Elf Step + Tiger Stance, aka rule clash?


Rules Discussion


The base rule is that the general rules are altered by a specific rule.
We can all Step 5ft, but Tiger Stance makes Steps into 10ft if you have 20 movement. Elf Step allows you to Step twice, but states they are 5ft Steps.

Which specific rule trumps here?


4 people marked this as a favorite.

Tiger Step allows you to Step 10 feet.
Elf Step allows you to Step 5 feet twice by using an action.

It's pretty straightforward.
If you're looking for a double 10 feet Step, then, it's not the proper combo to do it :)

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

These comboed in the playtest. They appear to have explicitly changed the language to remove the combo. Which is a little sad, but I can see why they did it.


SuperBidi wrote:

Tiger Step allows you to Step 10 feet.

Elf Step allows you to Step 5 feet twice by using an action.

It's pretty straightforward.
If you're looking for a double 10 feet Step, then, it's not the proper combo to do it :)

Not /that/ straightforward:

Step Action: You carefully move 5 feet.

Elf Step: You move in a graceful dance, and even your steps are broad. You Step 5 feet twice.

Tiger Stance: As long as your Speed is at least 20 feet while in Tiger Stance, you can Step 10 feet.

Both base Step and Elf-Step say 5. Tiger says you "can step 10 feet". Is there a straightforward hierarchy for specific rules I'm missing? One is Step 5ft. Another is Step 5ft x2. Third is "you can step 10ft".

I take it Elf Step still counts as a Step, otherwise it wouldn't benefit from Feather Step if it's not considered a Step? Or can it count as a Step for one feat but not another? In the end we're all just a Step(h).

Liberty's Edge

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the clear intent is for them not to combine, since the wording has actually been changed to this version, which seems to disallow it, and it was a well known and perhaps too powerful combo in the playtest.

Also, you're missing that Elf Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet twice. No more, no less.

If an action said 'You stride 20 feet, then step.' movement enhancers wouldn't help the stride distance, but Tiger Stance would work on the step because one specifies the distance and the other does not. Elf Step specifies the distance.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

Also, you're missing that Elf Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet twice. No more, no less.

If an action said 'You stride 20 feet, then step.' movement enhancers wouldn't help the stride distance, but Tiger Stance would work on the step because one specifies the distance and the other does not. Elf Step specifies the distance.

I don't mind if this doesn't work. I usually assume they don't when asking the things. Now just kind of more curious bout the wording and how rules override each other.

Step wrote:
You carefully move 5 feet. Unlike most types of movement, Stepping doesn’t trigger reactions, such as Attacks of Opportunity, that can be triggered by move actions or upon leaving or entering a square.You can’t Step into difficult terrain (page 475), and you can’t Step using a Speed other than your land Speed.
Elf Step wrote:
You move in a graceful dance, and even your steps are broad. You Step 5 feet twice.

They are both 1 Action, and both specify 5ft. The only difference is that the other does it twice for the cost of a feat. But it's still a Step which can benefit from Step based feats I presume?

Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet. No more, no less.
Elf Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet twice. No more, no less.
Tiger stance modifies just one of these. While Feather Step modifies both of these?


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet. No more, no less.

Elf Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet twice. No more, no less.
Tiger stance modifies just one of these. While Feather Step modifies both of these?

Yep! It really is that simple if you read the rules involved.

Feather Step applies to any Steps you take. It lets you Step into difficult terrain. Both Step and Elf Step let you take Steps so they both get this benefit.

Tiger Stance lets you Step 10 feet. Step, which is normally 5 feet, becomes 10 feet. Elf Step, which specifically says you take two 5-foot Steps, isn't affected. The two Steps you get from Elf Step aren't two of the base Step action, as it was in the playtest, they're two of the base Step action restricted to 5 feet each.

So Elf Step and Tiger Stance don't mix in any way, but have the same general effect barring difficult terrain (Tiger Stance is more powerful in that case), while Feather Step applies to both.

Step is not a real word anymore.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Ranged Reprisal also cuts out Tiger Style Monkadins by requiring the triggering enemy to be "within 5' of your reach" not "within 1 step action of your reach". I suppose in theory that could let you set up a flank, but it's not a recommended combination of things- it works better with giant instinct barbadins.


Alfa/Polaris wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet. No more, no less.

