Skinwalkers and Natural attacks.


Advice

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Sczarni

I want to write up a Skinwalker for a game I will be playing in soon and I want to make him viable using only natural attacks, I am looking at playing a combat heavy non caster.

I would really like some help with this.
here are the requirements for this build.
must be 3rd level,standard Skinwalker,20 point build.

I would appreciate any and all help.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ragebred Skinwalker Beastmorph Vivisectionist with Feral Mutagen and Extra Feature to grab both Gore and Hooves.

Go to town with 6x sneak attack.

Meet Harrison Zahhak, the king of sneak attack.

Liberty's Edge

blackbloodtroll wrote:
Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.

This. 5 natural attacks by 2nd level is hard to beat. Extra Feature plus Beast Totem equals two hoofs, a gore, and two claws, and is scary.

N. Jolly wrote:

Ragebred Skinwalker Beastmorph Vivisectionist with Feral Mutagen and Extra Feature to grab both Gore and Hooves.

Go to town with 6x sneak attack.

Meet Harrison Zahhak, the king of sneak attack.

Gore and Bite both use the head, and using them together is thus...controversial. And will vary by GM. For the record.

Sczarni

Deadmanwalking wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.
This. 5 natural attacks by 2nd level is hard to beat. Extra Feature plus Beast Totem equals two hoofs, a gore, and two claws, and is scary.

Can you lay that out for me? how does that equal 5 natural attacks by 2nd level?


northbrb wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.
This. 5 natural attacks by 2nd level is hard to beat. Extra Feature plus Beast Totem equals two hoofs, a gore, and two claws, and is scary.
Can you lay that out for me? how does that equal 5 natural attacks by 2nd level?

Extra Feature lets you get two features from your Skinwalker transformation.

Ragebred can choose a pair of Hooves or a Gore. Extra Feature lets them get both.

Lesser Beast Totem gives a pair of claw attacks.

After that point, it's simple math.

Liberty's Edge

northbrb wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.
This. 5 natural attacks by 2nd level is hard to beat. Extra Feature plus Beast Totem equals two hoofs, a gore, and two claws, and is scary.
Can you lay that out for me? how does that equal 5 natural attacks by 2nd level?

Uh...Ragebred get either a Gore attack or two Hoof attacks when the shift, and the Extra Feature Feat lets them get both. Barbarians with Lesser Beast Totem get two Claw attacks when they Rage. All these stack unambiguously, since Hoff attacks are on the feet, claws on the hands, and a Gore on the head.

EDIT: Ninja'd.

Silver Crusade

Deadmanwalking wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.

This. 5 natural attacks by 2nd level is hard to beat. Extra Feature plus Beast Totem equals two hoofs, a gore, and two claws, and is scary.

N. Jolly wrote:

Ragebred Skinwalker Beastmorph Vivisectionist with Feral Mutagen and Extra Feature to grab both Gore and Hooves.

Go to town with 6x sneak attack.

Meet Harrison Zahhak, the king of sneak attack.

Gore and Bite both use the head, and using them together is thus...controversial. And will vary by GM. For the record.

Gargoyles say otherwise.

The combo's legal, it's just if your GM permits it. At worst, you don't take extra feature, and just take the hooves. You're getting pounce at the same point through Beastmorph, and probably putting up more damage through Sneak Attack than you would through Rage, especially with how easy it is to set up Sneak Attack with 3/4ths casting. And everything else that 3/4ths casting gives.

Liberty's Edge

N. Jolly wrote:

Gargoyles say otherwise.

The combo's legal, it's just if your GM permits it. At worst, you don't take extra feature, and just take the hooves. You're getting pounce at the same point through Beastmorph, and probably putting up more damage through Sneak Attack than you would through Rage, especially with how easy it is to set up Sneak Attack with 3/4ths casting. And everything else that 3/4ths casting gives.

Hm! Hadn't caught that on the Gargoyle, that does lend a lot of support to allowing it.

And if that's allowed you can get the same number of attacks by playing a Skinwalker Barbarian raised by Half-Orcs or Orcs (gaining the ironically named 'Tusked' for a bite attack). For the record.

And I never said the Alchemist version wasn't a good build, it clearly is, I was just noting that some GMs would argue you can't combine the two head-based attacks (which they will, since I've seen people do so on these very forums, though the Gargoyle give solid evidence to dispute them, I admit).


Dot.

