PDA

View Full Version : Help me with an argument. (about monks and unarmed strikes)



ngilop
2012-06-11, 11:03 PM
Hello everybody, normally i am a pretty laid back kinda guy, but when I said that accoridng to RAW monks gets a - penalty to unarmde strikes becuase they actually lack weapon prificeny for Unarmdes trikes some guy got mad and laid a bunch of blah in my face. his repsonse was as such

Unarmed Strike
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

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.

Note that bolded part. It is the herald of you smacking your forehead into the desk. Since every creature is considered proficient in it's natural attacks and unarmed attacks are their natural attacks. Rules as Written you are wrong. Completely and utterly. In a way that would shame your family if they knew the amount of venom you had spewed in asserting the dominance of your faulty view of the game.

Proficient in the weapon - Check
Given Improved Unarmed Strike as a class feature - Check

Good night folks! I'll be here all week! Remember to tip your waiter!

Now, i alreayd sai at this point that is was an unintentional rules left out of the monk class and that i don't think a DM alive has actually enforced it, but sicne he was arguing that RAW ToB classes are more powerufl than druids, cleric and wizards becasue and that even though you cna GATe in a 40 HD solar, nobody ever would beucase that is not the intention (yes the hypocrasy did not fail to cath my attention. anyways i tried to be civil for a while and expalin that i was agreing withhim about that everybody ignores it, but as writted they (monks) do not get unarmded proficiency. here is my last points to be made, I am just wondering if people who are btter versed in ther ules than myself can ive me more supports ruleings here.
Unarmed Strikes and Natural Weaponry

Before we move on, it's worth pointing out that a character making an unarmed attack, even with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, does not have natural weapons. Nor is a natural weapon a substitute for the Improved Unarmed Strike feat.

As we saw in Part One, unarmed strikes allow iterative attacks and natural weapons do not.

A feat that requires natural weaponry as a prerequisite, such as Multiattack, doesn't work with unarmed strikes. Likewise, having a natural weapon is not a substitute for the Improved Unarmed Strike feat. For example, you don't meet the Improved Unarmed Strike prerequisite for the Deflect Arrows feat if you just have a natural weapon.

Remember, however, that magic weapon enhancements that work with natural weaponry, such as the magic fangspell, also work with unarmed attacks. This rule allows pugilists and martial artists access to some magic weapon enhancements (also see the next section). It also reflects the fact that a creature making an unarmed strike is using part of its body in the attack.


Last week, we considered the monk's unarmed strike class feature and also looked into what ensues when creatures combine unarmed attacks with attacks from manufactured or natural weaponry.

This week, we'll delve into a few more issues arising from monks' unarmed attacks and we'll conclude our look into unarmed attacks with a few notes about using unarmed attacks with some selected class features and special attack actions.

Monks and Natural Weapons

As we saw in Part Two, a creature with natural weapons can use them for secondary attacks when using the full attack action. A monk character with natural weaponry has the same option.

For example, an 8th-level lizardfolk monk with a Strength score of 17 has a base attack bonus of +7 (+1 for its 2 humanoid Hit Dice and +6 for its monk levels). The character has three natural weapons: two claws (1d4) and one bite (1d4). For this example, we'll assume the character also has the Multiattack feat.

With the full attack action, our example monk can make two unarmed attacks thanks to its +7 base attack bonus. After adding in the +3 bonus from the monk's Strength score of 17, our example character's unarmed attacks have the following attack bonuses: +10/+5. Thanks to the monk's class level and Strength score, damage for the unarmed strikes is 1d10+3.

The example monk also can attack with its claws and bite as secondary natural attacks at a -2 penalty (thanks to the character's Multiattack feat). Each natural weapon uses the character's +7 base attack bonus and +3 Strength modifier, except that the Strength bonus on damage is halved because these are secondary attacks: 2 claws +8 (1d4+1) and bite +8 (1d4+1).

