Stacking Bites in PF?

[TomeGnome]

So, I've posted a number of threads regarding this ridiculous hippo build I've been tinkering with. My DM has already ruled on something using what we consider to be common sense, but I wanted to know how others would interpret the following scenario.

So, I wildshape into a Behemoth Hippopotamus, which has a bite attack that deals 4d8. I also have levels in Barb and have taken the Hive Totem progression up to Hive Totem Toxicity. One of the prerequisites is the Aminal Fury rage power, which grants a 1d4 bite attack while raging that essentially functions as a secondary natural attack. Hive Totem Toxicity lets me poison using that bite and also increases the damage by one size category.

So, our thought is that the bite attack Animal Fury grants is temporary (since it is only there while raging) and is therefore in the same category as a sorcerer's claw attack. That means it's technically still there while wildshaped, but that 1d4 is based on the bite damage of a medium, humanoid creature. Obviously 1d4 will scale to 1d8 under normal conditions, but seeing as I already have a bite attack 4 times that strong, it seems like a rage power meant to give you a more powerful bite is actually nerfing the bite I already have. Wouldn't it stand to reason that I'd keep the 4d8 base damage and just gain the additional benefits of the rage power?

So the question is two-fold:

1) Does the Animal Fury bite damage replace my hippo bite damage?
2) If it doesn't, would I increase the bite damage one size category from Hive Totem Toxicity?

[Yanisa]

Well the general, but unwritten, rule in pathfinder seems to be one attack per "limb"(appendage?), with the exception of multiple attacks due a high base attack bonus. Eidolons are a good example in that regard. The general consensus is thus if you have 1 head, you get 1 bite, if you have 2 heads, you can get 2 bites.

Plus Hive Totem Toxicity specially states the bite attack gained Animal Fury, not your bite attack, so it wouldn't work with bite attacks from other souces.

Also a general rule, when you have two things, that don't stack, active at the same time, you get the best of those two.




So basically your Animal Fury and the follow-up Hive Totem Toxicity wouldn't work when you Wildshape into a form with a stronger bite attack.

[TomeGnome]

I was never expecting to gain a second bite attack. I'm aware that I'd only get one attack per limb (though there's been some debate at our table when those two attacks are a bite and a gore attack, but that's another debate there). That would actually likely be worse for me than just having the one, since I would only get to add 1x Str to my Greater Vital Strikes as opposed to the 1.5x Str I'm getting now since I only have a single natural attack.

I'm aware that HTT was meant to modify Animal Fury. However, if the other general rule that you cited is to be trusted and I get the better of the two non-stackable bites, shouldn't my hippo bite damage replace the base damage of Animal Fury, and thus have a 4d8 Animal Fury attack that gets bumped to 6d8 from HTT? It doesn't make sense to take 4 rage powers and in the end to have them do nothing.

Or are you suggesting that I only get one bite attack per round, and as a huge hippo I would either have to choose between using a straight-up hippo bite or the Animal Fury bite which would be ramped up from its original medium damage of 1d4 to gargantuan size and deal 2d6?

[Yanisa]

I was never expecting to gain a second bite attack. I'm aware that I'd only get one attack per limb (though there's been some debate at our table when those two attacks are a bite and a gore attack, but that's another debate there). That would actually likely be worse for me than just having the one, since I would only get to add 1x Str to my Greater Vital Strikes as opposed to the 1.5x Str I'm getting now since I only have a single natural attack.

I'm aware that HTT was meant to modify Animal Fury. However, if the other general rule that you cited is to be trusted and I get the better of the two non-stackable bites, shouldn't my hippo bite damage replace the base damage of Animal Fury, and thus have a 4d8 Animal Fury attack that gets bumped to 6d8 from HTT? It doesn't make sense to take 4 rage powers and in the end to have them do nothing.

Or are you suggesting that I only get one bite attack per round, and as a huge hippo I would either have to choose between using a straight-up hippo bite or the Animal Fury bite which would be ramped up from its original medium damage of 1d4 to gargantuan size and deal 2d6?

