Most natural attacks possible

[Zhentarim]

Well, if you start with a catfolk or teifling with claws, you have 2 claw attacks. If your starting class is bloodrager (primalist), you can take animal fury and lesser fiend totem to get a bite attack and a gore attack while raging. That’s 4 primary natural attacks at level 1. If at level 2, you take a dip into Witch (White-Haired Witch), you can make a 5th primary natural attack with your mustache. Also if you are a tiefling (or maybe catfolk but this is harder to imagine) and your GM rules you can take the Tail Terror feat (which is usually kobold only), you can get a secondary tail slap attack (-5 bab and half str bonus without multiattack feat) in addition to your 5 primary attacks (full bab and full str bonus).

Is this the maximum number of natural attacks possible?

Is it mechanically more sound to return to bloodrager after the witch dip or is another class like fighter or vigilante (warlock) better?

If I am a warlock, could I add the mystic bolt touch attack to my attack routine?

Can you buy an amulet of mighty fists or is it better to craft it yourself?


If this character is a catfolk and there is 25 pointbuy, I will use these stats (the +2 dex, +2 cha, -2 wis is already figured in)
16 str
9 dex
16 con
16 int
5 wis
15 cha

[Menzath]

I'm not going to look it up(to lazy), but there was a thread on this and warshaper came up in it.

I think it came out to 108(might be a few off) or so, not including the arbitrary openendedness that allows for NI.

[Zhentarim]

I'm not going to look it up(to lazy), but there was a thread on this and warshaper came up in it.

I think it came out to 108 or so, not including the arbitrary openendedness that allows for NI.

This warshaper?
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?363900-PF-Conversion-The-Warshaper

[Jack_Simth]

This warshaper?
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?363900-PF-Conversion-The-Warshaper

Menzath is referencing the 3.5 Warshaper (Complete Warrior). You didn't tag the thread as being Pathfinder-specific (although those familiar with Pathfinder might pick up on it due in part to the references to Bloodrager and Witch). That homebrew conversion closed the loophole of wording that permitted the 3.5 Warshaper to grow an arbitrarily large number of natural weapons.

[Menzath]

Menzath is referencing the 3.5 Warshaper (Complete Warrior). You didn't tag the thread as being Pathfinder-specific (although those familiar with Pathfinder might pick up on it due in part to the references to Bloodrager and Witch).

Ah Pathfinder. I thought bloodrager was the half orc racial substitution level for barbarian.... Or was it shifters from eberron?

[Jack_Simth]

Ah Pathfinder. I thought bloodrager was the half orc racial substitution level for barbarian.... Or was it shifters from eberron?
There's a lot of term overlap, in part because Pathfinder is based on 3.5's SRD. However: the parenthesis with something in it afterwards makes it clear that Bloodrager is a base class with an archetype as used in the OP... if you've played a goodly amount of Pathfinder.

[Particle_Man]

I think there is a way to temporarily grow tentacles.

[Rynjin]

1st party only, I'm assuming? I'm also going to assume you want the most discounting Polymorph stuff, because then it's just a matter of sifting through the bestiary to see which monsters valid for an extant ___ Shape spell have the most natural attacks.

Race: Ragebred Skinwalker (provides a Gore and two Hoof attacks, the latter of which is otherwise impossible to acquire as far as I know)

Class: Alchemist

Discoveries: Feral mutagen grants two claws and a bite. Tentacle grants one tentacle attack. Vestigial Arms x2 to wield weapons in addition to your Claw attacks.

Extracts: Wing Thorns for 2x Wing attacks, Tail strike for a Tail Slap

Magic Items: Fleshwarped Scorpion Tail or Wyvern Cloak (Sting attack), Necrograft Arm x2 (two Slam attacks), Beastrike Club x2 (wielded in Vestigial Arms, preferred Talon form for completeness' sake)

Total: 15 attacks. Take the Beastmorph archetype for Pounce, and have a nice day.

[Florian]

Yeah, it´s hard to beat ragebred skinwalkers skin walkers when it comes to that. Personally, I prefer Fighter (Mutagenic Warrior) VMC Sorcerer (Orc) to Alchemist as class choice, tho.

