By RAW, no. Animal Fury states that the Barbarian takes a -5 penalty to use it and only applies half her strength modifier to the damage.
However, as Bite is a primary natural attack, this is not an unreasonable houserule and probably one that I would use at my table if any of my players had levels in Barbarian.
|
So let's say we have a Bbn with Animal Fury who has walked up the feat chain to Greater Grapple (can use a move action to grapple).
The Bbn uses the bite attack first and hits as their standard action.
Then uses their move action (with the GG feat) to grapple. They succeed on the grapple check.
On the following round, the Bbn can use the bite attack twice, once for the grapple that is the standard action and once for the grapple that is the move action. Both of these allow the bite attack "as part of the action to maintain or break" the grapple.
In the first round, does the bite have a -5 penalty?
In the second round, does one or both bite attacks have a -5 penalty?
By RAW, this bite attack always has the -5 penalty. It's stated in the rage ability that it takes the penalty, not that it is a secondary natural attack.
Again, RAW is sometimes stupid, but it is what it is. Houserules (or even simple RAI interpretations) might change that. But as it stands, all Animal Fury bite attacks take the -5.
I think the bite attack follows all the normal rules for natural attacks, and as such should be treated as a primary attack and should use all the rules for primary attacks. The RAW for Animal Fury says that "if used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus -5". To me, this wording means that when you use it on its own (as a standard action) it uses the barbarian's full base attack bonus without any penalties. This is in line with the other rules that state that primary natural attacks take a -5 penalty when used together with weapons.
|
|
The RAW for Animal Fury says that "if used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus -5". To me, this wording means that when you use it on its own (as a standard action) it uses the barbarian's full base attack bonus without any penalties. This is in line with the other rules that state that primary natural attacks take a -5 penalty when used together with weapons.
And what if it's used twice, once as a standard action and once as a move action? (It's free for the Bbn to use it as part of the Greater Grapple feat which allows a grapple check as a move action.) If it's free, does it take the -5 penalty since the bite is not the primary weapon used in a grapple (I'm assuming the hands are)?
Just to make things more interesting... This Bbn has a couple levels of ex-monk so he has IUS, meaning his USs are primary weapons for him.
To me the "-5" wording makes it sound like the bite is supposed to be a secondary attack, not a primary attack. Which means the -5 should be there any time the bite is used (which is the way PF does things for creatures in the Bestiary). And if that's the case and the bite is used multiple times in a round, should it be treated as iterative attacks and the second one is at -10? I wonder about that because natural attacks do not normally receive iterative attacks...
|
|
Two days and no response, huh?
I have this situation in my Tuesday night game and the Bbn/Mnk/Sor/DD is a grapple monster! Anything I can do to rein that in would be good, but I'd like to do it RAW or, failing that, at least RAI.
Fortunately, I noticed that he was trying to flurry while wearing armor. That'll drop his AC significantly since he's getting rid of teh armor. :)
I'd say that the barbarian always treats the bite as secondary, and thus always applies the -5 (unless he or she has multiattack in which case he or she would apply a -2).
|
|
Heh, thanks for the reply. I was hoping the plaintive sound in my voice might actually help. ;)
What about a second bite attack each round? Normally second natural attacks are not allowed (I can't think of any creature which gains one) except that the Animal Fury bite gives a free attack when grappling and Greater Grapple gives an extra grapple check as a move action.
Do I say "no" to the second bite because only one per round? Do I say "yes" but set it to -10?
I think the decision to add Animal Fury didn't consider that Greater Grapple gave another grapple check as a move action...
honestly, the bite attack does such a small amount of damage, that I don't see a reason to not allow a second bite at the normal -5 in that case.
|
|
Nope. His bite attack does 1d3+15+2d6: a primary attack gets Str bonus * 1.5 (he typically goes around with a Str 30 unless he's raging, when it goes up!), and the 2d6 is for the amulet of mighty fists that has shock/fire energy damage on it.
So I really don't want to provide "free" attacks if the RAW aren't clear and I can interpret them to limit the number of attacks.
Looking at the description again...
Animal Fury (Ex): While raging, the barbarian gains a bite attack. If used as part of a full attack action, the bite attack is made at the barbarian's full base attack bonus –5. If the bite hits, it deals 1d4 points of damage (assuming the barbarian is Medium; 1d3 points of damage if Small) plus half the barbarian's Strength modifier. A barbarian can make a bite attack as part of the action to maintain or break free from a grapple. This attack is resolved before the grapple check is made. If the bite attack hits, any grapple checks made by the barbarian against the target this round are at a +2 bonus.
