PDA

View Full Version : Multiweapon Fighting, Unarmed Strike, and Natural Attacks



Urpriest
2010-10-13, 08:13 AM
I'd ask this question in the Q&A thread, but I feel like there might be multiple points of view.

Suppose I'm a monster with four arms, each tipped with a claw. When unarmed, I have four claw attacks. According to my stat block I can wield a two-handed weapon and still have two claw attacks. Suppose I take the Multiweapon Fighting tree and Improved Unarmed Strike. I attack while holding nothing in my hands. Can I use all four claw attacks and make unarmed strikes with all four arms? Or would making an unarmed strike with an arm stop me from making a claw attack with it?

By the way, assume this character isn't a monk. I don't want to have the thread derailed by the argument about whether monks are banned from TWFing.

WinWin
2010-10-13, 08:20 AM
Some creatures have specific limitations on their natural attacks. Those without them can use them in conjuction with weapon attacks (including unarmed strikes). Having said that, I would likely houserule this in a game.

Greenish
2010-10-13, 08:21 AM
Unarmed Strike doesn't require free hands, or even necessarily use hands. (Even if you're not a monk.)

You're basically asking if Unarmed Strikes can be TWF'ed.

[Edit]: In you example, you could make Unarmed Strikes as per your normal attack routine, then use all four of the claws as secondary natural attacks.

Emperor Ing
2010-10-13, 08:23 AM
Assuming you can use claw attacks in conjunction with your weapon, i'd say that's what the Multiattack feat is for, reduces penalties from secondary natural attacks form -5 to -2.

Also, claw attacks don't benefit from Improved Unarmed Strike since they're considered Armed.

Amphetryon
2010-10-13, 08:27 AM
My reading of the question is basically whether the same limb can make multiple attacks aside from normal iteratives. Please speak up if I'm radically incorrect in this interpretation.

The rules, AFAIK, do not explicitly exclude this, but they do fairly implicitly exclude this. In particular, Magic of Incarnum's rules for claw attacks preclude holding an item in a hand with which you wish to make a claw attack. To me, this precludes using a weapon - including an unarmed strike - with the same limb that makes a claw attack in the same round. It's not written so that this reading is definitive, though.

Quietus
2010-10-13, 08:32 AM
The text of the claw attack should mention if it can be used as a secondary, I think - but most can, and so I'm going to assume this is the case.

The key with unarmed strikes is that you don't have to make them with your fists. If your DM suggests that you can't punch someone, then claw them, that's fine; You're headbutting them. Or elbowing them. Or kicking them. Or body slamming them. Then you follow up with your claw attacks as natural secondaries, no problem.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 10:20 AM
You guys aren't quite getting the question.

So, imagine this. Guy has 4 arms and Multiweapon Fighting. In his 4 clawed hands, he wields 4 daggers. Lets assume a total attack bonus of +10 for simplicity.

His routine would normally be:
Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8

due to multiweapon fighting penalities. So far, so good.

Now, dropping a weapon is a free action. Since the limb is no longer "wielding" a weapon, he could continue to take secondary natural attacks (assume no Multiattack for now).
So, now his attack routine would be:
Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3

This is also clear. So far, still good.

Now, replace all instances of the word "dagger" with "unarmed strike". This aleviates the need to draw and drop a weapon to free it up to make claw attacks. He is, essentially, wielding 4 unarmed strikes. What he's then asking is what the attack routine would look like. The answer is thus:

UAS+8/UAS+8/UAS+8/UAS+8/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3

Keep in mind, this is before iteratives or feats that grant extra natural attacks like (Improved) Rapid Strike.

Greenish
2010-10-13, 10:56 AM
Now, replace all instances of the word "dagger" with "unarmed strike". This aleviates the need to draw and drop a weapon to free it up to make claw attacks. He is, essentially, wielding 4 unarmed strikes.So it boils down on whether unarmed strikes can be TWF'ed (or, in this case, MFW'ed).

I don't know, but I'm pretty sure you only have one unarmed strike.

Scow2
2010-10-13, 10:56 AM
An unarmed strike is not a Weapon. You can only make 1 unarmed strike +iteratives per round without Flurry of Blows. Your unarmed strikes are considered as armed, not Weapons.

Urpriest
2010-10-13, 02:01 PM
My reading of the question is basically whether the same limb can make multiple attacks aside from normal iteratives. Please speak up if I'm radically incorrect in this interpretation.

The rules, AFAIK, do not explicitly exclude this, but they do fairly implicitly exclude this. In particular, Magic of Incarnum's rules for claw attacks preclude holding an item in a hand with which you wish to make a claw attack. To me, this precludes using a weapon - including an unarmed strike - with the same limb that makes a claw attack in the same round. It's not written so that this reading is definitive, though.

This is indeed what I'm asking about. You're right that it's often assumed in statblocks and the like, but because it isn't particularly explicit I was interested in seeing the community consensus.


You guys aren't quite getting the question.

So, imagine this. Guy has 4 arms and Multiweapon Fighting. In his 4 clawed hands, he wields 4 daggers. Lets assume a total attack bonus of +10 for simplicity.

His routine would normally be:
Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8

due to multiweapon fighting penalities. So far, so good.

Now, dropping a weapon is a free action. Since the limb is no longer "wielding" a weapon, he could continue to take secondary natural attacks (assume no Multiattack for now).
So, now his attack routine would be:
Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Dagger+8/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3

This is also clear. So far, still good.

Now, replace all instances of the word "dagger" with "unarmed strike". This aleviates the need to draw and drop a weapon to free it up to make claw attacks. He is, essentially, wielding 4 unarmed strikes. What he's then asking is what the attack routine would look like. The answer is thus:

UAS+8/UAS+8/UAS+8/UAS+8/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3/Claw+3

Keep in mind, this is before iteratives or feats that grant extra natural attacks like (Improved) Rapid Strike.

This is almost exactly my line of thought. I had originally designed a character involving gloves of storing to attempt this trick, but I had realized that it would be less prohibitively expensive and silly to simply use unarmed strikes.

As for those arguing that a character only gets one unarmed strike: as far as I am aware, the only textual support for this claim is the Monk description, which is why I specifically excluded this character from being a Monk. I don't want to get in to that debate, though it's related.

Here's a way to phrase the problem: it may or may not be true that a Monk only gets one unarmed strike and cannot TWF with them. Suppose that one is not a Monk, and that one can use TWF (MWF) with unarmed strikes. Does this imply that the unarmed strikes are made with fists, or might they be TWFed and made with non-fist parts of the body? If they are indeed made with fists, then can the same limb make both a claw attack and an unarmed strike?

One thing that makes me somewhat hopeful, though it's not a source so much as charop tradition: everyone's favorite karate-chopping bear build is usually described as having a full attack with both claws and unarmed strikes. This build does not TWF, however, weakening its relevance.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 04:33 PM
Here's a thought. Can someone cite me a rule that states you can't "equip" more than one UAS?