Well the rule I cited is the general rule for stacking (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/basics-ability-scores/glossary#TOC-Stacking), which is more for bonuses then for natural attacks to be honest, but the same logic seems to apply. You get two things that clearly don't stack (as per the one attack per limb unwritten rule) or interact with each other (as per Toxicity specially calls out animal fury, and the Hippo bite is clearly not the one from animal fury, even if it would replace the bite.). So yeah, I am suggesting you get two bite attacks (one 4d8 and one 2d6+poison it seems), but whether you can choose is up to the DM. The stacking rules say the best applies, whichever one that is.
But do remember in the end it is a decision for your DM, because there aren't any clear rules. I am just trying to give an answer on the spirit of the rules, because one of my first points already mentioned an unwritten rule (who says you don't get two bites?) it shows we are kinda outside the normal rules.

Besides there must be other wildshapes out there that better fit your rage powers? But yeah there is a clear lack of synergy which seems to mean that one or the other end up wasted in this set up.

[TomeGnome]

Au contraire. The rage powers were meant to complement the bite, not the other way around. This entire build is a maximization of bite damage. As it stands, I have Strong Jaw, Improved Natural Attack, and Titan Strike (from Mythic Adventures) enhancing the bite, so on a greater vital strike, I'm dealing 72d8 plus added damage. Hive Totem Toxicity was meant to increase the bite damage again.

I see where you're coming from, but honestly, that makes no sense. My mouth isn't getting smaller, nor is my jaw getting weaker when using a rage power, especially when that rage power was meant to make biting more effective. Maybe what you're saying is what RAW intended for the sake of game balance, but my GM has already ruled that its effects add to that of the hippo bite.

The problem is, I know there have to be more concrete rules out there than the rules of thumb you're bringing up. Wild shape is famous for being poorly worded, but there are usually concrete rules to be found. They just usually take a little digging (or a lot). This is just the one grey area where we haven't found an official ruling yet. Everything else is clear-cut in the build (though it took a loooong time and a lot of surfing to find those rulings).

[Yanisa]

Au contraire. The rage powers were meant to complement the bite, not the other way around. This entire build is a maximization of bite damage. As it stands, I have Strong Jaw, Improved Natural Attack, and Titan Strike (from Mythic Adventures) enhancing the bite, so on a greater vital strike, I'm dealing 72d8 plus added damage. Hive Totem Toxicity was meant to increase the bite damage again.

:smallconfused:

How do you even manage that? With Greater vital strike I reach 32d6 max for a colossal bite attack with improved natural attack.
Unless your DM allows off the charts progression, but then you are already dealing with home ruling.

And what does Titan Strike do for Natural Attack Damage?


I see where you're coming from, but honestly, that makes no sense. My mouth isn't getting smaller, nor is my jaw getting weaker when using a rage power, especially when that rage power was meant to make biting more effective. Maybe what you're saying is what RAW intended for the sake of game balance, but my GM has already ruled that its effects add to that of the hippo bite.

To be honest the hard RAW answer is... you get two bites... at the same time. No seriously, nothing states you cannot have two bites, you have two sources giving a bite attack. It makes as much sense as having to choose, but that at least seems more in the spirit with the rules. Both options are nonsensical, but that's why you have a DM.

And yes, your jaw is getting weaker or your mouth is getting smaller, how stupid that may sound. That the problem with a lot of pathfinder, it is written with humanoids in mind. The bite attack gained from Animal Fury deals damage as if it was one size category smaller then your current form, aka 1d4 for a medium sized creature. The logic seems that humanoids have a small mouth and a weak jaw, thus cannot deliver the same kind of bite attack as a 6 feet animal could. The rules get all wonky when you use a Rage Power as an animal, when its written for humanoid.


The problem is, I know there have to be more concrete rules out there than the rules of thumb you're bringing up. Wild shape is famous for being poorly worded, but there are usually concrete rules to be found. They just usually take a little digging (or a lot). This is just the one grey area where we haven't found an official ruling yet. Everything else is clear-cut in the build (though it took a loooong time and a lot of surfing to find those rulings).
I don't think there are any concrete rules, but I can be wrong. Pathfinder has this tendency to not answer questions. It's already weird that I cannot find a concrete rule for having 2 bite attacks, let alone for complicated issues that arise from it.

In any case let's tackle the relevant polymorph paragraph. (Because Wild Shape = Beast Shape and Beast Shape is a polymorph effect and polymorph has ruling about class abilities while polymorphed.)

While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.

The rules we got already state that it is in fact a GM decision which abilities function while polymorpht and which not, it has an exception for adding features, which hints at gaining, rather then replacing existing natural attacks. The last line could imply that things like Hive Totem Toxicity increase the Bite attack gained from the new form, but it is not solid evidence and only works if the bite attack gets replaced, while earlier we saw more evidence that you add extra attacks.

