If a White Haired Witch has no other natural attacks, whould their hair as a primary natural attack deal 1.5×modifier on damage? Or does White Hair (Su) using Int overwrite that making it just default Int mod?
My understanding is that the 1.5 STR modifier is for creatures that only have one single natural attack (i.e no other attacks, such a other natural attacks or the ability to attack with weapons).
The language isn't entirely clear, but that is how I think it works and it makes sense to me.
My understanding is that the 1.5 STR modifier is for creatures that only have one single natural attack (i.e no other attacks, such a other natural attacks or the ability to attack with weapons).
I had to look up that bit about attacks with weapons.
In all technicality, the White Haired Witch could have an unarmed strike. Would manufactured count against natural attacks? I.E. short of Wild Shape, players can never get this 1.5x Str mod.
'Only one natural attack' could mean only one "natural attack" (i.e. one natural attack but other attacks as well) or it could mean only "one natural attack" (i.e. not other attacks at all, except the only natural attack, like a shark.)
To me the second makes more sense to me, but it could reasonably be read either way as the context isn't clear enough to determine.
If there has been a FAQ that resolves this I don't know of it.
Any creature can unarmed strike. It’s not unique to humanoids. Unarmed strikes just aren’t meant to count.
Any creature can unarmed strike. It’s not unique to humanoids. Unarmed strikes just aren’t meant to count.
I have 1 level of Monk, so things are iffier. Even if I didn't, I'd still need Improved Unarmed and Feral Combat Training for the grapple build I'm working with.
The character was a Changeling, but I realized she's never going to use the claws with only 1/2 BAB. That being the case, I reworked the character as a Tiefling, losing Create Water 3/day (which was nice for crab familiar) but gaining no penalties on Con, a boost to Dex for Finesse reasons, and then of course the hair becomes the only natural weapon and may get 1.5×mod to damage.
I know my comment will be of no real help, but I'd certainly allow it. WHW needs all the love she can get.
|
Once upon a time when Sean K Reynolds’ posts were still mostly official he thought so. Or at least, he did for Prehensile Hair, which should carry over.
I think there’s a thread specific to white haired witch with the same answer, but I don’t seem to have that one favorited.
And here is a later post with a longer explanation.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If a creature has only a single natural attack it gets the x1.5 mod and the natural attack is primary.
If a creature has more than one primary natural attack, they each deal x1 damage
Unarmed strikes are not natural attacks, this is explicitly stated.
If a creature combines natural weapon attacks with manufactured weapons, the natural weapons are secondary and deal x.5 damage.
Barring rules stating otherwise, the witch will get the x1.5 damage mod as long as she has no other natural weapons and is not attacking with a manufactured weapon.
If a creature has only a single natural attack it gets the x1.5 mod and the natural attack is primary.
If a creature has more than one primary natural attack, they each deal x1 damage
Unarmed strikes are not natural attacks, this is explicitly stated.
If a creature combines natural weapon attacks with manufactured weapons, the natural weapons are secondary and deal x.5 damage.
Barring rules stating otherwise, the witch will get the x1.5 damage mod as long as she has no other natural weapons and is not attacking with a manufactured weapon.
This is exactly how I read it as well.
The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier.
Compare that to a Half Orc feat that gives you a natural attack:
You can make a bite attack for 1d4 points of damage, plus your Strength modifier.
If you were going to get your Strength modifier it would say so. For the record, there are weapons that get no stat modifier.
In general Pathfinder is an "Inclusive" system, which - somewhat counter-intuitively - means the rules tell you what you can include. If it's not specifically in the rules you can't include it (with some exceptions due to the DnD 3.5 compatability stuff).
The combat chapter says:
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal).....If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack
The hair is a natural attack, so by default it gets strength bonus to damage, and it would take text otherwise to change this. The orc text is just being redundant. A natural attack doesn’t have to say it uses strength to use strength, but sometimes writers will include that kind of thing for clarity. Though, this is likely just an oversight on the part of the witch.
So I guess technically the witch would be getting 1.5 to their strength mod and just the base int mod for a sole natural attack, though I do suspect it was the intention for intelligence to simply be replacing strength.