In theory, you could wield a dozen UASs, just like you could in theory wield a dozen or so actual weapons between both hands, armor spikes, 2x spiked gauntlets, 2x knee blades (CScoundrel), 2x boot blades (CScoundrel), 2x elbow blades (CScoundrel), a weighted cloak (A&EG), a Mouthpick weapon (LoM), and braid blades (A&EG). There is no difference. Since a human only has 2 arms (most of the time), he can only TWF, and could gain at MOST 3 extra attacks (TWF, ITWF, GTWF) regardless of how many weapons he wields. The restriction on number of attacks is determined by your limbs. If you have 2 arms, you can TWF with a second UAS (which doesn't even have to be a hand, by the definition of UAS). If you have 4 arms, you can MWF with 4 UASs, just the same as you could wield 4 daggers. If you have 26 arms, you could MWF with 26 UASs, just the same as you could with 26 daggers.

Your number of arms limits the number of sets of iterative attacks you can gain, REGARDLESS of the number of "weapons" you have equipped. Since there is no IMWF or GMWF, you'd gain one extra attack with each limb you have beyond the first unless you had an ability that dicated otherwise (at which point you'd gain a "set" of offhand attacks all with the same weapon). If you had 4 arms and a +6 BAB, your attack routine would look like:
Mainhand: +4/-1
Offhand1: +4
Offhand2: +4
Offhand3: +4

Those offhand attacks wouldn't have to be with weapons actually held in the hand (could be with armor spikes, for exampl), but you'd need the hand in order to get the attack. A creature with 10 arms and MWF and a +11 BAB would have an attack routine like:
Mainhand: +9/+4/-1
Offhand1: +9
Offhand2: +9
Offhand3: +9
Offhand4: +9
Offhand5: +9
Offhand6: +9
Offhand7: +9
Offhand8: +9
Offhand9: +9

Again, the only restriction on the offhands is that the creature must have a hand to acompany it, and the weapon must be one not previously used in the attack. So he might have something like this if he chose:

Mainhand: +9(+1 Frost Longsword)/+4 (+1 Shocking Longsword)/-1 (+1 Flaming Longsword)
Offhand1: +9 (+1 Frost Shortsword)
Offhand2: +9 (+1 Shocking Shortsword)
Offhand3: +9 (+1 Flaming Shortsword)
Offhand4: +9 (+1 Frost Dagger)
Offhand5: +9 (+1 Shocking Dagger)
Offhand6: +9 (+1 Flaming Dagger)
Offhand7: +9 (+1 Wounding Knee Blade)
Offhand8: +9 (+1 Vorpal Knee Blade)
Offhand9: +9 (Unarmed Strike)

He gets 3 mainhand attacks due to his BAB. He can make them all with the same weapon, or spread them out to up to 3 weapons, all with mainhand bonuses (full +str). Then, he can designate any number of offhand attacks UP TO the number of arms he has. He makes 3 attacks with each of his 3 short swords, 3 attacks with each of his 3 daggers, 2 attacks with each of his equipped knee blades, and an unarmed strike, totalling 10 limbs worth of attacks (1 mainhand + 9 offhands). Regardless of the "hand" that wields the offhand attack, all attacks that are considered offhand only recieve 1/2 +str bonus.

Now, if he was completely unarmed but had Improved Unarmed Strike, his attack routine would look like this:

Mainhand: +9 (UAS)/+4 (UAS)/-1 (UAS)
Offhand1: +9 (UAS)
Offhand2: +9 (UAS)
Offhand3: +9 (UAS)
Offhand4: +9 (UAS)
Offhand5: +9 (UAS)
Offhand6: +9 (UAS)
Offhand7: +9 (UAS)
Offhand8: +9 (UAS)
Offhand9: +9 (UAS)

That means he has between 10 and 12 UASs "equipped". Each one is identical, just the same if he wielded 10 identical daggers. The first 3 UASs he makes are mainhand UASs, so they get full +str bonus on their damage rolls. ALL of the other UASs made that turn are offhand and thus only recieve 1/2 +str bonus on damage.

Now, moving along. If each of those hands had a claw as well, and he made a full attack, (assuming +11 BAB, IUAS, Multiweapon Fighting, and Multiattack)

Mainhand: +9 (UAS)/+4 (UAS)/-1 (UAS)
Offhand1: +9 (UAS)
Offhand2: +9 (UAS)
Offhand3: +9 (UAS)
Offhand4: +9 (UAS)
Offhand5: +9 (UAS)
Offhand6: +9 (UAS)
Offhand7: +9 (UAS)
Offhand8: +9 (UAS)
Offhand9: +9 (UAS)
2ndary Claw1: +7 (Claw1)
2ndary Claw2: +7 (Claw2)
2ndary Claw3: +7 (Claw3)
2ndary Claw4: +7 (Claw4)
2ndary Claw5: +7 (Claw5)
2ndary Claw6: +7 (Claw6)
2ndary Claw7: +7 (Claw7)
2ndary Claw8: +7 (Claw8)
2ndary Claw9: +7 (Claw9)
2ndary Claw10: +7 (Claw10)

This follows from the above. He gets one set of mainhand iteratives with his UAS, then 9 offhand attacks, then 10 secondary natural weapon attacks since he hand isn't occupied by holding a manufactured weapon.

Its a bit complicated, but not THAT difficult. The number of sets of attacks you can make is limited by your arms, despite the fact that those arms are not required to actually wield the weapon (such as in the case of armor spikes or similar non-hand weapons).

Along a similar line of thought, a typical human monk has 2 arms, and thus can TWF with 2 UASs. The rule in the monk's description refers to the fact that during normal iterative attacks, it doesn't matter which part of the body the monk is attacking with, these are still main hand attacks, similar to my example above with the 10 armed guy attacking with 3 different longswords (one frost, one shocking, and one flaming) with his 3 iterative attacks. If, however, the monk chooses to TWF and make more attacks than his BAB would normally grant him, then he gains an offhand attack, just like the 10 handed gentleman above. If the 10 handed guy above was a monk, he could take Multiweapon Fighting and make 1 extra UAS per hand he has (even if those UASs are labled as headbutts, elbow strikes, pelvic thrusts, kicks, etc). These offhand attack is treated in every way, shape, and form as an offhand attack made by any other creature. Its consitancy within the rules that applies to ALL classes.

# of sets of offhand attacks possible = # of limbs -1, no exceptions.

Greenish
2010-10-13, 04:46 PM
Suppose that one is not a Monk, and that one can use TWF (MWF) with unarmed strikes. Does this imply that the unarmed strikes are made with fists, or might they be TWFed and made with non-fist parts of the body?
Unarmed Attacks
Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following…http://www.d20srd.org/srd/combat/actionsInCombat.htm#standardActions

Eloel
2010-10-13, 05:16 PM
Here's a thought. Can someone cite me a rule that states you can't "equip" more than one UAS?

