Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lonely Tylenol" data-source="post: 4046628" data-attributes="member: 18549">Yes.&nbsp; These attacks are made with a -4 penalty.SRD sez: 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.However, there is an issue here: do natural weapons count as weapons for the following statement?SRD sez: You can’t attack with two weapons while grappling, even if both are light weapons.I read it as meaning that you can't perform two-weapon fighting while grappled, although I can see how someone might read it differently.&nbsp; This isn't exactly a problem with grappling per se, but more a problem with the wording of that sentence and definitions in general.No.&nbsp; It's a full-round action to attack with its full complement of natural weapons.&nbsp; If it makes a grapple check to damage, it's not attacking with natural weapons, but is grappling the character and damages that character according to which attack (in this case, a claw) it grabbed him with.&nbsp; If it were a monster without improved grab, it would only do unarmed damage (i.e. 1d4 nonlethal).&nbsp; An owlbear has a BAB of +5, so it doesn't get any iterative attacks.&nbsp; It therefore gets one grapple check per round.&nbsp; It has the choice of grappling for 1d6+5, or making its three natural attacks at -4 to hit with each.No, only one grapple check per round. However, it can hold one creature using one of its natural weapons (presumably a claw, at a -20, for a total of -6 grapple) while using its remaining attacks to hit an adjacent character.edit: aha, I see.&nbsp; You were assuming that the owlbear was taking -20.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lonely Tylenol, post: 4046628, member: 18549"] Yes. These attacks are made with a -4 penalty. [b]SRD sez[/b]: 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. However, there is an issue here: do natural weapons count as weapons for the following statement? [b]SRD sez[/b]: You can’t attack with two weapons while grappling, even if both are light weapons. I read it as meaning that you can't perform two-weapon fighting while grappled, although I can see how someone might read it differently. This isn't exactly a problem with grappling per se, but more a problem with the wording of that sentence and definitions in general. No. It's a full-round action to attack with its full complement of natural weapons. If it makes a grapple check to damage, it's not attacking with natural weapons, but is grappling the character and damages that character according to which attack (in this case, a claw) it grabbed him with. If it were a monster without improved grab, it would only do unarmed damage (i.e. 1d4 nonlethal). An owlbear has a BAB of +5, so it doesn't get any iterative attacks. It therefore gets one grapple check per round. It has the choice of grappling for 1d6+5, or making its three natural attacks at -4 to hit with each. No, only one grapple check per round. However, it can hold one creature using one of its natural weapons (presumably a claw, at a -20, for a total of -6 grapple) while using its remaining attacks to hit an adjacent character. edit: aha, I see. You were [i]assuming[/i] that the owlbear was taking -20. [/QUOTE]

Verification