Slam Attacks and Hands

Question: How does one tell whether a slam attack is associated with a particular limb?

This issue has come up a couple of times in the past, and as far as I know, it has never really been resolved.

The primary problem with this is the bestiary.

It contains many creatures that seemingly use arms to slam. Examples:
Genies
Mariliths
Storm Giants

It also contains many creatures that seemingly do not use arms to slam. Examples:
Animated Objects
Dolphins
Gelatinous Cubes

Even worse, it contains some creatures that are pretty much up in the air. Examples:
Apes
Earth Elementals in a shape that's humanoid enough to hold weapons
Zombies

There's a quote from the bestiary:
"Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam)."

And a quote from a magus FAQ, of all places:
"For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand"

But neither of those change the fact that there are clearly creatures that make slams without using arms.

So, how can you tell?

This can't really be determined just with common sense, and it can be very important to many characters that use natural attacks to fight (coughapeshamanscough).

So, how can you tell?

I am not exactly sure.

I think it would be up to the GM's discretion. If the stat block doesn't tell you as far as I know there is no way to tell.

Out of curiosity why does it matter in your instance?

Just gonna dot this right here. Hope you get an answer cause this is one of the things I gave up trying to come up with a concrete answer for.

A slam seems to just be a general, all-encompassing natural attack that is not already covered by one of the other more specific natural attack types. Pretty much just need to determine what limb, if any, is being used for a slam attack based on the creatures description. If it has arms, it's almost certainly being done with it's arms, if it has no arms then the slam is being performed with some other part of its body. "Slam" is a very non-specific word and it's meant to be so that it can describe a multitude of ways to attack using just one word.

I know what it should be, but I don't have any actual rules citations. There are actually three kinds of slam attack.

The first is a single meaty fist slam. You'll see this on golems, giants, and other things that are big and vaguely humanoid shaped. Marilith is the best way to show this.

The second kind is a two-handed hammer punch like Kirk did all the time. Hold their hands together and swing. Off the top of my head this is vampires. It's why they only have one slam.

The third kind is a body slam. That's everything without arms with a slam: dolphins, jello, oozes. This tends to only be one slam, but I'll get into the exceptions.

Now we get into the cluster@#$%. Elementals always have two slams because they're assumed to be humanoid shaped (so the first kind) but they're also described with "Most earth elementals look like terrestrial animals made out of rock, earth, or even crystal, with glowing gemstones for eyes." So it could be something with multiple arms or no arms, but it still gets two slams. Oozes are in a similar boat as they are described as attacking with pseudopods, but they only ever get one slam despite (presumably) having more than one pseudopod. "...this crimson blob reaches out amorphous pseudopods in all directions."

To the best of my knowledge if they have arms and have slam attacks, the slam attacks always use up all of their arms (otherwise they would have more slam attacks). If they don't have arms and have slam attacks, the slam attacks don't use up any limbs (which would just be legs at that point, I guess).

As Crazy Alchemist said it's just an all encompassing natural attack which can be anything. Take the Zombie it has one slam attack which can be described/flavored to be anything; the swinging of the arm/hands, a forceful body slam, or a forceful kick. It can be anything, pretty much deciding which limb to use is just personal flavor and common sense.

So I guess a more specific question would be, "If a creature with a slam attack has arms, is it always forced to use its arms to slam, or can it choose?"

It seems like most people agree that it has to use its arms.

There are two specific issues I am considering: Ape Shaman druids and turning into an elemental with Wild Shape.

But honestly, this has always bugged me, and it would be nice to find a definitive answer.

You can also have tail slams. See Argorth [Melee bite +19 (3d6+11+grab) and tail slam +18 (2d6+11+grab)]. And tentacle slams. See Emkrah [Melee bite +15 (1d8+7 plus 1d8 acid) and 4 tentacle slams +13 (1d6+3)].

I think the default is it uses a non-leg limb if the creature has one.

