Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Salla 07-14-07, 06:45 PM	And it has nothing to do with Superior Unarmed Strike. :) I'm a little rusty on Eberron, haven't had a lot of chances to play or run it, so I needed to double-check a couple of things I can't find (failed my Search check) ... 1. Since a Battlefist increases the damage from a Warforged's natural slam, it does not gain additional attacks from a high BAB, correct? 2. Does a battlefist impair the manual dexterity of the hand it's on (say, to impair use of spells or infusions)? 3. It just needs simple weapons proficiency, being based on the Gauntlet, right?
Phasma Felis 07-14-07, 07:03 PM	1. Since a Battlefist increases the damage from a Warforged's natural slam, it does not gain additional attacks from a high BAB, correct? Correct. 2. Does a battlefist impair the manual dexterity of the hand it's on (say, to impair use of spells or infusions)? Not by the letter of the rules, I don't think. It might count as having that hand occupied, I suppose, meaning you'd need the other hand free to cast. 3. It just needs simple weapons proficiency, being based on the Gauntlet, right? Technically, it doesn't require any proficiency; it's not a "weapon" in its own right, it just improves your natural slam attack, which you're always proficient in. Personally, I think that's a bit wierd; if I were running a game, I might houserule it as a spiked gauntlet that does 1d8 bludgeoning/piercing. That's just me, though.
Phasma Felis 07-14-07, 07:16 PM	I've got a couple related questions. Can a warforged monk wear two battlefists to increase his unarmed damage by two levels? Seems kinda broken, but it doesn't specifically say you can't, unless I'm missing something. Also, can weapon enhancements like flaming and so forth be applied to battlefists? Seems like they should, but the description just says "...he can add the battlefist’s enhancement bonus to his unarmed attack and damage rolls." Nothing about weapon effects other than the enhancement bonus.
gensuke626 07-14-07, 08:04 PM	I've got a couple related questions. Can a warforged monk wear two battlefists to increase his unarmed damage by two levels? Seems kinda broken, but it doesn't specifically say you can't, unless I'm missing something. It doesn't specifically say that you can either. The RAW of the ability is "A warforged monk who uses a battlefist deals increased unarmed damage as though the character were one size larger than actual, and can add the battlefist's enchancement bonus to his unarmed attack and damage rolls." The way I interpret this is that any Forged Monk who uses a Battlefist gets the size increase. Period. If you wield two you get no additional benefit. Also, can weapon enhancements like flaming and so forth be applied to battlefists? Seems like they should, but the description just says "...he can add the battlefist’s enhancement bonus to his unarmed attack and damage rolls." Nothing about weapon effects other than the enhancement bonus. The battlefist is listed as a +1 weapon and it is mentioned that Versions with higher enhancement bonuses are not uncommon. Because of that, I do allow +1 Flaming Burst Battlefist monks to run around screaming "Burning Fist!"
Salla 07-14-07, 08:08 PM	Thanks. By the by, since a +1 Battlefist costs 2,600, is it reasonable that a regular Battlefist costs 300gp? (+300 for Masterwork, +2000 for the +1)?
TiwazTyrsfist 07-14-07, 08:17 PM	I'd definately say that the battlefist could be enchanted with other weapon effects, like flaming burst or weapon of impact. Slam is a natural weapon, so you don't gain extra attacks form high BAB, the battle fist improves slams damage, it doesn't make it a weilded weapon. Like wise, the battle fist is not a weapon, it's an accessory that improves a natural attack. Thus, it doesn't involve proficiency in any way. As for the monk question, I have no clue. But at a guess, I'd say no.
gensuke626 07-15-07, 04:55 PM	Thanks. By the by, since a +1 Battlefist costs 2,600, is it reasonable that a regular Battlefist costs 300gp? (+300 for Masterwork, +2000 for the +1)? No, for the simple reason that the size increase on unarmed damage / increased slam damage is a function of the fact that Bull's Strength is used in the creation of a Battlefist (Or atleast partly so), and so a "mundane" battlefist is basically an oversized spiked gauntlet. Personally I'd charge 50 for a Flawed Battlefist (Non-masterwork). For an unfinished battlefist, I'd charge 450 because while the rules say that you only add 300 for masterwork weapons, a flawed fist can never become a true battlefist, where an unfinished fist can. in either case, I'd treat it as a Spiked Gauntlet sized for a Large Creature. They both cost that much because of the materials required for production and the fact that it is still a warforged component. The rest of the cost comes from the +1 enchant and the Bull's Strength needed to compete the device.