So my conclusion seems: RAW 2 bite attacks. RAI 1 bite attack per head (if you have 2 or more, gain the best one). Further rules are unclear, ask your DM.




P.S. I do see logic in allow the Hippo bite replace the one from Animal Fury, and then apply the bonuses from Hive Totem Toxicity on the Hippo's bite. It makes far more sense then any rule I can offer, but that's just my opinion.

[grarrrg]

To be honest the hard RAW answer is... you get two bites... at the same time. No seriously, nothing states you cannot have two bites, you have two sources giving a bite attack.
I don't think there are any concrete rules, but I can be wrong. Pathfinder has this tendency to not answer questions. It's already weird that I cannot find a concrete rule for having 2 bite attacks, let alone for complicated issues that arise from it.

There's a FAQ (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9n88) for that.


As for Hive Totem it doesn't quite state that you must use the Rage-Bite.
"While raging, the barbarian increases her bite damage die type with the animal fury rage power by one die type and decreases the penalty on attack rolls with that bite to –2. Once per rage, a bite that hits can deliver an injury toxin that ..."
This is quibbling on words, but it does say "a" bite.

[Yanisa]

There's a FAQ (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fn#v5748eaic9n88) for that.

Cool :smallbiggrin: (why did that not turn up in my million searches :smallmad:), but it doesn't answer anything beyond that. With that ruling, I guess they expect players to avoid abilities that grant a bite when they already have a bite.


As for Hive Totem it doesn't quite state that you must use the Rage-Bite.
"While raging, the barbarian increases her bite damage die type with the animal fury rage power by one die type and decreases the penalty on attack rolls with that bite to –2. Once per rage, a bite that hits can deliver an injury toxin that ..."
This is quibbling on words, but it does say "a" bite.

So you say the damage increase doesn't apply, but the poison does? Words are words I guess, but it's an odd halfway ruling.

[grarrrg]

So you say the damage increase doesn't apply, but the poison does? Words are words I guess, but it's an odd halfway ruling.

I'm quibbling words on purpose mind you. But there are 2 separate sentences.
"While raging, the barbarian increases her bite damage die type with the animal fury rage power by one die type and decreases the penalty on attack rolls with that bite to –2." end sentence "Once per rage, a bite that hits can deliver an injury toxin that ..."
One can make a decent argument that (partially due to the FAQ ruling) the poison was INTENDED to work with 'any' bite.

[StreamOfTheSky]

Your best bet instead of getting multiple bite attacks is probably to just get extra attacks you can apply to the bite.

Think haste. Wild Rager's level 2 ability. Monk's flurry of blows (with Feral Combat Training) and ki points for an extra attack. The "Multiattack" benefit of Eidolons and animal companions when they only have one natural weapon (they get a 2nd attack with it at -5 to hit). And so forth.

[TomeGnome]

How do you even manage that? With Greater vital strike I reach 32d6 max for a colossal bite attack with improved natural attack.
Unless your DM allows off the charts progression, but then you are already dealing with home ruling.

And what does Titan Strike do for Natural Attack Damage?

Okay. To explain the damage progression, we need the text from Improved Natural Attack (which gives progression for a couple of different dice combinations) and the understanding that each increase is meant to be 1.5x higher than the one before it for once we scale off the end of the chart.

Look for the progression that has 4d8 listed:
"A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8."

Improved natural attack increases 4d8 -> 6d8. Strong Jaw increases by two size categories, which puts it from 6d8 -> 8d8 -> 12d8. Titan Strike is paired with Feral Combat Training, which means all feats that augment an unarmed strike also apply to my bite attack, which increases one further step. Since this puts the total off the end of the scale, multiply 12 x 1.5, and we get 18d8. Vital strike doubles rolled damage, IVS triples it, and GVS quadruples it, so we get 18x4=72, so we end up with 72d8.

If HTT applies, then it gets multiplied by 1.5 one more time and we end up with 108d8.



P.S. I do see logic in allow the Hippo bite replace the one from Animal Fury, and then apply the bonuses from Hive Totem Toxicity on the Hippo's bite. It makes far more sense then any rule I can offer, but that's just my opinion.

I'm glad I'm at least not crazy.

