Player trying to get 5 attacks per round

[Scottlang]

Hi all,

Hope you all had a pleasant Christmas/ Holidays and a good New Years.

I have a question; I have a power player to the max in my group, who is trying to take things to the next level, for example, the character which he was playing got slain, at level 5, was a Pyrophile (Ash Hag) Changeling Sorcerer/ Wizard, with cross blooded lines, had a blood line of the phoenix and I think the other one was the Efreeti Bloodline, could do a can trip of changing ray of frost to a ray of fire doing 1d3+9 damage to any creature. And could heal the players up with it healing for half damage.

Now that character is dead, which died from normal combat, I did not go out of my way to kill him, is now trying to bring in a lizard folk into the campaign, who is going to be a fighter brawler.
He now recons he can get 5 attacks per round, he says obviously at low damage, which we all know there are things that will increase the damage!!
The way he recons he can do this is through having: 1 bite attack, 2 claw attacks and 2 talon attacks. Is this at all possible? I don't believe it is, but he said after he has now down the research he says it can be done. Do any of you agree with this?

[Kurald Galain]

can trip of changing ray of frost to a ray of fire doing 1d3+9 damage to any creature. And could heal the players up with it healing for half damage.
That's... probably not legal.


He now recons he can get 5 attacks per round, he says obviously at low damage, which we all know there are things that will increase the damage!!
Getting 5 attacks per round is plausible. And yes, this is wildly overpowered in terms of melee damage, so you should prohibit this. Even three natural attacks will probably upstage any martial character at this level.

[Gnaeus]

Can he get talon attacks? Probably. I don’t know what feat he is using to get them but that doesn’t mean there isn’t one (in vanilla PF. I know how I would do it with DSP stuff). Post his feats/build and we can check.

Is it OP? Power level has to be measured by table. In general, IME, making the character with a bunch of natural attacks is likely to give less damage at the same optimization level than the same player building a standard power attack build with a greatsword or greataxe. My dragon gets 6 attacks/round but generally is outdone damage wise by the 2-3 attacks from the colossal nodachi that my teammate is wielding. And I have a harder time on rounds where I can’t full attack or on DR I can’t beat. I wouldn’t find a level 5 lizard man brawler with 5 attacks to be very strong in my game. But if he is playing next to very low op players he may be in yours.


Getting 5 attacks per round is plausible. And yes, this is wildly overpowered in terms of melee damage, so you should prohibit this. Even three natural attacks will probably upstage any martial character at this level.

Assuming we are starting from the base lizardman. Give him 18 str. That’s 3d4+12.
The same guy with a greatsword PAs for 2d6+12. Except he will have an easier time beating DR and his weapon enhancements are cheaper. Next level (at 6) he will have 2 greatsword attacks and the lizardman is still using the same natural attack routine.

[Kurald Galain]

To the OP, I recommend using the suggestions on this page (https://paizo.com/pathfinderSociety/clarifications) to curb most loopholes in low-to-mid level play.


making the character with a bunch of natural attacks is likely to give less damage at the same optimization level than the same player building a standard power attack build with a greatsword or greataxe.
How do you figure that? At level 5, a greatsword barbarian gets one attack for 1d12+16. A natural attacker gets to quintuple-dip on all damage bonuses, giving him five hits for 1d6+11? That's almost four times the damage, and the difference only goes up if your party uses e.g. bard song.

[Gnaeus]

How do you figure that? At level 5, a greatsword barbarian gets one attack for 1d12+16. A natural attacker gets to quintuple-dip on all damage bonuses, giving him five hits for 1d6+11? That's almost four times the damage, and the difference only goes up if your party uses e.g. bard song.

1. Lizard folk get d4s, not 6s.
2. Multi attack as a required feat
3. The greatsword is likely to be cold iron or adamantium with a higher + than the double priced amulet
4. Even if he can’t break DR the one heavy hit will do more than 5 light hits.
5. Move and hit is inherently easier than full attack.
6. Next level at +6 bab his attacks double and the lizardman gets no extra attacks.
7. Bardsong is weaksauce. With Haste he adds another 2d6+12 and the lizard adds 1d4+4. Unless his caster is a Druid weapon buffs are more common than natural attack buffs.
8. He makes AOOs at 2d6+12.
9. Weapon specific feats take extra work to work with natural attacks. Improved Crit Greatsword compared with 3 feats for Improved Crit Bite, Claw, and Talon.

[Kurald Galain]

That's not right. You can't simultaneously give greatsword guy the advantage of "haste and BAB give extra attacks" and "mobility plus single attack is better". The two are direct opposites.

At level 5? Spending one feat isn't a big deal, and with standard WBL neither can afford more than a +1 weapon for some time. Even with haste or an iterative or an OA, 5d4+55 is still a lot more than 2d12+32.

It is true that at higher level, the greatsword build will deal more damage. But not at 5 or 6 yet. The multiattack build is available from level one and will dominate for most of your campaign (given that most campaigns never get anywhere near level 20). So to actually answer the OP's question, yes, this player appears to be powergaming well beyond the rest of his group, and the GM should put the brakes on that.

[Bronk]

He now recons he can get 5 attacks per round, he says obviously at low damage, which we all know there are things that will increase the damage!!
The way he recons he can do this is through having: 1 bite attack, 2 claw attacks and 2 talon attacks. Is this at all possible? I don't believe it is, but he said after he has now down the research he says it can be done. Do any of you agree with this?

