3
\$\begingroup\$

If you have a pair of claws that deal d6 damage and gain another pair of d6 claws but the second source does not have scaling damage based on size, are you able to use the second pair on your feet instead of you hands. Since some races like catfolk and lizardfolk already have small claws that cannot be used in combat I don't see why they could not have slightly larger than normal claws on their feet just as with their hands.

This also raises the question whether this would qualify for Multi-attack and whether or not you be would able to use these normally claws in combat to increase you iterative attacks?

So, the question is:

  1. Can the claws be placed on you feet for something like catfolk/lizardfolk?

  2. If yes to Q1 then does that increase your iterative attacks (4x claw attacks)?

  3. Does this qualify you for Multi-attack?

The Rakasta race is the precursor race to catfolk in 1e and AD&D in which they have "2 hand-claw attacks and a rear claw/rake attack that can only be used if both hand-claw attacks hit the same target in a single round." I know the rules change but racially I think it would make sense.

\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ DM is using a mix between the two but most rulings are based on 3.5. \$\endgroup\$ – That one guy Jun 2 '17 at 21:33
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage Then good answers will have to address that. We cannot close every question that uses both tags; playing “3.PF” is far too common to force questions to pick one. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Jun 2 '17 at 22:20
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan Most 3.PF games use Pathfinder rules and simply allow 3.5 content. For a question about content it's often fine to have both tags, but for a general rules question like this the asker will usually only care about the rules from one of the two systems. Narrowing down the tags gets them a more useful answer. \$\endgroup\$ – Oblivious Sage Jun 2 '17 at 23:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage That simply is not true. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Jun 3 '17 at 1:15
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @ObliviousSage The opposite is true in my experience: most 3.p games allow pathfinder content, but use 3.x as the base - I've seen the occasional adaption of PF rules into 3.5, but as Pathfinder has become worse than 3.x, it's really not worth playing. \$\endgroup\$ – nijineko Jun 3 '17 at 22:19
3
\$\begingroup\$

Pathfinder monsters who use their foot claw typically have the rake special attack (and not two additional claw attacks):

A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks under certain conditions, typically when it grapples its foe. In addition to the options available to all grapplers, a monster with the rake ability gains two free claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. The bonus and damage caused by these attacks is included in the creature’s description. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn already grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn.

For example the tiger has 2 claw attacks and rake (2 claws +10, 1d8+6) as a special attack, not 4 claw attacks.

Another example with a summoner's eidolon can get it for 2 evolution points:

An eidolon grows dangerous claws on its feet, allowing it to make 2 rake attacks on foes it is grappling. These attacks are primary attacks. The eidolon receives these additional attacks each time it succeeds on a grapple check against the target. These rake attacks deal 1d4 points of damage (1d6 if Large, 1d8 if Huge). This evolution is only available to eidolons of the quadruped base form. This evolution counts as one natural attack toward the eidolon’s maximum. The summoner must be at least 4th level before selecting this evolution.

(emphasis mine)

That considered, unless you have a weird anatomy it clearly suggests that you can't do a claw attack with your feet.

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$
  • \$\begingroup\$ You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, **so long as a different limb is used for each attack** . I would think feet/legs would count as different limbs then a creatures hands. \$\endgroup\$ – That one guy Jun 2 '17 at 21:55
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Thatoneguy Perhaps, but it's slightly illogical to suggest that a creature to use more than half its locomotive limbs for attacks; it'd fall over. The rake attack is akin to a grapple (and often creatures that have a rake attack may use it in a grapple) \$\endgroup\$ – Chemus Jun 3 '17 at 0:54
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Chemus It would be more or less claw-claw with hands then something akin to a kick from each clawed foot. However, if claws on your feet would be considered a rake attack then I think you would need to grapple, but I cannot find any rulings in either 3.5 or PF that says having foot claws give you a rake attack or additional claw attacks. Also a turn translates to about 6 seconds so there is no reason they would fall over if the attacks are one after the other instead of all at once. \$\endgroup\$ – That one guy Jun 3 '17 at 3:10
0
\$\begingroup\$

There are no explicit limitations on gaining foot-based claw attacks in either D&D 3.5 or Pathfinder. Nothing says you can’t. At the same time, the overwhelming majority of claw attacks in the game are described as being on the hands/forepaws, so it certainly would be unusual. Where a natural weapon is described as being found is important in both systems, as both use a vague and implicit “logical” limitation on natural weapons that you cannot use more of them than you have the appropriate limbs for. For claws described as going on the hands/forepaws, that’s usually two.

In Pathfinder, there are no exceptions to this general concept. As Anne Aunyme’s answer points out, creatures with claws on their feet/hindpaws usually get rake attacks, not claw attacks. For birds and bird-like dinosaurs, you instead tend to see talon attacks; for example, see the velociraptor. Larger raptors like deinonychus and megaraptor even specify that they have foreclaw attacks, in addition to their talons.

In D&D 3.5, we have a lot of similar stories; the tiger and deinonychus entries make it clear that the Pathfinder versions were straight conversions without any significant changes. Tigers have rake, deinonychus has talons (and foreclaws), and so on. Even though the notorious fleshraker from Monster Manual III is described as having “a pair of 6-inch-long hooked claws” on each of its four limbs, it still has only two claw attacks and a rake.

However, Magic of Incarnum has an exception for you. The landshark boots soulmeld, when bound to one’s totem chakra (requiring a minimum of two levels in the totemist class), grants a pair of claw attacks on your hands, as well as the ability to attack with four claws, hands and feet, if you manage to jump at least 5 feet high while within reach of an opponent (a DC 20 Jump check).

  1. Can the claws be placed on you feet for something like catfolk/lizardfolk?

Catfolk or lizardfolk can take totemist levels and use landshark boots, but then, so can pretty much everyone else. Catfolk and lizardfolk do not have any native access to such features in either system.

  1. If yes to Q1 then does that increase your iterative attacks (4x claw attacks)?

Natural weapons are never iterative attacks. “Iterative” is used only for those extra attacks you get from having high BAB, that take successive −5 penalties. Natural weapons cannot be used for iteratives (barring a special exception like a monk with Feral Combat Training).

But yes, landshark boots do allow you to attack four times. It requires jumping through some hoops (ba-dum-tish), but you can.

  1. Does this qualify you for Multi-attack?

Yes, landshark boots would qualify you for the Multiattack feat (either system; the feat is the same in both).

| improve this answer | |
\$\endgroup\$

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.