I read the FAQ differently than has been discussed though:

"This is one of those areas where we tried to get at the same idea multiple ways. In this case, the answer is no, unless you somehow manage to get an extra mouth. Generally speaking, natural weapons can only be used once per round each."

It says that you can only have one bite attack per round, but it never says that bite effects from other sources are nullified or cancel out. Keep in mind that the question that they said "no" to in the FAQ was whether it grants you a second bite attack per round, not whether effects from different sources stack. I feel like that very first sentence is referring to the fact that each of these abilities just grant you a bite attack, and having multiple things that grant bite attacks doesn't increase the number of attacks. I see nothing that says the Animal Fury bite and the hippo bite can't be combined and have stackable effect. The logical conclusion to me is that the stronger bite makes more sense to be the base damage. It may not be explicitly stated in RAW, but it also is not disallowed as far as I can see.

To muddy issues further, I am a half-orc, and I do have the Toothy racial feature. :p It was to satisfy to my GM that I qualify for a monster feat, since it seems cheesy to take a feat to enhance a natural weapon I don't actually have permanently.


Your best bet instead of getting multiple bite attacks is probably to just get extra attacks you can apply to the bite.

I see where you're coming from. My initial intent with the natural attack build was to go allosaurus and get ALL the attacks. The thing is, VS is just a standard action. In Mythic Adventures, you can spend a mythic point and get an extra standard action. I have an Ioun Stone that removes fatigue twice per day as a free action, so that means after I take Furious Finish, I can get two maxed out Greater Vital Strikes with insane damage in one round, which can one-round almost any monster that gets thrown our way.

That's not to mention the possibility to use it in a grapple. I or pin an opponent as part of the standard action used to maintain a grapple, then I spend a mythic point and have an extra standard action to vital strike an opponent that's pinned down. If that's not tasty, I don't know what is.

Also, it takes a tenth of the time to total damage. You just need to use a good dice roller.

[TomeGnome]

Ah! Forgive the double post, but I just realized that I think StreamOfTheSky is misunderstanding the goal. I had no intent of gaining multiple bite attacks, simply to augment my existing bite to maximize Vital Strikes to their fullest potential. I've played the "10 attacks in a round" builds, and they just don't do it for me. Full round actions are too restrictive. I like being able to pack the punch in a standard.

[Coidzor]

Since it just gives a bite attack rather than having a provision for the ability to enhance an existing bite attack, the increase to size doesn't stack but the poison does. If there's a ruling more specific to your situation or that specifically covers whether using an effect that gains a bite attack can instead enhance an existing bite attack, then that would apply instead.

As it stands you've got the bite attack, you've got the rage power, you've got the poison.

[TomeGnome]

Since it just gives a bite attack rather than having a provision for the ability to enhance an existing bite attack, the increase to size doesn't stack but the poison does. If there's a ruling more specific to your situation or that specifically covers whether using an effect that gains a bite attack can instead enhance an existing bite attack, then that would apply instead.

As it stands you've got the bite attack, you've got the rage power, you've got the poison.

The wording of the rage powers assumes that the player did not already have a bite attack, which I believe is why they are specifically referencing one another, not for the sake of differentiating between multiple types of bites. You only have one set of teeth. With iterative attacks, it's easy to say "I use my +1 long sword" or "I use my keen long sword," but the same can't be said for natural attacks.

You gain a bite attack when you wild shape into a hippo. We all agree on this, obviously. The rules then state, "While under the effects of a polymorph spell, (in this case, Beast Shape as per the rules of wild shape) you lose... ...any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed."

Since it's not dependent upon simply being a barbarian and is added when you start to rage, it stands to reason that you gain Animal Fury any time you are wild shaped and start to rage. I think we're all on the same page that they should both count as far as being able to use them in combat, but the question is whether one replaces one, whether the effects stack, or whether they are separate kinds of bite attack.

The unfortunate fact of the matter is, abilities that grant natural attacks (especially ones that are meant to be a bit of an afterthought) are often pretty poorly phrased. For example, Animal Fury states "If used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus –5. If the bite hits, it deals 1d4 points of damage (assuming the barbarian is Medium; 1d3 points of damage if Small) plus half the barbarian's Strength modifier. "

What does that mean? Is it a secondary natural attack? Is it primary and just gets a penalty because it assumes you'll be using iterative attacks on top of it? It never says, so we can't really know whether it's primary or secondary by nature, and we have to do some guess work and use logic to fill in the blanks. It stands to reason that the rage power assumed that you were using a weapon (because you're a barbarian, and barbarians are known for using big, two-handers or at least some sort of weapon). You're almost forced to assume that it's a primary natural attack (since bite attacks are typically primary according to the table for natural attacks under the universal monster rules section in the bestiary) and is being reduced to secondary because of iterative attacks. This is not a point of contention in this discussion. I'm merely using it to illustrate that the manual makes you do some guess work where no clear explanation is presented.