Hmmm, I've always assumed that a slam was more of a whole body thing unless the creature has multiple slams. A zombie or vampire grabs at you with both limbs in a mixture of push/pulls, crushing grasps or fisticuffs. Like a more primitive and wild version of unarmed strike.

An example of your specific situation might help us out.

As I mentioned, the two primary issues for me are these:
Ape Shaman druids
Turning into elementals with wild shape.

As I mentioned, the two primary issues for me are these:

Ape Shaman druids
Turning into elementals with wild shape.

Under natural attacks for universal monster rules it states that when you attack with claws, slams, tentacles, etc and weapons you will probably have to give up one or more natural attacks to wield your weapon(s).

Also, the ape shaman specifically states you can't combine totem transformation with other polymorph effects. Which means no elemental shenanigans.

Plus, when you gain the slams you have to assume there's a source for these attacks since it doesn't state you gain two ape limbs the only recourse is to look at the eidolon rules. They state that any attacks gained must originate from a limb. So if you had a catfolk with the claws trait who became an ape shaman they would have to choose between claws or slams not have both (and thus 4 attacks a round).

Another complication is the Phantom from Spiritualist. It's a humanoid ghost-type and gets two slams. Slams in this game are just very poorly defined and so always up to GM discretion.

Wait - people keep talking about vampires using both hands in order to slam. If that's so - why is the common vamp strategy using a one-handed weapon and using the slam as a secondary attack?

Sorry, I should have clarified, the Ape Shaman and the elemental wild shape are two separate instances of this issue; they are not intended to be combined.

I'm not sure it's appropriate to use the eidolon rules for natural attacks in general, but yeah, the consensus seems to be that the ape shaman would have to use their hands to slam.

So my primary remaining specific question is how it works with elementals, I guess. But there are other issues, as people have pointed out, and it would be nice if there were actual rules for slam use as there are for claws.

Again, RAI seem to clearly want slams to act as "primitive" unarmed strikes. No style (though you can finesse slams) just brute force in the most direct way possible.

The game is built around abstractions, but for many of us that's a constant source of frustration. Ultimately it is always in everyone's best interest to communicate their ideas and not assume everyone has the same interpretation. Just tell your players that the slams need to occupy two upper body limbs. For elementals the whole "looks like animals, but only made of earth/fire/air/water is flavor, not hard rules.

I too wish they'd clearly define slams, but until they make a base class that grants slam attacks I doubt we'll see any rulings. Corner case archetypes don't usually get a lot of rule attention.

Example:
Aeon, Othaos
Melee 4 slams +10 (1d4+4)

They should turn it into:

Aeon, Othaos
Melee 4 slams +10 [fists] (1d4+4)

Basically, they should just add what is used for the slams. Say, you have the ability to sever/cripple/injure a specific limb, you should be able to know if that limb is used for the slam attack.

If you have arms a slam uses arms as a default, unless it states otherwise (e.g. tail slam). If you don't have arms then it uses some other mechanism appropriate to the form in question. Simple, straightforward, consistent with every rule I've found.

Other definitions run into inconsistencies or unnecessary complication.

I agree.

Even without abilities targeting specific limbs (called shots, anyone?) there are plenty of situations where you need to know whether something uses a limb. For example, whether or not it can be used with spell combat.

But most important is just figuring out whether it can be used in combination with other attacks. Fighting with natural weapons increases in power by gaining more and more natural weapons, and slams can be a vital part of any build that manages to get them. Could a pouncing alchemist or barbarian gain two more attacks with an Animal Totem Tattoo (ape), or would their slams be wasted when they conflict with their claws?

You usually tell what limb a slam is associated with via inference. However, I'd advise against looking too deeply- in the way combat rules are an abstraction of actual combat, slam attacks are an abstraction of actual slams. Once you stop accepting the arbitrary decisions some designer made a while back, the rules stop making sense.