Can a sword and shield fighter make a natural weapon slam attack in the same round?

[Phlebas]

Incorrect. Single slams (such as a vampire or warforged have) are "2 handed attacks" - but double slams (such as certain oozes and golems have) are not. This makes sense, because it follows the natural attack rules to the letter. Solitary natural attacks are treated as 2 handed weapons.

So a "single slam" prohibits the use of another weapon or hand held item (unless specifically called out like a vampires attack) but can you still have them in hand?

In Asmors scenario

................
A bit of sword play, see an opening, lean back a bit to balance yourself as you raise your leading leg up, and then thrust it forward, hitting them in the chest with the sole of your foot.

Rules wise i'd interpret this that your effectively giving up your normal melee attack to do a slam / unarmed attack - you don't have to drop your weapon / shield but you don't get any benefits from them that round.

(Having done a bit of LARP, I'm pretty sure that i wouldn't get the same benefit from a shield whilst kicking as I would hunkering down behind it and stabbing)

to me that interpretation makes more sense then allowing everyone a secondary attack in addition to their normal attack.

JMHO

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I disagree with your statment "you can't use it to perform the other."

"Generally."

This is the part that you alluded to previously that I don't agree with. I'll agree that you could require hands-free to attack with a slam (e.g.), but not that you cannot have attacked else-wise with your arm.

If the requirement for a particular slam attack is to not have used that arm already, then attacking with the dagger at the end of that arm precludes using the slam.

Moreover, as we've seen, there are creatures who apparently require their arms free in order to use their slam: the astral deva and planetar angels can use their weapons (heavy mace and greatsword, both used in both hands) or their slams, but not both.

This is certainly not evidence that all slams require that the arm be "free" (indeed, I ruled otherwise in my games in re: warforged slams), but it is evidence that some of them are.

What you say here would be identical to ruling that you cannot attack with a dagger, drop it, quick draw a short sword, and then attack with the short sword (iterative).

Absolutely not at all. The rules on manufactured and natural weapons are different in this ruleset, and conflating the two should be done only at your own peril.

 

[Meeki]

Not sure what oozes you are talking about. It appears large creatures with two slam attacks do not get their 1.5 str, even when taking a single slam attack. Judging from this there is no reason that a medium sized golem shouldn't get two slam attacks, maybe they thought it would be an issue to allow smaller creatures to use two slam attacks. However, according to the rules medium sized creatures only get 1 slam attack for 1.5 str, so what about large vampires :O.

 

[Zurai]

So a "single slam" prohibits the use of another weapon or hand held item (unless specifically called out like a vampires attack) but can you still have them in hand?

No. Seriously, it's right there in the rules for natural attacks: Any solitary natural weapon (be it a slam, gore, bite, claw, tail slap, whatever) uses the 2 handed weapon calculations. It doesn't mean you need 2 hands to "wield" such a natural weapon - that's silly. It just means they use 1.5x strength bonus to damage and a 2:1 power attack ratio.

 

[Zurai]

It appears large creatures with two slam attacks do not get their 1.5 str, even when taking a single slam attack.

This is because they have 2 slam attacks. Whether they choose to use one or both doesn't matter. The damage calculations for natural weapons are simple: Are there multiple of the weapon (2 claws, 2 slams, 8 tentacles, etc)? If yes, 1x strength bonus and 1:1 power attack ration. If no, 1.5x strength bonus and 2:1 power attack ratio.

It's not hard, and it's spelled out explicitly in the rules.

Judging from this there is no reason that a medium sized golem shouldn't get two slam attacks, maybe they thought it would be an issue to allow smaller creatures to use two slam attacks.

I honestly have no clue what you're trying to say here.

However, according to the rules medium sized creatures only get 1 slam attack for 1.5 str

Please cite the RULE that says this.

 

[blargney the second]

a kick isn't really powerful enough IMO.

Ever been kicked?
-blarg

 

[Hypersmurf]

No. Seriously, it's right there in the rules for natural attacks: Any solitary natural weapon (be it a slam, gore, bite, claw, tail slap, whatever) uses the 2 handed weapon calculations. It doesn't mean you need 2 hands to "wield" such a natural weapon - that's silly. It just means they use 1.5x strength bonus to damage and a 2:1 power attack ratio.

1.5x Str and 1:1 Power Attack.

Natural weapons always use 1:1 Power Attack; there is nothing in any of the rules to state that any natural weapon, sole or otherwise, benefits from the 2:1 rule that applies to a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands or a two-handed weapon.

-Hyp.

 

[mvincent]

there are no "existing" examples of a creature using their leg to "kick" slam damage?

From the 3.5 FAQ (if desired)*:
"The free attack for the mount in a trample represents the
mount literally knocking down the foe and stepping on him as
he falls underneath the mount’s churning feet. The feat
description specifies a hoof attack, but the kind of natural
weapon is not limited only to hoof attacks. Any attack that is
delivered with a foot, such as a claw or slam attack, also works."

* i.e. FAQ-haters please ignore. We've heard it already. I am simply providing a quote saying it is at least possible.

 

[Meeki]

Read the natural attack section, it mentions slam in the intro section. It also says large creatures with two or more arm like appendages can make 2 slam attacks. Here is what it says:

"Natural Weapons: ....The number of attacks a creature can make with its natural weapons depends on the type of the attack—generally, a creature can make one bite attack, one attack per claw or tentacle, one gore attack, one sting attack, or one slam attack (although Large creatures with arms or arm-like limbs can make a slam attack with each arm). Refer to the individual monster descriptions."

Also it makes no sense that a creature with 2 slam attacks that uses only 1 of them does not get 1.5 str to damage. Just like a medium sized creature with two arms cannot make more than one slam attack, but if he is enlarged he can.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Also it makes no sense that a creature with 2 slam attacks that uses only 1 of them does not get 1.5 str to damage.

It's one of the principles of natural weapons. A creature with a primary bite attack? 1.5x Str bonus. A creature with a primary bite and two secondary claws? 1x on the bite, whether he uses the claws or not. It's based on whether you have other natural weapons, not on whether you use other natural weapons.

Just like a medium sized creature with two arms cannot make more than one slam attack, but if he is enlarged he can.

I read that more as a design-time consideration, rather than a run-time one - if you're creating a creature which is Large and can slam, it has two. That's why it goes on to say "Refer to the individual monster descriptions."

Let's take a hypothetical Kolaryut psychic warrior. He's a Medium humanoid-shaped construct with a single slam attack, and adds 1.5x Str bonus to damage.

He manifests Expansion, and becomes a Large construct. I don't think I'd personally have his slam (1.5x) change to two slams (1x) at this point - he's still a Kolaryut, and has the attacks of a Kolaryut.

I haven't figured out yet what I'd do if he manifested Bite of the Wolf - I suspect I'd still consider the slam to deal 1.5x Str bonus to damage, but I'm not certain on that.

-Hyp.