I could explain. I think.

An unarmed strike can be made with any part of the body. There are way too many parts to the body. (Part is not defined. You could nosebump someone.) No, you can't multi-wield a 'headbutt', a 'nosebump', a 'bodyslam', a 'right kick', a 'left kick', a 'right punch', a 'left punch', a 'left knee', a 'right knee', a 'left elbow'... You get the picture.

Frosty
2010-10-13, 05:24 PM
Keld Denar is essentially right. I've asked about and also explained this before on the forums, except I was using TWF in my example.

You get to make your full-attack with your non-natural weapons first (be it a sword or an Unarmed Strike which can be a kick or a headbutt for example). So if you have BAB +20 and GTWF, you'd get 7 attacks. THEN you add in your natural attacks as secondary (-5 penalty unless you have multiattack, which lowers penalty to -2) attacks. Notice that because the character used TWF, the -2 penalty also extends to the natural attacks on top of the penalty for secondary attacks.

In the case of multi-weapon fighting, it's the same thing just calculate your full-attack routine without natural weapons (in the case of having 4 arms and BAB +20, there's again 7 attacks), then add in the claw attacks.

If confused, see the Marilith entry in the monster manual.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 05:47 PM
An unarmed strike can be made with any part of the body. There are way too many parts to the body. (Part is not defined. You could nosebump someone.) No, you can't multi-wield a 'headbutt', a 'nosebump', a 'bodyslam', a 'right kick', a 'left kick', a 'right punch', a 'left punch', a 'left knee', a 'right knee', a 'left elbow'... You get the picture.

I fail to see how this counters my post. You are always wielding an arbitrarily large number of UASs, essentially. Every striking surface of your body is essentially an UAS. However, since you only have 2 arms, you are limited to a number of attacks you could make with one primary weapon, and one secondary weapon. See the above post for a breakdown on how those attacks are dispersed. Those attacks can be with any part of your body, as I described above.

What Multiweapon Fighting does NOT allow, is you to claim an attack with every body part you can name (I have 212 bones in my body, so I get 212 attacks per round, right? Wrong.). The maximum number of attacks you can make is still proportional to the number of arms you possess. The easiest way to think about it is to consider how many daggers a character could wield at any given time. One of those daggers is mainhand, and all the rest are offhand. For each dagger you could have wielded, you can make one set of unarmed strikes in its place (a mainhand set is defined as your iteratives, an offhand set is determined by which TWF/MWF feats you have).

Urpriest
2010-10-13, 06:31 PM
This discussion brings up a related question: must secondary natural attacks be made after manufactured attacks, or can they be made first (at the appropriate -5 penalty, of course)?

Runeclaw
2010-10-13, 06:55 PM
Here's a thought. Can someone cite me a rule that states you can't "equip" more than one UAS?

It's right next to the rule that states that Improved Unarmed Strike doesn't allow you to teleport as a free action.

Which is to say, it isn't usually incumbent upon rules writers to state every ridiculous thing that can't be done. Instead, the Feats tell you what you CAN do with them.

Clearly, an unarmed strike isn't equipped. Adding quotes does nothing to change this.

Runeclaw
2010-10-13, 06:59 PM
The maximum number of attacks you can make is still proportional to the number of arms you possess.

Where is this stated?

Godskook
2010-10-13, 07:28 PM
Since there is no IMWF or GMWF,

This is not correct. They are in an abnormal part of the SRD, but they *ARE* in there.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 07:54 PM
Why not? It's not like I'm saying that since there are no rules dictating which direction gravity pulls, therefore I can fall up if I choose. Unarmed Strike is a weapon choice here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions), right next to gauntlet and dagger. Its a weapon, just the same as they are. Why would it be treated any different? Balance-wise, its no different than any other weapon, and fluff-wise, its simply attacking at a higher rate at the expense of accuracy, similar to the mechanics behind Rapid Shot or Flurry of Blows. I've already proven that the number of attacks you can make is not dependant on how many weapons you can wield, so mechanically speaking, there is no difference between wielding one UAS and wielding a million UASs.

As far as number of attacks with arms, that can easily be infered by looking at any multiarmed monster's stat block. Exhibit A) Marilith (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#marilith) and Exhibit B) Xill (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/xill.htm).

Xills have 4 arms. Their stat block has them making 2 attacks with short swords and 2 claw attacks or 4 claw attacks. They can't make 4 claw attacks WITH the 2 shortsword attacks unless they drop the short swords mid attack routine. If you shuffled some of his feats around to give him IUAS, he could make 4 UASs and 4 claw attacks in a round, since his UAS doesn't impede with his ability to use natural attacks like a sword would.

Marilith have 6 arms. They make their iterative attacks with their primary arm, followed by 5 attacks with each of their other arms. Since they also have a slam, if you swapped around a marilith's feats to give her Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Multiweapon Fighting, she could make 6 sets of UASs with 2 attacks each (one set being primary), 6 slams (all secondary), and 1 tail slap (also secondary). All published multiarmed monsters follow this formula, provided they are able to wield weapons with those arms (not all can, like a bear).

Unless you have evidence to the contrary?

EDIT:

This is not correct. They are in an abnormal part of the SRD, but they *ARE* in there.

Yup, I just found them. Thats what I get for doing a google search of the SRD instead of just going through the main page...

Curmudgeon
2010-10-13, 10:17 PM
You are always wielding an arbitrarily large number of UASs, essentially.
Nope. It's always just the one. The D&D rules don't go into any elaboration of different characteristics for head butts vs. kicks. vs. elbow strikes. It's a single weapon because you can't have different characteristics for those body parts when used in combat. Also the number and distribution of those body parts makes no matter for the number and effect of your unarmed attacks.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 10:21 PM
Also the number and distribution of those body parts makes no matter for the number and effect of your unarmed attacks.

This is EXACTLY my point. It doesn't matter. The only thing that matters is the number of arms you have (where Multiweapon Fighting is involved).

Are you implying that a creature with Multiweapon Fighting and IUAS wouldn't get multiple attacks?

How many attacks would you say a 4 armed creature with a BAB of +1, Multiweapon Fighting, and Improved Unarmed Strike would get to make? And what is your justification?

Curmudgeon
2010-10-13, 10:53 PM
Are you implying that a creature with Multiweapon Fighting and IUAS wouldn't get multiple attacks?
I'm saying that the number of unarmed attacks wouldn't change, because Two-Weapon Fighting and Multiweapon Fighting only refer to weapon attacks, not unarmed attacks.

