Attacking with Two Natural Weapons?

[Cthulhudrew]

Here's another one for you guys (btw, thanks again to all who helped out with the Outsider question I had):

If a creature has three or more natural weapons, he can take the Multiattack feat to reduce his attack penalties. What does he do if he has only two natural weapons?

Example, a Diabolus attacks with both bite and tail sting. That's only two natural attacks, so presumably the secondary attack (in this case, I'm making it the tail) is at a -5 penalty. He isn't eligible for the Multiattack feat, but could he take the Two Weapon Fighting feat and reduce his penalty with the tail by -2 (to a -3 overall)? I'm mainly confused because Two Weapon Fighting seems only to apply to manufactured weapons (hence the reduction by -2 to both weapon attacks, which presumably his primary bite wouldn't suffer in any case).

I think that the Dragon magazine with the saurials answered this question, but I'm currently at work and can't double check. If anyone has a solution to this dilemma, I'm very interested in hearing it.

Thanks!

 

[Jaxom]

Cthulhudrew, I'm surprised no one answered your question. I posted the same question on a website I moderate along with Corwin and Administrator Valdier (both really good players and gamemasters with the 3e rules in a few campaingsn we play in together). Corwin answered this question pretty well.

The link to the site is in my sig. and the just click on Forums and proceed to the Dungeons & Dragons 3e Forum listed under d20.

Hope this helps.

 

[AGGEMAM]

He isn't eligible for the Multiattack feat, but could he take the Two Weapon Fighting feat and reduce his penalty with the tail by -2 (to a -3 overall)?

No.

I'm mainly confused because Two Weapon Fighting seems only to apply to manufactured weapons.

Correct, see the MM, page 7.

I know that was not much help, but unless there are some optional rules (house rules) presented in the Dragon Magazine that you would rather use, these are the rules, sorry!

 

[Cthulhudrew]

Jaxom-

Thanks for the link. Corwin's reply about humans being able to use the feats Ambidexterity and Two Weapon Fighting with unarmed attacks makes sense. I hadn't looked at it that way before.

Also, for the record- when I went home, I looked through the Monster Manual for some type of example like the one I posted. The only one I could find is one that seems to break DnD's own "three natural weapon for Multiattack" rule- the Flame Salamander. It attacks with both a weapon and its tail (one natural weapon and one manufactured), and it has the Multiattack feat (thus incurring only a -2 to hit with its tail). So, presumably, it's either an error (one not caught, to my awareness) or else the Multiattack feat is usable for any number of natural weapons...

In any case, I think I'll just go with the suggestion that TWF and Amb are useful for creatures with fewer than three natural attacks.

Thanks again!

 

[AGGEMAM]

The only one I could find is one that seems to break DnD's own "three natural weapon for Multiattack" rule- the Flame Salamander. It attacks with both a weapon and its tail (one natural weapon and one manufactured), and it has the Multiattack feat (thus incurring only a -2 to hit with its tail). So, presumably, it's either an error (one not caught, to my awareness) or else the Multiattack feat is usable for any number of natural weapons...

That is not an error. The flame salamander actually has three natural attacks, since it has two hands, which could deliver a slam or claw attack (whatever, it is not specified or important, really), but it chooses to use a longspear instead.