Using a feat similar to what Javier has put would be OK. You're using up your ASI to take it, so that keeps it balanced. Except maybe the possible +6 to AC as a free use - the mechanics of Rage class feature balance it for the Barb, granting it unlimited use as a feat is not balanced.
Mostly agree with the concept of dropping the "parry" ability of the tail, especially since it does tend to unbalance the feat a bit. I was also considering having it be a flat bonus (or scaling with proficiency), but that might be too close to the defensive duelist feat, which only grants one benefit (i.e., adding a parry bonus as a reaction). So, while I liked the idea of having the tail help run some interference in combat, I'd agree that dropping that item would be better for the sake of balance.
Giving the tail reach would mean that it would be at least 10 feet long. That is not a tiefling tail, comrade.
Not sure if the physical tail would truly have to be 10+ feet long to qualify for the Reach aspect, but I would agree that the standard tiefling tail would probably not be long enough to extend that far. The "Reach" aspect was carried over from the Path of the Beast aspect that grants it to the barbarian with a tail. For sake of balance, I would be willing to remove it from this feat, which would further help keep the barbarian path beneficial.
I'd lose that and bump the tail to 1d6 with a successful hit allowing you to use a bonus action to make a grapple attempt allowing you to grapple the opponent without needing a free hand. Something like that. This also means taking a Beast Barb would still be beneficial.
Thanks! I like these concepts as an alternative. Increasing the damage to 1d6 offsets losing the "parry" ability that we're dropping but still keeps it below the Path of the Beast barbarian ability. Would probably drop the Reach aspect as well (as noted above), which would further allow the barbarian to be better during a rage. Adding the grapple would be a nice third benefit that keeps the general flavor but doesn't provide too much strength. Maybe something along the lines of:
When you hit a creature with your tail on your turn, you can use a bonus action to attempt to grapple the target. Since this grapple uses your tail, you do not need to have a free hand to make the attempt.
I also like this idea.
Perhaps making it into a feat that allowed you to do this as a bonus action. Meaning you could attempt to grapple the enemy with your tail, which they could roll a STR save, to attempt to break free from.
If they failed their save, they'd be grappled and give you an advantage on your attack action, for as long as they were grappled for. They could, of course, use their action each turn to attempt to break free of the grapple.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A caffeinated nerd who has played TTRPGs or a number of years and is very much a fantasy adventure geek.
Grappleand advantage? That seems overly powerful - because that's basically restrained. Already being able to grapple without using a single hand (so you could wield a 2h sword for example) is very good.
Grappleand advantage? That seems overly powerful. Already being able to grapple without using a single hand (so you could wield a 2h sword, for example) is very good.
That's a fair point, I guess. I think I was perhaps thinking in too literal of real-world terms, where a grappled opponent would have a disadvantage on any attack, and the grappler would have an advantage.
I was thinking, as they struggled with your tail, they wouldn't be able to defend themselves otherwise.
You're correct though, grappled and restrained are two different things in d&d.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
A caffeinated nerd who has played TTRPGs or a number of years and is very much a fantasy adventure geek.
Perhaps making it into a feat that allowed you to do this as a bonus action. Meaning you could attempt to grapple the enemy with your tail, which they could roll a STR save, to attempt to break free from.
Yes, the idea would be to add the grapple point to the feat design suggestion that I had previously posted. With switching the grapple for the parry aspect (and updating some of the other points that had been discussed), the revised version would look something like this:
Tail Combatant
Prerequisite: Must have a tail.
Through extensive training, you have learned how to use your tail more effectively during combat.
Your tail helps provide counterbalance to the rest of your body. You gain advantage on Strength and Dexterity saving throws made against Effects that would knock you prone.
You can make an unarmed strike at a target with your tail, which deals 1d6 bludgeoning damage on a hit.
When you hit a creature with your tail on your turn, you can use a bonus action to attempt to grapple the target. Since this grapple uses your tail, you do not need to have a free hand to make the attempt.
If they failed their save, they'd be grappled and give you an advantage on your attack action, for as long as they were grappled for. They could, of course, use their action each turn to attempt to break free of the grapple.
Agree with Emmber that giving advantage would probably overbalance this aspect of the feat. However, as a DM, I wouldn't have an issue with a character having this feat combine it with the Grappler feat, which would provide advantage against the grappled creature...but at the cost of two feats.
That doesn't look like it would work well as a weapon, at least to me.
A highly flexible appendage as thick as a leg and twice as long doesn't look like it would work well as a weapon? Agree to disagree.
Well, if you look at real-life animals that use their tails as weapons (porcupines, alligators, monitor lizards, humpback whales, Stegosaurus), their tails are actually rather stiff. This provides better leverage- more force gets transferred to the target on impact. Tiefling tails are generally depicted as being extremely flexible, like a cat's tail.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Curious thought that I had, but it seems that a Tiefling tail would make an excellent weapon. They could fit the end of it with something akin to a spearhead, and it would be pretty deadly, essentially becoming a flexible spear that they could use as an additional melee weapon.
Beyond that, if you're a Tiefling that has a thick heavy tail, you could use it in melee combat to slap about your opponent, making an additional unarmed attack, as well as your regular attacks. Even if a thick heavy tail is not flexible enough to be bent round to the front of your body, you could still use it to make an unarmed attack and to fend off an attacker from behind.
Fitting metal armour to your tail would also make it into a heavy blunt weapon, especially if your tail is already thick and heavy In the first place.
At the very least, you could use your tail to trip up your enemies and send them flying, sprawling on the floor, or headfirst into walls and furniture and so forth.
So, can a Tiefling use its tail as a weapon, and if not, why not?
