4
\$\begingroup\$

I've read that they only get half the strength modifier to the damage roll but what about the attack roll?

\$\endgroup\$

2 Answers 2

9
\$\begingroup\$

Natural Attacks:

Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon). These attacks fall into one of two categories, primary and secondary attacks. Primary attacks are made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and add the creature’s full Strength bonus on damage rolls. Secondary attacks are made using the creature’s base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. If a creature has only one natural attack, it is always made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and adds 1-1/2 times the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one. If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type.

Period. So half STR bonus to damage but no change in STR bonus to attacks.

You also probably could have verified this by looking at the stat block of any monster with secondary attacks and back-calculating their attack bonus.

\$\endgroup\$
3
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I was trying to back-calculate but kept getting the wrong results that's why I asked. I was forgetting to do the size modifier, thank you! \$\endgroup\$
    – Nerevar
    Apr 22, 2014 at 11:41
  • \$\begingroup\$ Some of the printed natural attack modifiers are pretty wonky, too. Bite attacks, notably. \$\endgroup\$
    – user2754
    Apr 22, 2014 at 11:49
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Ultimately, example statblocks in 3.x are notoriously flaky. It’s not a bad idea to try to confirm your understanding that way, but you are somewhat liable to trip yourself up with a monster where the designer decided to fudge the numbers (or miscalculated himself, or something was changed in errata and people forgot to update the monster, or whatever) \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Apr 22, 2014 at 12:14
1
\$\begingroup\$

Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon). These attacks fall into one of two categories, primary and secondary attacks. Primary attacks are made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and add the creature’s full Strength bonus on damage rolls. Secondary attacks are made using the creature’s base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. If a creature has only one natural attack, it is always made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and adds 1-1/2 times the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one. If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type.

So it depends on whether you have any other natural attacks. If you do, the italicized sentence applies, and you get "base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls". If your only natural attack is a secondary natural attack, the bolded sentence applies. Note the presence of the word "always" in the bolded sentence, which implies that the italicized sentence is a general guideline, but the bolded sentence provides information to the contrary in certain circumstances. This more stringent condition should be used when it applies. For reference, see the Dinosaur, Ankylosaurus (note that, per the universal monster rules, a "tail" attack is a form of attack not covered by the chart, and is therefore assumed to be secondary) and Porcupine entries (I would also advise viewing the Porcupine, Giant entry, but it seems they miscalculated the tail slap's damage). In both cases, there is no -5 penalty to the creature's attack roll on an attack which would normally be secondary because it is being treated as primary due to the bold text.

However, this bolded rule seems to be violated when a creature uses a natural attack in tandem with a manufactured weapon, as is the case with the Jackalwere. This creature suffers the minus five penalty on attack rolls with its bite in the attack routine where it also makes use of a weapon, despite having only a single natural attack. This is making use of a set of rules that read as follows:

Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type.

In such cases, the attack (in this case a bite, a primary natural attack) is treated as secondary, but despite still being the only natural attack possessed by the creature, it defaults back to the italicized sentence. As stated above, this implies that an attack being "treated" as secondary uses the italicized portion of text rather than the bolded portion. It is the opinion of this author that this is functioning as intended, to prevent an overabundance of powerful and accurate attacks from canine humanoids; and to keep functionality consistent with monsters suck as Troglodytes, who would not partake of the benefits inherent in a reading of the rules where the Jackalwere were possessed of two attacks at a +5 bonus through what most observers would call the unhappy accident of being born with too many natural attacks.

\$\endgroup\$
6
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ The question was specifically about Strength to attack rolls, which you don’t really address. You quote, and even italicize, the relevant rule, but you don’t actually draw attention to the relevant portion in your answer. What you do draw attention to wasn’t really asked about. Also, the bit about mixing manufactured and natural weapons is easily explained by those rules being more specific, and thus overriding, the bolded rule—that is, the sole natural attack becomes a primary weapon, but when you go to use manufactured weapons too, it is forced back to secondary status by the rules. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Jul 2, 2017 at 19:40
  • \$\begingroup\$ I disagree that I did not address the question. My answer provides contingencies not captured in previous discussion on the topic (namely: does Nerevar seek to use a secondary natural attack while having no others, or does he have other natural attacks, or is he using a weapon in tandem with this natural attack). \$\endgroup\$ Jul 2, 2017 at 19:44
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ Except none of those concerns affects whether or not you add your entire Strength bonus to your attack roll, and at no point does your answer actually come out and say yes, you add your entire Strength bonus to your attack roll. If anything, your discussion of various cases suggests that this fact is sometimes not true, which is inaccurate. The claim that “it depends on whether you have any other natural attacks,” is flatly untrue, assuming “it” refers to “the answer to the question.” \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Jul 2, 2017 at 19:44
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ Hi, and welcome to the site! This is an exceptionally thorough first answer, so I've upvoted you so you can get rep, but you should still consider checking out our help center and tour when you get a chance, so you can see more about how our site works. Like KRyan was pointing out, much of your answer is a little tangential to the question, and we try and keep our questions and answers very tightly focused here. If a question inspires you to provide information on a related but distinct topic, you might want to consider posting and answering your own question. In any case, welcome! \$\endgroup\$ Jul 2, 2017 at 19:49
  • 2
    \$\begingroup\$ (As a note, this question is about the to-hit part of the attack roll, and all the information you're discussing is only about to-damage) \$\endgroup\$ Jul 2, 2017 at 19:51

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .