so I have a ranger with natural weapons (aspect of the beast) and am about to get my first spells. I was looking through some of the options and was intrigued by the Lead Blade spell (APG)
The spell states that "all melle weapons carried" ... would this include natural weapons?
so I have a ranger with natural weapons (aspect of the beast) and am about to get my first spells. I was looking through some of the options and was intrigued by the Lead Blade spell (APG)
The spell states that "all melle weapons carried" ... would this include natural weapons?
It's a corner case, but the fact that there is a spell that does what Lead Blades does but singles out Natural Attacks (Strong Jaw), leaves me skeptical that it does.
You don't leave your natural attacks at home do you? If not, then you are considered to be "carrying them."
The game developers have almost always ruled that you can apply such effects to natural weapons in similar situations despite them not being "held," "carried," or "wielded" in the traditional fashion as manufactured weapons. I see no reason for it to be any different here.
So, intent = YES. Strictest RAW = No.
You don't leave your natural attacks at home do you? If not, then you are considered to be "carrying them."
The game developers have almost always ruled that you can apply such effects to natural weapons in similar situations despite them not being "held," "carried," or "wielded" in the traditional fashion as manufactured weapons. I see no reason for it to be any different here.
So, intent = YES. Strictest RAW = No.
Here's a related question that came up in my game: can you apply the spell gravity bow to thrown weapons (chakrams, in this case)? Strict wording of the spell description says no. But then that kind of leaves thrown weapons out in the cold.
You don't leave your natural attacks at home do you? If not, then you are considered to be "carrying them."
The game developers have almost always ruled that you can apply such effects to natural weapons in similar situations despite them not being "held," "carried," or "wielded" in the traditional fashion as manufactured weapons. I see no reason for it to be any different here.
So, intent = YES. Strictest RAW = No.
Not really. I've seen statements that are rather specific about things "held" or "carried" to try and outmaneuver people taking advantage of corner cases and bad wording (instead of just fixing the wording, but whatever). Natural weapons are not weapons carried.