|
No, the ability needs to state it can be used on 'a natural weapon' or you need something that lets you treat natural weapons as 'weapons' (such as a monk's Unarmed Strike class feature).
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.
Usually a monk's unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but he can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on his attack roll. He has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
A monk also deals more damage with his unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown above on Table: Monk. The unarmed damage values listed on Table: Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with his unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage on the table given below.
There is a dedicated warpriest archetype for natural attacks, the feral champion.
|
I have to disagree with Taja. I can't find anything in the rules that says "no spell can be used on natural weapons unless it specifically says so in the spell description." Indeed, align weapon and magic weapon take pains to call out that they can't be used on natural weapons. Just as magic fang calls out that it can only be used on natural weapons.
Without some other source, I'd have to say that any spell or ability can be used on any weapon (manufactured or natural) unless it specifically says otherwise.
I have to disagree with Taja. I can't find anything in the rules that says "no spell can be used on natural weapons unless it specifically says so in the spell description."
I agree. While there are isntances where the rules use "weapon" when clearly only talking about manufactered weapons, in general, natural weapons seem to be encompassed by that term. For instance look at the combat stytistics rules, pg. 178f.: "Your attack bonus with a melee weapon is the following: Base attack bonus + Strength modifier + size modifier"; "When you hit with a melee or thrown weapon, including a sling, add your Strength modifier to the damage result." The natural attack rules even refer to those ("plus your Strength modifier, as normal").
I'm pretty sure this is one of these instances where we're supposed to use common sense (because the Paizo folks apparently think a rulebook shouldn't be guidelines rather than rules). We're officially told that "You count as your own ally unless otherwise stated or if doing so would make no sense or be impossible.", and we have to decide what makes sense and what doesn't, I would apply the same thign to the topic of this thread: If something refers to "weapons", it talks about manufactured weapons, natural weapons, and unarmed strikes, unless "doing so would make no sense or be impossible", i.e. unless something indicates otherwise.
If spells and effects mentioning weapons only included natural weapons when explicitly saying so, Divine Favor wouldn't improved the damage roll for a natural attack. That just doesn't sound right, does it?
|
In the same vein as abilities like Arcane Strike that affect a character’s weapons, abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon” almost never work with special abilities because such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon.” The exception is abilities that deal damage when a creature touches or hits you in melee (for instance, the occultis’s energy ward focus power), which should also deal damage when a creature makes a melee touch attack against you but rarely call them out directly.
"Almost always" is a horrible term when referred to the rules, but the gist is clear. You need a text that says that the ability affects natural weapons or the basic assumption is that abilities or spells that say weapon doesn't work with natural weapons.
No. You're grossly misapplying the FAQ.
The part you quoted is about "abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon”", but the blessing in question uses neither phrase, and thus that part of the FAQ doesn't apply.
The relevant part of the FAQ is this: "Abilities like Arcane Strike that specifically enhance a character’s weapon or weapons themselves never apply to special abilities (with the exception of special abilities like the warlock’s mystic bolts that specifically call out that Arcane Strike applies)." Since this only says that such abilities don't apply to "special abilities", which is short for "spells, spell-like abilities, supernatural abilities, and extraordinary abilities", and natural weapons are not in that group, the FAQ doesn't apply to natural weapons at all.
It's not hard proof, but there are a bunch of enemies in APs that are stated to use Arcane Strike with natural weapons, for example an enemy from Ironfang Invasion that says "it uses Arcane Strike and Power Attack to rend enemies with its claws", or an enemy from Council of Thieves that "uses Arcane Strike and Vital Strike with his slam attacks at all times". If Arcane Striek can affect natural weapons, so can the blessing.
|
|
I'm sticking with "it's not clear." But probably allowed for spells and abilities that don't specifically disallow natural attacks.
Paizo is really inconsistent in their terminology here. The Bestiaries have a specific definition in the Universal Monster Rules.
Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon).
If they'd stuck to that language, it would be fine. Say "natural attack" to mean one thing and "weapon" to mean another. But they didn't. You can find instances of the term "natural weapon" all over the place, including in the fighter's Natural Weapon group in the CRB, as well as the magic fang and magic weapon spell descriptions.
|
|
abilities that say “with a weapon,” “with a melee weapon,” and “with a ranged weapon"
...
such wording is almost always used as shorthand for “manufactured weapon,” “manufactured melee weapon,” and “manufactured ranged weapon
To me, that makes pretty clear that generally when a Paizo contributor writes "weapon" without specifying anything, he mean "manufactured weapon".
They are always consistent? No.
It is a good idea to use that shorthand? Again, no.
That notwithstanding, the basic rule is that if the term "natural weapon" isn't used, a natural weapon can't be affected or targeted.