Take giant scorpions for example. The go to way i have seen most people attack with them is tail, claw grab release claw grab. Turn two same order except with a drop first. This allows you to put in all your attacks, and hopefully keep your opponent grabbed at the end. In case of verminous hunter, each grab ca also let you do some bleed damage, so theres that added benefit.
Take giant scorpions for example. The go to way i have seen most people attack with them is tail, claw grab release claw grab. Turn two same order except with a drop first. This allows you to put in all your attacks, and hopefully keep your opponent grabbed at the end. In case of verminous hunter, each grab ca also let you do some bleed damage, so theres that added benefit.
Most people seem to be grossly overestimating just how many attacks per turn a Giant Scorpion gets for you then.
The way I run it is its got 2 claws or 1 tail with poison.
I can either See it attack with its 1 tail to deal a good deal of damage and poison you. Or I can see it attacking with two claws wherein if both hit then it has a chance to grab you which would then give it a better tail attack each turn.
anytime i see something akin to 2 Claws + grab that to me states (and I think it is referenced somewhere) that if both attacks hit then there is a chance that it will grapple freely.
Take giant scorpions for example. The go to way i have seen most people attack with them is tail, claw grab release claw grab. Turn two same order except with a drop first. This allows you to put in all your attacks, and hopefully keep your opponent grabbed at the end. In case of verminous hunter, each grab ca also let you do some bleed damage, so theres that added benefit.Most people seem to be grossly overestimating just how many attacks per turn a Giant Scorpion gets for you then.
The way I run it is its got 2 claws or 1 tail with poison.
I can either See it attack with its 1 tail to deal a good deal of damage and poison you. Or I can see it attacking with two claws wherein if both hit then it has a chance to grab you which would then give it a better tail attack each turn.
anytime i see something akin to 2 Claws + grab that to me states (and I think it is referenced somewhere) that if both attacks hit then there is a chance that it will grapple freely.
From a similar discussion in 2012:
1) A successful grab does not end a full attack, but any subsequent attacks are at a -2 because you now have the grappled condition (unless you're using the "hold" ability to make the grab check at -20.) Nowhere in the rules does it say anything about not being able to full attack while grappling, you just ordinarily don't have enough actions to do it (because maintaining a grapple is a standard action.)
2) You can grab multiple targets with the same full attack, causing them all to gain the grappled condition (although the attacker only gains it once, multiple grappled conditions don't stack.) You can only maintain one grapple, but there's nothing to stop you from releasing all the grapples, and making a new round of grabs on your next full attack.
Any attack with grab gets a free grab. Some may have (Ex) abilities when they hit with more than one attack they grapple, this will be in their stat block as an (Ex) ability. The giant scorpion reads as follows:
Melee 2 claws +6 (1d6+4 plus grab), sting +6 (1d6+4 plus poison)
Space 10 ft.; Reach 10 ft.
Special Attacks constrict (1d6+4)
This means on a regular attack, it choses does it want to attack with one claw, or one sting (or 2 claws in the case of revised action economy from unchained, as TWF and Flurry are also 2 per action). On a full attack, it uses natural attack 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 when the Giant Scorpion full attacks, it gets both claws, with 2 grab chances (and applicable constrict) and the sting, all at -5 from the normal boost (as it lacks Multiattack).
EDIT: I derped, pulled the wrong section of 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 times 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. You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, 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).
Both Claw and Sting are primary attacks, so it designates one to be it's secondary attack when it full attacks. So the claws can be full bonus, then the sting at -5, or vice versa.
As for the OP's question though. There's nothing in the rules saying they cannot grapple a grappled target, and we have rules for multiple creatures in a grapple. It's viable, using the scorpion as example, it lashes out with the first claw, catching it's target and opting to use the hold feature. Then with the second claw, attempt to grab again if it strikes. The downside of this is if it's target is a squirmy little guy, and the scorpion misses that second claw, the scorpion has -20 to maintain the grapple. Unless it chooses to on the first claw, give itself the grappled condition in order to control the grapple fully. In which case it gets -2 to the second attack and the other penalties therein.
|
When a monster has the grab ability listed for more one attack, does the monster make a grapple check on each successful hit?