[Calthropstu]

Obviously, the most natural attack is to throw sticks from off the ground. But make sure they are gluten free first!

[Florian]

Obviously, the most natural attack is to throw sticks from off the ground. But make sure they are gluten free first!

*Throws a stone at ´stu*

There, gluten free pain.

[Calthropstu]

*Throws a stone at ´stu*

There, gluten free pain.

*gets stoned*

... does throwing stones at someone make you a stoner?

[Zhentarim]

1st party only, I'm assuming? I'm also going to assume you want the most discounting Polymorph stuff, because then it's just a matter of sifting through the bestiary to see which monsters valid for an extant ___ Shape spell have the most natural attacks.

Race: Ragebred Skinwalker (provides a Gore and two Hoof attacks, the latter of which is otherwise impossible to acquire as far as I know)

Class: Alchemist

Discoveries: Feral mutagen grants two claws and a bite. Tentacle grants one tentacle attack. Vestigial Arms x2 to wield weapons in addition to your Claw attacks.

Extracts: Wing Thorns for 2x Wing attacks, Tail strike for a Tail Slap

Magic Items: Fleshwarped Scorpion Tail or Wyvern Cloak (Sting attack), Necrograft Arm x2 (two Slam attacks), Beastrike Club x2 (wielded in Vestigial Arms, preferred Talon form for completeness' sake)

Total: 15 attacks. Take the Beastmorph archetype for Pounce, and have a nice day.

That is impressive.

If you count polymorph spells, which creature in the beastiary has the most natural attacks?

[Zerathize]

According to a quick scan of "Other Spreadsheets on d20pfsrd"
I only see a Kraken(gargantuan sized) as having 11, eight secondary. Didn't look long but... shrugs.

Second look I found the "Herald Of Tsathogga" with 12

[upho]

First off, a few important details in the rules for natural attacks and the additional limbs an alchemist can gain through discoveries:

You can only make one attack per limb you possess in a full attack, even if you have several different attacks associated with that limb. So if you for example wield a longsword using an arm/hand which also has a claw and a slam attack, when taking the full attack action, you have to choose whether to use that hand/arm to make one longsword attack (plus any iteratives), one natural claw attack, or one natural slam attack. Note however that most types of natural attacks using more exotic limbs are typically gained together with their associated limb(s) (as in the case of most options granting a sting, tail slap, wing or tentacle attack).
A head isn't treated as a limb for the above purpose, meaning you can for example make both a bite and a gore as part of the same full attack, even though you only have a single head. There are however no 1PP option allowing you to gain more than one natural attack of each associated type (bite, gore) per head you possess. (Yeah, you may gain several heads.)
The tentacle/vestigial arm discoveries never increase the total number of attacks you can make in a full attack, but may increase the number of different specific attacks you may choose from. So even should you have four arms/hands and wield one weapon in each, you cannot make a greater number of attacks than you'd be able to make using only your two normal arms/hands. Provided you can make at least four attacks in total when taking the full attack action, you may however include at least one attack with each of your four different weapons, instead of the normal maximum two different weapons. (Though there are ways to gain more from Vestigial Arm(s) when using only natural attacks, see below.)

So AFAIK, not every attack Rynjin mentioned can be made as part of the same full attack per RAW. There may also be some superior alternatives depending on stuff like level and item accessibility:


Race: Ragebred Skinwalker (provides a Gore and two Hoof attacks, the latter of which is otherwise impossible to acquire as far as I know)You may instead use your legs to make primary talon attacks, granted by an Animal Totem Tattoo (Eagle) (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/wondrous-items/wondrous-items/r-z/tattoo-animal-totem/) (along with a bite attack) for at least 5 minutes/day. Does however require a standard action to activate (or a move action if you have 2+ druid levels with the Eagle Shaman archetype).

And speaking of items, I very much recommend you get a pair of the dirt cheap tusk blades (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment/goods-and-services/animals-animal-gear/#TOC-Tusk-Blades) (50 gp) if you have/gain a gore attack. Very nifty item.


