Improved Grab

[Moon-Lancer]

so if a creature with improved grab (claw) and its claws are primary while the bite is secondary, could this creature get two attempts to grapple if both claws hit?

while grappleing with improved grab would this creature do automatic damage with one of its claws, but more importently get a chance to at a -4 to attack with the other claw and at a -9 attack with the bite?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No. It only keeps you from using two-weapon fighting.

No, it doesn't. It allows you a single attack with a single weapon (light, natural, or unarmed) - and you can perform this action once for every attack based on high BAB that you have. It further points out that you're not allowed to use TWF in order to gain additional attacks.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

so if a creature with improved grab (claw) and its claws are primary while the bite is secondary, could this creature get two attempts to grapple if both claws hit?

Yes - assuming that it failed the first grapple check.

while grappleing with improved grab would this creature do automatic damage with one of its claws, but more importently get a chance to at a -4 to attack with the other claw and at a -9 attack with the bite?

No. It has a particular BAB, which allows it to take grappling actions that replace attacks. One of those options is "Damage your Opponent." If he chooses that option, he makes a grapple check and, if successful, deals Claw damage. If he chooses "Attack your Opponent," he can make an attack with a single natural weapon, takes a -4 penalty on his attack roll, and does damage as appropriate for that weapon.

If he's got a BAB of +6 or higher, then he can take each of those options multiple times. There's debate on how to handle the second and subsequent "Attack your Opponent" choices.

 

[Infiniti2000]

No, it doesn't. It allows you a single attack with a single weapon (light, natural, or unarmed) - and you can perform this action once for every attack based on high BAB that you have. It further points out that you're not allowed to use TWF in order to gain additional attacks.

I have to think on this. I was sure of my position, but looking back through, I'm not so sure. I'll post on this in a day or so and either try to support my position further or concede.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

No problem; I'll just post the important bits again:

When you are grappling (regardless of who started the grapple), you can perform any of the following actions. Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action). If your base attack bonus allows you multiple attacks, you can attempt one of these actions in place of each of your attacks, but at successively lower base attack bonuses.

...

Attack Your Opponent: You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You take a –4 penalty on such attacks.

Good thinking!

 

[Iku Rex]

Curse all the incompetent 3.5 designers...

Y'all are missing the real problem. (?)

"Some of these actions take the place of an attack (rather than being a standard action or a move action)". A natural attack is an attack. Can you take the "Attack Your Opponent" action in place of a natural attack? The next sentence doesn't say you can't.

OTOH, the "Attack Your Opponent" entry lacks the "in place of an attack" note found in the description of several other grapple actions. If you conclude that it doesn't "take the place of an attack" then the use of the singular becomes important. Can you make more than one "Attack Your Opponent" action? Now the situation is reversed, since if natural attacks are one of the generic "attacks" referred to before then the lack of a "in place of an attack" note indicates that you can't make your usual number of attacks with natural weapons. (Because if you could, then there'd be no reason not to specify that it occurs "in place of an attack".) [Did this paragraph make sense? I'm not entriely sure myself.]

There's a hint in the MM description of "Rake".

Rake (Ex): A creature with this special attack gains extra natural attacks when it grapples its foe. Normally, a monster can attack with only one of its natural weapons while grappling, but a monster with the rake ability usually gains two additional claw attacks that it can use only against a grappled foe. Rake attacks are not subject to the usual -4 penalty for attacking with a natural weapon in a grapple.

A monster with the rake ability must begin its turn grappling to use its rake-it can't begin a grapple and rake in the same turn.

Whoever wrote this one doesn't seem to be very fond of multiple attacks in a grapple.

But then there's Skip Williams [RotG article]:

Attack Your Opponent: You can make an attack with an unarmed strike, natural weapon, or light weapon against another character you are grappling. You take a -4 penalty on such attacks.

You can't attack with two weapons while grappling, even if both are light weapons. If you have multiple natural weapons, however, you can use all of them while grappling. In many cases, though, you're better off making an opposed grapple check to damage your opponent rather than making an attack with a natural weapon (see the section on damaging your opponent for details).

He actually worked on the 3.5 MM before he was fired, so IMO he has at least some credibility when it comes to the intent of the 3.5 monster attack rules.

 

[Trodax]

Hmmm... So there seems to be some disagreement regarding the number of natural weapons allowed to use with Attack Your Opponent...

What about the situation when the creature with Improved Grab chooses to take a -20 penalty on his grapple check, and is therefore "not considered grappled"? Does this mean he is no longer restricted to choosing from the grapple actions on page 156 of the PHB, and is instead free to perform standard, move and full-round actions as normal?

 

[Infiniti2000]

He actually worked on the 3.5 MM before he was fired, so IMO he has at least some credibility when it comes to the intent of the 3.5 monster attack rules.

I agree, but I think it's a houserule. I concede my position on it and perhaps it was the RotG I was thinking of (or perhaps 3.0, dunno, not important though).

Fwiw, I will continue to allow multiple natural weapons in a grapple (at -4), but it's a houserule. I don't personally think it's overpowered, but would listen to comments in that regard.

What about the situation when the creature with Improved Grab chooses to take a -20 penalty on his grapple check, and is therefore "not considered grappled"? Does this mean he is no longer restricted to choosing from the grapple actions on page 156 of the PHB, and is instead free to perform standard, move and full-round actions as normal?

Yes. I think so, anyway.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Fwiw, I will continue to allow multiple natural weapons in a grapple (at -4), but it's a houserule. I don't personally think it's overpowered, but would listen to comments in that regard.

Well, it makes getting grappled by things like Kraken really, really, really suck, whereas before they just really sucked, so ...

 

[Infiniti2000]

Well, it makes getting grappled by things like Kraken really, really, really suck, whereas before they just really sucked, so ...

True, but I think that the downside to the natural weapon attacks (having to overcome AC and with a penalty) will counterbalance the potentially larger number of attacks. Also, by taking the attacks, the creature does not constrict, so it would not benefit creatures with abilities similar to contrict.