Yes.
Each grapple check is only to make the grab though, you can’t use subsequent ones to move/pin/etcetera. As stated above, this tactic is insanely good for monsters with constrict, as each successful grab/release will gain the bonus constrict damage.
For monsters without constrict, you’re basically just getting a bunch of tries to land the grappled condition. The math isn’t too bad, your -2 attack balances with their -4 dex for the rest of the full attack after you grab them.
This seems to mostly answer the question I had awhile back on this.
I guess since the damage output is better using a grab and release approach it's ok that the action economy doesn't really support grappling 3+ enemies.
|
I was thinking specifically of the Dire Tiger. I would like to be able to claw (try to grappld), claw (try to grapple if the first failed), and bite (try to grapple if the first two both failed). Only one of those three attempts needs to succeed. I don't need to maintain the grapple in that first round.
I was thinking specifically of the Dire Tiger. I would like to be able to claw (try to grappld), claw (try to grapple if the first failed), and bite (try to grapple if the first two both failed). Only one of those three attempts needs to succeed. I don't need to maintain the grapple in that first round.
Yep. Doable. And if any of them succeed, you can still finish your other attacks at the -2 attack roll grappled penalty (and the target's -4 Dex grappled penalty).
So no penalty to attacks if you factor in the dex penalty unless you are using a dex based attack? You take the dex penalty to don't you?
So no penalty to attacks if you factor in the dex penalty unless you are using a dex based attack? You take the dex penalty to don't you?
That would be the case, yep. There's also the case the target has heavy armor and enough Dex that a -4 doesn't actually dent his AC at all (14 or so for 0 Dex Full Plate I believe? Might be wrong). Would still dent the target's CMD though to resist subsequent grapples (plus the bonus for having grappled the target etc). So it's important to know that they're separate bonuses and penalties. An Agile Maneuvers grappker would take a hit to their grapple while grappling for example.
Thanks. :)
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 times 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. You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, 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).Both Claw and Sting are primary attacks, so it designates one to be it's secondary attack when it full attacks. So the claws can be full bonus, then the sting at -5, or vice versa.This is wrong, you don't designate one to be secondary, they are both primary and both made at full bab and with full strength to damage.
If you only had 1 primary nat attack it would be at 1.5 str to damage.
Whoops. My bad. Was still thinking w/ manufactured, with mild bleed-over from 3.5e. The downside of playing too many systems.
I guess I have been running my scorpions exceedingly weak then XD.
the idea of 1 round doing up to 30 hp of damage + poison + grapple vs a group of lvl 3 people where my Barbarian only has 35 hp seems terribly terribly strong and since the scorpion doesn't have multiattack or actually any feats for that matter I read it as a Has to choose mkay this round I'm grabbing or this round I'm stabbing my stinger in.
If you want to look at absolute maxed damage, sure thats kinda nasty, but not if you do the same thing for the party. level 3 wiz burning hands 12 damage, power attack orc greataxe fighter doing 21 , rogue doing 14ish etc. Scorpion wont last long
If you want to look at absolute maxed damage, sure thats kinda nasty, but not if you do the same thing for the party. level 3 wiz burning hands 12 damage, power attack orc greataxe fighter doing 21 , rogue doing 14ish etc. Scorpion wont last long
I'm kinda looking at it as average damage too. Like okay lets say the Orc greataxe fighter. he gets attacked and lets assume with +6 to hit all 3 attacks hit and he fails his fort save for poison.
Average damage 22.5 Rounded down to 22 damage. Massive hit + now hes got two chances to be grappled which removes him from being able to attack that turn so now the party is down to 26 damage that turn. Then if you average out its poison that orc fighter in 6 rounds just took 9 points of Strength damage.
now you have two options. rest for two complete days for the fighter with long term care being done on him to get back 8 points of Strength damage and heal up from possibly being downed in 1 hit.
Or continue on and now the Orc fighter (whom I'm going to assume is not minmaxed)is now in single digits for its strength score probably grossly over encumbered and now vastly unable to join in on any fights. If they get a random encounter over those 2 days woe betide the party without their meat shield/melee damage.