As noted last week, there are no two-weapon or off-hand penalties for these attacks.

The example monk cannot use a flurry of blows because a flurry doesn't work with natural weaponry.

Biffoniacus_Furiou
2012-06-11, 11:44 PM
It's probably not a good idea to even repost heated arguments here, as it could lead to rules infractions depending on the community's response.

Point this out:

"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."

And the fact that a creature's natural weapon is not improved by that creature gaining or lacking proficiency in its use. A creature's proficiency in a weapon has absolutely no effect on the weapon itself, and the unarmed strike is only considered both natural and manufactured for effects that improve the weapon itself. His argument has zero RAW support.

tyckspoon
2012-06-12, 12:18 AM
Well, your arguments are wrong- Unarmed Strikes *are* a Natural Weapon, they just have a huge list of exceptions to make them work more like Manufactured Weapons. You're still right, but it's because his argument is *also* wrong- you are not automatically proficient with Natural Weapons (relevant rules here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons) The words 'proficient' or 'proficiency' do not appear anywhere in there.) That proficiency is normally provided by your Type Traits, which will have a line like

Proficient with all simple and martial weapons, as well as any natural weaponsfrom Giants, or

Proficient with all simple weapons and any weapons mentioned in its entry. from Monstrous Humanoids (note as natural weapons are 'weapons mentioned in its entry', this covers the claws/bites/gores/etc often found on Monstrous Humanoids.)

The Humanoid type entry, however, says this:

Proficient with all simple weapons, or by character class.
Now, Druids are fine here- their class proficiency listing specifically gives the proficiency in natural weapons. Most shape-changing spells are also fine, because they give you the new Type and the associated natural weapons proficiencies.

And then we get to the subject under discussion, the Monk: the Monk is proficient with a very strict list of weapons. This list does not include either 'all Simple weapons', which would cover unarmed strikes. It does not include Natural Weapons, which also covers unarmed strikes. And it does not specifically call out Unarmed Strike itself. So, since Humanoids have proficiency By Class (when not using racial hit dice), and the Monk class proficiency list does not include Unarmed Strikes, Monks are non-proficient with Unarmed Strikes. QED.

(Interesting side effect: The same reasoning forces us to conclude that when you Alter Self into a Humanoid creature with natural attacks, you are non-proficient with said Natural Weapons. The Alter Self spell does not include a provision for proficiency, and the classes that typically have this spell are not naturally proficient with Natural Weapons. )

TuggyNE
2012-06-12, 05:04 AM
Well, your arguments are wrong- Unarmed Strikes *are* a Natural Weapon, they just have a huge list of exceptions to make them work more like Manufactured Weapons. You're still right, but it's because his argument is *also* wrong- you are not automatically proficient with Natural Weapons (relevant rules here. (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#naturalWeapons) The words 'proficient' or 'proficiency' do not appear anywhere in there.) That proficiency is normally provided by your Type Traits, which will have a line like
from Giants, or
from Monstrous Humanoids (note as natural weapons are 'weapons mentioned in its entry', this covers the claws/bites/gores/etc often found on Monstrous Humanoids.)

The Humanoid type entry, however, says this:

Now, Druids are fine here- their class proficiency listing specifically gives the proficiency in natural weapons. Most shape-changing spells are also fine, because they give you the new Type and the associated natural weapons proficiencies.

And then we get to the subject under discussion, the Monk: the Monk is proficient with a very strict list of weapons. This list does not include either 'all Simple weapons', which would cover unarmed strikes. It does not include Natural Weapons, which also covers unarmed strikes. And it does not specifically call out Unarmed Strike itself. So, since Humanoids have proficiency By Class (when not using racial hit dice), and the Monk class proficiency list does not include Unarmed Strikes, Monks are non-proficient with Unarmed Strikes. QED.

QFT, and because I would have presented the exact same evidence had I seen this earlier. :smallwink: