The Deinosuchus' attacks are listed as Bite OR Tail Slap. Since they are Natural Attacks, shouldn't it get both with the tail slap being -5? If it is only getting one of them, shouldn't it get reiterative attaacks since his bab is +18?
BTW you better make that guy Fiendish or your players will knock it out in 1 shot with ray of stupidity....I ended up having to upgrade all of the major dinosaurs that way.
|
Nope. The Deinosuchus is essentially just giant crocodile that has been advanced using the standard Improving Monsters rules. As such, they don't gain additional attacks.
To compare, take a look at a regular T-Rex. 13 BAB, but only one attack.
I've just looked at the SRD, and it makes no explicit ruling on iterative attacks for advanced creatures; in fact, it doesn't mention them either way.
There are several mentions of increases to size, STR, and HD causing an improvement in the attack bonus, but nowhere does it say that number of attacks should remain static.
Now, it may be desirable, or realistic for the T-Rex and the Deinosuchus to have just the one attack (usually such creatures get one-and a half STR bonus to this overwhelming attack), and the designer is perfectly at liberty to rule this, but I think such creatures are the exception, not the rule.
Consider, that all high-HD creatures (except constructs, obviously) were once low-HD creatures, back when they were born, and 'advanced' to high HD as they grew up, and most seem to have gained additional attacks as they got bigger and meaner.
PS: We are talking about the 'Full Attack' entry, aren't we?
Obviously, the 'Attack' entry is for a partial action, so won't be for more than one attack, no matter what the creature is.
|
Nope. The Deinosuchus is essentially just giant crocodile that has been advanced using the standard Improving Monsters rules. As such, they don't gain additional attacks.
To compare, take a look at a regular T-Rex. 13 BAB, but only one attack.
I've just looked at the SRD, and it makes no explicit ruling on iterative attacks for advanced creatures; in fact, it doesn't mention them either way.
There are several mentions of increases to size, STR, and HD causing an improvement in the attack bonus, but nowhere does it say that number of attacks should remain static.
Now, it may be desirable, or realistic for the T-Rex and the Deinosuchus to have just the one attack (usually such creatures get one-and a half STR bonus to this overwhelming attack), and the designer is perfectly at liberty to rule this, but I think such creatures are the exception, not the rule.
Consider, that all high-HD creatures (except constructs, obviously) were once low-HD creatures, back when they were born, and 'advanced' to high HD as they grew up, and most seem to have gained additional attacks as they got bigger and meaner.
PS: We are talking about the 'Full Attack' entry, aren't we?
Obviously, the 'Attack' entry is for a partial action, so won't be for more than one attack, no matter what the creature is.
Natural Weapons
Natural weapons are weapons that are physically a part of a creature. A creature making a melee attack with a natural weapon is considered armed and does not provoke attacks of opportunity. Likewise, it threatens any space it can reach. 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 arm-like limbs can make a slam attack with each arm). Refer to the individual monster descriptions.
Unless otherwise noted, a natural weapon threatens a critical hit on a natural attack roll of 20.
When a creature has more than one natural weapon, one of them (or sometimes a pair or set of them) is the primary weapon. All the creature’s remaining natural weapons are secondary.
The primary weapon is given in the creature’s Attack entry, and the primary weapon or weapons is given first in the creature’s Full Attack entry. A creature’s primary natural weapon is its most effective natural attack, usually by virtue of the creature’s physiology, training, or innate talent with the weapon. An attack with a primary natural weapon uses the creature’s full attack bonus. Attacks with secondary natural weapons are less effective and are made with a -5 penalty on the attack roll, no matter how many there are. (Creatures with the Multiattack feat take only a -2 penalty on secondary attacks.) This penalty applies even when the creature makes a single attack with the secondary weapon as part of the attack action or as an attack of opportunity.
long story short: natural weapons do not provide iterative attacks, instead they provide 1 attack per mode of hurting others
-the hamster
The Deinosuchus' attacks are listed as Bite OR Tail Slap. Since they are Natural Attacks, shouldn't it get bothIts body isn't that flexible. It must go either/or. I suppose if you really wanted you could give it a secondary attack only when flanked and attacking the two opposing flankers.
Rez
Never heard of either/or in 3.5 though occasionally you come upon some kind of weirdness in a monster entry. Really if they want an either or option that should not be an attack at all but an exceptional ability with the specific mechanics spelled out in the monster description.
I'm perfectly happy to let Advanced monsters gain more attacks if I feel it is appropriate to the monster.Think about what Snorter said and then take a look at MM p.69. Of course, since each new attack requires one (or two) advancements in size category and those usually only come with every other CR advancement, any creature gaining addl. attacks beyond its species norm is pretty darned advanced.
Of course, we're talking here about gaining attack modes (the whole OP bite/tail thing), not iterations.
I'm not sure what the fact that Dragons get more powerful as they age has to do with this really. Dragons follow very specific mechanics as they age, mechanics that are not available to over sized crocodiles.
Natural Weapons
... generally, a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack ... Refer to the individual monster descriptions.
