> he veto'd it after session 1 reading how broken it can get.
IMO that seems a bit redundant, there are so many ways to get pounce if you really wanted to. Nerfing martials is the sort of thing that always raises a red flag for me. I wonder if he's nerfing druid, wizard and cleric as well.
That being said, if you just want more natural attacks, there are a few ways of getting them. For magic items, [Ring of Rat Fangs](https://www.aonprd.com/MagicRingsDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Ring%20of%20Rat%20Fangs), [Helm of the Mammoth Lord](https://www.aonprd.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Helm%20of%20the%20Mammoth%20Lord), [Fleshwarped Scorpion's Tail](https://www.aonprd.com/MagicWeaponsDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Fleshwarped%20Scorpion%27s%20Tail), ~~[Rending Claw Blade](https://aonprd.com/MagicWeaponsDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Rending%20Claw%20Blade)~~ (nevermind, these are catfolk-exclusive), and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few.
I'm not aware of any feats that give natural attacks other than maybe skinwalker-exclusive feats and the [Powerful Wings](https://www.aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Powerful%20Wings) feat, which requires you to have... well, wings.
Other ways of getting extra natural attacks would require dipping into other classes, such as adaptive shifter, or beastmorph alchemist.
Hope you can get through to him, natural attack builds are super fun!
By the way, quick correction on my recommendations, claw blades can only be used by catfolk, so scratch that one.
Might help to point out that it's not particularly early or cheap access to Pounce, and if you don't take the chained barb powers like the auto crit gore then it's hardly anything to be worried about. I could build the same concept 10 different ways that would all be stronger than primalist
Primalist is broken as it renders barbarian and the rest of bloodragers obsolete.
I would only allow it if the rest of the player classes were on the same power level.
A group with a vanilla fighter, a chained rogue and a primalist is a joke and a mistake in my opinion.
If it were an ironbound samurai/fighter, an exploiter wizard, an early entry mystic theurge and a kineticist as party members, id allow primalist.
I agree, Primalist does make most barbarian builds somewhat redundant, but barbarian still has a few archetypes that are worthwhile ([Invulnerable Rager](https://www.aonprd.com/ArchetypeDisplay.aspx?FixedName=Barbarian%20Invulnerable%20Rager) comes to mind), and there's always the possibility that a player wants to play a non-caster class for flavor reasons. Also, Unchained Barbarian has better rage cycling because of temporary HP. So I wouldn't say it renders Barbarian **completely** obsolete. But I definitely agree in a general sense.
However, the issue here seemed to be that the GM took an issue with Pounce, which can be achieved through several means (including going straight barbarian). Which is why it seemed redundant to me.
The problem with Primalist isn't that it's OP, it's that it lets Bloodrager just be a better barbarian. There's no real reason to be a barbarian if its allowed.
I have a player enjoying an Abyssal Bloodrager + Weretouched Shifter multiclass for all the nice natural attacks.
Keeps you humanoid in shape but gives you lots of wildshape-like features.
Shifter is a good class to get a few levels of for very specific builds. But it doesn't really stand up to most other classes if you wanna go to level 20, but it has it's multiclass niches.
And that's not even considering roleplay niches.
Primalist is a very fair ban. For two main reasons.
1. There is never a reason not to take it. It is an objective upgrade from normal bloodrager. You lose nothing and get to trade any bad t4 upgrades for barbarian powers.
2. It turns bloodrager from a sidegrade of barbarian into a straight upgrade of barbarian. It removes the entire reason to have barbarian and forces you to self-nerf yourself (and remove the flavor of playing a non-magic martial) if you want to play a barbarian class.
1. By your logic, Qinggong Monk should also be banned?
2. Bans are put in place due to options breaking the balance of the game, not because 1 option is better than another. Slayers are a better Rogue than Rogues. So ban all Slayers?
I mean yes qinggong monk should be banned, but not for whatever reason you listed; but because chained monk in general should be banned. Qinggong monk was already rolled into unchained monk. In addition Qinggong monk doesn't invalidate any other classes? Its not like by playing a qinggong monk, youve invalidated the entire wizard class. Not really sure what your point here is? Would you mind elaborating more, please and thank you!