So, I'm not really a pathfinder expert, but from looking at the pfsrd it sure looks like a lizardfolk only gets one claw attack and one bite attack, or one morningstar attack and one bite attack. It seems odd to me that it isn't two claw attacks, one for each hand, but yeah.

You would think that if he's turning claws into talons, the claws would disappear. Unless he's adding extra arms somehow? Or putting them on his feet and trying to do a leap attack? Definitely figure out what this guy thinks he's doing and how he thinks he's doing it.

Don't forget that only one attack is at the full BAB, the rest are secondary attacks at BAB-5 unless he's using multiattack, and then it's still BAB-2.

Also don't forget that he can always pick up a greatsword later and add his bite.

Also also, don't forget that as DM, you get final approval over his character.

[Gnaeus]

That's not right. You can't simultaneously give greatsword guy the advantage of "haste and BAB give extra attacks" and "mobility plus single attack is better". The two are direct opposites

Of course you can. On rounds where you don’t get full attack the greatsword is clearly better. By next level the greatsword with haste is better whether or not you get to full attack.


At level 5? Spending one feat isn't a big deal

It’s 1/4 of your feats including the brawler feats. And again, most other feats are many times the cost for the natural attacker.


with standard WBL neither can afford more than a +1 weapon for some time.

With standard WBL at level 5 the lizard can’t afford a +1 enhancement bonus at all. He needs 5 oils of magic fang to break DR magic with his attacks. It’s fully half his WBL at level 6. The cost of a spare MW cold Iron weapon is about the same as the cost for the lizard to buff against DR magic one time.



It is true that at higher level, the greatsword build will deal more damage. But not at 5 or 6 yet. The multiattack build is available from level one and will dominate for most of your campaign (given that most campaigns never get anywhere near level 20). So to actually answer the OP's question, yes, this player appears to be powergaming well beyond the rest of his group, and the GM should put the brakes on that.

Well we start at 5, and it’s better by 6. So natural attack wins for 1 level and Two handed wins for the rest of the game.

I’m sorry, Kurald, are you in this game? You must have seen the other PCs to make that assessment.

[Eldaran]

So, I'm not really a pathfinder expert, but from looking at the pfsrd it sure looks like a lizardfolk only gets one claw attack and one bite attack, or one morningstar attack and one bite attack. It seems odd to me that it isn't two claw attacks, one for each hand, but yeah.

This is wrong, two claws 1 bite (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/more-races/standard-races-1-10-rp/lizardfolk-8-rp/)



You would think that if he's turning claws into talons, the claws would disappear. Unless he's adding extra arms somehow? Or putting them on his feet and trying to do a leap attack? Definitely figure out what this guy thinks he's doing and how he thinks he's doing it.

This is also wrong, talons are natural attacks on the legs, though I don't know how he's getting them.




Don't forget that only one attack is at the full BAB, the rest are secondary attacks at BAB-5 unless he's using multiattack, and then it's still BAB-2.


Wrong yet again, in PF all primary natural attacks are at full BAB (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/rules-for-monsters/universal-monster-rules/#Natural_Attacks), Multiattack is unnecessary and does nothing.

[Railak]

The thing with the natural weapons.. that's the max amount of attacks he'll probably ever get with them, aside from maybe rapid strike, I don't remember prerequisites off hand, and the brawler stuff doesn't increase natural weapon damage, and as far as I know there's only 1 maybe 2 canon feats to increase the damage. He might be stronger than the rest of the party til about level 6, past that he's going to learn he put himself in a very limiting predicament.

[Kurald Galain]

You would think that if he's turning claws into talons, the claws would disappear.
Talons go on feet.


Don't forget that only one attack is at the full BAB, the rest are secondary attacks at BAB-5
That's the crux of the issue here. You can have multiple primary attacks, and they're all at full BAB. If you restrict yourself to "only" bite, claws, gore, slam, sting, and talons; then you don't even need the multiattack feat.

For instance, an aerieborn skinwalker starts with bite/talon/talon, there's a number of classes that give two claws for free (e.g. bloodrager), and there's a cheap magical item that adds a gore. Bam, six primary natural attacks, all before level five.


Also also, don't forget that as DM, you get final approval over his character.
I completely agree.


He might be stronger than the rest of the party til about level 6, past that he's going to learn he put himself in a very limiting predicament.
A well-built natural attack build stays relevant until level 10 at least (and dominates for most of that). The catch is that many campaigns end around level 10, so it's plausible that the natural attacker dominates melee for most of the campaign.


as far as I know there's only 1 maybe 2 canon feats to increase the damage.
Nah. Get a shocking AOMF, get sneak attack, pick up Bane somewhere... plenty of ways to add a couple d6 to each of your five or six attacks per round.

[Gnaeus]

The thing with the natural weapons.. that's the max amount of attacks he'll probably ever get with them, aside from maybe rapid strike, I don't remember prerequisites off hand, and the brawler stuff doesn't increase natural weapon damage, and as far as I know there's only 1 maybe 2 canon feats to increase the damage. He might be stronger than the rest of the party til about level 6, past that he's going to learn he put himself in a very limiting predicament.

Being a brawler, he could make unarmed strikes. But you can’t do that with a limb that’s making a natural attack. And you can’t combine a flurry with natural attacks without blowing a bunch more feats making the different attacks count as monk weapons. I couldn’t figure out a cost effective way to do that on my dragon so if he does I would love to know how.

