Improved natural attack [Archive] - Wizards Community

Improved natural attack [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Eerongal
06-22-07, 12:14 PM Something that recentley came up in a discussion with me and a friend:

Does improved natural attack (claws) improve the damage on rake/rend attacks, as they are derivative of claw attacks, or are you required to take INA(rake)/INA(rend)?

Thanks in advance!
jaelis
06-22-07, 12:17 PM I would say that rend isn't a natural weapon at all, but a special attack. So it wouldn't qualify for INA anyway.

Edit: and rake is a separate weapon.
ShinAkuma2
06-22-07, 12:33 PM Claw is claw is claw, and rake is not claw. Specifically, I believe claws are usually forelegs/paws, while rakes are probably rear paws.

[Edit: Ok, so apparantly the text does describe a rake as an additional claw. I never thought of it that way, but I suppose it is so.]

I agree that Rend is not a natural weapon at all.
Eerongal
06-22-07, 12:41 PM Rake
A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual -4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple.

A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn.

Emphasis mine

Rake is indeed as written a type of claw attack. I agree with rend not being effected, but i can see sufficient argument for rake to be considered. Also, i can see the argument against it. I'm not trying to say you're wrong about rake, i'm just trying to get all points considered. I'm swayed more towards the "rake counts" side at the moment, but i could easily change that stance given sufficient reasoning.
Bedlamtom
06-22-07, 02:24 PM Sorry to segue, but instead of making my own INA thread I figured I'd leap in here.

My DM just declared my Soul Blade to be a natural attack. He gave me gloves of natural attack keen and said they'd work with my blade.

Does it follow then that I'd be able to take INA?

Just thought I'd see what others thought.

Thanks.

Oh and I think that INA would work with rake. The rules specifically call them a claw attack.

Imnsho
jaelis
06-22-07, 02:27 PM They are claw attacks, but a monster can have two different claw attacks that are not the same weapon and can do different damage. (As is generally the case for a rake.) INA applies to one weapon, which is generally taken to apply to all weapons in an identical set. But that's not the same as all weapons of the same type.
Eerongal
06-22-07, 02:50 PM Sorry to segue, but instead of making my own INA thread I figured I'd leap in here.

My DM just declared my Soul Blade to be a natural attack. He gave me gloves of natural attack keen and said they'd work with my blade.

Does it follow then that I'd be able to take INA?

Just thought I'd see what others thought.

Thanks.

Oh and I think that INA would work with rake. The rules specifically call them a claw attack.

Imnsho

Not a problem, i dont mind. That's really a question for your DM since that's a house rule, but if i were going to implement that rule, i would say yes it qualifies as a natural attack for INA.

They are claw attacks, but a monster can have two different claw attacks that are not the same weapon and can do different damage. (As is generally the case for a rake.) INA applies to one weapon, which is generally taken to apply to all weapons in an identical set. But that's not the same as all weapons of the same type.

Improved Natural Attack [General]
Prerequisite
Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4.

Benefit
Choose one of the creature’s natural attack forms. The damage for this natural weapon increases by one step, as if the creature’s size had increased by one category: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.

A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.

This feat may be taken multiple times, but each time it applies to a different natural attack.

I suppose this comes down to a personal interpretation of the rules, but to me INA states the above highlighted, and my interpretation of that is if you take INA(Claws) it would apply to all claw attacks, INA(Bite) to all bite attacks etc. Otherwise if could see arguments for having to take it with EACH natural weapon (ex. INA(right hand claw), INA(Left hand claw), INA(bite - left head), INA(bite - right head)).

However, while working on this post, i noticed something while looking over information that makes me believe it does work:

A Lion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lion.htm) has 1D4 claw attacks, and 1D4 rake attacks. No big surprise here. The question is if it were to get INA(claw) would it have 1D6 claws and 1D4 rakes.

Now the other part. Every creature i looked at that has rake has their rake/claw damage the same on both the rake/claw, which includes the Tiger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/tiger.htm), which if you notice the feats has INA(Claw) and the claw damage for both the rake AND claw are 1D8

Thoughts?
jaelis
06-22-07, 03:20 PM which includes the Tiger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/tiger.htm), which if you notice the feats has INA(Claw) and the claw damage for both the rake AND claw are 1D8

Sounds convincing to me.

So you'd say that if a chimera took INA (bite), both the lion head and dragon head bite would improve, huh? I wouldn't have said those were the same attack form, but perhaps the designers would.
Eerongal
06-22-07, 03:30 PM that's what it seems the intent was to me, now.

When i originally posted this topic, i would have been inclined to say no, but after looking at it a bit, it would seem, to me at least, that this is how they wanted it to be.
morvegil
06-22-07, 03:40 PM Can a Human Monk take this feat?
Eerongal
06-22-07, 03:47 PM yes, yes they can.
Tinari
06-22-07, 04:04 PM Can a Human Monk take this feat?

For clarification of what Eerongal said.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

Emphasis mine.