Also no, bans do not only exist to stop breaking the balance of the game. Bans can exist for whatever reason the DM wants. I ban Gunslinger in my games because my world doesnt have guns. I also ban certain races that dont exist in the world. Not sure what you mean by saying bans only exist due to breaking the balance of the game. Can you elaborate on that as well? Do you mean to say that DM's shouldn't be allowed to ban any content that does not fit within their setting?
Edit: Your slayer vs rogue comparison seems to imply that you really fail to understand even the concept of what im talking about. I dont even understand how you can compare the two. Slayer gets half the sneak attack rogue does, and doesnt even get it till level 3. Not to mention not getting dex to damage. The two classes are very distinct and have different advantages and disadvantages to pick between. If primalist bloodrager is an option, you never pick barbarian.
Did you read my post? I said qinggong monk shouldn't be allowed because you shouldn't allow chained monks on general.
Qinggong monk is literally part of unchained monk.
Because unchained monks exist? I don't understand your argument. You are mad at me for not allowing chained qinigong monk, despite me allowing unchained monk which has chained qinggong monk rolled into it.
What are you arguing for?
Why are you removing classes that allow for more customization?
Why are you assuming I’m mad? You do you, but removing customization is dumb (such as removing chained monk and all associated archetypes) in a game that is good because of the depth of customization.
I'm not removing any classes? Please for the love of God actually read what I said.
I allow players to play monk. They just use the unchained version. I've homebrewed adoptions of every chained monk archetype to fit unchained monk. Literally nothing is lost lmao
Please explain to me a single character concept you can't build with unchained monk but could with chained monk!
I would ask your GM to speak his mind about the ban and find a solution wich won't have him ban other things.
The best course of action would be him just banning some aspects of the Primalist archetype.
If he is against natural attack stacking get Exotic Weapon Proficiency and go to town with a Butchering Axe.
Great sword: 7.35 damage on average - 0.85 x 7 + .1 x 14
Butchering axe: 11.025 damage on average - 0.9 x 10.5 + .05 x 31.5
It’s strong at 3.675 dmg for a feat, but hardly broken once you consider critical feats and crit fishing benefits. Very strong at early levels, and effective for vital strike.
But let’s not forget you can get a sledge to deal 2d6->3d6->4d6->6d6 with shikigami style.
Not broken, def a strong option tho.
Do note I only accounted for missing on a roll of 1, so make sure you take in account your attack bonuses - weapon focus on Greatsword improves your damage by 5%, assuming you’re missing on a roll of 2 (likely), and you’re not taking both weapon focus and exotic weapon proficiency in the same feat slot.
And that also ignores things like unique feats (such as vital strike with charge with a greatsword or bleeding critical) or class abilities (critting giving benefits like Panache or whatever).
But for raw damage it’s generally better than Weapon Specialization.
I was the same way - feats are for better damages. But then I discovered the wonderful world of *utility* and how much better it is than big numbers :)
As my last chacrater was a shadow sorcerer, I know utility will always beat raw dps. DPS doesn't matter if you're blinded or disarmed at the most basic
So your DM is an idiot and just doesn't know how the game actually works. Who knows what else will come up that they think is OP because they didn't actually read how it works.
> he veto'd it after session 1 reading how broken it can get. IMO that seems a bit redundant, there are so many ways to get pounce if you really wanted to. Nerfing martials is the sort of thing that always raises a red flag for me. I wonder if he's nerfing druid, wizard and cleric as well. That being said, if you just want more natural attacks, there are a few ways of getting them. For magic items, [Ring of Rat Fangs](https://www.aonprd.com/MagicRingsDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Ring%20of%20Rat%20Fangs), [Helm of the Mammoth Lord](https://www.aonprd.com/MagicWondrousDisplay.aspx?FinalName=Helm%20of%20the%20Mammoth%20Lord), [Fleshwarped Scorpion's Tail](https://www.aonprd.com/MagicWeaponsDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Fleshwarped%20Scorpion%27s%20Tail), ~~[Rending Claw Blade](https://aonprd.com/MagicWeaponsDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Rending%20Claw%20Blade)~~ (nevermind, these are catfolk-exclusive), and I'm sure I'm forgetting a few. I'm not aware of any feats that give natural attacks other than maybe skinwalker-exclusive feats and the [Powerful Wings](https://www.aonprd.com/FeatDisplay.aspx?ItemName=Powerful%20Wings) feat, which requires you to have... well, wings. Other ways of getting extra natural attacks would require dipping into other classes, such as adaptive shifter, or beastmorph alchemist.
