But it says the claw attack is part of the same action. So wouldn't I be able to attack twice with claws, then use my extra attack for 3, then as a bonus action I can use a light weapon? Maybe the claws
To use your claws to attack with the bonus action, you would have to dip monk.
You could use one of the attacks for the claws, the second with a light weapon in one hand and a bonus action for an attack with a weapon in the other. Without other MCs or feats, that's the best you can do RAW.
Dual Wielder would give you the ability to attack with your claws the same as you are suggesting, but you wouldn't likely get the +1 AC.
Claws. 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.
It's says the second claw attack is part of the same action so wouldn't that mean that I attack twice with that one action then attack again with my extra attack. So that's 3 right?
I get the monk for the bonus action which I mean yeah that makes sense but that's at least 3 attacks per turn. Otherwise that's just a weak extra attack. Also I think you should be able to bonus with the claws because they should should be lighter than a short sword but whatever.
Claws. 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.
It's says the second claw attack is part of the same action so wouldn't that mean that I attack twice with that one action then attack again with my extra attack. So that's 3 right?
I get the monk for the bonus action which I mean yeah that makes sense but that's at least 3 attacks per turn. Otherwise that's just a weak extra attack. Also I think you should be able to bonus with the claws because they should should be lighter than a short sword but whatever.
It makes sense, but they're just identified as simple melee weapons, not light simple melee weapons, which is the mechanical requirement. And based on what you had said there, it would require the dual wielder feat to get the 4 without monk. That would let you do your first attack with your claws (yes, both claws) and then pull two weapons at the same time. Using one you make your third attack with the extra attack you picked up at barb 5, which can trigger the bonus action attack.
Of course, if your DM rules differently, you could possibly get the bonus action attack without the feat or the MC.
The Monk MC is actually a better attack than anything you'd get with two weapon fighting since it adds your attack modifier by default. Using your Claws, you'd actually get the 1d6 plus attack modifier on all of the attacks, including the bonus action attack. You'd have to have the dual wielder feat and the two weapon fighting style to beat that (which could give you a 1d8 plus attack modifier). It'd be rough getting stats for it, but you wouldn't have to have your dex or wisdom higher than a 13. You would want at least the dex to be a 14, so that you could have your unarmored defense mimic the medium armor. You'd then use the barbarian version to key off of constitution instead of wisdom (from monk), though you couldn't use the shield and martial arts at the same time. You would still use strength for your attack stat so that you could get the rage damage and use reckless attacks.
So, as you know, the RAW is: Claws. 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.
If your barbarian has both hands free, there is no doubt she/he can do the additional claw attack. But, if one of the hands wields a shield (or any other thing), do you consider the barbarian still able to do the additional attack? (In that case two attacks with the same hand.) I think we can go both ways... The RAW doesn't say the additional attack must be with the other hand. But, at the same time, both hands are transformed and that could imply you need both to do two attacks. What do you think?
(As far as I could see, I didn't find a similar question in the previous discussion, but I may not have read all the posts properly. So, if this was already covered, I'm sorry.)
So, as you know, the RAW is: Claws. 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.
If your barbarian has both hands free, there is no doubt she/he can do the additional claw attack. But, if one of the hands wields a shield (or any other thing), do you consider the barbarian still able to do the additional attack? (In that case two attacks with the same hand.) I think we can go both ways... The RAW doesn't say the additional attack must be with the other hand. But, at the same time, both hands are transformed and that could imply you need both to do two attacks. What do you think?
(As far as I could see, I didn't find a similar question in the previous discussion, but I may not have read all the posts properly. So, if this was already covered, I'm sorry.)
If what you posted was the full RAW, then RAW would support making the extra attack since it doesn't say that you have to make the attack with the other hand. I do think that there is a rider that boosts the damage to 1d8 if both hands are empty, which clearly wouldn't be in effect. The interpretation could be open for either, but there is certainly less support for limiting the extra attack.
(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) i copied and pasted this from the description, it clearly says if your claws are empty you can use then to attack.
