| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
how are you suggesting using them without?
I'm not suggesting anything, I'm just pointing out the areas in which your analogies miss the mark or confuse existing rules. I have no strong opinion on how you choose to run Clawdancer at your tables.
Let's see what Frenzied claw and Talon stance say:
Can a character with a talon attack use either stance? The portion you quoted says 'claw' for both.
|
If the ancestry has claws on their hands, they can do claw attacks, if the ancestry has claws/talons on their feet, they can do talon strikes. if they have both, they can do both.
This seems obviously correct to me. This is how I would rule it at my table, and I wouldn't think twice about it.
But I can also easily see how someone could build a Clawdancer without ever thinking that would be the ruling.
This absolutely needs a clarification.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
unless you suggest that you can do monk punches without arms and monk kicks without legs
I see no reason both shouldn't be possible. All PCs are assumed to have roughly the same capability regardless of anatomy. So you should absolutely be able to punch and kick if you look like this.
Like an awakened animal PC who is a snake can still use all the monk stances!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the ancestry has claws on their hands, they can do claw attacks, if the ancestry has claws/talons on their feet, they can do talon strikes. if they have both, they can do both.This seems obviously correct to me. This is how I would rule it at my table, and I wouldn't think twice about it.
But I can also easily see how someone could build a Clawdancer without ever thinking that would be the ruling.
This absolutely needs a clarification.
How do you tell which ancestry has claws where though? With proper heritages, Tengu and Strix can get a Talon attack. Ok, cool. Do they also have claws on their hands? If not, why not? A Changeling that takes Hag's Claws gains a Claw attack. Do they also get them on their feet? How do you tell?
The truth is the game hasn't bothered because it ultimately doesn't matter. Clawdancer is perfectly clear in how you can qualify for it and how it works. It's a pretty fun archetype and we don't need to make it more complex than it already is. If you qualify for it, you can use both stances, that's the RAW, and it's the simplest and fairest way to run it.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If the ancestry has claws on their hands, they can do claw attacks, if the ancestry has claws/talons on their feet, they can do talon strikes. if they have both, they can do both.This seems obviously correct to me. This is how I would rule it at my table, and I wouldn't think twice about it.
But I can also easily see how someone could build a Clawdancer without ever thinking that would be the ruling.
This absolutely needs a clarification.
I think it's a reasonable enough approach if your goal is strict RAW, but it also diminishes the archetype quite a bit.
The archetype has specific options built around stance swapping, but as far as I can tell there are very few (if any?) creatures that specifically have both kinds of attack in the first place. So this whole dimension of the archetype kind of disappears the more strict you're being about the wording.
Even some of the solutions in this thread involve playing fast and loose with the RAW by handwaving what counts as what, so at that point why even hold onto the pretense?
... It's the same thing with the aside about monks. Like, if you put emphasis on the whole description, preventing a Merfolk from utilizing Dragon Stance is technically correct because they don't have legs, but in what way does that actually serve to make the game better by restricting some very specific character concept? There's no balance or logic involved, it's just kind of weaponizing a flavorful description against a player to literally no one's benefit.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The archetype has specific options built around stance swapping, but as far as I can tell there are very few (if any?) creatures that specifically have both kinds of attack in the first place. So this whole dimension of the archetype kind of disappears the more strict you're being about the wording.
This whole thread made me go want to check and if we go full RAW, no ancestry has both (that is to say, nobody has both Claws and Talons as Natural Weapons).
But the Slashing Claws graft says it can go on hands or feet, so theoretically any ancestry could get both. I don't think it's required though. It would IMO fall into TBTBT territory considering the amount of stance switching the Archetype expects of you.
Maybe I don't agree with shroud, actually. I think you need to have claws or talons on your hands and feet to use the stances. Only one needs to be a specific unarmed attack, though.
Like your awakened cat PC would probably have a claw attack, and maybe a bite attack but even though a cat has claws on both their front and rear legs, they do not have what you would call "talons" since only birds of prey have talons, really.
But there shouldn't be anything weird about an awakened cat being a clawdancer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Catfolk don't have talons. Insofar as I'm aware, there is no obvious way for them to get talons. And yet, they are the iconic representation for the Clawdancer archetype, in which they are visually represented as lashing out with the talons they don't have on their feet.
Don't overthink it. The archetype enables itself.
Like if you really wanted to have a merfolk character who is a clawdancer, you would probably want to flavor your fish tail as having spines or sharp fins, and just reflavor the talon attacks as "hitting people with your tail spikes."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like if you really wanted to have a merfolk character who is a clawdancer, you would probably want to flavor your fish tail as having spines or sharp fins, and just reflavor the talon attacks as "hitting people with your tail spikes."that's a houserule though, not a simple reflavor, since now you are adding mechanical effects.
