Quick question
If a creature has a natural slam attack and is also wielding a 2h sword for example, can they choose to make a slam attack without dropping the sword ?
I know you can't attack with the sword and slam in the same round but can you choose to slam attack but not attack with the sword without letting go of the sword ?
The vast majority of slams are with the arms. There's only one non-arm slam I know of (tanuki), but that's partially due to not knowing monsters well. Unfortunately, my citation is not on the forums but comes from asking one of the Paizo developers the question in private. This is a case of a non-explicit rule, much like how humanoids don't have claws on their feat, but talons.
For argument sake lets say its a Summon Synthesits 1 set of arms which do a slam attack and who also holds a sword.
Another would be a cloud giant morningstar or 2 slams
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.
Looks like clutching the weapon would require the creature to forgo the slam attack. Personally, I would allow it to slam with one arm and hold onto the weapon with the other hand. I don't believe there are any in-game advantages to be had by holding a weapon with 2 hands unless attacking with it; the disarm rule applies the same if a wepaon is held one handed or 2 handed
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.Looks like clutching the weapon would require the creature to forgo the slam attack. Personally, I would allow it to slam with one arm and hold onto the weapon with the other hand. I don't believe there are any in-game advantages to be had by holding a weapon with 2 hands unless attacking with it; the disarm rule applies the same if a wepaon is held one handed or 2 handed
That rule is more about combining natural with iterative attacks, this is more just doing one or the other but not both together.
Let me put this another way
What if as a standard action you make a 2handed attack with the sword.
Then later in the same round an enemy provokes an AoO and you choose to make a slam attack.
Next round you only attack with the sword again on your turn.
If you use the 2H weapon you'd have to release the grasp as a free action after your attack with the weapon during your turn if you want to use the slam as an AoO. This would prevent the character from using the 2H weapon until its next turn when it has the free action to return its hand to the weapon to use it again.
If you use the 2H weapon you'd have to release the grasp as a free action after your attack with the weapon during your turn if you want to use the slam as an AoO. This would prevent the character from using the 2H weapon until its next turn when it has the free action to return its hand to the weapon to use it again.
have you got a rules link for that ?
I can't find anything that says you can't be holding something when making a slam attack. And how would holding something in one hand instead of two make a difference for a slam attack ?
The rules only cover what happens during a full attack action.
The limb you are using to make an attack with a manufactured weapon cannot be used to make a natural attack. It's in the CRB. Wielding a weapon (aka having a 2H weapon usable for an AoO) is different than just holding a weapon in one hand and using your free limb to slam with for that AoO.
With few exceptions, actions need to be taken during your turn, even free ones. As an AoO interupts the flow of combat you need to be wielding your weapon in order to attack with it. If you take your hand off the weapon before the end of your turn, your 2H weapon is no longer a valid option to attack with at the point of the AoO, you can't take the free action to change your hand over as it isn't your turn.
The limb you are using to make an attack with a manufactured weapon cannot be used to make a natural attack. It's in the CRB. Wielding a weapon (aka having a 2H weapon usable for an AoO) is different than just holding a weapon in one hand and using your free limb to slam with for that AoO.
With few exceptions, actions need to be taken during your turn, even free ones. As an AoO interupts the flow of combat you need to be wielding your weapon in order to attack with it. If you take your hand off the weapon before the end of your turn, your 2H weapon is no longer a valid option to attack with at the point of the AoO, you can't take the free action to change your hand over as it isn't your turn.
Are you talking about this rule ?
"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."As it only applies to full attacks
That is a really 'nitpicky' way to look at it. There are numerous other rules floating around in the book places where you wouldn't necessarily expect them. Do we get to ignore them as well? To me what you quoted are the general rules about natural weapons and another specific rule about weapon/natural attack interaction. It makes sense to place in in the full round attack context as it is more pertinent in that situation, that doesn't mean it is strictly a full round attack 'rule.'
If a natural attack requires a limb (slam attacks generally being a fist/forearm/smashing attack etc) and that limb is in use, you are saying you can do it regardless of that limb being in use through the round? That actually doesn't seem to coincide with the other rules of the game.
Can you provide a rule or quote showing that it isn't a free action on your round to switch 'handedness' of a weapon to free that limb up to use it for other purposes when you were wielding a 2H weapon before the end of your round and didn't take the action to free it?
That is a really 'nitpicky' way to look at it. There are numerous other rules floating around in the book places where you wouldn't necessarily expect them. Do we get to ignore them as well? To me what you quoted are the general rules about natural weapons and another specific rule about weapon/natural attack interaction. It makes sense to place in in the full round attack context as it is more pertinent in that situation, that doesn't mean it is strictly a full round attack 'rule.'
If a natural attack requires a limb (slam attacks generally being a fist/forearm/smashing attack etc) and that limb is in use, you are saying you can do it regardless of that limb being in use through the round? That actually doesn't seem to coincide with the other rules of the game.