The hair is also an (Su) ability though. Most (Su) attacks tend to need to clarify their specifics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The hair is a natural attack, so by default it gets strength bonus to damage, and it would take text otherwise to change this.
It does contain text that says otherwise.
If it said: "The Witch adds her Intelligence modifier to damage" then you'd be absolutely right. It doesn't say that though, it says: "The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier."
The hair is a natural attack, so by default it gets strength bonus to damage, and it would take text otherwise to change this.It does contain text that says otherwise.
If it said: "The Witch adds her Intelligence modifier to damage" then you'd be absolutely right. It doesn't say that though, it says: "The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier."
And that says nothing about not adding strength. It doesn’t even imply it really.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sorry I didn't express myself very well there.
The text doesn't say: "You add X to damage."
It instead says: "Your damage is X" - where X is 1d4 + Int-mod.
I'm not citing rules here, but rather grammar. If you think the general rule over-rides the grammar of the text in White Haired Witch then you're correct.
At this point I'm happy if we agree to disagree.
I am constantly amused that merely having an attack but not using it causes a different attack to be permanently weakened.
...Did I say "amused"? What's the word for that feeling you get after slamming your forehead into your keyboard a few dozen times?
It is worth noting (for completeness) that the White Haired Witch doesn't mention anything about attack rolls - meaning you use you STR modifier for attack rolls and your INT modifier for damage (so Cavall you're still taking that penalty on attack rolls). As a natural weapon it is compatible with Weapon Finesse, so you can use DEX instead of STR for the cost of a feat.
And yes blaphers, the natural attack rules are definitely "amusing" =P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gotta work on those hair muscles, yo.
Reading through the ability and then referencing Natural Attacks makes it pretty clear.
From White Haired Witch:
o "This ability functions as a primary natural attack..."
o "The hair deal 1d4 points of damage... plus the witch's intelligence modifier..."
From Natural Attacks:
o "Primary attacks are made using the creature's full base attack bonus and add the creature's full strength bonus on damage rolls..."
o "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..."
o "You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limp and body parts capable of making the attack..."
o "Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently... These exceptions are noted in the creature's description..."
o "Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack... 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 break it down:
o The WHW does not get to apply str to damage because it states in her ability what it applies to damage.
o It will only EVER get to attack with it's hair once a turn, because you never get to attack with a natural weapon more than once; AoO excluded in that number.
o It only gets to apply it's INT mod to damage because it has other options for attack; even if it only chooses to use it's hair to make an attack; because it has the option of making a natural attack or a weapon attack REGARDLESS of if you have a weapon on you or not.
o If it uses it's hair and a manufactured weapon to attack in the same round the damage the hair does is reduced to 1/2 INT mod because it automatically gets down graded to a secondary attack.
Examples of some of the references above:
o Sharks, regardless of what their BAB is they only get one attack a round because they don't have any other limb capable of making an attack.
o Dragons, who always get to apply 1-1/2 STR to their bite attack because it's noted in the attack damage itself.
o Barbarians who can gain a bite attack while raging but only apply 1/2 STR mod because it is considered a secondary natural attack.
o Tigers get to make two claw attacks a round because they have two claws so they are really only making one attack with each claw.
Hope this translation of the rules helps you guys.
o It only gets to apply it's INT mod to damage because it has other options for attack; even if it only chooses to use it's hair to make an attack; because it has the option of making a natural attack or a weapon attack REGARDLESS of if you have a weapon on you or not.
I decided to actually try and look this up with a monster capable of making a natural attack and a weapon attack.
Bestiary 1, Planetar Angel
As a humanoid it can use any weapons, and Greatsword is in its entry along with Slam, a natural attack.
Anyway, they have a 27 Str for +8 modifier. Their +3 Greatsword deals 2d6+15, it would uave 1.5×Str as a 2h weapon so +12, then +3 from +3 to make it +15. The Slam deals 2d8+12. The +12 is of course 1.5×Str mod.
