# Unarmed strike and natural weapons?



## Theroc (Apr 14, 2009)

I've been wondering about this for a bit, as I've always been interested in playing a lycanthropic character, how do unarmed feats correlate with natural weapons if at all?

Do things that affect unarmed bonuses affect natural weapons?  

If not, what sorts of things do apply to natural weapons, and is it possible to make a character who is heavily focused on their alternate forms for combat, rather than relying on manufactured weapons and armor?


----------



## freyar (Apr 15, 2009)

Unfortunately, natural weapons don't count as having the Improved Unarmed Strike (even though logically maybe they should).  But maybe you could negotiate with your DM if you want to play a lycanthrope.  Or look for other good unarmed kind of feats that don't require IUS.  There might be some good monster feats outside the core, actually.


----------



## wizarddog (Apr 15, 2009)

Feats that require Improved unarmed strike require the feat. However, unarmed strike does count as a natural weapon for feats that require that. The deal is that an improved unarmed strike is a trained ability while natural weapons are really, natural weapons. As a lycanthropy, you can take improved natural weapon feats (as well with the improved but it won't stack your bare fist AND Claw.)


----------



## Theroc (Apr 15, 2009)

Improved natural weapon feats?  I didn't see any of those in the SRD.  DId I miss them?  Are they in the other supplementary materials in my signature?

A lycanthrope is one example of what I was thinking of... I wanted to create a character whose primary combat method was natural weapons, but I can't tell if it's possible to make an effective character that way or not.


----------



## Herzog (Apr 15, 2009)

I think he refers to Improved Natural Attack.

It's in the SRD under Monster Feats.

You may need DM fiat to use monster feats, although the most important reason they are seperate from the 'normal' feats is that 'normal' characters don't have access to them.

Since you are a lycanthrope, you have natural attacks. Since you have natural attacks, you should be able to improve them using this feat.


----------



## Runestar (Apr 15, 2009)

freyar said:


> Unfortunately, natural weapons don't count as having the Improved Unarmed Strike (even though logically maybe they should).  But maybe you could negotiate with your DM if you want to play a lycanthrope.  Or look for other good unarmed kind of feats that don't require IUS.  There might be some good monster feats outside the core, actually.




I am guessing the key reason for natural weapons and unarmed strikes being tracked separately is because unarmed strikes can be made with any part of your body, so it makes little sense for INA: claw to benefit your kicks. 

As natural weapons never get iterative attacks, I think the key way of playing a successful PC who uses natural attacks effectively is to either go totemist or warblade (since their base damage account for only a small part of the total damage they can deal). Otherwise, you may find yourself falling behind the damage curve very quickly.


----------



## freyar (Apr 15, 2009)

Runestar said:


> I am guessing the key reason for natural weapons and unarmed strikes being tracked separately is because unarmed strikes can be made with any part of your body, so it makes little sense for INA: claw to benefit your kicks.
> 
> As natural weapons never get iterative attacks, I think the key way of playing a successful PC who uses natural attacks effectively is to either go totemist or warblade (since their base damage account for only a small part of the total damage they can deal). Otherwise, you may find yourself falling behind the damage curve very quickly.



A fair point.  When I said I think it would make sense for a natural attack to qualify you for the IUS feat chain, I meant that I feel like natural attacks would be reasonable substitute prereqs for Improved Grapple, Deflect Arrows, Stunning Fist, and Snatch Arrows.  It's been an annoyance a couple of times in monster design.


----------



## Theroc (Apr 15, 2009)

Runestar said:


> I am guessing the key reason for natural weapons and unarmed strikes being tracked separately is because unarmed strikes can be made with any part of your body, so it makes little sense for INA: claw to benefit your kicks.
> 
> As natural weapons never get iterative attacks, I think the key way of playing a successful PC who uses natural attacks effectively is to either go totemist or warblade (since their base damage account for only a small part of the total damage they can deal). Otherwise, you may find yourself falling behind the damage curve very quickly.




I don't recall seeing either of those in the materials I can access, though the Totemist is a class I wish I could play (Incarnum looks very interesting).

Is that play idea not viable if I don't have access to those classes?  The materials I am capable of accessing are in my signature, in the event you too can access those/know something from them that would help.

I'd heard about the iterative attacks, and with that in mind I was wondering if it was even possible to make a viable build centered around animal/hybrid type forms of any shapeshifter capable of changing their shape.

