Contextualizing a bit. The original text of many battle forms until the 3º print said:
One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose, which are the only attacks you can use. You're trained with them. Your attack modifier is +9, and your damage bonus is +1. These attacks are Strength based (for the purpose of the enfeebled condition, for example). If your unarmed attack bonus is higher, you can use it instead.
But due undesired restrictions to Atletics attack actions the designers changed to:
One or more unarmed melee attacks specific to the battle form you choose, which are the only attacks you can Strike with. You're trained with them. Your attack modifier is +9, and your damage bonus is +1. These attacks are Strength based (for the purpose of the enfeebled condition, for example). If your unarmed attack bonus is higher, you can use it instead.
But this change also allow to use the Battle Form Strikes to be used as normal subordinate Strikes of larger actions like Power Strike?
So a char in a Bear Battle Form that has a Fighter Archetype and Power Attack feat is now able to use it normally once the new text calls the form attacks as unarmed Strikes like any action the uses Strikes and unarmed Strikes as part of the action (like Attack of Opportunity, Flurry of Blows...)?
Power Attack and the like have always worked in Battle Forms.
Power Attack and the like have always worked in Battle Forms.
I think it was intended to always work. But until the 3rd printing it technically didn't, because actions like Power Attack had the Attack trait and were not allowed to be used while in Battle Form spells along with Grapple and Escape.
But yes, with the changed wording of the 3rd printing, it would be allowed. Much like the various Monk stances that only allow a specific Unarmed Attack to Strike with. You can still use those in Flurry of Blows or Power Attack.
Those actions don't have the Attack trait. The subordinate Strike does, but Power Attack does not. Other "metaStrike" feats are generally the same, in that regard.
*checks*
Hmm... So they don't.
Always a bit confusing keeping track of what does and doesn't have the Attack trait.
I mean it would be kind of terrible if Power Attack had the attack trait, because it would mean the strike it gives you would have MAP.
A couple abilities had this error in the first printing of the CRB and were swiftly errata'd to fix it.
It's actually fairly consistent: the attack trait is on the action that you can't really decompose further into subordinate actions.*checks*
Hmm... So they don't.
Always a bit confusing keeping track of what does and doesn't have the Attack trait.
Mostly it is from things like Feint doesn't have the Attack trait, but Escape does. Grapple does. Tumble Through doesn't. Ray of Frost does. Electric Arc doesn't. Power Attack doesn't, but counts as though it has it twice.
And I'm not sure about Spirit Object - it says to make a spell attack roll, but doesn't add the Attack trait. And nothing in spell attack rolls actually says to increase your MAP. The spell probably should, but it currently doesn't by strict RAW.
None of those are really inconsistent though, except maybe spirit object hard to say.
No. But they are confusing and hard to keep track of.
It only avoids being completely arbitrary nonsense if you fully understand all of the underlying balance reasons for why an action would have the Attack trait. And it is hard to remember because the Attack trait doesn't really match up with 'Hostile Action' that is the normal English meaning of the word 'attack'.
Can you use Skill actions with the attack trait in battle form now like trip or grapple? It always seemed like a ridiculous restriction that you couldn't trip or grapple in a battle form.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
No. But they are confusing and hard to keep track of.
All you have to do is look at the traits of the action you're taking.
Or even simpler than that, looking at the type of action being taken.
This is how RAW was brought into line with the obvious RAI with the Errata yes. Those specific actions also have the "free hand" requirement, but we know that was written for humanoids (as evidenced by the snake animal companion that must grapple to use its Constrict ability.) So GM adjudication of the anatomy of a specific form can come up for a given action.
Can you use Skill actions with the attack trait in battle form now like trip or grapple? It always seemed like a ridiculous restriction that you couldn't trip or grapple in a battle form.
Yes. That was part of the 3rd CRB printing errata.
In aerial form, animal form, avatar, dinosaur form, dragon form, elemental form, insect form, monstrosity form, nature incarnate, plant form, change "only attacks you can use" to "only attacks you can Strike with." You can still use non-Strike attacks like Grapple and Trip as normal.
All you have to do is look at the traits of the action you're taking.
So apparently you have the rule books memorized a lot better than I do.
Can you use Skill actions with the attack trait in battle form now like trip or grapple? It always seemed like a ridiculous restriction that you couldn't trip or grapple in a battle form.Yes. That was part of the 3rd CRB printing errata.
In aerial form, animal form, avatar, dinosaur form, dragon form, elemental form, insect form, monstrosity form, nature incarnate, plant form, change "only attacks you can use" to "only attacks you can Strike with." You can still use non-Strike attacks like Grapple and Trip as normal.All you have to do is look at the traits of the action you're taking.So apparently you have the rule books memorized a lot better than I do.
Finally, clarification. We all knew that was likely something overlooked not being able to escape in battle form or Grapple in King Kong form.