Ravenstein 07-22-07, 12:37 AM	I wouldn't think of it so much as a spiked gauntlet as I would think of it in terms brass knuckles for a human's fist. Its not a weapon, its a component. However, it can be enchanted like a weapon as well since its magical. I think relating it to the spiked gauntlet merely confuses the issue. Its a basically a metal sleeve that goes over the warforge's hand that enhances damage. Which begs the question (I think its been answered before) does this stack with Improved Nat Atk, thus gaining a x3 in die damage? As for the monk issue, a monk's attack is considered to be a series of punches, kicks, and other moves. A monk can't "dual-wield fists", so having two battlefists would give you no benefit. What's this about the battlefist not gaining the BAB? You mean you couldn't Slam four times with a BAB of +20?
Phasma Felis 07-22-07, 03:37 AM	Which begs the question (I think its been answered before) does this stack with Improved Nat Atk, thus gaining a x3 in die damage? Even better: Warforged Monk + Battlefist + Improved Natural Attack + Superior Unarmed Strike. Unarmed strikes do 4d6 by level 9, cap at 6d8 by 16. :D What's this about the battlefist not gaining the BAB? You mean you couldn't Slam four times with a BAB of +20? Nope. A Slam is a natural weapon, and they never iterate. Warforged slams can get weird. Some people interpret the rules to mean that you can get all your iteratives (with a weapon or unarmed strike) and Slam in one full attack. I think it's a lot simpler to just take away the slam attack and say that warforged get all the benefits of Improved Unarmed Strike (except for prereqs) and do 1d4 when dealing lethal damage.
Ravenstein 07-22-07, 10:27 AM	So they could "Unarmed Strike" four times with a +20? Enh...that jus' seems kinda lame that Slams don't work off the BAB like that. Sure its a balance issue...
Phasma Felis 07-22-07, 10:45 AM	So they could "Unarmed Strike" four times with a +20? Enh...that jus' seems kinda lame that Slams don't work off the BAB like that. Sure its a balance issue... The balance issue is for critters with claw/claw/bite routines or 8 tentacles or whatever. Letting warforged get iterative slams shouldn't cause any kind of problem, but it would've been too much hassle to give them different rules, I guess. Heck, they probably ought to get two slams by default, like all the other humanoids with slams do. I guess they figured two attacks at first level would cause balance problems...
Ravenstein 07-22-07, 11:08 AM	That does make a lot of sense actually. For some reason, I always assumed heroic characters used different rules. That was a big silly of me to think. :P Anywho, good to know. That's actually quite useful for a wizard-Warforged who is forced to get into melee for whatever reason; don a battlefist and you whack the crap outta someone who gets too close. Better than that silly dagger they always give you at first level. :P
Dr. Benway 07-23-07, 06:48 PM	Despite what a couple of people have already said, the Battlefist IS indeed counted as a gauntlet IF you choose to attack with it. You dont have to attack with it to gain any of its other benefits, such as increasing a monk's dam, increasing your slam dam, and allowing its enchantments to carry through to these attacks. However, it does count as a gauntlet for purposes of getting it enchanted with stuff, in terms of price etc. Just to clear that up... DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail?
Dr. Benway 07-23-07, 06:56 PM	Warforged slams can get weird. Some people interpret the rules to mean that you can get all your iteratives (with a weapon or unarmed strike) and Slam in one full attack. Yes, because that is by the rules. I think it's a lot simpler to just take away the slam attack and say that warforged get all the benefits of Improved Unarmed Strike (except for prereqs) and do 1d4 when dealing lethal damage. This is not. Its not a matter of interpretation. The rules are quite clear. Assuming you take the full attack action, after your normal iterative-based attacks, you may make any and all natural attacks you possess (assuming the limb wasnt already used) at a -5 penalty. There is a feat in the ECS that reduces this penalty to -2. Hope this clears things up... DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail?
Dragoloth 07-23-07, 07:08 PM	There are no non-magical battlefists. A battlefist is a warforged component and the components are by definition magical.