So as far as I can tell, monster entries don't consider manufactured weapons to count against the natural attacks 1.5×, and since Pathfinder (players) takes a tonne of pride in players and monsters playing by the same rules (if arguements in the Playtest and Starfinder forums are any indication), that has to mean players recieve this benefit.
To address the Barbarian bite, it is secondary. However the natural attack rules state even a secondary becomes a primary if it is your only attack, gaining 1.5×. If the Barb also takes the totem for Claws, it's important to state that the bite is secondary however, since most bites are primary.
Back to the witch though, your other point about being used with a weapon becoming secondary. That's important.
Basically:
Option A: The hair is treated like a normal natural weapon getting 1.5×Mod (in this case Int) to damage if it's the only, and 0.5×Mod if used with a weapon as a secondary.
Option B: The hair's replacement RAW applies +Int mod flat, regardless. It would add only +Int because it says it does, and even secondary would still add +full Int because unlike Power Attack there is no specification that it only gets half on off hand/secondary.
Either it plays by all the natural attack rules, getting 1.5× as only, or it counts as specific trumping general and would recieve full mod as a secondary (not that a 1/2 BAB class would hit often if ever with a -5 to hit).
|
|
As I mentioned before, there's a pretty strong designer comment on Prehensile Hair that it would receive 1.5x INT. Since I'm sure the designer (SKR) was aware that a witch could also potentially wield a manufactured weapon, I don't think being able to wield a manufactured weapon affects whether or not you get 1.5xSTR. Actually wielding (attacking with) the manufactured weapon would, but not just having or being able to have one.
Now, there is an important difference between the way Prehensile Hair is worded and the way White Haired Witch is worded. Prehensile Hair lets you use your INT as your STR when using the hair. This has a few effects. First, you can use your INT to attack as well as for damage. Second, you can pick things up with your hair as though it was stronger than you. Third, it's clearer that it should act like STR for damage, because it effectively is your STR for that attack.
I think Isaac's two options are the correct options, for the reasons he stated. Though I'm not sure which one is the answer. I would probably give them 1.5xINT based on the Prehensile Hair ruling, but it's not completely clear, and I could see a GM ruling either way.
o It only gets to apply it's INT mod to damage because it has other options for attack; even if it only chooses to use it's hair to make an attack; because it has the option of making a natural attack or a weapon attack REGARDLESS of if you have a weapon on you or not.
"If a creature has only one natural attack, ..."
Read that again.
|
|
The strongest point against 1.5 * int to damage is natural attack rules say you get 1.5 * str, and the ability doesn't say that int replaces str for the bonus to damage. Leaving us with 2 cases.
1) If you replace str with int, it gets 1.5 * int to damage.
2) If you don't replace the str, it gets 1.5 * str + 1 * int.
Not exactly. There are abilities that replace STR with DEX and the DEX doesn't get multiplied for things like two-handing the weapon. So replacing STR isn't necessarily enough. Counting as STR is, and there's designer comment to back that up. I still think INT should get multiplied here, but I see where the ambiguity comes in.
Others have posted the counter argument to point 2 above.
The unchained faq makes it pretty clear that replacing strength also includes the multipliers. It’s just that there are almost no strength to dexterity options for 2 handed weapons. As far as I know, only unchained rogue and mythic weapon finesse can do it.
Agile can be put on a 2 hander but excludes the multiplier as an exception.
|
|
No, the Unchained FAQ makes it clear that replacing STR with DEX for an unchained rogue gets the 1 1/2x modifier. It's specific to the Unchained Rogue, and a deviation from normal behavior. It's even specifically called out in the FAQ that other effects don't benefit from that for an Unchained Rogue. Remember that the Unchained classes are allowed to break the normal rules, so just because something works one way in Unchained, it doesn't mean that it works that way everywhere else in the rules.
Unchained Rogue Finesse Training: When I'm replacing Strength for Dexterity, what happens with a one-handed weapon? What about an off-hand weapon?
With a two-handed weapon, you add 1-1/2 times your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls, and with an off-hand weapon, you add half your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls. As per the ability's text, if an effect would prevent you from adding your Strength modifier on damage rolls, you don't add your Dexterity modifier. However, any other effects that would increase the multiplier to your Strength bonus on damage rolls (such as the two-handed fighter archetype's overhand chop) do not affect your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls.