Elf Step is its own action. It explicitly allows you to Step 5 feet twice. No more, no less.
Tiger stance modifies just one of these. While Feather Step modifies both of these?

Yep! It really is that simple if you read the rules involved.

Feather Step applies to any Steps you take. It lets you Step into difficult terrain. Both Step and Elf Step let you take Steps so they both get this benefit.

Tiger Stance lets you Step 10 feet. Step, which is normally 5 feet, becomes 10 feet. Elf Step, which specifically says you take two 5-foot Steps, isn't affected. The two Steps you get from Elf Step aren't two of the base Step action, as it was in the playtest, they're two of the base Step action restricted to 5 feet each.

So Elf Step and Tiger Stance don't mix in any way, but have the same general effect barring difficult terrain (Tiger Stance is more powerful in that case), while Feather Step applies to both.

Step is not a real word anymore.

This feels a lil odd since they use the same terminology, aka, Step, and both Step action and Elf Step action function the same, ie not triggering Reactions.

I'm not being dense on purpose, but RAW wording, it seems like the Step action specifies 5 ft of movement. Elf Step says 5ft Step x2. Unlike Step, Elf Step isn't even bringing up movement, it directs to the Step action itself, which is itself altered by Tiger Stance.

If we go by "Elf Step specifies 5ft so it cannot be 10ft as Tiger Stance states." then it goes for Step as well since that also specifies 5ft. They are both a specific Step mechanic which doesn't trigger reactions, and they can be altered by feats that directly affect Step, such as Feather Step or Light Step.

The biggest difference between the two is the fact that Step says "you move 5ft" while Elf Step says "You Step 5 foot twice" yet the latter isn't affected by "You can Step 10 feet."


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Step is a basic action that anyone can do. It is therefore a "general rule" in the context of "specific beats general". Tiger Stance modifies the generic Step to be 10ft, by being a more specific rule. Elf Step is an action that lets you take 2 5ft Steps. This is a more specific rule still, so it overrides.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I think the following on Subordinate Action on p462 of the CRB is relevant:

Subordinate Actions
An action might allow you to use a simpler action—usually one of the Basic Actions on page 469—in a different circumstance or with different effects. This subordinate action still has its normal traits and effects, but is modified in any ways listed in the larger action. For example, an activity that tells you to Stride up to half your Speed alters the normal distance you can move in a Stride. The Stride would still have the move trait, would still trigger reactions that occur based on movement, and so on. The subordinate action doesn’t gain any of the traits of the larger action unless specified. The action that allows you to use a subordinate action doesn’t require you to spend more actions or reactions to do so; that cost is already factored in.

So Elf Step makes the Step be 5 feet in any case, as it is a specific Modifikation.


Smugmug wrote:

I think the following on Subordinate Action on p462 of the CRB is relevant:

Subordinate Actions
An action might allow you to use a simpler action—usually one of the Basic Actions on page 469—in a different circumstance or with different effects. This subordinate action still has its normal traits and effects, but is modified in any ways listed in the larger action. For example, an activity that tells you to Stride up to half your Speed alters the normal distance you can move in a Stride. The Stride would still have the move trait, would still trigger reactions that occur based on movement, and so on. The subordinate action doesn’t gain any of the traits of the larger action unless specified. The action that allows you to use a subordinate action doesn’t require you to spend more actions or reactions to do so; that cost is already factored in.

So Elf Step makes the Step be 5 feet in any case, as it is a specific Modifikation.

This is handy to know, but if it's a specific modification, then it should also override Feather Step, since Feather Step is applied to the Step action the same way Tiger Stance is applied to the Step action.

I understand that Elf Step say specifies a distance of 5ft, but so does the general action Step, which also specifies 5ft movement. They both specify the same distance, and for all intents and purposes seem to be the same Action, just like a Stride action could be altered to say, have +10ft movement until next turn, and Sudden Charge is an action that allows us to Stride twice in one action, still gaining that +10ft to each Stride because even if he's not using the Stride general action, he is using Stride.


Whoever wrote Elf Step had the luxury of simply saying take two Steps (and be done with it).
That left the loophole that improved Steps (i.e. in Tiger Stance) made that too strong in the playtest.
So Elf Step still references Steps, and all those Step rules still apply, it's just that Elf Step also specifies its Steps are 5'. That's nearly always redundant, but devs had their reasons, again Tiger Stance, but also it aids w/ futureproofing too.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Castilliano wrote:

Whoever wrote Elf Step had the luxury of simply saying take two Steps (and be done with it).