If you use a double bladed scimitar, you would be able to attack four time at lvl 5. Attack once with the DBS, free action let go with one hand, attack with claws, attack with claws again, item interaction grab DBS, then BA use the DBS again.
This would result in an average of 38.5 DPR.
For context, assuming non v.human/custom lineage, any other GWM martial would deal around 41 DPR around this point ASSUMING both hits even land. That's to say the beast is a very competitive damage build without reliance on things like PAM or GWM.
If you use a double bladed scimitar, you would be able to attack four time at lvl 5. Attack once with the DBS, free action let go with one hand, attack with claws, attack with claws again, item interaction grab DBS, then BA use the DBS again.
This would result in an average of 38.5 DPR.
For context, assuming non v.human/custom lineage, any other GWM martial would deal around 41 DPR around this point ASSUMING both hits even land. That's to say the beast is a very competitive damage build without reliance on things like PAM or GWM.
Yeah its pretty good damage but also requires that DBS be part of your world which as an Eberron creation might not be the case.
Also not sure where you get 41 DPR vs the 38.5 DPR either as that highly depends on the AC you are targeting....likely a lower AC enemy will heavily favor the GWM build and the Beast will be favored in a higher AC enemy.
Also you are forgetting a combo you could do: GWM and the Beast claws.
You could do Maul Attack with GWM + 2 Beast claw attacks and get better damage thanks to the static GWM bonus. You would even leave your BA open if you happen to crit.
Well, even in the absolute worst case scenario, you could just dual wield for the same effect. Free action drop one of your weapons, attack with one, claw, claw, item interaction pick it up, BA attack. Sounds lame, so I'd reflavor as the whole sequence being tossing up a short sword into the air before attacking with claws, then catching it midair for another strike.
Also, my DPR averages just come from looking at dice averages, assuming a maul or greatsword, in a round its 4d6 or 15+ 6 from STR+ 20 from GWM. That 41 is assuming both attacks hit, but it's not accounting for any BA from downing a target, as it's hard to quantify exactly how often that'll happen. However, if we adjust for to hit probability, that 41 goes down a significant portion because not only does it suffer from the -5 to hit property, but because choosing GWM over STR means you're now behind the curve, so you'll miss more frequently because of that as well. Whereas the 38.5, while it may decrease slightly accounting for AC, will actually be less affected due to access to reckless and staying on curve.
In your given example, we'd be doing 9 from STR, 6 from rage, 10 from GWM, and 15 from dice for a total average of 40 damage. But again, the same as I said above applies. So, the DBS/dual wield build is probably more reliable in the long term for most campaigns.
Well, even in the absolute worst case scenario, you could just dual wield for the same effect. Free action drop one of your weapons, attack with one, claw, claw, item interaction pick it up, BA attack. Sounds lame, so I'd reflavor as the whole sequence being tossing up a short sword into the air before attacking with claws, then catching it midair for another strike.
Also, my DPR averages just come from looking at dice averages, assuming a maul or greatsword, in a round its 4d6 or 15+ 6 from STR+ 20 from GWM. That 41 is assuming both attacks hit, but it's not accounting for any BA from downing a target, as it's hard to quantify exactly how often that'll happen. However, if we adjust for to hit probability, that 41 goes down a significant portion because not only does it suffer from the -5 to hit property, but because choosing GWM over STR means you're now behind the curve, so you'll miss more frequently because of that as well. Whereas the 38.5, while it may decrease slightly accounting for AC, will actually be less affected due to access to reckless and staying on curve.
In your given example, we'd be doing 9 from STR, 6 from rage, 10 from GWM, and 15 from dice for a total average of 40 damage. But again, the same as I said above applies. So, the DBS/dual wield build is probably more reliable in the long term for most campaigns.
Well, even in the absolute worst case scenario, you could just dual wield for the same effect. Free action drop one of your weapons, attack with one, claw, claw, item interaction pick it up, BA attack. Sounds lame, so I'd reflavor as the whole sequence being tossing up a short sword into the air before attacking with claws, then catching it midair for another strike.
