No, a Large Cat's attacks are all at full attack bonus. Note that the Multiattack feat does nothing for a Large Cat (since it doesn't have any secondary attacks).
No, a Large Cat's attacks are all at full attack bonus. Note that the Multiattack feat does nothing for a Large Cat (since it doesn't have any secondary attacks).Really? I thought one attack was designated as a primary (the 2 claws) at full the the other (bite) was secondary at -5. That's the way it looked in the beastiary, at least...
Here's what I see in the PRD: Tiger
"Melee 2 claws +10 (1d8+6 plus grab), bite +9 (2d6+6 plus grab)"
I don't see any secondary natural weapons there. Could you be more specific?
Pathfinder changed what "primary" and "secondary" mean.
In 3.5, the primary attack was the first attack type *listed*, the others listed were secondary. So a monster with bite/claw/claw had a primary bite and two secondary claws (at -5), whereas a monster with claw/claw/bite had two primary claws and a secondary bite (at -5).
In Pathfinder, the attack *type* determines whether it's primary or secondary (see Bestiary table 3-1 on page 302). Bites and claws are primary. Hooves, pincers, and others are secondary.
So in Pathfinder, a creature with bite/claw/claw and one with claw/claw/bite have the same attack bonuses (all other things equal, such as HD, Str, and so on) because those are all primary attacks. It no longer matters whether the monster goes C/C/B, B/C/C, C/B/C, and so on... the order doesn't matter, and it gets all its attacks at the normal value. If it has secondary attacks, those have the -5 penalty (-2 with Multiattack) and the order still doesn't matter, it's the attack type that matters.
So if a creature (say, a wyvern-dragon) is listed as having
bite +0
2 claws +0
sting +0
2 wings -5
tail slap -5
(obviously this monster doesn't have the Multiattack feat)
it doesn't matter what order it takes these attacks in, they use the listed value. And it can use any one of them to make an AOO at the listed value. That's another reason why our stat blocks don't have a separate line for a single attack or a full attack... a single attack is ANY of the attacks listed in the attack line, at the full value.
So a large cat animal companion gets a bite and two claws at the listed value, the order it takes them doesn't matter. And it doesn't need Multiattack because it doesn't have any natural attack types that are secondary weapons.
mind blowing information
Wow, that really changes things up a lot... going to have to look at some stuff all over again...
It's actually MUCH easier to run a monster now, which is partly why we made the change. It also makes it easier to compare a monster to other monsters for CR purposes; for example, a creature with 1 bite and 4 claws is just as dangerous as a creature with 4 claws and 1 bite, whereas before the 4 claws/1 bite monster was much more dangerous (because the claws were at the normal bonus) than the 1 bite/4 claws monster (because the claws were at the secondary attack bonus).
mind blowing informationWow, that really changes things up a lot... going to have to look at some stuff all over again...
I told you so like 5 weeks ago :) Keep mister pig he's the bomb
I told you so like 5 weeks ago :) Keep mister pig he's the bombmind blowing informationWow, that really changes things up a lot... going to have to look at some stuff all over again...
Dude, I'm keeping mister pig cause he hits almost as well as you and the fighter, and he has a higher AC to boot!
Dude, I'm keeping mister pig cause he hits almost as well as you and the fighter, and he has a higher AC to boot!I told you so like 5 weeks ago :) Keep mister pig he's the bombmind blowing informationWow, that really changes things up a lot... going to have to look at some stuff all over again...
He's also gonna taste better when he regretfully passes :)
And after last week, I'm going with noone hits as hard as the fighter, except maybe Miracle who gets three attacks to her 1.
|
I just want to say that it's so freakin cool that Sean K Reynolds pops on to answer a quick question about a rules change from 3.5-Pathfinder.
Where else but here will line developers and writers with such long and storied histories in the RPG profession just 'pop on' to answer a quick question.
Wicked.
Thank you, Sean!
