| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, I have been searching the message boards for a good 1-2 hours now, attempting to discover if the age old question of "Is a natural weapon considered an unarmed strike?" I have been unable to locate a definitive answer and am curious if anyone knows anything definitive or has found statements saying so.
Now, I am about to play a Druid with natural weapons when I wild shift and I would like to take a style feat like Tiger Style or Boar Style. Now, putting aside whether you believe an animal could assume these styles when in combat, could I utilize the portions of each feat that include reference to an unarmed attack (ie. Would I be able to cause bleed damage from two successful natural attacks using boar style, wild-shaped as a Dire Tiger).
I fully understand portions of the book that state that an unarmed strike is not a natural attack (Not considering the countless arguments from anything related to monk). What I mainly need to know is, is a natural attack an unarmed attack even if an unarmed attack is not a natural attack?
|
From the PRD:
"Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do."
Seems pretty clear that the inference here is that there is a difference between Natural attacks and Unarmed Strikes.
The monk also says:
" A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."
A monk can flurry with UAS, but not with natural weapons, again, pointing to the fact that they are two completely separate and distinct things.
Those are both very good indications that a natural weapon was not intended to be an unarmed strike.
I could probably argue that the first sentence is only meant to describe a human's ability to fight without a weapon. There are plenty of things that a natural weapon could conceivably do that the rules describe using an unarmed strike for. For example, stunning fist states:
"Stunning Fist forces a foe damaged by your unarmed attack to make a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wis modifier), in addition to dealing damage normally."
I could easily see a creature with a natural slam attack being able to perform the same feat, but I guess that's my opinion rather than what the rules/authors wanted it to be.
I guess I was hoping to find a more concrete quotation or response paizo or their related material.
If anything, Unarmed Strike (with improved unarmed strike) would be a subset of natural attacks, but the reverse is not true.
Feral combat training it is
Glutton has the right of it, if you want to use monkish feats (aka feats with IUS as a prereq) while wildshaped as a druid, feral combat is a must. My only suggestion would be to plan out which shapes you will be using as FCT is a little feat intensive to get them all, pick one or two attacks to focus on.
For what it is worth, unarmed strikes are actually a type of weapon, listed on the weapon table, stat'ed out and with a description in the weapon section. The fluff of it is "attacking without a weapon," but mechanically it is in fact a weapon in and of itself.
Interesting. So the conclusion is that they are completely separate entities but the powers that be decided to give me what I wanted in the terms of a feat. I like this.
Thanks to all who helped with this.
I grant all of you +100 exp points
|
An unarmed strike is not a natural weapon.
All RAW supports this.
You cannot attack with an unarmed strike as a natural weapon.
You cannot attack with a natural attack as an unarmed strike.
Feats that specifically work with an unarmed strike do not work with natural weapons.
Feats that specifically work with natural weapons do not work with unarmed strikes.
Certain feats, racial abilities, and class features may create exceptions, but default treats them different.
I... Dont understand what you just said...
Im asking if someone that has limbs that all have claws can make normal unarmed strikes at all?
Sure. Its all about how you attack. Just because there are claws on your hand doesnt mean you have to use them when attacking with that hand: chop with the bottom of the hand or palm strike.
If you have claws, can you form a solid fist without hurting yourself? :P
