Please read the 5 million other threads on the topic. But the offical word is stuff that is given to humanoids from a class feature etc that gives you claws are intended for your hands. If allowed on feet it will say so or call them talons.
There are several monsters with claws on their feet.
I don't see any reason why you wouldn't be able to do this.
Yes, but we have to talk about whether those are bipedal creatures. Generally, the designers put talons on the legs of bipedal creatures.
Even ignoring that, the only quadrapedal creatures that I can think of with 'claws' on their hind legs are creature with rake....which are made purposefully difficult you (either pounce or grapple) to show how ineffective they are at being used as normal weapons.
Anyway, just look up the other dozen or so threads on this for appropriate links to dev comments. 'Catfolk Barbarian' might be a good search term... since it was always those darn furry freaks that just happened to be raised by half-orcs and taught the art of growing foot long tusks....
Claws and Talons: If I gain claw attacks, can I put those claw attacks on my feet?
If you are a bipedal creature (roughly humanoid-shaped, with two arms and two legs), your claws must go on your hands; you can not assign them to any other limb or body part.
If you are a quadruped (or have more than four legs), you can have claws on your feet. If you have claws on all of your feet, normally you can't use all of those claw attacks on your turn unless you have a special ability such as pounce or rake.
Talons are much like claws, but go on a creature's feet, usually a bipedal creature (especially a flying bipedal creature such as a giant eagle or harpy). An ability that grants you claw attacks cannot be used as if they were talon attacks (in other words, you can't "re-skin" the ability's game mechanics so you can use it on a different limb).
The only creature i can tink of where i find it confusing is Tengu which probably were intended at one time to get the claws on their feet. but now get some word of wing arm claws to keep with the new paradigm.
He can calll himself Razor wing!
|
Officially, if you tried to attack with claws on your feet, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
Because nobody with arms and legs ever learned how to do this or this.
The real problem is that the combat paradigm makes a lot of assumptions about physicality and fighting. A lot of effort has clearly gone into making it broad and flexible, but the demarcation between attack types causes as many problems as it fixes.
Officially, if you tried to attack with claws on your feet, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.Because nobody with arms and legs ever learned how to do this or this.
The real problem is that the combat paradigm makes a lot of assumptions about physicality and fighting. A lot of effort has clearly gone into making it broad and flexible, but the demarcation between attack types causes as many problems as it fixes.
But notice that their putting themselves in a position where the rest of their body is pretty much unusable for anything.
Its not that kicking with a claw would break the game, be overpowered, or break verisimilitude. Its WHY people want to kick with a claw thats overpowered and verisimilitude breaking: They want to kick with their claws stab with two daggers and probably wrap a tentacle around the guy to boot.
|
|
Officially, if you tried to attack with claws on your feet, you wouldn't have a leg to stand on.Because nobody with arms and legs ever learned how to do this or this.
The real problem is that the combat paradigm makes a lot of assumptions about physicality and fighting. A lot of effort has clearly gone into making it broad and flexible, but the demarcation between attack types causes as many problems as it fixes.
But notice that their putting themselves in a position where the rest of their body is pretty much unusable for anything.
Its not that kicking with a claw would break the game, be overpowered, or break verisimilitude. Its WHY people want to kick with a claw thats overpowered and verisimilitude breaking: They want to kick with their claws stab with two daggers and probably wrap a tentacle around the guy to boot.
The simple clip was illustrating the concept. There are several martial arts styles and forms that use feet and legs as primary weapons. Adding claws to them would have a similar effect to having claws on your hands. A snap kick, for instance. Or axe kick, or cartwheel kick, a few types of takedowns...well there's a lot and we don't need an exhaustive list. It's not the point.