Also, my DPR averages just come from looking at dice averages, assuming a maul or greatsword, in a round its 4d6 or 15+ 6 from STR+ 20 from GWM. That 41 is assuming both attacks hit, but it's not accounting for any BA from downing a target, as it's hard to quantify exactly how often that'll happen. However, if we adjust for to hit probability, that 41 goes down a significant portion because not only does it suffer from the -5 to hit property, but because choosing GWM over STR means you're now behind the curve, so you'll miss more frequently because of that as well. Whereas the 38.5, while it may decrease slightly accounting for AC, will actually be less affected due to access to reckless and staying on curve.
In your given example, we'd be doing 9 from STR, 6 from rage, 10 from GWM, and 15 from dice for a total average of 40 damage. But again, the same as I said above applies. So, the DBS/dual wield build is probably more reliable in the long term for most campaigns.
4d6 is actually 14 average damage not 15, so a touch lower. As far as the BA attack from GWM, it also occurs from crits, so you can baseline that start at .05. An additional conservative estimate of another .05 for kills that aren't also crits and still have enemies available isn't out of the realm of possibility, giving a weighting of .1.
Outside of that, you're mileage may vary. If other party members don't benefit from kills and are willing to target new enemies when you get close to the kill zone, you could conceivably roll in BA attacks, especially in melee scrums or if you have a high movement build. The only times that you'd miss out are when someone manages just enough damage for the kill without knowing they were that close. On the other hand, other characters that benefit from direct kills and players that have more fun with higher personal kill counts will lower your pool of available BAs from kills.
Reckless attack usage will also scale your crit procs, moving the baseline to between 10 and almost 15% between crits and kills depending on Reckless attack usage.
Well, even in the absolute worst case scenario, you could just dual wield for the same effect. Free action drop one of your weapons, attack with one, claw, claw, item interaction pick it up, BA attack. Sounds lame, so I'd reflavor as the whole sequence being tossing up a short sword into the air before attacking with claws, then catching it midair for another strike.
Also, my DPR averages just come from looking at dice averages, assuming a maul or greatsword, in a round its 4d6 or 15+ 6 from STR+ 20 from GWM. That 41 is assuming both attacks hit, but it's not accounting for any BA from downing a target, as it's hard to quantify exactly how often that'll happen. However, if we adjust for to hit probability, that 41 goes down a significant portion because not only does it suffer from the -5 to hit property, but because choosing GWM over STR means you're now behind the curve, so you'll miss more frequently because of that as well. Whereas the 38.5, while it may decrease slightly accounting for AC, will actually be less affected due to access to reckless and staying on curve.
In your given example, we'd be doing 9 from STR, 6 from rage, 10 from GWM, and 15 from dice for a total average of 40 damage. But again, the same as I said above applies. So, the DBS/dual wield build is probably more reliable in the long term for most campaigns.
Disagree once you factor in Reckless as the ADV will negate the -5 pretty well and overall you would come out ahead for almost every AC sans 18+.
I should clarify: Part of the comparison I was making was to other martials in general, not exactly other barbarians. In that case, the difference would be around 38 vs 45, accounting for rage. If we say it's a v.human barbarian build that starts with GWM, then we actually go up against a comparison point of 47.
However, I'm in love with the idea of a very effective non-v.human/pam/gwm martial build.
I should clarify: Part of the comparison I was making was to other martials in general, not exactly other barbarians. In that case, the difference would be around 38 vs 45, accounting for rage. If we say it's a v.human barbarian build that starts with GWM, then we actually go up against a comparison point of 47.
However, I'm in love with the idea of a very effective non-v.human/pam/gwm martial build.
Fair and I personally love beast barbarian myself.
Seems rather dull to play a beast by the numbers. Going for DPS and all that is fine but a beast is just fun to play so it doesn't really matter about getting one more hit or trying to work the system.
Seems rather dull to play a beast by the numbers. Going for DPS and all that is fine but a beast is just fun to play so it doesn't really matter about getting one more hit or trying to work the system.
Agree.... I'm just saying that they are a bit behind in damage but I would play them for the free spider climb and tail option if I'm trying to tank since you can use that with a shield
The real problem with the claws is that after a certain level they are outpaced by magic items and other attacks and become useless, a feature you will never use again after level 8-10 or so in most cases. If you do it will just be you actively choosing to do less damage than you could with an actual weapon. The 3rd attack wont make up for it.