Keld Denar
2010-10-13, 11:26 PM
Funny, I look at the table here (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions), and it lists Unarmed Strike as a weapon. If its not a weapon, then what is it?

ffone
2010-10-14, 12:24 AM
A character's Unarmed Strike is one 'weapon'. I'm fairly sure you can't TWF with the unarmed strikes being both 'sides' or 'weapons' of the TWF routine - and (if you're a normal nonmonstrous character) you can't TWF with two manufactured weapons and then use Unarmed Strikes as a third weapon (even though it's not the lack of free hands stopping you), unless you're of a race that can normally do so.

Think of it this way - it's not 'Two Hand Fighting', it's 'Two Weapon Fighting'.

The Rules of the Game: All About Unarmed Strikes series (Part One: http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070327a) has a rundown of unarmed / TWF issues (it might be Part Two or Three). IIRC it doesn't explicitly say you cannot TWF with your Unarmed Strike as both weapons, but it has a rundown of various TWFing options involving unarmed, and unarmed+unarmed is not among them. And my guess is that RAW you can't b/c unarmed strike is always referred to as 'one weapon' (and flusswise it's the very fact that it IS any part of your whole body that suggests you don't have a 'second' such weapon) and I don't think anything says you can?

Again, this has nothing to do with 'punches' or 'fists'. Being able to kick/headbutt etc. lets you use Unarmed Strikes with your hands full - but it doesn't give you extra attacks (just as you can't TWF + armor spikes, or get infinity attacks by using Quick Draw). Your full attack progression is defined by your BAB and iteratives, and then the TWFing rules and natural weapon rules give you a certain amount of extra attacks, with various penalties (to all attcks i the case of TWF, and just to secondary natural weapons themselves in the case of natural weapons).

And balancewise, I wouldn't suggest allowing uanrmed+unarmed TWFing b/c then you can get two weapons' enhancements from one (Greater) Magic Fang spell or Amulet of Natural Attacks.

ffone
2010-10-14, 12:29 AM
He is, essentially, wielding 4 unarmed strikes..

Where does it say that a character has multiple 'unarmed strike' weapons, or that the number of such weapons is based on their number of hands? (Despite, somehow, the fact that you can use any part of your body as one.)

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 01:03 AM
Where does it say that a character has multiple 'unarmed strike' weapons, or that the number of such weapons is based on their number of hands? (Despite, somehow, the fact that you can use any part of your body as one.)
To quote myself to save time:

As far as number of attacks with arms, that can easily be infered by looking at any multiarmed monster's stat block. Exhibit A) Marilith (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#marilith) and Exhibit B) Xill (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/xill.htm).

Xills have 4 arms. Their stat block has them making 2 attacks with short swords and 2 claw attacks or 4 claw attacks. They can't make 4 claw attacks WITH the 2 shortsword attacks unless they drop the short swords mid attack routine. If you shuffled some of his feats around to give him IUAS, he could make 4 UASs and 4 claw attacks in a round, since his UAS doesn't impede with his ability to use natural attacks like a sword would.

Marilith have 6 arms. They make their iterative attacks with their primary arm, followed by 5 attacks with each of their other arms. Since they also have a slam, if you swapped around a marilith's feats to give her Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Multiweapon Fighting, she could make 6 sets of UASs with 2 attacks each (one set being primary), 6 slams (all secondary), and 1 tail slap (also secondary). All published multiarmed monsters follow this formula, provided they are able to wield weapons with those arms (not all can, like a bear).

Unless you have evidence to the contrary?
There is a formula there. Even if its not explicitly stated anywhere, you can easily pull it out of monster stat blocks.

As far as why you can't do Unarmed/Unarmed TWF, I have yet to see any concrete proof on why you can't. Again, I reference you to the weapon table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#weaponDescriptions) in the SRD. There is "Unarmed Strike", right next to "Dagger" and "Gauntlet". Its a weapon. You can "wield" it. Again, it doesn't matter how many weapon you wield at any given time...if you have 2 arms, you can never have more than one set of offhand attacks, if you have 3+ arms, you can never have more than X-1 sets of offhand attacks, where X is the number of arms you have, as I proved with the evidence above. Why should unarmed strikes be any different from daggers or short swords or any other weapon listed on the table?


Think of it this way - it's not 'Two Hand Fighting', it's 'Two Weapon Fighting'.
And an unarmed strike isn't a weapon? Why does it appear on the list of weapons in my PHB? Why can you make iteratives with it? It is a weapon.


Again, this has nothing to do with 'punches' or 'fists'. Being able to kick/headbutt etc. lets you use Unarmed Strikes with your hands full - but it doesn't give you extra attacks (just as you can't TWF + armor spikes, or get infinity attacks by using Quick Draw). Your full attack progression is defined by your BAB and iteratives, and then the TWFing rules and natural weapon rules give you a certain amount of extra attacks, with various penalties (to all attcks i the case of TWF, and just to secondary natural weapons themselves in the case of natural weapons).

And I never said it has ANYTHING to do with punches or fists. Multiweapon Fighting does explicitly deal with arms though (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsterFeats.htm#multiweaponFighting).

Multiweapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisites
Dex 13, three or more hands.

Benefit
Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.

Normal
A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.

Special
This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
You need 3 or more hands, or more than 2 arms, as the text states. If you do qualify, you follow the template I outlined above with Xill and Marilith as examples. There is no reason, however, why a creature with multiple arms couldn't have multiple UASs just like there is no reason a creature couldn't hold multiple daggers, or a creature with 2 arms couldn't have 2 UASs (or two daggers). Its not about punching with both hands, or all four hands, or all 26 hands, I've never said it is. Its simply attacking more quickly with your UASs, fluffed any way you so desire, as long as the mechanics of mainhand attacks and offhand attacks all match up. Stop thinking in terms of a physical body and more in terms of pure game mechanics. The mechanics are there for you to see, interpret, and extrapolate.

If you disagree, riddle me this: What would the attack routine look like for an unarmed Xill with IUAS? What about the Marilith?

Curmudgeon
2010-10-14, 01:38 AM
Again, it doesn't matter how many weapon you wield at any given time...if you have 2 arms, you can never have more than one set of offhand attacks, if you have 3+ arms, you can never have more than X-1 sets of offhand attacks, where X is the number of arms you have, as I proved with the evidence above. Why should unarmed strikes be any different from daggers or short swords or any other weapon listed on the table? They're not. If you have 3 arms and 3 daggers (one basic one, one masterwork, and one +2) you can wield all 3 of those daggers, and you'll use the properties of each individual weapon you wield. If you have 2 arms, 4 arms, or no arms you still have just one unarmed strike you can wield, and that unarmed strike can never have different properties based on your different body parts.

There's just no connection between the number of arms and the number of unarmed attacks.

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 01:46 AM
you still have just one unarmed strike you can wield,

I don't care about the rest. I want to know where this is from. I haven't seen any evidence for it. Why is an unarmed strike different from all the other weapons on the table? Where does it say "you only have one unarmed strike"? Without an exception, the unarmed strike should be treated just like any other weapon on the table.

ffone
2010-10-14, 01:56 AM
I don't care about the rest. I want to know where this is from. I haven't seen any evidence for it. Why is an unarmed strike different from all the other weapons on the table? Where does it say "you only have one unarmed strike"? Without an exception, the unarmed strike should be treated just like any other weapon on the table.