I'd ay at best it's unclear how an ability that replaces strength works. But Unchained Rogue should not be looked at as defining the normal behavior.
Unchained Rogue Finesse Training: When I'm replacing Strength for Dexterity, what happens with a one-handed weapon? What about an off-hand weapon?
With a two-handed weapon, you add 1-1/2 times your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls, and with an off-hand weapon, you add half your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls. As per the ability's text, if an effect would prevent you from adding your Strength modifier on damage rolls, you don't add your Dexterity modifier. However, any other effects that would increase the multiplier to your Strength bonus on damage rolls (such as the two-handed fighter archetype's overhand chop) do not affect your Dexterity bonus on damage rolls.
Note that it’s answering a specific question, but in a broad way. The devs knew there are other dexterity to damage options out there and chose to answer the question in a way that would apply to them all. But other than mythic weapon finesse, this was the only other place that the two handed answer matters. And we know the devs abandoned mythic a long time ago.
|
|
You, or a GM, are welcome to read that as a general FAQ. But it's got the ability name in the text of the question, references the ability in the text of the FAQ, and is for a book that is specifically not considered to be part of the core rules. I doubt there will ever be an FAQ specifically addressing that topic outside of Unchained, given 2E looming, but I would not expect the designers to feel like they would have to rule consistent with Unchained in other circumstances. Nor do I think a GM should feel that way.
The designers for unchained were the same designers as for other core books. And the FAQ team is the same for all FAQs.
Also, the language was clarifying and not additive. It’s letting you know that when you see this kind of ability, this is how it’s inteended to be read. But like I said, this case almost never matters, except for a handful of corner cases.
o The WHW does not get to apply str to damage because it states in her ability what it applies to damage.
That's how I rerad it too.
o It will only EVER get to attack with it's hair once a turn, because you never get to attack with a natural weapon more than once; AoO excluded in that number.
Correct, except for things like Haste.
o It only gets to apply it's INT mod to damage because it has other options for attack; even if it only chooses to use it's hair to make an attack; because it has the option of making a natural attack or a weapon attack REGARDLESS of if you have a weapon on you or not.
That's not how that works. You have to be armed to lose the 1.5 modifier (you should have to actually attack as far as I'm concerned, but I'm pretty sure the rules as written don't agree with me).
o If it uses it's hair and a manufactured weapon to attack in the same round the damage the hair does is reduced to 1/2 INT mod because it automatically gets down graded to a secondary attack.
Yup.
o It only gets to apply it's INT mod to damage because it has other options for attack; even if it only chooses to use it's hair to make an attack; because it has the option of making a natural attack or a weapon attack REGARDLESS of if you have a weapon on you or not.I decided to actually try and look this up with a monster capable of making a natural attack and a weapon attack.
...
So as far as I can tell, monster entries don't consider manufactured weapons to count against the natural attacks 1.5×, and since Pathfinder (players) takes a tonne of pride in players and monsters playing by the same rules (if arguements in the Playtest and Starfinder forums are any indication), that has to mean players recieve this benefit.
Perfect example. PLANETAR ANGEL <- Link for those interested.
Option A: The hair is treated like a normal natural weapon getting 1.5×Mod (in this case Int) to damage if it's the only, and 0.5×Mod if used with a weapon as a secondary.
Option B: The hair's replacement RAW applies +Int mod flat, regardless. It would add only +Int because it says it does, and even secondary would still add +full Int because unlike Power Attack there is no specification that it only gets half on off hand/secondary.
This pretty much sums it up. I'd accept either of these rulings. I tend toward A, but B is totally a possibility based on the wording.
The unchained faq makes it pretty clear that replacing strength also includes the multipliers.
An FAQ about one specific class feature based on DEX won't tell you much about a class feature from a different class that's based on INT.
The Devs have said many times that the FAQs are only about what's stated in the text.
And finally, there are many ways to get DEX to damage, most of them DON'T get the 1.5 multiplier (but do get the 0.5 multiplier for offhand). If you're looking for precedent then you've taken the minority and used it as your sample.