That left the loophole that improved Steps (i.e. in Tiger Stance) made that too strong in the playtest.
So Elf Step still references Steps, and all those Step rules still apply, it's just that Elf Step also specifies its Steps are 5'. That's nearly always redundant, but devs had their reasons, again Tiger Stance, but also it aids w/ futureproofing too.

They should just have written something like "You can move 5ft twice without triggering reactions."

The wording right now isn't the best.
Step: "You can move 5ft"
Elf Step: "You can Step 5ft twice."
Tiger: "You can Step 10ft"
Yet all three count the same for Feather Step.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path, Lost Omens, Rulebook Subscriber
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Castilliano wrote:

Whoever wrote Elf Step had the luxury of simply saying take two Steps (and be done with it).

That left the loophole that improved Steps (i.e. in Tiger Stance) made that too strong in the playtest.
So Elf Step still references Steps, and all those Step rules still apply, it's just that Elf Step also specifies its Steps are 5'. That's nearly always redundant, but devs had their reasons, again Tiger Stance, but also it aids w/ futureproofing too.

They should just have written something like "You can move 5ft twice without triggering reactions."

The wording right now isn't the best.
Step: "You can move 5ft"
Elf Step: "You can Step 5ft twice."
Tiger: "You can Step 10ft"
Yet all three count the same for Feather Step.

Really not sure how that's not clear, each one of Step, Elf Step, and Tiger Stance say exactly what they let you do. And Feather Step applies to them all since they're all the Step action.

Elf Step lets you step 5ft twice as that's exactly what it says you can do. It doesn't say you can take 2 steps, if it did Tiger would apply, but it doesn't.


Vlorax wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Castilliano wrote:

Whoever wrote Elf Step had the luxury of simply saying take two Steps (and be done with it).

That left the loophole that improved Steps (i.e. in Tiger Stance) made that too strong in the playtest.
So Elf Step still references Steps, and all those Step rules still apply, it's just that Elf Step also specifies its Steps are 5'. That's nearly always redundant, but devs had their reasons, again Tiger Stance, but also it aids w/ futureproofing too.

They should just have written something like "You can move 5ft twice without triggering reactions."

The wording right now isn't the best.
Step: "You can move 5ft"
Elf Step: "You can Step 5ft twice."
Tiger: "You can Step 10ft"
Yet all three count the same for Feather Step.

Really not sure how that's not clear, each one of Step, Elf Step, and Tiger Stance say exactly what they let you do. And Feather Step applies to them all since they're all the Step action.

Elf Step lets you step 5ft twice as that's exactly what it says you can do. It doesn't say you can take 2 steps, if it did Tiger would apply, but it doesn't.

I guess I just thought that the specific of "You can Step 10ft" trumped the general action "You can carefully move 5ft" and "You Step 5ft". Looking for other examples of this, and if we take the reading as strict as it's here, then Belt Pouch and Bandolier can't hold Soap or Vials since the text specifies "Items of Light Bulk." and both vials and soap are "- bulk", which is not Light Bulk. But Tents are kosher with this "specifics trump general".


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Deadmanwalking wrote:
These comboed in the playtest. They appear to have explicitly changed the language to remove the combo. Which is a little sad, but I can see why they did it.

Yeah...it would have let an elf do a step for a distance that is the entire movespeed of a dwarf. Which seems hilarious, and would lead to peeved off dwarves. But for balance reasons, I can see why they did so. Because the dwarf would have been smacked by the giant while the elf would have PRANCED its way in.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
I guess I just thought that the specific of "You can Step 10ft" trumped the general action "You can carefully move 5ft" and "You Step 5ft".

The specific text of elf step isn't 'general' though. It's specific.


lemeres wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
These comboed in the playtest. They appear to have explicitly changed the language to remove the combo. Which is a little sad, but I can see why they did it.
Yeah...it would have let an elf do a step for a distance that is the entire movespeed of a dwarf. Which seems hilarious, and would lead to peeved off dwarves. But for balance reasons, I can see why they did so. Because the dwarf would have been smacked by the giant while the elf would have PRANCED its way in.