Can you provide a rule or quote showing that it isn't a free action on your round to switch 'handedness' of a weapon to free that limb up to use it for other purposes when you were wielding a 2H weapon before the end of your round and didn't take the action to free it?
I'm simply looking for a supporting rule one way or the other.
Because I'm not seeing any reason you couldn't slam something while holding a weapon.
e.g. your holding a 2handed greatsword you can maintain a 2h grip and still swing your hands/arms to connect directly with an opponent without dropping your grip, if anything the extra weight from the sword would give more power to the blow.
No where does it say a slam requires a free hand or to have empty hands , say a cloud giant picks up a small boulder can he not still make slam attacks which holding the small boulder ? To me it doesn't make sense that he couldn't.
Now if we're talking claws sure you can't claw something with the hand you holding a weapon in because the claws wouldn't function wrapped around a hilt, but we're not talking claw we're talking a very non descript blunt force slam attack.
The claws don't function not because they're wrapped around the weapon, but rather because you already used your arm to attack. That's due to the text you quoted above. The limb has been used already.
hah, Slams were defined in 3.5, but they must've missed the transition to PF, like a dozen other things. Slams are definitely appendages. Trying to track down the slams are usually arms thing.
|
Quick question
If a creature has a natural slam attack and is also wielding a 2h sword for example, can they choose to make a slam attack without dropping the sword ?
I know you can't attack with the sword and slam in the same round but can you choose to slam attack but not attack with the sword without letting go of the sword ?
May I ask why the creature wants to do that? If it has natural slam attacks but has chosen to wield a weapon, I'd assume it did so because the weapon is superior to it's natural attack. Otherwise, why would it bother?
At any rate I don't really smell any cheese here so I think it should be possible. You'd just flavor the attack as striking with the pommel/haft of the weapon (but not claiming any special benefit from enchantment or materials), or the back of the hand, elbow etc. Heck, you could even call it a head-butt.
Well, I guess it doesn't matter so much because the slam evolution for eidolons is explicitly for arms.
...
At any rate I don't really smell any cheese here so I think it should be possible. You'd just flavor the attack as striking with the pommel/haft of the weapon (but not claiming any special benefit from enchantment or materials), or the back of the hand, elbow etc. Heck, you could even call it a head-butt.
I can. But I look for loopholes for a living.
Say you have 2 slam attacks, and a greatsword, and you have not yet gotten your second iterative attack with the GS. For a full round attack, you might want to use your 2 slams for the superior damage or superior hit chance or whatever. Whereas if your only getting a single attack (like an attack of Op) you might wish to greatsword as it's the superior option.
Failing that, when fighting multiple opponents with different DR. Greatsword is slashing damage (and might be enchanted), while the slams are natural, bludgeoning, subject to return damage from some creatures that have a 'when hitting this creature with a natural weapon' clause in them. Depending on what provokes the attack of Op, you might want to use different options based on either how effective it will be against that opponent, OR what your HP is vs potential return damage.
Next complication is around what happens when hands are 'full', even if it's not a weapon. Dual wield wands? Shield? Could he go sword and board, claim the shield bonus, slam with his natural attacks during his round, and then use the sword for AoOs?
Now, I know someone is going to talk about 'release the weapon to one handed make the attacks, and then re-grab it', but I can't remember the action economy on that, so I'm ignoring it.
I'm simply looking for a supporting rule one way or the other.
Because I'm not seeing any reason you couldn't slam something while holding a weapon.
e.g. your holding a 2handed greatsword you can maintain a 2h grip and still swing your hands/arms to connect directly with an opponent without dropping your grip, if anything the extra weight from the sword would give more power to the blow.
No where does it say a slam requires a free hand or to have empty hands , say a cloud giant picks up a small boulder can he not still make slam attacks which holding the small boulder ? To me it doesn't make sense that he couldn't.
Now if we're talking claws sure you can't claw something with the hand you holding a weapon in because the claws wouldn't function wrapped around a hilt, but we're not talking claw we're talking a very non descript blunt force slam attack.
The rule not in reference or under the Full Attack Action heading.
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.
Just whacking something with any part of your body is a monk specialty, where it is explicitly called out to work that way in thier IUS. Just about every natural attack is based off a limb of some sort. Given the cited rules, if that limb is being used to make attacks it cannot be used to make a natural attack. Not wanting to get into the 'grey areas' of the rules, for humanoid shaped creatures, those attacks typically occur with the arms (being the most obvious place for attacks to be based off of or come from).
In the OP you asked about using a 2H weapon and natural attacks. In order to use a 2H weapon both of the arms would need to be involved so no slam attacks from them.