It is. It's just that you have to show where you are getting a second 'body' from.

To TWF with two shortswords, a character must possess two shortswords. You can't TWF with one shortsword, even if, say, you grip it in both hands. (Whereas a double weapon is actually treated as two weapons.)

To wield two unarmed strikes, you must possess two (this is different than using flurry, haste or iterative to make multiple attacks). I infer that a character does not, b/c

1. I haven't found anywhere saying it does, and the burden of proof has to be on showing you can do some particular attack routine.
2. Text about unarmed strikes generally suggests it's your entire body, and that you only have one such weapon. Since you can unarmed strike with any part of your body, if you were unarmed+unarmed TWFing....then 'both' of them could be headbutts, yes?
3. Reduction from the absurd. Since unarmed strikes are not keyed to hands...if you can do 2, why not 100?

A marilith's Slams are different than Unarmed Strikes. Those are natural weapons (and the monster's stat entry suggests it needs a free hand per slam, since it can't do 6 swords + 6 slams).

Curmudgeon
2010-10-14, 02:16 AM
Where does it say "you only have one unarmed strike"?
You have as many unarmed strikes as your BAB allows, but there's only one weapon involved: your body. Where does it say you only wield one dagger if you buy just one dagger? It's inherent in the nature of things.
unarmed strike

A successful blow, typically dealing nonlethal damage, from a character attacking without weapons. How can you be wielding multiple lack of weapons?

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 03:20 AM
Your body is an abstraction. Each unarmed strike, mainhand or offhand is simply an attack. Its a mechanical construct reflecting the interaction between the number of attacks a person can make physically land in a given period of time. If you have multiple limbs, you can attempt to land more blows in a given period than someone who doesn't, just like a person with multiple arms has more chances to sucessfully stab someone with a dagger. The mechanics reflect this if you can wield multiple unarmed strikes, or one unarmed strike multiple times, if you will. It really doesn't matter either way, since the mechanics dictate exactly how many attacks you can make regardless of how many weapons you wield, as I've shown twice in previous examples. IE: a character could conceivably wield 2 daggers, armor spikes, a weighted cloak, 2 boot blades, 2 elbow blades, 2 knee blades, a braid blade, and a mouthpick weapon. Thats at LEAST 12 weapons wielded simultaneously, yet the character only gets 2 sets of attacks...one set of main hand attacks (defined as attacks that get 1x +str bonus damage), one set of offhand attacks (with appropriate feats, defined as 1/2x +str bonus to damage), because he only has 2 arms. If he had 4 arms, he could make 4 sets of attacks with any of those weapons, and if he had 12 arms, he could make attacks with all of them or any of the extra weapons he could hold in those extra hands. Again, so nobody misunderstands: It doesn't matter how many weapons you wield, your number of weapon attacks you can potentially make is proportional on the number of arms you have. Period. Hitting with different body parts is meerly a fleshy skin covering a mechanical body, something to take it from an abstract mechanical quality to a relatable human quality.

One thing I am not, nor have I ever suggested, however, is the idea that a character can make an arbitrarily large number of attacks with their body. I don't care if Tai Kwon Do teaches you that the body has 154 striking surfaces, or that Brazilian Jujitsu teaches you the body has 286 striking surfaces, or that Master Joe's Rabid Skunk fighting style teaches you that the body has one million striking surfaces...that doesn't matter. The fact is, if you can TWF and your BAB is 16, you can do so with 4 mainhand iteratives (dependant on your BAB) and 3 additional offhand attacks (thanks to TWF, GTWF, and ITWF) baring other modifiers like Snap Kick or Haste. Whether thats 4 right hooks and 3 left jabs, or sword kick + backhand strike + overhead smash + snap kick + uppercut + booty smack + pelvic thrust, it doesn't matter. What matters is that you've made 4 attacks at +16/+11/+6/+1 that deal normal damage with 1x +str bonus, and 3 attacks at +16/+11/+6 that deal normal damage with only 1/2x +str. This is the only thing that matters. The rest is just details.

Quit focusing on the body, and focus on the mechanics. The fluff isn't a rule, the mechanics are.

And ffone, I'm WELL aware of the rules for natural attacks, thank you. What I was trying to get across, is something along the lines of what would happen if you took a vanillia by the book marilith (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#marilith), and then exchanged her Weapon Focus feat with Improved Unarmed Strike and took away all her swords. What would her attack routine look like? How many unarmed strikes would she get? Of course she'd get 6 slams and a tail slap, since she isn't wielding any weapons to interfere with her natural attack routine, but what would her iterative sequence look like? Thats what I'm wondering.

Greenish
2010-10-14, 01:45 PM
It doesn't matter how many weapons you wield, your number of weapon attacks you can potentially make is proportional on the number of arms you have. Period.Interesting. Where does it say that?

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 01:46 PM
To quote myself again to save time:

As far as number of attacks with arms, that can easily be infered by looking at any multiarmed monster's stat block. Exhibit A) Marilith (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/demon.htm#marilith) and Exhibit B) Xill (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/xill.htm).

Xills have 4 arms. Their stat block has them making 2 attacks with short swords and 2 claw attacks or 4 claw attacks. They can't make 4 claw attacks WITH the 2 shortsword attacks unless they drop the short swords mid attack routine. If you shuffled some of his feats around to give him IUAS, he could make 4 UASs and 4 claw attacks in a round, since his UAS doesn't impede with his ability to use natural attacks like a sword would.

Marilith have 6 arms. They make their iterative attacks with their primary arm, followed by 5 attacks with each of their other arms. Since they also have a slam, if you swapped around a marilith's feats to give her Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Multiweapon Fighting, she could make 6 sets of UASs with 2 attacks each (one set being primary), 6 slams (all secondary), and 1 tail slap (also secondary). All published multiarmed monsters follow this formula, provided they are able to wield weapons with those arms (not all can, like a bear).

Greenish
2010-10-14, 01:53 PM
Does any critter actually use multiple different Unarmed Strikes, though?

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 02:00 PM
I haven't found a published multiarmed critter who uses unarmed strikes of any kind, no. The absense of an example doesn't disprove the rule, though. Are there any Thri-Kreen Monk statblocks published anywhere or similar?

Greenish
2010-10-14, 02:16 PM
Are there any Thri-Kreen Monk statblocks published anywhere or similar?Not in EXP, PGtE (which mentions Thri-kreen as native to Xen'Drik, but I don't have the Secrets of Xen'Drik) nor, if my memory serves, in Shining South. No other book with them leaps to mind.

Anyhow, I'd point at the "Exhibit B". Xill can use two weapons and two claws, or four claws. It seems by your interpretation, the limb doesn't have to be capable of holding a weapon to qualify for being used to claim additional Unarmed Strikes.

