Post/Author/DateTime	Post
im_robertb 09-07-07, 12:47 AM	So I'm planning on using an Average Salamander, http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/salamander.htm , in an upcoming encounter, but I have a few questions on how it works: 1) It has 5' reach with its spear, and 10' reach with its tail slap. When someone provokes an Attack of Opportunity, the AoO occurs before the provoking action. So, if someone is moving towards it, say from 3 squares away to melee, this would provoke an AoO when they move from 10' away (only reachable by the tail slap) to adjacent (within spear reach). The salamander would make an AoO with the tail slap, correct? I'm unsure because Tail Slap isn't listed on the Attack line, only the Full Attack line, implying it only uses its spear for AoOs. 2) When using its Tail Slap + Improved Grab + Constrict, does it go as follows? -Normal attack with Tail Slap. Hit. Roll Damage. -Improved Grab: Opposed grapple checks. If the salamander wins, it and the target are now grappling. -Because it just started a grapple, it gets to deal unarmed damage, which is its constrict damage. So it can go tail-slap-grapple-constrict for what basically adds up to tail slap damage x2? If both of the methods listed above work, then it could feasibly go like this: Fighter charges. Salamander gets an AoO for movement, uses its tail slap. Hits (+9). 2d6+1 plus 1d6 fire damage. Tries to start a grapple (+11). Wins. 2d6+1 plus 1d6 fire damage. Fighter is now in the salamander's space, grappled, and his action may now be over. (I'd rule if he moved up to 1x his movement before the AoO and grapple, he still has a standard action, otherwise, he's done.) Also, he's now taken (on average) 23 damage.
Colmarr 09-07-07, 12:52 AM	1. Yes. The AoO is with the tail, as it is the only weapon that the salamander has that can reach the 10' square. 2. No. Improved Grab allows the salamander to start a grapple as a free action. As a general rule, "actions" can only be taken during your turn. Two obvious exceptions are AoOs and speaking, but the rules specifically state that they can be taken during another's turn. Improved Grapple doesn't include that wording, so it can only be used during the Salamander's turn. It gets its AoO, but doesn't get to start the grapple. P.S. Note instead of tail slapping, the salamander could declare a grapple attack as it's AoO, in which case a normal grapple check is made and constrict damage applies if the check is successful. However, it doesn't get the initial tail slap damage and may itself provoke AoOs (depending on how you rule in those situations). P.P.S The tail slap is mentioned only on the full-attack line because natural attacks are always secondary when a creature is wielding a manufactured weapon. The salamander could quite validly choose to use its tail slap as it's only attack, in which case it would be Tail slap +11 melee (2d6+3 plus 1d6 fire). P.P.P.S Thanks for linking to the salamander in the SRD. That sort of helpfulness will take you a long way on these forums...
The_Ditto 09-07-07, 05:44 PM	2. No. Improved Grab allows the salamander to start a grapple as a free action. As a general rule, "actions" can only be taken during your turn. Two obvious exceptions are AoOs and speaking, but the rules specifically state that they can be taken during another's turn. Improved Grapple doesn't include that wording, so it can only be used during the Salamander's turn. It gets its AoO, but doesn't get to start the grapple. I disagree entirely with the logic involved here ... but haven't seen any confirmation one way or the other "officially" .. Improved grab triggers on any successful attack ... the statement of being a "free action" just clarifies that it costs the creature nothing to initiate it ... (unlike a creature without .. which must use a seperate action to get into a grapple) .. I believe his #2 option as stated: hit-dmg-grapple-constrict is pretty much accurate ... Whether it's an AoO or not is (IMHO) irrelevant ... Just to clarify Colmarr's opinion ... your #2 option is correct if it's the creature's normal turn ... Colmar is only saying no on the AoO .. :tiphat: (Colmar - correct me if I got that wrong .. hehe) ;)
im_robertb 09-07-07, 07:12 PM	From the SRD: Free Actions Free actions don’t take any time at all, though there may be limits to the number of free actions you can perform in a turn. Free actions rarely incur attacks of opportunity. Some common free actions are described below. ... Speak In general, speaking is a free action that you can perform even when it isn’t your turn. Speaking more than few sentences is generally beyond the limit of a free action. This could be interpreted as implying that other free actions (obviously excepting immediate actions) cannot be taken during someone else's turn, which would include the free-action-grapple from Improved Grab.
Colmarr 09-08-07, 04:56 AM	Exactly my point. I don't fault The_Ditto for taking the position he has, cause it's a nit-picky area of the rules, but I stand by my position that Improved Grab doesn't trigger from an AoO. To deal with The_Ditto's last point, yes: the salamander can tail slap-grapple-constrict as a standard action in its own turn. :tiphat:
mvincent 09-10-07, 01:33 PM	While I understand how RAW is open to interpretation here, I'm fairly sure that the authors intended improved grab to be useable with AoO's similar to how cleave and improved trip can. Example: the tripping ability of a wolf also uses the same (possibly poorly chosen) wording of "as a free action", yet I believe this can be used on an AoO (just like improved trip), and that this is what the writer's intended.
