Power Attack and unusual natural attacks

[Astral Wanderer]

Power Attack:
This bonus to damage is halved (–50%) if you are making an attack with an off-hand weapon or secondary natural weapon.

Now, taking for example a dragon's tail slap attack (which is a secondary natural weapon but adds 1-1/2 Str modifier to damage), does anyone think the bonus damage from Power Attack should be applied as for a secondary weapon? Personally, I'd say it should be as for two-handed weapon attacks (or anyway any attack that adds 1-1/2 Str modifier) and that the above line from the text of Power Attack was intended to be applied to those attacks that hadd only 1/2 Str modifier.

[AvalonXQ]

RAW is clear. A secondary natural weapon uses half power attack. A primary natural weapon that deals 1-1/2 Str uses 150% power attack. They could have made the tail slap a primary natural weapon; they didn't. So it gets half power attack damage.

[Phage]

Dragon's tail slap is an anomaly of secondary attacks and specifically states that it functions counter to standard secondary attack rules.

This is more likely that Paizo just didn't go back to edit dragon's tails to include Power Attack or add an errata to Power Attack itself, but going by RAW it would technically be no...in a long line of poorly worded rulings for natural attacks.

However,

In basically every other case Power Attack matches the weapon's base strength bonus because it is basically offering you a comparable bonus based on the strength you can swing that attack. Since that trend is basically consistent in every other case, except a Dragon's tail that is clearly self-labeled an exception, it would definitely seem to follow that this should be treated as a two handed weapon for Power Attack's bonus.

It would also follow the opposite. If your weapon gives you a reduced strength bonus, PA should also match that reduced bonus.

Would definitely be nice to just have a clear response from Paizo, but I'm not holding my breath.

[Louis IX]

Since secondary attack offer 50% and attacks that inflict 1-1/2 Str give 150%, strictly speaking, the attack should be at 100% (keeping in mind that percentage factors should be interpreted as adding or removing the data - otherwise, multiplying 50% by 150% would give 75%).

Just saying.

But then again, +1 to the comment about choosing yourself.

[Phage]

Louis, I don't think you can take two points, average them, and then arbitrarily replace one of those values with that new average.

RAW is 50%
Reasoning is 150%

If your GM is being super reluctant to venture off of RAW you could compromise at 100%, but this is more along the lines that Paizo has terribly ambiguous, short-sighted natural attack wording.

[AvalonXQ]

Louis IX wrote:

Since secondary attack offer 50% and attacks that inflict 1-1/2 Str give 150%, strictly speaking, the attack should be at 100% (keeping in mind that percentage factors should be interpreted as adding or removing the data - otherwise, multiplying 50% by 150% would give 75%).

That's not how the rule is worded. PRIMARY natural attacks that inflict 1-1/2 Str give 150%. The tail attack is a SECONDARY natural attack. RAW, it's flat-out 50%; the 150% clause doesn't apply.

[Phage]

AvalonXQ wrote:

That's not how the rule is worded. PRIMARY natural attacks that inflict 1-1/2 Str give 150%. The tail attack is a SECONDARY natural attack. RAW, it's flat-out 50%; the 150% clause doesn't apply.

RAW, it is 50%.

However, this is far more probable that Paizo missed the application of strength modifiers to unique natural attacks and Power Attack.

Really Paizo should just make a clear response saying that their intention was that Power Attack only functioned by 50% for all secondary natural attacks and 100% for all primary regardless of their strength bonuses OR that they intended for the PA bonus to match the strength modifier.

Again the ridiculous deficiency and ambiguity of almost every rule for PCs with natural attacks would indicate that Paizo just hasn't gotten around to it as opposed to them actually being intentional.