Converting "Real World" Animals and Vermin

[Shade]

Perhaps we're going about this the wrong way. The SRD Octopus does not have multiple tentacle attacks like their giant versions, just a single attack with its arms. The SRD Squid does the same, and that's Medium sized like the Deepwater Octopus. We could just give it a single "Arms" attack with its tentacles in the same fashion.

That only works since their arms deal no actual damage. It's a bit like the "attach" damage for some creatures that attack only to latch on, but deal no damage.

EDIT: I have a feeling the debate over this is going to be as long as that over Houyhnhnm Hoof damage.

Weeps profusely.

The original only had 6 tentacles (should we change that in our writeup?) presumably to keep the other two free for manipulating things and didn't get a Str bonus. Taking 1d6 tentacles at 1d2 each gives an average constrict damage of 3.5*1.5=5.25. 1d6+1 gives an average of 4.5, which isn't that far off. And that's assuming that you get lots of tentacles attached as much as just 1 or 2. I just don't think we should compare constrict by adding in Str for each tentacle, since that's not how constrict generally works in 3.X. We've done some exceptional constricts in the past, I think, but those were for more exceptional monsters, too.

I like 1d6+1 for a creature of its power level.

I do think we should add the shortspear to the attack line as a possibility.

Agreed.

 

[Cleon]

The original only had 6 tentacles (should we change that in our writeup?) presumably to keep the other two free for manipulating things and didn't get a Str bonus. Taking 1d6 tentacles at 1d2 each gives an average constrict damage of 3.5*1.5=5.25. 1d6+1 gives an average of 4.5, which isn't that far off. And that's assuming that you get lots of tentacles attached as much as just 1 or 2. I just don't think we should compare constrict by adding in Str for each tentacle, since that's not how constrict generally works in 3.X. We've done some exceptional constricts in the past, I think, but those were for more exceptional monsters, too.

I do think we should add the shortspear to the attack line as a possibility.

That's right, the original write-up says it uses two limbs to stabilize itself while attacking with the remaining six. The AD&D versions of the giant octopus was the same, only being able to attack with 6 limbs, while the AD&D giant squid could use 8. Oh and they both automatically did double tentacle damage per tentacle per round when constricting.

Anyhow, I'm just trying to get a feel for what damage level would be appropriate for when the Deepwater Octopus constricts a victim. 1d6+1 just seems too low if it can opt to attack with eight tentacles for 1d2+1 apiece.

The SRD giant octopus can constrict for 2d8+6 (which I'm sure is a typo, since its Strength is 20 it should either be 2d8+7 or 2d8+5).

I'd prefer the Constrict damage to be significant enough for it to be the Deepwater's favourite tactic, rather than it often being better off Full-Attacking with its tentacles.

Hmm, how about this:

• Drop the Deepwater Octopus's Strength to 11.
• Give it 6 tentacle attacks (or 3 weapons) like the original write up.
• Make its constrict do 1d10 damage (since the SRD Giant Octopus does 2d8 and is one size category larger).

That way, the deepwater could attack with 6 arms for 1d2 (average 9) or Constrict for 1d10 (5.5), roughly four times a single tentacle damage. Throw in a racial grapple bonus and that would make Constriction an effective tactic for it.

 

[freyar]

Uggh. I thought we wanted to go 2 steps down from the giant octopus? I guess I could go up to 1d8 or maybe 1d10. Dropping Str to 11 is ok, but did we have a reason for 13?

Another question, though: if the AD&D giant octopus and squid did better constrict damage relative to tentacles than the deepwater did, doesn't that argue for a weak constrict attack?

 

[Cleon]

Weeps profusely.

Sorry Shade, I didn't mean to give you flashbacks.

I like 1d6+1 for a creature of its power level

It's just that I don't think 1d6+1 Constrict is anywhere near comparable to a potential 8d2+8 (plus 1d6 bite!) with a Full Attack. So, I'd prefer to either increase the Constrict damage or cut down the tentacle damage (maybe 3 tentacles attacks for 1d2, or 6-8 doing 1 point each?).

What sort of power level are you thinking of, anyway, Challenge Rating 2ish?

Oh, and we definitely need Shortspear attacks.

Come to think of it, that may open up yet another can of worms. Would we need a primary shortspear attack and a couple of secondary shortspear attacks?

I'm making things difficult for ourselves, again, aren't I.

 

[freyar]

The shortspears would be handled by Multiweapon fighting rules (same as 2-weapon fighting) as usual, right? I guess that's more or less like secondary attacks.

The thing is, I don't know that these are likely to hit with all 6 or 8 tentacle attacks. So the constrict is trading off iffy damage for pretty much guaranteed damage, right?