I noticed that it doesn't say it's a natural attack at all! That's great, because it means the normal attacks are subject to the TWF penalties if the Bbn doesn't have TWF.
I'm afraid that last part isn't really the intent of the Animal Fury ability, though. :( I can argue that if they had wanted the BAB to be the same for the main attacks they would've said so, the same way that the unarmed strikes say that the monk operates as though he had TWF. But preventing the bite from being used twice a round is probably sufficient.
The bite provided by animal fury is never a primary attack (which is why it always takes a -5 to attack rolls) for the barbarian, and the animal fury ability itself says that the bite deals 1d4 plus 1/2 strength bonus (assuming the barbarian is medium sized).
From the PRD
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 attack 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.
This to me, along with the wording of Animal Fury, means that when using the bite attack on its own it does not receive the -5 penalty and the barbarian uses his/her full attack bonus. In all other instances, such as when making a full attack action, or using it as part of a grapple I would rule that the -5 penalty applies. As noted above some natural attacks deviate from the normal damage bonus and Animal Fury specifies that the damage is 1d4 + 1/2 Strength bonus for a Medium creature, as such I would rule that the damage is always 1d4 + 1/2 Strength. In all instances he can only make one bite attack per round, as natural attacks do not use iterative attacks. This is, of course, just my interpretation of the rules and Animal Fury could probably do with a better wording, but I hope this helps.
|
|
This to me, along with the wording of Animal Fury, means that when using the bite attack on its own it does not receive the -5 penalty and the barbarian uses his/her full attack bonus.
That's what I originally thought. Except that you're reading from a section of the manual that defines how natural attacks work for creatures that have them. This isn't a racial ability we're talking about -- it's a class ability.
And there is no statement that Animal Fury is a natural attack. It's simply an additional attack. Treat it like an extra arrow shot via Rapid Shot -- it's almost identical except it's one attack at -5 where RS is two shots, each at -2. If they had wanted it to be a natural attack, they would have said so like they did with the Abyssal and Draconic bloodlines of the sorceror and the Dragon Bite feature of the dragon disciple PrC.
In all other instances, such as when making a full attack action, or using it as part of a grapple I would rule that the -5 penalty applies. As noted above some natural attacks deviate from the normal damage bonus and Animal Fury...
But... The description says (paraphrased), "when making a full attack, the bite is at -5". Note that the bite could be the only thing in the full attack but the wording is such that it still takes -5. NOWHERE does it say the penalty goes away when the bite is the only attack used.
So I'm currently at the bite being an off-hand, light weapon since it's not defined as a natural attack. In fact, I was only able to find two references to any PC class having natural attacks as class abilities and that's the sorceror's Abyssal and Draconic bloodlines.
Given how the designers are obviously reluctant to give natural attacks as class abilities (otherwise the druid and ranger would likely have some kind of natural attack as well), I'm inclined to read the Animal Fury description literally.
I see where you are coming from and your interpretation works just as well as mine. It is just that to me the whole "if used as part of..." sentence sounds as a qualifier that notes an exception to the normal way of handling the bite attacks. If used as a stand-alone attack it uses the full attack bonus, but if used as part of a full attack action there is a -5 penalty. And given that the damage is not really overpowering, I do not see the problem of allowing the full attack bonus when the bite is used as the only attack made in a round.
It would make things easier of the Animal Fury rage power clearly spelled out whether the bite attack is meant to be a normal natural attack or whether it is something different.
|
|
It is just that to me the whole "if used as part of..." sentence sounds as a qualifier that notes an exception to the normal way of handling the bite attacks. If used as a stand-alone attack it uses the full attack bonus, but if used as part of a full attack action there is a -5 penalty. And given that the damage is not really overpowering, I do not see the problem of allowing the full attack bonus when the bite is used as the only attack made in a round.
Except this particular question is related to a PC with a Str of 30 normally, more if he rages. That means the damage output is ridiculous because of the Str modifier. Although the bite only gets half-Str so maybe it's not too tough.
In any case, I feel better about limiting the usefulness of something that isn't clearly defined and then allowing it later -- that's much easier than allowing something and having to restrict it later. :)
It would make things easier of the Animal Fury rage power clearly spelled out whether the bite attack is meant to be a normal natural attack or whether it is something different.
Yep. I had really hoped JB or JJ would stop by and say, "It's a natural attack." Simple and easy. But no such luck.