Kinger 07-23-07, 07:16 PM	Its not a matter of interpretation. The rules are quite clear. Assuming you take the full attack action, after your normal iterative-based attacks, you may make any and all natural attacks you possess (assuming the limb wasnt already used) at a -5 penalty. There is a feat in the ECS that reduces this penalty to -2. Actually, there IS some interpretation. Does a Slam use a limb? Specifically, does it use a hand? Does it use TWO hands? Can one slam with a hand that has already attacked with a longsword? If it's a claw, you can't. Why are slams different? I've seen people rule it many ways. I personally rule a Slam, from a game-mechanical perspective, to count as using both hands, thus it cannot be used if an attack with a manufactured weapon was used. You can say it's a kick, or a head-but, or whatever, but it's still a natural attack that cannot be made if you use the required appendages for an attack with a manufactured weapon. I haven't seen a Warforged NPC stat-block yet that includes a Slam as part of its full-attack routine with its spear/axe/whatever, so I believe this to be the correct interpretation. Now, having said that, I have based this interpretation not on PROOF, but on EVIDENCE. There's evidence for and against. As for proof? I'm still waiting on the "Ask Wizards" response.
LoneStranger 07-23-07, 07:42 PM	A GM could houserule that in order to use two battlefists (and get the benefits from both) the character would need to take second slam from Races of Eberron. Really I'm not sure about it, haven't made one slam attack with my character ever.
Dr. Benway 07-23-07, 11:36 PM	Actually, there IS some interpretation. Does a Slam use a limb? Specifically, does it use a hand? Does it use TWO hands? Can one slam with a hand that has already attacked with a longsword? If it's a claw, you can't. Why are slams different? This isnt the subject of interpretation we were discussing. I already mentioned that if the limb in is in use you cant then attack with it. If the WF was a monk, even using your exremely limiting houserule, they could still kick and headbutt the bejeezus outta something and slam away at the end. Slam uses a limb. The book isnt explicit, but the conservative interpretation is that slamming uses one arm when we are talking about a humanoid. One cannot slam with an arm that is currently wielding a weapon, wand, etc. Slams are Natural Weapons, no different than a claw or a bite. Thus, I would encourage you to brush up on how Natural Weapons work. Understanding that will tell you all of the same things I have outlined in my posts here. Unless you can point out the place that says the WF slam works differently then every other NA... DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail? PS - pls tell me that in handicapping WF so badly in your game that you at least let them add their STR x1.5 when you make them use two hands to slam with... I mean, do you make people with claw atack use both hands? The damage is exactly the same for a medium creature...so to quote you, "how are they different?"
Phasma Felis 07-24-07, 01:47 AM	Warforged slams can get weird. Some people interpret the rules to mean that you can get all your iteratives (with a weapon or unarmed strike) and Slam in one full attack. Yes, because that is by the rules. Not the way some people do it. You need to have a hand free (unless you interpret "slam" to mean a headbutt or kick, as Kinger said), and, no, you can't ever combine it with a flurry of blows, because it's not a monk special weapon or an unarmed strike. At least, if you're going by the RAW. I think it's a lot simpler to just take away the slam attack and say that warforged get all the benefits of Improved Unarmed Strike (except for prereqs) and do 1d4 when dealing lethal damage. This is not. Its not a matter of interpretation. The rules are quite clear. Um...yes. I was stating my houserule. Hang out in CharOp too long and you forget that the rules are supposed to serve the game, not the other way around. I think the way warforged slams work by RAW is confusing and counterintuitive, so I've changed it. And your last post basically agreed with everything Kinger said, so I'm not sure why you want him to "brush up on how Natural Weapons work."
Phasma Felis 07-24-07, 07:19 AM	Oh, yeah: Despite what a couple of people have already said, the Battlefist IS indeed counted as a gauntlet IF you choose to attack with it. You dont have to attack with it to gain any of its other benefits, such as increasing a monk's dam, increasing your slam dam, and allowing its enchantments to carry through to these attacks. However, it does count as a gauntlet for purposes of getting it enchanted with stuff, in terms of price etc. Just to clear that up... While that's a reasonable houserule, and one I use myself, I don't see anything in the RAW to indicate that a battlefist counts as a gauntlet. You can use it to boost a natural attack or (for monks) an unarmed strike, but not as a weapon in its own right. It does count as a weapon for purposes of enchantment, but not as a gauntlet in particular.
Dr. Benway 07-24-07, 02:24 PM	Not the way some people do it. You need to have a hand free (unless you interpret "slam" to mean a headbutt or kick, as Kinger said), and, no, you can't ever combine it with a flurry of blows, because it's not a monk special weapon or an unarmed strike. At least, if you're going by the RAW. And your last post basically agreed with everything Kinger said, so I'm not sure why you want him to "brush up on how Natural Weapons work." Listen, if you actually DID know how Natural Weapons work, you would know that you can add them to the end of ANY full attack routine at an additional -5. I am not talking about making them PART of a flurry, just that you can add them onto the end. As for the second part of your post...were you even reading what he was responding to in the first place? He was arguing the point I already made. For the third time, I already said that using a limb to attack with a weapon forbids you from using it to slam in the same round. DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail?