[Edit]: What about creatures (such as many smaller birds of prey) that use a pair of limbs as a single natural weapon?

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 02:25 PM
Anyhow, I'd point at the "Exhibit B". Xill can use two weapons and two claws, or four claws. It seems by your interpretation, the limb doesn't have to be capable of holding a weapon to qualify for being used to claim additional Unarmed Strikes.
Thats an example creature. Orcs have a falchion in their stat block. Does that mean that all orcs ever all use falchions? No. There is no mention whether or not a Xill can wield four weapon if it so choose, unlike say, a Diopsid (Dragon Compendium) which explicitly can't wield four weapons. Simply put, there isn't enough information. If all of their arms are identical, then there is no reason a Xill couldn't wield 4 weapons (although this would be slightly foolish since then the Xill couldn't take advantage of his Improved Grab ability if it chose).



[Edit]: What about creatures (such as many smaller birds of prey) that use a pair of limbs as a single natural weapon?
That is a function of natural weapons, not non-natural weapons with which a creature can make iterative attacks. My example also excluded things like bears, since bears can't wield weapons with their claws, unlike a lizardman or similar.

Chen
2010-10-14, 02:42 PM
That is a function of natural weapons, not non-natural weapons with which a creature can make iterative attacks. My example also excluded things like bears, since bears can't wield weapons with their claws, unlike a lizardman or similar.

What about a bear with improved unarmed strike and TWF (or MWF). How many attacks would it be able to get in this case?

Hague
2010-10-14, 03:57 PM
Heh, you can use a sword as a primary and your UAS as an off-hand, it's not really much of a stretch to say you can do a one-two combo with both fists or a spinning back-hand followed by a roundhouse. The essential element is that you're taking a penalty for concentrating. If I can wear 2+ gauntlets and make attacks with them but not be able to UAS punch with them I think we're getting into unbelievable territory. I can wield 4 clubs, which are essentially free, I can be unarmed in multiple hands. The actual nature of the strikes can be palms, elbows, or whatever, but the essential fact remains that you are always equipped with your Unarmed strike and it can occupy any hand you have and can freely be swapped with an occupied weapon as a primary instead. There's absolutely no logical reason to say you can't punch with both hands if you can attack with a weapon in one and punch with the other. Granted, the rules don't explicitly say one way or the other, but it's better to err on the side of reasonable expectations instead of stringent application of the rules.

Cieyrin
2010-10-14, 05:18 PM
While it is the FAQ, I found this tidbit of interest:


Can you use the two-weapon fighting rules to make an
extra unarmed attack if your first attack was also an
unarmed attack?
In the Sage’s opinion, yes. Unarmed attacks are described
as using any part of your body to attack in several places, so
using two parts of your body to attack, like both hands, seems
permissible.

Also of interest:


Can a creature make a slam or claw attack when both
his hands are used for something else, such as holding a
two-handed weapon?
As long as the creature can easily let go with one hand, yes.
A two-handed weapon requires two hands to wield in combat,
but not to hold. A frost giant could choose to make a slam
attack instead of a greataxe attack without having to drop the
greataxe.
On the other hand, a frost giant carrying a heavy weight in
both arms doesn’t have a free hand to use for a slam attack.
He’d have to drop the object (a free action) before making a
slam attack.

Greenish
2010-10-14, 05:28 PM
There's absolutely no logical reason to say you can't punch with both hands if you can attack with a weapon in one and punch with the other.What if you want to attack with two swords and kick the enemy for good measure?

Keld Denar
2010-10-14, 07:28 PM
You can. Your mainhand can be any combination of attacks you rant, so long as you don't want to make offhand attacks with that weapon. You can't make offhand attacks with any weapon you've used for mainhand attacks. So if you have a +6 bab, you could make one mainhand sword and one UAS, followed by 2 offhand sword attacks.

Curmudgeon
2010-10-14, 09:22 PM
Your mainhand can be any combination of attacks you rant, so long as you don't want to make offhand attacks with that weapon. You can't make offhand attacks with any weapon you've used for mainhand attacks.
So you're saying you can't make unarmed strikes as both main and offhand attacks, and yet the number of unarmed strikes you can make is still somehow proportional to the number of hands you have?

You've just shot a hole in your argument there.

Scow2
2010-10-14, 09:49 PM
So you're saying you can't make unarmed strikes as both main and offhand attacks, and yet the number of unarmed strikes you can make is still somehow proportional to the number of hands you have?

You've just shot a hole in your argument there.
+1 for correctness.

As someone mentioned, your entire body is the source of the Unarmed strike. Being able to get multiple attacks from it without iterative blows requires you to wield another body. Otherwise, you could argue for making a number of attacks with a Spiked Chain equal to its number of links (Or even sub-links!), or a Greatsword from the Tip of the Blade, one handguard, the other handguard, the pommel, and the length of the blade.

You need another body to be able to wield a second Unarmed Strike.

Personally, I've never seen any rules anywhere that allow you to make an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack with 2-weapon fighting either, the exception proving the rule in the wording of the Wolf Fang Strike Maneuver and similar, where it says if you don't have a second weapon, you can make an unarmed strike instead.

You can't make an unarmed strike if you attack with a weapon, because you have a weapon to attack with. It's listed beside the Gauntlet in the weapons table just for completeness sake and designating its damage. In fact, gauntlets aren't considered weapons either, and just another Unarmed Strike.

Unarmed strikes aren't considered weapons. You don't suffer a -4 nonproficiency penalty for using them, and they, unlike manufactured weapons, provoke AoO's for using.

Hague
2010-10-14, 10:15 PM
No, my point is that you can substitute your UAS for your off-hand attack. You can also substitute it for your main hand attack. So you get two UASs that are indeed related to the number of "hands." If your form allows you to be coordinated enough to strike with multiple tool-using appendages then it is not unreasonable to believe that those appendages can make unarmed attacks when they aren't filled with knives or nunchaku or whatever. You have a huge reality hole otherwise.

Curmudgeon
2010-10-14, 10:24 PM
No, my point is that you can substitute your UAS for your off-hand attack. You can also substitute it for your main hand attack. So you get two UASs that are indeed related to the number of "hands."

Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. Your "also" clause is dependent on having a second body for your off hand (and additional bodies if you have more hands). You would only be correct if these were "hand attacks" rather than unarmed attacks.

Scow2
2010-10-14, 10:27 PM
[changed explanation]

Hague
2010-10-14, 10:42 PM
If you attack with it, then it's a weapon. You can call it whatever you want, but it deals damage, and uses an attack roll, therefore it is a weapon. You are always considered proficient with your unarmed strike. Since an unarmed strike is so nebulous in it's definition it can be considered to be as many weapons as you want it to be, however, since your standard humanoid body is only capable of concentrating on 2 weapons at once, it has to off-hand those attacks.