Couldn't any dwarf pick this up with adopted?

Squiggit wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
I guess I just thought that the specific of "You can Step 10ft" trumped the general action "You can carefully move 5ft" and "You Step 5ft".
The specific text of elf step isn't 'general' though. It's specific.

With that I agree. And my only beef with that is that specific feats such as Feather Step can alter both the general rule and the Elf Step specific. It seems that the specific of "5ft" can't be altered by another specific after all. It's a bit convoluted to me how "You can Step 10ft" overrides one "you step 5ft" but isn't specific enough to affect another specific. But Feather/Light Step is specific enough to alter a specific.

If the specifics of Elf Step trump Step, and Elf Step doesn't have a requirement of "Your Speed is at least 10 feet.", that should mean that the specific "Step 5ft twice" can be used even with 0 base speed. As it specifies 5ft, not up to 5ft, it can't be more or less, it has to be 5ft, and the action itself has no requirement...

Oh well, shame it doesn't combo, but at least this made me look up wording more specifically, and I just realized that belt pouches specify Light Bulk items, so Tents(pup) are legit, but a bar of soap can't be stowed there. Wonder what else is specific like that.


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
These comboed in the playtest. They appear to have explicitly changed the language to remove the combo. Which is a little sad, but I can see why they did it.
Yeah...it would have let an elf do a step for a distance that is the entire movespeed of a dwarf. Which seems hilarious, and would lead to peeved off dwarves. But for balance reasons, I can see why they did so. Because the dwarf would have been smacked by the giant while the elf would have PRANCED its way in.

Couldn't any dwarf pick this up with adopted?

Squiggit wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
I guess I just thought that the specific of "You can Step 10ft" trumped the general action "You can carefully move 5ft" and "You Step 5ft".
The specific text of elf step isn't 'general' though. It's specific.

With that I agree. And my only beef with that is that specific feats such as Feather Step can alter both the general rule and the Elf Step specific. It seems that the specific of "5ft" can't be altered by another specific after all. It's a bit convoluted to me how "You can Step 10ft" overrides one "you step 5ft" but isn't specific enough to affect another specific. But Feather/Light Step is specific enough to alter a specific.

If the specifics of Elf Step trump Step, and Elf Step doesn't have a requirement of "Your Speed is at least 10 feet.", that should mean that the specific "Step 5ft twice" can be used even with 0 base speed. As it specifies 5ft, not up to 5ft, it can't be more or less, it has to be 5ft, and the action itself has no requirement...

Oh well, shame it doesn't combo, but at least this made me look up wording more specifically, and I just realized that belt pouches specify Light Bulk items, so Tents(pup) are legit, but a bar of soap can't be stowed there. Wonder what else is specific like that.

look at the rules one by one, and SEPERATE them by their Actions:

Action: Step: You move 5ft without provoking
Action: Tiger stance. Modifies "Action: Step" to be 10ft instead of 5ft
Action: Elf step: You do the "Action: Step" modified to go 5ft twice.
No Action: Feather step: Modifies "Action: Step" to ignore difficult terrain.


shroudb wrote:

look at the rules one by one, and SEPERATE them by their Actions:

Action: Step: You move 5ft without provoking
Action: Tiger stance. Modifies "Action: Step" to be 10ft instead of 5ft
Action: Elf step: You do the "Action: Step" modified to go 5ft twice.
No Action: Feather step: Modifies "Action: Step" to ignore difficult terrain.

The Action approach isn't without fallacy, the whole "Elf Step specifies..." is more reasonable.

Example: Running Reload is an action that allows Step and then Interact to reload. If Tiger Stance was clashing with a specific action because it's a "Action: Step" then it wouldn't work with any other action that has Step in it. Seems if Running Reload said "You can Step 5 feet then Interact to reload" then Tiger Stance wouldn't work from what has been said here.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Couldn't any dwarf pick this up with adopted?

I have seen too many barbarian/alchemist catgirls raised by half orcs. So my mind does not accept the existence of that feat.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Couldn't any dwarf pick this up with adopted?
I have seen too many barbarian/alchemist catgirls raised by half orcs. So my mind does not accept the existence of that feat.