Tentacle grants one tentacle attack. Vestigial Arms x2 to wield weapons in addition to your Claw attacks.As noted above, neither of these discoveries increase the total number of attacks you can make in a full attack. So strictly per RAW, for example in the case of a tiefling alchemist 6 who has Feral Mutagen, Tentacle discovery and Vestigial Arm x2, each of their four arms/hands equipped with claws (two from race and two from feral mutagen) and each holding a short sword, would still only be able to make an absolute maximum of four attacks as part of a full attack.

In detail, this alchemist has the following limbs and associated attack types:

Right normal arm/hand claw - OR - short sword
Left normal arm/hand claw - OR - short sword
Right vestigial arm/hand claw - OR - short sword
Left vestigial arm/hand claw - OR - short sword
Head/mouth bite
Tentacle tentacle
Any part of body unarmed strike


Since the vestigial arms and tentacle don't add any attacks it's easiest to simply ignore them when determining the maximum number of attacks this tiefling can make in a full attack. When doing so, and assuming our fiendish hero also has Power Attack, Improved Unarmed Strike and say Str 22, a full attack including the greatest possible number of attacks would look like this (numbers including Power Attack):

Unarmed Strike using any part of body +8 (4 bab, 6 Str, -2 Power Attack) (1d4+10 (6 Str, 4 Power Attack))
Bite using head/mouth +3 (4 bab, 6 Str, -2 Power Attack, -5 secondary) (1d8+5 (3 Str, 2 Power Attack))
Mutagen Claw using right normal arm/hand +3 (4 bab, 6 Str, -2 Power Attack, -5 secondary) (1d6+5 (3 Str, 2 Power Attack))
Mutagen Claw using left normal arm/hand +3 (1d6+5)

The reason this tiefling would be able to make four attacks rather than three is because an unarmed strike can be made with any part of your body, and can thus always be made in addition to any natural attacks you have as part of a full attack. So when also including the vestigial arms and the pair of claws from race, this tiefling may simply replace the unarmed strike and bite with two additional claw attacks. Doing so has the significant benefit of keeping all the attacks primary natural attacks of the same type (claws). Meaning all claw attacks are made at full BAB, all hits with them gaining the normal "one-handed" 1 x Str mod to damage and Power Attack penalty x2 damage bonus, and all claw attacks will benefit from the same weapon/attack type dependent investments our tiefling may gain later, such as Feral Combat Training and any associated feats (like Dragon Ferocity and the prerequisite Weapon Focus).

So in reality, the tiefling's most effective full attack will most likely be:

Mutagen Claw using right vestigial arm/hand +8 (4 bab, 6 Str, -2 Power Attack) (1d6+10 (6 Str, 4 Power Attack))
Mutagen Claw using left vestigial arm/hand +8 (4 bab, 6 Str, -2 Power Attack) (1d6+10 (6 Str, 4 Power Attack))
Tiefling Claw using right normal arm/hand, replacing unarmed strike +8 (1d4+10)
Tiefling Claw using left normal arm/hand, replacing bite +8 (1d4+10) - OR - Bite using head/mouth +8 (1d8+10)

As a result, in a nearly all games and situations it would of course be nothing but detrimental for this tiefling to attack with one of the short swords instead, so any investments improving those attacks specifically would likewise be largely wasted. The same is true for attacks with any other manufactured weapon and an overwhelmingly large majority of natural attack focused PCs. (At least in games without 3PP options.)


Necrograft Arm x2 (two Slam attacks), Beastrike Club x2 (wielded in Vestigial Arms, preferred Talon form for completeness' sake)These don't actually grant additional natural attacks as part of a full attack. Again, see above regarding manufactured weapons like the Beaststrike Club (even when transformed). A Necrograft Arm also replaces an existing arm according to their rules:

"Necrografts can be attached only to humanoids and only to replace a part—a necrograft arm can’t be added in addition a human’s two healthy arms, for example, but could replace a lost arm."

So the zombie arms won't allow you to make their slam attacks in addition to any claw attacks using the same pair of arms.


