This is driving me nuts.
The racial trait toothy says that the bite is primary.
The feat Razortusk says that the bite attack it allows is secondary when part of a full attack
So I have 2 questions I cant find answers for.
1. Is there a difference between Toothy and Razortusk?
2. How would they combine with a beast totem barbarian/shape-shifting rangers claw attacks that are also called out as primary?
As near as I can see
Beast totem/aspect of the beast + toothy = 3 primary attacks in a full attack. Full BAB full STR.
Beast Totem/aspect of the beast + razortusk = 2 primary and 1 secondary attacks in a full attack.
Why the difference?!?
They are both the same thing they are just different ways to get them.
When it is the only attack you make it is a primary attack as far as damage is concerned per normal natural attacks. If you make it as an attack as part of a full attack with weapons it is secondary for to hit and damage caculations.
They are both the same thing they are just different ways to get them.
When it is the only attack you make it is a primary attack as far as damage is concerned per normal natural attacks. If you make it as an attack as part of a full attack with weapons it is secondary for to hit and damage calculations.
Any clue where the source is for this? I can't find anything that prevents Toothy from being primary when used in a full attack with only other natural attacks. I know it is but I need to support it.
EDIT. Hmmmm hero lab believes so long as you only use natural attacks they are all, claws toothy razortusk and animal fury, considered primary. Very odd.
I'm 99% sure the Razortusk feat is supposed to mean "if used as part of a full attack with weapons" (i.e. not other natural weapons)
I have never seen anywhere else a natural attack that is primary, but becomes secondary when used with other natural attacks, so i think it must be an oversight.
If it is intended, then Razortusk is just crap lol..
It is listed in the Bestiary under the general rules for creatures with natural attacks. A creatures attacks are listed as primary or secondary based upon the type. See page 302. Any natural attack used with a weapon attack always gets bumped to a secondary attack no matter what type of natural attack it is.
Additionally some creatures will have special rules for what is primary and what is not... such as horses and dragons.
I have never seen anywhere else a natural attack that is primary, but becomes secondary when used with other natural attacks, so i think it must be an oversight.
If a creature has only one natural attack, it uses the full BaB (and 1.5x Str mod) even if it's a secondary attack, so in a way it acts like a primary attack.
Basically, Razortusk only gives you a 1d4 primary bite attack. Everything else in the description of the feat is just a summary of how natural attacks work in geleral.
The two are almost, but not exactly the same though. Toothy specifically says it deals piercing damage while Razortusk doesn't say anything about damage type. As written, Razortusk would assume the basic damage type for a bite attack which is B/S/P. So with Razortusk you can actually bite a skeleton more effectively, giving it a slight edge over the Toothy racial trait.
Ok I may be a idiot but I still can't grasp this.
So
Down to basics
Basingstoke the barbarian has a BAB of 10, the Toothy trait and the Lesser Beast Totem rage power. No other effects feats or conditions or other effects apply and we will say that through STR damage Basingstoke's raging STR is only 10.
Basingstoke is also nude havng had everthing he owns recently stolen by Ramsgate the rapacoius rogue.
Basingstoke finally decides Faunthorpe the Feindish Flumph has gone too far. Faunthorpe is an advanced, giant, fiendish, vampiric flumph for those following at home.
So Basingstoke unleashes a full attack of 2 claws 1 bite, and no other attacks.
What is the BAB for the first claw?
The second claw?
The bite?
Does the order of attack matter?
Would it make a diference if Razortusk rather than Toothy provided the bite?
Would it make a difference if Animal Fury provided the bite?
I am sorry to waste the boards time on this but for some reason I have a mental block around this.
So thanks in advance.
|
Ok I may be a idiot but I still can't grasp this.
So
Down to basics
Basingstoke the barbarian has a BAB of 10, the Toothy trait and the Lesser Beast Totem rage power. No other effects feats or conditions or other effects apply and we will say that through STR damage Basingstoke's raging STR is only 10.