I need to know more about that. For science.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
shroudb wrote:

look at the rules one by one, and SEPERATE them by their Actions:

Action: Step: You move 5ft without provoking
Action: Tiger stance. Modifies "Action: Step" to be 10ft instead of 5ft
Action: Elf step: You do the "Action: Step" modified to go 5ft twice.
No Action: Feather step: Modifies "Action: Step" to ignore difficult terrain.

The Action approach isn't without fallacy, the whole "Elf Step specifies..." is more reasonable.

Example: Running Reload is an action that allows Step and then Interact to reload. If Tiger Stance was clashing with a specific action because it's a "Action: Step" then it wouldn't work with any other action that has Step in it. Seems if Running Reload said "You can Step 5 feet then Interact to reload" then Tiger Stance wouldn't work from what has been said here.

No, it really, is. What you're doing now is just confusing activities with their subordinate actions.

An action is an action. It's it's own unique thing, you can't substitute it for something else. If something tells you to "Step", you don't "elf step" instead.

BUT

An action can also have Subordinate actions.

The "parent" action is NOT ANY of the subordinate actions, but its subordinate actions are modified for all the effects that nomrally modify them.

As an example:

let's invent a new "Elf feat".
It's elf strike.
"one action cost"
"You can elf-step and Strike"

By itself, it does nothing. But it has 2 "subordinate actions"
a)Strike.
----Everything that modifies your strikes will modify said feat.
b)Elf Step, Modifies Step to be 5ft. And it has 2 subordinate actions, Step and step.
----b1)(step 1)Everything that modifies step modifies it.
---------Tiger makes the steps 10ft
----b2)(step 2)Everything that modifies step modifies it.
---------Tiger makes the steps 10ft

Putting it all back together:

you do a move action, that doesn't provoke, modified from 5 to 10 back to 5.
followed by another identical movement
followed by an attack modified like A Strike would have been modified

ALL of this together, is it's own unique action "Elf strike", not a step, not a strike, but having all those traits massed together.

is it any more clear now?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Companion, Rulebook Subscriber

So does Ki Rush in Tiger Stance give you 2 10 ft steps or 2 5 ft steps. It is clearer than Elf Step in that it states clearly you have 2 steps or 2 strides or one of each, with no length specified. But is it action step that is 5 or 10 ft? I would assume that it's 10 but requires the ki point. So very limited use, and it get's you concealment till your turn.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
shroudb wrote:


b)Elf Step, Modifies Step to be 5ft. And it has 2 subordinate actions, Step and step.
----b1)(step 1)Everything that modifies step modifies it.
---------Tiger makes the steps 10ft
----b2)(step 2)Everything that modifies step modifies it.
---------Tiger makes the steps 10ft

...

you do a move action, that doesn't provoke, modified from 5 to 10 back to 5.

...

is it any more clear now?

As mud.

You seem to be saying it goes from 5 feet to 10 feet back to 5 feet, but your stepwise example reads to me as each of b1 and b2 ends up as 10 foot.

Also, the rules aren't a computer program, otherwise Corvo is correct and you can't put stuff that is too small or light inside sacks.

It isn't an unreasonable assumption that if feather step can change the two steps in elf step, that tiger stance modifies it, and that the language in elf step is either a last editing pass by someone that was so used to the term 5-foot step in PF1 that they reworded it thusly, or is there as a reminder of what a step action normally does (who knows, maybe they recieved a lot of playtest feedback from GMs who thought it was broken that elf step gave you two stride actions, because they both start with s and so people kept getting them mixed up)

While this may well be intentional on the part of the Devs, if we're going to have specific can override specific but only if it's specific enough situation, they need to be way clearer and less ambiguous with their wording, because if you're going to be this rigid about what things can and can't do, they're eventually going to end up with more totem warriors and monkey lunges where they didn't intend them.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
vagabond_666 wrote:
snip

You're overcomplicating it for yourself. The elf feat just has specific language on what you do with that action, so... you do what the skill says you do.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
vagabond_666 wrote:
shroudb wrote:


b)Elf Step, Modifies Step to be 5ft. And it has 2 subordinate actions, Step and step.
----b1)(step 1)Everything that modifies step modifies it.
---------Tiger makes the steps 10ft
----b2)(step 2)Everything that modifies step modifies it.
---------Tiger makes the steps 10ft

...

you do a move action, that doesn't provoke, modified from 5 to 10 back to 5.