Remember, if it's a boar you play then it's trotters and not hooves that are kicking the phlegm out of your foes.

Boars look great except the racial bonus goes to Wisdom if I'm reading the race correctly. Hope I'm wrong on that one.

Liberty's Edge

EpicFail wrote:

Dot.

Remember, if it's a boar you play then it's trotters and not hooves that are kicking the phlegm out of your foes.

Boars look great except the racial bonus goes to Wisdom if I'm reading the race correctly. Hope I'm wrong on that one.

They also get Con when shifted...and can stay shifted as long as they like (and so are only not shifted for social reasons). +2 each to Con and Wisdom, along with -2 Cha, are solid Barbarian mods...as Dwarf Barbarians demonstrate.

It's not quite as good as a Strength bonus, but it's not bad at all.

Sczarni

So these options look good for the number of natural attacks I can get in a round but what about damage? I really want my character to be able to hold his own with just his natural attacks.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Yes. You will do quite well with damage.

Liberty's Edge

N. Jolly wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
blackbloodtroll wrote:
Wereboar-Kin(Ragebred) Skinwalker Barbarian going along the Beast Totem Rage Powers.

This. 5 natural attacks by 2nd level is hard to beat. Extra Feature plus Beast Totem equals two hoofs, a gore, and two claws, and is scary.

N. Jolly wrote:

Ragebred Skinwalker Beastmorph Vivisectionist with Feral Mutagen and Extra Feature to grab both Gore and Hooves.

Go to town with 6x sneak attack.

Meet Harrison Zahhak, the king of sneak attack.

Gore and Bite both use the head, and using them together is thus...controversial. And will vary by GM. For the record.

Gargoyles say otherwise.

The combo's legal, it's just if your GM permits it. At worst, you don't take extra feature, and just take the hooves. You're getting pounce at the same point through Beastmorph, and probably putting up more damage through Sneak Attack than you would through Rage, especially with how easy it is to set up Sneak Attack with 3/4ths casting. And everything else that 3/4ths casting gives.

The argument that it wasn't legal came from Paizo staff and amounted to monsters following special, unwritten rules that let them do stuff like that while pcs don't.

Grand Lodge

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Well, if it's clearly written in the unwritten rules....


1 person marked this as a favorite.

All you have to do is hold your head in your metaphorical hands and guide your jaws into place and you'll be fine.


Well then let my changes to gore/bite characters also go unwritten...

EDIT:Advanced Race Guide also shows the PC stats for gargoyles and how they build them. No mention of any special rules used...


monk/monk/fighter

use maneuver master

swordlord fighter

Then go kensai magus the last 17 levels
Get a bite attack type,

Liberty's Edge

northbrb wrote:
So these options look good for the number of natural attacks I can get in a round but what about damage? I really want my character to be able to hold his own with just his natural attacks.

By 3rd level (when you get Power Attack) you can do 1dX+7 on each attack, with a +7 to hit on all of them as a raging Barbarian, or +6 to hit with a Mutagen using Alchemist (though the Alchemist uses higher damage dice on some and may have 2d6 sneak attack as well).

So...yeah, you'll do serious damage.

The Exchange

dot


The Gore attack should take priority over the bite attack due to the strength of some later Gore based rage powers.

Boar's Charge

Disemboweling Tusks

Silver Crusade

ShadowcatX wrote:
The argument that it wasn't legal came from Paizo staff and amounted to monsters following special, unwritten rules that let them do stuff like that while pcs don't.

Well until it's in the FAQ under "Rules you need to go to the boards to find out as well as know the secret handshake to discover", then I'm sure it's nice and legal.

In a game based on written rules, 'unwritten rules' are quite possibly the dumbest possible rationalization for anything.

I'm not saying this to insult you, ShadowcatX, more to insult the concept that unwritten rules should hold any sway in a game that adheres to written ones.


northbrb wrote:
So these options look good for the number of natural attacks I can get in a round but what about damage? I really want my character to be able to hold his own with just his natural attacks.

The skinwalker rageboar has SLA to enable you to qualify for Arcane Strike which scales.


EpicFail wrote:
northbrb wrote:
So these options look good for the number of natural attacks I can get in a round but what about damage? I really want my character to be able to hold his own with just his natural attacks.
The skinwalker rageboar has SLA to enable you to qualify for Arcane Strike which scales.

Ragebred Skinwalkers get "speak with animals" as an SLA. It counts as a Druid spell in this case, according to the Core Rulebook FAQ. I don't think it qualifies for Arcane Strike.