Kinger 07-24-07, 06:06 PM	This isnt the subject of interpretation we were discussing. I already mentioned that if the limb in is in use you cant then attack with it. If the WF was a monk, even using your exremely limiting houserule, they could still kick and headbutt the bejeezus outta something and slam away at the end. Slam uses a limb. The book isnt explicit, but the conservative interpretation is that slamming uses one arm when we are talking about a humanoid. One cannot slam with an arm that is currently wielding a weapon, wand, etc. Slams are Natural Weapons, no different than a claw or a bite. Thus, I would encourage you to brush up on how Natural Weapons work. Understanding that will tell you all of the same things I have outlined in my posts here. Unless you can point out the place that says the WF slam works differently then every other NA... DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail? PS - pls tell me that in handicapping WF so badly in your game that you at least let them add their STR x1.5 when you make them use two hands to slam with... I mean, do you make people with claw atack use both hands? The damage is exactly the same for a medium creature...so to quote you, "how are they different?" Hmm, some mistaken interpretations all around, it seems. I was under the impression you would allow a Warforged Fighter wielding a Great Axe to attack with it, then make a Slam after. I stand corrected, in that it appears you would not. Not paying enough attention and jumping the gun a bit on my part there, for which I apologize. You would, however, let him hit with a longsword (one handed weapon) and THEN slam with the other hand. Here's where we disagree. IF a Warforged needed only one hand to Slam, why does he not get two slams? Two hands, after all. A Lizardfolk has 2 claw attacks, because he's got 2 claws. Forgey gets one slam, at 1.5 Str, so I interpret that as meaning he needs both hands. A Kirk punch. Similarly, Ravens and other creatures often combine multiple natural attacks into one (Ravens have two feet, but only 1 Claw attack), so there IS precedent, however flimsy. I realize Ravens are tiny. I'm unaware if they use Strx1.5 for damage, because I can't recall an example with a positive strength modifier. My questions and subsequent rulings regarding Slam are due to our similar interpretations of slams (you say 1 hand, I say 2, but we both say hand(s)). Where we seem to differ further is the interaction between natural attacks and Unarmed Strikes. Finally, I'm curious how you think denying a Warforged the ability to tack on an additional attack to ANY full-attack action is "handicapping" the race. I would have thought giving them a free attack almost whenever they want (like a Bite or Gore) would tip the scales far enough to justify a Level Adjustment. But that's just me.
ShadowChemosh 07-25-07, 12:55 AM	IF a Warforged needed only one hand to Slam, why does he not get two slams? Two hands, after all. A Lizardfolk has 2 claw attacks, because he's got 2 claws. Forgey gets one slam, at 1.5 Str, so I interpret that as meaning he needs both hands. A Kirk punch. Similarly, Ravens and other creatures often combine multiple natural attacks into one (Ravens have two feet, but only 1 Claw attack), so there IS precedent, however flimsy. I realize Ravens are tiny. I'm unaware if they use Strx1.5 for damage, because I can't recall an example with a positive strength modifier. Any creature with only 1 natural attack gets to use 1.5x Str damage. For example a Dire Wolf gets one attack at 1d8+10 even though it only has a 25Str. If used as a secondary attack than its always at .5Str damage. See Full Attacks of Monsters in the SRD. Or pg299 of the MM. This ruling is also covered in Races of Eberron pg22. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/improvingMonsters.htm#attackandFullAttac k "Damage changes with Strength. If the creature uses a two-handed weapon or has a single natural weapon, it adds 1˝ times its Strength bonus to the damage. If it has more than a single attack then it adds its Strength bonus to damage rolls for the primary attack and ˝ its Strength bonus to all secondary attacks." My questions and subsequent rulings regarding Slam are due to our similar interpretations of slams (you say 1 hand, I say 2, but we both say hand(s)). Where we seem to differ further is the interaction between natural attacks and Unarmed Strikes. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons "The number of attacks a creature can make with its natural weapons depends on the type of the attack—generally, a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack (although Large creatures with arms or arm-like limbs can make a slam attack with each arm)." A warforged can only make one attack because you can only slam once per the rules unless you are size Large or bigger and have more than one appendage. Warforged are sized Medium so only one slam attack even though they have 2 appendages. The definition of Slam Attacks says it uses one appendage not both to make the attack. "Slap or Slam: The creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage." A natural attack can always be used during a full-round action even if wielding a manufactured weapon or a flurry of blows. You can even use a Flurry of Blows and a single Unarmed Attack if you wish, but all normal Two-Weapon Fighting penalty applies PLUS the FLURRY negative. If using a Natural Attack and a Manufactured weapon then the Natural Attack(regardless if its primary or secondary) gets -5 to hit and only gets .5Str damage.
