We were discussing this as we were building new PCs for a new campaign we're starting, and it was brought to my attention in the universal monster rules that it states a natural bite attack could do piercing damage (which I understand), but potentially also slashing and bludgeoning damage.
I've pondered this a while, and just as confused as I was before I ask the community: what creature has a bludgeoning bite? And no, the stegosaurus does not. :) What I find even more interesting that I never noticed before is that the bestiary does not specify what type of damage the natural attacks are. It makes sense that a slam is bludgeoning, but by the same chart in the universal rules section, a claw could deal bludgeoning damage too. Can anyone shed some light for me?
A cow and most other herbivores should.
Whale shark or blue whale would be other examples.
And then there's the point that when the dragon is *big* enough his teeth are going to bludgeon a medium creature no matter what (sheer size of the teeth compared to the creature involved).
I agree with you, herbivores would be my thought as well. Yet as per the bestiary herd animals, who are herbivores, do not have a bite attack. While an Orca is listed as having a bite, the book fails to specify which type of damage dealt.
|
In the 3.5 Monster manual under natural attacks there used to be this bit:
Natural weapons have types just as other weapons do. The most common are summarized below.
Bite: The creature attacks with its mouth, dealing piercing, slashing, and bludgeoning damage.
Claw or Talon: The creature rips with a sharp appendage, dealing piercing and slashing damage.
Gore: The creature spears the opponent with an antler, horn, or similar appendage, dealing piercing damage.
Slap or Slam: The creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage.
Sting: The creature stabs with a stinger, dealing piercing damage. Sting attacks usually deal damage from poison in addition to hit point damage.
Tentacle: The creature flails at opponents with a powerful tentacle, dealing bludgeoning (and sometimes slashing) damage.
As to why the bite had all three (and came in handy in my games MANY times) the teeth puncture (piercing) the jaws clamp down (bludgeoning) and then it rips away (slashing). At least that was always my take on it.
I would say look at the shape of the creature's teeth. Snakes and some things have piercing teeth. Most carnivores have slashing (although I could see argument for feline fangs being piercing as well) and herbivores have bludgeoning.
Do the teeth stab, slice or crush?
|
As to why the bite had all three (and came in handy in my games MANY times) the teeth puncture (piercing) the jaws clamp down (bludgeoning) and then it rips away (slashing). At least that was always my take on it.
Does this mean it deals 1/3 slashing, 1/3 bludgeoning, and 1/3 piercing damage? Calculating that nightmare sounds like a headache in the making, but NOT calculating it sounds like I'll shortly have a huge group of biting PCs. Bah . . .
|
|
As to why the bite had all three (and came in handy in my games MANY times) the teeth puncture (piercing) the jaws clamp down (bludgeoning) and then it rips away (slashing). At least that was always my take on it.Does this mean it deals 1/3 slashing, 1/3 bludgeoning, and 1/3 piercing damage? Calculating that nightmare sounds like a headache in the making, but NOT calculating it sounds like I'll shortly have a huge group of biting PCs. Bah . . .
Nope, it means it does all three, similar to a morning star. Morning stars deal bludgeoning and piercing, so against skeletons they deal full damage, against zombies they would deal 5 less because of their DR 5/slashing. Against giant slugs that have DR 10/Piercing or Slashing Morning stars would again deal full damage because they deal piercing in addition to bludgeoning.
Looking in the Bestiary, while they don't have the same text, the table on pg 302 lists bites as B/S/P which should mean they deal all three just as it did in 3.5.
As to why the bite had all three (and came in handy in my games MANY times) the teeth puncture (piercing) the jaws clamp down (bludgeoning) and then it rips away (slashing). At least that was always my take on it.Does this mean it deals 1/3 slashing, 1/3 bludgeoning, and 1/3 piercing damage? Calculating that nightmare sounds like a headache in the making, but NOT calculating it sounds like I'll shortly have a huge group of biting PCs. Bah . . .
Unless a creature has immunity to a particular type of damage, it's not too big of a deal. DR X/slashing, DR X/piercing and DR X/bludgeoning are all over come by a bite attack. Since the attack is all three types of damage (it says and, not or), it overcomes any DR X/(damage type).
