Beast Totem Weirdness

[sithlordnergal]

So, Tasha's recently came out with a new Barbarian Subclass, the Beast Barbarian, and one of my players wants to try a thing with it. I feel like, by RAW, this is correct, but I want some extra input. See, when the Beast Barbarian rages, they are able to manifest a Natural Weapon. This weapon counts as a Simple Melee Weapon for the Barbarian, and you use Strength for it. They can get a Bite, Tail, and Claw attack, each of which does different things. We're looking at the Claw attack for this.


Each of your hands transforms into a claw, which you can use as a weapon if it’s empty. It deals 1d6 slashing damage on a hit. Once on each of your turns when you attack with a claw using the Attack action, you can make one additional claw attack as part of the same action.

So, already this is pretty strong. You can make an special attack that doesn't cost any actions when you attack with a claw when using the Attack Action. But here's where the weirdness sets in.

First, if you took the Dual Wielder feat, could you dual wield your claws. They count as Simple weapons, and you're technically wielding them if you're using them. However, once you get Extra Attack, you're basically making as many attacks as a Monk does when they use Flurry of Blows. Of course this is off set by the fact you can only do this while Raging, and those are limited per long rest until level 20.

Second, its pretty much agreed that you can cast spells with Somatic components while wielding a Greatsword because you can hold the Greatsword in one hand. So, by that logic, once you have Extra Attack you could make one attack with the Greatsword, then attack with one Claw while holding the Greatsword in a single hand, which gives you a third claw attack. Does that sound about right?

[Greywander]

I'm not sure natural weapons can be dual wielded since they're not held in the hand. Yes, the claws are on the hand, but they aren't held by them, as evidenced by the fact that you can hold something else in your hand if you need to. Note that you can't attack with the claws while holding something, but you can hold things in that hand.

[Zhorn]

First, if you took the Dual Wielder feat, could you dual wield your claws. They count as Simple weapons, and you're technically wielding them if you're using them. However, once you get Extra Attack, you're basically making as many attacks as a Monk does when they use Flurry of Blows. Of course this is off set by the fact you can only do this while Raging, and those are limited per long rest until level 20.
This has been talked about a few times on these boards since Tasha's was released, most recently here (https://forums.giantitp.com/showthread.php?626062-Beast-barbarian-and-BA-attacks).
Currently a little grey as we've not had a rule designer weigh in on this since the book was released.
Strict parsing would suggest 'no' based on TWF's general rule referencing the weapon being "in hand" vs the subclass ability making you hands "as weapons".
But also linked in the above thread is a dndbeyond interview with a WotC writer (James Haeck) saying it does work (specifically when using the Dual Wielder feat).

Mechanically; allowing it doesn't let you do things that you couldn't already do with the same investments of feats, just using weapon swapping during the process.

Assume Dual Wielder and Two Weapon Fighting Style.

Start with either a 1h 1d8 weapon drawn or two free hands
Attack Action claw (1d6+mod), free claw (1d6+mod)
Object interaction draw one or two 1h 1d8 weapons depending on your starting state
Extra Attack main hand (1d8+mod)
Bonus Action off hand (1d8+mod)
next round
free action drop one weapon
Attack Action claw (1d6+mod), free claw (1d6+mod)
Object interaction pick up dropped weapon
Extra Attack main hand (1d8+mod)
Bonus Action off hand (1d8+mod)
repeat for 2*(1d8+mod)+2*(1d6+mod) ≈ 16+(4*mod)

vs just letting the claws work
Attack Action (main hand), Extra Attack (any), free claw (any), Bonus Action attack (off-hand) = 4*(1d6+mod) ≈ 14+(4*mod)

with that gap just widening once magic weapon(s) come into play.
Best to always check with your DM first if you want to go for the pure claw build and don't take it as a given.


Second, its pretty much agreed that you can cast spells with Somatic components while wielding a Greatsword because you can hold the Greatsword in one hand. So, by that logic, once you have Extra Attack you could make one attack with the Greatsword, then attack with one Claw while holding the Greatsword in a single hand, which gives you a third claw attack. Does that sound about right?
As long as you are going from the 2H attack first and swapping to just holding the weapon in one hand while you do the remaining claw attacks it works out fine and is consistent with the idea of dropping being a free action, you're just dropping one hand off the weapon instead of both.
There's a thread on rpg stack exchange (here (https://rpg.stackexchange.com/questions/162923/does-switching-between-using-a-versatile-weapon-one-handed-to-two-handed-cost-an)) with a longer write up and the links to tweets about the discussion which if applied for consistency indicates this should be fine.

[Unoriginal]

Second, its pretty much agreed that you can cast spells with Somatic components while wielding a Greatsword because you can hold the Greatsword in one hand. So, by that logic, once you have Extra Attack you could make one attack with the Greatsword, then attack with one Claw while holding the Greatsword in a single hand, which gives you a third claw attack. Does that sound about right?