Oh, and it looks like the lizardman race is different from lizardman. On the + side, it doesn’t have to spend a feat on multi attack (although it will need to if it plans to blend natural attacks with other types.) on the - side the bite is a D3. Still curious about the talons.

A +1 shocking AoMF would be available at CL8 for half your wealth.

[Railak]

Talons go on feet.


That's the crux of the issue here. You can have multiple primary attacks, and they're all at full BAB. If you restrict yourself to "only" bite, claws, gore, slam, sting, and talons; then you don't even need the multiattack feat.

For instance, an aerieborn skinwalker starts with bite/talon/talon, there's a number of classes that give two claws for free (e.g. bloodrager), and there's a cheap magical item that adds a gore. Bam, six primary natural attacks, all before level five.


I completely agree.


A well-built natural attack build, I'd give until level 10 at least. The catch is that many campaigns end around level 10, so it's plausible that the natural attacker dominates melee for most of the campaign.


Nah. Get a shocking AOMF, get sneak attack, pick up Bane somewhere... plenty of ways to add a couple d6 to each of your five or six attacks per round.

Going pure brawler, unless you go into the strangler archetype (which is a grapple class that doesn't get improved grapple and loses improved unarmed, so you gotta take that to get improved grapple), it's really difficult to get sneak attack without a level (or a couple levels) dip. And adding magic enchantments to all your natural weapons, like using the AoMF, is rather expensive, and by the time you can actually do it, everyone else will have already been rocking magic weapons. Sure it's possible to get additional d6 or whatever, but there's still only so much you can do. Past about level 6 or so your going to start lagging behind in damage. You might catch up every once in a while, but it won't be long before you lag behind again.

I play a lot of beast type characters that use natural weapons, and I do it intentionally, because it limits my power progression.

[Kurald Galain]

Going pure brawler,
Snakebite archetype says hi.


And adding magic enchantments to all your natural weapons, like using the AoMF, is rather expensive, and by the time you can actually do it, everyone else will have already been rocking magic weapons.
The math shows that this is incorrect. A +2 AOMF costs about the same as a +3 magic weapon (16000 vs 18000). Adding +2 (or +1d6+1) to six attacks is more powerful than adding +3 (or +2d6+1) to two attacks. 6 x 4.5 > 2 x 8.

Funny how force multipliers work. They usually win against force adders :smallamused:

[Gnaeus]

Going pure brawler, unless you go into the strangler archetype (which is a grapple class that doesn't get improved grapple and loses improved unarmed, so you gotta take that to get improved grapple), it's really difficult to get sneak attack without a level (or a couple levels) dip. And adding magic enchantments to all your natural weapons, like using the AoMF, is rather expensive, and by the time you can actually do it, everyone else will have already been rocking magic weapons. Sure it's possible to get additional d6 or whatever, but there's still only so much you can do. Past about level 6 or so your going to start lagging behind in damage. You might catch up every once in a while, but it won't be long before you lag behind again.

I play a lot of beast type characters that use natural weapons, and I do it intentionally, because it limits my power progression.

I agree.

Also, remember that this is a lightly armored muggle starting the game at a level at which casters already have fly and animate dead. If he does manage to beat vanilla fighter’s greatsword damage on rounds when he can full attack things with no DR..... Um..... Good for him? It’s not like he’s putting anything on the table besides damage.



Snakebite archetype says hi

So, Snakebite adds 1d6 sneak, 2d6 at 6. Gives up 1 feat per dice. For situational damage. I’m really not sure that’s better than what a fighter 6 can do with his 2 extra feats. I don’t see one clear standout in first party, but I see a lot of ways to build a fighter where 2 feats is a big kick up the combat effectiveness chain.

[Railak]

Snakebite archetype says hi.


The math shows that this is incorrect. A +2 AOMF costs about the same as a +3 magic weapon (16000 vs 18000). Adding +2 (or +1d6+1) to six attacks is more powerful than adding +3 (or +2d6+1) to two attacks. 6 x 4.5 > 2 x 8.

Funny how force multipliers work. They usually win against force adders :smallamused:

Okay forgot snakebite, but still he has to go into an archetype for sneak attack that has a rediculously slow progression.. I think you're forgetting two weapon fighting, 2x +2 weapons is the same cost as the +2 AoMF.. at generally a higher base damage weapons will overpower natural weapons fast. Let's say dual wield long sword and short sword that's a d6 and a d8 compared to the d4 all the naturals do (if they even all do that) that's 2d6+2d8+8 (24) compared to 5d4+10 (22)

[Kurald Galain]

Okay forgot snakebite, but still he has to go into an archetype for sneak attack that has a rediculously slow progression..
Accomplished Sneak Attacker feat says hi.


I think you're forgetting two weapon fighting,
No, my point is that having many small attacks is better than fewer big attacks. Having six natural attacks is generally better than a greatsword, and four dual-wield attacks is also generally better than a greatsword.


compared to the d4 all the naturals do (if they even all do that)
The aforementioned skinwalker bloodrager deals d6/d6/d6/d4/d4, actually. So make that 3d6+2d4+10, which is 25.5.

Bear in mind that all the skinwalker's attacks are at full BAB, and your dual wielder's is at -5 for his secondaries. And, any bonus to damage (power attack, sneak attack, shocking weapon, etc) applies five or six times to the skinwalker, and four times to the dual wielder.

