Natural weapons question and a question about bard song

[Mordante]

My character has claws from Deformity (Clawed Hands). I presumed that these together were a primary weapon. So that when you attack you roll for each claw individually to hit and for damage but that it counts as one attack. Because I considered the pair to be a primary natural weapon. I thought that when I charge I could attack with both claws since it's one primary attack. Now if I had a secondary natural weapon, like a bite attack I could not use that with a charge. My DM was not so sure about this. He asked me if I might only have one claw attack when I charge. To make things more complicated I play a Warlock. The DM agreed that I could use Eldritch claws as an enhancement on my "natural" clawed hands. We are level 3 now, I do 3D6 damage per claw, 1D6 from the deformity claw, 2D6 from the eldritch. So what do you think? One or two claws when I charge?

Next question.

I was thinking about getting deformity madness. Can I still get the buffs from the bard in the party? Do positive mind buffs still work?

[Tzardok]

1. No, you can't attack with both claws as a single action. You have two primary natural weapons. Compare to, for example, the dire tiger. Its claws are both primary and its bite secondary, but a single attack only involves one claw.

2. I'm unsure in that regard. Instinctually I would say no, but I can't find anything that justifies that. So, propably yes.

[Mordante]

1. No, you can't attack with both claws as a single action. You have two primary natural weapons. Compare to, for example, the dire tiger. Its claws are both primary and its bite secondary, but a single attack only involves one claw.

I think you are correct on this. When my BaB gives me 1 attack per round, can I still use both claws in a full round attack without penalty?


2. I'm unsure in that regard. Instinctually I would say no, but I can't find anything that justifies that. So, probably yes.

It would drop my WIS score to 4. Not sure if that is a good idea.

[Tzardok]

I think you are correct on this. When my BaB gives me 1 attack per round, can I still use both claws in a full round attack without penalty?


Yep. The number of attacks you can do with natural weapons is based solely on the number of weapons and in no way on the BaB.

[loky1109]

Deformity (Clawed Hands) doesn't give you natural weapons, namely "claws". It gives you 1d6 unarmed damage and you considered armed even when unarmed.
This means regular TWF rules and existence of iterative attacks.

[Doctor Despair]

Deformity (Madness) gives you immunity to mind affecting effects. That includes the good and the bad. You can't voluntarily lower it.

[Mordante]

Deformity (Madness) gives you immunity to mind affecting effects. That includes the good and the bad. You can't voluntarily lower it.

Hmmm in that case it might not be the best choice. Our party "leader" or at least the character who my Warlock sees as leader is a Bard. My current wisdom is 8. I will need to think about it some more. The idea of deformities is nice. but the gains are a bit low for the cost of a feat.

[Mordante]

Deformity (Clawed Hands) doesn't give you natural weapons, namely "claws". It gives you 1d6 unarmed damage and you considered armed even when unarmed.
This means regular TWF rules and existence of iterative attacks.

Not sure if that is true. When you look at deformity Teeth is states that it is a natural attack. IMHO the wording in Book of Vile Darkness, is just not so good compared to Heroes of Horror.

[loky1109]

Not sure if that is true. When you look at deformity Teeth is states that it is a natural attack. IMHO the wording in Book of Vile Darkness, is just not so good compared to Heroes of Horror.

I sure. Wording is clear. Teeth is Teeth, there is natural attack. In Clawed Hands - no.
This is weird and bad design, but it is. Dura lex, sed lex.
Yes, it should give two claws, and it's reasonable house rule, but isn't RAW.

[Tzardok]

Don't forget that the BoVD is 3.0 and the feat needs updating. IIRC there were other abilities that were worded the same way in 3.0 and became natural weapons in 3.5. I think making it natural weapons is a valid way to deal with that.

[loky1109]

Don't forget that the BoVD is 3.0 and the feat needs updating.
Of course needs, alas but it never was.


IIRC there were other abilities that were worded the same way in 3.0 and became natural weapons in 3.5. I think making it natural weapons is a valid way to deal with that.
If you have examples I'll be very glad to see them. I don't like how it worded, too.