I'm not adding mechanical effects. You're entitled to enter Spinning Talon stance by way of "having the Clawdancer archetype", which you can qualify for by simply having Claws on your hands. Broadly the two stances are flavored as "attacks with your hands" and "attacks with your feet". If you only have claws on your hands and not on your feet, you can still make spinning talon attacks in that stance. If you want to explain how that happens, then you can flavor it how you want.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If your character has dragon stance, even if they have no legs they can make dragon tail attacks. It's up to the player to explain how that happens.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What else? can you swing a sword without having arms now?
Yes. Your quadruped poppet who is a toy horse can wield a sword, as can your awakened snake PC.
All PCs have basically the same functionality in terms of their limbs as regular-degular humans do, even if they don't have those limbs. It's up to you to explain how your snake wields a sword.
If your PC looks exactly like this they can wield a sword, kick, juggle, play a wind instrument, and deal cards. It's up to you to explain how you do any of that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You are telling me you are choosing to play an ancestry without claws and "reflavoring" them as claws though. That is a mechanical effect, not a reskin.
I think you're reading what I said uncharitably. My example of a merfolk with the clawdancer archetype obviously gained claws from somewhere (like being a changeling, or grafts, or any other thing that can give you claws). Having gained claws they are able to make claw attacks and are able to take the clawdancer archetype.
What I'm saying though is that even though they cannot have talons (as a result of not having feet), they can still make spinning talon attacks since the archetype gives you the stance.
It's similar to how your awakened bird PC has talons but not claws, but if they take clawdancer they can still make frenzied claw attacks in that stance.
If you're looking to play a character who can make only claw (or talon) attacks but not the other one, don't take clawdancer.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
catfolk feet are clawed though.
According to what? They're a fantasy creature, not cats. It's anybody's guess whether or not they have claws on their feet, fur, human-like skin, or whatever!
That's the point.
No, that's splitting hairs.
A human with grafted claws wouldn't have claws on their feet. Hence he wouldn't have the body part to attack with.
Clawed feet are not necessary to access the archetype and its stances though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clawed feet are not necessary to access the archetype and its stances though.
You can also access the archetype (and its stances) if you only have talons but do not have claws (like you're an awakened bird of prey of some kind).
An eagle doesn't have claws, but does have talons. An awakened eagle PC with the clawdancer archetype can make frenzied claw attacks in the appropriate stance.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Clawed feet are not necessary to access the archetype and its stances though.You can also access the archetype (and its stances) if you only have talons but do not have claws (like you're an awakened bird of prey of some kind).
An eagle doesn't have claws, but does have talons. An awakened eagle PC with the clawdancer archetype can make frenzied claw attacks in the appropriate stance.
I agree.
Clawed feet are not necessary to access the archetype and its stances though.You can also access the archetype (and its stances) if you only have talons but do not have claws (like you're an awakened bird of prey of some kind).
An eagle doesn't have claws, but does have talons. An awakened eagle PC with the clawdancer archetype can make frenzied claw attacks in the appropriate stance.
Still strange to say that. How does a character with only talons on their feet extend claws in their hands when they go into claw stance?
How do you explain that when the character doesnt have claws to extend?
Actually looking at the text for clawdancer dedication it seems they didnt have the space to fully flesh out everything they may have wanted to.
"You’ve practiced the art of fighting with your natural claws,
hooking them into prey and thrashing at targets surrounding
you. You gain the following two actions, which let you assume
specific stances to strike more effectively with your claws."
If they had the space I think they would have equally addressed your talons in that last sentence.
I mean im being charitable too, it could have just been an editing oversight or worse intentional omission.
Clawed feet are not necessary to access the archetype and its stances though.You can also access the archetype (and its stances) if you only have talons but do not have claws (like you're an awakened bird of prey of some kind).
An eagle doesn't have claws, but does have talons. An awakened eagle PC with the clawdancer archetype can make frenzied claw attacks in the appropriate stance.
Still strange to say that. How does a character with only talons on their feet extend claws in their hands when they go into claw stance?
How do you explain that when the character doesnt have claws to extend?
Perhaps they harde their feathers, or they simply use their talons. Like, is it so strange to think you could have two different kinds of kicks?
As has been pointed out before, it's no different than some Rare or Uncommon ancestries like Conrasu or Merfolk or Spider-Form Anadi, who can all use Monk stances just fine.
