If the lizardfolk in question were to get weapon focus into their natural attacks, do they still count as natural attacks? And if so - does it stack with the improved natural attack feat?
As I understand things, yes you can take weapon focus for you natural attack, but they are still considered natural attacks. I am not sure if you can stack improved natural attack with the sacred weapon damage, but I would not allow it.
As I understand things, yes you can take weapon focus for you natural attack, but they are still considered natural attacks. I am not sure if you can stack improved natural attack with the sacred weapon damage, but I would not allow it.
Which is reasonable it's just some theorycrafting lead me to this and I was wondering on the legality of it within the pathfinder rules.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The way the two interact is as such:
1. Improved Narural Attack increases your base claw damage (e.g. d4 to d6).
2. Sacred weapon allows you to choose either Base Damage or the damage off the table.
So the table damage overrides the effect of the feat.
Non-natural weapon example: Greatsword does 2d6 base damage. If your sacred weapon is Greatsword, it doesn't give you any benefit to damage for a long time, and you just use base damage.
The wording on improved natural attack increases the damage as if the creature were one size larger, not as if the attack were one size larger. So, it may actually increase the warpriest damage, because they have a table for what their damage is when size larger.
The way I understand the feat is as follows
Attacks made by one of this creature's natural attacks leave vicious wounds.
Prerequisite: Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: Choose one of the creature's natural attack forms (not an unarmed strike). The damage for this natural attack increases by one step on the following list, as if the creature's size had increased by one category. Damage dice increase as follows: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.
Special: This feat can be taken multiple times. Each time it is taken, it applies to a different natural attack.
So unless Sacred weapon makes it so that natural weapons aren't natural weapons anymore the improved natural attack feat should still apply unless it removes the fact that the claws/bite/tail attacks are a natural weapon.
Because Improved Natural Attack increases the base damage die of the attack (and not the effective size of the user) it will have no effect when combined with Sacred Weapon.
When wielding Sacred Weapon you get the better of either your base weapon damage or your Sacred Weapon damage. Improved Natural Attack will affect your base damage, but not Sacred Weapon damage.
To further off of Blake Tiger's example:
A normal bastard sword deal 1d10 damage. If you wield a large bastard in two hands (with EWP) and have the Impact enhancement you increase the effective damage by 2 size categories. It would deal 3d8.
Or, you could deal Sacred Weapon damage of a warpriest of your level. Sacred Weapon doesn't even care if your weapon is large, only your size category. It also isn't affected by the Impact enhancement.
Hmm, I thought with how it would work is that since your natural attack is considered one size category larger it'd make the sacred weapon considered large size since it's still a natural weapon, wish we could get an official word on it but I think the way Claxon described it might be correct.
Because Improved Natural Attack increases the base damage die of the attack (and not the effective size of the user) it will have no effect when combined with Sacred Weapon.
It never says it only increases the base damage die of the attack. It increases the damage as if the "creature" were one size larger. If the warpriest were one size larger, the damage would be higher. As if.
Compare this to an effect like impact that increases damage based on the weapon and not the creature wielding the weapon.
"An impact weapon delivers a potent kinetic jolt when it strikes, dealing damage as if the weapon were one size category larger."
So, impact doesn't work with sacred weapon, while improved natural attack does.
INA is not a supernatural effect, it's a natural one. Your claws or your bite or your horns are stronger/sharper/meaner than usual. Because they're natural attacks, it makes sense to describe them as if the creature were larger (natural attacks are part of the creature). However, you are not now Large. A Medium pudding with a slam attack improved by INA is not now Large (10' space and reach), it just hits harder.
Edit: In fact, if there was a distinction between natural attack size and creature size, then the feat would do nothing, a medium wolf with a medium bite does the same damage as a large wolf with a medium bite. So, I'm a medium wolf, I take INA the way Melkiador is interpreting the text and I do no additional damage (I guess maybe +2 damage for my large size Astro increase?) because I'm technically still wielding a medium bite.
Sacred Weapon doesn't care if your weapon is actually larger or even if it counts as larger.
How much damage would a large longsword do in the hands of a 20th level warpriest? It would have either 2d6 from the weapon damage, or 2d8 from Sacred Weapon because the warpriest themselves is medium size category. It doesn't care what size the weapon is, only what size the warpriest is.