[Bronk]

This is wrong, two claws 1 bite (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/other-races/more-races/standard-races-1-10-rp/lizardfolk-8-rp/)

Weird. I was looking here, and the two pages have different info for some reason.
https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/humanoids/lizardfolk/



This is also wrong, talons are natural attacks on the legs, though I don't know how he's getting them.

Right? This is the main problem... the lack of communication between player and DM.



Wrong yet again, in PF all primary natural attacks are at full BAB (https://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/rules-for-monsters/universal-monster-rules/#Natural_Attacks), Multiattack is unnecessary and does nothing.

Nifty, I see it mentions both attacks being primary in your link.

[Railak]

Accomplished Sneak Attacker feat says hi.


No, my point is that having many small attacks is better than fewer big attacks. Having six natural attacks is generally better than a greatsword, and four dual-wield attacks is also generally better than a greatsword.


The aforementioned skinwalker bloodrager deals d6/d6/d6/d4/d4, actually. So make that 3d6+2d4+10, which is 25.5.

Bear in mind that all the skinwalker's attacks are at full BAB, and your dual wielder's is at -5 for his secondaries. And, any bonus to damage (power attack, sneak attack, shocking weapon, etc) applies five or six times to the skinwalker, and four times to the dual wielder.

We're talking about this lizardfolk character, not your build, cause I could list of 18 builds off the top of my head for either side of this argument. Comparing this LIZARDFOLK's damage potential vs a standard character's. Thing is I'm actually trying to make the argument for them to be able to use it, because the damage isn't rediculous compared to other characters.

[Kurald Galain]

We're talking about this lizardfolk character, not your build,
Yes, we are. This lizardfolk has five attacks per round. And as the OP states, there are things that will increase the damage.

The point is that for any damage boost (high str, power attack, sneak attack, bard song, anything) the lizardfolk gets five times the benefit.

That is the force multiplier, and that is why the build mentioned in the OP is problematic.


Do you see the catch here? If we cast Heroism or do a bard song, a greataxe guy gets +4 to damage; your dual wielder gets +8 damage; and the OP's lizard gets +10 damage. If we give everyone shocking weapons or sneak attack, greataxe guy gets +2d6, dual wielder gets +4d6, lizard gets +5d6. That greataxe guy gets, on average, one more plus on his weapon is not nearly enough to compensate for that.

[Gnaeus]

I’m not sure that giving up two feats for 2d6 situational damage per attack is a good idea. But yes you can double down and give 3 feats for 3d6.

[Railak]

Thing is it takes longer for the 5 attacks to get up to there, and usually by then the others have already started doing more, using the standard rules.
The thing that gets me, this lizard folk for being a min/max power player sure chose a strange class for it.. barbarian, fighter, or hell even ranger would have been a better choice.

[Efrate]

Are you using strictly pf, pf plus 3rd party, 3.p, or 3.p plus 3rd party? Makes a big difference. Because natural weapon stuff is a lot rarer in core pf than 3.5. DSP has some things but regular pf has a lot less.

[Railak]

Are you using strictly pf, pf plus 3rd party, 3.p, or 3.p plus 3rd party? Makes a big difference. Because natural weapon stuff is a lot rarer in core pf than 3.5. DSP has some things but regular pf has a lot less.

Yeah THIS makes a huge difference, that's the difference between a 1d4 and a 3d6 claw attack, by just taking a few feats.

Or by allowing the brawler damage boost to work with natural weapons.

[Gnaeus]

Do you see the catch here? If we cast Heroism or do a bard song, a greataxe guy gets +4 to damage; your dual wielder gets +8 damage; and the OP's lizard gets +10 damage. If we give everyone shocking weapons or sneak attack, greataxe guy gets +2d6, dual wielder gets +4d6, lizard gets +5d6. That greataxe guy gets, on average, one more plus on his weapon is not nearly enough to compensate for that.

And if we cast Fire Shield the lizard takes 2 and a half times as much damage. And if we cast stoneskin the lizard loses 30 extra damage/round, except that it’s 50 because his claws aren’t likely adamantine. And if the bard casts Umbral Weapon the greatsword user benefits and the natural attack guy doesn’t.

[Railak]

And as far as I can tell no one has even tried to explain the additional talon attacks. Aside from the second post saying it's probably against the rules. In all my knowledge I don't know how to add talon attacks.. I can add tentacles, gore, slam, claws, bite, tail slap, wing attacks, extra arms.. but not talons.

[Scottlang]

Well he's come back to me he's a cross class shifter/warpriest with 4 attacks 2 claws and talon attack, all at a +10 1d6+5 and a bite +9 1d3+5 not op...?? So this is what he's come to me with... Lizardfolk pc...

[Gnaeus]

Well he's come back to me he's a cross class shifter/warpriest with 4 attacks 2 claws and talon attack, all at a +10 1d6+5 and a bite +9 1d3+5 not op...?? So this is what he's come to me with... Lizardfolk pc...

Shifter is by and large a dog with fleas. I can see how he gets the talon as a bird-type shifter.

OP isn’t a thing in a vacuum. I suspect it would be underpowered for a 5th level character in my group. We don’t know what is in yours.

[Bronk]

As far as I can tell, the shifter class would let him replace his claws with talons depending on what form he's in, but that's instead of the claws, so still only two attacks from that.

[Gnaeus]

As far as I can tell, the shifter class would let him replace his claws with talons depending on what form he's in, but that's instead of the claws, so still only two attacks from that.