Besides, colossal dragons teeth are basically a series of longsword blades; absolutely piercing damage at that angle. Arguing bludgeoning makes absolutely zero sense.
Actually they are in all likelihood much bigger than longswords -- probably outside the range of greatswords even.
Yeah they pierce -- as the crush through you too (especially with those jaws) -- much like a morning star.
|
|
These answers don't seem to make sense in light of the RAW:
"The Damage Type column refers to the sort of damage that the natural attack typically deals: bludgeoning (B), slashing (S), or piercing (P). Some attacks deal damage of more than one type, depending on the creature."
It seems to imply GM discretion, without being clear. If the table is to be believed as applying to everything, all claw attacks do both slashing and bludgeoning damage, and all hoof/wing/tentacle and "other" attacks also do ALL damage types. This is of course absurd; how does a hoof do slashing damage, and how are the damage types from all "other" attacks known in advance?
The morningstar just became a much more powerful weapon (especially for being a *simple weapon*) if it overcomes both types of damage reduction instead of simply half of its damage being piercing and the other half bludgeoning.
I've pondered this a while, and just as confused as I was before I ask the community: what creature has a bludgeoning bite?
I don't find the idea that a significant amount of bite damage comes from crushing particularly odd. Have you ever seen a dog gnawing at a bone?
It seems to imply GM discretion, without being clear. If the table is to be believed as applying to everything, all claw attacks do both slashing and bludgeoning damage,
That's correct. These rules are intentional (they were the same in 3.5), in that they give bite and claw attacks a slight advantage on the DR front.
The morningstar just became a much more powerful weapon (especially for being a *simple weapon*) if it overcomes both types of damage reduction instead of simply half of its damage being piercing and the other half bludgeoning.
The morningstar is an "AND" weapon, not an "OR" weapon. All of its damage is considered both bludgeoning and piercing; that's the way it works. Again, this is a slight advantage on the DR front.
I've never seen flexibility of damage type break a campaign; have you?
These answers don't seem to make sense in light of the RAW:
"The Damage Type column refers to the sort of damage that the natural attack typically deals: bludgeoning (B), slashing (S), or piercing (P). Some attacks deal damage of more than one type, depending on the creature."It seems to imply GM discretion, without being clear. If the table is to be believed as applying to everything, all claw attacks do both slashing and bludgeoning damage, and all hoof/wing/tentacle and "other" attacks also do ALL damage types. This is of course absurd; how does a hoof do slashing damage, and how are the damage types from all "other" attacks known in advance?
It doesn't imply DM discretion, it SAYS a bite does all three damage types and if the creatures description states differently, use the detailed description. Also if you actually look at the table on page 301 of the Bestiary, you will see that hoof/wing/tentacle and pretty much all other attacks are called out as a specific type of damage and the only attack that does all three types is "other." "Other" in this case being an attack that isn't specifically called out as something else. If something "other" isn't called out in the detailed description of the attack to do some specific type of damage, it defaults to the table "other" and does all three. Pretty simple.
We were discussing this as we were building new PCs for a new campaign we're starting, and it was brought to my attention in the universal monster rules that it states a natural bite attack could do piercing damage (which I understand), but potentially also slashing and bludgeoning damage.
I've pondered this a while, and just as confused as I was before I ask the community: what creature has a bludgeoning bite? And no, the stegosaurus does not. :) What I find even more interesting that I never noticed before is that the bestiary does not specify what type of damage the natural attacks are. It makes sense that a slam is bludgeoning, but by the same chart in the universal rules section, a claw could deal bludgeoning damage too. Can anyone shed some light for me?
The molars.
Wolves like to get bones on the back , flat teeth and crush down to get at the marrow. Works great on skeletons.
Not sure what the fuss is all about. Crocodile teeth aren't particularly sharp -little more than bluntly-pointed pegs. It is the bone snapping, powerfully crushing force their jaws bring down that forces those blunt pegs through their unfortunate victims. That is pretty much the case for most animals (you can't cut cardboard with a bear tooth), and makes more than enough sense to count as bludgeoning/piercing/slashing damage.