Silver Crusade

dariusu wrote:
EpicFail wrote:
northbrb wrote:
So these options look good for the number of natural attacks I can get in a round but what about damage? I really want my character to be able to hold his own with just his natural attacks.
The skinwalker rageboar has SLA to enable you to qualify for Arcane Strike which scales.
Ragebred Skinwalkers get "speak with animals" as an SLA. It counts as a Druid spell in this case, according to the Core Rulebook FAQ. I don't think it qualifies for Arcane Strike.

I actually had to look this up (as I use Arcane Strike without thinking for the Harrison Zahhak Build), and Speak With Animals is also a Bard (read: arcane) spell, so it should work with Arcane Strike. I know there's a chart somewhere of 'how spells work in regards to Arcane vs. Divine', but I feel like Bard is above Druid.


N. Jolly wrote:
dariusu wrote:
EpicFail wrote:
northbrb wrote:
So these options look good for the number of natural attacks I can get in a round but what about damage? I really want my character to be able to hold his own with just his natural attacks.
The skinwalker rageboar has SLA to enable you to qualify for Arcane Strike which scales.
Ragebred Skinwalkers get "speak with animals" as an SLA. It counts as a Druid spell in this case, according to the Core Rulebook FAQ. I don't think it qualifies for Arcane Strike.
I actually had to look this up (as I use Arcane Strike without thinking for the Harrison Zahhak Build), and Speak With Animals is also a Bard (read: arcane) spell, so it should work with Arcane Strike. I know there's a chart somewhere of 'how spells work in regards to Arcane vs. Divine', but I feel like Bard is above Druid.

The FAQ says it defaults as Wizard/Sorcerer. If the spell is not on the Wizard/Sorcerer list it defaults in this order: Cleric, Druid, Bard, Paladin, and Ranger, in that order. Druid is before Bard.

Here is the FAQ entry:

Quote:

Spell-Like Abilities: How do I know whether a spell-like ability is arcane or divine?

The universal monster rules for spell-like abilities states: "Some spell-like abilities duplicate spells that work differently when cast by characters of different classes. A monster's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order."

For spell-like abilities gained from a creature's race or type (including PC races), the same rule should apply: the creature's spell-like abilities are presumed to be the sorcerer/wizard versions. If the spell in question is not a sorcerer/wizard spell, then default to cleric, druid, bard, paladin, and ranger, in that order.

For spell-like abiities gained from a class, use the spell type (arcane or divine) of that class to determine whether the spell-like ability is arcane or divine. If the class doesn't cast spells, use the above rule for spell-like abilities from race or type.

Edit 7/15/13: Wording changed match the precedent in the universal monster rules for spell-like abilities.

Edit 9/23/13: Wording updated to clarify racial/type SLAs vs. class SLAs.

Liberty's Edge

N. Jolly wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
The argument that it wasn't legal came from Paizo staff and amounted to monsters following special, unwritten rules that let them do stuff like that while pcs don't.

Well until it's in the FAQ under "Rules you need to go to the boards to find out as well as know the secret handshake to discover", then I'm sure it's nice and legal.

In a game based on written rules, 'unwritten rules' are quite possibly the dumbest possible rationalization for anything.

I'm not saying this to insult you, ShadowcatX, more to insult the concept that unwritten rules should hold any sway in a game that adheres to written ones.

Make no mistake, I loathe the idea of unwritten rules myself, I just included the explanation for the sake of giving complete information.

Sczarni

So from what I am reading, the best build option will be for the most possible natural attacks? Normally I am the sort of person who aims for fewer stronger attacks. (I love the Vital Strike feat chain) Is it possible to go the natural attack route with only say 3 natural attacks per round (Claw,Claw,Bite) and still be dangerous in combat?


northbrb wrote:

So from what I am reading, the best build option will be for the most possible natural attacks? Normally I am the sort of person who aims for fewer stronger attacks. (I love the Vital Strike feat chain) Is it possible to go the natural attack route with only say 3 natural attacks per round (Claw,Claw,Bite) and still be dangerous in combat?

The problem her is a single Natural Attack will never be as strong as, say, a 2H attack. So you want to always have MORE Natural Attacks than a given 2H wielder could have (and they can have 3. By 6th if THEY grab a Bite too).

And there's no reason not to, since they're all made at your highest attack bonus.