FINAL THOUGHTS: Going back to Isaac Zephyr's 2 options I think either of them works within the rules. It's important to choose one way of doing things and stick to it, so that your world is internally consistent. My preference is to give 1.5 X INT.
The unchained faq makes it pretty clear that replacing strength also includes the multipliers. It’s just that there are almost no strength to dexterity options for 2 handed weapons. As far as I know, only unchained rogue and mythic weapon finesse can do it.
Agile can be put on a 2 hander but excludes the multiplier as an exception.
Bladed Brush + Slashing Grace allows you to DEX-to-damage with a glaive and does not restrict the multiplier.
|
|
In 2008, Paizo released the Pathfinder Roleplaying Game. It was a massive project, and we gave it everything we had, combining the best legacies of the past with fresh new ideas to create the game you know today.
But a game designer never stops tinkering.
In the years since, we’ve released tons of new rules, from classes and subsystems to feats and spells. Yet there were always those ideas too big to be touched—the shiny, terrifying ones that could fundamentally alter the way the game works. Unwilling to rock the boat, we incorporated them into our home games or set them aside.
Until now. Within these pages, you’ll find lovingly crafted refinements that fine-tune the Pathfinder RPG rules system, and mad experiments that transform it completely. With Pathfinder Unchained, you become the designer—which parts of this book you incorporate into your game, and which parts you leave on the shelf, are entirely your call.
We’re opening up our workshop and offering you our best tools. What you build with them is up to you.
So for those of you who are looking at the monster entry Planetar Angel you missed a section of what I quoted from the Natural Attack rules.
o "Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently... These exceptions are noted in the creature's description..."
If you look at the entry for the Planetar Angel it clearly states that it gets to add 1-1/2 it's strength bonus to it's slam attack. But, it also states that it can't use that attack and make attacks with it's greatsword in the same full round action.
Planetar Angel:
Melee +3 holy greatsword +27/+22/+17 (3d6+15/19–20) or slam +24 (2d8+12)
So no the Planetar Angel isn't the perfect example for 1-1/2 int mod, but is the perfect example for my argument.
If the Planetar Angel uses it's slam attack can it make ANY other attacks? No. It clearly states that it is the ONLY attack that can be made. This causes it's slam attack to fall under the Natural Attack rule for 1-1/2 mod because it is the ONLY attack that can be used that round.
o "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..."
Once again; using it's slam attack makes it the only attack that can be made so it gets 1-1/2 mod.
The WHW can use it's hair in conjunction with normal attacks once it gets a high enough BAB so the attack doesn't get 1-1/2 mod. Which is why it's written 1d4 + int and not 1d4 + 1-1/2 int. Just because the WHW may choose to ONLY make an attack with it's hair doesn't mean that it gets the multiplier.
o "...This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one..."
Another reason why the WHW doesn't get to add 1-1/2 mod is the following: "...Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do."
It's important to remember that the WHW is a CLASS that grants a SU; Super Natural Ability; that gives you a natural attack, but your RACE doesn't have a natural attack, but can make UNARMED STRIKES. So even WITHOUT a MANUFACTURED WEAPON you still have an attack inherent to you that you can use.
But, regardless I will use Planetar Angel and WHW to show why it's only mod and not 1-1/2 mod and it lies in the description of the attack.
Planetar Angel: Slam +24 (2d8+12)
WHW: The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier.
It states right in the ability that it deals 1d4 + mod. NOT 1d4 + 1-1/2 mod. Which means it falls under the "... treats it's attack differently... this is noted in it's description..." rules of natural attacks.
A Tiger get's it's full str mod to both of it's claw attacks and it's bite attack despite it getting to make three attacks a round.
An Iron Golem gets to add 1-1/2 it's str mod to BOTH of it's slam attacks a round.
A Beheaded-Giant only gets to add it's str mod to it's single slam attack; though there might be an error on the site since it says slams instead of slam.
A Shark gets to add 1-1/2 it's str mod to it's single bite attack.