That is correct.

[animewatcha]

The price of 4 attacks a round is usually not getting the accuracy and damage bonuses from the enchantments or damage types like extra 1d6 fire or things like that. That is unless, DM forks over custom items.

[sophontteks]

RAW you can't hold a claw, so it can't be used with two-weapon fighting.
You also can't weapon swap RAW, as the bonus action requires the full attack action to be completed first.

As a DM I am very cautious about giving people extra attacks. No exception here.

[Zhorn]

You also can't weapon swap RAW, as the bonus action requires the full attack action to be completed first.
There's no such rule saying you can't, and there are such rules saying you can, and also as the Bonus Action in the above examples is the LAST part to occur each round, the Attack Action has been fully resolved. The weapon switching method does not require any special exceptions as it is 100% RAW compliant.


Other Activity on Your Turn
...
You can also interact with one object or feature of the environment for free, during either your move or your action. For example, you could open a door during your move as you stride toward a foe, or you could draw your weapon as part of the same action you use to attack.
...

Interacting with Objects Around You
Here are a few examples of the sorts of thing you can do in tandem with your movement and action:
draw or sheathe a sword
...
pick up a dropped axe
...


Breaking Up Your Move
...
Moving between Attacks
If you take an action that includes more than one weapon attack, you can break up your movement even further by moving between those attacks.
...


Object interactions can be done in tandem with Actions and Movement, and Movement is allowed to occur between attacks.
As an Object Interaction on your turn, you can draw a weapon (or two if using the Dual Wielder feat) or pick up a dropped weapon between attacks, as either part of the next attack being made, or as a function of your allowed movement between attacks.
The order of the process matters, but it is all RAW compliant and supported.

[sithlordnergal]

RAW you can't hold a claw, so it can't be used with two-weapon fighting.
You also can't weapon swap RAW, as the bonus action requires the full attack action to be completed first.

As a DM I am very cautious about giving people extra attacks. No exception here.

Makes sense about the two-weapon fighting. That said, the extra claw attack isn't a Bonus Action. Its actually not an action at all, you just get to make another attack with your claw if you attack once with your claw.

It also isn't swapping weapons either. You make an attack with your Greatsword, then you hold it in one hand and attack twice with your claws. Seeing as you can do that to cast a Spell that has Somatic components, you can technically do the same with the Claw attacks.

I will agree that it seems powerful. Especially if you go Monk/Barbarian, you can essentially get 5 attacks at level 5.

[Heyboo]

Is the bonus claw attack coming from the other hand though?
Are you swiping the same direction with both arms, one over the other? Or are you criss-crossing- forming an x with your swipes (with a wolverine snikt)? Or is the second attack merely the second fingernail claw swiping alongside the first and the whole motion is achieved with a solitary hand swipe?
Does the interpretation of this not impact what you can hold in your other hand?

[Zhorn]

Is the bonus claw attack coming from the other hand though?
There's nothing in the wording of the feature that says you need to use any particular claw in relation to the claw you first used to make an attack with.

Once on each of your turns when you attack with a claw using the Attack action, you can make one additional claw attack as part of the same action.They can both be done with the same claw, or with opposite main-hand off-hand claws.


I will agree that it seems powerful. Especially if you go Monk/Barbarian, you can essentially get 5 attacks at level 5.
for 5 attack you'd need to get to lv7 at the earliest (Barbarian5/Monk2) to get all the class features needed to make 5 attacks.
Ki at Monk lv2 for Flurry of Blows
Form of the Beast at Barbarian lv3 for Claws
Extra Attack at lv5 in either class, using Barbarian being closer as doing that in monk pushes it up to a level 8 build (Monk5/Barbarian3)

Of note this build does not let you make 5 claw attacks, but 3 claws and 2 unarmed strikes, just to avoid any confusion for people who have not read Tasha's. The claws count as simple weapons, so they qualify for Martial Arts as Monk Weapons, but not as unarmed strikes, so Flurry of Blows will have to be without using the claws.

[Heyboo]

They can both be done with the same claw, or with opposite main-hand off-hand claws.

So it is possible to hold a great sword (or shield or torch, etc.) in one clawed hand and swipe/bonus swipe with the other clawed hand, but it is also possible to fight bare-clawed with two-hand technique.
Schrodinger's claw, then.

[rlc]

Can you use great weapon master with weapons that are just okay?

[Yakmala]

I'm not sure natural weapons can be dual wielded since they're not held in the hand. Yes, the claws are on the hand, but they aren't held by them, as evidenced by the fact that you can hold something else in your hand if you need to. Note that you can't attack with the claws while holding something, but you can hold things in that hand.

The definition of wield is "to use" not "to hold". The Dual Wielding feat states that you can use two-weapon fighting even when the one handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light. Beast Barbarian claws are simple melee weapons that you are using/wielding. How they are attached to the hand is of no consequence.