...

is it any more clear now?

As mud.

You seem to be saying it goes from 5 feet to 10 feet back to 5 feet, but your stepwise example reads to me as each of b1 and b2 ends up as 10 foot.

Also, the rules aren't a computer program, otherwise Corvo is correct and you can't put stuff that is too small or light inside sacks.

It isn't an unreasonable assumption that if feather step can change the two steps in elf step, that tiger stance modifies it, and that the language in elf step is either a last editing pass by someone that was so used to the term 5-foot step in PF1 that they reworded it thusly, or is there as a reminder of what a step action normally does (who knows, maybe they recieved a lot of playtest feedback from GMs who thought it was broken that elf step gave you two stride actions, because they both start with s and so people kept getting them mixed up)

While this may well be intentional on the part of the Devs, if we're going to have specific can override specific but only if it's specific enough situation, they need to be way clearer and less ambiguous with their wording, because if you're going to be this rigid about what things can and can't do, they're eventually going to end up with more totem warriors and monkey lunges where they didn't intend them.

forgive me if it wsn't clear, english is not my native language.

in the part where i list the subordinate action, you start from the furthest step and go up.
not from the closest and go down.

So:
the last part of the "chain" is the step. You first modify that (to 10 ft from tiger).
Then you go up the chain. To elf step. That says that your steps are 5ft. So, that modifies them back to 5ft.

If the feat read "you step and step again" then it would have stayed at 10ft.

Following that exact same logic for feather step:

the last part of the "chain" is the step. You first modify that to ignore difficult terrain.
Then you go up the chain. To elf step. That says nothing about modifying how "step" acts in difficult terrain.

So, you keep that modification.

Always keep that "order" in mind (i.e. start with modifying the subordinate action) and it becomes easy to follow the flow.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Related question: How does Feather Step interact with Tiger Stance of Elf Step? By my reading, Feather Step+Elf Step lets you move 10' as you step 5' twice and can explicitly step into the difficult terrain. However, tiger stance still only goes 5' because you still treat 5' of movement as 10' with the exception that you can step into it.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Couldn't any dwarf pick this up with adopted?
I have seen too many barbarian/alchemist catgirls raised by half orcs. So my mind does not accept the existence of that feat.
I need to know more about that. For science.

Summary: "This is the reason why they changed natural attack rules". A bit of the explanation below is written for history purposes for future readers less familiar with PF1.

Minmaxer shenanigans ahead:

In PF1, your natural attacks didn't have iteratives/MAP/whatever. You got them all at highest BAB (or slightly less if you had a secondary attack). So the goal was to get as many attacks as possible. So people tried to exploit as many things as possible.

Half orcs are easy- they had a 'trait' (similar to background) that gave them a bite attack. The adopted trait would give you another race's trait, and people used that to paste bites onto things (because you learn how to grow 4 in teeth?).

Catgirls was because the catfolk have a racial trait to give them claws, as well as a feat that allows them to both move and get off the max number of attacks in the same turn- but only for claws. Given the fact that most of the easily accessed natural attacks are claws (alchemist feral mutagen was the same, and there was a low level rage power for claws), this made them popular for shenanigans.

There were also silliness about people trying to put their extra claws onto twig like mutant arms (alchemist feat; they were meant for shield or crossbows, and never meant to attack, but people argued wording), as well as people trying to stick the claws onto the feet (which is why there is a FAQ that says 'talons go on feet for humanoids'- that is a rare natural attack type separate from claws).

All of those are separate little bits of rule, bending, of course... but they often got bundled together to some degree or another by minmaxers because they would make a natural attack monster with high mobility and 6-7 attacks per turn.

By comparison, getting 20' worth of steps seems cute as far as min maxing goes. It at least LOOKS like the parts could be brought together in the same lifeform. "Elf monk" is a lot more believable than "catgirls raised by half orcs in he arts of anger, chemistry, and dental bonzai".


3 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:
By comparison, getting 20' worth of steps seems cute as far as min maxing goes.

