Two-handed Weapon Graft?

[Xarteros]

Not the psionic power or a spell or anything, but the Weapon Graft entry from Fiend Folio.

The entry states "A normal, masterwork or magic melee weapon grafted onto the hand". The grafted weapon becomes a natural weapon, and if you are proficient with the type of melee weapon that is grafted, you get a +1 on attack and damage rolls (no mention of any penalties for not being proficient with the original weapon, presumably because it becomes a natural weapon and you immediately gain a basic proficiency with its use as such)

My question is: How does this function with two-handed weapons?

Nowhere in the description does it state you cannot graft a two handed weapon. The only limitation it explicitly states is that it MUST be melee (but a crossbow arm would still be cool). Is there some other rule that somehow covers this?

My interpretation would be that the weapon is simply treated as held/equipped as normal, and that if it is two handed, you require the support of an additional hand to wield it as normal. However, my housemate argued that becoming a natural weapon means that you don't require any additional hands to wield it.

Which if either, is closest to RAW? Would there just be some kind of strength requirement to wield a two handed graft on the one arm?

[Necroticplague]

My question is: How does this function with two-handed weapons?

Nowhere in the description does it state you cannot graft a two handed weapon. The only limitation it explicitly states is that it MUST be melee (but a crossbow arm would still be cool). Is there some other rule that somehow covers this?

My interpretation would be that the weapon is simply treated as held/equipped as normal, and that if it is two handed, you require the support of an additional hand to wield it as normal. However, my housemate argued that becoming a natural weapon means that you don't require any additional hands to wield it.

Which if either, is closest to RAW? Would there just be some kind of strength requirement to wield a two handed graft on the one arm?

The two-handed weapon still only takes up one hand, sicne it doesn't say two handed weapon grafts need more hands. However, since it's now a natural weapon, it's no longer a two-handed weapon, so it looses all the benefits it had before (so you don't get STRx1.5 to damage, PA is now only at 1L1 ration, ect.). All it means it that you get a beefier weapon-hand (so your weapon-hand is better as a greatsword than a longsword).
Note that the assumption you made about proficiency is flat-out wrong. Not all classes and races are automatically proficient with their natural weapons.

[Zanos]

You would get 1.5x and better power attack ratios if it's your only natural weapon, per the normal rules for natural weapons.

[Necroticplague]

You would get 1.5x and better power attack ratios if it's your only natural weapon, per the normal rules for natural weapons.

However, since all creatures have unarmed strikes, which are natural weapons, that may prove difficult to do.

[Xarteros]

The two-handed weapon still only takes up one hand, sicne it doesn't say two handed weapon grafts need more hands. However, since it's now a natural weapon, it's no longer a two-handed weapon, so it looses all the benefits it had before (so you don't get STRx1.5 to damage, PA is now only at 1L1 ration, ect.). All it means it that you get a beefier weapon-hand (so your weapon-hand is better as a greatsword than a longsword).
Note that the assumption you made about proficiency is flat-out wrong. Not all classes and races are automatically proficient with their natural weapons.

Well, the entry states "The weapon actually becomes a natural weapon, though its other properties are unchanged". I'd have thought that two-handedness counts as a property of the weapon (as well as size, weight, material type, damage and enhancements). I don't see how it automatically becomes a one-handed weapon just by being classed as a natural weapon. If you can't use a second hand to support it, wouldn't you just then use it as a two handed weapon wielded in one hand (But still based on natural attack bonus/penalty instead of BAB)? Power Attack provides 1:2 ratio based on being a two handed weapon, even if you wield it in one hand (explicitly with "a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands", doesn't specify a two-handed weapon has to be wielded in two hands). Although, you'd still take all the normal penalties for wielding a two handed weapon in one hand.

It's only being grafted into your hand, the way its described makes it sound more like it functions like a locking gauntlet, but grafted into your hand instead of locked in place with a worn gauntlet

I didn't really assume that you're automatically proficient with your natural weapons, I'm just really sure I've read it in the rules somewhere. If you look at a Black Bear, for instance, it doesn't have any listed mention of proficiency with its natural claw or bite attacks. It has +4 from strength, and 3 HD gives it +2 BAB, so it has +6 total bonus to its attacks. If it wasn't automatically proficient with its natural attacks, why doesn't it only have a total bonus of +2? Many creatures also have Weapon Focus (Claw) or something similar, which requires Proficiency as a prereq, but still doesn't list any proficiency on their stat block. There must be some kind of entry somewhere that lists when natural attacks are or aren't considered automatically proficient.