Two Weapon Fighting style states that when you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack. There is nothing in this statement about how you are holding or even wielding your weapons. As Beast Barbarian claws are classified as simple melee weapons they should fit the criteria. You have two hands. Both are claws, both are thus simple melee weapons so you are engaging in combat with two weapons.

[Greywander]

The definition of wield is "to use" not "to hold". The Dual Wielding feat states that you can use two-weapon fighting even when the one handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light. Beast Barbarian claws are simple melee weapons that you are using/wielding. How they are attached to the hand is of no consequence.

Two Weapon Fighting style states that when you engage in two-weapon fighting, you can add your ability modifier to the damage of the second attack. There is nothing in this statement about how you are holding or even wielding your weapons. As Beast Barbarian claws are classified as simple melee weapons they should fit the criteria. You have two hands. Both are claws, both are thus simple melee weapons so you are engaging in combat with two weapons.
PHB page 195:

Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light
melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can
use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee
weapon that you're holding in the other hand.

Base TWF rules require the weapons to be held. The feat only lifts the requirement that they be light weapons, it does not allow you to use TWF with weapons you aren't holding.

You can always ask your DM, of course. Especially if you're spending a feat to do it, I don't know that it's that big of a deal. But RAW is RAW. Even if I allowed it, it would still be a houserule. Nothing wrong with houserules, but it's important not to promote your own houserules to other players as if they were RAW; that player's DM is unlikely to agree and it will just cause problems between that player and their DM. It's better to say, "RAW says this, but here's the houserule we use instead and it works pretty well. Ask your DM if they might want to try this houserule, too."

[Zhorn]

If we are talking baseline Two-Weapon Fighting rules, I'm with Greywander on this, even with the lack of light property on the claws being ignored, "in hand" is there in text so as a strict parsing of RAW it cannot work.

The Dual Wielder feat though has me lean towards Yakmala, as that does specify;
"You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light."
which I think is fair ground to argue as it now also specifies wielding as well as being able to ignore the light property without any "in hand" text. If we take a specific beats general stance, I think it would be fair to view the specifics of Duel Wielder overriding the general rule of Two-Weapon Fighting on that front.

Again though; I'd still say check with your DM first and don't take it as a given, but there are at least a case to be made within the strict parsing of RAW.

[Yakmala]

I guess the question I would put forth, concerning the Beast Barbarian is this: If we go with a ruling that both Dual Wielding and Two Weapon Fighting Style don't work with the claws, and perhaps switching a two hand weapon to one hand doesn't work between the action and the bonus action as some have suggested, then how do we best optimize this sub-class?

If the best we can hope for as a single-class is three 1D6+bonus+rage attacks with the claws, then what other support mechanisms do we put with this?

Using a shield immediately comes to mind. If you are not using a bonus action attack, you might as well get the extra AC.

I also thought about a Long Fang Shifter to get the bonus action attack as a bite, but that would take at least three rounds to get going: 1st round bonus action rage, 2nd round bonus action shift, 3rd round bonus action bite. And as well all know, a lot of fights are over by the 3rd round.

Ideas?

[Greywander]

The way I'm reading it, you only need to make one claw attack in order to get the extra claw attack. So once you get Extra Attack, I think you can attack once with a greatsword, then twice with the claws. It's kind of like the Kensei's Agile Parry, which only requires you to make one unarmed attack with your Attack action to get the AC bonus, your other attack can be with a weapon.

That said, lets not overlook our other options for natural weapons. The bite allows you to regain some HP, and again you only need to make one bite attack, the other can be with a weapon. The tail doesn't even require you to attack with it, you can just use a reaction to boost your AC. It seems like picking the right weapon for that particular encounter will be the most important thing.

[sithlordnergal]

I guess the question I would put forth, concerning the Beast Barbarian is this: If we go with a ruling that both Dual Wielding and Two Weapon Fighting Style don't work with the claws, and perhaps switching a two hand weapon to one hand doesn't work between the action and the bonus action as some have suggested, then how do we best optimize this sub-class?

If the best we can hope for as a single-class is three 1D6+bonus+rage attacks with the claws, then what other support mechanisms do we put with this?

Using a shield immediately comes to mind. If you are not using a bonus action attack, you might as well get the extra AC.

I also thought about a Long Fang Shifter to get the bonus action attack as a bite, but that would take at least three rounds to get going: 1st round bonus action rage, 2nd round bonus action shift, 3rd round bonus action bite. And as well all know, a lot of fights are over by the 3rd round.

Ideas?

Well, keep in mind its not a bonus action to do the other claw attack. Its just a free attack that you get when you make one attack with a claw. And if you can't swap from the two-handed weapon to a single handed claw attack, then Eldritch Knights and Valor Bards shouldn't be able to cast a somatic spell and make an attack with their bonus action if they're using a two-handed weapon.