Animal bites

[awa]

So I was trying to picture monsters fighting and it occurred to me that I had a really hard time picturing an animal both able to bite and at the same time able to maintain its defense in a realistic fashion. It then occurred to me that very few animals even try to do that they mostly bite and then try and increase the damage by shaking.

So i was considering making it so biting animals are flat footed after a hit. Its not D&D its a home brew system and all the monster will be built from the ground up to account for this in their power ratting im mostly consider the logic. Is my logic sound does this make sense, should the penalty be worse or not at all. What are peoples opinions?

[Segev]

The question you need to answer (and possibly ask) is at what level of abstraction are you working? To use D&D as an example, that "bite" in a round is actually representing the one good nip gotten in out of those six seconds of snapping jaws and lashing claws. It might actually represent grabbing and worrying a bit before being pulled or beaten off.

People often forget their levels of abstraction when trying to model things. But it's important to remember.

Then, too, there's balance. Does this change make animals that bite too dangerous or too vulnerable?

[Knaight]

There's a fair amount of nature footage of animals fighting - and it tends to suggest that animals can fight with their teeth fairly effectively without compromising their defense. This often includes effectively blocking teeth with teeth. Given that I'd avoid post-attack penalties.

[JoeJ]

The question you need to answer (and possibly ask) is at what level of abstraction are you working? To use D&D as an example, that "bite" in a round is actually representing the one good nip gotten in out of those six seconds of snapping jaws and lashing claws. It might actually represent grabbing and worrying a bit before being pulled or beaten off.

People often forget their levels of abstraction when trying to model things. But it's important to remember.

This. When fighting with a sword, committing yourself to an attack creates an opening in your defense that an enemy can exploit. If your game tries to model every move in a fencing match, you'll need to include that. If you're combining a few seconds worth of fencing into a single character action, then you don't want to include it.

[awa]

Balance is not a concern because its a home-brew system i have to make all the monsters anyway so that isn't an issue

the game is also more in-depth when it come to mundane combat than regular d&d so my only concern is, is it accurate.

the difference between a sword/ claw and the bite though is that for most animals it means getting their important bit a lot closer to the enemy so the opening a lot bigger.

Im just trying to picture any animal attack i have every seen and they almost never release and bite again once they have an actual hold it possible that just means i haven't looked in the right spot though. Partially i just don't think a biting animal can disengage as fast as a claw/sword its got no reach so to speak so it had to move close to hit and now it has to back off a lot farther to get out of its opponents reach.

[WindStruck]

If the animal continues holding on to the bite, I'd say it's more like the animal is in the grappled condition (and thus flat footed, losing dex to ac bonus), though the bitten creatures, if large enough, may not be grappled. Would solve that little issue.

[awa]

im just not sure they can disengage fast enough because if they have their head on someone then that kind limits their body a lot more then someone who struck with a sword.

I also feel that a full bite just takes more time to get its full delivery of energy than a normal weapon which because of the reduced mobility and the fact that they needed to move such a vital part so close to the target, i just can picture a wolf have any real ability to evade counter attacks.

I mean when I think of the rare anime with say an attacking wolf (is fighting and not just one shoting) they either lunge past somehow biting and tearing a bit off which either requires vorpral fangs or such precision that its not practical, or they just kinda bounce off of them but with a blood spray which is even less realistic.

[Jay R]

Wolves attempt to bite the neck. their defense is that in that position, the enemy can't bite back.

Many snakes coil around their foe and then bite. The opponent is mostly unable to attack.

Any animal whose defense is dodging can move most of their body while biting, and still have their defense.

So I'm not convinced that they are helpless.

[Braininthejar2]

the closest D&D has is probably the 'latch' special rule that dire weasels have

[Keltest]

Wolves attempt to bite the neck. their defense is that in that position, the enemy can't bite back.

Many snakes coil around their foe and then bite. The opponent is mostly unable to attack.

Any animal whose defense is dodging can move most of their body while biting, and still have their defense.

So I'm not convinced that they are helpless.

Pretty much this. Any animal that latches on to something for any length of time is using that latching as a defensive mechanism during the bite. You cant use your arm to attack a wolf if the wolf is attached to that arm, for example.

[awa]

which is well modeled by the grapple mechanic.

So nothing so far has really changed my mind i think i'm gonna go ahead and make biting monsters flat footed on the rnd they bite, and just give them all free improved grab

[Knaight]

which is well modeled by the grapple mechanic.

So nothing so far has really changed my mind i think i'm gonna go ahead and make biting monsters flat footed on the rnd they bite, and just give them all free improved grab

If you're building your own system you could just have weapons give defensive bonuses as well, where biting gives you a bit more than an unarmed human has but a fair bit less than a sword, spear, etc. It's a lot less clunky than a flat footed mechanic, particularly given how many animals there are that can quickly bite and retreat (see: venomous snakes).