[Xarteros]

However, since all creatures have unarmed strikes, which are natural weapons, that may prove difficult to do.

Isn't the distinction that an unarmed strike is a natural attack, not a natural weapon? Unless you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you're not considered armed because it's not considered a weapon. Claws, bites etc. all consider you to be armed, because they are considered weapons

[Necroticplague]

Well, the entry states "The weapon actually becomes a natural weapon, though its other properties are unchanged". I'd have thought that two-handedness counts as a property of the weapon (as well as size, weight, material type, damage and enhancements).Except for the fact that 'handedness' property is changed by it being natural. Natural Weapons are always Light Weapons, a point the SRD reiterates at least twice. Thus, it is a changed property.

Natural weapons are always considered light weapons.

You can’t add the bonus from Power Attack to the damage dealt with a light weapon (except with unarmed strikes or natural weapon attacks)


I don't see how it automatically becomes a one-handed weapon just by being classed as a natural weapon. If you can't use a second hand to support it, wouldn't you just then use it as a two handed weapon wielded in one hand? Power Attack provides 1:2 ratio based on being a two handed weapon, even if you wield it in one hand (explicitly with "a two-handed weapon, or with a one-handed weapon wielded in two hands", doesn't specify a two-handed weapon has to be wielded in two hands). Although, you'd still take all the normal penalties for wielding a two handed weapon in one hand.It doesn't become one-handed. It becomes a light weapon.



I didn't really assume that you're automatically proficient with your natural weapons, I'm just really sure I've read it in the rules somewhere. If you look at a Black Bear, for instance, it doesn't have any listed mention of proficiency with its natural claw or bite attacks. It has +4 from strength, and 3 HD gives it +2 BAB, so it has +6 total bonus to its attacks. If it wasn't automatically proficient with its natural attacks, why doesn't it only have a total bonus of +2? Many creatures also have Weapon Focus (Claw) or something similar, which requires Proficiency as a prereq, but still doesn't list any proficiency on their stat block. There must be some kind of entry somewhere that lists when natural attacks are or aren't considered automatically proficient.
That's not a universal rule, that's a function of type. In the Black Bear's case, it's an Animal.

Traits

An animal possesses the following traits (unless otherwise noted in a creature’s entry).

Intelligence score of 1 or 2 (no creature with an Intelligence score of 3 or higher can be an animal).
Low-light vision.
Alignment: Always neutral.
Treasure: None.
Proficient with its natural weapons only. A noncombative herbivore uses its natural weapons as a secondary attack. Such attacks are made with a –5 penalty on the creature’s attack rolls, and the animal receives only 1/2 its Strength modifier as a damage adjustment.
Proficient with no armor unless trained for war.
Animals eat, sleep, and breathe.

[animewatcha]

Is elvencraft the one that turns a bow into also a quarterstaff weapon? Graft on elvencraft ( or whatever it is ) for melee AND ranged natural weapon ( with a free +1 to and damage for proficiency ).

[Xarteros]

Where does the SRD say that they're always light weapons (book and page number? I have all the 3.5 core books)? I'm not doubting you, I just want to see the entire entry for myself. I was reading from here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons) (D20SRD entry copied from MM1) and it doesn't mention their status as light weapons anywhere there.

Why would becoming a natural weapon inherently change the handedness-type of the graft? How do you determine what properties it gains as a natural weapon? Would it mean the grafted weapon cannot be sundered too? It just strikes me as odd, because as I said, it's basically the same as a locking gauntlet, but permanently fused to the flesh/bone of your hand instead of needing to wear a gauntlet. I just don't see how you can draw such a clear line around what properties it does and doesn't get.

I see what you mean in the type entry, that must be what I was thinking of. That's not an issue then, because the Warforged creature I'm thinking of grafting weapons onto lists proficiency with its natural weapons in its Construct type entry.

On the note of Warforged, a Battlefist acts in many ways as a graft (covering the entire hand of a Warforged), and it's described as a "+1 weapon" but it boosts the damage of your natural attack (or Monk unarmed strike) by one size category. It can be enchanted as a weapon, and applies its enhancement bonus/effects to your slam attack (indicating that you're clearly using the Battlefist to deliver a punch/strike as your natural slam attack). Wouldn't this be a similar case?