Total: 15 attacks.Not if made as part of the same full attack. Assuming a BAB above +10 (= can make at least 3 unarmed strikes in a full attack), the maximum number of attacks in a full attack are:

R arm mutagen claw - OR - necro-arm slam
L arm mutagen claw - OR - necro-arm slam
R vesti-arm club - OR - unarmed strike
L vesti-arm club - OR - unarmed strike (iterative)
Disco-tentacle :smallbiggrin: tentacle (secondary) - OR - unarmed strike (iterative)
Head mutagen bite
Head ragebred skinwalker gore
R wing thorns wing (secondary)
L wing thorns wing (secondary)
Fleshwarped Scorpion's Tail sting
Wyvern Cloak sting
Tail strike tail slam (secondary if part of full attack)
R leg/foot ragebred skinwalker hoof (secondary)
L leg/foot ragebred skinwalker hoof (secondary)

So a maximum of 14 attacks, of which none of the natural attacks would remain primary (since at least two of the attacks would be unarmed strikes or using the club).

However, if replacing the two vestigial arms' club attacks/unarmed strikes with an additional pair of claw attacks, the total number of attacks of would remain 14, of which 8 may also remain primary attacks. And all the four claw attacks would also benefit from all claw-specific investments. (Of course, if instead using two clubs, up to four attacks can also gain feat/spell/ability benefits as if claws. But since attacking with the club(s) also means all actual natural attacks become secondary, it would be a pretty horribly bad idea.)


Is it mechanically more sound to return to bloodrager after the witch dip or is another class like fighter or vigilante (warlock) better?I wouldn't recommend either of these classes if you're looking to maximize your combat effectiveness with natural attacks. Although the witch may be interesting if you're simply trying to find out how many natural attacks a character can theoretically gain.

I think the far best class options to base a natural attacker on are Bloodrager (abyssal or perhaps arcane bloodline) with the Primalist (and maybe Bloody-Knuckled Rowdy and/or Bloodrider) archetype(s) and the aforementioned Alchemist. These two can also be combined in various proportions, and both may often gain plenty from also grabbing a level in the Master of Many Styles Monk.


If I am a warlock, could I add the mystic bolt touch attack to my attack routine?No, as attacking with a mystic bolt is treated as attacking with a manufactured weapon, even if that "weapon" can be used to make touch attacks at 3rd level:

"The warlock vigilante attacks with mystic bolts as though they were light one-handed weapons..."


Can you buy an amulet of mighty fists or is it better to craft it yourself?Whether you can buy an AoMF is highly dependent on what specific enchantments you'd like it to have, the nature of your game and setting, and especially what your GM finds appropriate. The same is true also for all other (magic) items. So I suggest you simply ask your GM how accessible specific magic items are expected to be in the game. That said, if your GM follows the GM guidelines for a "standard" game, it should be possible for you to find (and buy) an AoMF with at least a +3 enhancement or equivalent special abilities in a larger cities.

If you want to focus on fighting with your natural attacks, it's not very likely you'll be able to afford the feat(s) and spellcasting required for magic item crafting before high levels. If your party includes a full caster, they may however very well have a feat slot to spare for Craft Wondrous Item. I suggest you talk to them IC and/or their players OoC first.

Finally, keep in mind that a more combat optimized natural attack focused PC can easily become broken, and even more easily be seen as broken in the eyes of many people. Especially during the earliest levels if starting with (or quickly gaining) more than two primary natural attacks. So I really recommend you take extra care to ensure your PC's combat prowess is on par with that of the other player's characters in your game and meet the expectations set by your GM/group.

HTH!

[Max Caysey]

There were a build on the min/max boards that reached something like 1,5 million attacks...

[Rynjin]

First off, a few important details in the rules for natural attacks and the additional limbs an alchemist can gain through discoveries:
[LIST=1]
You can only make one attack per limb you possess in a full attack, even if you have several different attacks associated with that limb. So if you for example wield a longsword using an arm/hand which also has a claw and a slam attack, when taking the full attack action, you have to choose whether to use that hand/arm to make one longsword attack (plus any iteratives), one natural claw attack, or one natural slam attack. Note however that most types of natural attacks using more exotic limbs are typically gained together with their associated limb(s) (as in the case of most options granting a sting, tail slap, wing or tentacle attack).

I don't believe this is quite accurate. You can't make an attack with a manufactured weapon and a Natural Attack held in the same limb at the same time, that much is clear ("although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam"), but there's nothing specifically precluding a creature using, say, a Slam and a Claw on the same limb (if they even are; slams are ill-defined and are sometimes described as a headbutt or body check not requiring an arm at all). There's at least one creature (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/undead/nachzehrer/) that has only two limbs and does both, and there may be more.