I agree, the problem is not the specific allowance of claws on feet. The issue is that the language used to rationalize limitations on behavior and actions in combat creates a problem. Arcane Spell Failure is a great example. A helmet provides a % chance of failure, but it doesn't restrict the one hand needed to fulfill somatic component requirements. Clearly the goal is to create a trade-off between wearing armor and using magic, but the specific language hinges on something you could achieve in full plate by taking a gauntlet off. Light/One/Two-handed weapons are also a good example. Ine on section they stick with the label as measuring "the effort involved" and in other areas it is a literal hand.
While not identical, the natural weapon arguments all fall in the same category. I feel the situation is compounded by the fact that natural weapons are a separate system for resolving monstrous combat and it operates under different assumptions than combat using weapons. It's even been stated that the natural attack rules are a way of helping creatures keep up with PC's. Blending the two separate systems is going to be a problem as long as there are two systems to blend. (And people wanting to use them both to create blenders.)
What about eidolons? You can buy claws for any set of limbs you have, right? A bipedal eidolon gets claws for free. You could put them on your feet, right?
What about eidolons? You can buy claws for any set of limbs you have, right? A bipedal eidolon gets claws for free. You could put them on your feet, right?
No, reread the evolution, you can only put one pair of claws on your legs.
But anyway, the eidolon rules were made purposefully general since there are other baseforms, and you can alter your form to a large extent. Essentially, the 'claws on one pair of feet' rule was made so you could make a tiger kind of thing, or if you decided to give a biped an extra pair or legs (no idea why you would do so rather than take advantage of a quadraped base form for the same results+pounce, but it is an option)
Essentially, it does not reflect the designers actual design principles that well since it had to be broad enough to cover all the weird things people can do, yet simple enough to actually understand. ....I never said they did it well, but that was the intention at least.
I could see feet claws if you had feet that could be used as hands (ie, prehensile feet). Add in a prehensile tail and you could actually use all those claws if you where hanging from that tail. Like the old Su-Monsters.
But to the OP, no by the rules you can't put claws on feet. You might get a DM to allow you to put an attack there but it'd be a house rule (and I'd expect them to be secondary attacks even if allowed.).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the rules say you need to put the claws on your hands.arms, then that's where they must go. If they don't possess such verbiage, then it stands to reason you can place them wherever they logically could go.
The eidolon evolutions clearly allow for claws on the feet. Other race/class options may not be so lenient.
I always wanted to make an eidolon with wings who can hover and attack with wing buffets, feet claws, and a two-handed greatsword. That's ok by the rules I think.
It most certainly is, no question.
|
|
I'm pretty sure there's a difference between attacking with claws on your feet and delivering a kick. Claws require some kind of raking movement to function. A tiger, for instance, can easily rake with its two forelimbs while standing on its hind legs. But if you only have the two legs to stand on, you need to "slash" with the front of your foot to attack with a foot claw. By contrast, a Talon can be used with much the same motion as a kick since you'd be expected to "grab" with the talon as you deliver a kick. This is why you can use Talon attacks with your feet as a biped but it's unrealistic to use Claw attacks on your feet as a biped. Even an animal with claws on all four limbs can't use the back ones without a special action (pounce or rake during a grapple). It stands to reason that, even if a biped had claws on their feat, they'd need to either Pounce or Grapple in order to use them adequately. With the video that was posted showing the martial artist doing a jump kick against two boards, how are you going to manage that while also making a competent full-attack using a pair of daggers?
This is not entirely accurate to nature. A lot of animals use claws that are a part of the same compound bone structure (the foot) but it's a spur that extends differently. Cock fighting, for instance, is an easy example, though I acknowledge it's a talon. They often put metal reinforcements on the spur (which is used with a kicking motion, no grabbing involved.) Want a mammal? My favorite is the platypus with claws and spurs, and then there's the lemur...