I've allowed it. In fact I've homebrewed a Vicious Katar of Venom for the Tiefling that was in my party which is worn or gripped on the end of the tail. His tail wasn't as thick as the one in the picture someone linked below but was rather more typical of the devil tails you see in cartoons, like thin with a triangle on the tip. I didn't really think to feat it, which in hindsight might indeed have been a better idea. The character is a swashbuckler who uses a rapier and shield but who can choose to use a tail attack instead of an attack with the rapier.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Thank you for your time and please have a very pleasant day.
You can also already make unarmed strikes with whatever appendage you want. Want to smack things with your tail as a bonus action? Just be a monk.
In my homebrew world dragonborn have tails, and I actually have a monk subclass limited to dragonborn that gives them extra uses for it:
Sweeping Tail Technique
Starting when you choose this tradition at 3rd level, whenever you hit a creature with one of the attacks granted by your Flurry of Blows, you may strike with your tail and impose one of the following effects on that target instead of dealing damage:
It must succeed on a Dexterity saving throw or be knocked prone by a sweep of your tail.
It must succeed on a Strength saving throw or be pushed up to 10 feet away from you in a direction of your choice with a mighty flick of your tail.
Its speed is reduced by 5 times your proficiency bonus in feet on its next turn, as your tail coils around it and impedes its movement.
These effects cannot be used against a creature two or more sizes larger than you.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock) Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric) Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue) Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Sounds like simple monk option, anything could be reflavored as a tail attack, but if your using your tail as a maul, a normal weapon can be removed, it doesn't work as well with body parts.
I had a rogue tiefling, I strapped a dagger to its tail and the DM let me use that in combat, didn’t give me anything massive (like extra attacks etc) it was more for flavor. Although on one occasion I was carrying a chest and the DM allowed me to attack with my dagger at disadvantage in a fight instead of dropping and picking the chest up, he agreed it made sense from a cinematic perspective and just seemed cool.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I also like this idea.
Perhaps making it into a feat that allowed you to do this as a bonus action. Meaning you could attempt to grapple the enemy with your tail, which they could roll a STR save, to attempt to break free from.
If they failed their save, they'd be grappled and give you an advantage on your attack action, for as long as they were grappled for. They could, of course, use their action each turn to attempt to break free of the grapple.
A caffeinated nerd who has played TTRPGs or a number of years and is very much a fantasy adventure geek.
Grapple and advantage? That seems overly powerful - because that's basically restrained. Already being able to grapple without using a single hand (so you could wield a 2h sword for example) is very good.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
That's a fair point, I guess. I think I was perhaps thinking in too literal of real-world terms, where a grappled opponent would have a disadvantage on any attack, and the grappler would have an advantage.
I was thinking, as they struggled with your tail, they wouldn't be able to defend themselves otherwise.
You're correct though, grappled and restrained are two different things in d&d.
A caffeinated nerd who has played TTRPGs or a number of years and is very much a fantasy adventure geek.
Yes, the idea would be to add the grapple point to the feat design suggestion that I had previously posted. With switching the grapple for the parry aspect (and updating some of the other points that had been discussed), the revised version would look something like this:
Agree with Emmber that giving advantage would probably overbalance this aspect of the feat. However, as a DM, I wouldn't have an issue with a character having this feat combine it with the Grappler feat, which would provide advantage against the grappled creature...but at the cost of two feats.
Well, if you look at real-life animals that use their tails as weapons (porcupines, alligators, monitor lizards, humpback whales, Stegosaurus), their tails are actually rather stiff. This provides better leverage- more force gets transferred to the target on impact. Tiefling tails are generally depicted as being extremely flexible, like a cat's tail.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
Love the grapple idea, it's like we got some friezas in here.
I've allowed it. In fact I've homebrewed a Vicious Katar of Venom for the Tiefling that was in my party which is worn or gripped on the end of the tail. His tail wasn't as thick as the one in the picture someone linked below but was rather more typical of the devil tails you see in cartoons, like thin with a triangle on the tip. I didn't really think to feat it, which in hindsight might indeed have been a better idea. The character is a swashbuckler who uses a rapier and shield but who can choose to use a tail attack instead of an attack with the rapier.
Thank you for your time and please have a very pleasant day.
You can also already make unarmed strikes with whatever appendage you want. Want to smack things with your tail as a bonus action? Just be a monk.
My homebrew subclasses (full list here)
(Artificer) Swordmage | Glasswright | (Barbarian) Path of the Savage Embrace
(Bard) College of Dance | (Fighter) Warlord | Cannoneer
(Monk) Way of the Elements | (Ranger) Blade Dancer
(Rogue) DaggerMaster | Inquisitor | (Sorcerer) Riftwalker | Spellfist
(Warlock) The Swarm
In my homebrew world dragonborn have tails, and I actually have a monk subclass limited to dragonborn that gives them extra uses for it:
Active characters:
Carric Aquissar, elven wannabe artist in his deconstructionist period (Archfey warlock)
Lan Kidogo, mapach archaeologist and treasure hunter (Knowledge cleric)
Mardan Ferres, elven private investigator obsessed with that one unsolved murder (Assassin rogue)
Xhekhetiel, halfling survivor of a Betrayer Gods cult (Runechild sorcerer/fighter)
Sounds like simple monk option, anything could be reflavored as a tail attack, but if your using your tail as a maul, a normal weapon can be removed, it doesn't work as well with body parts.
I had a rogue tiefling, I strapped a dagger to its tail and the DM let me use that in combat, didn’t give me anything massive (like extra attacks etc) it was more for flavor. Although on one occasion I was carrying a chest and the DM allowed me to attack with my dagger at disadvantage in a fight instead of dropping and picking the chest up, he agreed it made sense from a cinematic perspective and just seemed cool.