My answer is to ask your GM as this is a very grey area. I would allow it assuming you follow the high to low attack rules. Meaning that you have to make the claw after your first weapon attack and would have to have a way to get the weapon back to make any further attacks.
Frankly, I'd refrain from mix-and-matching natural and weapon attacks that use the same limb in a single turn.
Did an attack (or a series of strikes) with your weapon and dropped it? Great. You're already at (or above) the limit for your number of natural attacks with that limb (being exactly one attack).
Did an attack with your natural weapon? Great. This concludes your use of that limb for the current round.
Anything else either opens the possibility of getting too many attacks, attacks at too high bonuses, or a full-size nightmare of re-calculating bonuses.
The rules note being unable to attack while grasping a weapon or object. As long as the limb is doing neither, I see no need to limit the attacks. One natural attack per limb, one weapon attack as BAB allows. That is the rules, and there is no balance issue either.
As in:
Four-Clawed Fury (STR 18, BAB+13, Multiweapon Fighting, Multiattack) delivering
Longsword +15/+9/+5 (1d8+4), plus 3 x Shortsword +15 (1d6+2), plus (dropping all weapons as free actions, so the clawed hands are not wielding anything at the time) 4 x Claw +15 (1d6+2), plus Bite +15 (1d6+2)?
Thanks, but no thanks.
From the Bestiary - Universal Monster Rules:
"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 available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type."
So to the OP's question:
I would say yes, but only if you would be eligible to multiple attacks because of a high BAB...
From the Bestiary - Universal Monster Rules:
"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 available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type."
So to the OP's question:
I would say yes, but only if you would be eligible to multiple attacks because of a high BAB...
Same.
And I would add this:With the claw attack suffering a -5 penalty (regardless of the Multiattack feat, if present), or -10/-15 if the character made two/three weapon attacks before dropping it. Plus, if the penalties are equal to or greater than the character's base attack bonus, no claw attack can be made. Thus, if you have +5 BAB or less (thus no more than one weapon attack per round), you cannot use the claw. With +6 to +10 you can do it; with +11 to +15 you can attack twice with weapon and one with claw (or just one with weapon and one with claw with -5 to hit, rather than -10), and so on.
|
Wait, if I have a BAB of +6, I can attack with boot blade, armor spikes, then claw, and claw. Now I do the same thing, let's say longsword, dagger, drop both, then claw, and claw, I am breaking the rules? How does this break anything? Why would I need extra rules, extra penalties? If there is errata or such that now contradicts this, then let me know.
|
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I hear the term munchkin a lot. What does it mean to you? This is not Pun-Pun. Look at it this way: You can wear a gauntlet, wield a weapon with that hand, attack with it, drop it, then attack with the gauntlet. Insert claw instead of gauntlet, and that should work as well, right?
You only get one attack with a limb unless you have iterative attacks, and those don't apply to natural weapons. So you could claw or use a weapon but not both in the same round with the same limb.
If you had a boot blade then you would be able to kick as a weapon without penalty and make additional claw attacks as well, but all natural attacks would be at -5 and half strength damage. I don't think the extra attack from the boot would justify itself. If you go natural weapon, your best bet is to get as many as possible, such as two claws and a bite.
In theory a ranger barbarian with natural weapon style, animal fury rage power and lesser fiend totem rage power could get claw, claw, bite, gore, but the bite and the gore both use the head, so that would be a grey area... They'd all be primary though if he got them all.
I hear the term munchkin a lot. What does it mean to you? This is not Pun-Pun. Look at it this way: You can wear a gauntlet, wield a weapon with that hand, attack with it, drop it, then attack with the gauntlet. Insert claw instead of gauntlet, and that should work as well, right?
No, you can only attack with weapon and then gauntlet (in the same hand) as iterative attacks. You can't use natural weapons with iterative attacks so a claw is not the same as a gauntlet.
Well, without errata, I guess dm fiat is all I have.
Why would they errata what is already clear in the rules?
Natural Attacks: "You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword."
The d20pfsrd words it differently. This is much clearer.
It's not the site, it's the chapter. Someone upthread quoted the Bestiary rule, I quoted the rule from the combat chapter of CRB.
|
|
Bestiary is correct on natural attacks, core is not. There is no powergaming here by the way, and am in no way competitive in my tabletop gaming. There is no power problem here. I tend to like, out of the way concepts for characters, and have often been my various dm's confidante. This is so like the "hands" issue that was put forth on two-weapon fighting, which I was right about (sorry irrelevant, and gloating). There is no reason to disallow this, other than misunderstanding the reasons to do so.
Bestiary is correct on natural attacks, core is not.
This line: "In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting." is in error, but that does not invalidate the rest of the section.
Wait, if I have a BAB of +6, I can attack with boot blade, armor spikes, then claw, and claw. Now I do the same thing, let's say longsword, dagger, drop both, then claw, and claw, I am breaking the rules? How does this break anything? Why would I need extra rules, extra penalties? If there is errata or such that now contradicts this, then let me know.