[Psyren]

The question you need to answer (and possibly ask) is at what level of abstraction are you working? To use D&D as an example, that "bite" in a round is actually representing the one good nip gotten in out of those six seconds of snapping jaws and lashing claws. It might actually represent grabbing and worrying a bit before being pulled or beaten off.

People often forget their levels of abstraction when trying to model things. But it's important to remember.

Then, too, there's balance. Does this change make animals that bite too dangerous or too vulnerable?

This works fine for me. OP, sorry if it doesn't for you and good luck I guess.

[Pleh]

which is well modeled by the grapple mechanic.

So nothing so far has really changed my mind i think i'm gonna go ahead and make biting monsters flat footed on the rnd they bite, and just give them all free improved grab

Be careful adding Improved Grab with grapple checks between creatures of substantially different sizes.

A wolf latching onto a human arm actually restrains the human's movement. A tiny viper doing the same does not.

D&D rules tend to say, "you either do grab and restrain movement or you fail to grab or restrain movement." They don't tend to account for, "you grab them, but fail to restrain movement."

You almost need climbing rules for attackers substantially smaller than their grab targets.

[Maelynn]

I'd go with grapple for this. With perhaps size modifiers.

Same size:

1) opposing grapple (strength) checks to determine if grapple is successful

Animal is larger:

1) advantage on grapple (strength) check
2) a +2 bonus to grapple (strength) check for every size larger
3) target must roll strength check of DCsomething (+3 to DC for every size larger) or be grappled

Animal is smaller:

1) disadvantage on grapple (strength) check
2) a +2 penalty to grapple (strength) check for every size smaller
3) target must roll strength check of DCsomething (-3 for every size smaller) or be grappled

[Knaight]

I'd also point out that the same thing applies to weapons - at the instant you're hitting someone with a sword, it's not a great defensive tool (you might have a block going because you're working out of a bind or something), and also you can't dodge very far while staying close enough to make that hit. Basically any individual attack leaves you at least somewhat more open than you are when in a ready stance, armed or unarmed. Much like with bites, there are ways to minimize this - good timing, good positioning, etc. All those fit within the abstraction already.

[Jay R]

I'd also point out that the same thing applies to weapons - at the instant you're hitting someone with a sword, it's not a great defensive tool (you might have a block going because you're working out of a bind or something), and also you can't dodge very far while staying close enough to make that hit. Basically any individual attack leaves you at least somewhat more open than you are when in a ready stance, armed or unarmed. Much like with bites, there are ways to minimize this - good timing, good positioning, etc. All those fit within the abstraction already.

Correct. And because they are built in to any sword tactics already, only a fool is more open at the instant he or she hits with a sword.

Furthermore, since a sword blow is likely to kill you, only a fool will throw a shot rather than blocking one that's already on its way. With a very few opponents, my defense is to keep throwing blows as fast as possible, so that they can only think about parrying.

At the instant I'm hitting somebody with a sword, I've either blocked their shot, stopped their momentum, thrown a shot in the path of their potential shot, or timed it when they aren't able to throw. The defense is that you don't merely ignore all defense when you attack, you actually throw shots with defense in mind.

Period sword manuals -- I.33, Lichtenauer, Fiore dei Liberi, Marozzo, Agrippa, Capo Ferro and many more -- show how to throw shots without dropping your defense.

This is what wolves do when timing their bites, too. If you've ever watched two dogs fighting, they are circling, and looking for a moment when they can bite without being bitten back.

[awa]

Be careful adding Improved Grab with grapple checks between creatures of substantially different sizes.

A wolf latching onto a human arm actually restrains the human's movement. A tiny viper doing the same does not.

D&D rules tend to say, "you either do grab and restrain movement or you fail to grab or restrain movement." They don't tend to account for, "you grab them, but fail to restrain movement."

You almost need climbing rules for attackers substantially smaller than their grab targets.

tiny or huge creatures simply don't come up often in the system at least not as enemy combatants and when they do they always have special rules anyway


the important point is not defense against the primary target which is handled by knock down or grapple but defense against a second attacker.

[Keltest]

tiny or huge creatures simply don't come up often in the system at least not as enemy combatants and when they do they always have special rules anyway


the important point is not defense against the primary target which is handled by knock down or grapple but defense against a second attacker.

I have yet to see a system that can both simulate grappling and integrate it into combat such that it doesn't take 20 minutes to resolve. Just putting it out there.

Anyway, an easy solution would be for any target trying a latching type attack to provoke an extra attack from targets in melee, where they don't benefit from any dexterity bonuses or whatever your equivalent is. Something like a wolf will have a hard time avoiding being hit, while something with, say, a really thick natural hide will still be able to absorb the blows.

[Knaight]

Correct. And because they are built in to any sword tactics already, only a fool is more open at the instant he or she hits with a sword.

Furthermore, since a sword blow is likely to kill you, only a fool will throw a shot rather than blocking one that's already on its way. With a very few opponents, my defense is to keep throwing blows as fast as possible, so that they can only think about parrying.