A two-handed sword or hammer being treated as a light weapon just because it's stitched/glued/bolted on seems ridiculous

[Darrin]

Where does the SRD say that they're always light weapons (book and page number? I have all the 3.5 core books)?


It's hidden at the end of the Weapon Finesse feat. PHB p. 102: "Natural weapons are always considered light weapons."

That's the general rule.



Why would becoming a natural weapon inherently change the handedness-type of the graft?


There aren't any examples in the rules that treat natural weapons as anything other than light weapons. Weapon Graft doesn't include any specific text that overrules the general rule.



How do you determine what properties it gains as a natural weapon? Would it mean the grafted weapon cannot be sundered too?


The general rules for natural weapons are found in the MM p. 302. However, that doesn't necessarily mention how they always interact with the rest of the rules. For example, it doesn't say anything about natural weapons being light.

Hmm. I thought the Sunder rules would have something on natural weapons, but I don't see anything there in the Combat chapter. Well, unless you declare a natural weapon is not a "carried or worn object".



On the note of Warforged, a Battlefist acts in many ways as a graft (covering the entire hand of a Warforged), and it's described as a "+1 weapon" but it boosts the damage of your natural attack (or Monk unarmed strike) by one size category. It can be enchanted as a weapon, and applies its enhancement bonus/effects to your slam attack (indicating that you're clearly using the Battlefist to deliver a punch/strike as your natural slam attack). Wouldn't this be a similar case?


The battle fist is a rules nightmare. It won't really help the discussion here.



A two-handed sword or hammer being treated as a light weapon just because it's stitched/glued/bolted on seems ridiculous

You get the base damage of a two-handed weapon but the rest of it is treated as a natural weapon.

The designers weren't terribly good at understanding their own rules, particularly when it comes to parsing out the differences between manufactured and natural weapons. Unarmed strike, for example, is another confusing amalgamation of some of the manufactured weapon rules and some of the natural weapon rules. In fact, whenever the designers tried to mix manufactured and natural weapons together, they always horked up the rules in some way, and relied heavily on the DM/players using "common sense" to sort out the details. Some other examples: Spiker's armor spikes are natural weapons but use the rules of manufactured armor spikes (Planar Handbook). Osteomancer's claws/armor spikes also use manufactured weapon rules (Dragon Compendium), even though they are grown out of the Osteomancer's bones.

[Necroticplague]

Where does the SRD say that they're always light weapons (book and page number? I have all the 3.5 core books)? I'm not doubting you, I just want to see the entire entry for myself. I was reading from here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons) (D20SRD entry copied from MM1) and it doesn't mention their status as light weapons anywhere there. PHB page 102, 2nd column, 5th line.


Why would becoming a natural weapon inherently change the handedness-type of the graft?
Because natural attacks are light weapons. Becoming a weapon graft makes it a natural weapon. Thus, becoming a weapon graft makes it a light weapon.


How do you determine what properties it gains as a natural weapon? Would it mean the grafted weapon cannot be sundered too? It just strikes me as odd, because as I said, it's basically the same as a locking gauntlet, but permanently fused to the flesh/bone of your hand instead of needing to wear a gauntlet. I just don't see how you can draw such a clear line around what properties it does and doesn't get.Not sure how Locked Gauntlet's function is in any way relevant, given how the Weapon Graft makes absolutely no mention of it.
And yes, a grafted weapon can't be sundered. This, however, is not a property of it being a Natural Weapon, but the fact you're not holding it anymore


You can use a melee attack with a slashing or bludgeoning weapon to strike a weapon or shield that your opponent is holding.
You aren't holding something that's fused into you/ a part of you.
As for how to draw the line, it's simple: If natural weapons have a certain property, it get's it. Anything else remains the same. So using it and a normal weapon makes the Graft a secondary natural weapon, instead of invoking TWF rules, you can take INA to beef it up, and you use Magic Fang instead of Magic Weapon. However, it keeps the damage dice, crit range and multiplier, material bonuses, and enchantments.




I see what you mean in the type entry, that must be what I was thinking of. That's not an issue then, because the Warforged creature I'm thinking of grafting weapons onto lists proficiency with its natural weapons in its Construct type entry.
Sorry, but you might wanna read the Construct entry a little closer.


Proficient with its natural weapons only, unless generally humanoid in form, in which case proficient with any weapon mentioned in its entry.


