On feat in particular that covers this topic (snowflake wardance) is out of wizards book and reads "you add your Charisma modifier to your attack rolls with any slashing melee weapon you wield in one hand."
I know that natural weapons count as weapons otherwise you couldn't take "weapon focus" and I already read another offical post that natural weapons do NOT count as unarmed strikes but for the purpose of feats like this do they count as a weapon wielded in one hand? I think I read somewhere else in the pathfinder book that for the purpose of a feat (that I forget) natural weapons counted as an offhand weapon, but I have no idea.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
On feat in particular that covers this topic (snowflake wardance) is out of wizards book and reads "you add your Charisma modifier to your attack rolls with any slashing melee weapon you wield in one hand."
A Natural Weapon is not wielded.
A Natural Weapon is a Light Weapon.So depending on how you interpret that line, both ways result in it not working with a Natural Weapon.
"you add your Charisma modifier to your attack rolls with any slashing melee weapon you wield in one hand."
The way I read that it only works with a manufactured (wielded) weapon.
bbt is correct. Natural weapons are light weapons.
Weapon Finesse (Combat)
You are trained in using your agility in melee combat, as opposed to brute strength.Benefit: With a light weapon, rapier, whip, or spiked chain made for a creature of your size category, you may use your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier on attack rolls. If you carry a shield, its armor check penalty applies to your attack rolls.
Special: Natural weapons are considered light weapons.
|
Bbt is also correct in that Natural Weapons have their own set of rules... For instance, they can simultaneously be considered "light weapons" and stil do 1.5 x STR mod to damage and receive 3:1 return on Power Attack.
Personally I don't have enough info about this snowflake war dance feat from a different, earlier gaming system, to offer comment on how or if it would work with Natural Weapons.
Personally I don't have enough info about this snowflake war dance feat from a different, earlier gaming system, to offer comment on how or if it would work with Natural Weapons.
http://dndtools.eu/feats/frostburn--68/snowflake-wardance--2671/
"natural" weapons are not "melee" weapons.
If the feat or ability says you can add your Charisma Modifier to attack rolls with any slashing "melee" weapon, then you could not add it to a Natural Attack. Because it is not a "melee" weapon.
This is false. Very, very, VERY false.
A melee weapon is any weapon you attack in melee with. A ranged weapon is any weapon you attack at range with.
There are both melee natural weapons and ranged natural weapons.
This is probably the most ancient necro I've seen.
Damn, you're right. I hadn't noticed. It sure was an amazing necro job only to make a totally incorrect point. That's kind of embarrassing... :P
It seems pretty clear to me that you wield a Claw in 1 hand. But I don't think you wield a Bite or a tentacle in 1 hand.
I don't think even a Claw is either a 1 handed or a light weapon. For instance, you normally couldn't use the 2 weapon fighting style to fight with long sword and claw, treating the claw as your light, off-hand weapon.
Also, the OP's feat doesn't only work on light and 1 handed weapons, but rather "with any slashing melee weapon you wield in one hand," which is not the same thing as a 1 handed weapon.
Funny you should say that you can't use a claw as an offhand attack with two weapon fighting.
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.
Some natural attacks are denoted as secondary natural attacks, such as tails and wings. Attacks with secondary natural attacks are made using your base attack bonus minus 5. These attacks deal an amount of damage depending on their type, but you only add half your Strength modifier on damage rolls.
You can make attacks with natural weapons in combination with attacks made with a melee weapon and unarmed strikes, so long as a different limb is used for each attack. For example, you cannot make a claw attack and also use that hand to make attacks with a longsword. When you make additional attacks in this way, all of your natural attacks are treated as secondary natural attacks, using your base attack bonus minus 5 and adding only 1/2 of your Strength modifier on damage rolls. Feats such as Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiattack can reduce these penalties.
Note how it explicitly states that you can reduce that penalty for natural weapon attacks made in conjunction with manufactured weapon attacks using the two weapon fighting feat.
Natural Attacks: Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet).
Natural attacks are melee attacks.
Wielding means "actively trying to use the item," and is normally only used in the context of weapons or weapon-like objects such as rods, wands, and so on.
You can wield a natural weapon.
Well, to address the actual question, recent FAQs have clarified that "one-handed" and "wielded in one hand" have distinct mechanical meanings. If it said, "while wielding a one-handed weapon", that would exclude light weapons (though include "virtual 1-h weapons" via feats/abilities like Quarterstaff Master or Phalanx Fighter). However, what it says is "while wielding a weapon in one hand" which is any weapon wielded by one hand. This would include mfg weapons, both one-handed and light, that utilize only one hand (as well as a Lance while mounted) but exclude weapons wielded in zero hands such as armor spikes, boot blades, and non-hand-associated weapons like bites, tail, and unarmed strikes not involving the hands (ie. your hands are full so you kick; that doesn't count).
Regarding the line in combining natural weapons with mfg weapons and using TWF to reduce penalties, that was a holdover from a version of the rules that stated you suffer normal TWF penalties when attacking with mfg weapons and natural weapons combined. They took out that part, but forgot to remove the "TWF feats can reduce these penalties" part.
Now can someone come and channel this thread back into its grave?
If you follow the logic behind the two handed weapon and spiked armor faq, you can't two weapon fight because the armor spikes require your 'off hand' of effort. So is it your actual hand it's referring to in the feat or your metaphysical 'hand of effort'? If armor spikes can't be used with two weapon fighting it seems that for the same reason they'd work for this feat.