Basingstoke is also nude havng had everthing he owns recently stolen by Ramsgate the rapacoius rogue.Basingstoke finally decides Faunthorpe the Feindish Flumph has gone too far. Faunthorpe is an advanced, giant, fiendish, vampiric flumph for those following at home.
So Basingstoke unleashes a full attack of 2 claws 1 bite, and no other attacks.
What is the BAB for the first claw?
The second claw?
The bite?
Does the order of attack matter?
Would it make a diference if Razortusk rather than Toothy provided the bite?
Would it make a difference if Animal Fury provided the bite?
I am sorry to waste the boards time on this but for some reason I have a mental block around this.
So thanks in advance.
Natural attacks are not really that complicated.
In the above scenario all 3 attacks would be at +10 BaB + STR bonus, and all 3 would be primary attacks so they'd add their full strength mod to damage.Toothy Bite +10 for 1D4+0 damage
Claw +10 for 1D4+0 damage
Claw +10 for 1D4+0 damage
Now if he added Razortusk (added not replaced important difference)
and got his strength up to 14 for a +2 bonus he'd be at:
Toothy Bite +12 for 1D4+2 damage
Claw +12 for 1D4+2 damage
Claw +12 for 1D4+2 damage
Razortusk +7 for 1D4+1 damage
Remember razortusk ADDS a secondary attack not a primary one so he would get a second bite that round at a diminished bonus to hit and only half strength damage.
Remember razortusk ADDS a secondary attack not a primary one so he would get a second bite that round at a diminished bonus to hit and only half strength damage.
This would fall afoul of the 'one natural attack per limb' rule, would it not?
In anycase only 'Toothy' is called out as a primary attack. 'Animal Fury' and 'Razortusk both' mention that they take a -5 and 1/2str when part of a full attack but is this a full attack with weapons or any full attack?
From the SRD
This would fall afoul of the 'one natural attack per limb' rule, would it not?
Where is that rule?
All I can find is instead of iterative attacks "you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks)"
and you can attack with melee weapons and natural weapons "so long as a different limb is used for each attack"
That doesn't specify, to me, that if a creature is granted multiple attacks on one limb somehow, that they can't use them.
For instance a bite and gore are both on the head, but lots of creatures have both.
So while I initially agreed that you couldn't ever get 2 bites, now I'm not so sure. Maybe the Toothy is using massive tusks that jut out, while Razortusk is more like canines or molars or something, not as good, somewhat incidental. On the other hand, it's quite reasonable to say that you need multiple mouths to have multiple bites. (like Tarn Linnorm)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
From the APG FAQ
Does the Toothy alternate racial trait in the Advanced Player's Guide (page 19) stack with the Razortusk feat (page 168) granting you two bite attacks?
This is one of those areas where we tried to get at the same idea multiple ways. In this case, the answer is no, unless you somehow manage to get an extra mouth. Generally speaking, natural weapons can only be used once per round each. This also applies to the Animal Fury barbarian rage power (Core Rulebook, page 32).
—Jason Bulmahn, 08/13/10
There is also Tusked. giving orcs 3 ways to gain a bite attack.
Check so no multiple bites.
But we are still left with the BAB question.
Assuming no weapon or unarmed attacks are used, because those rules are pretty clear, what is Basingstoke's BAB for:
Claw 1 when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
Claw 2 when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
A bite with the "Toothy" race trait when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
A bite with the "Razortusk" feat when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
A bite with the "Animial Fury" rage power when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
I am ignoring "Tusked" as I do not have access to the book it is in but if you do please mine it for any info useful to finding an answer.
Again please forgive my inability to grasp what I expect is an embarassingly simple matter.
|
|
Check so no multiple bites.
But we are still left with the BAB question.
Assuming no weapon or unarmed attacks are used, because those rules are pretty clear, what is Basingstoke's BAB for:
Claw 1 when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
Claw 2 when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
A bite with the "Toothy" race trait when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
A bite with the "Razortusk" feat when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
A bite with the "Animial Fury" rage power when part of a claw/claw/bite full attack?
