Barbarian Animal Instinct attacks


Rules Discussion


Pathfinder LO Special Edition, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

I'm building a Barbarian with the Animal (Deer) Instinct. He gets an antler attack. How should I visualize this working. He might, for example, grow antlers on his head, just like a deer, and then the attack would be a head butt, and he'd still have attacks possibly with his hands. Or it might be that his hand attacks are now antler attacks and that takes the place of bare hand or fist attacks. Which do you think?

In the latter case, he might wear Handwraps of Mighty Fists, which might have runes etched on them. This would certainly affect his antler attacks. In the former case, I'm not sure Handwraps on his hands would have any effect on his Antler attacks, and I'm not sure how he would apply runes to his antlers, which I envision showing up only when he's enraged.

From a RP standpoint I kind of like the idea of the antler attack being a head butt. On the other hand, from a game play standpoint, I'd prefer the other view, since it's easy to justify apply hand wrap bonuses to the attack.

What say you? :-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Pathfinder Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber

I would note that handwraps apply runes to all unarmed attacks, not just to hand based unarmed attacks. Bites, tail whips, everything.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

The antlers grow on your forehead. Your hands are free (hint : use a shield). Your handwraps' properties apply to your antlers.

Note though that a caster can cast Magic Fang on your antlers only after you start raging, since this unarmed attack is not there before you rage.


Pathfinder LO Special Edition, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
HammerJack wrote:
I would note that handwraps apply runes to all unarmed attacks, not just to hand based unarmed attacks. Bites, tail whips, everything.

Aha! I missed that in the description. Thanks for pointing it out. :-)


Pathfinder LO Special Edition, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber
The Raven Black wrote:
The antlers grow on your forehead. Your hands are free (hint : use a shield). Your handwraps' properties apply to your antlers.

A raging barbarian with a shield? Hm.. I dunno about that. :-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Yes, this has been one of the key problems I've had with the animal instinct- pretty much everything is head focused. Bites, antlers, etc.

And when creatures have claws, they are objectively terrible for the class- agile weapons on a class that actively punishes agile weapon use. And they are two damage dice weaker in a system focused on damage dice.

It mostly gives me the feeling "this is the instinct you use if you want to play an apeman, or if you really want a weird bite only character".

You know what would be cool? WOLF PUNCH. You know you would love that. Don't lie to me.

Horizon Hunters

3 people marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:

Yes, this has been one of the key problems I've had with the animal instinct- pretty much everything is head focused. Bites, antlers, etc.

And when creatures have claws, they are objectively terrible for the class- agile weapons on a class that actively punishes agile weapon use. And they are two damage dice weaker in a system focused on damage dice.

It mostly gives me the feeling "this is the instinct you use if you want to play an apeman, or if you really want a weird bite only character".

You know what would be cool? WOLF PUNCH. You know you would love that. Don't lie to me.

That's what Monks are for though.


Cordell Kintner wrote:
lemeres wrote:

Yes, this has been one of the key problems I've had with the animal instinct- pretty much everything is head focused. Bites, antlers, etc.

And when creatures have claws, they are objectively terrible for the class- agile weapons on a class that actively punishes agile weapon use. And they are two damage dice weaker in a system focused on damage dice.

It mostly gives me the feeling "this is the instinct you use if you want to play an apeman, or if you really want a weird bite only character".

You know what would be cool? WOLF PUNCH. You know you would love that. Don't lie to me.

That's what Monks are for though.

No, not a wolf style punch.

A punch. That is also a wolf.

Ok, to be more specific- allow the various natural weapons too form from areas like the hand, perhaps as some kind of manifested totem spirit. This would keep in line with the general theme of the instinct, while allow for less awkward combat styles.

And honestly, it is not any more unusual than what dragon or giant instinct has going on.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
lemeres wrote:

No, not a wolf style punch.

A punch. That is also a wolf.

As someone who has had a large, excited dog jump on my tender bits, this would be a devastating attack. No wonder monks choose that style.


The ability is balanced around its damage and effects. Visualize it absolutely anyway you like. It can be antlers you carry around. It can be ghostly antlers that shoot out from your limbs while you strike. It can be a vortex that pulls your foe into your antler-rigid fingers.

Animal instinct is intentionally vague around how it works to give you the freedom to play whatever you envision.


lemeres wrote:
You know what would be cool? FALCON PUNCH. You know you would love that. Don't lie to me.

FTFY

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Ed Reppert wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
The antlers grow on your forehead. Your hands are free (hint : use a shield). Your handwraps' properties apply to your antlers.
A raging barbarian with a shield? Hm.. I dunno about that. :-)

Mechanically, the better AC it provides balances the lower damage of the Animal Instinct.

Historically, Viking berserkers were known to bite the edge of their shield when working themselves into a state of frenzy. Which implies that they were wielding a shield ;-)


2 people marked this as a favorite.
The Raven Black wrote:
Ed Reppert wrote:
The Raven Black wrote:
The antlers grow on your forehead. Your hands are free (hint : use a shield). Your handwraps' properties apply to your antlers.
A raging barbarian with a shield? Hm.. I dunno about that. :-)

Mechanically, the better AC it provides balances the lower damage of the Animal Instinct.

Historically, Viking berserkers were known to bite the edge of their shield when working themselves into a state of frenzy. Which implies that they were wielding a shield ;-)

That's because in real life wielding two weapons is mostly dumb and not effective.

You're better off wielding a single big weapon or wielding a shield to protect yourself (but can also be used to push the enemy around and bash them).

Shield are popular because most people don't like dying.


Dude, do you know anything about ninjas or numchucks? /s


Plane wrote:
Dude, do you know anything about ninjas or numchucks? /s

I see the /s so I recognize this is sarcasm, but I'm not sure if you were going for "this statement is obviously dumb and I'm bringing up ninjas and nunchuks because they're often depicted being wielded in pairs" or if you were trying to say "this armchair ancient warfare idiot doesn't understand how two weapon fighting works".

And all I really got in response is, from documents I've seen and read from reliable sources fighting with two weapons was extremely uncommon. In part because people like having shields for protection if they were going to wield two different things in their hands. A secondary reason is that the physics involved in wielding one weapon with two hands vs two meant that the two weapons were generally much less effective as you couldn't break someone's guard as easily and you recovery after a swing would generally prevent you from swinging a second weapon very effectively until you would already be able to swing your first weapon again.

It simply wasn't a common tactic, though it was probably used by at least some number of people. But I think it's mostly regarded as being less effective (for most people) than using a weapon two handed or using a shield.


/silly


Pathfinder LO Special Edition, Maps, Pathfinder Accessories, PF Special Edition Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber; Starfinder Superscriber

Yeah, I would say somebody wielding two ninjas is pretty silly.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder Second Edition / Rules Discussion / Barbarian Animal Instinct attacks All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.