Given how few things have Attacks of Opportunity now, is moving 20 feet without provoking really that much better than the stride of 50 odd feet (or whatever ridiculous movement distance a 9th level elf monk already has)


vagabond_666 wrote:
lemeres wrote:
By comparison, getting 20' worth of steps seems cute as far as min maxing goes.
Given how few things have Attacks of Opportunity now, is moving 20 feet without provoking really that much better than the stride of 50 odd feet (or whatever ridiculous movement distance a 9th level elf monk already has)

Fair enough there. I haven't gone through the bestiary, but I can already get an idea of the rarity based off of the small number of player classes get AoOs.

Still, some of the giants still have it, and they were always fairly common users of reach tactics (there is a reason why giant instinct builds are often made for reach). As long as there is some common family that gets AoOs... you will likely see at least one campaign that focuses on them.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

I count 60 creatures (out of around 400) with either AoO or something that works nearly identically.

But most of those are actually in very predictable categories:

1. Creatures that would be statted with Fighter levels in PF1 (Hobgoblin Soldiers, Orc Warriors, higher ranking Ogres and Gnolls, etc.)

2. Giants. Specifically 'true' Giants (Cloud, Stone, etc.)

3. Dragons (not all have it, but several whole types do, like Red Dragons).

4. Linnorms. They all have it.

5. Specifically martial Demons and Devils (Vrocks, Mariliths, Barbazu, etc.).

Very few things not in the above categories have AoO.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Those are predictable, but they take up a large amount of design space in a campaign.

Humanoid fighters can be inserted anywhere as servants of something bigger, and thus make good fodder. Giants are decent, beefy midbosses in a dungeon raid. if the villain sacrifices a few orphans, martial demons can be inserted as boss fights early on or as decent back up for a boss later on. And dragons usually take up the high end territory in a story.

As a result, I could easily see someone making an entire campaign with full dramatic encounter progression made SOLELY out of AoO capable enemies.

The only category that is forgettable is the linnorm, and that is only because it overlaps with dragons to an extent.


vagabond_666 wrote:
lemeres wrote:
By comparison, getting 20' worth of steps seems cute as far as min maxing goes.
Given how few things have Attacks of Opportunity now, is moving 20 feet without provoking really that much better than the stride of 50 odd feet (or whatever ridiculous movement distance a 9th level elf monk already has)

In theory you can make that 20' elf step as fast as your stride speed. Dwarf, MC Monk, and adopted ancestry elf would have 20' speed and both elf step and tiger stance. That said, I'm reasonably certain elf step and tiger stance don't mix.


lemeres wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:
These comboed in the playtest. They appear to have explicitly changed the language to remove the combo. Which is a little sad, but I can see why they did it.
Yeah...it would have let an elf do a step for a distance that is the entire movespeed of a dwarf. Which seems hilarious, and would lead to peeved off dwarves. But for balance reasons, I can see why they did so. Because the dwarf would have been smacked by the giant while the elf would have PRANCED its way in.

Using Ki Rush still allows it, but that's a ki power, so...


lemeres wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
lemeres wrote:
Corvo Spiritwind wrote:
Couldn't any dwarf pick this up with adopted?
I have seen too many barbarian/alchemist catgirls raised by half orcs. So my mind does not accept the existence of that feat.
I need to know more about that. For science.

Summary: "This is the reason why they changed natural attack rules". A bit of the explanation below is written for history purposes for future readers less familiar with PF1.

** spoiler omitted **...

Wasn't really going for a min-max approach. Mostly just picking up Monk for the tiger claw attacks on a rogue as an alternative to Spiked Gauntlets and didn't like the other human/elf feat options so went with Elf-Step. The wording is still curious to me, but if the concensus is that it doesn't work, then sure. I'm still on the fence on the logic of one specific saying "You Step 5ft twice." and a passive specific saying "But you can Step 10ft".

If it worked it'd be a bonus, but nothing impactful on the build itself.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:

Those are predictable, but they take up a large amount of design space in a campaign.

Humanoid fighters can be inserted anywhere as servants of something bigger, and thus make good fodder. Giants are decent, beefy midbosses in a dungeon raid. if the villain sacrifices a few orphans, martial demons can be inserted as boss fights early on or as decent back up for a boss later on. And dragons usually take up the high end territory in a story.

As a result, I could easily see someone making an entire campaign with full dramatic encounter progression made SOLELY out of AoO capable enemies.

The only category that is forgettable is the linnorm, and that is only because it overlaps with dragons to an extent.