Lots of sources for alternate claw attack. Aspect of the beast would do it. Or racial from something. War priest could kick up claw damage to 1d6 if he found a god with claw favored weapon. Which could be a thing.

[Railak]

Okay yeah I forgot shifter was even a thing, that class was wildly underpowered from my understanding. And 1d4 with +5 damage, even with some extra damage boosts from various sources, definitely not op. With a damage range of 30-45 a round if he hits with everything.. if you're still worried about his damage, instead of single large opponents send a bunch of little ones, and don't group them up. Or find ones that have a bit of damage reduction.

[icefractal]

Natural weapon melee can be an effective style, but whether it's OP depends on the rest of the group. Level 5 is probably the high point, since iterative attacks haven't kicked in, but unless he has Pounce it's going to be more positioning-dependent than the reliable "Barbarian with a Greatsword".

For reference, at 5th level, assuming pretty basic gear (+1 sword, belt of strength +2) and moderate stats (Strength 18 including racial bonus), a Barbarian looks something like:
Greatsword +14 (2d6+17)

And will be sometimes doubling that next level. So evaluate in light of that.

Incidentally, while that is a lot to get out of a cantrip, 1d3+9 isn't even remotely a lot of damage at 5th level - against serious foes its borderline wasting your action. Am I missing something about why this was a problem?

[Gnaeus]

I mean he’s basically a Deinonychus Druid who gave up 9th level casting and the animal companion for no good reason and can’t cast all the cool Druid natural attack buffs

[Kurald Galain]

Well he's come back to me he's a cross class shifter/warpriest with 4 attacks 2 claws and talon attack, all at a +10 1d6+5 and a bite +9 1d3+5 not op...??
That depends.

The obvious thing a warpriest is going to do every combat, is a swift-action buff for +2 to hit and damage. Is this the kind of guy that tries to get (e.g.) barbarian rage, or, sneak attack, or a freezing AOMF as soon as possible? It's not all that hard to get from the above to +14 / 3d6+9.

Based on your earlier post (of the 1d3+9 cantrip) I imagine he might well try that. You know your own players best. Do four attacks for a total of 1d3+11d6+36 bother you? Does an average of 76 damage all day upstage the rest of your party?


Incidentally, while that is a lot to get out of a cantrip, 1d3+9 isn't even remotely a lot of damage at 5th level - against serious foes its borderline wasting your action. Am I missing something about why this was a problem?
Infinite free out-of-combat healing, presumably.

[the_david]

That's... probably not legal.Maybe? I'm getting up to 1d3+4. +2 damage from 4 levels of wizard (evocation specialist.) +2 damage from the ash-born changeling. Bloodline arcana from both the Efreeti and the Phoenix. I'm missing 5 points of damage somewhere, but the ice to fire thing is real, as is the healing thing.
It's not the best build, and you're just optimizing a single cantrip, but it works.

The lizardfolk thing is probably also okay. Maybe a bit overpowered at level 5, but at level 11 it won't matter much anymore. One suggestion I can give is to dive into the rules and FAQ and figure out how natural attacks are supposed to work with things like iterative attacks and haste. I don't think this is the best way to optimize. There are some neat tricks here, but that's all they are.

Another thing is that lizardfolk only speak draconic, while shifter adds druidic. So, there's a chance the player might show up with a character that doesn't speak common because he "forgot".

Edit: Ofcourse, one way to handle this is to say no to lizardfolk. Unless you like to play in a kitchensink or your setting has an established place for lizardfolk among the "civilized races", lizardfolk probably aren't greeted with open arms in most settings. You know, with the cannabalism and all that.

[Gnaeus]

The obvious thing a warpriest is going to do every combat, is a swift-action buff for +2 to hit and damage. Is this the kind of guy that tries to get (e.g.) barbarian rage, or, sneak attack, or a freezing AOMF as soon as possible? It's not all that hard to get from the above to +14 / 3d6+9.

Based on your earlier post (of the 1d3+9 cantrip) I imagine he might well try that. You know your own players best. Do four attacks for a total of 1d3+11d6+36 bother you? Does an average of 76 damage all day upstage the rest of your party?

Because if it does, don’t ever let anyone play a Druid. Because the heavily nerfed PF Druid can trivially do that by himself, with an animal companion and full casting on top of it, easier. He can create his own +0 flaming shocking AoMF at half price and back it up with greater magic fangs. He can actually beat DR with other spells on his list.

And this is generally regarded as his weakest play style.


Edit: Ofcourse, one way to handle this is to say no to lizardfolk. Unless you like to play in a kitchensink or your setting has an established place for lizardfolk among the "civilized races", lizardfolk probably aren't greeted with open arms in most settings. You know, with the cannabalism and all that.

Meh. All the lizard is giving him is the 2 claw attacks. I’m pretty sure there are a half dozen races that can do that. Or the aspect of the Beast feat. Or alter self (available as an at will at level 8 for a claw claw bite routine, 40’ move, darkvision and scent, and +2 str. Unless you choose to be small or aquatic or an average gnome or whatever).

[Rynjin]

Multi-natural attackers looks OP on paper, but really aren't. The main deal is that they get all their attacks frontloaded rather than at late game, but they're all still relatively weak.

Coming in at level 5...I wouldn't worry too much. My last natural attacker was a Ragebred Shifter that had 6 natural attacks at level 1 (Bite, Claw, Claw, Gore, Hoof, Hoof). By level 7 it had fallen off immensely. He'll be really strong for a session or two and then taper off.