If it's clearly written in the unwritten rules, then I'm sure it's fine to make the spell like ability Speak with Animals, which is cast by an arcane caster, i.e. the Bard, not arcane. [/sarcasm]

Liberty's Edge

EpicFail wrote:
If it's clearly written in the unwritten rules, then I'm sure it's fine to make the spell like ability Speak with Animals, which is cast by an arcane caster, i.e. the Bard, not arcane. [/sarcasm]

1) The rules for rather a spell like ability are arcane or divine are clearly stated, nothing unwritten there.

2) When speak with animals is cast by an arcane caster (as part of his spell allotment) it is arcane. That is not the same as the spell like ability version.

Liberty's Edge

northbrb wrote:

So from what I am reading, the best build option will be for the most possible natural attacks? Normally I am the sort of person who aims for fewer stronger attacks. (I love the Vital Strike feat chain) Is it possible to go the natural attack route with only say 3 natural attacks per round (Claw,Claw,Bite) and still be dangerous in combat?

Yes, you can make 3 attacks per round dangerous. It may not be as dangerous as someone making 5, but dangerous none the less. The fact that natural attacks hit at full base attack bonus is EXTREMELY powerful, especially if you're playing a not full BAB character, leverage that as much as you can.


Linnorms additionally have both a Gore and a Bite, I think, though that's explicitly to make up for the lack of wings.


ShadowcatX wrote:
N. Jolly wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:
The argument that it wasn't legal came from Paizo staff and amounted to monsters following special, unwritten rules that let them do stuff like that while pcs don't.

Well until it's in the FAQ under "Rules you need to go to the boards to find out as well as know the secret handshake to discover", then I'm sure it's nice and legal.

In a game based on written rules, 'unwritten rules' are quite possibly the dumbest possible rationalization for anything.

I'm not saying this to insult you, ShadowcatX, more to insult the concept that unwritten rules should hold any sway in a game that adheres to written ones.

Make no mistake, I loathe the idea of unwritten rules myself, I just included the explanation for the sake of giving complete information.

The race building section was the place for such a rule. Since they didn't add it there, It's safe to ignore the 'unwritten' and follow the written. The ARG shows a completely valid race with both so there'd have to be some kind of errata to overcome that. Unwritten BS doesn't cover that.


ShadowcatX wrote:


1) The rules for rather a spell like ability are arcane or divine are clearly stated, nothing unwritten there.

It's clearly written by the unwritten rules of FAQ. It's clear that the rules don't mention it all. I'll leave it to others as to how much sense the FAQ makes on this one.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber
N. Jolly wrote:

In a game based on written rules, 'unwritten rules' are quite possibly the dumbest possible rationalization for anything.

Amen.

Careful though.

If you get too vocal about the silliness of unwritten rules on the boards, you can get banned.

It is one of the unwritten board rules.


EpicFail wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:


1) The rules for rather a spell like ability are arcane or divine are clearly stated, nothing unwritten there.

It's clearly written by the unwritten rules of FAQ. It's clear that the rules don't mention it all. I'll leave it to others as to how much sense the FAQ makes on this one.

The FAQ is official clarification of "the rules" provided by the developers. "The rules" say Arcane Strike requires the ability to cast arcane spells. "The rules" don't say spell-like abilities count as spells for various requirements. The FAQ clarifies when they do count as spells for certain requirements. "The rules" don't say if a spell-like ability counts as being arcane or divine. The FAQ clarifies when they are considered arcane or divine.


dariusu wrote:
EpicFail wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:


1) The rules for rather a spell like ability are arcane or divine are clearly stated, nothing unwritten there.

It's clearly written by the unwritten rules of FAQ. It's clear that the rules don't mention it all. I'll leave it to others as to how much sense the FAQ makes on this one.
The FAQ is official clarification of "the rules" provided by the developers. "The rules" say Arcane Strike requires the ability to cast arcane spells. "The rules" don't say spell-like abilities count as spells for various requirements. The FAQ clarifies when they do count as spells for certain requirements. "The rules" don't say if a spell-like ability counts as being arcane or divine. The FAQ clarifies when they are considered arcane or divine.

Thanks for making my point. The unwritten rules clearly state that an SLA that's a Bard, i.e. arcane, spell is whatever. Neither published paizo nor errata speak to that.

Feel free to embrace FAQ and feel that they are whatever - that does not make them published Paizo nor does it make sense to have an arcane spell like ability not count as arcane.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

Does casting the non-arcane, Arcane, Spell-like ability, require a metaphorical hand, for metaphorical somatic components?