Likewise, there is nothing that states that there can be two separate kinds of bite attack, and logic would dictate that since you only have one set of teeth that it can't use different base damages just like a sword can't do different base damages just because you are using it differently. Therefore, when HTT tells us that it increases the damage size of the bite from Animal Fury, it could logically be assumed that it means bite attacks in general and that it most likely specifically mentions Animal Fury since it assumes you didn't have a bite to begin with.

[grarrrg]

the understanding that each increase is meant to be 1.5x higher than the one before it for once we scale off the end of the chart...
Improved natural attack increases 4d8 -> 6d8. Strong Jaw increases by two size categories, which puts it from 6d8 -> 8d8 -> 12d8. Titan Strike is paired with Feral Combat Training, which means all feats that augment an unarmed strike also apply to my bite attack, which increases one further step. Since this puts the total off the end of the scale, multiply 12 x 1.5, and we get 18d8. Vital strike doubles rolled damage, IVS triples it, and GVS quadruples it, so we get 18x4=72, so we end up with 72d8.

I haven't checked the rest of your math, but "x1.5" is incorrect. Strong Jaw is correct, you get a x2 bonus for every 2 size increases, which means that every single size increase is actually closer to (but not quite) "x 1+square root of 2"

So when you get up to 12d8 and would 'go another step' you get 16d8 (which is 8d8 x2), so you're looking at 64d8 on your GVS.


Another reason that Strong Jaw is correct is that, technically, the Size Increase chart STOPS at a certain point, and, technically, you can't go beyond what isn't written (same reason a 10 level PrC can't be taken to level 11, it just doesn't exist). Strong Jaw is the only rules official way to go 'beyond' the published damage tables.

(there's also the fact that there are at least three different 'damage progression' things going on in PF at the moment, with various overlaps between them)

[grarrrg]

The unfortunate fact of the matter is, abilities that grant natural attacks (especially ones that are meant to be a bit of an afterthought) are often pretty poorly phrased. For example, Animal Fury states "If used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus –5. If the bite hits, it deals 1d4 points of damage (assuming the barbarian is Medium; 1d3 points of damage if Small) plus half the barbarian's Strength modifier. "

What does that mean? Is it a secondary natural attack? Is it primary and just gets a penalty because it assumes you'll be using iterative attacks on top of it? It never says, so we can't really know whether it's primary or secondary by nature, and we have to do some guess work and use logic to fill in the blanks.
...
Likewise, there is nothing that states that there can be two separate kinds of bite attack

It does what it says it does and nothing else.
For starters, I give you the Alchemist Tentacle. At first glance it _seems_ to function as a Primary-Tentacle Natural Attack.
It does not (http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fz#v5748eaic9rc5). It is neither a Primary, nor a Secondary Natural attack. It is what it is, and does what it does.

The Rage-Bite says "While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus –5. If the bite hits, it deals 1d4 points of damage (assuming the barbarian is Medium; 1d3 points of damage if Small) plus half the barbarian's Strength modifier."
There are 3 sentences here.
The first one says you get a Bite Attack.
The second says what happens on a Full Attack.
The third explains how much damage it does.

"If used as part of a Full Attack"...Bite at -5 To-Hit. You can make Full Attacks with all Natural Weapons, the Bite is still done at -5 to-hit.
You can make a Bite as a Standard Action (as per normal Standard Attack rules), this is done at full/normal to-hit bonus.
Neither of the above much care if you actually have any other Natural Attacks or not.

The damage is listed as 1d4+1/2 STR. This is fixed. Using it as a Standard attack, or as part of a Full attack, it will ALWAYS do 1d4+1/2 STR damage. That is how it is written, that it how it works.

[Coidzor]

What does that mean?

Mostly it means the writers and editors in question should be flogged for incompetence and the wording fixed to conform to the rules for uniformity and if it has to reference standard rules that cover something, so be it. :smalltongue:

[TomeGnome]

"Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is. If the creature is already Gargantuan or Colossal-sized, double the amount of damage dealt by each of its natural attacks instead."