Levels in Warshaper would no doubt help with this, as they are focused around the changing of shape.


----------



## milo (Apr 16, 2009)

You might want to take one level of monk.  A monk's unarmed strike can be considered manufactured or man made, you might be able to work with that and get your natural attacks considered to be manufactured and get second attacks with them.  
If not multiattack is a must.  You only get a -2 on your secondary attack.  Typically 2 claws and a bite as the secondary.  You might only get 3 attacks a round, but they are all at a good bonus.


----------



## dingle (Apr 16, 2009)

Improved natural attack is also a useful feat to increase the damage. It increases the natural weapon damage by one size catagory.


----------



## Theroc (Apr 16, 2009)

As for talking my DM into accepting the natural weapons as a manufactured weapon due to a monk level, I'd rather not have to resort to such tactics to get a mechanically viable character.  Especially since that'd force an alignment shift from most of my characters.

Improved Natural Attack and Multiattack were feats I figured would be gimmes for the natural weapons, but does that make them 'equal' to the iterative attacks I am losing?

Or did Wizards/TSR(I forget when Wizards took over) not anticipate players opting for a natural weapon focused character?


----------



## freyar (Apr 16, 2009)

I suspect that Multiattack by itself makes the natural weapons about as good as iterative attacks for weapons with similar damage to the natural attacks.  Wulf Ratbane did some calculations for his Trailblazer product to show that fewer iterative attacks with less of an attack roll penalty are generally as good if not better than 3.5 iterative attacks (in almost all cases).  Having several natural attacks with Multiattack should be similar to that.


----------



## Theroc (Apr 16, 2009)

freyar said:


> I suspect that Multiattack by itself makes the natural weapons about as good as iterative attacks for weapons with similar damage to the natural attacks.  Wulf Ratbane did some calculations for his Trailblazer product to show that fewer iterative attacks with less of an attack roll penalty are generally as good if not better than 3.5 iterative attacks (in almost all cases).  Having several natural attacks with Multiattack should be similar to that.




Isn't a Full attack an attack with all natural weapons?  Meaning in the case of a weretiger, they'd use both claws and a bite during a full attack?  What is the difference between this and multi-attack?

I'm rather new to D&D, so forgive if this is a silly question.  Also, I'm not entirely certain how iterative attacks work either.  Maybe I should understand that before I try and determine if the build I'm going for is possible, lol.


----------



## freyar (Apr 16, 2009)

You're right.  With natural weapons, a full attack is just an attack with all natural weapons.  Normally, when you make a full attack, your secondary natural attacks take a -5 penalty on the attack roll.  If you have the Multiattack feat, your secondary natural attacks only take a -2 penalty.  To qualify for Multiattack, you need 3 or more natural attacks.  I never can remember if 2 claws (for ex) count as two separate natural attacks for that, though.

Iterative attacks are something you get with manufactured weapons as you get higher and higher BAB.  If you have BAB +6, it's often written as +6/+1 because that means you get one attack at your full BAB and one at a -5 penalty compared to the first.  Every time your BAB increases by 5, you get an extra attack at an extra -5 penalty.  This is in full attacks, that is.


----------



## Jhaelen (Apr 16, 2009)

Theroc said:


> Or did Wizards/TSR(I forget when Wizards took over) not anticipate players opting for a natural weapon focused character?



Well in the Living Greyhawk RPGA rules the feats from the Monster Manual were restricted, IIRC.


----------



## Theroc (Apr 16, 2009)

Jhaelen said:


> Well in the Living Greyhawk RPGA rules the feats from the Monster Manual were restricted, IIRC.





Not familiar with the Greyhawk setting anyway.  However, without those, it makes a character based around natural attacks impossible as far as I can tell.


----------



## billd91 (Apr 16, 2009)

Theroc said:


> Not familiar with the Greyhawk setting anyway.  However, without those, it makes a character based around natural attacks impossible as far as I can tell.




They're not restricted in Greyhawk, per se. They were restricted in the Living Greyhawk campaign run by the RPGA, which allowed you to have a home-built character and bring him to various events at conventions, run out of homes, etc. Think of it as playing a game at a con but with your own, on-going character. 
Because it was a massive, shared campaign with many different adventure writers and DMs and a great need for balance control, a lot of extra-complex or unbalanced options were barred.