Also, there are plenty of kicks you can perform which use a striking motion that would compliment claws quite well, including many of the powerful roundhouse style. All you need is a sweeping motion, snapping motion, pushing motion or similar. The split kick video shoes the sole of both feet at the opponents, which means you could strike using claws on your toes without issue. Again, a snap kick is also great example. Knee comes up, leg extends, claws sink into target with the force of the kick and toes flex to grab and tear the flesh as the target is pushed by the force of the blow and the leg comes back down. The idea that a biped is not capable of employing claws on the hind limbs/legs, is just not very well supported. Take a look at some kicking styles and see a broader range of kick attacks. Are there kick attacks that would be useless with claws? Absolutely. Are there kick attacks which would be good with claws? Absolutely. There are even weapons, like the ashiko which are similar (but less versatile than) growing claws on your feet. Acknowledged, ashiko were primarily used for climbing assist. They were still incorporated into the fighting style using it's existing strike techniques.
In regards to: "how do you expect to do all of that in a full attack action"...I have to call shenanigans. The basic level of suspension of disbelief required to play already covers that. A TWFighter could feasibly get 6 attacks in a round using weapons and then another 6 attacks of opportunity in the same 6 second slice of time. All of these attacks are not happening together, but at this point you're averaging a full-power swing every .5 seconds. With races, feats, and equipment you could get natural attacks on top of that for an even greater saturation.
Animals are not student warriors. They don't train in combat, and cannot be taught elaborate or complex ways of fighting. Player Characters are. Consider that someone came up with Net and Trident fighting, the Hunga Munga is not an intuitive weapon, and neither is the Urumi, or the bolas, or three section staff... the list goes and on. The way animals fight in nature to use the advantages they have been equipped with is not the only way to employ those advantages; and clever monkeys have found ways to gain an advantage using unconventional methods.
My point, if it was unclear, is that wanting to do it is very reasonable. The world around us provides examples of it. The problem is that the system doesn't support it in such a way that it's appropriate to play. Natural weapon combat was built using different assumptions.
FYI, there's already a FAQ on this subject. The link to it can be found here.
|
|
FYI, there's already a FAQ on this subject. The link to it can be found here.
Thanks Cheapy. BigNorseWolf also posted a link to that and quoted the text earlier, resolving the OP's question. I was just running down the rabbit hole labeled "Tangent"
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.
So I should trade in my eidolon's claws for a slam. Can I slam and use a weapon in my hands at the same time? Or do you need your hands to slam?
That is, can you slam with your feet?
If you DO have to slam with your hands, then if you had a glove of storing, could you swing your sword, then put your sword in your glove, then slam?
|
|
So I should trade in my eidolon's claws for a slam. Can I slam and use a weapon in my hands at the same time? Or do you need your hands to slam?
That is, can you slam with your feet?
If you DO have to slam with your hands, then if you had a glove of storing, could you swing your sword, then put your sword in your glove, then slam?
I have no idea where this one is coming from. Why do you need to change your eidolon's weapons? Also, Slam specifies limbs. You can Slam with your hind limbs or forelimbs, or mid-limbs or aft-limbs...you get the idea. Be a tree, limb it up.
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.
That is wrong. The rules apply wherever they are applicable. There is no rule saying that rules from one book don't affect another book. It was the eidolon argument that prompted that FAQ so of course it applies.
So I should trade in my eidolon's claws for a slam. Can I slam and use a weapon in my hands at the same time? Or do you need your hands to slam?
That is, can you slam with your feet?
If you DO have to slam with your hands, then if you had a glove of storing, could you swing your sword, then put your sword in your glove, then slam?
how many limbs are used in slam is a little unclear its kind of an un-defined clubbing thing for large animals or monsters.
I think normally, a creature could have a sword in one hand and attack with a slam in their offhand (secondary attack)
so bab 6 18 str +10/+5 longsword 1d8+4 Slam +5 1d8? +2
You cant attack with a weapon then use a Natural attack associated with that limb. So while my first example works
Greatsword then gloves of storing then slam does not work as the limb was used in the attack
The only confusing bit is Eidolons slam is associated with a pair of limbs usually and so im not sure if the slam is on a specific limb or just an action both participate in.
If that is the case attacking then slamminb within the same pair of limbs doesnt work.. but this is fuzzy.