To be nitpicky (and let's face it, that's what we're all here to do), I am not Gargantuan or Colossal. The largest you can become with wild shape is Huge, which I am. It doesn't say "If the creature already deals damage as if," it says "if they are."

That being said, I'm seeing a bit of what you're talking about with the every two size categories essentially doubling the dice. I'll see if I can find more literature to see if that's a clear-cut rule or just coincidence.


Another reason that Strong Jaw is correct is that, technically, the Size Increase chart STOPS at a certain point, and, technically, you can't go beyond what isn't written (same reason a 10 level PrC can't be taken to level 11, it just doesn't exist). Strong Jaw is the only rules official way to go 'beyond' the published damage tables.

Can you give me a specific citation on this? I've been shooting ideas around with this build with some pretty skilled rule monkeys and not once has that come up.

[TomeGnome]

It does what it says it does and nothing else.
For starters, I give you the Alchemist Tentacle. At first glance it _seems_ to function as a Primary-Tentacle Natural Attack.
It does not. It is neither a Primary, nor a Secondary Natural attack. It is what it is, and does what it does.

That FAQ is one of the more helpful things someone has presented in a long time. The existence of "other" natural attacks that don't fit the mold of either primary or secondary is annoying, but I can kinda see the need to have them with lower level abilities. That FAQ needs to be linked to a lot of other pages though, cuz it seems like they just got lazy on some of them. >_>

That clears that up rather nicely, but I still see no literature that says there can be multiple types of bite attacks existing simultaneously if you only have one mouth. The superior would just seem to supersede, I would think.

I mean, if there were no other bite attack, it would be pretty clear cut. You would just follow the damage progression of the 1d4 bite to its logical conclusion, but there's another another source that grants a bite attack, and it is superior in every way. Normally, I might be inclined to believe that the bite damage is only increased when it's being somehow used only with Animal Fury, but seeing as this is a 4 rage power investment, this is no longer butting up against the same issue cited in the FAQ.

"Remember that these two discoveries do not have any level requirements, and therefore are not especially powerful; permanently adding additional attacks per round is beyond the scope of a discovery available to 2nd-level alchemists."

Seeing as HTT has a prerequisite of a level 8 Barb and 3 prerequisite rage powers, game balance is hardly an issue. The poison is pretty unimpressive, with such a low potential for the save DC, a single save being all that's required to end its effects, and not to mention being limited to one shot per rage. The damage increase under normal circumstances is pretty negligible considering you can only make one attack per round with it under normal circumstances. Seems like its full effects should be allowed to stack with a bite, not split hairs between different sources.

[grarrrg]

Can you give me a specific citation on this? I've been shooting ideas around with this build with some pretty skilled rule monkeys and not once has that come up.

Specific citation? No.
But it's the same thing as "if it isn't printed, it doesn't exist". Same reasoning for why you can't take "Mystic Theurge" to level 11 for another dual casting level.

The designers have never explicitly stated their logic on how damage increases scale, therefore, everything past what's written is pure guesswork.
Also, I wasn't joking about there being (at least) three damage scale tables:

Universal Monster Rules / Strong Jaw
1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 2d8, 4d6

Improved Natural Attack feat
1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6
Imp Natural Attack 1d10-base
1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8

Monk
1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6, 2d8, 2d10

Comparing the first two progressions: 2d8 and 3d6 are different things, 2-16 damage, 9 avg, vs. 3-18 10.5 avg.
Assuming that there's some 'mathematical formula' the designers used, either of these would wind up in VERY different places after a few more increases.
Assuming there's no formula (much more likely) then they are still inconsistent enough that we have no idea what their exact plan is.

Comparing Monk damage...Monk is VERY slow gaining damage compared to the rest, and doesn't really compare well with anything else.

I'm sure there are plenty of other places where a damage bump-up is inconsistent.

As it stands, Strong Jaw is the ONLY thing giving us any guideline on how to 'get bigger'.

[Yanisa]

This discussion has gone way past me (I mean Hippo starting with 4d8 bite, even though that is impossible, good job Paizo), so there is way more home ruling then my rule riddled brain can handle, but I like to point out this


Benefit: While raging, the barbarian increases her bite damage die type with the animal fury rage power by one die type and decreases the penalty on attack rolls with that bite to –2. Once per rage, a bite that hits can deliver an injury toxin that has a frequency of once per round for 4 rounds, deals 1d3 points of Constitution damage, and has a cure of one save. The saving throw has a Fortitude save DC of 10 + 1/2 the barbarian’s level + the barbarian’s Constitution modifier.