Dude, I'm keeping mister pig cause he hits almost as well as you and the fighter, and he has a higher AC to boot!I told you so like 5 weeks ago :) Keep mister pig he's the bombmind blowing informationWow, that really changes things up a lot... going to have to look at some stuff all over again...He's also gonna taste better when he regretfully passes :)
And after last week, I'm going with noone hits as hard as the fighter, except maybe Miracle who gets three attacks to her 1.
Only when the kid rolls for the fighter...
No joking people out of 12 attack rolls with a falcata the child rolled 10 critical hits, 30 points of damage on average. DM was unhappy because it was his dice the child was rolling.
|
I think I understand, but I want to clarify.
I've chosen a tiger for my 1st level druid's animal companion. Tiger in the Bestiary has bite (damage plus grab) & claw (damage plus grab). The base tiger animal companion does not have grab, but does have rake. Rake does not apply unless grapple has succeeded (with bite or both claws).
So for my animal companion to rake, it must hit with bite or both claws & then next round make a grapple attack?
Correct, it has to make a grapple attack (just like a PC would) to use its rake ability.
But at 7th-level, he gets grab!
|
|
Correct, it has to make a grapple attack (just like a PC would) to use its rake ability.
But at 7th-level, he gets grab!
We had an issue very similiar to this come up in our game this weekend.
With grab you can make a grapple check (with a +4) as a free action without an attack of opportunity (assuming you hit with your attacks of course) to use its rake attack against a creature one size category smaller (unless otherwise noted which is not in this case) than said tiger (large). reference pg 301 BestiaryRake states a creature with the rake ability must begin its turn already grappling to use its rake - it can't begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. reference pg 303 Bestiary
How would the grab work in conjuction with this special attack?
Could one attack, hit, initiate the grapple as per grab (with a smaller foe), then rake?
Then one more situation regarding the same two special abilities.
Our issue...
We were fighting a dire shark (gargantuan) so it was bigger than our tiger (large). Underwater combat issues were accounted for.
My interpretation & I would like to know if this is correct.
1) Both claw attacks hit
2) Grab can't be initiated as a free action due to size difference
SO...
3) The next round the tiger could as a regular combat maneuver; attempt the rake attack as a grapple check with a +4
OR...
4) The next round the tiger could as a regular combat maneuver; attempt the rake attack as a grapple check without the +4
OR...
5) You can't use the rake against a foe larger than your size category.
Correct, it has to make a grapple attack (just like a PC would) to use its rake ability.
But at 7th-level, he gets grab!
We had an issue very similiar to this come up in our game this weekend.
With grab you can make a grapple check (with a +4) as a free action without an attack of opportunity (assuming you hit with your attacks of course) to use its rake attack against a creature one size category smaller (unless otherwise noted which is not in this case) than said tiger (large). reference pg 301 BestiaryRake states a creature with the rake ability must begin its turn already grappling to use its rake - it can't begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. reference pg 303 Bestiary
How would the grab work in conjuction with this special attack?
Could one attack, hit, initiate the grapple as per grab (with a smaller foe), then rake?Then one more situation regarding the same two special abilities.
Our issue...
We were fighting a dire shark (gargantuan) so it was bigger than our tiger (large). Underwater combat issues were accounted for.My interpretation & I would like to know if this is correct.
1) Both claw attacks hit
2) Grab can't be initiated as a free action due to size difference
SO...
3) The next round the tiger could as a regular combat maneuver; attempt the rake attack as a grapple check with a +4
OR...
4) The next round the tiger could as a regular combat maneuver; attempt the rake attack as a grapple check without the +4
OR...
5) You can't use the rake against a foe larger than your size category.
In order to use grab you have to be bigger than the opponent.
In order use rake the opponent only had to be grappled from the previous round, size is not a factor.
I give my animal companions improved grapple so they can choose to grapple as a standard action. They still get the +4 bonus from grab, and the +2 from improved grapple.