I can't find the relevant description in Paizo's rules, but D&D's description of a slam attack states here that "the creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage." I imagine it as a kind of flailing gorilla-smash type of thing.
I think of it basically as the monstrous version of unarmed strike. An unarmed strike is about physical training, while a slam is brute strength. For some creatures, like oozes, slams probably aren't only made with arms, given that some creatures don't have arms, but still have slam attacks. But the very fact that the eidolon's slam attacks have arms as a prerequisite makes it seem to me that you attack with your arms and no other appendages.
Anything.
A slam attack is an attack with your body, doesn't really matter which part of it. Could be a punch, an arm-swing, a kick, a tail slam, a headbutt, a face smash, a body slam.
It's pretty much the same as an unarmed strike, but without any training, stronger and not affected by the same rules.
C'mon and slam attack, and welcome to the jam attack!
... sorry.
If it requires arms and has the option to replace claws, I definitely wouldn't allow claws and slam on the same pair of limbs.
Looking at the Hill Giant:
Melee: greatclub +14/+9 (2d8+10) or 2 slams +13 (1d8+7)
If his hands are full he apparently can't use his slams, suggesting his fists are the appendages he's using.
Not true for all slam-users, I suppose.
I've understood slams to be generic blunt attacks with whatever appendage the creature has, if it isn't spiked, clawed, serrated, or otherwise fits as a slashing or piercing natural attack. From a giant's (Or vampire's) fists, to tail club bashings, to smacking with an acidic psuedopod.
I understand its an attack made with a body part much like an unarmed strike is thematically but for Eidolon's it can be done with in any way right? It simply needs Limbs (Arms) but does not use your limbs (arms) to attack right?
To quote the rules:
The eidolon must have the limbs (arms) evolution to take this evolution. Alternatively, the eidolon can replace the claws from its base form with this slam attack (this still costs 1 evolution point). This evolution can be selected more than once, but the eidolon must possess an equal number of the limbs evolution.
The eidolon must have the limbs (arms) evolution to take this evolution. Alternatively, the eidolon can replace the claws from its base form with this slam attack (this still costs 1 evolution point). This evolution can be selected more than once, up to the number of the eidolon’s limbs (arms) evolutions.
So you need arms, it replaces claws and you need more arms for more slams. For me the intention is pretty clear: The eidolon uses two arms per slam attack.
Pincers use pretty much the same wording - would you count them as independent from arms?
If we're looking at this from a visualization standpoint, for things that are roughly humanoid, I always tend to picture slams as the same sort of motion as a backhanded tennis swing, just without the racket. Big ol' swing of your big beefy forearm from your chest outward to knock aside wimpy little humans cowering before you.
Ok so my DM is allowing us to play Eidolons as Characters. I've got Claw, Claw, Gore, Slam.
I think you can't use your slam if you also use both your claws, FYI. But I guess it depends on the details.
I had an eidolon in an Iron Gods game that was thematically a super fighting robot; he was old Numerian tech my summoner found and fixed up, but a lot of his auxiliary stuff didn't work anymore. He started out with the Slam from the Inevitable Eidolon, which I flavored as punching people with his giant servo fist. Personally, from a thematic standpoint I don't really think it matters how you make your attacks as long as you follow the proper mechanics to do so. If you want to make your smash attack use your legs or something and your claws are on your hands, who cares? Just makes sure that mechanically your claws are technically attached to your leg limbs and slam to your arms, or you have multiple arms mechanically. I've had an eidolon who mechanically had six arms but functionally only had two in-game.
I think you can't use your slam if you also use both your claws, FYI. But I guess it depends on the details.
The rules don't actually say that - RAW, one can make two different natural attacks on the same body part ine one round. While there don't seem to be monsters using claw+slam from one arm, bite+gore with horn on the head is pretty common.
Eidolon natural attacks are not exactly written in an airtight way. The body part evolutions seem to expect you to use that specific body part, but the rules don't enforce that. Using legs to slam is legal, as long as you fulfill the requisites. The illegally build mammoth eidolon model in Ultimate Magic does actually use a foot slam, as do many monsters - it's indeed the default attack for trample.
The two limbs = one slam" is also eidolon specific, monsters often have one slam per arm.
Long story short, ask your GM if your slam can be a stomp.
I've understood slams to be generic blunt attacks with whatever appendage the creature has, if it isn't spiked, clawed, serrated, or otherwise fits as a slashing or piercing natural attack. From a giant's (Or vampire's) fists, to tail club bashings, to smacking with an acidic psuedopod.