Toxicity doesn't increase size, it increases "die type". Another badly written point.

[Coidzor]

Toxicity doesn't increase size, it increases "die type". Another badly written point.

Which I suppose is great if one started with a d12, increased it to a d20 and then got multiple dice somehow. But, yes, poor writing and a lack of editing. :/

[TomeGnome]

Universal Monster Rules / Strong Jaw
1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 2d8, 4d6

Improved Natural Attack feat
1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6
Imp Natural Attack 1d10-base
1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8

Monk
1d6, 1d8, 1d10, 2d6, 2d8, 2d10

Ah. I see where you're getting 3 different progressions now. Here's the thing though... Monk isn't really a progression. Sure, it progresses, but it's a set thing based on level. The base damage will then scale by size, which is based on regular damage progressions, but each base damage of a monk is a set number determined by level. The other progressions aren't like that.

As far as the inconsistency in damage scaling, I wonder if it has something to do with the fact that the universal monster rules table is meant to use set sizes. You use it like a reference table, finding the natural attack the Y axis and then the size category on the X. The rules for Imp. Natural Attack are just a progressing scale. It seems like it's put there as a catch-all rather than a specific progression for specific instances. I feel like I've found resources that have talked about going above the end of the scale... Lemme do some poking around, see what I can come up with.

[Yanisa]

Improved Natural Attack seems to use the weapon progression tables, rather then the Natural Attack progression. Although Pathfinder self is lacking of such progression table, we can look back at 3.5 (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponSize) to see that.

The two relevant are:

Longsword 1d2 1d3 1d4 1d6 1d8 2d6 3d6 4d6 6d6
Bastard Sword 1d3 1d4 1d6 1d8 1d10 2d8 3d8 4d8 6d8

So Improved Natural Attack is a Weapon size increase, not a Natural Attack size increase. (Add the confusion of Natural Weapon vs Natural Attack as another point for bad consistency.) So using other modifiers that increase Natural Attack size don't work with the chart given by Improved Natural Attack (yeah figure that logic out, pffft)

So our Hippo cannot benefit from size increases, unless your DM houserules the charts. Except Strong Jaw, because Strong Jaw has a clause for it.

So we end up with 4d8 (Base Behemoth Bite) -> 6d8 (Improved Natural Attack) -> 12d8 (Strong Jaw) -> 12d10 (Hive Totem Toxicity) -> 48d10 (Greater Vital Strike)

Yeah, this is an asinine point, based on inconsistent rules, but that's that the Rules as Written seem to offer us... A mess of clashing rules.
Owh no, RAW means you cannot take Improved Natural Attack because you don't posses a Natural Weapon. :smallmad: Ugh I hate it when I use literal wording vs common sense.

(The better option is to allow the Natural Attack chart, which leads to 96d8 as maximum (this also treats Toxicity as a size increase.) before needing off the charts guesstimates, which is also a stupid number, who is going to 96 dice... that would take days...)

[grarrrg]

Improved Natural Attack seems to use the weapon progression tables, rather then the Natural Attack progression....
So Improved Natural Attack is a Weapon size increase, not a Natural Attack size increase.

WUT?! Poor quality control/rules knowledge in a Paizo product?


who is going to 96 dice... that would take days...

There are computer assisted ways to do so (i.e. there's an app for that).
For good old "at the table" nonsense, I'd say it's fair to assume an 'average' result for the majority of the dice, and then only actually roll 10 at the most.

[TomeGnome]

Natural Attack/Natural Weapon/Weapon is splitting hairs a bit more than even most hair splitters would attempt. It looks like the term "Natural Weapon" is leftover from when Paizo copied and pasted from Wizards, since most search results are from 3.5 sources. I think it's safe to assume that the two terms were meant by Paizo to be used interchangeably.

Okay. So. To recap. Assuming that there really is a cap on the end of that table and that HTT doesn't increase the dice according to RAW (even though my GM already green-lit it), I can still get the damage pretty flippin' high while staying legal:

(4d8) Regular Hippo Bite - because wild shape.
(6d8) Improved Natural Attack - because Toothy counts as a permanent NA as per the prerequisites (hair splitting aside).
(8d8) Titan Strike/Feral Combat Training (Bite) - Titan strike makes me deal damage as if I were one size category larger, so it's the same progression.
(16d8) Strong Jaw - because even though the table ends before that point, it provides for moving past the end.
(64d8) Greater Vital Strike - because of being a baws.