Kinger 07-25-07, 06:46 PM	http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons "The number of attacks a creature can make with its natural weapons depends on the type of the attack—generally, a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack (although Large creatures with arms or arm-like limbs can make a slam attack with each arm)." I never recall actually reading this, so thanks for pointing it out. However, there are exceptions to this rule (see the Raven, Hawk, etc.) They do say in their Monster entries that they combine two claws into one attack, and the warforged entry says nothing of the sort. My bad, there, really. A warforged can only make one attack because you can only slam once per the rules unless you are size Large or bigger and have more than one appendage. Warforged are sized Medium so only one slam attack even though they have 2 appendages. The definition of Slam Attacks says it uses one appendage not both to make the attack. "Slap or Slam: The creature batters opponents with an appendage, dealing bludgeoning damage." I concede this point. A natural attack can always be used during a full-round action even if wielding a manufactured weapon or a flurry of blows. Not entirely true. A claw wielding a longsword cannot make a claw attack. Going by my interpretation of Slams (now modified after seeing the above rules citations) you need a hand free to perform one. So, attack with a longsword and you can slam, too. Greatsword? Not so much. Slams aren't Unarmed Strikes, otherwise they'd be, well, Unarmed Strikes. A Slam indicates to me that the creature in question has a piece of anatomy specifically to smash something really hard. It isn't an Unarmed Strike, which is an attack with anatomy in such a fashion that nature/the gods/the daelkyr/evolution/the flying spaghetti monster/whoever/whatever never really intended. Humans don't have big fists reinforced with stone and iron, so no Slam. Gotta have special training or technique, represented by the feat Unarmed Strike. If using a Natural Attack and a Manufactured weapon then the Natural Attack(regardless if its primary or secondary) gets -5 to hit and only gets .5Str damage. No argument there. Thinking on this further, and based on the fact you can make Unarmed Strikes without using your hands, I'm considering changing my opinion regarding the interaction between unarmed strikes and hand-like natural weapons (slams, claws). Namely, you Flurry, you can still slam. Fortunately enough for me it's never come up in any game I've played in or run, so me flip-flopping on this issue will have no effect. :) It does give Warforged Monks another significant advantage, though I suppose that might make up for certain overlapping class abilities. That, however, is a subject for another thread perhaps.
Kaladon7779 07-26-07, 05:56 PM	I got a question about the Slam attack part with the Battlefist. If you take improved Natural Attack it woudl bump your slam to 1d6, does the Battlefist still remain at 1d8? Or would that bump up to 2d6?
Kinger 07-26-07, 06:55 PM	Reading it literally, the Battlefist says it increases your slam to 1d8. It doesn't say it increases it as if your were two size categories larger (which is what you'd need to be to get from 1d4 to 1d8). Now we get into an order-of-operations thing. Which applies first, Battlefist or Improved Natural Attack? From a more mathematical perspective, I would say that Feats, since they are effectively permanent, would be applied before Items, which by definition are not. So, Imp Nat Attack would up your slam to 1d6, and the Battlefist would make it 1d8. However, I'd think your DM (or you, if you are the DM) would be reasonable in saying it goes the other way. Battlefist ups slam to 1d8, Imp Nat Attack makes it 2d6. Maybe you could houserule the change to be not so great (1d8 to 1d10?) just because otherwise you're effectively giving a medium creature the slam of a gargantuan one. Effectively, they'd be getting a free Greatsword attack (albeit at 0.5 Str) in with every full-attack-action in which a slam could be added.
DarkPawn 07-26-07, 10:53 PM	I got a question about the Slam attack part with the Battlefist. If you take improved Natural Attack it woudl bump your slam to 1d6, does the Battlefist still remain at 1d8? Or would that bump up to 2d6? No, because for the fact that a battlefist is a weapon, it says this specifically in the description. Weapons have set damage....the battlefist is set at 1d8 damage as a weapon. Hence, no it would not bump it up.
