Can a stone golem make slams if it’s arms are full?

[Particle_Man]

And would it make one slam or two if it’s arms were full?

[Mike Miller]

AFB but is "slam" ever defined in the rules? I have a feeling this is DM territory

[RoboEmperor]

Rules heavily imply slam attacks are your fists for humanoid creatures but not outright stated. So up to DM whether a kick or a body slam is a slam attack.

[Necroticplague]

I don't see a mechanical or flavor reason you can't use two slams with your hands full.

Here's the closest thing I can find on the subject:

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.

I'd note the fact that it's 'appendage' and 'arm', and not 'hand' to indicate that it's perfectly fine to just say that they slam with other parts of the arm when they're using weapons. Elbow strikes can hit pretty dang hard even if you aren't made out of solid granite, and a shoulder-check from a statue would knock the wind out of your sails.

[RoboEmperor]

I don't see a mechanical or flavor reason you can't use two slams with your hands full.

Here's the closest thing I can find on the subject:


I'd note the fact that it's 'appendage' and 'arm', and not 'hand' to indicate that it's perfectly fine to just say that they slam with other parts of the arm when they're using weapons. Elbow strikes can hit pretty dang hard even if you aren't made out of solid granite, and a shoulder-check from a statue would knock the wind out of your sails.

You say that, but then you look at the Battlefist, an oversized gauntlet, increasing your slam damage. Pretty silly to say a gauntlet increases your elbow damage.

In d&d slam is a fist/slap. If you don't have fists then it's tentacles, not shoulder. Especially since a shoulder attack having as much reach as your arms is...

[Necroticplague]

You say that, but then you look at the Battlefist, an oversized gauntlet, increasing your slam damage. Pretty silly to say a gauntlet increases your elbow damage.No more than a necklace increasing your slam damage does, which is an items that definitely exists. The form of a magic item is not necessarily related to it's function.


Especially since a shoulder attack having as much reach as your arms is...
Exactly as sensible as an attack with your fist having as much reach as a slash with a 12-foot piece of metal?

[Mr Adventurer]

Along the same theme as your other thread about slams, I'd say yes if it has other things in its hands, but no if it's doing something else with its arms altogether (such as carrying a two-armed load). That's what I'd rule if I were DM. (Look at the official illustration of the iron golem by the way: it's got a sword in one hand but makes two slams instead...)

I don't think there's more information about how slams work than you got in your other thread.

[Bronk]

And would it make one slam or two if it’s arms were full?

I would go with slams being arm related, then see why the stone golem's arms are full.

They're mindless, so if it was ordered to carry something carefully in one or both arms, those slams would be out. If there wasn't a direct order involved, I would rule that the slams take place, and whatever is in the arms at the time would be either dropped or still be grasped and damaged in some way.

[DrMotives]

While elephants can slam with their trunks, I think every other slam in the game is assumed to be an arm or tentacle blow. If the stone golem wasn't mindless, there'd be a good case for them making a "monklike" slam with a kneekick or headbutt. But as a dumb magic robot made of rock, I agree with the above posters than it needs to drop what it's holding to slam.

[RoboEmperor]

Make the Stone Golem have 100 arms like a Hecatoncheries. You can only ever use two slams in a round but the other 98 can be holding stuff.

[Elkad]

A stone golem stomping halflings would probably count as a slam, and it seems a reasonable thing to do for something it can't reach without bending down, even with int 0.

[Necroticplague]

If the stone golem wasn't mindless, there'd be a good case for them making a "monklike" slam with a kneekick or headbutt. But as a dumb magic robot made of rock

I'd argue being made of rock counteracts their stupidity. Humans need special training to use their body as a weapon mostly because it's easy to accidentally hurt yourself while hitting someone else (i.e, a headbutt is as likely to crack your skull as it is theirs). Being solid granite does away with this problem the vast majority of the time.