Spell Combat sets the precedent that "in your (other) hand" refers specifically to your physical hand to the extent that the FAQ clarifies it is invalid to combine a non-hand-associated melee weapon (ie. Boot Blade or Tail attack) with Spell Combat. Ergo, "in one hand" isn't talking about a weapon using only one hand worth of effort (ie. Armor Spikes use one hand worth of effort) but rather occupying one physical hand. To further support this, the Lance while mounted follows the "in one hand" rule but this doesn't change the effort required to wield it. So while it only occupies one hand, it never becomes a "virtual 1-h weapon" which requires only one hand worth of attack effort; it is still a 2-h weapon for all purposes, including (but not limited to) getting 1.5x Str and 1.5x power attack bonus, subsuming your off-hand attack, and counting as a 2-h weapon for feats/abilities that call for the use of a 2-h weapon (ie. Pushing Assault, Shield of Swings), just with an explicit exception to the rule that using a 2-h weapon occupies two hands (and nothing more).
Magus: When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?
Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
posted April 2013
So it doesn't have to be IN a hand, just associated with a hand.
Magus, Spell Combat: When using spell combat, do I specifically have to use the weapon in my other hand, or can I use a mixture of weapons (such as armor spikes and bites) so long as my casting hand remains free?
You specifically have to use the light or one-handed melee weapon in your other hand.
posted April 2013
SO it has to be in your 'other hand'.
Armor Spikes: Can I use two-weapon fighting to make an "off-hand" attack with my armor spikes in the same round I use a two-handed weapon?
No.
Likewise, you couldn't use an armored gauntlet to do so, as you are using both of your hands to wield your two-handed weapon, therefore your off-hand is unavailable to make any attacks.posted July 2013
A LATER FAQ that associates non-hand weapons with hands. (EI spiked armor uses a hand) This invalidates BOTH magus FAQ's. Physical hand is stated no place in them. The magus FAQ's do still have value as it does still make natural attacks 'light weapons associated with a hand'. Note, this is ALL do to the Armor spikes FAQ use of 'hands' to invalidate TWF. By making them use hands has more consequences than just blocking TWF.
A natural weapon is not wielded "in one hand" nor can it be wielded in two hands.
Where is this quote found?
Wielding means "actively trying to use the item," and is normally only used in the context of weapons or weapon-like objects such as rods, wands, and so on.You can wield a natural weapon.
That was a responce from Sean k Reynolds on what "wield" means. Best I could find.
Natural weapons count as "wielded in one hand"?
no - cannot disarm a wing attack or bite.
Where is this quote found?
Wielding means "actively trying to use the item," and is normally only used in the context of weapons or weapon-like objects such as rods, wands, and so on.You can wield a natural weapon.Don't know about that one specifically, but I do know
this one:So, in your unofficial opinion...what constitutes wielding? It seems pretty inconsistent in the rules (alternately being holding, or actively using it seems like).Unofficially, there's just so many examples that do weird things either way that it leads me to suspect that there were a bunch of ability writers who held each view, all while thinking that everyone held the same view and using "wield" to mean their own view. This leads me in my home games to define it on a case-by-case basis. Does it let you trade out something that only matters if you use it but important if you use it for something extremely good? Then it probably means use. Does it give you a passive benefit that would be useless if it only worked when you used it? Then it probably means hold in hand.
Unfortunately, this is a messy way to do it when it comes to a FAQ, so I don't suspect it will be FAQed that way, but I think in your own games that it leads to the most harmonious results.
It's from here.
You can search a poster's posting history. It's really handy for this sort of thing (assuming you know some of the contents of the post).
|
That was a responce from Sean k Reynolds on what "wield" means. Best I could find.Where is this quote found?
Wielding means "actively trying to use the item," and is normally only used in the context of weapons or weapon-like objects such as rods, wands, and so on.You can wield a natural weapon.
Obviously it's from SKR, otherwise you wouldn't have attributed it to him. But I can say whatever I want and say whoever I want originally said it, but without proof it's pretty meaningless.
It's from here.
You can search a poster's posting history. It's really handy for this sort of thing (assuming you know some of the contents of the post).
Thanks, this is what I was looking for.
Seeing the whole quote, it doesn't apply to natural weapons as they're not items. And it's pretty clear he's talking about objects in his post.
|
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.
When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?
Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
A hand-associated natural weapon is considered "wielded in the hand."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
To use this ability, the magus must have one hand free (even if the spell being cast does not have somatic components), while wielding a light or one-handed melee weapon in the other hand.When using spell combat, can the weapon in my other hand be an unarmed strike or a natural weapon?
Yes, so long as the weapon is a light or one-handed melee weapon and is associated with that hand. For example, unarmed strikes, claws, and slams are light melee weapons associated with a hand, and therefore are valid for use with spell combat. A tail slap is not associated with a hand, and therefore is not valid for use with spell combat.
A hand-associated natural weapon is considered "wielded in the hand."
No the FAQ states you can use the natural weapon for this class ability. The two are not interchangeable nor does a FAQ specifically for the Magus class mean that it is a blanket rule sadly. It means for this specific instance it can be considered to be that way. Extrapolating anything beyond what it says leads to debate on RAI.