PDA

View Full Version : What is a slam attack?



satorian
2009-07-04, 11:41 AM
I have always been wondering what separates a slam attack from a normal unarmed strike. Is it an extra natural natural that can taken in addition to other things? Does it bypass xyz? If so, why? Is it bludgeoning? If not, why not?

Keld Denar
2009-07-04, 11:44 AM
Its a type Bludgeoning natual attack. Small/medium creatures usually get 1, and large creatures usually get 2. Its what most undead and constructs use for their attacks.

If you have one, you can usually make it in addition to weapon attacks as a 2ndary natural attack, provided you aren't using that hand for a weapon.

The difference between it and an Unarmed Strike is that a Slam is always considered "armed", while an UAS is only considered "armed" if you wear a gauntlet or have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.

A Slam only overcomes DR if the creature specifically states its natural attacks overcome DR. So, like an Evil Outsider with a slam could overcome DR/Evil.

satorian
2009-07-04, 11:46 AM
Thanks. Where is it? I couldn't find a description of it in the SRD, except that certain monsters were noted to have it.

Xefas
2009-07-04, 11:49 AM
It's basically the equivalent of having an unarmed attack so brutal that it deals lethal damage instead of nonlethal damage.

Still not sure why Vampires get one. Golems, I can understand. Their limbs are made of stone or metal or something similar, and so their equivalent of unarmed attacks should do lethal damage. Zombies, I think should rather have unarmed attacks and a bite.

Keld Denar
2009-07-04, 11:51 AM
Its hidden (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons).



Slap or Slam
The creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage.

TSED
2009-07-04, 11:56 AM
It's basically the equivalent of having an unarmed attack so brutal that it deals lethal damage instead of nonlethal damage.

Still not sure why Vampires get one. Golems, I can understand. Their limbs are made of stone or metal or something similar, and so their equivalent of unarmed attacks should do lethal damage. Zombies, I think should rather have unarmed attacks and a bite.

Vampires in pop culture are often super strong so they beat people and they go flying around. I think that's why, at least.

Callista
2009-07-04, 12:56 PM
Yup.

Hey, do brass knuckles let you deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike, like gauntlets do? That'd be really cool flavor for a thug type rogue.

satorian
2009-07-04, 01:00 PM
Well by that logic a STR 26 fighter should have a slam attack (without taking a feat to give him one). And the idea of something getting a bonus fist attack even when it's doing something else smacks a bit of a bugs bunny boxing glove on an accordion lever coming out of the zombie's chest at will. Don't a golem's fists do lethal damage no matter what? Why the need to call it a slam attack? Sorry to focus on this piddling little thing, but it's bugged me for a while.

Riffington
2009-07-04, 01:03 PM
Well by that logic a STR 26 fighter should have a slam attack (without taking a feat to give him one). And the idea of something getting a bonus fist attack even when it's doing something else smacks a bit of a bugs bunny boxing glove on an accordion lever coming out of the zombie's chest at will. Don't a golem's fists do lethal damage no matter what? Why the need to call it a slam attack? Sorry to focus on this piddling little thing, but it's bugged me for a while.

There would be nothing broken about giving the fighter the slam attack.

But what do you mean "bonus attack?"

Yuki Akuma
2009-07-04, 01:07 PM
If a golem tried an unarmed strike, it would deal nonlethal damage because golems never have feats.

That's one of the reasons they get slam attacks.

Vampires have slam attacks because... when they're embraced they suddenly instinctively know how to hit really, really hard, without needing to take a feat for it? I don't know.

(As for brass knuckles, in D20 Modern they just up your unarmed strike damage one die (from 1d3 to 1d4, or 1d4 to 1d6), but don't make the damage lethal. For some reason.)

satorian
2009-07-04, 01:10 PM
I mean this:



If you have one, you can usually make it in addition to weapon attacks as a 2ndary natural attack, provided you aren't using that hand for a weapon.


By that logic, anybody with two hands wielding only one weapon should get a free offhand unarmed (nonlethal unless otherwise noted) strike at full BAB every round.

Aside from this, I guess slam attack is just a rulesy way of saying "x has a lethal unarmed strike".

Keld Denar
2009-07-04, 01:12 PM
Slam is just the generic name for any natural attack that does bludgeoning damage, just like Claw is the generic term for a natural attack that does slashing damage. A golem slams with its fists, an octopus slams with its tentacles. They had to call it something...what would you rather they call it? Backhand? Pimpslap? Punch?

Nah, I like Slam.