It's not unreasonable to believe that you can punch with your off-hand if you can bash someone with a shield. You lose the benefit of that arm.

If it's really such an issue, then call all off-hand unarmed strikes punches and then use the main hand iterative unarmed attacks as your knees, and kicks. Simple. It's better than having the continuity hole of not being able to punch with your off-hand.

Scow2
2010-10-14, 10:46 PM
I thought of a different method of explaining the situation that contradicts my previous statement, but doesn't detract from the status of only having a single Unarmed Strike as a weapon. In this case, the "unarmed Strike" weapon is an artificial construct of the game mechanics to allow you to fight without a manufactured melee weapon (Without Improved Unarmed Strike, it's a ranged weapon with only one ranged increment, and a range equal to your natural reach:smalltongue: Hence, you don't threaten the area around you, and you provoke AoO's for attacking).

If the rules say you can use it as an Off-hand attack, it means you are wielding your Unarmed Strike weapon (An artificial construct of game mechanics, not a real object) in your off-hand instead of your main hand. If you have more than two hands, you can wield your unarmed strike in any one unoccupied hand. The Unarmed Strike, like a Gauntlet/spiked gauntlet, cannot be dropped or disarmed (but it can be deconstructed or constructed as a non-action by equipping or unequipping a weapon there), closing that loophole.

If you need an associated mechanic explanation for why you need a free hand to attack with any part of your body, you can assume it's the coordination required. However, an unarmed strike is unique in that because it uses your whole body to attempt to destroy your foe, you can only make one per iterative attack

ffone
2010-10-15, 04:02 AM
The SRD monk states "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed."

(Note that that sentence is not specific to Flurry.)

So is the 'multiple Unarmed Strike weapons' camp claiming that taking a monk level makes the character *lose* the ability to TWF with unarmed+unarmed?

(Insert obligatory GitP 'that's how bad monks are, they're worse than nothing at all!' comment here.)

Keld - a marilith with IUS couldn't replace the 6 slams with 6 unarmed, in the same way a creature with 2 claw attacks can't replace those with 2 unarmed. Slams are natural weapons for all mechanical purposes, they just have more vague fluff than 'claw', 'bite', 'tail slap', etc.

Urpriest
2010-10-15, 02:34 PM
The SRD monk states "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed."

(Note that that sentence is not specific to Flurry.)

So is the 'multiple Unarmed Strike weapons' camp claiming that taking a monk level makes the character *lose* the ability to TWF with unarmed+unarmed?


The usual argument for the Unarmed TWF Camp is that that sentence refers to the fact that no attack, no matter what limb you use to make it, is automatically off-hand. Off-hand attacks only exist using TWF, and you take no penalty on making attacks with your "off-hand" when not using TWF.

Before I made this thread I had the impression that most people who argued that you can't TWF with unarmed strikes used that paragraph, and argued that the inability to TWF with unarmed strikes was specific to the monk, which is why I excluded the case of the monk from this discussion.

Godskook
2010-10-15, 02:51 PM
So you're saying you can't make unarmed strikes as both main and offhand attacks, and yet the number of unarmed strikes you can make is still somehow proportional to the number of hands you have?

That's not what he's saying.

Curmudgeon
2010-10-15, 03:11 PM
That's not what he's saying.

You can't make offhand attacks with any weapon you've used for mainhand attacks. Looks like that's exactly what he's saying. You can't make offhand attacks with your unarmed strike if you've used your unarmed strike for main hand attacks.

Godskook
2010-10-15, 03:33 PM
Looks like that's exactly what he's saying. You can't make offhand attacks with your unarmed strike if you've used your unarmed strike for main hand attacks.

Nope. He's maintained that a PC has multiple 'unarmed strike' weapons since page 1.

Curmudgeon
2010-10-15, 03:43 PM
Nope. He's maintained that a PC has multiple 'unarmed strike' weapons since page 1.
... but never cited a rules source for that assertion. Unarmed strike is a single weapon. A Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) boosts your unarmed strike, and is priced per natural weapon enhanced. You don't get different qualities for left fist, right fist, left elbow, right foot, and so on, because your unarmed strike is only one weapon.

Godskook
2010-10-15, 06:39 PM
... but never cited a rules source for that assertion. Unarmed strike is a single weapon. A Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) boosts your unarmed strike, and is priced per natural weapon enhanced. You don't get different qualities for left fist, right fist, left elbow, right foot, and so on, because your unarmed strike is only one weapon.

1.Our tangent discussion isn't about the rules, but rather what his argument was or wasn't.

2.Why bring up the Necklace? It doesn't mention rules for natural attacks or unarmed strikes.

3.If his argument is correct, that you can 'equip' multiple UASs, then it'd require a NoNA that had 3 attacks worth of enchantments would only work on the first 3 UASs you 'equipped'. The rules you quoted have no conflict with his interpretation.

ffone
2010-10-15, 11:23 PM
... but never cited a rules source for that assertion. Unarmed strike is a single weapon. A Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) boosts your unarmed strike, and is priced per natural weapon enhanced. You don't get different qualities for left fist, right fist, left elbow, right foot, and so on, because your unarmed strike is only one weapon.

Yep. And this is why balance-wise unarmed/unarmed TWFing would be a bad idea...it'd let characters skirt the usual costs of enhancing two weapons for TWFing.

And a reply to "2." in the post above this one - bringing it up is relevant b/c it's just one more example of how official material always seems to refer to characters as having a single 'unarmed attack' weapon. Multiple unarmed strike weapons is one of those things where, RAW may have no line saying "you don't", in the same way it never says "characters can't shoot laser beams from their eyes", but it doesn't seem to be supported by RAW. (And thus you can't for the broader reason that you can't make up arbitrary abilities for your characters.)

Andion Isurand
2010-10-16, 12:42 AM
Now, what would the general consensus be concerning Gnomish Quickrazors combined with Claw attacks?

Godskook
2010-10-16, 01:16 AM
Yep. And this is why balance-wise unarmed/unarmed TWFing would be a bad idea...it'd let characters skirt the usual costs of enhancing two weapons for TWFing.

And a reply to "2." in the post above this one - bringing it up is relevant b/c it's just one more example of how official material always seems to refer to characters as having a single 'unarmed attack' weapon. Multiple unarmed strike weapons is one of those things where, RAW may have no line saying "you don't", in the same way it never says "characters can't shoot laser beams from their eyes", but it doesn't seem to be supported by RAW. (And thus you can't for the broader reason that you can't make up arbitrary abilities for your characters.)

Why ignore point #3? People who assume you can 'equip' multiple UASs assume that doing so works like having multiple claws, and the rules handle having 2 claws or more just fine.

ffone
2010-10-16, 02:15 AM
3. Is predicated on having multiple IUSs (how NoNAs would work if you did), rather than an argument that you in fact do.