If after your actions during a round you choose to release your 2H sword from both hands, it would be held in one hand and the other arm would be free to make slam attacks with, BUT you would be unable to use the 2H sword until your next turn where you could put both hands on the sword and properly 'wield' it instead of just holding it.
To answer your OP, no it isn't possible to use them both without 'releasing' the sword.
The rule not in reference or under the Full Attack Action heading.
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.
But they're not being used in combination they are occurring sequentially during a different attack action.
But they're not being used in combination they are occurring sequentially during a different attack action.The rule not in reference or under the Full Attack Action heading.
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.
But they really aren't, everyone's actions are occuring during the round duration. For easy of play your 'turn' is dealt with at a specific time, then someone else's, then someone else's. We see the turns bit pieced, but they are all occuring during the same time frame. Your AoO is still occuring during the same round as your turn occurred so you are in fact using both in combination.
If you want to use the slam attack as an AoO after your 'turn' I've given you the rule mechanics on how to do so. You can either have access to your sword to make AoOs or free your limb and have access to the slam attack instead for the AoO.
It comes down to you making a decision on either wielding the 2H sword, or not so you can take advantage of your natural attack. If you want to be able to attack while holding a 2H with both arms, take a level of monk and use their unarmed strike. You would have the option to use either or at any time.
I agree the AoO is occurring during the same round but not the same time as your attack on your turn, the AoO happens after your attack has finished.
A cloud giant who has to drop their morning star to make a slam attack which is in their attack profile just doesn't make sense to me.
I agree the AoO is occurring during the same round but not the same time as your attack on your turn, the AoO happens after your attack has finished.
A cloud giant who has to drop their morning star to make a slam attack which is in their attack profile just doesn't make sense to me.
In the case of a one handed weapon, it doesn't matter. You use the weapon in one hand and your other arm is free to make the slam attack. When an AoO occurs you can choose to make the attack with either of them.
In the case of a weapon being used by both limbs (2H or 1H to take advantage of the STR mod) the issue comes in. You are using the limbs which would normally be used to slam attack to use the weapon. This drops the slam attack from possible attack options, they are busy swinging the weapon through out your turn. By no means do you have to drop the weapon, but you cannot use the 2H weapon with just one limb/arm. So before the end of your turn you decide 'I want to make slam attacks (and free action my hand off the 2H weapon)' OR 'I want to make 2H attacks with this weapon (and keep both limbs on the 2H weapon).'
There is no dropping the weapon involved. It is still in hand, it just cannot be used to attack with (because it is only in one hand, the other is free to slam) OR it is busy occupying both limbs (and is keeping both limbs from making slams as they are being used). It would be a free action on your next turn to put your hand back on the weapon and make use of it for that turn.
I agree the AoO is occurring during the same round but not the same time as your attack on your turn, the AoO happens after your attack has finished.
A cloud giant who has to drop their morning star to make a slam attack which is in their attack profile just doesn't make sense to me.
In the case of a one handed weapon, it doesn't matter. You use the weapon in one hand and your other arm is free to make the slam attack. When an AoO occurs you can choose to make the attack with either of them.
In the case of a weapon being used by both limbs (2H or 1H to take advantage of the STR mod) the issue comes in. You are using the limbs which would normally be used to slam attack to use the weapon. This drops the slam attack from possible attack options, they are busy swinging the weapon through out your turn. By no means do you have to drop the weapon, but you cannot use the 2H weapon with just one limb/arm. So before the end of your turn you decide 'I want to make slam attacks (and free action my hand off the 2H weapon)' OR 'I want to make 2H attacks with this weapon (and keep both limbs on the 2H weapon).'
There is no dropping the weapon involved. It is still in hand, it just cannot be used to attack with (because it is only in one hand, the other is free to slam) OR it is busy occupying both limbs (and is keeping both limbs from making slams as they are being used). It would be a free action on your next turn to put your hand back on the weapon and make use of it for that turn.
Sorry what ?
Where are you inferring that you need only one hand/arm free to make a slam attack ?
Natural attacks are typically associated with a limb, I'm pretty sure I've mentioned it before. When that limb is being 'used' for attacking with a manufactured weapon (for example in RAW, I'd probably take it farther to things like shields and the like) you cannot use it to make natural attacks.
If it could be done with any body part it would be more like an unarmed strike. But that doesn't have any rules backing nor does that line of reasoning work well with the natural attack rulings that exist.
And what it comes down to is, it is a 'grey area.' When trying to work out 'grey areas' I try to keep as close to the rules we actually do have pertaining to the subject. On an unmodified humanoid shape the limbs typically used to attack with are the arms. If said creature aquires a slam attack that would be the 'default' limb(s) to attach it to if there were no other specifics about the attack correct?
If you want to argue that point, that's where the GM comes in to make a decision on the subject for their game. They arbitrate the 'grey areas' for us in such situations.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems Phasics is in a "you are wrong until proven right" state of mind.
