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

[Slaved]

I do not know if this is one of the places where the only system resource document is different from the book, but here is an interesting entry.

Full Attack
A vampire fighting without weapons uses either its slam attack (see above) or its natural weapons (if it has any). If armed with a weapon, it usually uses the weapon as its primary attack along with a slam or other natural weapon as a natural secondary attack.

 

[Hrothgar Rannúlfr]

What's the Difference?

Maybe I missed it, but what's the difference between a Slam and an Improved Unarmed Strike?

 

[Asmor]

Maybe I missed it, but what's the difference between a Slam and an Improved Unarmed Strike?

A slam attack is a natural attack. Unarmed attacks are considered manufactured attacks.

What? Don't look at me like that, I didn't write the rules!

 

[Infiniti2000]

You don't agree with the process, or you don't agree with the conclusion?

Considering I never offered a conclusion, you must be disagreeing with the process.

I disagree with your statment "you can't use it to perform the other." Did you mean to strike that part of your post so as not to offer a "conclusion"?

If you decide that you need only not attack with a particular limb in order to perform a slam attack, then you can't slam if you used that limb for something else. (Attack with dagger in hand = no slam attack with that arm.)

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. 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). That's clearly allowed and thus I think what you suggest here is not a valid interpretation, it's outright wrong.

I'd have no issue if a DM said, "In order to use your slam attack, you must have your hand free." I'd similarly have no issue if a DM said, "In order to use your slam attack, you can't attack with that arm at all otherwise." I'd similarly have no issue if a DM said, "In order to use your slam attack, you just have to describe it appropriately based on how you're currently fighting."

The first and third, agree. The second, disagree.

 

[irdeggman]

A slam attack is a natural attack. Unarmed attacks are considered manufactured attacks.

What? Don't look at me like that, I didn't write the rules!

Specifically only for a monk (it is under the class ability description) - the description of strike, unarmed (in the equipment section) and the Improved Unarmed Strike in the feat section do not have this statement.

The damage it does is always considered "weapon damage" though.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Specifically only for a monk (it is under the class ability description) - the description of strike, unarmed (in the equipment section) and the Improved Unarmed Strike in the feat section do not have this statement.

Replace 'considered manufactured' with 'behave like manufactured', though, and it's pretty accurate...

-Hyp.

 

[darthkilmor]

Oooo! Body slam! I hadn't even considered that possibility. Are there any existing creatures that use a body slam?

Unless its already been mentioned, dragons can Crush

 

[irdeggman]

Replace 'considered manufactured' with 'behave like manufactured', though, and it's pretty accurate...

-Hyp.

Are you considered "armed" if you don't have improved unarmed strike?

Can you do a bless weapon on a strike, unarmed that is not considered to be "armed"?

It is a much larger picture (and thus consequences) if you simply state that a strike, unarmed behaves like a manufactured weapon.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Are you considered "armed" if you don't have improved unarmed strike?

No, but that's not a point of differentiation between natural weapons and manufactured weapons, since you're normally considered 'armed' with either.

More telling, I think, are things like unarmed strikes using the iterative attack and off-hand attack rules, but this never being stated in the rules, merely assumed to be obvious.

The places where unarmed strikes differ from manufactured weapons are generally stated explicitly, while the places where they differ from natural weapons are generally ignored... the underlying assumption of the designers that they work like manufactured weapons except where noted otherwise is apparent.

-Hyp.

 

[Elemmakil]

Hyp, I'd say that this puts your interpretation on pretty solid ground from a RAW standpoint:

Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following...

-Elemmakil