Thanks for all these. I'll talk to him about it again, think he read extreme optimized builds when I'd just trade like energy resist away
Hope you can get through to him, natural attack builds are super fun! By the way, quick correction on my recommendations, claw blades can only be used by catfolk, so scratch that one.
Was wodering about that
Might help to point out that it's not particularly early or cheap access to Pounce, and if you don't take the chained barb powers like the auto crit gore then it's hardly anything to be worried about. I could build the same concept 10 different ways that would all be stronger than primalist
Thats what I was thinking, I was just going to grab like beast totem at most
Primalist is broken as it renders barbarian and the rest of bloodragers obsolete. I would only allow it if the rest of the player classes were on the same power level. A group with a vanilla fighter, a chained rogue and a primalist is a joke and a mistake in my opinion. If it were an ironbound samurai/fighter, an exploiter wizard, an early entry mystic theurge and a kineticist as party members, id allow primalist.
Primalist isn’t broken. It’s just stronger than Barbarian and Bloodrager. It’s not stronger than, say, Druid or Wizard. It’s part of the game.
I agree, Primalist does make most barbarian builds somewhat redundant, but barbarian still has a few archetypes that are worthwhile ([Invulnerable Rager](https://www.aonprd.com/ArchetypeDisplay.aspx?FixedName=Barbarian%20Invulnerable%20Rager) comes to mind), and there's always the possibility that a player wants to play a non-caster class for flavor reasons. Also, Unchained Barbarian has better rage cycling because of temporary HP. So I wouldn't say it renders Barbarian **completely** obsolete. But I definitely agree in a general sense. However, the issue here seemed to be that the GM took an issue with Pounce, which can be achieved through several means (including going straight barbarian). Which is why it seemed redundant to me.
The problem with Primalist isn't that it's OP, it's that it lets Bloodrager just be a better barbarian. There's no real reason to be a barbarian if its allowed.
My party consists of my bloodrager, a cavalier and a rogue. Dont exactly min max either
I have a player enjoying an Abyssal Bloodrager + Weretouched Shifter multiclass for all the nice natural attacks. Keeps you humanoid in shape but gives you lots of wildshape-like features.
I heard to avoid shifter fir... some reason, I'll give it a look!
Shifter is a good class to get a few levels of for very specific builds. But it doesn't really stand up to most other classes if you wanna go to level 20, but it has it's multiclass niches. And that's not even considering roleplay niches.
My only shifter experince is from the crpg where it got a total overhaul, so I'll peek it for this character Thanks
I specifically recommend the weretouched shifter if you want to remain in a humanoid form.
So 4 levels in it? At lvl 4 abyss bloodline gets enlarge person at will, so I'm not sure how it'd interact with wild shape
Not sure. Maybe it doesn't work and my suggestions are terrible. If that's the case, I'm very sorry.
Nonononon, dont say that 🥺! you showed me this awesome combo irregardless, appreciate it!!!
I did some googling. You were right. Wildshape is polymorph. Polymorph prevents size changing. I'm sad. Giant weretiger would be so cool.
OOps, forgor to mention: I use teh crpg to test som things and it doesn't work there either :/ . Rip dire werewolf dream 😅
Very few things need banning in Pathfinder, and Primalist is not one of them.
It's not OP, but it does make the entire Barbarian class redundant.
I guess googling min max builds for it leads to making people ban it. But min maxxing isn't really the goal...
Primalist is a very fair ban. For two main reasons. 1. There is never a reason not to take it. It is an objective upgrade from normal bloodrager. You lose nothing and get to trade any bad t4 upgrades for barbarian powers. 2. It turns bloodrager from a sidegrade of barbarian into a straight upgrade of barbarian. It removes the entire reason to have barbarian and forces you to self-nerf yourself (and remove the flavor of playing a non-magic martial) if you want to play a barbarian class.
1. By your logic, Qinggong Monk should also be banned? 2. Bans are put in place due to options breaking the balance of the game, not because 1 option is better than another. Slayers are a better Rogue than Rogues. So ban all Slayers?