This is why IMO around level 10 or so the dmg die should be bumped up to a d8. Doesn't 100% close the gap but it's close enough to make you actually want to keep using your claws rather than ignoring an entire feature of your subclass.
That's not the only issue with this subclass. As written, you'll never gain any of the benefits of any weapons (like Finesse) so many of the Fighting Styles (if you dip into a martial class) don't work. There's also no Feat like GWM that you can use either. The only way I can see improving the situation is by allowing the Unarmed Combat Fighting Style to bump the damage to D8. I would also like to see a ruling on using Claws and the Unarmed Fighting style on a Monk in the early levels when their Martial Arts die is a D4.
The real problem with the claws is that after a certain level they are outpaced by magic items and other attacks and become useless, a feature you will never use again after level 8-10 or so in most cases. If you do it will just be you actively choosing to do less damage than you could with an actual weapon. The 3rd attack wont make up for it.
This is why IMO around level 10 or so the dmg die should be bumped up to a d8. Doesn't 100% close the gap but it's close enough to make you actually want to keep using your claws rather than ignoring an entire feature of your subclass.
That's not the only issue with this subclass. As written, you'll never gain any of the benefits of any weapons (like Finesse) so many of the Fighting Styles (if you dip into a martial class) don't work. There's also no Feat like GWM that you can use either. The only way I can see improving the situation is by allowing the Unarmed Combat Fighting Style to bump the damage to D8. I would also like to see a ruling on using Claws and the Unarmed Fighting style on a Monk in the early levels when their Martial Arts die is a D4.
They remain competitive for quite a while and 90% of campaigns end by level 10 so it's overall only an issue if you go 11th or higher in a campaign.
I will agree at that point they will fall behind in damage quite a bit.
Just to keep it more or less in perspective, pure claw attacks: They lose to magical great weapons +3 at level 3. They lose to magical great weapons +2 at level 5. They lose to magical great weapons +1 at level 7.
These calculations do not account for the magical tattoo you can get to make magical unarmored strikes and such. Nor does it account for bonus action attacks with magical weapons. However, considering you can go medium armor and a shield and still get the additional attack from claws, it seems fine. Specially since you can always switch to tail and while you lose benefits, you still keep some relevance on your character's features.
However, if you consider the 14th level feature and lack of use of claws, your damage does soar higher if you consider 3 other allies adding the extra 1d6 to their damage. After level 14 if you just went claws, the Call the Hunt feature will propel you above magical weapon damage of great weapon +3 (if you have 3 allies).
Also to consider is the damage output for races with natural weapons already included, like Satyrs, Centaurs, Lizardfolk, Tabaxi and Minotaurs. Those natural weapons are included in the Infectious Fury feature. Thus races like Centaur and Minotaur that can perform those natural weapon attacks as a bonus action get to add the extra 2d12 psychic. Which is not much, but certainly allows you to retain some from your class while still using magical weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
To use your claws to attack with the bonus action, you would have to dip monk.
You could use one of the attacks for the claws, the second with a light weapon in one hand and a bonus action for an attack with a weapon in the other. Without other MCs or feats, that's the best you can do RAW.
Dual Wielder would give you the ability to attack with your claws the same as you are suggesting, but you wouldn't likely get the +1 AC.
Claws. 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.
It's says the second claw attack is part of the same action so wouldn't that mean that I attack twice with that one action then attack again with my extra attack. So that's 3 right?
I get the monk for the bonus action which I mean yeah that makes sense but that's at least 3 attacks per turn. Otherwise that's just a weak extra attack. Also I think you should be able to bonus with the claws because they should should be lighter than a short sword but whatever.
It makes sense, but they're just identified as simple melee weapons, not light simple melee weapons, which is the mechanical requirement. And based on what you had said there, it would require the dual wielder feat to get the 4 without monk. That would let you do your first attack with your claws (yes, both claws) and then pull two weapons at the same time. Using one you make your third attack with the extra attack you picked up at barb 5, which can trigger the bonus action attack.
