Slam Attacks and Claws

[Shazek]

So, an interesting question has come up in one of my campaigns about which two of my players disagree and which I'm on the fence about. The underlying question is this: How do slam attacks work? The character in question has two claw attacks (from the Feral Template) and a Slam attack (from a piece of Half-Golem (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9939137) Homebrew I approved). He says he can use the Slam as a headbutt, the claws with his arms, and a knee for the unarmed strike. Another player disagrees, saying he can't use the Slam and the Claws at the same time, and cited a Rules of the Game article which claims you can't even use UAS and both claws or slams, among other things. He also mentioned something called a Natural Weapon Slot, which I can't find in RAW. The RAW seems quite unclear here, (not counting Skip Williams as RAW, of course) so I was hoping the rest of the Playground knows something I don't. I may houserule it in the end, but I'd at least like a clear sense of what's supposed to happen.

[Krazzman]

From what I got:

UAS is any body part.

You have a Primary Natural Attack (or a Set if you have two claws for example a Totemist with the Sphinx Claws bound to his totem).
And secondary Natural Attack (which have a -5 to hit and only half strmod dmg on a hit)
About the Slam: what Half Golem thing does he have that grants him the Slam?

If it is a Bodyslam then going Claws claws slam UAS is not unlikely to be ok. The DM has to give his call in this though.

I would advice reading the Natural attacks 101 guide found somewhere on this board.

[Darrin]

How do slam attacks work?


This isn't a particularly well-defined area of RAW (Rules As Written).

MM p. 312 gives us most of what we know about slams:



The number of attacks a creature can make with its natural weapons depends on the type of the attack—generally, a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack (although Large creatures with arms or armlike limbs can make a slam attack with each arm).
[...]
Slap or Slam: The creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage.


The rest we have to infer from the stat blocks in the MM. Many large creatures with a humanoidish appearance have two slam attacks that represent their arms: giants, elementals, and golems mostly. We can also infer (mostly from the giants) that when they wield manufactured weapons with their arms, they lose their slam attacks.

Slam attacks on medium-sized creatures are not so common, but we have a couple examples: Doppelgangers in MM and Warforged in MM3. Unfortunately, we don't have any rules text that tells us what or how many appendages we are dealing with. I would presume that the arms are being used, but there can be arguments made for elbows, knees, shoulder-checks, and so on. Maybe not headbutts, though, unless you consider the head an "appendage".

There's also oozes that get slams when they form a pseudopod, which I suppose counts as an "appendage", although I like to think of it as more of a body-slam.

Things get considerably more confusing when you start adding templates such as Vampire and Woodling, which grant a slam attack to a creature regardless of its size or existing natural weapons. As far as I can determine, these slams continue to work even if all of the creature's appendages are busy with other things, such as attacking with claws/wielding weapons/etc.

When I tried to sort this out in an older thread, the best I could come up with that wasn't loudly shouted down was a houserule that sacrifices expediency and playability at the expense of convoluted rules kludges:

"One Slam Good, Two Slams Bad."

Essentially, if a creature has a single slam, then it doesn't directly involve the arms, and he may keep the slam in his attack routine if his arms are busy doing something else.

If a creature has two slams, then they represent the creature's arms, and the creature loses one or both slams if he uses the respective arms for something else (such as attacking with a weapon).

This makes the Warforged slightly more powerful, as they can still slam when wielding a two-handed weapon (an ability not supported by their stat block in the MM3), but it prevents a lot of rules headaches (unless the Warforged mounts a Battlefist).



The character in question has two claw attacks (from the Feral Template) and a Slam attack (from a piece of Half-Golem (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?p=9939137) Homebrew I approved). He says he can use the Slam as a headbutt, the claws with his arms, and a knee for the unarmed strike.


I'm not sure you can slam via headbutt, since I don't think the head counts as an appendage (but then, I am not a biologist, so I may not be the proper authority in this case). However, you can make unarmed strikes via headbutt, as described on page 139 of the PHB. So you could say the unarmed strike is the headbutt, and then call the slam either an elbow or knee.



Another player disagrees, saying he can't use the Slam and the Claws at the same time


This player is attempting to use common sense. This is severely frowned upon in D&D rules discussions.



and cited a Rules of the Game article which claims you can't even use UAS and both claws or slams, among other things.


Skip's articles are neither official rules nor errata, and should be treated with the same severe skepticism that many of us have for the D&D FAQ (much of which is comprised of Sage rulings authored by Skip). While many of the Rules of the Game articles are full of helpful advice, Skip doesn't always understand the rules for unarmed strikes and natural weapons. Actually, most designers don't, as they are poorly written (when written at all), confusing, and sometimes outright contradictory.

If a creature has both claws and a slam attack in it's stat block, it can use them in a full attack. If a creature has one type of attack and then gains another via a template, it still gets to use both types of attack, unless there is some specific rules text that removes the existing natural weapon(s) or prevents them from being used (the claws of the beast power, for example, doesn't allow any other weapons, natural or otherwise, to be used on the same turn).



He also mentioned something called a Natural Weapon Slot, which I can't find in RAW. The RAW seems quite unclear here, (not counting Skip Williams as RAW, of course) so I was hoping the rest of the Playground knows something I don't. I may houserule it in the end, but I'd at least like a clear sense of what's supposed to happen.

Never heard of it.

The rules on mixing natural weapons with other attacks are murky, and slam attacks in particular even more so. The only sane way to rectify this without this thread devolving into a 10-page argument is via DM's Call and find out what works best for your game.

[Fax Celestis]

You need to define where those slam attacks are coming from. Are they attached to an appendage? If this is from the half-golem template, then most likely they are from replaced limbs, which would mean they are.