On the note of Warforged, a Battlefist acts in many ways as a graft (covering the entire hand of a Warforged), and it's described as a "+1 weapon" but it boosts the damage of your natural attack (or Monk unarmed strike) by one size category. It can be enchanted as a weapon, and applies its enhancement bonus/effects to your slam attack (indicating that you're clearly using the Battlefist to deliver a punch/strike as your natural slam attack). Wouldn't this be a similar case? Again, you're drawing parallels between completely and utterly unrelated sets of rules. One is a Warforged Component that modifies your natural weapons, one is Graft that grants you a natural weapon.


A two-handed sword or hammer being treated as a light weapon just because it's stitched/glued/bolted on seems ridiculous
And having something being a physical part of your body should make it much easier to use, having it be just as hard to use as before seems ridiculous.

[Xarteros]

1 Not sure how Locked Gauntlet's function is in any way relevant, given how the Weapon Graft makes absolutely no mention of it.

2 Sorry, but you might wanna read the Construct entry a little closer.

3 Again, you're drawing parallels between completely and utterly unrelated sets of rules. One is a Warforged Component that modifies your natural weapons, one is Graft that grants you a natural weapon.

4 And having something being a physical part of your body should make it much easier to use, having it be just as hard to use as before seems ridiculous.

1 It doesn't mention locked gauntlets anywhere in the entry, obviously. My point is that it describes the graft functioning in a very similar fashion. You graft the weapon on so that the creature is never unarmed. You're cutting into their hand and somehow anchoring or bolting the weapon in place, so they can never let go of that weapon. Much like a locking gauntlet, but a locking gauntlet can be unlocked and taken off, whereas this is a permanent graft. You still have to hold it in your hand, it doesn't replace your entire arm or anything. It is, in all purposes of its theme, wielded.

2 "Proficient with its natural weapons only, unless generally humanoid in form, in which case proficient with any weapon mentioned in its entry." Nowhere in that line does it state that generally-humanoid-form Constructs lose proficiency with their natural weapons. It does not say "only proficient with any weapon mentioned in its entry". Also, if I were to graft something onto a monster, that graft would then need to be listed on its entry. Given that players can use any monster entry that lists a level adjustment or side rules on how to play as a character, I see no reason to exclude natural weapon proficiency regardless.

3 They're unrelated mechanically, but not thematically. That's the exact point I'm trying to make. There isn't a relevant parallel to the Illithid Weapon Graft from Fiend Folio, so what exactly am I meant to compare to?

4 Why. WHY? Go and get a sledge hammer that you struggle to use in two hands. Now, place it in one hand, where that hand would normally hold the hammer's shaft. Drill a hole through your hand, through the handle, and bolt the hammer securely onto your hand. Apply a thick layer of glue all around where your skin meets the hammer shaft, so it really sets on tight. Can you suddenly swing it one-handed with ease? Does the weight suddenly decrease? Do you suddenly get stronger? Can you suddenly not use that hammer for tasks you could normally use it for? Does the property of the hammer somehow change? Is that hammer now immune to damage? Is it suddenly impossible to use your second hand to wield this hammer as normal? Do your special techniques for using that hammer suddenly not apply?

If you're right, what's to stop you from just grafting colossal-sized two-handers onto your arm(s) and wielding them with no penalty?

[Necroticplague]

1 It doesn't mention locked gauntlets anywhere in the entry, obviously. My point is that it describes the graft functioning in a very similar fashion. You graft the weapon on so that the creature is never unarmed. You're cutting into their hand and somehow anchoring or bolting the weapon in place, so they can never let go of that weapon. Much like a locking gauntlet, but a locking gauntlet can be unlocked and taken off, whereas this is a permanent graft. You still have to hold it in your hand, it doesn't replace your entire arm or anything. It is, in all purposes of its theme, wielded.

3 They're unrelated mechanically, but not thematically. That's the exact point I'm trying to make. There isn't a relevant parallel to the Illithid Weapon Graft from Fiend Folio, so what exactly am I meant to compare to?
O.k, I understand the weak thematic relationship. However, we are discussing the rules for how this very specific piece of content works, so bringing up these unrelated (mechanically) things in support of any (mechanical) position is, at best, a non sequitor.



