiskers and fake buckteeth*
There, now my apparent type is ratfolk. ^^
And no, not all of them. I was still disguised as gnoll with no penatly.
Face in the crowd has other problems, by the way. By RAW, it would allow for nonsense like every aberration that took it blending in with crowds of every other aberration species. Aboleths blending in with will-o'-wisps, yeah right.
And what if your creature type isn't apparent at all? Someone who doesn't know that an aboleth is an aberration wouldn't be fooled unless he makes a succesful knowledge: dungeoneering check?
That talent only makes sense if you replace "apparent creature type" with something like "general physiology", except that would perhaps make it too good. Oh well.
Though at the same time, a level one commoner can easily ID aracial heritage human, correctly knowing what their heritage is based on..?
Like I said, the talent has problems, but that isn't one when you remove appearance from heritage effects.
I was referring to the RH, rather than the talent there.
Face in the crowd has other problems, by the way. By RAW, it would allow for nonsense like every aberration that took it blending in with crowds of every other aberration species. Aboleths blending in with will-o'-wisps, yeah right.
And what if your creature type isn't apparent at all? Someone who doesn't know that an aboleth is an aberration wouldn't be fooled unless he makes a succesful knowledge: dungeoneering check?
That talent only makes sense if you replace "apparent creature type" with something like "general physiology", except that would perhaps make it too good. Oh well.
The sad part is? Taking Racial Heritage and counting as more than one (sub)type, your "creature type" is no longer apparent, especially considering the borderlined ramifications of what Racial Heritage makes "apparent", as well as counting as both at the same time. Are you a Human or a Kobold? You're both, and that's not so obvious (or "apparent") to the random Kobold Slayer you may come across.
So if it's no longer apparent, you no longer qualify for "blending in" with the other creatures.
Well, technically, if you're a human, your creature type is humanoid. Any racial heritage you take with the feat will give you another helping of humanoid. Face in the crowd, by RAW, gives any kind of humanoid some bonuses when blending in with any kind of humanoid. The racial heritage feat isn't necessary at all to make the talent more attractive.
Well, technically, if you're a human, your creature type is humanoid. Any racial heritage you take with the feat will give you another helping of humanoid. Face in the crowd, by RAW, gives any kind of humanoid some bonuses when blending in with any kind of humanoid. The racial heritage feat isn't necessary at all to make the talent more attractive.
True, provided humanoid isn't broken down into subtype as it usually is for the feat.
Right, cause I hadn't made a point in the slightest did I? Not about how a human could disguise themselves without taking the racial penalty. Because I believe that physical appearance in step six is an effect related to race, something that doesn't jive with you, It becomes more important to utterly ignore what I've said in my post.
Of course.. The Mother of Beasts Racial trait, or the Misbegotten flaw gives me ability to what would be called a 'physical deformity'
Obviously someone in my ascestory was a follower of Lamastu, since they had to probably use her mask to get it on with a kobold.
Deformities cover a wide range of deformities.
Right, cause I hadn't made a point in the slightest did I? Not about how a human could disguise themselves without taking the racial penalty. Because I believe that physical appearance in step six is an effect related to race, something that doesn't jive with you, It becomes more important to utterly ignore what I've said in my post.
Of course.. The Mother of Beasts Racial trait, or the Misbegotten flaw gives me ability to what would be called a 'physical deformity'
Obviously someone in my ascestory was a follower of Lamastu, since they had to probably use her mask to get it on with a kobold.
If we are arguing intent, then that's when we get to opinions, since the intent is apparently unclear on this front. And that's you're opinion. When you're taking Human, you aren't able to start off with a tail unless you have GM approval; the same is true for all races. And by illustrations and descriptions, Humans aren't known for having tails, so they shouldn't have those limbs to begin with. If you show me a Human description from the book that shows them having tails (from just their Race, no other effects; illustrations are valid too), then you can be right.
Except a Deformity is something that is based upon what should already exist. I can't have a deformity of something that I don't have. I can't have a deformed mandible because there is no mandible to deform to begin with.