Max damage and Crits would guaranteed bring down a minmaxed lvl 3 barbarian with 20 constitution score as he would take 60 damage round 1 be poisoned and grappled + next round he would take another 9 points of damage bringing him down to -17 hp.
it seems overly nasty for a CR 3 fight is all.
If you want to look at absolute maxed damage, sure thats kinda nasty, but not if you do the same thing for the party. level 3 wiz burning hands 12 damage, power attack orc greataxe fighter doing 21 , rogue doing 14ish etc. Scorpion wont last long
I'm kinda looking at it as average damage too. Like okay lets say the Orc greataxe fighter. he gets attacked and lets assume with +6 to hit all 3 attacks hit and he fails his fort save for poison.
Average damage 22.5 Rounded down to 22 damage. Massive hit + now hes got two chances to be grappled which removes him from being able to attack that turn so now the party is down to 26 damage that turn. Then if you average out its poison that orc fighter in 6 rounds just took 9 points of Strength damage.
now you have two options. rest for two complete days for the fighter with long term care being done on him to get back 8 points of Strength damage and heal up from possibly being downed in 1 hit.
Or continue on and now the Orc fighter (whom I'm going to assume is not minmaxed)is now in single digits for its strength score probably grossly over encumbered and now vastly unable to join in on any fights. If they get a random encounter over those 2 days woe betide the party without their meat shield/melee damage.
Max damage and Crits would guaranteed bring down a minmaxed lvl 3 barbarian with 20 constitution score as he would take 60 damage round 1 be poisoned and grappled + next round he would take another 9 points of damage bringing him down to -17 hp.
it seems overly nasty for a CR 3 fight is all.
Going into spoiler territory for Shattered Star.
The giant scorpion has a pretty high DC on it's poison save, however, it can only do the full attack w/ grab and poison on turns where it can devote the full attack action. Yes, on a bad day it might do a pretty devastating amount of damage between claw, constrict, sting. However, with AC 16 and 37 HP total, it's unlikely to last more than a round or two against a full party of PCs.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Grab/Constrict monsters are in my experience the best way to kill PCs with hard CC like domination, and lucky critics. They have to be used wisely until the moment where the PCs can escape a grab with more ease.
I guess I have just been grossly underestimating my group then maybe... then again RNGeezus hates them so scorpions and ogres and other creatures like that with a Rogue a bard a antipaladin and a barbarian lasts anywhere from 3 to 5 rounds cause they just cant hit the darn thing lol
The barbarian in particular is especially unlucky as he has had a Dc 13 filth fever on him for 6 in game days now and has not had 2 consecutive Fort saves on it.
quoting, "You can only maintain one grapple"I haven't found any rule that says that. I think rather that is only usually the case because you usually do not have enough actions left over to do that.
Yes. It takes a standard action (without feats) to maintain one grapple. No creature to my knowledge could even pull off the maximum 3 (rapid grappler, plus 3 natural grab attacks using the hold function. All at a whopping -20). Thus forgive my paraphrasing but the scorpion in question could not maintain more than one grapple, nor could most players, or monsters.
Any attack with grab gets a free grab.I think not quite. You can't use the Free Action Grapple attempt to Maintain a Grapple, only to start one. Recall my quote.
If a creature with this special attack hits with the indicated attack (usually a claw or bite attack), it deals normal damage and attempts to start a grapple as a free action
This is why I used the term "grab" and not "grapple", because that is correct. They cannot increase the severity of an existing grapple free.
Interesting:
Melee 2 claws +6 (1d6+4 plus grab), sting +6 (1d6+4 plus poison)That stat block quote suggests that a Scorpion's Sting is a Primary Natural Attack. Scorpion Stings are in their tails, and usually, a Tail Attack is a Secondary Natural Attack.
Unfortunately "stings" in general are primary, regardless of whether on a tail or otherwise.
There's nothing in the rules saying they cannot grapple a grappled targetBut the Grab Ability does not give you the ability to do that as a Free Action. If you were say an Alchemist with the Tentacle Discovery and the Greater Grapple Feat, you could Attack with your Tentacle as a Standard Action, Initiate your Grapple as a Free Action, and then Pin your opponent as a Move Action, but with 2 Tentacles, while you could make a 2nd Tentacle Attacks as an Off-Hand Weapon, you cannot take your Free Action Grapple attempt from Grab to Pin your opponent. The Free Action Grapple attempt granted by Grab is only granted to start a Grapple.
