I understand the use of table 3.1, which btw I think is a nice addition.
But how to understand the difference in the following two melee listings:
Ghoul: Melee bite +3 (1d6+1 plus disease and paralysis) and 2 claws +3
(1d6+1 plus paralysis)
Xorn: Melee bite +10 (4d6+3), 3 claws +10 (1d4+3)
- Notice, the Ghoul has an "and" in its listing. How do we approach that?
- Does the Xorn have 4 attacks if he were to do a full attack or 2 (3 claws as one "hit")?
Thanks!
- Notice, the Ghoul has an "and" in its listing. How do we approach that?
- Does the Xorn have 4 attacks if he were to do a full attack or 2 (3 claws as one "hit")?
There is no difference between the "," and the "and" mechanically -- it looks like a style typo. The correct style should be the "," according to the universal monster rules.
Xorn attack with their claws and a bite in a full attack action. They can, as a standard action, attack with either the bite or a single claw, but the bite is clearly the better option.
- Notice, the Ghoul has an "and" in its listing. How do we approach that?
- Does the Xorn have 4 attacks if he were to do a full attack or 2 (3 claws as one "hit")?There is no difference between the "," and the "and" mechanically -- it looks like a style typo. The correct style should be the "," according to the universal monster rules.
Xorn attack with their claws and a bite in a full attack action. They can, as a standard action, attack with either the bite or a single claw, but the bite is clearly the better option.
Ahhh, as a style error, that would make sense, and be consistent with the rest of the rules.
Thanks!
Correct, the "and" and the comma have the same meaning.
Thank you!
So, to further clarify, either attack can be chosen as a standard action, but all attacks listed go off on a full action, at full BAB? And all claws go off as a standard action or just one claw?
And an unrelated question: what exactly is a Slam attack?
Thanks!
Shadewest!
Hello?
Woah, easy does it there tiger! Give us more than 28 minutes to reply...
Unless the monster has a specific ability to attack with more than one weapon as a standard action, then it's always just one single attack for a standard action.
And no, not every monster gets to use all attacks at full BAB. The stat block for each monster should make it clear what their attacks are and what BAB, or what +Hit they have with each one.
Yes, usually if a monster has multiple attacks listed in the Full Attack line of its stat block, it can use all of them on a full attack. This is not true in every case, so read the monster description, and also read its special abilities in the appendix when any such apply.
Slam is a bludgeoning attack, using a fist (or the equivalent) or some other appendage to whack the opponent.
|
Slam is a bludgeoning attack, using a fist (or the equivalent) or some other appendage to whack the opponent.
Thanks. For some reason I was imagining it as somewhere in between slam-dancing and a body-slam.
I'm still unclear on when Natural Attacks are Standard Actions vs Full Attack Actions and at what combat bonus.
I too have a question regarding attacks from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
3.5 , the Dire Bear got 3 attacks, 2 claw attacks and a bite attack.
The claws got +19 attack each and the bite got a +13 attack. (weapon focus, claws)
The dire bear in pathfinder has +13 to its claw attacks and +13 to its bite.... so why does it get a full bonus to ALL of its attacks? As does the lion, as does the cheetah, as does the leopard.
Next , lets look at the giant squid, it gets a ton of attacks, however its first 3 (bite, 2 arms) get full attack bonus, and then its tentacles suffer a negative...
So with this assumption, is it anything with over 3 attacks suffers a negative? If that is the case, lets look at the cloaker or the crocodile, each have a bite attack and have a tail attack - why is it the tail gets the negative as these creatures only have 2 attacks, whereas a bear who gets 3 attacks gets full bonus from ALL attacks?
Then lets look at dragons, Bite , 2 claws, 2 wings, and a tail slap - the bite and the claws get a full bonus, yet the wings and the tail suffer the negative - with this info comparing to the monsters above, does this mean that any attacks the monster makes facing "forward" get full bonus, and the "rear" attacks suffer the negative?