Colmarr 09-11-07, 01:19 AM	I dont like debating intention, as it's an amorphous entity that none of us can ever truly know, but I would like to point one thing out: Neither Improved Trip nor Cleave refer to the "bonus activity" as requiring an action, and thus it is RAW legal for those bonus activities to be taken during an AoO. Improved Grab is a different RAW proposition because of the wording of the ability. Was it intended to work that way? Who knows. I wouldn't find fault with a DM who played it contrary to my interpretation, but I think it can radically alter the power level of some creatures if that interpretation is applied.
Marcus Majarra 09-11-07, 11:10 AM	Except that nothing in the description for free actions limits them to be used only on your turn. As it is, you're entitled to certain actions during your turn, but you are in no way limited in how many actions you're capable of taking outside your turn. Let me explain. During your turn, you get an opportunity to perform a standard action, a move action, and as many free actions as the DM is willing to allow. Alternatively, you can take a move action in lieu of your standard action or you can make a full-round action in lieu of both your standard and move actions. This is what you're entitled to during your turn. Outside your turn, you're not normally entitled to any kind of action unless stated otherwise. Immediate actions and attacks of opportunity are explicitly allowed to you outside your turn. Improved Grab is a free action that is allowed to you whenever you successfully make a melee attack with a weapon with which you can use Improved Grab. It doesn't matter that this is listed as a free action; it's allowed to you every time you hit by virtue of Improved Grab.
Colmarr 09-11-07, 06:47 PM	Obviously we disagree, and I've already indicated why, so I'll leave it at that. :)
eamon 09-11-07, 07:42 PM	I also interpret Improved Grab to allow a grapple check on an attack of opportunity. Free actions don't specify that they're only usable in your turn, though some do. Concentration specifically states that it's a free action when used reactively (though this is usually in your turn), and even more clearly: http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicOverview/castingSpells.htm#counterspells Counterspells require that you use spellcraft to identify the spell you're trying to counter (which is a free action, and one you'll virtually always be using outside of your turn). Grappling is rather confusing, however, unless I'm mistaken, constrict damage is in addition to natural weapon damage if you're successful on the grapple check to attack an opponent - that's 4d6 +2 total damage (barring fire resistance or damage reduction, anyhow)! So the order is 1.AoO 2.Hit, damage 3. Imp.Grab+grapple 4. if sucess, constrict dmg and during your turn: 5. attack-your-opponent (requires grapple check) 6. only if successful, deal nat.wp. dmg 7. constrict kicks in (since you were successful), deal constrict dmg. 8. since BAB +9, you get to make another grapple check at -5.
The_Ditto 09-12-07, 04:29 PM	I dont like debating intention, as it's an amorphous entity that none of us can ever truly know, I agree totally .. however, in this case, we do know what the intention is: grappling (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050301a) specific quote: The rules say the opposed grapple check that follows a successful grab is a free action for you, but it's really not an action at all. You make the grapple check as part of the attack you used to make the grab. agree or disagree ... like or dislike ... intention is clear .. :tiphat: (even if the rules/RAW are not .. ;) ) slight side step here .. constrict (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20050322a) A creature deals extra constriction damage when it first grabs a foe and establishes a hold. If the creature later makes a grapple check to deal damage to a creature in its grasp, it deals damage from the natural weapon it uses in the attack (if any) and extra constriction damage as well. Cheers! :tiphat:
mvincent 09-12-07, 04:42 PM	specific quote:Excellent find.
Colmarr 09-12-07, 11:38 PM	Indeed, although it should be noted that Skip Williams' Rules of the Games articles have on occasion been roundly criticised for errors and/or passing off house rules as RAW (on more than one occasion they were erratad in response to player responses). Nevertheless, assuming Skip had some input into the rules for Improved Grab, the intention of the ability does appear to be clear.
eamon 09-17-07, 12:45 PM	Indeed, although it should be noted that Skip Williams' Rules of the Games articles have on occasion been roundly criticised for errors and/or passing off house rules as RAW (on more than one occasion they were erratad in response to player responses). True enough. Nevertheless, barring explicit reasons to the contrary, I use those articles as guidelines. The difference between a "mistake" in an online article and a "misdesign" leading to an errata is small, and I have the feeling that in general the online articles/FAQ work pretty well in-game. Following their advice is a simple way to ensure better consistency - unless there's an explicit reason to not do so. I guess it's similar to the "intent" question. Often enough, rules "intent" isn't anything beyond rules "context". And you have to interpret that, since taken out of context, there's no way the rules can work. The question simply becomes how much of the rules you need to take into account. Since consistency is so important, I try to take a lot of rules into account when in doubt - which pretty much comes down to "intent" - if a rule is similar to a bunch of other rules, but vague or silent on a specific point, and all similar rules resolve the issue the same way, it's usually safe to say that issue should to. Of course it's only a heuristic, but it's better than nothing, in my book.