4 Why. WHY? Go and get a sledge hammer that you struggle to use in two hands. Now, place it in one hand, where that hand would normally hold the hammer's shaft. Drill a hole through your hand, through the handle, and bolt the hammer securely onto your hand. Apply a thick layer of glue all around where your skin meets the hammer shaft, so it really sets on tight. Can you suddenly swing it one-handed with ease? Does the weight suddenly decrease? Do you suddenly get stronger? Can you suddenly not use that hammer for tasks you could normally use it for? Does the property of the hammer somehow change? Is that hammer now immune to damage? Is it suddenly impossible to use your second hand to wield this hammer as normal? Do your special techniques for using that hammer suddenly not apply?

If you're right, what's to stop you from just grafting colossal-sized two-handers onto your arm(s) and wielding them with no penalty?
A weapon would obviously be modified to serve as a graft. In this case, most of the difficulty in swinging a sledgehammer comes not from it's weight (which is only about 10 pounds, not too heavy), but from it's long lever-handle. However, if you're gonna have it attached to you, you don't really need a handle, so you can take that off and just attach the head to your wrist. Now, it's not much harder to use as a weapon than a normal punch (since you basically just have a 10-pound fist at this point). Might take a little bit of adjustment to use, but nothing insurmountable.

Because it's still a hammer, I can still use it for the same things (just as Fiend Folio says "it's other properties are unchanged"). The hammer is not immune to damage, but, as a part of me, any damage to it is damage to me. Damaging it is the same at damaging my other, normal hand. And yes, I can't use my other hand to wield it, because it doesn't have a handle that lets me do so anymore, just like how I can't wield a claw attack two-handed.

However, utlimately, this is a sidetrack. After all, this is entirely fluff-based argument. Regardless of how much sense it makes, the rules are the rules. And in this case, the rules clearly state that natural weapons are light weapons.



If you're right, what's to stop you from just grafting colossal-sized two-handers onto your arm(s) and wielding them with no penalty?
Because natural weapons don't have any form of exemption from the rules for wielding inappropriately sized weapons.

Every weapon has a size category. This designation indicates the size of the creature for which the weapon was designed.
Every weapon. Not every manufactured weapon. Every weapon.

[Xarteros]

A weapon would obviously be modified to serve as a graft. In this case, most of the difficulty in swinging a sledgehammer comes not from it's weight (which is only about 10 pounds, not too heavy), but from it's long lever-handle. However, if you're gonna have it attached to you, you don't really need a handle, so you can take that off and just attach the head to your wrist. Now, it's not much harder to use as a weapon than a normal punch (since you basically just have a 10-pound fist at this point). Might take a little bit of adjustment to use, but nothing insurmountable.

Because it's still a hammer, I can still use it for the same things (just as Fiend Folio says "it's other properties are unchanged"). The hammer is not immune to damage, but, as a part of me, any damage to it is damage to me. Damaging it is the same at damaging my other, normal hand. And yes, I can't use my other hand to wield it, because it doesn't have a handle that lets me do so anymore, just like how I can't wield a claw attack two-handed.

Nowhere, at any point at all in this description, does it state in any form or even weak indication, that the weapon be heavily modified for use as a graft. It, in fact, strongly implies that the weapon is simply bound into your hand, as if you were holding it, so that you can never let it go. Because the weapons properties are unchanged, a reach weapon still has to have reach, so grafting a longspear into your hand can't mean that you just stick a spearpoint onto your fist. Part of the reason greathammers have extra sundering power is because of their wide arc, as you yourself described. You cannot change that arc without removing the properties of the weapon, thereby negating the purpose of the graft.

I think you and I just have very opposing views on how this actually functions. Nowhere at all does it imply that grafting a sledgehammer on is merely just replacing your fist with a slab of stone.

[Necroticplague]

Nowhere, at any point at all in this description, does it state in any form or even weak indication, that the weapon be heavily modified for use as a graft. It, in fact, strongly implies that the weapon is simply bound into your hand, as if you were holding it, so that you can never let it go.
Yes, because things that are designed to be a part of your body are built the same as things that aren't. That's why it's not to hard to turn a small camera into a cybernetic eye, because they're basically the same thing, right?


Because the weapons properties are unchanged, a reach weapon still has to have reach, so grafting a longspear into your hand can't mean that you just stick a spearpoint onto your fist. Part of the reason greathammers have extra sundering power is because of their wide arc, as you yourself described. You cannot change that arc without removing the properties of the weapon, thereby negating the purpose of the graft.Are we talking about the real world of sledgehammers, or the fictional one of greathammer? Because, funny thing about the greathammers

The incredibly heavy head of this hammer allows it to make devestating strikes against weapons and shields, granting the wielder a +2 on attack rolls to sunder an enemy weapon or shieldSooooo....apparently, the sunder-improving properties of a Greathammer are located in the head.