A Were-Shark only adds 1/2 it's str mod to it's bite attack but can make two attacks a round with a BAB of 3; one with it's trident and one with it's bite.
So in conclusion... no... you only get 1d4 + int mod to damage for your hair. As it stats that as the damage it does in the ability description and fits into the RAW for natural attacks.
Link to Universal Monster Rules, White-Haired Witch, and Planetar Angel.
The or is more or less tye fact that slam attacks generally are described as needing a free hand/limb. They're the punch of Natural Attacks, so the Greatsword taking 2 hands leaves that appendage occupied.
Using the Wereshark (as the only one relevant to the arguement at hand), it and every other monster written with a weapon generally describes their full attack. The Drider has Mace + Bite as well, and it assumes the creature should be using the stronger attack (the Mace). The Hound Archon has Bite + Slam, and Greatsword + Bite, with bite at 2 different bonuses, but it does not list Slam alone, or Bite alone because it always assumes better attack.
It's difficult to find single-attack monster that also uses a weapon, as most have 2 claws, or 2 slams, which negate themselves since 2 is not a singular attack. The Iron Golem is the exception as they have the Powerful Blows ability.
However, there is one monster which does have a weapon and a natural attack, with the natural attack listed solo, and with their weapon. The Minotaur.
They have Str 19 Greataxe for 3d6+6 with Gore secondary at 1d6+2. However, their Gore is listed again under their Powerful Charge special attack. Powerful Charge adds the weapon damage again (and I had to double check charging had no additional damage, and that he had no feats to offer that at all) and the end result is the Gore listed at 2d6+6, giving it 1.5× Str mod.
Bonus: For an additional example of monster entries only putting the ideal full attack options, the Rakshasa is listed with Kukri + Claw + Bite as their only full attack option, despite the fact they have 2 claws. Paizo assumes they will have the Kukri in one hand to use the META (Most Effective Tactics Available) rather than anything else.
But, it also states that it can't use that attack and make attacks with it's greatsword in the same full round action.No it doesn't.
Planetar Angel:
Melee +3 holy greatsword +27/+22/+17 (3d6+15/19–20) slam +24 (2d8+12)It either attacks with its greatsword or it attacks with its slam, not both.
Similarly, a balor can attack with its whip and longsword, or its slams.
Not sure what you're trying to say here by disagreeing with what I posted and then agreeing with it... pretty sure that you misread what I posted.
But, it also states that it use that attack and make attacks with it's greatsword in the same full round action.
The Salamander is another example, with only a Tail Slap with the special ability Constrict. Compared to the Kraken who also has Constrict which does not have 1.5×Str added.
Violating this pattern though is the Sea Serpent. But there are a few things in its block which I can't explain. Their 34 Str is +12, which is +6 on their tail secondary, yet somehow +22 on their bite? And both their Constrict and Swallow Whole are rocking +18s which as far as I can tell is just 1.5× mod. Far more than their tail for constrict, yet less for their bite on swallow.
The Minotaur.
They have Str 19 Greataxe for 3d6+6 with Gore secondary at 1d6+2. However, their Gore is listed again under their Powerful Charge special attack. Powerful Charge adds the weapon damage again (and I had to double check charging had no additional damage, and that he had no feats to offer that at all) and the end result is the Gore listed at 2d6+6, giving it 1.5× Str mod.
This is pulled directly from Universal Monster Rules - Powerful Charge with pertinent points in bold.
Powerful Charge (Ex)When a creature with this special attack makes a charge, its attack deals extra damage in addition to the normal benefits and hazards of a charge. The attack and amount of damage from the attack is given in the creature’s description.
The ability that increases the damage dealt by Powerful charge is indeed two times the normal 1d6 and the amount of STR mod added to it is indeed 1-1/2 more than normal, but the ability states that the damage it deals is "... given in the creature's description." Gore itself isn't listed sepparately which means you'd look on the Natural Attacks Table in the Natural Attacks section of the Universal Monster Rules to see if it is considered a Primary or Secondary attack to see what it's damage is if used as the only attack a round. To keep you from having to look it up the table states that Gore is a Primary Attack. When you look up what kind of damage a Primary Attack gets when used it says that you get your full str mod. But, since a Minotaur can use another attack, this one a manufactured weapon; you have to reference what that does and the rules say this "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."