Ummm ... emphasis added. If you need more wiggle room than that then you have spent too many years in crappy-rules-lawyer school :-)FWIW,
Rez
I'm not sure why in the world your looking for wiggle room? Your the DM - DM can do whatever they want, especially with monsters. That said advanced monsters don't get extra attacks unless the DM decides they do by DM fiat.
>> 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 arm-like limbs can make a slam attack with each arm). Refer to the individual monster descriptions.
So the croc gets a bite attack and one slam attack - the tail. Seems like it should have two attacks not an either/or.
Though my party will probably fly to the island and all of this is moot.
The giant crocodiles bite and tail slap are both primary natural attacks... It stands to reason that both can't be used at once, otherwise one would be written up as a secondary attack.
And, to emphasize an earlier poster's point, natural weapons never receive iterative attacks. If for whatever reason the crocodile was bipedal and wielding a sword, he could make multiple attacks with the sword (since it is a manufactured weapon) and then make a single bite attack as a secondary attack (with a -5 penalty).
BTW you better make that guy Fiendish or your players will knock it out in 1 shot with ray of stupidity....I ended up having to upgrade all of the major dinosaurs that way.
That or be very careful about what spells are allowed from the Spell Compendium. There are some good spells in that book but there are some very broken ones as well. A spell that renders an entire type of opposition irrelevant, especially something as standard issue as the animal type, is simply a badly designed spell. Should never have been included as written. A lower threshold like say making it so that one can't be reduced below 3 intelligence would have been a good way of handling this and probably would have gotten closer to the designers intent.
The giant crocodiles bite and tail slap are both primary natural attacks... It stands to reason that both can't be used at once, otherwise one would be written up as a secondary attack.
I think its just a messed up statblock, its not like we have never seen one of those before.
Otherwise they'd have needed to have explained how this was supposed to work and why they did not seem to be following the rules for secondary attacks in some kind of exceptional ability format.
It does break the rules. If you look in the "Making Monsters" section, the designer of a monster must "decide which of the monster's natural weapons is its natural weapon" (MM 299). This implies that a monster can only have a single primary weapon, or a group of primary weapons of the identical type (as in the case of multiple claw attacks, as mentioned further down on page 299). However, in the case of the crocodile and its giant counterpart, we see a monster that has two primary attacks: a bite and a tail slap.
My thoughts on why this is go like this: The designer limited the creature by making it so only one could be used at a time in order to keep the beast in the lower CR range. If the giant crocodile, a CR 4 creature, was able to use both of its attacks (the tail slap being secondary) on a single 4th level adventurer (say, a rogue with 18 dex, 14 con, and a chain shirt), it has has a 70% chance of doing an average of 21 damage on the first hit, and a 50% chance of doing 12 damage on the second attack. That rogue would have an average of 24 hp, which means the croc would have a 60% chance of dropping the rogue in 1 round, possibly killing him. The same croc has a 55% chance of dropping a fighter (plate armor, 13 dex, 16 con, avg. hp 38) to only 7 health in one round. If the crocodile is run as written, however, it has only a small chance of dropping the rogue (no chance of killing him) in one round and can only drop the fighter to an average 17 health. Thus, it's my opinion that the designer limited the crocodile to 1 attack in order to balance it against a 4th level party.
So I think it is imperative to understand that the guidelines in the MM are just that: guidelines. They can be bent when needed.
To be honest, were I designing the giant crocodile, I would've gotten rid of the tail slap and gave it some sort of constrict damage to go along with its improved grab.
Ah, thanks for the real-world facts... I was just going about it with a game design perspective; I don't know much about crocodiles! Considering its size and real-world analogues, the giant crocodile probably should be upped in power and CR, making it at comparable to some of the more powerful dire animals. If it were upgraded, adding a constrict attack probably wouldn't be out of the question.
1) The either / or approach of a bite or tail slap is appropriate for this animal;2) Their basic attack routine as an ambush predator is to bite and hold, drag you under the surface of the water, "roll" you to force the air out and then let you drown in their mouths before they eat you;
3) They do have a very powerful and very dangerous tail that they will use to slap and stun prey or aggressors to the sides or rear of them. The plurality of the meat harvested from a gator comes from the tail, which is almost entirely muscle, and you really don't want to get hit by it;
4) These animals have...
I'm not really arguing about how a crocodile operates but feel that if they give it an either or ability then they need to explain the mechanic via an exceptional ability. There really is no either or unless there is some exceptional (or supernatural I suppose - but not for a big Croc) ability that spells it out.
Also I have a hard time thinking that tail can be a primary attack. Granted I don't know much about Crocs but, by the current rules the various great cats attack with some kind of a claw and bite routine. Now we know that most great cats attack by leaping onto larger prey and basically grasp it with the claws while going for something vital with the teeth. Yet in all the great cat entries either the claws or the bite is a secondary attack. So are you telling me that a croc is so accurate with its tail that its does not deserve the standard penalty while a tiger does? I'm honestly skeptical.
While looking at this I have to wonder at the choice of making the bite secondary - almost all great cats kill by sinking their teeth into something vital like the spinal cord of the jugular - you'd think the bite would be the primary - though maybe they are deciding that the leaping part where the cat first connects with its prey is the more important.