2 weapon fighting + natural attack routine [Archive] - Wizards Community

2 weapon fighting + natural attack routine [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
The Mailman
04-04-05, 02:48 PM OK, I know that when a monster that has a natural attack routine uses a manufactured weapon, it uses standard BAB rules for the manufactured weapon (as a primary attack) and all its natural weapons at -5 (w/o multiattack) as secondary attacks. I assume that if that monster had two weapon fighting, it would apply it to the manufactured primary attack and just do its natural attacks normally as secondary weapons. But,

if the monster was not using manufactured weapons, and was only using its natural attack routine, what would two-weapon fighting do for it? In other words, is there a reason for a monster that doesn't use manufactured weapons to take two-weapon fighting?
Da Dinictus
04-04-05, 03:34 PM I don't think TWF would help a creature using natural weapons only as its attacks at all. Just go for Multi-attack, then.
I'm planning a Gargoyle Fighter who uses his claws, bite and a gained tail attack for good measure. Guess what Monstrous feats I'll be choosing to increase Claw-damage :D
Egres
04-04-05, 03:50 PM In other words, is there a reason for a monster that doesn't use manufactured weapons to take two-weapon fighting?Yes.

He could TWF with his Unarmed Strikes.
The Mailman
04-05-05, 12:19 PM Yes.

He could TWF with his Unarmed Strikes.
But would the unarmed strikes do claw or slam damage? Or would they do unarmed strike damage for a creature that size? And would they be considered unarmed attacks provoking AoOs etc, without improved unarmed strike? That seems odd, to say the least.

I'll be more specific--I'm thinking about a Sorceror/MasterTransmografist (from CA), with a couple of levels in Ranger (it's a gestalt character)-- will the combat style be useable by the majority of animals, magical beasts, abberrations, dragons, etc. that the MT would turn into?
Egres
04-05-05, 03:51 PM But would the unarmed strikes do claw or slam damage? Or would they do unarmed strike damage for a creature that size?
Unarmed Strike damage, of course.

And would they be considered unarmed attacks provoking AoOs etc, without improved unarmed strike? That seems odd, to say the least.
Maybe odd, but these are the RAW.

I'll be more specific--I'm thinking about a Sorceror/MasterTransmografist (from CA), with a couple of levels in Ranger (it's a gestalt character)-- will the combat style be useable by the majority of animals, magical beasts, abberrations, dragons, etc. that the MT would turn into?
Yes, of course:with your Unarmed Strikes. ;)
ieattrollsforbreakfast
04-05-05, 04:32 PM In other words, if you want to focus on attacking with natural weapons, there is no reason to take Two-Weapon Fighting. While you could use the feats with unarmed strikes, there really is no point.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
The Mailman 04-04-05, 02:48 PM	OK, I know that when a monster that has a natural attack routine uses a manufactured weapon, it uses standard BAB rules for the manufactured weapon (as a primary attack) and all its natural weapons at -5 (w/o multiattack) as secondary attacks. I assume that if that monster had two weapon fighting, it would apply it to the manufactured primary attack and just do its natural attacks normally as secondary weapons. But, if the monster was not using manufactured weapons, and was only using its natural attack routine, what would two-weapon fighting do for it? In other words, is there a reason for a monster that doesn't use manufactured weapons to take two-weapon fighting?
Da Dinictus 04-04-05, 03:34 PM	I don't think TWF would help a creature using natural weapons only as its attacks at all. Just go for Multi-attack, then. I'm planning a Gargoyle Fighter who uses his claws, bite and a gained tail attack for good measure. Guess what Monstrous feats I'll be choosing to increase Claw-damage :D
Egres 04-04-05, 03:50 PM	In other words, is there a reason for a monster that doesn't use manufactured weapons to take two-weapon fighting?Yes. He could TWF with his Unarmed Strikes.
The Mailman 04-05-05, 12:19 PM	Yes. He could TWF with his Unarmed Strikes. But would the unarmed strikes do claw or slam damage? Or would they do unarmed strike damage for a creature that size? And would they be considered unarmed attacks provoking AoOs etc, without improved unarmed strike? That seems odd, to say the least. I'll be more specific--I'm thinking about a Sorceror/MasterTransmografist (from CA), with a couple of levels in Ranger (it's a gestalt character)-- will the combat style be useable by the majority of animals, magical beasts, abberrations, dragons, etc. that the MT would turn into?
Egres 04-05-05, 03:51 PM	But would the unarmed strikes do claw or slam damage? Or would they do unarmed strike damage for a creature that size? Unarmed Strike damage, of course. And would they be considered unarmed attacks provoking AoOs etc, without improved unarmed strike? That seems odd, to say the least. Maybe odd, but these are the RAW. I'll be more specific--I'm thinking about a Sorceror/MasterTransmografist (from CA), with a couple of levels in Ranger (it's a gestalt character)-- will the combat style be useable by the majority of animals, magical beasts, abberrations, dragons, etc. that the MT would turn into? Yes, of course:with your Unarmed Strikes. ;)
ieattrollsforbreakfast 04-05-05, 04:32 PM	In other words, if you want to focus on attacking with natural weapons, there is no reason to take Two-Weapon Fighting. While you could use the feats with unarmed strikes, there really is no point.