[Firebug]

at level 5, was a Pyrophile (Ash Hag) Changeling Sorcerer/ Wizard, with cross blooded lines, had a blood line of the phoenix and I think the other one was the Efreeti Bloodline, could do a can trip of changing ray of frost to a ray of fire doing 1d3+9 damage to any creature. And could heal the players up with it healing for half damage.Not to derail, but let's figure this out. Maybe not what the player actually took, but let's see what we can do.

Race: Changling(Ash Hag) for +1 damage (+1/4 beyond 1st) with fire spells, if the player also took another hag feature (because misreading race entry) they could also get +1 damage on Ranged attacks(Storm Hag). Let's call this +2 at level 5 for now.

At least 1 level of Crossblooded Sorcerer(Pheonix|Efreeti). That gets the heal and the convert cold to fire damage. Crossblooded is normally where +2 damage/dice comes into play from taking Orc and Draconic(whatever element type). There are other ways to convert, but that's a different build.
Blood Havoc could get 1 more point of damage, but doesn't actually work with Crossblooded (until you can trade a feat for it at 7th). But let's assume the player is bending that rule and took it anyway.
Wizard, if it was 4 evoker wizard as mentioned by someone else, that gets another 2 damage from Intense Spells.

So that is +5 (race 2, evoker 2, blood havoc 1)
Alternative to the Wizard 4, would be a level of Medium(Archmage), but would only be Wizard 3 at that point so +2 and then -1 in comparison.

Point Blank Shot (https://aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Point-Blank%20Shot), Havoc of the Society (https://aonprd.com/TraitDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Havoc%20of%20the%20Soci ety)(though wouldn't convert to fire, but again, misreading it), Alchemical Reagents (https://aonprd.com/AlchemicalReagents.aspx)Liquid Ice(as a focus, maybe as a material but that's a different thread), Black Powder(as an additional material component, 10gp per cast though), and we are up to another +4.
So +9 is doable with a couple misreadings of the rules with Wizard 4. They could easily get higher though, if they dropped a level of Wizard for Medium and changed out the bloodlines.

I had a character that did something similar but was with Acid Splash and a slightly liberal reading of Frozen Caress (https://aonprd.com/ArchetypeDisplay.aspx?FixedName=Witch%20Winter%20W itch)(liberal in that the 'touch' referred to is targeting touch AC, not a range of touch). Empowered it was something like 30 damage per cast as a cantrip, and with Extend(acid flask used as a material component) it was potentially 60 damage per cast as a 1st level spell. It wasn't amazing, because it is over several rounds, but it was enough. And by the time it wasn't worth the action, other aspects of the build came online.

[Particle_Man]

If Variant Multiclassing is allowed and you want more SA, you could go VMC Rogue. Cost some feats, gets some more sneak attack (on top of Snakebite Striker sneak attack). Not bad for full BAB.

[Rynjin]

N
I had a character that did something similar but was with Acid Splash and a slightly liberal reading of Frozen Caress (https://aonprd.com/ArchetypeDisplay.aspx?FixedName=Witch%20Winter%20W itch)(liberal in that the 'touch' referred to is targeting touch AC, not a range of touch). Empowered it was something like 30 damage per cast as a cantrip, and with Extend(acid flask used as a material component) it was potentially 60 damage per cast as a 1st level spell. It wasn't amazing, because it is over several rounds, but it was enough. And by the time it wasn't worth the action, other aspects of the build came online.

It's not really liberal, it's just wrong; a Touch spell is always specifically the ones with range: touch. Mind in the last game I ran I allowed my Winter Witch to do the same thing with Ray of Frost to give her a boost at low levels; it's such a ridiculously weak Hex otherwise and that's always a shame for an archetype-specific ability.

[Firebug]

It's not really liberal, it's just wrong; a Touch spell is always specifically the ones with range: touch. Mind in the last game I ran I allowed my Winter Witch to do the same thing with Ray of Frost to give her a boost at low levels; it's such a ridiculously weak Hex otherwise and that's always a shame for an archetype-specific ability.So agree to... agree?

[Rynjin]

So agree to... agree?

Pretty much. I just think it's always important to remember the distinction between a ruling (table variance based on flexible/unclear rules) and houserules (specifically changing a clear rule) in discussions like this.

[icefractal]

Infinite free out-of-combat healing, presumably.Ah, maybe so. Doesn't really matter whether it's 1d3 or 1d3+9 in that case though. And I'd hardly call that cheese, it's the obvious direct usage of the Phoenix bloodline ability.

[upho]

A well-built natural attack build stays relevant until level 10 at least (and dominates for most of that). The catch is that many campaigns end around level 10, so it's plausible that the natural attacker dominates melee for most of the campaign.Pretty much this. At least if we're talking about a somewhat casually built natural attacker, which seems to be the case here. A more well-built - and typically highly disruptive - one can certainly maintain a bonkers single-target melee damage output during all 20 levels. For example, I doubt any other type of build in a game limited to 1PP material is able to reliably solo one-shot the tarrasque several times per day by 15th or so.


Multi-natural attackers looks OP on paper, but really aren't. The main deal is that they get all their attacks frontloaded rather than at late game, but they're all still relatively weak.I'd say they're "relatively weak" in most games only if they're either (very) low-op or built by an overly cautious player aware of the build type's disruptive potential. And my general impression is that players interested in natural attackers very often seem to be in an unfortunate sorta "Oppenheimer phase"; eager to try and build and play ever more mechanically powerful PCs but not yet aware their creations could end up nuking the fun, much less how they can avoid blowing things up and still get to scratch their char-op itch. Which means that while their natural attackers are of course weak in comparison to things like high-op melee control builds, batman wizards and the general standards of this forum, they could easily be OP in your average "Paizo AP run as written"-game.