And after that interesting little finding about creatures with claw attacks having the same claw/rake damage, including the Tiger with it's INA (Claws) I would have to say I am more inclined to believe that INA is encompassing of all forms that use said attack.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Eerongal 06-22-07, 12:14 PM	Something that recentley came up in a discussion with me and a friend: Does improved natural attack (claws) improve the damage on rake/rend attacks, as they are derivative of claw attacks, or are you required to take INA(rake)/INA(rend)? Thanks in advance!
jaelis 06-22-07, 12:17 PM	I would say that rend isn't a natural weapon at all, but a special attack. So it wouldn't qualify for INA anyway. Edit: and rake is a separate weapon.
ShinAkuma2 06-22-07, 12:33 PM	Claw is claw is claw, and rake is not claw. Specifically, I believe claws are usually forelegs/paws, while rakes are probably rear paws. [Edit: Ok, so apparantly the text does describe a rake as an additional claw. I never thought of it that way, but I suppose it is so.] I agree that Rend is not a natural weapon at all.
Eerongal 06-22-07, 12:41 PM	Rake A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual -4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple. A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake—it can’t begin a grapple and rake in the same turn. Emphasis mine Rake is indeed as written a type of claw attack. I agree with rend not being effected, but i can see sufficient argument for rake to be considered. Also, i can see the argument against it. I'm not trying to say you're wrong about rake, i'm just trying to get all points considered. I'm swayed more towards the "rake counts" side at the moment, but i could easily change that stance given sufficient reasoning.
Bedlamtom 06-22-07, 02:24 PM	Sorry to segue, but instead of making my own INA thread I figured I'd leap in here. My DM just declared my Soul Blade to be a natural attack. He gave me gloves of natural attack keen and said they'd work with my blade. Does it follow then that I'd be able to take INA? Just thought I'd see what others thought. Thanks. Oh and I think that INA would work with rake. The rules specifically call them a claw attack. Imnsho
jaelis 06-22-07, 02:27 PM	They are claw attacks, but a monster can have two different claw attacks that are not the same weapon and can do different damage. (As is generally the case for a rake.) INA applies to one weapon, which is generally taken to apply to all weapons in an identical set. But that's not the same as all weapons of the same type.
Eerongal 06-22-07, 02:50 PM	Sorry to segue, but instead of making my own INA thread I figured I'd leap in here. My DM just declared my Soul Blade to be a natural attack. He gave me gloves of natural attack keen and said they'd work with my blade. Does it follow then that I'd be able to take INA? Just thought I'd see what others thought. Thanks. Oh and I think that INA would work with rake. The rules specifically call them a claw attack. Imnsho Not a problem, i dont mind. That's really a question for your DM since that's a house rule, but if i were going to implement that rule, i would say yes it qualifies as a natural attack for INA. They are claw attacks, but a monster can have two different claw attacks that are not the same weapon and can do different damage. (As is generally the case for a rake.) INA applies to one weapon, which is generally taken to apply to all weapons in an identical set. But that's not the same as all weapons of the same type. Improved Natural Attack [General] Prerequisite Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4. Benefit Choose one of the creature’s natural attack forms. The damage for this natural weapon increases by one step, as if the creature’s size had increased by one category: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6. A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8. This feat may be taken multiple times, but each time it applies to a different natural attack. I suppose this comes down to a personal interpretation of the rules, but to me INA states the above highlighted, and my interpretation of that is if you take INA(Claws) it would apply to all claw attacks, INA(Bite) to all bite attacks etc. Otherwise if could see arguments for having to take it with EACH natural weapon (ex. INA(right hand claw), INA(Left hand claw), INA(bite - left head), INA(bite - right head)). However, while working on this post, i noticed something while looking over information that makes me believe it does work: A Lion (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/lion.htm) has 1D4 claw attacks, and 1D4 rake attacks. No big surprise here. The question is if it were to get INA(claw) would it have 1D6 claws and 1D4 rakes. Now the other part. Every creature i looked at that has rake has their rake/claw damage the same on both the rake/claw, which includes the Tiger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/tiger.htm), which if you notice the feats has INA(Claw) and the claw damage for both the rake AND claw are 1D8 Thoughts?
jaelis 06-22-07, 03:20 PM	which includes the Tiger (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/tiger.htm), which if you notice the feats has INA(Claw) and the claw damage for both the rake AND claw are 1D8 Sounds convincing to me. So you'd say that if a chimera took INA (bite), both the lion head and dragon head bite would improve, huh? I wouldn't have said those were the same attack form, but perhaps the designers would.
Eerongal 06-22-07, 03:30 PM	that's what it seems the intent was to me, now. When i originally posted this topic, i would have been inclined to say no, but after looking at it a bit, it would seem, to me at least, that this is how they wanted it to be.
morvegil 06-22-07, 03:40 PM	Can a Human Monk take this feat?
Eerongal 06-22-07, 03:47 PM	yes, yes they can.
Tinari 06-22-07, 04:04 PM	Can a Human Monk take this feat? For clarification of what Eerongal said. A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons. Emphasis mine. And after that interesting little finding about creatures with claw attacks having the same claw/rake damage, including the Tiger with it's INA (Claws) I would have to say I am more inclined to believe that INA is encompassing of all forms that use said attack.