Of course, if your DM rules differently, you could possibly get the bonus action attack without the feat or the MC.
The Monk MC is actually a better attack than anything you'd get with two weapon fighting since it adds your attack modifier by default. Using your Claws, you'd actually get the 1d6 plus attack modifier on all of the attacks, including the bonus action attack. You'd have to have the dual wielder feat and the two weapon fighting style to beat that (which could give you a 1d8 plus attack modifier). It'd be rough getting stats for it, but you wouldn't have to have your dex or wisdom higher than a 13. You would want at least the dex to be a 14, so that you could have your unarmored defense mimic the medium armor. You'd then use the barbarian version to key off of constitution instead of wisdom (from monk), though you couldn't use the shield and martial arts at the same time. You would still use strength for your attack stat so that you could get the rage damage and use reckless attacks.
Hey guys!
So, as you know, the RAW is:
Claws. 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.
If your barbarian has both hands free, there is no doubt she/he can do the additional claw attack. But, if one of the hands wields a shield (or any other thing), do you consider the barbarian still able to do the additional attack? (In that case two attacks with the same hand.) I think we can go both ways... The RAW doesn't say the additional attack must be with the other hand. But, at the same time, both hands are transformed and that could imply you need both to do two attacks. What do you think?
(As far as I could see, I didn't find a similar question in the previous discussion, but I may not have read all the posts properly. So, if this was already covered, I'm sorry.)
If what you posted was the full RAW, then RAW would support making the extra attack since it doesn't say that you have to make the attack with the other hand. I do think that there is a rider that boosts the damage to 1d8 if both hands are empty, which clearly wouldn't be in effect. The interpretation could be open for either, but there is certainly less support for limiting the extra attack.
As long as one hand is empty and you have extra attack, you could hit 3 times with your claws.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137390-weretouched-beasthide
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137424-weretouched-longtooth
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137431-weretouched-razorclaw
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137461-weretouched-swiftstride
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137646-weretouched-wildhunt
(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) i copied and pasted this from the description, it clearly says if your claws are empty you can use then to attack.
If you use a double bladed scimitar, you would be able to attack four time at lvl 5. Attack once with the DBS, free action let go with one hand, attack with claws, attack with claws again, item interaction grab DBS, then BA use the DBS again.
This would result in an average of 38.5 DPR.
For context, assuming non v.human/custom lineage, any other GWM martial would deal around 41 DPR around this point ASSUMING both hits even land. That's to say the beast is a very competitive damage build without reliance on things like PAM or GWM.
Yeah its pretty good damage but also requires that DBS be part of your world which as an Eberron creation might not be the case.
Also not sure where you get 41 DPR vs the 38.5 DPR either as that highly depends on the AC you are targeting....likely a lower AC enemy will heavily favor the GWM build and the Beast will be favored in a higher AC enemy.
Also you are forgetting a combo you could do: GWM and the Beast claws.
You could do Maul Attack with GWM + 2 Beast claw attacks and get better damage thanks to the static GWM bonus. You would even leave your BA open if you happen to crit.
Well, even in the absolute worst case scenario, you could just dual wield for the same effect. Free action drop one of your weapons, attack with one, claw, claw, item interaction pick it up, BA attack. Sounds lame, so I'd reflavor as the whole sequence being tossing up a short sword into the air before attacking with claws, then catching it midair for another strike.
Also, my DPR averages just come from looking at dice averages, assuming a maul or greatsword, in a round its 4d6 or 15+ 6 from STR+ 20 from GWM. That 41 is assuming both attacks hit, but it's not accounting for any BA from downing a target, as it's hard to quantify exactly how often that'll happen. However, if we adjust for to hit probability, that 41 goes down a significant portion because not only does it suffer from the -5 to hit property, but because choosing GWM over STR means you're now behind the curve, so you'll miss more frequently because of that as well. Whereas the 38.5, while it may decrease slightly accounting for AC, will actually be less affected due to access to reckless and staying on curve.