You cannot use a natural attack (claw, slam, or tentacle, generally, but in some cases bite qualifies too (mouthpicks are weird)) from a limb that has been used for a manufactured weapon attack. If for some reason a girallon were to wield a greatsword, he would lose two claw attacks as those hands would be using the sword, but he would retain two other claw attacks and his bite.

Quoting from a recent Q&A thread:


Q 319 What happens if a character casts bite of the Were-X and has natural attacks other than those granted by the spell? E.g. Bite of the Wererat and 2 claws.


A 319 In the example given you end up with 2 claw attacks and a bite attack.


Re: A 319 All three at your highest AB, since the claws are primary and the spell says nothing about any penalty? What about the STR bonus? Still 1.5*STR despite having more than one natural weapon?

Q 321 Do the attacks granted by the Bite of the Were-X spells count as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming DR and hitting incorporeal foes?


A319Cont No. All "alike" attacks of your primary natural attack are at the same AB. Since bite of the wererat does not re-designate your primary natural attack, any other natural attack that specifically calls out as your primary natural attack is your primary. If you have multiple sources of natural attacks that do not designate your primary, choose one set (claws, bites, talons, rakes, tentacles, etc.) to be your primary, usually your best set. If you have multiple natural attacks that designate themselves as your primary natural attack, use the most recently acquired as your primary, then (for simultaneously-acquired or inherently-acquired natural attacks) the most effective.

Your primary natural attack (or attacks, if you have multiple kinds of the same primary attack, such as a girallon having four claws) uses your full AB and your full STR mod (unless otherwise designated;), while all secondaries, regardless of set, are at AB -5 and use .5*STR mod for damage (AB -2 if you have Multiattack, AB +0 if you have Improved Multiattack). Exception: if you only have one natural attack, you gain 1.5*STR mod for damage. You only may attack with secondary natural attacks if you make a full-attack for any reason (including pounce). Some natural attacks (like rake) only function under special conditions (such as a tiger's rake attack).

If you attack with a manufactured and a natural weapon, you do not use Two-Weapon Fighting. Your manufactured weapon (or weapons, if TWFing) are at your standard full attack routine, while your natural weapons are considered secondary attacks. A 20th level Fighter wielding a greatsword and using a bite attack has an attack routine of greatsword +20/greatsword +15/greatsword +10/greatsword +5/bite +15. A 20th level Fighter wielding two daggers using GTWF and using a bite attack with Improved Multiattack has an attack routine of dagger +18/dagger +13/dagger +8/dagger +3/off-hand dagger +18/off-hand dagger +13/off-hand dagger +8/off-hand dagger +3/bite +18.

You cannot use a natural attack bound to a limb that is wielding a natural weapon unless otherwise specified (such as a skarn's arm blades), so you cannot claw if you are wielding a weapon with that hand.


Re: A 319 So in short would a character with 2 claws and Bite of the Wererat would get 2 claws at -0 and STR to damage and 1 bite with 1.5* STR, or bite -0 with 1.5*STR and 2 claws at -5 and 0,5*STR to damage?


A319Cont Assuming the character's claws are his primary natural attack, he would have two claws at AB +0, Str*1, and a bite at AB -5, Str*0.5. If the character's bite were his primary attack, he would have a bite at AB +0, Str*1, and two claws at AB -5, Str*0.5.

Secondary attacks always are at Str*0.5, regardless of their type. If a character has one natural attack, and attacks with it as their primary attack (so no manufactured weapons either), they receive Str*1.5 to damage.


This contradicts the description of the spell:

Your face lengthens into a ratlike snout, and you gain a bite attack that deals 1d4 points of damage (or 1d3 points if you are Small) + 1-1/2 times your Str modifier.It does not say that this attack is a natural attack or that the usual rules for natural attacks apply. Isn't that a case of specific trumping general?


A319 Further Cont A 'bite' attack is a specific kind of natural attack. It does not need to be delineated as such, in much the same way that a longsword does not need to be delineated as a one-handed martial weapon.

However, bite of the wererat does specify 1.5*STR to damage. RAW, no matter where you place the bite in your attack routine, you gain that benefit as a function of the spell. RAI, the author of the spell probably did not take into consideration the possibility of a PC who already possessed natural attacks (despite that being readily available in core via kobold, lizardfolk, and similar), and as such wrote the spell as if the bite gained from bite of the wererat were the only natural attack possessed by the PC after casting the spell. Note how bite of the weretiger, while functionally equivalent to bite of the wererat, also includes claws and does not designate a higher STR bonus to the bite attack, further supporting the reasoning that the author didn't take existing--or later-gained--natural attacks into consideration.

This discussion is probably getting outside the scope of this thread. If you like, we can continue it via PM, or you can start a thread and I can go over the ins and outs of natural attacks with you there.

I should really do an All About Natural Attacks thread.

[Shazek]

Thank you all for your advice/interpretations. I tend to agree that a slam can be attached to a particular appendage and as such can't be used with that appendage, but aren't necessarily in which case they can be used freely. That's how I intend to run unless some other bit of rules falls out of the cracks, and probably even if it does.

[Yogibear41]

If the character has a half golem template replacing one of his arms, then he doesn't have a claw on that arm anymore anyway. If it replaces one of his legs he can claw with each hand, then slam with the leg, although I would imagine it would be difficult to stand on one leg while thrashing about like that.

[Dusk Eclipse]

Natural Weapons and you a miniguide by Solo and Keld Denar (http://brilliantgameologists.com/boards/index.php?topic=10994.0)