The tentacle/vestigial arm discoveries never increase the total number of attacks you can make in a full attack, but may increase the number of different specific attacks you may choose from. So even should you have four arms/hands and wield one weapon in each, you cannot make a greater number of attacks than you'd be able to make using only your two normal arms/hands. Provided you can make at least four attacks in total when taking the full attack action, you may however include at least one attack with each of your four different weapons, instead of the normal maximum two different weapons. (Though there are ways to gain more from Vestigial Arm(s) when using only natural attacks, see below.)

This, however, I was already iffy on. I was assuming the OP was asking as a thought exercise (where I'd be willing to make the argument that "does not allow any additional attacks" doesn't apply to Natural Attacks, since they kind of bend the rules for normal attacks already), but on further reading I think he wanted this for an actual GAME, in which case it'd be wildly table dependent, with many (most?) leaning towards this exact interpretation. So there are issues with my suggestions either way.

[Zhentarim]

I don't believe this is quite accurate. You can't make an attack with a manufactured weapon and a Natural Attack held in the same limb at the same time, that much is clear ("although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam"), but there's nothing specifically precluding a creature using, say, a Slam and a Claw on the same limb (if they even are; slams are ill-defined and are sometimes described as a headbutt or body check not requiring an arm at all). There's at least one creature (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/undead/nachzehrer/) that has only two limbs and does both, and there may be more.




This, however, I was already iffy on. I was assuming the OP was asking as a thought exercise (where I'd be willing to make the argument that "does not allow any additional attacks" doesn't apply to Natural Attacks, since they kind of bend the rules for normal attacks already), but on further reading I think he wanted this for an actual GAME, in which case it'd be wildly table dependent, with many (most?) leaning towards this exact interpretation. So there are issues with my suggestions either way.

I will eventually make a character with a bunch of natural attacks.

[grarrrg]

This, however, I was already iffy on. I was assuming the OP was asking as a thought exercise (where I'd be willing to make the argument that "does not allow any additional attacks" doesn't apply to Natural Attacks, since they kind of bend the rules for normal attacks already), but on further reading I think he wanted this for an actual GAME, in which case it'd be wildly table dependent, with many (most?) leaning towards this exact interpretation. So there are issues with my suggestions either way.

FAQ official (https://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1fz#v5748eaic9rc5) 'no means no'
"the text of both discoveries says they do not give you any extra attacks per round, whether used as natural weapons, wielding manufactured weapons, or adding natural weapons to a limb that didn't originally have natural weapons."

[upho]

I don't believe this is quite accurate. You can't make an attack with a manufactured weapon and a Natural Attack held in the same limb at the same time, that much is clear ("although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam"), but there's nothing specifically precluding a creature using, say, a Slam and a Claw on the same limb (if they even are; slams are ill-defined and are sometimes described as a headbutt or body check not requiring an arm at all).The general rules for natural attacks also say:

"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."

And the rules for eidolon evos granting additional limb(s) and natural attacks follow this general rule, as does all 1PP creatures with natural attacks AFAIK. (The only somewhat related exception in the case of eidolons is that they can gain claw attacks for one pair of legs, while PCs and most other creatures can only gain claw attacks for their arms.)


There's at least one creature (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/undead/nachzehrer/) that has only two limbs and does both, and there may be more.Yeah, some slam attacks aren't associated with limbs and are instead made with the creature's head or body, just as you wrote. So why assume that a creature able to make a full attack including both a slam and attacks exclusively tied to specific limbs (such as claws) indicates anything other than that the creature simply has a slam which doesn't use the same limbs?

Unless you or someone else can point to published creatures able to make multiple natural attacks of a type which are exclusively tied to - and obviously made with - the same single limb, I don't see any reason to doubt that the "max one attack per limb" rule applies to all three associated attack categories (manufactured weapon attacks, unarmed strikes and natural attacks), in any combination.

(And yes, unarmed strikes are very rarely affected since they normally aren't tied to any specific limbs. But I'm certain the above remains true for the few unarmed strikes which are, such as some of the Un-Monk's style strikes which can explicitly only be made using a fist or foot/leg.)