In your given example, we'd be doing 9 from STR, 6 from rage, 10 from GWM, and 15 from dice for a total average of 40 damage. But again, the same as I said above applies. So, the DBS/dual wield build is probably more reliable in the long term for most campaigns.
4d6 is actually 14 average damage not 15, so a touch lower. As far as the BA attack from GWM, it also occurs from crits, so you can baseline that start at .05. An additional conservative estimate of another .05 for kills that aren't also crits and still have enemies available isn't out of the realm of possibility, giving a weighting of .1.
Outside of that, you're mileage may vary. If other party members don't benefit from kills and are willing to target new enemies when you get close to the kill zone, you could conceivably roll in BA attacks, especially in melee scrums or if you have a high movement build. The only times that you'd miss out are when someone manages just enough damage for the kill without knowing they were that close. On the other hand, other characters that benefit from direct kills and players that have more fun with higher personal kill counts will lower your pool of available BAs from kills.
Reckless attack usage will also scale your crit procs, moving the baseline to between 10 and almost 15% between crits and kills depending on Reckless attack usage.
Disagree once you factor in Reckless as the ADV will negate the -5 pretty well and overall you would come out ahead for almost every AC sans 18+.
I should clarify: Part of the comparison I was making was to other martials in general, not exactly other barbarians. In that case, the difference would be around 38 vs 45, accounting for rage. If we say it's a v.human barbarian build that starts with GWM, then we actually go up against a comparison point of 47.
However, I'm in love with the idea of a very effective non-v.human/pam/gwm martial build.
Fair and I personally love beast barbarian myself.
I would play one in a heartbeat
Seems rather dull to play a beast by the numbers. Going for DPS and all that is fine but a beast is just fun to play so it doesn't really matter about getting one more hit or trying to work the system.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137390-weretouched-beasthide
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137424-weretouched-longtooth
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137431-weretouched-razorclaw
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137461-weretouched-swiftstride
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137646-weretouched-wildhunt
Agree.... I'm just saying that they are a bit behind in damage but I would play them for the free spider climb and tail option if I'm trying to tank since you can use that with a shield
spider climb is amazing in a closed room/cave/dungeon fight.
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137390-weretouched-beasthide
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137424-weretouched-longtooth
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137431-weretouched-razorclaw
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137461-weretouched-swiftstride
https://www.dndbeyond.com/subraces/137646-weretouched-wildhunt
That's not the only issue with this subclass. As written, you'll never gain any of the benefits of any weapons (like Finesse) so many of the Fighting Styles (if you dip into a martial class) don't work. There's also no Feat like GWM that you can use either. The only way I can see improving the situation is by allowing the Unarmed Combat Fighting Style to bump the damage to D8. I would also like to see a ruling on using Claws and the Unarmed Fighting style on a Monk in the early levels when their Martial Arts die is a D4.
They remain competitive for quite a while and 90% of campaigns end by level 10 so it's overall only an issue if you go 11th or higher in a campaign.
I will agree at that point they will fall behind in damage quite a bit.
Just to keep it more or less in perspective, pure claw attacks:
They lose to magical great weapons +3 at level 3.
They lose to magical great weapons +2 at level 5.
They lose to magical great weapons +1 at level 7.
These calculations do not account for the magical tattoo you can get to make magical unarmored strikes and such. Nor does it account for bonus action attacks with magical weapons. However, considering you can go medium armor and a shield and still get the additional attack from claws, it seems fine. Specially since you can always switch to tail and while you lose benefits, you still keep some relevance on your character's features.
However, if you consider the 14th level feature and lack of use of claws, your damage does soar higher if you consider 3 other allies adding the extra 1d6 to their damage. After level 14 if you just went claws, the Call the Hunt feature will propel you above magical weapon damage of great weapon +3 (if you have 3 allies).
Also to consider is the damage output for races with natural weapons already included, like Satyrs, Centaurs, Lizardfolk, Tabaxi and Minotaurs. Those natural weapons are included in the Infectious Fury feature. Thus races like Centaur and Minotaur that can perform those natural weapon attacks as a bonus action get to add the extra 2d12 psychic. Which is not much, but certainly allows you to retain some from your class while still using magical weapons.