Improved Natural Attack Questions

[mcgeedis]

A druid takes Improved Natural Attack (Claw). So now, every form he takes increases by one increment, right? So, I can be a Polar Bear and each claw deals 2d6 damage, but if I shape into a leopard, my claws deal 1d8 each, and so on.

What about Rake? Since using Rake is using a claw, would the Leopard's Rake go from 1d3 to 1d4?

And lastly, what is the next increment up over the Dire Bear's 2d4? The feat doesn't reference this progression.

 

[Nifft]

1: I think Rake is its own attack form, since it has its own name. No increase IMHO.

2: 2d4 -> 2d6 in weapon size changes, so that's what I'd do here, too.

Cheers, -- N

 

[Zurai]

1: I think Rake is its own attack form, since it has its own name. No increase IMHO.

Nope. Rakes are claw attacks. Check the MM entry for the Dire Tiger - it has INA claw, INA bite, but no INA rake; its rake and claws still deal the same base damage (2d4). The MM glossary entry for Rake also explicitly says "A monster with the Rake ability usually gains two extra claw attacks ...".

 

[Nifft]

Nope. Rakes are claw attacks. Check the MM entry for the Dire Tiger - it has INA claw, INA bite, but no INA rake; its rake and claws still deal the same base damage (2d4). The MM glossary entry for Rake also explicitly says "A monster with the Rake ability usually gains two extra claw attacks ...".

I missed that, thanks! -- N

 

[Hypersmurf]

Nope. Rakes are claw attacks. Check the MM entry for the Dire Tiger - it has INA claw, INA bite, but no INA rake; its rake and claws still deal the same base damage (2d4). The MM glossary entry for Rake also explicitly says "A monster with the Rake ability usually gains two extra claw attacks ...".

So let's say we advance a griffon and give it INA: Claw.

Its claw attacks deal 1d4, and its rake attacks deal 1d6. Do they both improve?

-Hyp.

 

[Hawken]

Yes.

The (front) claws improve to 1d6 and the (rear) claws used in the rake adjust to 1d8.

Front claws are eagle claws so they wouldn't do as much as its rear (lion) claws, hence the difference in claw and rake damage.

 

[Zurai]

That was my thought as well, but I've learned my lesson about applying logic to the rules I await Hyp's response with bated breath.

 

[Hypersmurf]

The (front) claws improve to 1d6 and the (rear) claws used in the rake adjust to 1d8.

But the fact that the griffon's claw and rake deal different amounts of damage means that you can't immediately say that just because the Dire Tiger's rake and claws deal the same base damage (2d4), they're both improved - after all, you're saying that a Griffon whose rake and claws both improved would deal different damage. It could be that the Dire Tiger, before application of the INA: Claw feat, would have a lower damage for Claw, but still have a 2d4 rake.

Consider that the Weapon Focus: Claw feat does not appear to apply to the attack rolls for rake.

-Hyp.

 

[Zurai]

But the fact that the griffon's claw and rake deal different amounts of damage means that you can't immediately say that just because the Dire Tiger's rake and claws deal the same base damage (2d4), they're both improved - after all, you're saying that a Griffon whose rake and claws both improved would deal different damage. It could be that the Dire Tiger, before application of the INA: Claw feat, would have a lower damage for Claw, but still have a 2d4 rake.

Except that every other rake-capable creature in the MM has identical claw and rake damage, with or without improved natural attack: claw.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Except that every other rake-capable creature in the MM has identical claw and rake damage, with or without improved natural attack: claw.

Including Skum?

-Hyp.