Strenght bonus for monsters Options

[aigleborgne]

Hello,

Players use strenght bonus for melee weapons.

What about monsters?
I know bonus is applying for claw's type weapon, but for bite?
I have looked into many monsters in BG2, and some does have it, some doesn't.

For example, greater basilisk have 3 attack:
- petrification
- claw with poison (with strenght bonus)
- bite (no strenght bonus)

What do you think about that?

This post has been edited by aigleborgne: Dec 18 2005, 05:41 PM

[Rabain]

You can choose to turn on or off strength bonus for a weapon, be it a sword or a claw.

I think what aigleborne was trying to point out was that it does not seem consistent through the creature files he has looked at. Saying that a claw inflicts such high damage partly because of the creatures strength is fair enough but it is the same for creatures wielding swords. A sword lying on the ground does no damage to anyone of its own volition, it definately doesn't do 1d8 damage. For game purposes claws should be treated as wielded weapons and the strength bonus applied logically.

So in aigleborne's example I would agree that what has been done is fine. The bite of a basilisk should not draw on the creatures strength bonus as basilisks are not generally known for the powerful nature of their bite. Giving the bite attack of a Kua-toa/Sahuagin a strength bonus would be okay in my book as this creature has a large set of teeth and is shark-like in countenance though I don't think they actually come with a bite attack but you get the idea. A dog for example should be able to apply strength bonus to its bite as dogs generally bite rather than claw (paw?) and are built to better attack in this fashion.