So I should trade in my eidolon's claws for a slam. Can I slam and use a weapon in my hands at the same time? Or do you need your hands to slam?
That is, can you slam with your feet?
If you DO have to slam with your hands, then if you had a glove of storing, could you swing your sword, then put your sword in your glove, then slam?
Slams tend to be done with arm appendages.
From the PRD:
The eidolon must have the limbs (arms) evolution to take this evolution.
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.
No. The context is absolutely meant for PCs, and there's no reason to assume it's not for PCs as well.
Eidolons fall out of normal rules in many ways.
They have their own rules.
Thus, they are terrible examples of what can, and can't be done.
Yup, exactly this. Their rules are different for many things in subtle and intentional ways. Not exactly a good argument, although it certainly can help to strengthen another argument.
Buttttt, in this case, wraithstrike is correct. Slams usually use arms. There are some exceptions, but the devs have confirmed it to me...can't really link it though since it was private...
Anyhow, one big exception is the Tanuki, and you are welcome to guess what body part the slam uses ;)
|
|
So I should trade in my eidolon's claws for a slam. Can I slam and use a weapon in my hands at the same time? Or do you need your hands to slam?
That is, can you slam with your feet?
If you DO have to slam with your hands, then if you had a glove of storing, could you swing your sword, then put your sword in your glove, then slam?
how many limbs are used in slam is a little unclear its kind of an un-defined clubbing thing for large animals or monsters.
I think normally, a creature could have a sword in one hand and attack with a slam in their offhand (secondary attack)
You must apply the Attack(Slam) Evolution to the Limbs Evolution. You get to slam for big damage because you are using both limbs. Slam is the THF of natural combat, at least as far as Eidolons are concerned. Claws specify that the each limb sprouts a set of claws. The language is pretty clear to me, but maybe I missed something.
if you decided to give a biped an extra pair or legs (no idea why you would do so rather than take advantage of a quadraped base form for the same results+pounce, but it is an option)
The Biped gets reach when given the Enlarge Evolution, the other two forms do not. Adding Limbs for legs and Limbs for arms gets you an equally fast moving beast with greater natural reach, and you could improve on that with the Reach evolution or manufactured reach weapons. (I do not believe they stack, but I've never followed up on that).
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.That is wrong. The rules apply wherever they are applicable. There is no rule saying that rules from one book don't affect another book. It was the eidolon argument that prompted that FAQ so of course it applies.
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.No. The context is absolutely meant for PCs, and there's no reason to assume it's not for PCs as well.
Why on earth is it in the Bestiary FAQ then?
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.That is wrong. The rules apply wherever they are applicable. There is no rule saying that rules from one book don't affect another book. It was the eidolon argument that prompted that FAQ so of course it applies.Why on earth is it in the Bestiary FAQ then?Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.No. The context is absolutely meant for PCs, and there's no reason to assume it's not for PCs as well.
Dunno. Why are there non-bestiary options for a PC to take "Monster Feats", and why does it say in the bestiary that GM's may allow PC's to take Monster Feats?
Paizo really needs to consolidate the FAQ. I have no idea why some faqs are where they are...
Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.That is wrong. The rules apply wherever they are applicable. There is no rule saying that rules from one book don't affect another book. It was the eidolon argument that prompted that FAQ so of course it applies.Why on earth is it in the Bestiary FAQ then?Bah! That's from the Bestiary FAQ and has little to no bearing on PC rules from other books. The context is likely for GMs creating their own monsters and what not.No. The context is absolutely meant for PCs, and there's no reason to assume it's not for PCs as well.
Since when does the placement of the FAQ mean it does not apply to everyone? I am sure the CMB rules apply to monsters even if the formula is not in the bestiary. I could keep going and list many other rules and FAQs that apply to monsters, but I dont think I need to.
As usual in such threads, I'd like to point out that the Bestiary is a valid source of feats for PCs along with their animal companions and mounts unless you're playing in PFS or your DM house rules otherwise.