I should also point out that Howl of the Wild has a similar archetype with the Thlipit Contestant, which can be accessed by either having a Tongue Unarmed Attack or a Tail Unarmed Attack. Except that Archetype does have a few feats that work differently depending on whether you got it with a Tongue or a Tail. So the Clawdancer not caring about Claw or Talon beyond qualifying for the archetype seems like a deliberate design decision.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
catfolk feet are clawed though.According to what? They're a fantasy creature, not cats. It's anybody's guess whether or not they have claws on their feet, fur, human-like skin, or whatever!
This kind of sums up my hangup here. In principle I don't really mind the idea of saying "of course catfolk can use it."
But it feels weird to first take this hyper literal RAW stance on who's allowed to use the feats and then turn around and handwave things for convenience and usability's sake a moment later.
Clawed feet are not necessary to access the archetype and its stances though.You can also access the archetype (and its stances) if you only have talons but do not have claws (like you're an awakened bird of prey of some kind).
An eagle doesn't have claws, but does have talons. An awakened eagle PC with the clawdancer archetype can make frenzied claw attacks in the appropriate stance.
Still strange to say that. How does a character with only talons on their feet extend claws in their hands when they go into claw stance?
How do you explain that when the character doesnt have claws to extend?Perhaps they harde their feathers, or they simply use their talons. Like, is it so strange to think you could have two different kinds of kicks?
As has been pointed out before, it's no different than some Rare or Uncommon ancestries like Conrasu or Merfolk or Spider-Form Anadi, who can all use Monk stances just fine.
I should also point out that Howl of the Wild has a similar archetype with the Thlipit Contestant, which can be accessed by either having a Tongue Unarmed Attack or a Tail Unarmed Attack. Except that Archetype does have a few feats that work differently depending on whether you got it with a Tongue or a Tail. So the Clawdancer not caring about Claw or Talon beyond qualifying for the archetype seems like a deliberate design decision.
There is no requirement you have legs to take the monk class either.
As Squiggit just said too.This kind of sums up my hangup here. In principle I don't really mind the idea of saying "of course catfolk can use it."
But it feels weird to first take this hyper literal RAW stance on who's allowed to use the feats and then turn around and handwave things for convenience and usability's sake a moment later.
The dedication is being specific about who gets in the door and then were to just ignore what got the character in the gate once they are inside?
I would have preferred they named the stances based on what they do instead of labeling them by claw or talon if they wanted them both to be useaable for those getting the dedication with only claw or only talon.
There is another argument to make here. This dedication is strong as far as dedications go. A character gets two stances enabling different fighting styles out of it.
Often to have both talons and claws you need to spend some character resource to get the one that didnt come with your ancestry.
That build in cost expectation balances access to both stances from one feat.
|
|
catfolk feet are clawed though.According to what? They're a fantasy creature, not cats. It's anybody's guess whether or not they have claws on their feet, fur, human-like skin, or whatever!
According to the art on the page with the Clawdancer archetype.
(I understand that isn't rules text, so it doesn't actually count. But it is *right there*.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
All you need us a single unarmed attack with the name "claw" or "talon". The archetype then allows you to functionally have talon and claw attacks unrelated to it.
If you are a limbless blob with a single tongue that has a talon attack, you can use the full archetypes normally. If you are a catbird with razor finger and razor toe attacks, you do not qualify.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The thing is- nobody naturally has both claws and talons. Only birds have talons- cats, bears, lizards, etc. have claws but not talons.
If you needed both claws and talons to access both stances (rather than just one, as is spelled out in the archetype feat) this would be an archetype for nobody.
Thematically much like the monk stance attacks are "use your body in a way that evokes an animal or a thing in nature" the stances the clawdancer gets are "use your claws or talons in a way that evokes the ways other creatures use their claws and/or talons." Like if your a cat person, you don't have talons, but you can evoke how the eagle attacks with its talons with your rear claws through training.
According to what? They're a fantasy creature, not cats. It's anybody's guess whether or not they have claws on their feet, fur, human-like skin, or whatever!
This comment (coupled with the previous one about Fist accounting for all kicks, knees, elbows etc.) made me go looking. Assuming it is possible for you to have claws on your feet (which I feel is a fair interpretation, especially with Talon Stance saying "the claws on your feet)
Lizardfolk, Catfolk, and Changelings don't seem to specify having them on your hands, nor does it specify a number. Either it accounts for all of a creature's claw attacks (however many that may be), or said creatures only have a single Claw, as it is written in the singular. So with the "claws on your feet" part of talon stance, those three are in the clear.
Goloma and Nephilim are are out of luck, their claw attack mentions it is on their hands.
For the record, I believe the intent is for Clawdancer to give you both from the stances even if you only have one or the other. Finding the first piece just led me down the rabbit hole, and I wanted to share.