[Thurbane]

FWIW, here's some citations from the Official FAQ (underlining mine), which, amusingly and possibly not surprisingly, contradict each other:


If you have the Trample feat, and you perform a
mounted overrun, your target cannot choose to avoid you,
and if you knock your opponent prone with the overrun,
your mount can make one hoof attack against your
opponent. Suppose you’re mounted on something other
than a horse. Should the mount get one attack with its
primary natural weapon (a hoof attack is the horse’s
primary attack), or does a creature without a hoof attack
get no free attack to attack against the trampled and prone
opponent?
The free attack for the mount in a trample represents the
mount literally knocking down the foe and stepping on him as
he falls underneath the mount’s churning feet. The feat
description specifies a hoof attack, but the kind of natural
weapon is not limited only to hoof attacks. Any attack that is
delivered with a foot, such as a claw or slam attack, also works.
If the quadruped mount has natural weaponry on all four feet,
use the weapon on the front feet. (For example, if your mount
is a big cat, use the claw attack for a trample, not the rake.)
Mounts that don’t attack with their feet don’t get the free
attack. For example, if your mount is a riding dog, it won’t get
a free attack from a trample; it can’t use its bite, and it has no
natural weaponry on its front feet.


Can a creature make a slam or claw attack when both
his hands are used for something else, such as holding a
two-handed weapon?
As long as the creature can easily let go with one hand, yes.
A two-handed weapon requires two hands to wield in combat,
but not to hold. A frost giant could choose to make a slam
attack instead of a greataxe attack without having to drop the
greataxe.
On the other hand, a frost giant carrying a heavy weight in
both arms doesn’t have a free hand to use for a slam attack.
He’d have to drop the object (a free action) before making a
slam attack.

Note: this example is almost exactly what the OP asks.

The official glossary says the following, in the section on natural attacks:


Creatures do not receive additional attacks from a high base attack bonus when using natural weapons. 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). Refer to the individual monster descriptions.


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

This is echoed in the Rules Compendium:


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


Large or larger creatures that have arms or armlike limbs can make a slam attack with each arm.

...and a brief mention in this article: Unarmed Attacks (Part Two) (http://archive.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070403a)


The creature must make all unarmed attacks with its primary limb, which prevents that hand from being used for a natural attack such as a claw or slam.

My own 2 cents? I think RAI may have been for slams to be delivered by hands or arms, but I can't provide a definitive citation for that.

I think the best answer that can be provided is "ask your DM".

[Uncle Pine]

It is a grey area: the "Full Attack:" line in the statblock of every creature with slam attacks that is also able to wield manufactured weapons (for example, giants (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/giant.htm)) lists a full attack routine with the weapon OR one or more slam attacks, in addition to whatever other gore/bite/natural attack the creature may have, implying the developers intended slams to be used in alternative to manufactured weapons in these cases. However, such restriction is never outright stated in the rules, which brings us back to the square one. I've seen it ruled differently from various DMs, so you might as well detail the dilemma to yours and see what he or she thinks.

[Thurbane]

It is a grey area: the "Full Attack:" line in the statblock of every creature with slam attacks that is also able to wield manufactured weapons (for example, giants (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/giant.htm)) lists a full attack routine with the weapon OR one or more slam attacks, in addition to whatever other gore/bite/natural attack the creature may have, implying the developers intended slams to be used in alternative to manufactured weapons in these cases. However, such restriction is never outright stated in the rules, which brings us back to the square one. I've seen it ruled differently from various DMs, so you might as well detail the dilemma to yours and see what he or she thinks.

Interesting points about the Full Attack line.

In the case of templates that grant a slam, it usually says something along these line, although it can vary:


Full Attack: A greenbound creature fighting with out weapons uses either its slam attack (see above) or its natural weapons (if it has any): If armed with a weapon, it usually uses the weapon as its primary attack along with a slam or other natural weapon as a natural secondary attack.

[Uncle Pine]

Interesting points about the Full Attack line.

In the case of templates that grant a slam, it usually says something along these line, although it can vary:
Full Attack: A greenbound creature fighting with out weapons uses either its slam attack (see above) or its natural weapons (if it has any): If armed with a weapon, it usually uses the weapon as its primary attack along with a slam or other natural weapon as a natural secondary attack.
The vampire template from MMI has an identical wording, yet the example vampire fighter has a full attack line of slam or spiked chain (a two-handed weapon) or shortbow.
Same for the woodling template from MMIII, although Autumn, the example woodling druid, is wielding a scimitar (one-handed weapon). Her full-attack is scimitar and slam.

[frogglesmash]

Nothing I'm aware of specifies what limbs golems use for their slam attacks, and I'm also aware of any golem specific, or general rule that says a creature must have it's limbs free for slam attacks, so provided all that is true, golems should be able to use their slam attacks even if their arms are full. That being said, it seems clear to me that the intention is for the slam attacks to represent the golems fists, so I'd personally rule that a golem with its arms full is either incapable of making slam attacks, or is only capable of making one slam attack per turn by using its foot.