It doesn't even have to be an appandage, a dolphin's slam is done with it's snout.
Slam is a monsters version of Unarmed strike.
Pretty much anything that the hulk does.
Remember, that think with Loki? Those were slams.
"Slam" is a generic catch all term for any type of strike that doesn't involve claws, beaks, tentacles, or specifically named melee attacks. It could be caused by colliding into another target with one's body, a headbutt, a knee attack, a shoulder slam, so on and so forth.
Pretty much anything that the hulk does.
Remember, that think with Loki? Those were slams.
LOL Yep. "HULK SMASH" IS the perfect description for slams. ;)
"Slam" is a generic catch all term for any type of strike that doesn't involve claws, beaks, tentacles, or specifically named melee attacks. It could be caused by colliding into another target with one's body, a headbutt, a knee attack, a shoulder slam, so on and so forth.
But some tentacles, tails, ect. ARE slams instead of tail slaps, tentacle attacks, ect. Literally anything can have slam taped over it so trying limit it is failed to crash and burn. Heck, you can Slam someone with a club...
I'd put in my two cents that, while the slam is generic across the broad range of creatures, for any specific monster it refers to a particular appendage implicitly. For the eidolon, this seems to be the "arms."
I'd put in my two cents that, while the slam is generic across the broad range of creatures, for any specific monster it refers to a particular appendage implicitly. For the eidolon, this seems to be the "arms."
So what appendage is a gelatinous cube using? ;)
Without a further rule, all we know is that some slams are linked to a limb and if it is that you must forgo it to make a weapon attack with said limb. For eidolons, it doesn't actually say that slams are linked to arms just that you must have "limbs (arms) evolution" to take the slam ability. Note that the number of times you can take slam isn't the number of "limbs (arms) evolution"s you have but the number of limb evolutions you have. If your eidolon has 2 arms and 6 legs you can take 4 slams by the rules. They may have meant to link it to arms but they failed to do so in the text.
Also note that "Alternatively, the eidolon can replace the claws from its base form with this slam attack". The avian base form has "Free Evolutions: claws, flight, limbs (legs)" meaning that it can take slam without even having ANY arms...
Pretty much anything that the hulk does.
Remember, that think with Loki? Those were slams.
LOL Yep. "HULK SMASH" IS the perfect description for slams. ;)
"Slam" is a generic catch all term for any type of strike that doesn't involve claws, beaks, tentacles, or specifically named melee attacks. It could be caused by colliding into another target with one's body, a headbutt, a knee attack, a shoulder slam, so on and so forth.But some tentacles, tails, ect. ARE slams instead of tail slaps, tentacle attacks, ect. Literally anything can have slam taped over it so trying limit it is failed to crash and burn. Heck, you can Slam someone with a club...
No they arent. You're needlessly complicating things, which is of course your prerogative.
|
I'd put in my two cents that, while the slam is generic across the broad range of creatures, for any specific monster it refers to a particular appendage implicitly. For the eidolon, this seems to be the "arms."So what appendage is a gelatinous cube using? ;)
Personally, I've always thought that oozes create a appendage-like pseudopod to slam with.
No they arent. You're needlessly complicating things, which is of course your prerogative.Pretty much anything that the hulk does.
Remember, that think with Loki? Those were slams.
LOL Yep. "HULK SMASH" IS the perfect description for slams. ;)
"Slam" is a generic catch all term for any type of strike that doesn't involve claws, beaks, tentacles, or specifically named melee attacks. It could be caused by colliding into another target with one's body, a headbutt, a knee attack, a shoulder slam, so on and so forth.But some tentacles, tails, ect. ARE slams instead of tail slaps, tentacle attacks, ect. Literally anything can have slam taped over it so trying limit it is failed to crash and burn. Heck, you can Slam someone with a club...
Things are ALREADY needlessly complicated. It didn't need my help to get there.
Crawling Vine: vine = slam
Elephant/Mastodon: trunk = slam
Brethedan: line of tentacles = slam
Beaststrike Club: Club = slam
Jack-o'-Lantern: thick ropey vines = slam
Beheaded: headbutt/bodyslam = slam
Penanggalen: viscera = slam
Animate Hair: hair = slam
Tail Strike spell: Gain tail slam
Argorth, Cinder scourge: tail slam +18
Akaruzug: body slam +34 (2d8+5), and 2 wing slams +34 (1d8+5)
Pachycephalosaurus: headbutt = slam
Conclusion: Even named attacks can have slam attached to them like tail, wing, tentacle, club, ect. and there are plenty of instances of slams not attached to traditional limbs. SO I stand by "Literally anything can have slam taped over it so trying limit it is failed to crash and burn."