----------



## billd91 (Apr 16, 2009)

Theroc said:


> Isn't a Full attack an attack with all natural weapons?  Meaning in the case of a weretiger, they'd use both claws and a bite during a full attack?  What is the difference between this and multi-attack?
> 
> I'm rather new to D&D, so forgive if this is a silly question.  Also, I'm not entirely certain how iterative attacks work either.  Maybe I should understand that before I try and determine if the build I'm going for is possible, lol.




A full attack is just an attack action that enables you to use more than one attack. It's basically known as a full round action and that enables you to make attacks.

Think of it this way: all characters have a certain number of actions in the course of a round. They could get the equivalent of one swift action, one standard action, one move action, and any number of free actions (within reason). A single attack is generally a standard action (same with casting most spells, etc). To get multiple attacks, you basically have to trade in the normal standard action you get plus the move action and mash them together into the full round action in order to make the attacks. Standard action + move action = full round action. A full round action in which you are taking multiple attacks = a full attack.

So the full attack entries in the Monster Manual list all the attacks the monster makes when he's staying put and whaling on the PCs. But some monsters, particularly ones that fight like PCs (with weapons, are basically humanoid) are quirky and add iterative attacks into the mix.

Iterative attacks are how most PCs take full attack actions once they get a base attack bonus of +6 or higher. It allows them to make multiple attacks but at decreasing bonuses (-5 per additional attack, in fact). In essence, it's 3e's rules for allowing multiple attacks. It's great to get them, but you have to make a trade-off between getting those attacks, each of which is less likely to hit, or moving faster around the battlefield. Against opponents that are hard to hit, it may be better to forego the extra attacks and be able to move. But against softer opponents, it might be better to stay put and lay out tons of punishment.

Iterative attacks and natural attacks can be mixed together into PCs that use weapons as well as have natural attacks. Think of a centaur fighter with a sword and also lashing out with his hooves. You pretty much need to figure the iterative attack bonuses and the natural attack bonuses separately. They're two distinct subsystems of attacks. They can be used together, but calculate them separately based on the character's BAB.

For example, with a 11th level centaur fighter, Strength 18:

Iterative: look at fighter table and get a BAB of +11/+6/+1 (3 attacks/round)
Add 4 for his strength, maybe +1 for weapon focus (sword), +2 for magic sword, -1 for being large and you get +17/+12/+7. His first attack in the round with that weapon is at +17 to hit, his second at +12, third at +7.

Natural: for the same character, his BAB of +11, Strength of 18, +1 for weapon focus (hooves), and large size adds up to +15. Since the hooves are actually secondary attacks (in this case to the sword), both hoof attacks drop by 5 to +10.

Both of these types of attacks can be used together in a single full attack action yielding sword +17/+12/+7 and hooves +10 (with each hoof) for a total of 5 attacks.

Multiattack, as it's used here, is actually a monster feat that replaces the -5 penalty for secondary natural attacks and replaces it with a -2. His hooves in the above example would be +13 with multiattack in effect (if he could get it, he only has 2 natural attacks, so technically centaurs can get it).

Unarmed strikes, with improved unarmed strike or not, behave like iterative weapon attacks. It's one of the byproducts of being humanoid and fighting like a PC. You can get multiple attacks but there's a mild intellectual disconnect between punching and clawing that the rules impose as a result.

Does this help some. I fear I'm not structuring this the best way I can.


----------



## Theroc (Apr 16, 2009)

I think I understand for the most part, though it sounds like natural weapons get the short end of the stick as far as effectiveness goes, unless the monster has a high AC and the extra attacks miss anyway.


----------



## milo (Apr 17, 2009)

A weretiger gets a +12 str for a LA of +3, the werebear gets +16 for the same LA.  Weretiger gets two claws at D6 as his main attacks and a bite at D8 for his secondary.  With multiattack he gets his claws at full BAB and his bite at -2 BAB.  Normally he would have a good chance to hit with all attacks.  It also gets pounce in tiger form, including two rake attacks.  Take a few levels of scout and that is a nasty pounce attack.


----------



## Theroc (Apr 17, 2009)

Hrm... so, it would be your estimation that a weretiger if they took the correct feats could possibly fight effectively with just his natural weapons?


----------