Let's not forget that this is the actual order that the increases would be applied, since Strong Jaw is a spell and Greater Vital Strike is an effect applied to a specific action. The fact that it goes beyond the end of the legal chart is irrelevant because Strong Jaw allows for it and GVS is just a straight multiplier.

In any case, average damage for a bite attack would be 72 just with rolled damage alone. A Vital Strike would be 288. Furious Finish would put it at 512 before any added damage is applied. The fun thing is, with HTT out of the way, I could focus my abilities elsewhere... Toughness or Fickle Attack would both be worth a look-see.


There are computer assisted ways to do so (i.e. there's an app for that).
For good old "at the table" nonsense, I'd say it's fair to assume an 'average' result for the majority of the dice, and then only actually roll 10 at the most.

I used to use apps. Now I have a table on excel that does it for me. It even works in modifications to rolls from Fickle Attack, (which treats 1's as the highest result on the die) and then totals everything for me. It's nice.

[Yanisa]

Natural Attack/Natural Weapon/Weapon is splitting hairs a bit more than even most hair splitters would attempt. It looks like the term "Natural Weapon" is leftover from when Paizo copied and pasted from Wizards, since most search results are from 3.5 sources. I think it's safe to assume that the two terms were meant by Paizo to be used interchangeably.
Well I am trained to be the most literal hair splitting DM due one of my players. Even though I would never use this against any player, if said player comes up with a stupid RAW reading, I do can counter his druid now. :smalltongue: The rules ain't perfect in a lot of ways. (I also hate inconsistency, but that may be hypocrite :smalltongue:) I also rambled a bit, maybe should use blue instead of italics, even though I am not sarcastic... More annoyed... or saying stupid things because I can...



And yeah, it is a legacy issue. Improved Natural Attack is basically copied from 3.5, where as the Natural Attack/Weapon rules got an overhaul in pathfinder. I am not the greatest expert in 3.5, but it seems 3.5 didn't had a fancy table for Natural Attacks/Weapons and die damage per size. 3.5 had to use the weapon progression tables (oddly now pathfinder lacks that table) for Natural Weapons/Attacks. Hence why Improved Natural Attack in 3.5 echoed those rules. The fact pathfinder straight up copied it ends up with a couple of oversights due the revamps, like very different progression tables.
Then again, whatever overhaul they did to Natural Attacks, some critters ignore the whole new shiny table, so its good the old one is also there. I am looking at you Mr Behemoth Hippo.

Also the term "Natural Weapon" does get used more in Pathfinder (Damage Reduction for example), the only place they don't mention it is in the Natural Attack rules. Where they specifically state that Natural Attacks are not Weapons.

[TomeGnome]

So, my GM just reminded me that we're being given items that give us some customization options. As long as it doesn't drastically alter the build, he's pretty much okay with anything. What should I spring for to complement the bites? I've poured so much into maximizing that that I'm drawing a blank on anything else. :p Thoughts?

[Coidzor]

So, my GM just reminded me that we're being given items that give us some customization options. As long as it doesn't drastically alter the build, he's pretty much okay with anything. What should I spring for to complement the bites? I've poured so much into maximizing that that I'm drawing a blank on anything else. :p Thoughts?

Free trip attempt when you hit with a bite? Extra Reach? Improved crit range on the bite? Flight as a hippopotamus?

[grarrrg]

Flight as a hippopotamus?

I choose to read this as "gain the flight ability that all hippopotami (hippopotameese?) already possess."

[TomeGnome]

I choose to read this as "gain the flight ability at all hippopotami (hippopotameese?) already possess."

Yeah. Duh. What else would he mean? They look like blimps, bumping clumsily around the canopies.

Anyways, what me and my DM are talking about is letting me expend spell slots that have healing spells memorized to be able to use my bite to heal allies. It's especially helpful since I can'd heal while raging anyways, and my healing spells are pitiful anyways since I'm only an 8th level druid. Also, we don't really have a healer... We rarely need one, but that's never been a HUGE issue. However, we only have our last session with the big bad, so I have a feeling we'll need healing.