Once more, that is not what I said... Nor does that apply to the statement you've quoted here, you've made a jump in logic. Nowhere have I said, or implied the use of grab to escalate a grapple. My statement is about initiating a new grapple against a grappled target, which can be done.
Multiple Creatures: Multiple creatures can attempt to grapple one target. The creature that first initiates the grapple is the only one that makes a check, with a +2 bonus for each creature that assists in the grapple (using the Aid Another action). Multiple creatures can also assist another creature in breaking free from a grapple, with each creature that assists (using the Aid Another action) granting a +2 bonus on the grappled creature's combat maneuver check.
I've added the full text because it's complicated. Now we look at Constrict.
A creature with this special attack can crush an opponent, dealing bludgeoning damage, when it makes a successful grapple check (in addition to any other effects caused by a successful check, including additional damage). The amount of damage is given in the creature’s entry and is typically equal to the amount of damage caused by the creature’s melee attack.
FAQ: When a creature with constrict grapples a foe, when does it deal constrict damage?
A creature with constrict deals this additional damage every time it makes a successful grapple check against a foe. This includes the first check to establish the grapple (such as when using the grab universal monster rule).
As people have stated, the creature can grapple, constrict and end as a free action to go in again, removing all complications by simply cheesing the system. To the complications though.
Multiple creatures can grapple one foe. That is a flat statement and the following is the ruling for how mechanically you can perform that, which becomes the Aid Another action. When using Aid Another, you are doing the same check, albeit at DC 10 rather than the target DC. Arguably, the scorpion cannot aid itself, though doing so would be two successful grapple checks, and 2 constricts. However, as I've said, complications. 1) it cannot aid itself. 2) is Aid Another really a grapple against the target, or is it technically targetless?
So let's bypass that option. Let's take a look at getting control of a grapple for a moment. Let's take 3 characters. Character A is the hero, character B is the villain, and character C is the victim. Character B has character C in a grapple. Character A, can Aid Another character C, though the victim is likely unable to break character B's grapple with a +2. Plus this doesn't make much sense. Character A can instead grapple target B, there is nothing preventing him attempting to wrest control of a grapple against character B. This would be a new grapple, leaving character B the options of releasing his victim, or dealing with having the grappled condition along with character A. If character A succeeds, he would have control of the grapple, and could release character C as a free action. Alternatively he releases character B and subsequently tries to escape with her using the grappling move options. Character C can opt to not make a grapple check on her turn, and let character A whisk her away.
Back to the scorpion. Looking at the above example, scorpion connects with grab claw 1. Damage, grapple attempt. Now it can choose the -20 to use hold and not gain the grappled condition itself before the attempt. In this case, it is the same as above, with claw 1 as character B, holding the target character C. Second claw can then grapple the character to wrest control of the grapple from itself over character C it's target. It even gets a bonus because it's target has the grappled condition, then that attempt and constrict can be done full bonus. Claw 2 does not use hold because it it fully devoted to grappling 1 target so it would not take the -20, and the scorpion would gain the grappled condition. Alternatively, it doesn't take the -20 with the first claw. This means it has the grappled condition itself (as does the victim) on the second attack. It does not escalate the grapple if the second attack hits, it also doesn't get the +5 circumstance for having control of the grapple. The second claw attack it is entitled to gets an attack, and it's own grapple attempt if it hits at base with penalty (due to the grappled condition). If it succeds, it constricts, and wrests control of the grapple over the victim from itself. This is a successful grapple check thus entitled to constrict. However, nowhere in this convoluted explaination have I even implied multiple grab attacks get a pin or other non-specific grapple check.
Interesting:
Melee 2 claws +6 (1d6+4 plus grab), sting +6 (1d6+4 plus poison)That stat block quote suggests that a Scorpion's Sting is a Primary Natural Attack. Scorpion Stings are in their tails, and usually, a Tail Attack is a Secondary Natural Attack.Unfortunately "stings" in general are primary, regardless of whether on a tail or otherwise.I wasn't calling out any doubt nor making any kind of value judgement here except to say that I found it mildly unexpected.