IME, in most games it also rarely matters much whether a PC actually is objectively OP, but mostly whether the group feels the PC is problematic, and why they do so. And a natural attack build unfortunately tends to flaunt its power in the most bombastic manner through loads of die rolls and big damage numbers, which players often subconsciously see as a sign of extraordinary combat power. In addition, the combat style of a natural attacker tends to result in lots of one-shot villains if they're allowed in APs run as written, removing flavorful and interesting foes before they could be more fully introduced or interacted with. And most people probably agree that BBEGs tend to be less exciting as morbid splatter art than they are as live prisoners caught with control and debuff methods, especially for the GM, even though the PCs focusing on such methods can typically be far more powerful combatants than the natural attacker is.


@OP: I suggest you start by comparing the PC to the other ones in the party. If you don't find anything to really stand out, I think you should allow it as is, but keep an eye out for signs of players finding this PC problematic, especially if you also believe it often hogs the spotlight or easily overcomes challenges the other PCs struggle with. If you do find such signs, talk to the player of the natural attacker and maybe suggest some minor nerfs if you suspect they won't be able to balance their PC by themselves. But I'd first try to find a way to more concretely describe the suitable power range for PCs in your game and let the player decide how to best adapt their PC. IME, preparing a few suitable and a few unsuitable example PCs at different power levels to use as a basis for the discussion can help a lot, as abstract power levels are very difficult to convey, especially to a player who may very well be new to the concept of PC balance and/or may have a completely different way looking at and estimating "PC power".

I also recommend that the next time you decide to run (or play in) a game, try to get the people involved together to talk about PC balance and decide on a suitable PC power range together, before starting with character creation. Such a "Session 0" often does wonders to avoid balance issues later on IME.


....


Coming in at level 5...I wouldn't worry too much. My last natural attacker was a Ragebred Shifter that had 6 natural attacks at level 1 (Bite, Claw, Claw, Gore, Hoof, Hoof). By level 7 it had fallen off immensely. He'll be really strong for a session or two and then taper off.Bit OT, but I feel this mostly illustrates how the shifter is a poorly designed class, not how the relative power of natural attack builds in general changes over levels.

FWIW, the far most stupidly overkill "MOAH DAMAGE!"-opted PC I've personally ever seen in play was a natural attacker, although admittedly, it was in a kinda joke campaign where we actually played only about one in three levels, albeit still with "standard" options and rules. Anyways, he was sort of a classic Criosphinx supercharger turned up to 11, a half-orc Primalist Bloodrider who i think ended up with Alchemist, Brawler(?) and Mammoth Rider dips. He was certainly a competent damage dealer at 3rd when the game started, but I don't remember him as anything special compared to a few other low level damage focused N/PCs I've seen in play (or played myself) in more serious games.

But he had grown into a borderline TO monster by 9th, and somewhere around 12th he took off like a friggin' intercontinental ballistic missile that would've just kept accelerating ever faster all the way to 20th if the game hadn't ended at 17th. But by that time, I'm certain he had already passed a pounce annihilation silliness level of 4 TPC ("Tarrasques Per Charge"), or somewhere around 2,500 DPR. And, no; I can't remember that he was able to actually put his pounce to full use even once. Which is no surprise, considering it ended up including, IIRC, four claws, two talons, a bite, a sting, a "x3 damage"-gore, five damaging bull rushes, and at least four claw AoOs. Plus of course whatever silliness it was his Gargantuan elasmotherium mount "Lil' Barbie" brought to the pounce party, besides the half-orc himself (pretty certain she had Minotaur's Charge). But at least they made a lot of fine red BBEG mist... :smallamused:

[Kurald Galain]

IME, in most games it also rarely matters much whether a PC actually is objectively OP, but mostly whether the group feels the PC is problematic, and why they do so.
This is key.

For instance, there's a big difference in how Paizo's Summoner is viewed on the forums ("it's not tier 1 and doesn't even get 9th level spells, what's the issue here?") and how it is seen in actual gameplay ("its eidolon visibly deals more damage than many melee characters, and you get a free spellcaster to the side"). Note how this is in part because eidolons get a lot of natural attack, natch.


My last natural attacker was a Ragebred Shifter that had 6 natural attacks at level 1 (Bite, Claw, Claw, Gore, Hoof, Hoof). By level 7 it had fallen off immensely.
That's probably because you didn't invest in static damage boosts and/or didn't want to multiclass. And, well, you did get to dominate for over half the campaign.


Ah, maybe so. Doesn't really matter whether it's 1d3 or 1d3+9 in that case though. And I'd hardly call that cheese, it's the obvious direct usage of the Phoenix bloodline ability.
Personally I don't think infinite out-of-combat healing is cheese (considering wands of CLW are SOP). I do suggest that anyone who boosts cantrip damage to this level is probably a hardcore min-maxer who will hardcore min-max other things as well. It's not that a standard action for d3+9 is OP, but that a player who quadruples the expected damage of a cantrip very likely does other things that are OP.