I'm sorry, but you keep quoting partial points of the rules and misinformation about what an ability does.
...Powerful Charge adds the weapon damage again...
No where in the description of Powerful Charge does it state that it exclusively adds the weapon damage to the attack a second time. It states that the damage will be given in the creatures description.
You do this with the Salamander's constrict ability as well.
Constrict states this; pulled directly from the text with bold:
"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."
Meaning that it is usually the same, but not always and you should reference the creature's entry to verify that it is the same.
This once again proves the following from the Universal Monster Rules; also pulled directly from the text.
"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."
The reason you can't understand why the damages are different is because you keep ignoring the rule for Natural Attacks that I have quoted above. The creators of the stat blocks made them that way and can by using the catch-all quoted above.
As much as you may want the Witch's hair to deal 1-1/2 mod damage it can't because it is clearly stated as dealing; using text pulled directly from the ability; "The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier."|
|
Not being able to attack with a slam and a great sword in the same round has nothing to do with 1 1/2x STR. A slam requires a limb to attack with (usually an arm). The greatsword requires both the creatures hands. So it can’t slam, because it’s already used the limb that it needs.
And again, here is SKR stating that prehensile hair gets 1 1/2x INT,
here he is farther down the thread clarifying that adding a second natural attack makes the hair go back to secondary,
and here he is stating it follows the normal rules for natural attacks
Prehensile hair is a secondary natural attack, unless it is the only natural attack you have, in which case it’s a primary attack. It is also a witch ability. If being able to wield a weapon prevented being able to use the prehensile hair as a primary natural attack, he would have said so instead of stressing that it becomes primary when it’s your only natural attack.
The Salamander is another example, with only a Tail Slap with the special ability Constrict. Compared to the Kraken who also has Constrict which does not have 1.5×Str added.
Violating this pattern though is the Sea Serpent. But there are a few things in its block which I can't explain. Their 34 Str is +12, which is +6 on their tail secondary, yet somehow +22 on their bite? And both their Constrict and Swallow Whole are rocking +18s which as far as I can tell is just 1.5× mod. Far more than their tail for constrict, yet less for their bite on swallow.
the attack bonuses make sense if you assume it's using power attack and the fact that it doesn't have multi-attack. But the damage for the bite seems to be getting a +10 from power attack and the tail isn't receiving any bonus at all, even though they should be +8 and +4. So, it's attacks should look like
bite +23 (4d8+20/19–20 plus grab), tail slap +18 (3d6+10 plus grab)
The constrict and swallow whole abilities seem to be getting 1 1/2 it's str mod. While constrict gives a guideline that the damage is "typically" similar to the attack that initiated it, swallow whole fails to even have a guideline. What's more both abilities can just be whatever the author feels is right. So, this could be a deliberate choice, that has no bearing on the normal natural weapon rules.
As much as you may want the Witch's hair to deal 1-1/2 mod damage it can't because it is clearly stated as dealing; using text pulled directly from the ability; "The hair deals 1d4 points of damage (1d3 for a Small witch) plus the witch’s Intelligence modifier."
It's not a want. You've presented two conflicting pieces of information.
Either it deals flat Int, regardless of being primary or secondary, or it plays by normal natural attack rules, gaining 1.5× or 0.5× respectively.
You've claimed both. That it gains flat, and would be 0.5× Int as secondary, but both cannot be true.
Your arguement for why it wouldn't recieve 1.5× had nothing to do with the ability, but specifically that any creature that can weild a weapon or perform an unarmed strike thus has another option and cannot receive this benefit. A point I've gone through lengths to disprove, as it is important for any PC character (an Adaptive Shifter being a prime example, as they can manifest a singular gore, slam, or tail).
To quote directly from the Bestiary 3rd printing (my copy).
Natural Attacks
"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 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.
...*Reference to Dragons*...