I am ignoring "Tusked" as I do not have access to the book it is in but if you do please mine it for any info useful to finding an answer.
Again please forgive my inability to grasp what I expect is an embarassingly simple matter.
I hate missing Faq entries but other than that the information I gave you is correct.
Claw 1 = BaB 10
Claw 2 = Bab 10
Toothy bite = BaB 10
Animal Fury = Bab 10
Razortusk = Bab 10-5 = +5 to hit, it is the only one declared as a secondary attack so it is at -5 to hit if used as part of a Full Attack.
Remember though if used as a single attack it is at full BaB and full strength bonus.
edit: At a guess I think your problem is you're still trying to apply the iterative attack rules to these attacks. Natural weapons ignore the iterative rules and have their own rules for full attacks which, in my opinion, are far superior to the iterative rules.
edit: At a guess I think your problem is you're still trying to apply the iterative attack rules to these attacks. Natural weapons ignore the iterative rules and have their own rules for full attacks which, in my opinion, are far superior to the iterative rules.
I likely am. How are you getting "Animal Fury" as full BAB when the power mentions the -5 as part of a full attack?
I think my confusion comes from trying to determine what a 'natural attack' is and how a 'full natural attack' differs from a 'full attack'
And thanks for the very clear explanation.
I'm pretty sure the "Razortusk suffers a -5 penalty on a full attack" line in the feat's description is ONLY meant to apply to full attacks with weapon (in this case, unarmed strike would count as weapon). Why? Because orcs usually don't have even one natural attack,let alone enough to make a full attack with them.
I'll just quote the Bestiary rules for Natural Attacks and highlight the important parts.
Natural Attacks Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon). These attacks fall into one of two categories, primary and secondary attacks. Primary attacks are made using the creature's full base attack bonus and add the creature's full Strength bonus on damage rolls. Secondary attacks are made using the creature's base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature's Strength bonus on damage rolls. If a creature has only one natural attack, it is always made using the creature's full base attack bonus and adds 1-1/2 the creature's Strength bonus on damage rolls. This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one. If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type. Table: Natural Attacks by Size lists some of the most common types of natural attacks and their classifications.
Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently, such as dragons, which always receive 1-1/2 times their Strength bonus on damage rolls with their bite attack. These exceptions are noted in the creature's description.
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). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
Bottom line:
Claws and Bites are all primary natural attacks. If you full-attack ONLY with these, you make every single attack at your highest BAB and add your full STRMOD to the damage. It doesn't matter if you got the Bite from Razortusk, toothy or from somewhere else. It's ALWAYS a primary attack unless the source states otherwise.If you full-attack with any kind of weapon (including unarmed strike), and choose to atatck with your natural attacks as well, all your primary attacks become secondary. So they take a -5 penalty on attack and add only 1/2 your STRMOD to damage.
To avoid further confusion, I'll add one more note:
Do NOT look up the natural attack rules in the core rule book! Those say something completely different and have been marked as wrong by Paizo multiple times. No, they are not yet errata'd, but the Bestiary has the only true rules.
|
|
edit: At a guess I think your problem is you're still trying to apply the iterative attack rules to these attacks. Natural weapons ignore the iterative rules and have their own rules for full attacks which, in my opinion, are far superior to the iterative rules.
I likely am. How are you getting "Animal Fury" as full BAB when the power mentions the -5 as part of a full attack?
I think my confusion comes from trying to determine what a 'natural attack' is and how a 'full natural attack' differs from a 'full attack'
And thanks for the very clear explanation.
That would be from me having to pull this from a quick scan of the feat and not seeing the secondary flag (ie. I was lazy and didn't look it up). Blave quoted the important rules you should learn if you really want to understand the natural weapon rules.
To answer your question there is no difference between full attack and full natural attack, it's the same thing with an extra word.
Thank you all.
I think I have my head around this now. My claw/claw/bite brute is back on the road.
Thanks again for taking the time to explain this clearly and in a friendly manner even though it took a few tries to get it into my head.