[Rynjin]

When I said Shifter, I meant Skinwalker; race not class. He was a Bloodrager (sort of; we were using my Freeform Class homebrew, which a lot of my group likes to run games using, so he had some other goodies like Hunter casting), so plenty of static bonuses. We started at 5th level, so I hardly dominated for "half the campaign"

The thing is, it's really not that impressive in the grand scheme. The gap between a normal optimized attacker and a natural attacker is largely moot. If you're one round killing everything anyway (which you generally are as a Barbarian) , does it really matter if you're rolling 3 dice or 6?

[Kurald Galain]

If you're one round killing everything anyway (which you generally are as a Barbarian) , does it really matter if you're rolling 3 dice or 6?
It's a fair point that once your DPR becomes higher than the expected HP of an enemy, further optimization is largely irrelevant. However, you should really show some numbers on when you expect this to be the case for a greatweapon barbarian.

(e.g. a CR 12 enemy has 26 AC and 158 hit points, on average; can a level-10 barbarian reliably deal enough DPR to drop that in one round?)

[Rynjin]

It's a fair point that once your DPR becomes higher than the expected HP of an enemy, further optimization is largely irrelevant. However, you should really show some numbers on when you expect this to be the case for a greatweapon barbarian.

(e.g. a CR 12 enemy has 26 AC and 158 hit points, on average; can a level-10 barbarian reliably deal enough DPR to drop that in one round?)

I would expect it to reliably happen at level 11 for sure, but MAYBE not 10. I think a Barbarian of any level can one round CR = APL targets, which is why I don't think the 5 natural attacks thing is a huge deal. Especially since at lower levels, moving and attacking is more viable.

At level 1, your standard Greatsword Barbarian is swinging at +6 attack (+4 base Str, +2 Rage, +1 BaB, -1 Power Attack), and dealing 2d6+12. The average CR 1 creature has AC 12, HP 15; the Barb hits on a 6 and on average deals 19. Even on a CR 2 creature (AC 14, 20 HP) he has a very solid chance of killing it outright.

The same natural attacker is rolling in with the same attack bonuses, but is only dealing roughly 1d6+8 per attack. That means on a move and attack turn, he's incapable of killing a CR 1 or 2 creature; on a full attack though he's dealing that damage 5 times, which means he's pretty much guaranteed the kill, and could even potentially kill a CR 3 creature in one round (AC 15, 30 HP). So the natural attacker has a higher ability to punch above its weight class, potentially (though IMO it's more fair at this level to compare over 2 rounds, in which case the natural attacker is swinging once for 1d6+8, then 5 times for 3d6+32+2d4+10, and the GS guy is swinging for 4d6+24, so the ability to kill a CR 3 creature is comparable).

Jumping to level 5, the GS guy is now swinging for +11 (+5 base Str, +2 Rage, +5 BaB, +1 magic weapon, -2 PA) and something like 2d6+17; clearly not up to the task of mulching a CR 5 creature (AC 18, 55 HP) in one turn, or even over two. Notably, the natural attacker IS going to be capable of this, as they have ALL the advantages at this level; they even have a higher Enhancement bonus on their weapons (a Furious Amulet of Mighty Fists). Their damage is mostly unchanged from level 1, but it was ALWAYS up to the task.

At level 6 things change though. The numbers stay largely the same (save for +1 to attack rolls), but now the GS guy gets 3 attacks over 2 rounds instead of 1, and even the second attack has a solid chance (he hits on a 12 vs AC 19, HP 70 CR 6 monster), dealing the same 2d6+17 per hit; an average damage per hit of 24 is up to the task of whacking through 70 HP with a little luck, and with a tiny bit more optimization (eg. the addition of Witch Hunter to each attack, Beast Totem cheese with swapping hands after attacks to get 2 more attacks, Savage Jaw, etc.) can eke out that bit of extra damage to make up the difference. Nothing changes except +1 BaB for the natural attacker, and it begins to lose its lead a bit; 6d6+51 and 4d6+56+2d4+18 aren't quite comparable yet, but the gap is closing fast.

By level 11 for sure they're comparable and both capable of mulching a CR 11 (25 AC, 145 HP) creature in one round; GS guy has a +28/+23/+18 (+7 Str, +3 Rage, +5 weapon, +11 BaB, +2 Charge, -3 PA) attack routine; each attack has a more than even chance of hitting, even the second iterative. Each attack is now dealing 2d6+32 (+15 Str with Rage, +5 weapon, +3 Witch Hunter, +9 Power Attack), so roughly 117 damage on average if all attacks hit; not quite enough for one round but with a bit of extra op (things were easier before they nerfed Courageous, which I had forgotten about before now) or buffs you can make up the difference. However it's easier to just amend this to: a Barbarian can definitely TWO ROUND kill anything with only minimal optimization.

The natural attacker still has the same 5 attacks they had before, most likely. So 5 attacks at the same highest attack bonus as above, dealing 3d6+72+2d4+32, or 119 average damage. If you can get more natural attacks, you can get more damage, but it's hard once you've maxed out Claw/Claw/Bite or Gore/Hoof or Talon/Hoof or Talon since you start running into the issue of not being able to make attacks with the same body part more than once (technically bites and gores don't work together).

You could probably crunch the numbers to jam the average damage higher, and I didn't run full DPR to account for crits or anything, but eh, don't feel like it. I haven't played a Barbarian in a very long time because they're kind of too easy to juice; the one time I did I OTK'd a Mythic Nalfeshnee at level 14, though we were rolling as a party that was always buffed to the gills with Haste and whatnot, and Courageous hadn't been nerfed yet.