GamerLocke's page

How would you rule Spellcrafting a spell cast by a druid with Natural Spell. Natural spell says:

"You substitute various noises and gestures for the normal verbal and somatic components of a spell."

My personal opinion is clouded by me not wanting a druid to get free spell-stealth but I also can understand non-druid spellcasters having difficulty in comprehending this type of spellcasting.

Now, without a debate of whether this feat is extremely broken or not, would you allow a fellow spellcaster, we'll say a wizard in this example, to be able to Spellcraft a spell cast by a druid through Natural Spell? And are there any rules stating one way or the other?

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

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.

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?