What am I missing here?


This, however, I was already iffy on. I was assuming the OP was asking as a thought exercise (where I'd be willing to make the argument that "does not allow any additional attacks" doesn't apply to Natural Attacks, since they kind of bend the rules for normal attacks already), but on further reading I think he wanted this for an actual GAME, in which case it'd be wildly table dependent, with many (most?) leaning towards this exact interpretation. So there are issues with my suggestions either way.As grarrrg wrote, when it comes to the discovery limbs and additional attacks, the FAQ leaves no room for any other interpretation. So any game using mechanics deviating from what I wrote would be using house rules.

And just to be clear, I think your suggestions were really good, at least TO purposes. I even learned of the wing thorns spell which I didn't know of before! :smallsmile: (And thank you for that!) I just also got the impression the OP asked for advice for a character intended for an actual game, and therefore felt the clarifications and limitations of natural attacks in actual play were worth mentioning.


I will eventually make a character with a bunch of natural attacks.And I'm sure you'll enjoy it! Natural attackers can often be made unusually interesting and fun characters to play IMO (even though the combat style is mechanically often a bit repetitive, as it's probably the melee style the most limited to dealing hp damage). But I'm probably just in love with the "I'm a special snowflake custom monster!"-concept and almost any- and everything related... :smalltongue:

[Zhentarim]

The general rules for natural attacks also say:

"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."

And the rules for eidolon evos granting additional limb(s) and natural attacks follow this general rule, as does all 1PP creatures with natural attacks AFAIK. (The only somewhat related exception in the case of eidolons is that they can gain claw attacks for one pair of legs, while PCs and most other creatures can only gain claw attacks for their arms.)

Yeah, some slam attacks aren't associated with limbs and are instead made with the creature's head or body, just as you wrote. So why assume that a creature able to make a full attack including both a slam and attacks exclusively tied to specific limbs (such as claws) indicates anything other than that the creature simply has a slam which doesn't use the same limbs?

Unless you or someone else can point to published creatures able to make multiple natural attacks of a type which are exclusively tied to - and obviously made with - the same single limb, I don't see any reason to doubt that the "max one attack per limb" rule applies to all three associated attack categories (manufactured weapon attacks, unarmed strikes and natural attacks), in any combination.

(And yes, unarmed strikes are very rarely affected since they normally aren't tied to any specific limbs. But I'm certain the above remains true for the few unarmed strikes which are, such as some of the Un-Monk's style strikes which can explicitly only be made using a fist or foot/leg.)

What am I missing here?

As grarrrg wrote, when it comes to the discovery limbs and additional attacks, the FAQ leaves no room for any other interpretation. So any game using mechanics deviating from what I wrote would be using house rules.

And just to be clear, I think your suggestions were really good, at least TO purposes. I even learned of the wing thorns spell which I didn't know of before! :smallsmile: (And thank you for that!) I just also got the impression the OP asked for advice for a character intended for an actual game, and therefore felt the clarifications and limitations of natural attacks in actual play were worth mentioning.

And I'm sure you'll enjoy it! Natural attackers can often be made unusually interesting and fun characters to play IMO (even though the combat style is mechanically often a bit repetitive, as it's probably the melee style the most limited to dealing hp damage). But I'm probably just in love with the "I'm a special snowflake custom monster!"-concept and almost any- and everything related... :smalltongue:

If my app is accepted, I’m making a gestalt Bard (Demogague) 5/Noble Scion 1//Avenger Vigilante (who will load up on the “renown” talents and other talents that relate to being famous and well-liked). Next level after the game starts, I get leadership as a bonus feat (which I’m asking the GM to replace with Evil Leadership by GM fiat) and I’m going to make my cohort this natural attack guy we’ve been talking about.

[upho]

If my app is accepted, I’m making a gestalt Bard (Demogague) 5/Noble Scion 1//Avenger Vigilante (who will load up on the “renown” talents and other talents that relate to being famous and well-liked). Next level after the game starts, I get leadership as a bonus feat (which I’m asking the GM to replace with Evil Leadership by GM fiat) and I’m going to make my cohort this natural attack guy we’ve been talking about.Whoa! That's one darn beautiful "dark leader" gestalt outline!