Kinger 07-26-07, 11:07 PM	No, because for the fact that a battlefist is a weapon, it says this specifically in the description. Weapons have set damage....the battlefist is set at 1d8 damage as a weapon. Hence, no it would not bump it up. If it behaves like all other weapons, as you say, it would deal the damage of a Spiked Gauntlet, if anything. The added ability of the Battlefist is to specifically increase a Warforged's Slam attack to 1d8, which isn't the same thing.
DarkPawn 07-26-07, 11:24 PM	If it behaves like all other weapons, as you say, it would deal the damage of a Spiked Gauntlet, if anything. The added ability of the Battlefist is to specifically increase a Warforged's Slam attack to 1d8, which isn't the same thing. So you consider armblades natural weapons then? There is no difference between attaching an armblade (weapon) and attaching a battlefist (weapon). If you allow battlefist to magically become a natural weapon, then you should allow armblade too. The principle is the exact same thing. Something you attack to your arm and hit things with. ...and actually it exactly says the battlefist resembles a spiked gauntlet, albeit an oversized one. It resembles it because that is basically what it is, but it is an attached component, so not exactly a spiked gauntlet. EDIT: Also add the fact that the feat he is asking about specifically says it raises damage of natural weapons. A battlefist is a weapon, that gives you the ability to use its damage instead of what you would normally do with your natural weapon (slam) attack.
Dr. Benway 07-27-07, 10:28 AM	So you consider armblades natural weapons then? There is no difference between attaching an armblade (weapon) and attaching a battlefist (weapon). If you allow battlefist to magically become a natural weapon, then you should allow armblade too. The principle is the exact same thing. Something you attack to your arm and hit things with. This is where you are not getting it DP. The battlefist does not do 1d8 damage. The battlefist itself is just a spiked gauntlet. One of this item's special abilities, is that increases a Warforge's slam damage up to 1d8. That is, as Kinger mentioned, a significant difference. A battlefist is a weapon, that gives you the ability to use its damage instead of what you would normally do with your natural weapon (slam) attack. Unfortunately, this is incorrect. As mentioned above, its not the battlefist that does 1d8 damage, its the slam being magically enhanced that does. Think about it in these terms, a Monk can do damage with any limb they want right? So why would the battlefist enhance their damage with their kicks and elbow strikes and headbutts if it was the item itself doing the damage? Hope this clears things up for you... DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail?
DarkPawn 07-27-07, 02:15 PM	This is where you are not getting it DP. The battlefist does not do 1d8 damage. The battlefist itself is just a spiked gauntlet. One of this item's special abilities, is that increases a Warforge's slam damage up to 1d8. That is, as Kinger mentioned, a significant difference. I'm following you. The battlefist magically increases the damage from a natural weapon (slam). The feat improved natural weapon increases the damage from a natural weapon (slam). This is no different hen keen enchantments and improved critical(feat). Keen and improved critical don't stack so there is no reason battlefist and improved natural weapon should stack. Unfortunately, this is incorrect. As mentioned above, its not the battlefist that does 1d8 damage, its the slam being magically enhanced that does. Think about it in these terms, a Monk can do damage with any limb they want right? So why would the battlefist enhance their damage with their kicks and elbow strikes and headbutts if it was the item itself doing the damage? Hope this clears things up for you... DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail? Yes, it actually makes it very clear that the battlefist basically does what improved natural attacks does, but magically. The easiest comparison then is keen and improved criticals. They don't stack, and neither should this.
Dr. Benway 07-27-07, 10:10 PM	Yes, it actually makes it very clear that the battlefist basically does what improved natural attacks does, but magically. The easiest comparison then is keen and improved criticals. They don't stack, and neither should this. My understanding is that size increases to damage do in fact stack. Improved Natural Attack does damage as tho you were one size larger. If a character with that feat was then enlarged, would you say the dam increases further or not? My understanding is that it would. DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail?
DarkPawn 07-28-07, 01:13 AM	My understanding is that size increases to damage do in fact stack. Improved Natural Attack does damage as tho you were one size larger. If a character with that feat was then enlarged, would you say the dam increases further or not? My understanding is that it would. DocB :88E: vs :coolcthul Who shall prevail? The big difference is that a battlefist doesn't actually increase damage due to larger size (unless you're a monk), if it worked that way, the battlefist would increase damage per size by 2 steps. I don't view it as working that way by RAW. I'm not claiming that I'm 100% correct on this, nor do I say you can't allow it in your campaign. I'm just explaining why I feel it doesn't stack nor was intended to stack. I respect your opinion that it does (if that is your opinion), I just think as with many rules, you could argue either way. I don't think my reasoning is anymore or less sound on the subject.