Once an appendage has been used to weild a manufactured weapon it can not be used as a natural attack. That is the intent anyway. Finding a loophole in the wording does not change that.
Boot blade and armor spikes are not as good at being weapons as longswords, and daggers are. Armor spikes, as an example,are for the most part not assumed to be someone's primary weapons. Can you design a charcter around it? Sure you can.Rearming the boot blade is also a full round action so it is not beneficial to use it over the dagger or longsword.
It also makes normal terrain into difficult terrain.
The armor spikes are also only designed to work on grapple attacks.
This line: "In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting." is in error, but that does not invalidate the rest of the section.
I don't think it's in error. If you fight with weapon and fist, you're treated as fighting with two weapons, so -2/-2 with TWF. If you fight with weapon and claw you're treated as weapon and natural attack, so 0/-5 without feats. Unarmed strikes seem to be an exception to the natural attack rule.
Claws are not unarmed strikes and wouldn't be affected by that paragraph in the CRB, by RAW at least.
Just an addendum: I'm pretty sure you can get iterative attacks with an unarmed strike, but you can't with a claw.
Speaking of unarmed strikes, you can punch, kick, and use claws. Just saying.
I know that makes sense logically, but in rules terms unarmed strikes are always weapons when determining attacks, they're not natural weapons.
CRB p141 (Equipment) under light weapons:
"An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon."
Natural attacks don't get an entry as they don't follow the same rules.
|
|
Speaking of unarmed strikes, you can punch, kick, and use claws. Just saying.I know that makes sense logically, but in rules terms unarmed strikes are always weapons when determining attacks, they're not natural weapons.
CRB p141 (Equipment) under light weapons:
"An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon."
Natural attacks don't get an entry as they don't follow the same rules.
I know, I am just saying you could punch, and claw, with the same hand.
I know, I am just saying you could punch, and claw, with the same hand.
If an unarmed strike counts as a weapon then you can't also make a natural attack with the same limb, as discussed earlier.
I don't think it's in error. If you fight with weapon and fist, you're treated as fighting with two weapons, so -2/-2 with TWF. If you fight with weapon and claw you're treated as weapon and natural attack, so 0/-5 without feats. Unarmed strikes seem to be an exception to the natural attack rule.
It's in error as it disagrees with the bestiary.
CRB: "In addition, all of your attacks made with melee weapons and unarmed strikes are made as if you were two-weapon fighting."
Bestiary: "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."
Your iterative attacks are not penalized by TWF rules when you make natural attacks. (Unless you are TWF with the melee weapons)
Unarmed Strike: "Unarmed strikes do not count as natural weapons"
-edit- Here's the citation
I know, I am just saying you could punch, and claw, with the same hand.
Maybe some bold will help.
Natural Attacks: "You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack."
|
|
If an unarmed strike counts as a weapon then you can't also make a natural attack with the same limb, as discussed earlier.
I know, I am just saying you could punch, and claw, with the same hand.
As of yet defined as RAW, in fact, you are not clutching a thing, which would prevent you from making the claw attack as per rules.
|
No, not drop a cestus, simply use it as well, as the claw. You can use two different weapons, with the same hand, it would make sense that you could use a fingerless spiked glove, as well as the claws upon said fingers, in the same round.
There are rules in place barring you from making a natural attack from limb already used in an attack.
Also, claw attacks made outside your regular iterative attacks will be classified as secondary; they receive a -5 to hit and only get 1/2 strength.
You want to see the full range of limitations on mixing natural and manufactured weapons, go read the synthesist FAQ.
As of yet defined as RAW, in fact, you are not clutching a thing, which would prevent you from making the claw attack as per rules.If an unarmed strike counts as a weapon then you can't also make a natural attack with the same limb, as discussed earlier.
I know, I am just saying you could punch, and claw, with the same hand.
You can uanrmed strike with any part of the body, and it does the same damage.
Which part you use is just flavor really. It only matters if you use something like a cestus in which case the question would then have to be asked "do you really think the rules intended for the cestus to have that advantage when a dagger does not"?
| 7 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why are you trying to cheese the system?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why are you trying to cheese the system?
Why is it cheese? I am not doing anything power level breaking, or even something hard to imagine being done. I was sure there was no game breaking or mind breaking here. If I am wrong, tell me how and why. I can accept a reasonable response.
Why are you trying to cheese the system?
SKR is my hero. :)
Sean you might want to start law school so you can learn to write rules in legalese. ;)
Why are you trying to cheese the system?Why is it cheese? I am not doing anything power level breaking, or even something hard to imagine being done. I was sure there was no game breaking or mind breaking here. If I am wrong, tell me how and why. I can accept a reasonable response.
The RAW does often give great hints at the intent of a rule. Look at my dagger vs cestus post as an example.
The intent of the rule was to not use a limb that is a natural attack to also be able to wield a manufactured weapon in the same round.
In short if you plan to use a tentacle/claw/slam attack then you were not intended to use any other weapon with that same limb such as a dagger, cestus, and so on. The word "clutched" is used because most weapons are held.
PS:I guess it was not "in short" since it was longer. :)