At the instant I'm hitting somebody with a sword, I've either blocked their shot, stopped their momentum, thrown a shot in the path of their potential shot, or timed it when they aren't able to throw. The defense is that you don't merely ignore all defense when you attack, you actually throw shots with defense in mind.

Period sword manuals -- I.33, Lichtenauer, Fiore dei Liberi, Marozzo, Agrippa, Capo Ferro and many more -- show how to throw shots without dropping your defense.

This is what wolves do when timing their bites, too. If you've ever watched two dogs fighting, they are circling, and looking for a moment when they can bite without being bitten back.

I have a few quibbles with parts of this, but we're basically on the same page here. Most notably, I'd say that risk is minimized but not completely removed when striking. The moment of a strike is generally more open than when you're in a ready stance, but how much more open can vary, and you want that to be as small as possible. This is particularly true in more chaotic combat conditions with multiple combatants. There's some level of risk being accepted, and sometimes it can be worth it to accept a little more risk. As one example, I'll generally take a risky shot if it's likely to make the difference between a one on one followed by another one on one and a one on two.

Of course, if you fight totally defensively it's only a matter of time until you slip up. A moment of higher risk is needed to avoid that inevitable failure. Again, this has applications in more chaotic conditions; fighting defensively to buy time for allies to show up can easily be worth it.

The important part here is that the exact same thing applies to animals biting, including the quibbles. Mechanically, both are represented worse with a flat footed penalty following strikes, where a fighting defensively option works well for both.

[JoeJ]

I have yet to see a system that can both simulate grappling and integrate it into combat such that it doesn't take 20 minutes to resolve. Just putting it out there.

DC Heroes, Cortex Plus, Fate Core, FAE.

[Jay R]

Right. The fact is that I'm not flat-footed when I'm moving and reacting to the immediate threat in front of me, and any time I throw a shot, I am moving and reacting to the immediate threat in front of me.

And the same is true about any animal.

[awa]

I have yet to see a system that can both simulate grappling and integrate it into combat such that it doesn't take 20 minutes to resolve. Just putting it out there.

Anyway, an easy solution would be for any target trying a latching type attack to provoke an extra attack from targets in melee, where they don't benefit from any dexterity bonuses or whatever your equivalent is. Something like a wolf will have a hard time avoiding being hit, while something with, say, a really thick natural hide will still be able to absorb the blows.

grappling isn't as complicated as people make it out to be particularly considering improved grab lets you skip a few steps

But 1 rnd of being flat footed is currently what I'm thinking of

[Knaight]

Right. The fact is that I'm not flat-footed when I'm moving and reacting to the immediate threat in front of me, and any time I throw a shot, I am moving and reacting to the immediate threat in front of me.

And the same is true about any animal.

Exactly. I'd even go so far as to say that moment when you're mid shot and an opponent unexpectedly goes at you instead of parrying is where your Dexterity* really comes into play. Being quick is helpful in general, of course, but that's one of those moments where it really matters.

*Here defined as a mix of reaction time, gross movement skills, and agility, all of which fit the D&D definition.

[JoeJ]

grappling isn't as complicated as people make it out to be particularly considering improved grab lets you skip a few steps

But 1 rnd of being flat footed is currently what I'm thinking of

Improved grab? Rounds of being flat footed? Honestly, that doesn't sound very much not a homebrew "not D&D" game. It sounds like D&D 3.5 with a few tweaks. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it does affect any advice I might be able to offer.)

[Knaight]

Improved grab? Rounds of being flat footed? Honestly, that doesn't sound very much not a homebrew "not D&D" game. It sounds like D&D 3.5 with a few tweaks. (Not that there's anything wrong with that, but it does affect any advice I might be able to offer.)

I'm pretty sure that's the assumption we've all been making at this point. At the very least it's a fantasy d20 game with a fairly similar combat system, albeit a crunchier one.

[awa]

it does have a lot of differences but most of them simply don't apply here.

[Koo Rehtorb]

In Burning Wheel some animals get a special action, Lock and Strike. It's basically a combined grapple and attack.

[Cespenar]

The main downside of a bite is the zero reach problem. That's why humans hunt with long weapons. Even a stick would give you a huge advantage against a dog over your bare hands.

Game logic-wise, I'd make bite attacks have higher damage and on-hit grapple/latch effects, but provoke an AoO from the defender like an unarmed attack (in 3.5). In 5e, it could give advantage to the next attack towards the creature.

[Satinavian]

A (not D&D) system i use often has the following rule :

Under certain circumstances an animal that landed a bite attack can continue the bite thus automatically adding full damage every future round without an attack roll and without any active defenses and at the same body zone (leading fast to really nasty wounds). In turn it gives up its own active defense and is additionally easier to hit.

I think that is quite fitting as a rule and even speeds up combat.