EDIT:


By that logic, anybody with two hands wielding only one weapon should get a free offhand unarmed (nonlethal unless otherwise noted) strike at full BAB every round.
Note how I said "if you HAVE one". Not everyone has a Slam. A Slam is similar to an Unarmed Strike, but just a little different. Anyone can gain a Slam by taking Strength Devotion, or grafting on a Battlefist. If you HAVE a Slam, and you aren't using that limb to make an attack, you can make a 2ndary natural attack at -5 just the same as any other creature with a natural attack in addition to your weapon attacks, like a Lizardfolk with a sword and a Bite.


Aside from this, I guess slam attack is just a rulesy way of saying "x has a lethal unarmed strike".
Close. If you make an offhand attack with an Unarmed Strike, you use the Two Weapon Fighting rules regardless of whether your Unarmed Strike does lethal or non-lethal damage. If you make an offhand attack with a Slam, you use the natural attack rules. Each has mechanical advantages and disadvantages in different situations, even though they would look remarkably similar to a foe on the recieving end.

Claudius Maximus
2009-07-04, 01:17 PM
Slam attacks are like unarmed attacks for creatures who are never supposed to be "unarmed". It also allows for damage to be assigned at a different progression than for unarmed attacks, as Slam attacks are supposed to be stronger than unarmed strikes.

On another note, I always imagined that for a Gelatinous Cube's slam attack, it would just... rotate onto you.

Keld Denar
2009-07-04, 01:21 PM
On another note, I always imagined that for a Gelatinous Cube's slam attack, it would just... rotate onto you.

Pseudopods. Ever see the movie The Abyss? Something like that.

Devils_Advocate
2009-07-04, 01:41 PM
I think that a slam attack is supposed to represent an appendage being harder, not stronger, than a human one, or at least less susceptible to damage. A zombie can beat real hard on you without injuring itself. It's the same principle that gives it DR/Bludgeoning.


Why the need to call it a slam attack?
Well, they need to call it something. What would you have them call it? Do you have a problem with the chosen name for some reason?


By that logic, anybody with two hands wielding only one weapon should get a free offhand unarmed (nonlethal unless otherwise noted) strike at full BAB every round.
Um, no? Monsters don't make secondary natural attacks at full BAB. They take a -5 penalty. Their primary attack doesn't take a penalty, unlike a two-weapon fighter, because their secondary attacks are designed to be used as secondary attacks without compromising their primary attacks.

shadzar
2009-07-04, 05:28 PM
Slam attack? That's easy.

When Rick Flair goes WOOOOO! ~slap~

That is a slam attack.

AslanCross
2009-07-04, 05:36 PM
Well by that logic a STR 26 fighter should have a slam attack (without taking a feat to give him one). And the idea of something getting a bonus fist attack even when it's doing something else smacks a bit of a bugs bunny boxing glove on an accordion lever coming out of the zombie's chest at will. Don't a golem's fists do lethal damage no matter what? Why the need to call it a slam attack? Sorry to focus on this piddling little thing, but it's bugged me for a while.

A high level fighter would be wearing full plate, usually.

Full plate comes with gauntlets. These automatically let him do lethal damage with unarmed strikes. Problem is, he still provokes AOOs if he doesn't have the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. <_<

There's a key difference between slams and unarmed strikes: a slam is a natural weapon. Natural weapons don't gain iterative attacks. A golem that can do 2 slams in a full attack can do 2 slams. That's it. A vampire can only make one slam per round. A monk can gain iterative attacks with his unarmed strike.

As to why this is the case, I don't really know. Maybe it's because monsters tend to have way more HD than PCs, and so if they gained iterative attacks it could get hairy pretty quickly.

In any case, I always thought slams could be depicted as kicks or even headbutts, just like unarmed strike. Next time I make a warforged character, his slam is going to be a headbutt, not a punch. Or maybe I could get that Jaws of Death feat and make it a head drill instead of a bite.

Eldariel
2009-07-04, 05:41 PM
"Slam: (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#slaporSlam) The creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage."

Definitions are always good. So anything that goes about battering a creature with an appendage = slam. Unarmed strike falls more into the whole martial arts/unarmed combat thing as it really acts like a weapon while Slam is just something you take one swing at a guy with.

Dixieboy
2009-07-04, 10:23 PM
Vampires in pop culture are often super strong so they beat people and they go flying around. I think that's why, at least.Str 60000000 doesn't give you a slam attack

though admittedly with that much strength you don't need one :smalltongue:

AslanCross
2009-07-05, 01:17 AM
Str 60000000 doesn't give you a slam attack

though admittedly with that much strength you don't need one :smalltongue:

I believe they were given a slam attack so they had a way of delivering their energy drain ability without it applying to every single weapon they carried or causing them to take AOOs all the time by making unarmed strikes without the appropriate feat. Makes even less sense to give them the Improved Unarmed Strike feat as a bonus feat.

I always saw the vampire's slam attack as a punch or kick charged with pulsating necromantic energy.