Bites in full attacks

[SilverLeaf167]

I think most people agree that it gets a little hard to imagine what a full attack with, say, 8 tentacles, a few claws and a bite against the same target looks like, or with a spear and a bite. I am one of those people, and I'd like to think about how to fix the issue. Sure, it isn't quite as stupid if you think of it as entirely separate attacks within the space of 6 seconds and not a single flurry, but even that can be weird in some cases.

The bite attack in particular tends to feel sort of tacked on in most of these cases. It isn't that hard at all to think about a kraken whipping around with all its tentacles, but then it somehow also manages to bite the victim. So what I thought I'd do is somehow separate the bite from the rest of the natural weapons, at least in some specific cases (I have no trouble imagining, for example, a tiger biting and clawing at the same time). After all, to continue with the kraken example, in most media the tentacles are a threat all right, but the real horror is when the hero slips towards the beast's mouth.

So, would there be a problem with making certain creatures' bite attack, for example, only usable while grappling, but making it hit automatically and deal more damage somehow? Maybe a critical hit? Again, this would only apply to some specific beasties, and I'm open to other solutions. I just want to help the suspension of disbelief a little bit while also making bites much more threatening, the way they are in most media and even real life.

[Amphetryon]

The first "problem" that comes to mind is that, by reducing the presumed number of Attacks/Round of many Creatures/Characters with these Attacks, you're reducing their combat Damage potential. Depending on the specific example, this reduction of Damage potential could have a negligible effect on the encounter, or could make it easier than expected (or harder if the PC is the one with the Bite Attack). If it appears that this change is having an impact on the difficulty of encounters, you may need to adjust other aspects of the affected Creatures in order to compensate. . . which could, in turn, cause other issues to crop up.

[Arc_knight25]

Lets say your a Humaniod with a BAB of 6 and a bite attack.

The BAB 6 gives you 2 atracks 6/1 and your Bite is at a 1.

Thats 3 attacks.

Roll a d3. Depending on what you roll thats when the bite attack occurs.

Gives the attack an illusion of randomness from the dice roll.

[SilverLeaf167]

The first "problem" that comes to mind is that, by reducing the presumed number of Attacks/Round of many Creatures/Characters with these Attacks, you're reducing their combat Damage potential. Depending on the specific example, this reduction of Damage potential could have a negligible effect on the encounter, or could make it easier than expected (or harder if the PC is the one with the Bite Attack). If it appears that this change is having an impact on the difficulty of encounters, you may need to adjust other aspects of the affected Creatures in order to compensate. . . which could, in turn, cause other issues to crop up.
Well, I do want to keep it balanced somehow. Biting should be a somehow "equally good" option as using your other attacks, just useful in different situations. I get your point, and I'd thought of it, but how should I make it balanced without making bites situationally OP on the other hand?


Lets say your a Humaniod with a BAB of 6 and a bite attack.

The BAB 6 gives you 2 atracks 6/1 and your Bite is at a 1.

Thats 3 attacks.

Roll a d3. Depending on what you roll thats when the bite attack occurs.

Gives the attack an illusion of randomness from the dice roll.
I'm not sure how this helps? The order of the attacks isn't really a problem for me, just the fact that they can all be used at the same time. I'm pretty sure you can freely change the order of your attacks anyway; if not, well, it's at least a houserule at our table.

[Amphetryon]

Well, I do want to keep it balanced somehow. Biting should be a somehow "equally good" option as using your other attacks, just useful in different situations. I get your point, and I'd thought of it, but how should I make it balanced without making bites situationally OP on the other hand?

That's a really tricky question, because the efficacy of a given Creature's Bite Attack varies so wildly across different Creatures; some Creatures would lose a ton of their offensive power if their Bite Attack were reduced to being used in a Grapple, while others would barely notice the difference. It seems to me - having not run the numbers - that this would punish the Creatures that aren't primarily focused on Grappling disproportionately, while causing no noticeable change in power to the Grappler-focused Creatures. As such, those that Grapple incidentally, rather than primarily, would probably* need an added perk to offset the reduction in power of their Bite Attack.

*presuming the power of the Creature is in line with its CR. . . rofl.

[Chronos]

Maybe they all happen at the same time, maybe they happen one after the other. What difference does it make? Describe it however seems to make the most sense to you.

Although actually, there should always be at least some time between attacks, because if one attack kills the thing you're attacking, you always have the option of switching to some other enemy you can reach for your next attack(s). Maybe it's a shorter time from one tentacle to the next than it is to switch to bite, but the game rules don't track those intervals of time, so don't worry about it.