EpicFail wrote:
dariusu wrote:
EpicFail wrote:
ShadowcatX wrote:


1) The rules for rather a spell like ability are arcane or divine are clearly stated, nothing unwritten there.

It's clearly written by the unwritten rules of FAQ. It's clear that the rules don't mention it all. I'll leave it to others as to how much sense the FAQ makes on this one.
The FAQ is official clarification of "the rules" provided by the developers. "The rules" say Arcane Strike requires the ability to cast arcane spells. "The rules" don't say spell-like abilities count as spells for various requirements. The FAQ clarifies when they do count as spells for certain requirements. "The rules" don't say if a spell-like ability counts as being arcane or divine. The FAQ clarifies when they are considered arcane or divine.

Thanks for making my point. The unwritten rules clearly state that an SLA that's a Bard, i.e. arcane, spell is whatever. Neither published paizo nor errata speak to that.

Feel free to embrace FAQ and feel that they are whatever - that does not make them published Paizo nor does it make sense to have an arcane spell like ability not count as arcane.

Well it isn't "unwritten" if it is written somewhere, but anyway the "unwritten" rule clearly states that a "speak with animals" SLA would be divine(Druid), not arcane. EDIT: If that SLA came from a racial feature. Also, this rule is printed on page 304 of the Bestiary 1. The FAQ just extends it from "monsters" to PC races (among others).

Again, it is not in the published rules that spell-like abilities count as spells for the purposes of qualifying for anything. Spell-like abilities counting as spells for certain requirements comes from the FAQ. Without the FAQ ruling, even arcane spell-like abilities don't necessarily count as arcane spells.

Sczarni

So as a shifter if my clay attacks start at 1d4 then what is the highest I can get my natural attack damage to, is the Improved natural attack feat the only way to improve my base damage? (excluding things such as Enlarge Person) which are not permanent.

Liberty's Edge

northbrb wrote:
So as a shifter if my clay attacks start at 1d4 then what is the highest I can get my natural attack damage to, is the Improved natural attack feat the only way to improve my base damage? (excluding things such as Enlarge Person) which are not permanent.

Uh...do you mean hoof attacks? Ragebred doesn't give claws.

In any case, yeah, Improved Natural Attack is the only way to improve them...but honestly? Don't bother. You'll be getting so many attacks with so many static modifiers (if you build for it properly) that the one point of average damage per attack on maybe two attacks isn't worth a Feat.

Sczarni

I see I wrote "Clay attacks" I meant Claw attacks, and I was just trying to get an idea for increasing the base damage.

Liberty's Edge

northbrb wrote:
I see I wrote "Clay attacks" I meant Claw attacks, and I was just trying to get an idea for increasing the base damage.

And as noted, Ragebred don't get those. Both Barbarians and Alchemists can get them via class powers, though, and in both cases they do 1d6 damage, base.

And my general advice from my last post stands.


dariusu wrote:


... Also, this rule is printed on page 304 of the Bestiary 1. The FAQ just extends it from "monsters" to PC races (among others)...

Finally we have some published material. I have reservations and will post in the rules forum.

Sczarni

So I just went with a standard Skinwalker, I am combining my claws along with the Barbarian Rage power "Animal Fury" to gain a bite attack.

I know that the claws count a primary natural weapons and bite counts as a secondary natural attack, my big question is when my base attack reaches 6 and I have more than one attack per round how will using my natural attacks work?

I need some clarity on natural attacks and base iterative base attack bonuses? I just need a simple run through of how it works for my character?


Simple.

They don't interact. At all.

Natural Attacks do not get iteratives.

Sczarni

Rynjin wrote:

Simple.

They don't interact. At all.

Natural Attacks do not get iteratives.

So no matter what level I am I will only ever get those 3 attacks?

Do they count as an standard action or a full attack action?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Companion Subscriber

You get them all on a full-attack.

One, on a standard attack.


northbrb wrote:

So no matter what level I am I will only ever get those 3 attacks?

Yes. That's why people were advising you to stack on as many as you could, because with only 3 or 4 people will catch up to you eventually with even 2H attacks and outpace your damage considerably.

northbrb wrote:
Do they count as an standard action or a full attack action?

Full attack, as usual.

1 to 50 of 57 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Skinwalkers and Natural attacks. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.