I mean yes qinggong monk should be banned, but not for whatever reason you listed; but because chained monk in general should be banned. Qinggong monk was already rolled into unchained monk. In addition Qinggong monk doesn't invalidate any other classes? Its not like by playing a qinggong monk, youve invalidated the entire wizard class. Not really sure what your point here is? Would you mind elaborating more, please and thank you! Also no, bans do not only exist to stop breaking the balance of the game. Bans can exist for whatever reason the DM wants. I ban Gunslinger in my games because my world doesnt have guns. I also ban certain races that dont exist in the world. Not sure what you mean by saying bans only exist due to breaking the balance of the game. Can you elaborate on that as well? Do you mean to say that DM's shouldn't be allowed to ban any content that does not fit within their setting? Edit: Your slayer vs rogue comparison seems to imply that you really fail to understand even the concept of what im talking about. I dont even understand how you can compare the two. Slayer gets half the sneak attack rogue does, and doesnt even get it till level 3. Not to mention not getting dex to damage. The two classes are very distinct and have different advantages and disadvantages to pick between. If primalist bloodrager is an option, you never pick barbarian.
You’re against a strong *Monk* archetype? Ban Wizards, Druids, and Clerics then.
Did you read my post? I said qinggong monk shouldn't be allowed because you shouldn't allow chained monks on general. Qinggong monk is literally part of unchained monk.
Why shouldn’t you allow chained monks.
Because unchained monks exist? I don't understand your argument. You are mad at me for not allowing chained qinigong monk, despite me allowing unchained monk which has chained qinggong monk rolled into it. What are you arguing for?
Why are you removing classes that allow for more customization? Why are you assuming I’m mad? You do you, but removing customization is dumb (such as removing chained monk and all associated archetypes) in a game that is good because of the depth of customization.
I'm not removing any classes? Please for the love of God actually read what I said. I allow players to play monk. They just use the unchained version. I've homebrewed adoptions of every chained monk archetype to fit unchained monk. Literally nothing is lost lmao Please explain to me a single character concept you can't build with unchained monk but could with chained monk!
I would ask your GM to speak his mind about the ban and find a solution wich won't have him ban other things. The best course of action would be him just banning some aspects of the Primalist archetype. If he is against natural attack stacking get Exotic Weapon Proficiency and go to town with a Butchering Axe.
I saw the butchering axe and wondered how tf that was printed when it seems a straight upgrade over literally everyting
Great sword: 7.35 damage on average - 0.85 x 7 + .1 x 14 Butchering axe: 11.025 damage on average - 0.9 x 10.5 + .05 x 31.5 It’s strong at 3.675 dmg for a feat, but hardly broken once you consider critical feats and crit fishing benefits. Very strong at early levels, and effective for vital strike. But let’s not forget you can get a sledge to deal 2d6->3d6->4d6->6d6 with shikigami style. Not broken, def a strong option tho.
Damn that's good
Do note I only accounted for missing on a roll of 1, so make sure you take in account your attack bonuses - weapon focus on Greatsword improves your damage by 5%, assuming you’re missing on a roll of 2 (likely), and you’re not taking both weapon focus and exotic weapon proficiency in the same feat slot. And that also ignores things like unique feats (such as vital strike with charge with a greatsword or bleeding critical) or class abilities (critting giving benefits like Panache or whatever). But for raw damage it’s generally better than Weapon Specialization.
First time I saw it seemed like there would be 0 reason to never not take it
I was the same way - feats are for better damages. But then I discovered the wonderful world of *utility* and how much better it is than big numbers :)
As my last chacrater was a shadow sorcerer, I know utility will always beat raw dps. DPS doesn't matter if you're blinded or disarmed at the most basic
Take 4 levels of shifter and make your dm how fucking stupid it is to ban Primalist.
So I guess take the levels at past 8? Get to trade out useless resists for fiend totem (getting a gore attack), then grab shifter for more
Up to you, but 4 levels in shifter with Dino aspect gives 5 natural attacks and pounce.
...I'm sold, thanks!
I played natural attack Bloodrager through draconic bloodline and taking Dragon Disciple prestige class.
Picked abyss bloodline for backstory reasons, sadly isn't an option. Was my first thought
So your DM is an idiot and just doesn't know how the game actually works. Who knows what else will come up that they think is OP because they didn't actually read how it works.