I agree. In my initial default thoughts on the scorpion I also believed the tail would be secondary. Then again, my natural attack build experience was with a kobold tail terror. And more recently a necrocraft.
Grab and releasing as a free action is possible by the written rules, but most GM's won't do it because many see it as being against the intent of the rules. Hopefully it's in one of the upcoming FAQ's that's been made, but not released yet.
This question comes up a lot. As written, yes, the monster gets a FREE grapple attempt with each attack. Continuing as written, it is a standard action to maintain the grapple in the following round. The rest of the grapples would be released at that point.
Your mileage may vary. Different GMs will handle this differently.
Grab and releasing as a free action is possible by the written rules, but most GM's won't do it because many see it as being against the intent of the rules. Hopefully it's in one of the upcoming FAQ's that's been made, but not released yet.I am not at all certain that it is against the intent of the rules. It seems highly realistic that an Animal would engage in different tactics in different situations, sometimes Grabbing, holding, pinning, and Constricting a single prey-creature to death, or perhaps swallowing it whole, or deciding to tenderize it with multiple attacks first.
And by the rules dynamic, why else would you have a creature like a Giant Octopus with 8 Attacks all with Grab and Constrict if it were never the intent of the rules to score Constrict Damage 8 times?
From either perspective: realism or game-terms, Grab-and-release seems to me like a tactic that precisely is the intent of the rules.
How would you, as a GM, handle a Giant Scorpion or Giant Octopus vis a vis Grappling, Grab, and Constrict?
The rules allowing something is no proof that it was the intent. The summoner is an example of that. I'm sure that having a pet that outdoes the party fighter and barbarian while being paired with a class that doesn't even need it to do well was not intended. There are also FAQ's that exist that have overturned previous rules legal builds. However had there been no complaints those builds would still work. An example is the pouncing mounted barbarian with a lance.
Also if you look at how much damage such a creature does it is well outside of the CR range. It can easily do at least double, and even over 6 times the allocated damage for that CR when you have something like an Octopus. Now you can have a CR=party level monster being dangerous enough to kill two party members instead of being an fairly easy fight otherwise.
As for how I run the fights, I would never run a single scorpion vs a party because if it gets a hold of one party member the others will gang up on it and kill it. They then heal the grappled member.
If I go with the release grab idea then it would go like this.
Scorpion attacks for 5.5 points of damage, which initiates a grab for more constricting, which is another 5.5 points of damage. The sting is more likely to land for another 5.5. If the poison fail is saved then you're more likely to stay grappled. Now you've taken 16.5 points of damage.
Then you're released and hit again. for 5.5 point of damage and constricted for another 5.5. That is 27.5 points of damage which can easily take a 3rd level character down to 0.
The scorpion has 37 hit points, so he's likely to survive to make it to round 2.
A CR 3 monster is only supposed to do 13 points of damage per round.
37 points is in the range of a CR 8 to CR 9 monster.
The Octopus is likely going to do more than 7 times it's CR based damage.
The Giant Octopus, which is the version with 8 potential grapple attempts likely won't get every grapple attempt. With that many attacks it has a lower than normal attack and CMB bonus so maybe it only gets 4 out of 8 tentacle attacks. It has the same issue as the hydra with the attack bonus and damage being reduced due to the number of attacks.
That is about 4.5*8(including the constricts) not including the bite. That is 36 points of damage.
If you go to a tiger which is a CR 4 it can do 60.5 points of damage if all of the grabs hit, and tigers have been know to take people out with just a pounce. If you add in pounce which gives it the rakes, that is another 20.5 points of damage for 81 points against a level 4 character. Even if only 2 out of 5 attacks hit on a pounce that is still over 40 points of damage using the grab and release method.
As for real life comparisons I've never seen any animal get a hold of something and let it go so it can try to capture it again. I've seen a decent number of national geographic and discovery channel shows.
If there are some, it's the exception, and not the rule. I know the creatures in this example don't let things go if they grab them.
