If a Battle Smith casts alter self and selects the natural weapons option, do they get to use their Intelligence modifier instead of their Strength modifier for their unarmed strike attack and damage rolls?
If a Battle Smith casts alter self and selects the natural weapons option, do they get to use their Intelligence modifier instead of their Strength modifier for their unarmed strike attack and damage rolls?
No. The attack does not become a spell attack using the natural weapons and the spell does not state to use any other ability modifier.
"Natural Weapons. You grow claws, fangs, spines, horns, or a different natural weapon of your choice. Your unarmed strikes deal 1d6 bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage, as appropriate to the natural weapon you chose, and you are proficient with your unarmed strikes. Finally, the natural weapon is magic and you have a +1 bonus to the attack and damage rolls you make using it."
When you reach 3rd level, your combat training and your experiments with magic have paid off in two ways:
You gain proficiency with martial weapons.
When you attack with a magic weapon, you can use your Intelligence modifier, instead of Strength or Dexterity modifier, for the attack and damage rolls.
Technically, by RAW, your fists are not weapons. Due to janky weirdness in the controlling language of the rules that has screwed with player comprehension so many goddamned times, an unarmed attack is a melee weapon attack, but your Fists of Fury are not melee weapons.
It's horse manure.
In this case, given that the Alter Self spell specifically states "The natural weapon is magic and gives you +1", I'd be inclined to rule that a Battlesmith could make use of Battle Ready with it. I may ask the player to do some work ahead of time, prior to popping the spell, to describe how their artificer casts the spell, what form their natural weapon takes, and why they can drive it with their intellect rather than their muscles, but that would be as much to get the player immersed and invested as because the rules demand it.
It is the sort of thing that strikes me as being a DM interpretation rule, though. The spell states "natural weapon is magic", but it also states "your unarmed attacks", and it's long established (if still shitty) that naked monkey paws do not count as weapons, even though monkey slaps count as weapon attacks because D&D is ****y that way. There's language one can use to argue both ways.
The only magic is what was used to polymorph your hands, etc. The claws themselves aren't a magic weapon. The spell would specify if they were considered magic.
If a Battle Smith casts alter self and selects the natural weapons option, do they get to use their Intelligence modifier instead of their Strength modifier for their unarmed strike attack and damage rolls?
No. The attack does not become a spell attack using the natural weapons and the spell does not state to use any other ability modifier.
"Natural Weapons. You grow claws, fangs, spines, horns, or a different natural weapon of your choice. Your unarmed strikes deal 1d6 bludgeoning, piercing, or slashing damage, as appropriate to the natural weapon you chose, and you are proficient with your unarmed strikes. Finally, the natural weapon is magic and you have a +1 bonus to the attack and damage rolls you make using it."
Battle Ready
When you reach 3rd level, your combat training and your experiments with magic have paid off in two ways:
Is a magic natural weapon not a magic weapon?
Technically, by RAW, your fists are not weapons. Due to janky weirdness in the controlling language of the rules that has screwed with player comprehension so many goddamned times, an unarmed attack is a melee weapon attack, but your Fists of Fury are not melee weapons.
It's horse manure.
In this case, given that the Alter Self spell specifically states "The natural weapon is magic and gives you +1", I'd be inclined to rule that a Battlesmith could make use of Battle Ready with it. I may ask the player to do some work ahead of time, prior to popping the spell, to describe how their artificer casts the spell, what form their natural weapon takes, and why they can drive it with their intellect rather than their muscles, but that would be as much to get the player immersed and invested as because the rules demand it.
It is the sort of thing that strikes me as being a DM interpretation rule, though. The spell states "natural weapon is magic", but it also states "your unarmed attacks", and it's long established (if still shitty) that naked monkey paws do not count as weapons, even though monkey slaps count as weapon attacks because D&D is ****y that way. There's language one can use to argue both ways.
Please do not contact or message me.
The only magic is what was used to polymorph your hands, etc. The claws themselves aren't a magic weapon. The spell would specify if they were considered magic.
The spell specifies exactly that, Metaskie. "The natural weapon is magic and you have a +1 bonus to the attack and damage rolls you make using it."
Thus why the question was asked in the first place.
Please do not contact or message me.
How the hell did I overlook that that many times, both on the spell page, and the quote in thread. Screw this...I need more coffee. Apologies.
-deleted-
Edit -- a similar discussion came up with smite. Unarmed attacks / natural weapons is awkward. It should be made more clear.