So you'll be playing... Uh... Something like a Black Metal rockstar fantasy version of the Joker, accompanied by an über-monster version of Harley Quinn?

A manipulative dark lord socialite who works the masses into a frenzy and has them burning down the temples of Good deities, while his truly scary alternate persona assassinates anyone who tries to stop his plans for world domination? :smalleek:

I love it!

Seriously, I think that build outline is one of the most interesting I've seen for PF. It simply drips with stylish flavor and screams (growls?) its very own dark tune! Yeah, definitely has the potential to become a truly amazingly fun character to play. Also seems like it could work well mechanically, especially in a more intrigue and RP focused "urban" game.

[Zhentarim]

Whoa! That's one darn beautiful "dark leader" gestalt outline!

So you'll be playing... Uh... Something like a Black Metal rockstar fantasy version of the Joker, accompanied by an über-monster version of Harley Quinn?

A manipulative dark lord socialite who works the masses into a frenzy and has them burning down the temples of Good deities, while his truly scary alternate persona assassinates anyone who tries to stop his plans for world domination? :smalleek:

I love it!

Seriously, I think that build outline is one of the most interesting I've seen for PF. It simply drips with stylish flavor and screams (growls?) its very own dark tune! Yeah, definitely has the potential to become a truly amazingly fun character to play. Also seems like it could work well mechanically, especially in a more intrigue and RP focused "urban" game.

She uses perform (oratory) as her performance of choice and is a politician. The über-monster is her lover. I’m debating how I want to spread my prc classes and my core classes. Starting the game without “incite violence” seems like missing the best part of demagogue. In all likelihood, I’ll circle back around and pick it up later, but there is also the question of whether or not I should pick up the Evangelist PRC of Mammon or Dispater. See, this game requires there is some sort of agreement with a powerful dark force that has a time limit. My thought is since the city-state we are starting in has an upcoming election because the king died without and heir, I could have wished for wealth and power and in exchange, I’d need to win the election or else Hell will kill me and take my soul. This dark deal is what has me playing around with my build the most, since I feel like the “deal” I made is maybe a tad contrived.

What do you think?

[Lotheb]

Race: Ragebred Skinwalker (provides a Gore and two Hoof attacks, the latter of which is otherwise impossible to acquire as far as I know)
.

Hoof attacks are hard to come by but there is at least one other source: the brazen hoof demonic implant. Does require you to chop of your legs, are evil, and cost 15,000 gp each, but they do come with fire damage. Ragebred skinwalker is still prolly your best bet for race that grants hard to get natural weapons unless you go aasimar for the Metalic Wings feat (requires level 11 and three other feats, one of which is pretty bad)

[upho]

She uses perform (oratory) as her performance of choice and is a politician. The über-monster is her lover. I’m debating how I want to spread my prc classes and my core classes. Starting the game without “incite violence” seems like missing the best part of demagogue. In all likelihood, I’ll circle back around and pick it up later, but there is also the question of whether or not I should pick up the Evangelist PRC of Mammon or Dispater. See, this game requires there is some sort of agreement with a powerful dark force that has a time limit. My thought is since the city-state we are starting in has an upcoming election because the king died without and heir, I could have wished for wealth and power and in exchange, I’d need to win the election or else Hell will kill me and take my soul. This dark deal is what has me playing around with my build the most, since I feel like the “deal” I made is maybe a tad contrived.

What do you think?I like it. The deal doesn't necessarily have to feel contrived at all IMO, but I'd flesh it out a bit more and maybe change a few details. I'd especially focus on what the diabolic side of the deal might get out of your ruthless politician winning the election. I'd probably work with the GM to include one or more specific actions/decisions she'd also have to make as a ruler in order to fulfill her end of the bargain.

I don't think I'd bother with the Evangelist if I were to build this character, as I believe she'd be more interesting and her story would give your GM additional story hooks if she's not a dedicated servant of an infernal entity. Maybe she's more the sort of person who has carefully analyzed all her actual options, without needlessly limiting herself to only those meeting certain arbitrary moral standards, and then simply concluded that a contract with a devil would be the most rational and effecient method to achieve some of her objectives.