But, *if* you did, then I would agree that yes, you should have to buy a NoNA for each one (or use the 'bulk discount' SRD item for enhancing all your natural weapons that has 3x the cost of a magic weapon - a good deal for dragons, terrible deal for monks). In fact this would be the main add'l houserule to balance out unarmed/unarmed TWFing; requiring double cost on such items,or two casts of Greater Magic Fang.

For monks, unarmed/unarmed TWFing is probably not a big balance issue (and not just b/c everything thinks they stake) it's unlikely to be optimal, given they already have lower BAB than fighter-types, and have a large number of attacks thanks to flurry (which means -2 penalties to more other attacks to get 1 extra).

Snap Kick is a vastly superior alternative for monks, as it can be used on non-full attacks such as charges and AoOs and regular attacks. It's also better b/c it lacks the Dex requirement of TWF, although IIRC it does require a highish BAB. Of course, the serious optimizer will just do what everyone seems to, a single level of barbarian for Pounce, and since it's a a one-time dip the alignment conflicts are not much of an issue. Well worth the lost Rage. (And the serious optimizer is probably using an unarmed swordsage anyway, unless maybe it's gestalt.)

The sort of character who'd benefit overmuch from single-price TWF unarmed/unarmed would probably be a rogue using it to to get more sneak attacks with the weapon enhancement costs of only 1 weapon. (In fact Snap Kick is pretty darn good for sneak attackers.) And I'm sure there's twinkishness that ToB builds could do with it (b/c they always seem to outtwink non-ToB physical attackers.)

Dark_Nohn
2010-10-16, 02:39 AM
This discussion brings up a related question: must secondary natural attacks be made after manufactured attacks, or can they be made first (at the appropriate -5 penalty, of course)?

Under the full attack entry "starting with the highest attack bonus"

As far as my interpretation of RAW, you get one, and only one unarmed attack as a standard action, and zero in a full attack. The way I interpret RAW, the only way to attack multiple times with unarmed attack is with Flurry of Blows, not even with a full attack action as a monk (except for the fact that a monk, and only a monk's unarmed attacks are considered manufactured weapons, but that's not what this thread is about.)

My source is PHB pg 139 states that Unarmed Attacks are standard actions, and separate from Melee Attacks, and the only mention of a full round attack with unarmed attacks is in the monk section, specifically under flurry of blows.

However, in that very same section, it states: "Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of twoweapon attack penalties and so on)."

Of course, any DM would limit it to two if they're forced to go by RAW, otherwise you could likely go by what Ozgun was saying. Also during a full attack, the only other action you can take is a free-5 step between non-cleaving attacks, so you couldn't "drop" your unarmed for claws.

Another option is also to go by RAI and say that you can only either attack as many arms as you have, OR one, and only one non-arm unarmed attack, such as four claws and a kick.

Yet another argument against this malarkey is that natural weapons are considered unarmed attacks... "“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat (page 96), a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with claws, fangs, and similar natural physical weapons all count as being armed." and the improved UAS feat does nothing for things with natural weapons, except maybe one extra headbutt.

ffone
2010-10-16, 02:57 AM
"Unarmed strike" is different than the "armed" vs "unarmed" terminology that's used for threatening squares / making AoOs; it's just overloaded terminology. The terms have some relationship ( for most chars, the unarmed strike attack they possess does not make them considered 'armed', which is one of the benefits of IUS). I'm not sure what you mean by 'natural weapons are considered unarmed attacks'. Maybe that a character's unarmed strike is considered a natural weapon for some purposes (such as Magic Fang).

Dark_Nohn
2010-10-16, 03:16 AM
"Unarmed strike" is different than the "armed" vs "unarmed" terminology that's used for threatening squares / making AoOs; it's just overloaded terminology. The terms have some relationship ( for most chars, the unarmed strike attack they possess does not make them considered 'armed', which is one of the benefits of IUS). I'm not sure what you mean by 'natural weapons are considered unarmed attacks'. Maybe that a character's unarmed strike is considered a natural weapon for some purposes (such as Magic Fang).

I was quoting RAW, pg. 139 PHB. In clarification, that page states that claw attacks (and all natural weapons) are a form of unarmed strikes, and therefor you cannot claim claw and IUAS as two separate weapons on the same arm for MWF. The only advantage for someone with natural attacks to take IUAS is, if their DM lets them, make one extra headbutt attack per round. It also states on that page that "Unarmed strikes count as light weapons (for purposes of twoweapon attack penalties and so on)." so TWF and thusly MWF work for unarmed attacks, but you can't use the same limb twice for each attack bonus modifier (+6/+1 you get 2 attacks per arm, +11/+6/+1 you get 3 attacks per arm, +16/+11/+6/+1 4 attacks per arm, if you can find the Perfect TWF/MWF feat)
As far as monks with the "no offhand," this is stating that you add your full strength bonus to both your main hand and offhand attacks if you decide to waste your feats on TWF.
I know that this thread isn't supposed to be about monks, but while we're there, I gotta know, does "A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons (such as the magic fang and magic weapon spells)." mean that you can get your fists enchanted as though they were manufactured weapons, as "effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons?"

Greenish
2010-10-16, 04:13 AM
Now, what would the general consensus be concerning Gnomish Quickrazors combined with Claw attacks?If the claws are capable of holding weapons, that should work.

[Edit]: Hmm, excellent idea for a kobold rogue, say…

Curmudgeon
2010-10-16, 11:11 AM
I was quoting RAW, pg. 139 PHB. In clarification, that page states that claw attacks (and all natural weapons) are a form of unarmed strikes
You've overlooked a slight difference in terminology here, that between "unarmed strikes" and "unarmed attacks", and I'm afraid this has confused you a bit.
“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character’s or creature’s unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat (page 96), a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with claws, fangs, and similar natural physical weapons all count as being armed. Unarmed strike is the attack form that doesn't rely on natural weapons such as claws or fangs, and allows for interative attacks with BAB of 6+. Unarmed attack is the general term for any attack which doesn't use manufactured weapons, and includes both unarmed strikes (iterative attack rules) and other natural weapons (primary/secondary attack rules).

By mixing up these terms you've drawn an incorrect conclusion. Unarmed strikes can indeed be used for full iterative attacks. Other unarmed attacks cannot.

Cieyrin
2010-10-18, 02:29 PM
Yep. And this is why balance-wise unarmed/unarmed TWFing would be a bad idea...it'd let characters skirt the usual costs of enhancing two weapons for TWFing.

From a balance stand point? Two-weapon fighting is already a huge feat sink just to be capable of doing it competently, let alone well, compared to using a two-handed weapon. Even when you are able to use it well, it doesn't mean much unless you have some source of bonus damage, like Rogues or Swift Hunters with movement shenanigans. You'll almost always be out-damaged by the Pouncing Charger, so giving a two-weapon fighter a carrot of some kind would make up for the existing inequality.