 

[Cleon]

Uggh. I thought we wanted to go 2 steps down from the giant octopus? I guess I could go up to 1d8 or maybe 1d10. Dropping Str to 11 is ok, but did we have a reason for 13?

Well the SRD Octopus is Str 12 and the SRD Squid Str 14, so it just seemed reasonable at the time.

Another question, though: if the AD&D giant octopus and squid did better constrict damage relative to tentacles than the deepwater did, doesn't that argue for a weak constrict attack?

Well it's horses for courses.

An AD&D giant octopus could only hit a single man-sized foe with one tentacle (strike for 1d4 or Constrict for 2d4 damage per round), so would usually divide its tentacles amongst all the enemies it could reach and could do more total damage against a party. The AD&D Deepwater can use all six of its tentacle attacks against the same opponent, for a potential 6d2 Constriction damage, so it actually can do more damage mano-a-cephalopod against a single foe, although at least its grip was easier to escape from (anyone with Strength 16+ could automatically pry its tentacles free, while a Giant Octopus's grip was unbreakable unless its tentacles were severed).

Alternatively, how about modelling it after the behir's Rake attack - it gets a few regular tentacle attacks with Improved Grab when making a Full Attack, and if it enters a grapple it can Constrict plus make a bunch of low-damage tentacles attacks with its primary attack bonus and secondary damage bonus. e.g. its Constrict does 1d6+1 damage with a grapple check plus six +3 melee attacks doing 1d2 damage, its Full Attack is 3 tentacles +3 melee (1d2+1) plus bite -2 melee (1d6).

So, enough of my throwing ideas out to see what sticks. How much damage would you lot like it to do with its tentacles?

 

[freyar]

I'm going to mull over the suggestions a bit, but I'll answer your last question. Not a whole lot, since their flavor suggests that they're not really strong in melee.

 

[Shade]

Sorry Shade, I didn't mean to give you flashbacks.

<Wipes away tears, composes self>

It's just that I don't think 1d6+1 Constrict is anywhere near comparable to a potential 8d2+8 (plus 1d6 bite!) with a Full Attack. So, I'd prefer to either increase the Constrict damage or cut down the tentacle damage (maybe 3 tentacles attacks for 1d2, or 6-8 doing 1 point each?).

Hmmm...nothing prevents it from constricting with one tentacle while attacking with the rest, does it (other than the -20 penalty)? That's pretty damn potent!

What sort of power level are you thinking of, anyway, Challenge Rating 2ish?

Yeah, that sounds about right.

Oh, and we definitely need Shortspear attacks.

Come to think of it, that may open up yet another can of worms. Would we need a primary shortspear attack and a couple of secondary shortspear attacks?

The shortspears would be handled by Multiweapon fighting rules (same as 2-weapon fighting) as usual, right? I guess that's more or less like secondary attacks.

Right. Which would make them highly unlikely to hit with the Multiweapon Fighting feat, let alone without it.

The thing is, I don't know that these are likely to hit with all 6 or 8 tentacle attacks. So the constrict is trading off iffy damage for pretty much guaranteed damage, right?

Yep.

The more I think about this, I think the constrict should simply deal automatic tentacle damage, with perhaps bonus damage based on the number of arms comitted to the grapple.

 

[freyar]

You know, let's just stick to 1 shortspear. The damage boost might almost be enough to make it worthwhile.

I'm not so sure I like the constrict/tentacle thing. Haven't we mostly used that for big, special monsters before?

 

[Cleon]

Right. Which would make them highly unlikely to hit with the Multiweapon Fighting feat, let alone without it.

Well we could give them special multiweapon attacks like a Marilith which does not suffer an attack penalty with its secondary arms, and iterative attacks with its primary weapon arm. That would give it "primary shortspear +3 melee (1d6+1) and 2 secondary shortspears +3 melee (1d6)", with an 11.5 average damage if all three hit.

Of course that's a pretty meaty ability. We'd have PCs lining up to play a Deepwater Octopus rogue- and warrior-types in an aquatic campaign, to exploit its two extra weapon attacks.

I's still less average damage than its tentacle-strikes though. I'd either reduce its damage (give them secondary damage bonus), or maybe say it cannot strike at a creature its own size or less with more than 4 limbs?

The more I think about this, I think the constrict should simply deal automatic tentacle damage, with perhaps bonus damage based on the number of arms comitted to the grapple.

Yes, that works. 1d6 plus 1 per tentacle? That's a slightly lower level of damage to its shortspears, and is about on par with its tentacles if we cut their damage to six-eight 1d2s or four 1d2+1s.

Should we give it a grapple bonus equal to the number of tentacles it's holding on with, or just a set racial bonus?