The rules allowing something is no proof that it was the intent.It's not conclusive and comprehensive proof, but it is evidence in support. The fact that the RAW allows it certainly is stronger evidence that it was the intent than that it wasn't. Between you and me, the burden of proof is on you to demonstrate that A)The intent really is contrary to what was written, and B) the intent of the author even matters.
There is no way to prove it unless they step in. My goal was to show there was evidence. At the end of the day you have to decide what you count as "enough proof". Since I've already admitted that the written rules allow it, it's nigh impossible for me to prove it wasn't the intent since I don't have any precedence. All I have is math, and that may not be enough for you.
[qupte]
This is because what I am arguing is that a GM should feel free to run monsters with Grab and/or Constrict with varying tactics, even Pathfinder Society GMs insofar as their monsters' behavior has not been prescribed. It is definitely the intent of the PDT that most GMs run their games and their monsters their own way. And if it isn't, I urge every GM running his or her own game to politely tell the PDT where to put their intentions! When I am the Dungeon Master, I will run my own campaign my own way, thank you very much!
The Pathfinder team is not here to tell you how to run your game. They are very much against that. Their only goal is generally to show intent. However since every group is different what may work for one group may not work for another. Personally I dont put much stock in CR when I run for an optimized group because if I do they'll shred the encounter. For other "less experienced groups" I've had to use lower than normal encounters.
Regular Octopi don't even have 8 tentacle attacks. They have 1 tentacle attack that does no damage but has Grab. Clearly the way this works is that the Octopus Grabs it's victim and makes Bite Attacks, eating it's victim and injecting poison in it at the same time. Octopi have that thing where they can spray a cloud of ink and jet away when things go badly for them.Giant Octopi, on the...
I said that only the giant ones have the extra attacks.
I specifically said "The Giant Octopus, which is the version with 8 potential grapple attempts...."
I also pointed out that it's not likely to go over the DPR for it's CR level even with the catch and release method, unlike the tiger, which is 4 CR's lower and likely to do more damage to an APL appropriate party.
The authors are the pathfinder team, and they basically ported these monsters over from 3.5. Yes they know the rules, but many times things like this have gotten past them. People tend to think that others think as they do. That is how loopholes in rules get created.
With that being said I did ask that this get cleared up in the next round of FAQ's. Personally I don't care which way they rule it, but I would like to see official intent since not every GM will ignore what they see as intent.
@Wraithstrike
on your scorpion math are you using average or like minimum to show your math? I ask cause my math on it using average and max was so
Max 1 round without crits.
Claw 1 hit 10 damage + grab and constrict 9 damage.
Claw 2 hit 10 damage + grab and constrict 9 damage.
Stinger hit 10 damage + dc 17 poison 12 strength damage over 6 rounds.
Total damage 48 damage + 12 points of strength damage.
Average 1 round without crits.
Claw 1. 7.5 Damage + grab and constrict 6.5 damage.
Claw 2. 7.5 Damage + grab and constrict 6.5 damage.
Stinger. 7.5 Damage + Dc 17 poison 9 strength damage over 6 rounds.
Total damage 35.5 + 9 strength damage.
So are you using minimums? cause if so then wouldnt the damage be so.
Minimum 1 round damage without crits.
Claw 1. 5 Damage + grab and constrict 4 damage.
Claw 2. 5 Damage + grab and constrict 4 damage.
Stinger. 5 damage + 6 points of strength damage.
Total minimum damage 23 damage + 6 Points of strength over 6 rounds.
With crits the total damage would be:
78 damage max
58 Damage average
38 Damage Minimum
So all of that being said I agree with you using that ruling on a scorpion to hit is much too high for a 3rd level party.
My party consists of a
Anti-Paladin lvl 3 Ac 20 Hp 26 Con score 15.
Rogue lvl 3 Ac 15 Hp 25 Con score 14.
Bard lvl 3 Ac 16 Hp 25 Con score 14.
Barbarian lvl 3 (currently having delt with filth fever disease for 6 days now) Ac 17 31 HP con score 10.
With +6 to hit the scorpion has 50% chance to hit bard 55% chance to hit rogue 45% chance to hit barbarian and 30% chance to hit paladin any given round.