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 covers the bases from the Angels, since they only have 1 slam, but their Greatsword occupies it. My experience with Powerful Charge comes directly from the Shifter and their Bull Aspect, and each creature which can do it you can deconstruct to figure out where the damage comes from. Using "given in the creature's entry" as an argument is the equivalent of saying "you can't prove this isn't a random number". No one can prove a negative, but I can prove a number of positive points which refute your statements.
Natural attacks specifies the number of natural attacks is the decider on the 1.5×, not general attacks. The following sentence states multiple attacks, but weapons are not brought in until 2 paragraphs later. Context is your first paragraph is entirely about natural attacks, even if they don't use the word natural in more than the first instance. Otherwise, the statement on one type of attack and multiple attacks being primary would conflict with the statement that when used with weapons natural attacks are secondary.
Not being able to attack with a slam and a great sword in the same round has nothing to do with 1 1/2x STR. A slam requires a limb to attack with (usually an arm). The greatsword requires both the creatures hands. So it can’t slam, because it’s already used the limb that it needs.
And again, here is SKR stating that prehensile hair gets 1 1/2x INT,
here he is farther down the thread clarifying that adding a second natural attack makes the hair go back to secondary,
and here he is stating it follows the normal rules for natural attacksPrehensile hair is a secondary natural attack, unless it is the only natural attack you have, in which case it’s a primary attack. It is also a witch ability. If being able to wield a weapon prevented being able to use the prehensile hair as a primary natural attack, he would have said so instead of stressing that it becomes primary when it’s your only natural attack.
I hate to use this against you, but you should probably reread his quotes again. At no point is he stating that it gets 1-1/2 int mod.
Not sure where you're reading that. He literally pulled the text from the Natural Attacks section. He is stating that it is a Primary attack if it is the only attack you make in a round. Specifically saying that it is a secondary attack that becomes primary if it's the only attack you make. It's a secondary if the following happen: you gain a second natural attack or you make an attack with a manufactured weapon.I can see where everyone is getting hung-up on the one natural attack, but look at almost every single monster that only has one natural attack and can only make one attack around... the damage is 1-1/2 mod. Almost every other creature; save for a few exceptions; only gets to add STR mod to their damage. Even what he says follows the RAW.
Your interpreting the rules wrong because it's not written 100% clearly. It should say, "If a creature can only make one attack a round and has only one natural attack then they deal 1-1/2 mod damage," to make it completely clear how it functions.
HOWEVER that's a moot point because the ability states it deals 1d4 + int mod not 1d4 + 1-1/2 int mod.
What you are missing is that you get MORE ATTACKS. No matter how many HD it gains, or how HIGH it's BAB gets a shark will only EVER get to make that one attack a round. YOU as a player will eventually gain a higher BAB and the ability to make multiple attacks using different things. And as the Natural Attacks section states: "...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.
What is keeping you from making multiple attacks at level 1? Nothing. Nothing at all. You can make an attack with your hair AND a manufactured weapon at level 1 as a WHW. Nothing is stopping you from doing that save for the penalty to attack. Just like someone who doesn't have two-weapon fighting can make an attack with an off-hand weapon albeit at a massive penalty to hit.
Your hair is now an additional limb. You still have both your arms and you can use a dagger. If you choose not to take the penalty and you choose to only make the attack with your hair that's your choice. You still have another means of attack that can be done as a full attack action. Your hair will get to add 1-1/2 int mod to damage because it is not the only attack you char can make in a round; even at level 1.
But every creature ever has an "extra attack", because anything can use unarmed strike.
YOU as a player will eventually gain a higher BAB and the ability to make multiple attacks using different things.
That doesn't apply to Natural Attacks. To the point the Shifter needs a special ability to allow them to do so, Shifter's Fury.
Melklador and Cavall have the point. Though on Cavall's, holding a weapon wouldn't invalidate things. Using it would, because it would overwrite being the only natural weapon bonus by defaulting it to secondary during the full attack. Like Minotaur and his Axe + Gore.
It would become more complicated if weilding a weapon altered things, because technically anything can be an Improvised Weapon (and of course Unarmed Strike is a weapon (and specifically called out as not a natural attack)), which would make it as Archmic is trying to argue that anything with hands cannot have only one natural attack.