If this is the case, it almost seems like multiattack is a useless feat for a druid since very few creatures actually make use of this feat.
Could I get some clarification of why those monsters get the full bonus on all attacks compared to other creatures? Am i right with my assumption on my paragraph about dragons ("front" and "rear" attacks?)
Thanks
I too have a question regarding attacks from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
3.5 , the Dire Bear got 3 attacks, 2 claw attacks and a bite attack.
The claws got +19 attack each and the bite got a +13 attack. (weapon focus, claws)The dire bear in pathfinder has +13 to its claw attacks and +13 to its bite.... so why does it get a full bonus to ALL of its attacks? As does the lion, as does the cheetah, as does the leopard.
On page 302 of the Bestiary is table 3-1 Natural Attacks by size. What the table also nicely shows is which attacks are considered primary and which are considered secondary attacks. It no longer depends on which attack comes first in the monster stat block that makes an attack primary or secondary.
So a bear or tiger or any creature that has Bite gets to use it as a primary attack. Any creature that has claws gets to use them as primary attacks. If they have both claw and bite then they are still both primary attacks and they do not gain the -5 to hit 1/2 Str damage as that is only applied to secondary attacks now.
From Table 3-1 we see that only the following are considered secondary attacks now: Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, & Other.
Hope that helps.
From Table 3-1 we see that only the following are considered secondary attacks now: Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, & Other.
Hope that helps.
I think you mean "Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, Pincers, Tail Slap, & Other".
For the rest, you are completely correct.
|
I must say that I love the new natural attacks rule, it clears up so many issues and actually makes predatory animals like bears more dangerous than domestic ones like horses.
So far for me the Bestiary has been a huge boost to the playability of D&D from the simplifying of attacks to the reworking of abilities with the CMB/CMD rules like swallow whole (I love the addition of an internal AC and HP on the stat block). Overall the new stat blocks, though only slightly different to the 3.5 ones, provide alot more of the required information to run the creature from the stat block without having to reference other sections of the description or looking up other rules entirely.
That's why I'm confused. MM3.5 had separate entries Attack and Full Attack. PF Bestiary just has a single line for Melee.
Standard action means one attack. Not one entry, like "10 spiked tentacles +10 (1d8+5 plus forced intrusion)", but one attack roll with one damage roll (only one of the tentacles in the example above).
The critter gets to choose what attack it will use.
So, for instance, a bear still needs to use a Full Attack to get a bite and both its claws, but get its full attack bouns on all of the since they're all considered primary attacks. As a standard action, he would only get one claw or one bite, but now gets to choose.
Correct.
I too have a question regarding attacks from 3.5 to Pathfinder.
3.5 , the Dire Bear got 3 attacks, 2 claw attacks and a bite attack.
The claws got +19 attack each and the bite got a +13 attack. (weapon focus, claws)The dire bear in pathfinder has +13 to its claw attacks and +13 to its bite.... so why does it get a full bonus to ALL of its attacks? As does the lion, as does the cheetah, as does the leopard.
On page 302 of the Bestiary is table 3-1 Natural Attacks by size. What the table also nicely shows is which attacks are considered primary and which are considered secondary attacks. It no longer depends on which attack comes first in the monster stat block that makes an attack primary or secondary.
So a bear or tiger or any creature that has Bite gets to use it as a primary attack. Any creature that has claws gets to use them as primary attacks. If they have both claw and bite then they are still both primary attacks and they do not gain the -5 to hit 1/2 Str damage as that is only applied to secondary attacks now.
From Table 3-1 we see that only the following are considered secondary attacks now: Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, Hoof, Tentacle, Wing, & Other.
Hope that helps.
That clears EVERYTHING up! Thanks!!!
Creative Director
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
yeah... Like the new rules for regeneration, the new rules for what's a primary and secondary natural attack are sort of "land mines" for gamers used to 3.5. The new system works better and is less complex, but it'll take a little bit to get used to.