And again, regardless of sensibility, this doesn't change what the rules are. You're free to houserule that weapon grafts aren't light weapons, but you have no solid support for it.


I think you and I just have very opposing views on how this actually functions. Nowhere at all does it imply that grafting a sledgehammer on is merely just replacing your fist with a slab of stone.
We appear to be mostly trying to come at this from opposite angles. You're building a narrative, and then trying to use that to figure out the rules (thus, the analogies to the real world that keep being brought up). I'm starting from the rules, then trying to find a narrative that fits it.

[Jack_Simth]

...

So what happens if you graft a double-weapon to someone? Do they now have two natural attacks, and do they take penalties for two-weapon fighting?

[Xarteros]

Yes, because things that are designed to be a part of your body are built the same as things that aren't. That's why it's not to hard to turn a small camera into a cybernetic eye, because they're basically the same thing, right?

Are we talking about the real world of sledgehammers, or the fictional one of greathammer? Because, funny thing about the greathammers
Sooooo....apparently, the sunder-improving properties of a Greathammer are located in the head.

And again, regardless of sensibility, this doesn't change what the rules are. You're free to houserule that weapon grafts aren't light weapons, but you have no solid support for it.


We appear to be mostly trying to come at this from opposite angles. You're building a narrative, and then trying to use that to figure out the rules (thus, the analogies to the real world that keep being brought up). I'm starting from the rules, then trying to find a narrative that fits it.

The heavy head is meaningless without the shaft to provide its momentum. More to the point, the heavier head increases the effect of the normal-length shaft, removing the shaft wouldn't just make the heavy head as effective as normal. It's simple physics. If you swing an axe normally, you feel the tremendous force of momentum delivered to the head of the axe through the wide swing. Trying to chop wood with just the head of the axe alone, with no handle at all, would be completely laughable.

You can't add something like a longspear and justify keeping the reach (which the rules allow you to keep, as a property of the weapon) by removing the shaft and keeping only the spearhead, so how could you justify that the shaft of hammers is removed? Again, nowhere does it specify that the weapon is changed in any way other than the fact that it's treated as a natural weapon. Also, if the weapon were wielded in a completely different fashion than normal, why would having weapon proficiency provide any attack/damage bonus at all?

On that note, the only entry you've listed that states that natural weapons are considered light is in the Weapon Finesse feat. I can't see anywhere else that it mentions this, which would imply that natural weapons are always treated as light for the purpose of weapon finesse. I don't see any reason to assume that every other aspect of the light-weapon classification applies. For contrast, the description of Light Weapons itself actually only mentions that Unarmed Strike is always considered a light weapon. If it were RAW that all natural weapons were light, for all purposes, it would mention it there.

If all natural weapons were truly considered light weapons, they wouldn't be able to add full strength bonus unless they were the primary attack, yet many grafts provide natural attacks that add full strength bonus on their attacks (even if used as secondary attacks).

[Necroticplague]

On that note, the only entry you've listed that states that natural weapons are considered light is in the Weapon Finesse feat. I can't see anywhere else that it mentions this, which would imply that natural weapons are always treated as light for the purpose of weapon finesse. I don't see any reason to assume that every other aspect of the light-weapon classification applies. For contrast, the description of Light Weapons itself actually only mentions that Unarmed Strike is always considered a light weapon. If it were RAW that all natural weapons were light, for all purposes, it would mention it there. This might be true if it was listed in the benefits section. However, it isn't. It's in the 'special' section.

If all natural weapons were truly considered light weapons, they wouldn't be able to add full strength bonus unless they were the primary attack, yet many grafts provide natural attacks that add full strength bonus on their attacks (even if used as secondary attacks).
Not sure where you're getting this from. Light weapons do get full STR bonus to damage, unless used the in the off-hand.

A light weapon is easier to use in one’s off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and it can be used while grappling. A light weapon is used in one hand. Add the wielder’s Strength bonus (if any) to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or one-half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. The bolded, where they exist, is a case of specific overrides general. Just like how grafted weapons retain their crit ranges, despite the general rule for natural weapons to have crits of x2/20.