And you could perhaps also consider having the infernal deal set up so that being elected ruler is her reward, as wealth and power likely comes with that position anyways. And if so, I suggest you also work with the GM to establish what kind of aid and resources Hell might provide her with to ensure her success. I mean, there has to be a good reason for why she'd make a deal with Hell considering she could've simply used her own considerable talents to try and get elected and gain all the associated power and wealth anyways.

If her "monster" lover also happens to be a part of the aid Hell has provided her with, it could make for an even more interesting story, with friendship, lust and maybe even love complicating things for both characters.

When it comes to other build options, I suggest you consider taking one or two Damnation feats to represent some of the dark powers and associated corruption she has gained as a result of her association with a powerful fiend. I strongly suspect some of them could fit this character perfectly, in terms of pure crunch as well as flavor.

[Zhentarim]

I like it. The deal doesn't necessarily have to feel contrived at all IMO, but I'd flesh it out a bit more and maybe change a few details. I'd especially focus on what the diabolic side of the deal might get out of your ruthless politician winning the election. I'd probably work with the GM to include one or more specific actions/decisions she'd also have to make as a ruler in order to fulfill her end of the bargain.

I don't think I'd bother with the Evangelist if I were to build this character, as I believe she'd be more interesting and her story would give your GM additional story hooks if she's not a dedicated servant of an infernal entity. Maybe she's more the sort of person who has carefully analyzed all her actual options, without needlessly limiting herself to only those meeting certain arbitrary moral standards, and then simply concluded that a contract with a devil would be the most rational and effecient method to achieve some of her objectives.

And you could perhaps also consider having the infernal deal set up so that being elected ruler is her reward, as wealth and power likely comes with that position anyways. And if so, I suggest you also work with the GM to establish what kind of aid and resources Hell might provide her with to ensure her success. I mean, there has to be a good reason for why she'd make a deal with Hell considering she could've simply used her own considerable talents to try and get elected and gain all the associated power and wealth anyways.

If her "monster" lover also happens to be a part of the aid Hell has provided her with, it could make for an even more interesting story, with friendship, lust and maybe even love complicating things for both characters.

When it comes to other build options, I suggest you consider taking one or two Damnation feats to represent some of the dark powers and associated corruption she has gained as a result of her association with a powerful fiend. I strongly suspect some of them could fit this character perfectly, in terms of pure crunch as well as flavor.
I haven’t heard from the gm in a few days, but I agree there is potential here with the deal. Deciding what hell could get out of this has been the hardest part for me.

[Jack_Simth]

I haven’t heard from the gm in a few days, but I agree there is potential here with the deal. Deciding what hell could get out of this has been the hardest part for me.

Presumably, there should be some stuff in there about the lower planes getting an amount of say in local politics after you win. Because, after all, there's little point in setting someone up if you don't get a few strings you can pull later....

[Zhentarim]

Presumably, there should be some stuff in there about the lower planes getting an amount of say in local politics after you win. Because, after all, there's little point in setting someone up if you don't get a few strings you can pull later....

That’s enough? I thought about adding that, but thought the benefit was too minor.

[Jack_Simth]

That’s enough? I thought about adding that, but thought the benefit was too minor.

Depends on the city, the amount of control they get, what's around the city, and a bunch of other things. The only one who can really answer the question is the DM. I mean, you could just get blackmailed post-election for how you got there, and they get as much control as they like without ever mentioning that aspect in the contract, just with a touch of risk.

[Zhentarim]

Depends on the city, the amount of control they get, what's around the city, and a bunch of other things. The only one who can really answer the question is the DM. I mean, you could just get blackmailed post-election for how you got there, and they get as much control as they like without ever mentioning that aspect in the contract, just with a touch of risk.

That works for me.

[Florian]

I haven’t heard from the gm in a few days, but I agree there is potential here with the deal. Deciding what hell could get out of this has been the hardest part for me.

PF uses multiple subsystems to simulate this or that. It´s always interesting to ask a GM before a potential campaign if one of those is gonna see use and if yes, to which extend. For example, Ultimate Intrigue has sub-systems for Researching something and for building up long-term influence and contacts, while Book of the Damned has the rules for short- and long-term Infernal Contracts. The combination could be interesting to find out how and with which potential side-effects, consequeng´ces and escape classes some scenarios could play out.