Well, the thing is that, Linnorms aside, AoO isn't universal among any of those categories (sorry for any confusion). It's almost exclusive to them, but by no means do all creatures in any of those categories (except Linnorms) have AoO.

And actually, I slightly misstated in Giants who has them (only Fire and Cloud Giants have AoO). While for Demons and Devils, it's mostly the high level ones (of the ones level 10 and below, only the Vrock and Barbazu have AoO...of the ones level 15 and below, add the Gelugon and only them to that list). And for Humanoid opponents, it's not all fighty-types, just the ones that, thematically, really fit with the Fighter Class (and are melee focused).

Now, in practice, it is possible you should consider all Dragons to have AoO, since they all have some Reaction they can use when you move around them, but frankly that leaves just them and Linnorms as general categories possessing AoO equivalents.


It does not work together.

But if you want to make Elf step work in any situation, you can house rule it:

Any time you make Step move, increase that move distance by 5ft.


Corvo Spiritwind wrote:

Wasn't really going for a min-max approach. Mostly just picking up Monk for the tiger claw attacks on a rogue as an alternative to Spiked Gauntlets and didn't like the other human/elf feat options so went with Elf-Step. The wording is still curious to me, but if the concensus is that it doesn't work, then sure. I'm still on the fence on the logic of one specific saying "You Step 5ft twice." and a passive specific saying "But you can Step 10ft".

If it worked it'd be a bonus, but nothing impactful on the build itself.

Sorry, not accusing you. Just noting that they likely changed the feats so they couldn't combo because they felt a 20' step was 'too strong' or something along those lines. But it isn't really an offensive of a combo... especially when compared to... those catgirls.

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Well, the thing is that, Linnorms aside, AoO isn't universal among any of those categories (sorry for any confusion). It's almost exclusive to them, but by no means do all creatures in any of those categories (except Linnorms) have AoO.

And actually, I slightly misstated in Giants who has them (only Fire and Cloud Giants have AoO). While for Demons and Devils, it's mostly the high level ones (of the ones level 10 and below, only the Vrock and Barbazu have AoO...of the ones level 15 and below, add the Gelugon and only them to that list). And for Humanoid opponents, it's not all fighty-types, just the ones that, thematically, really fit with the Fighter Class (and are melee focused).

Now, in practice, it is possible you should consider all Dragons to have AoO, since they all have some Reaction they can use when you move around them, but frankly that leaves just them and Linnorms as general categories possessing AoO equivalents.

Fair enough. I saw that a lot of the lower level giants lack the reaction. Still... it is something to consider. It is basically a defense that becomes somewhat more common at higher levels. And it is spatter around enough monster types that a GM can shoehorn it into various scenarios.

Liberty's Edge

lemeres wrote:
Fair enough. I saw that a lot of the lower level giants lack the reaction. Still... it is something to consider. It is basically a defense that becomes somewhat more common at higher levels.

It's certainly a factor, but not a deciding one. IMO, it only becomes slightly more common at high levels, and it's around 15% of monsters in the book...so in reality you won't be dealing with it as often as all that.

lemeres wrote:
And it is spatter around enough monster types that a GM can shoehorn it into various scenarios.

If your GM is actively trying to screw you over with their monster choices, I think you have bigger problems than AoO stuff.


Deadmanwalking wrote:

I count 60 creatures (out of around 400) with either AoO or something that works nearly identically.

But most of those are actually in very predictable categories:

1. Creatures that would be statted with Fighter levels in PF1 (Hobgoblin Soldiers, Orc Warriors, higher ranking Ogres and Gnolls, etc.)

2. Giants. Specifically 'true' Giants (Cloud, Stone, etc.)

3. Dragons (not all have it, but several whole types do, like Red Dragons).

4. Linnorms. They all have it.

5. Specifically martial Demons and Devils (Vrocks, Mariliths, Barbazu, etc.).

Very few things not in the above categories have AoO.

I think they balanced the release of AoO quite well given the above. You can handily expect to fight at least some of those creatures every campaign, plausibly every major arc of any given campaign, so your investment in abilities that compensate for AoO isn't a waste assuming you are sufficiently dependant on mobility. However you shouldn't expect to fight them every game session barring specific campaign styles so the game stays mobile with AoO as the exception.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Elf Step + Tiger Stance, aka rule clash? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.