So of my group Max damage would drop and kill all of them.
Average damage would drop and assuredly kill all but the barbarian.
minimum damage would still seriously cripple any of them.
With +6 to hit the scorpion has 50% chance to hit bard 55% chance to hit rogue 45% chance to hit barbarian and 30% chance to hit paladin any given round.So of my group Max damage would drop and kill all of them.
Average damage would drop and assuredly kill all but the barbarian.
minimum damage would still seriously cripple any of them.
That's the additional. The scorpion has to actually hit all of those attacks, succeed on all those grabs, and the target has to fail the save DC (the hardest thing for the PCs to overcome).
However, even if you take one average constict out, (4-9 less damage total per round) all of those PCs are still pretty dead. Multiple consticts isn't the scorpion's problem, it is just an offensively powerful creature. Comparatively I've shown it's extremely vulnerable defensively. , Between the rogue's sneak, barbarian's rage and the anti-paladin it would likely not last the round.
@Wraithstrike
on your scorpion math are you using average or like minimum to show your math? I ask cause my math on it using average and max was so
I used average damage on successful attack rolls, but I assumed all of the attacks were successful. I didn't use a DPR formula because there is too much variance to account for different groups I've run for. Some have had crappy AC, and some have had insanely good AC for there levels.
For the giant octopus I assumed that only half of those attacks hit landed since its been my experience that monsters with that many attacks tend to miss more than monsters with less attacks.
Thank you for disclosing that. It is not at all fair to assume that all of the attacks were successful. The attacks that come off of the Grab Ability don't even happen unless some initial attack is successful, and that means when you are reckoning the Scorpion's Constrict Damage, you need to multiply it the first hit probability again and then by its chance of successful Grapple Check. If you are just assuming that all the attacks hit, you are weighing the bonus attacks that generate from Grab are equivalent to additional Natural Attacks, and that is just not so.
Since you want a specific AC used and an NPC who uses PC wealth is considered as 1 CR higher I can use an the default AC of a monster that is one higher than the monster. As an example I will use the scorpion vs a CR 4 base AC.
The comparison in extra damage based on chances of grappling then grab and release is used vs just holding should still be fairly significant.
Giant Scorpion is CR 3 vs fight CR 4 which has an AC of 17 with just the attacks landing.
The DRP is 18.99, which may as well be 19. The monster has about 40 hit points which is half.
It's safe to say that with 3 chances he can land one grapple and constrict.
about a 48% chance that one grab attack lands. The average for that is 7.5
.48x7.5=3.6
So with one constrict you get about 23.6 points of DRP
With the grapple release method and the grapple depending on the attack landing first you get
26.4, which is not as bad as I thought for the scorpion.
I admitted that that the octopus was already not going to do much damage
Admittedly on the scorpion it's not as bad as I thought it would be, but it is a bit swingy.
As for the PF guys not being the authors they did port the monsters over and they worked on the 3.5 system. In addition they changed the grapple rules so they are still the authors.
Conclusion: On average the difference is not that much, but it does make things more swingy so I still don't think it was the intent but without official word we'll never know for sure.
It's safe to say that with 3 chances he can land one grapple and constrict.
2 chances. The tail sting attack does not have the grab special ability.
2 chances. The
It's safe to say that with 3 chances he can land one grapple and constrict.tailsting attack does not have the grab special ability.
True. It's about about 2 points less for without the grab-release idea.
What is the default CMD--Grapple defense--of a CR4 monster?
According to my spreadsheet (with 197 CR4 monsters), 19.
Since you want a specific AC used and an NPC who uses PC wealth is considered as 1 CR higher I can use an the default AC of a monster that is one higher than the monster. As an example I will use the scorpion vs a CR 4 base AC.So, Giant Scorpion
Damage: 1d6+4, so an average of 4.5/hit.
That's wrong. 1d6+4's average is 3.5(the average roll for 1d6)+4. Making is 7.5/hit. The constict damage is the same of 7.5. Wraithstrike's DPR math was correct.
1d6 can deal 1-6, the +4 will always be +4. So the damage variance is 5-10 damage per hit, averaging 7.5.