[Arc_knight25]

My bad, I kind of misunderstood what you were trying to get at.

Maybe if the creature in question has reach and your wondering how his face all of a sudden gets to where his appendages are, reduce his bite range to something you find more believable and can only throw it in to his full attack when a creature is within range.

I don't think treating a bite attack as a grapple is a good thing. Creatures would need the improved grab ability or improved grapple feat not to incur attacks of oppurtunity. Because without those options the bite would be met with an AoO and if the AoO connects and deals damage the Bite is lost. As per Grappling rules.

[Fax Celestis]

Let me get this straight:

You're okay with wizards flying under their own brainpower, dragons breathing gouts of fire (or lightning or acid or light) that basically come from nowhere, bugs so big they would collapse under their own weight without magical intervention, horrible amalgam halfbreeds (half-dragon gelatinous cube, I'm looking at you), and time-traveling cthulhoid squidthings from beyond the stars...

...but you have a hard time believing that a tiger could claw and bite in the same attack?

[Dr. Azkur]

Let me get this straight:

You're okay with wizards flying under their own brainpower, dragons breathing gouts of fire (or lightning or acid or light) that basically come from nowhere, bugs so big they would collapse under their own weight without magical intervention, horrible amalgam halfbreeds (half-dragon gelatinous cube, I'm looking at you), and time-traveling cthulhoid squidthings from beyond the stars...

...but you have a hard time believing that a tiger could claw and bite in the same attack?

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagicAIsMagicA

EDIT: Oh, and I think he meant that he can picture tigers clawing and biting at the same time (not a difficult thing to picture), but not other creatures (such as a human with sharp teeth). It's kind of a weird awkward movement depending on how you picture it.

[Fax Celestis]

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/MagicAIsMagicA

EDIT: Oh, and I think he meant that he can picture tigers clawing and biting at the same time (not a difficult thing to picture), but not other creatures (such as a human with sharp teeth). It's kind of a weird clumsy movement if you don't picture it right.

It doesn't matter. D&D combat is abstract. Restricting things to realism unless magic is involved is a big problem with the wizard/fighter disparity.

[Ashtagon]

I would consider ruling that bite attacks treat the creature as being one size category smaller for purposes of reach.

[Dr. Azkur]

It doesn't matter. D&D combat is abstract. Restricting things to realism unless magic is involved is a big problem with the wizard/fighter disparity.

Oh yeah, I agree. It's really abstract. We have to commit to that to play, otherwise we'd end up with a horribly realistic unplayable system. But it's okay if he tried to make a rule for something he can't work his head around as long as it doesn't hinder the game. Now as to the actual making of the rule I'll leave the thread be...

[Fax Celestis]

I would consider ruling that bite attacks treat the creature as being one size category smaller for purposes of reach.

You realize that this is the opposite of how some existing creatures (such as dragons) already work, right?

[Ashtagon]

You realize that this is the opposite of how some existing creatures (such as dragons) already work, right?

Accidentally pressed submit instead of preview somewhere. I meant it to apply for those creatures that have short necks (such as humanoids, some of which have bite attacks).

[TheStranger]

I don't have a problem with biting in combat. Think of it as sliding inside your opponent's guard for a second and following up with an attack. If I'm imagining two guys fighting, one of the things they're trying to do is get in close to throw elbows, knees, headbutts, etc. Bites aren't any different. If you think it's hard to get inside a guard that easily... that's why you take a -5 to the attack roll. If you miss, maybe it's because you never had a clear opportunity in the first place.

It's not a perfect explanation, but I'm comfortable with it given the level of abstraction in D&D combat. I try to think of D&D combat as dynamic - during your 6 seconds, you're doing a lot of different things, not just standing in your square swinging at your enemy in his. For instance, imagine that you and I are fighting with greatswords, and I have a bite attack. You attack, I parry and lunge forward with a counterattack. You manage to divert it, but you're off balance from your attack, so I step into my lunge, take a hand off my sword to pull you further off balance, and bite your shoulder. You twist away, I disengage before you can get your sword around, and we both return to our guards. In game terms, that's a single round of combat, in which we each missed with a weapon attack and I hit with a bite.

[Chronos]

It's related to the issue that humans are considered to completely take up a 5' cube in combat. We don't actually fill that space; we're just moving around within that space. So you stay near the center of your cube to hit things with your sword, and then lean over to the edge of your cube to bite them.

[Big Fau]

@OP: BlazBlue's Valkenhayn pulls off bite attacks fairly easily, mixing them in with rapid punches, kicks, and claw attacks.