Personally, I've always thought that oozes create a appendage-like pseudopod to slam with.I'd put in my two cents that, while the slam is generic across the broad range of creatures, for any specific monster it refers to a particular appendage implicitly. For the eidolon, this seems to be the "arms."So what appendage is a gelatinous cube using? ;)
That can work for oozes but the cube is literally a block of jello that rolls over you without any limbs. I could have said a 5' square crate with animated object on it. Neither one has any limbs but can slam. ;)
Firstly, of all the things of the world, game design is the last place where exception disproves the rule.
That being said, I agree that slam is a mess of a natural attack that has come about because long ago, the devs were afraid of having too many natural attack types for some strange reason. That being said, my case was that a slam cannot be defined in universal terms because of the way devs have used it so liberally--not just in what a slam is, but also in what a slam can and cannot do (i.e. the hill giant from before). Which is why the slam must be inferred by the rules around it, until official word is given.
Lastly, The gelatinous cube, from Pathfinder's predecessor.
A gelatinous cube attacks by slamming its body into its prey. It is capable of lashing out with a pseudopod, but usually engulfs foes.
So for the gelatinous cube, at least, a slam is explicitly defined as the body, including a pseudopod when necessary.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Has anyone brought up the tanuki in this thread yet?
Has anyone brought up the tanuki in this thread yet?
No. Actually, why is your comment blank? When I look at it, I feel like I am just hearing a beep. I have not experienced this since seeing threads talking about black tentacles or about a monk grappling a certain kind of demon.
I'm just sayin'. That tanuki's using a two-handed weapon and he still gets a slam attack. I wonder if female tanuki get the slam attack?
The freezing flow slams people with a tendril made out of ice that does slashing damage. ALways thought that one was a bit silly.
Firstly, of all the things of the world, game design is the last place where exception disproves the rule.
A single exception maybe but at a certain point it becomes a pattern. I can find dozens of them from 3.5 pathfinder up to one of the latest books a few months ago.
That being said, I agree that slam is a mess of a natural attack that has come about because long ago, the devs were afraid of having too many natural attack types for some strange reason. That being said, my case was that a slam cannot be defined in universal terms because of the way devs have used it so liberally--not just in what a slam is, but also in what a slam can and cannot do (i.e. the hill giant from before). Which is why the slam must be inferred by the rules around it, until official word is given.
I agree. Slam really boils down to a 'monster' version of unarmed strike made into a natural attack that ended up getting slapped on any attack that the person at the time didn't now what else to make it. It's nice that in some cases it explicitly attaches a 'limb' to the slam but most are left to your imagination. In some cases, the slam explicitly doesn't use a arm that's there, as is seen in the tanuki, or uses another limb, as in an avian eidolon. That's why it's impossible, for me at least, to infer a general rule that slams must take up a limb to work. At best I could say more likely than not a slam uses a limb but it's far from a certainty or even a general standard.
Lastly, The gelatinous cube, from Pathfinder's predecessor.
A gelatinous cube attacks by slamming its body into its prey. It is capable of lashing out with a pseudopod, but usually engulfs foes.So for the gelatinous cube, at least, a slam is explicitly defined as the body, including a pseudopod when necessary.
LOL I know it USED to be able to use a pseudopod but the current cube doesn't have that text which is why I said what I said. It's now just a "quivering cube of slime" that's "10 feet to a side" that's "mindlessly roaming dungeon halls and dark caverns, swallowing up organic material". Since it used to have the pseudopod text I'm assuming they no longer have one since there was plenty of space in the bestiary to keep said text if they wished for it to keep that ability.
Squiggit: a Brethedan can make their tentacles do slams that deal slashing or piercing damage. There are plenty of funky slams around if you dig a little.
Check out a Watersinger's Waterstrike ability: Water up to 30' away can make a slam attacks [and " multiple attacks per round if your base attack bonus allows you to do so"!]. So a slam can be a ranged melee slam you can use your full attack with... Makes a tendril of ice slam seem perfectly fine in comparison. ')