Skylancer4 is explaining what is right based on the details you have given him. I'm getting the idea the was a certain instance in game where you and your GM did not agree and you want someone to simply say "you are right". I doubt that is going to happen.
Here is the original post,
"Quick question
If a creature has a natural slam attack and is also wielding a 2h sword for example, can they choose to make a slam attack without dropping the sword ?
I know you can't attack with the sword and slam in the same round but can you choose to slam attack but not attack with the sword without letting go of the sword ?"
This is very vague. The very short answer would be 'Yes.' The short answer would be 'yes, but they wouldn't be able to use the 2H sword since they are using one of their limbs to make the slam attack therefore holding the 2H weapon in one hand.'
That answer has been given to you. You then give random examples asking for a more detailed answer. Why not just give us the exact situation where this became a problem? Why give us different examples every time?
After Skylancer4 has been very patient with you you then ask for word-for-word quotes from the book. If this is what you wanted to begin with why not just consult the book yourself?
What it comes down to is you want to do something that you can't, but want direct book quotes where it tells you it can't. If you can't find rules that give a verdict for it being right or wrong then it is up to the Gm. Period. If he tells you that you can't do it looking up 1oo different rules almost telling him he's wrong it won't help anything. Just accept it and move on.
It seems Phasics is in a "you are wrong until proven right" state of mind.
Skylancer4 is explaining what is right based on the details you have given him. I'm getting the idea the was a certain instance in game where you and your GM did not agree and you want someone to simply say "you are right". I doubt that is going to happen.
Here is the original post,
"Quick question
If a creature has a natural slam attack and is also wielding a 2h sword for example, can they choose to make a slam attack without dropping the sword ?
I know you can't attack with the sword and slam in the same round but can you choose to slam attack but not attack with the sword without letting go of the sword ?"
This is very vague. The very short answer would be 'Yes.' The short answer would be 'yes, but they wouldn't be able to use the 2H sword since they are using one of their limbs to make the slam attack therefore holding the 2H weapon in one hand.'
That answer has been given to you. You then give random examples asking for a more detailed answer. Why not just give us the exact situation where this became a problem? Why give us different examples every time?
After Skylancer4 has been very patient with you you then ask for word-for-word quotes from the book. If this is what you wanted to begin with why not just consult the book yourself?
What it comes down to is you want to do something that you can't, but want direct book quotes where it tells you it can't. If you can't find rules that give a verdict for it being right or wrong then it is up to the Gm. Period. If he tells you that you can't do it looking up 1oo different rules almost telling him he's wrong it won't help anything. Just accept it and move on.
Perhaps I'm not explaining what I'm trying to get a handle on. Granted there is no rule as written for the situation as far as I can tell. So isn't a matter of the rule that says you can or can't. I'm simply looking for the rule/s that details how a slam attack function at its core.
And from what I've gathered from yourself and Skylancer is that its a "grey area" and in the end your GM mileage will vary.
What I was really looking for was a chapter in one of the books which even if only briefly breaks down what a slam attack really is and how it works. Yes I get that "typically" natural attacks are associated with a limb, however you don't always know which limb the slam is associated with as its not always mentioned.
Hence if there was a fallback paragraph somewhere about slam attacks e.g. unless otherwise written slam attacks require and function as follows. But it looks like the reason I didn't find one in the books is because there isn't one. So again GM mileage will vary.
By the way Obolus you made quite a few inaccurate assumptions in you post about my situation. I'd be wary about doing that as some people can get upset about that sort of thing. Nothing personal just a word to the wise. I've made the mistake of doing that myself in the past.
If a monster has two slam attacks he should be able to slam with the limbs without dropping the sword, but he has to forego use of the sword until the next round.
Every natural attack is associated with a limb. That is why monsters such as giant with 2 arms have 2 slam attacks. It is not a coincidence. There is a monster with 4 arms with 4 slam attacks IIRC. The precedent is throughout the entire book.
Found it:
Clockwork Goliath
The gears of this enormous, four-armed mechanical giant shriek and grind in a deafening cacophony as it lumbers forth.
Clockwork Goliath CR 19
Melee 4 slams +41 (3d6+17)
When dealing with pregen monsters it is rather obvious where the slam attacks are based off of. As Wraithstrike provided an example, the mechanics and fluff of a creature created are fairly straight forward.
The only time it might be a particulary 'grey' area is templates which grant attacks (a vampire for example gives a single slam attack, not two). At this point we should default to what we already have access to, humanoid creatures use their arms (as in the example above). It is 'grey' because RAW doesn't say 'use the arms' but as the attack comes from a template, which might be applied to a creature that doesn't have arms, they cannot say 'use arms' because they would invalidate the attack RAW.
RAI on the subject can thankfully be seen in the bestiary unlike most 'grey areas' so we actually have a good deal of RAW referrence material to draw on.