Monk Confusion

[VGLordR2]

Hey, guys. I have often seen it written on these forums that Monks may make an Unarmed Strike with any part of their bodies. Each time the subject arises, everyone seems to assume that it is correct and move on. Well, I've spent quite a bit of time looking for this rule, and I just can't seem to find it. I've asked this question on other threads before, but I am told to read the Monk's Unarmed Strike entry and am quickly forgotten, even when I try to inquire more deeply. Here's the portion of the Unarmed Strike rules that tells you which parts of the body a Monk can use for an Unarmed Strike:

A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet.

Fists, elbows, knees, and feet seem like a far cry from an entire body. Every time that I have asked this question, I have been directed to this text. I just don't understand what I'm missing. Everyone seems to acknowledge that it is correct. Can any of you tell me what the heck I'm missing? Because I cannot for the life of me figure it out.

[Cespenar]

I can't see how you can misunderstand anything from that line. The actually important part is that the monk can Unarmed Strike with body parts other than their hands, so that a Monk can Unarmed Strike even with his hands full. So if they want, they can "dual wield" a Greatsword and an Unarmed Strike.

[VGLordR2]

I can't see how you can misunderstand anything from that line. The actually important part is that the monk can Unarmed Strike with body parts other than their hands, so that a Monk can Unarmed Strike even with his hands full. So if they want, they can "dual wield" a Greatsword and an Unarmed Strike.

I understand that part. However, I have seen many people post about applying weapon enhancements such as Brilliant Energy or Sizing to the entire Monk, because "Monks treat their entire body as a weapon". I don't see how they are coming to that conclusion.

[Cespenar]

I understand that part. However, I have seen many people post about applying weapon enhancements such as Brilliant Energy or Sizing to the entire Monk, because "Monks treat their entire body as a weapon". I don't see how they are coming to that conclusion.

Since there is exactly one Unarmed Strike for a given Monk, and that Unarmed Strike can use various parts (it doesn't specify a limit of body parts) of a Monk's body, there is no other option than to apply it to the full body. If you would have applied the enchantment only to the Monk's fists, for example, how could he use that enchantment when he attacks with his elbows? But, you see, he should, because it's the same Unarmed Strike.

In short, it isn't written directly, but it's a logical leap.

[KillianHawkeye]

Yeah, it's because the Monk's entire body is more or less in between all of the listed attack surfaces. It's like, just because you only attack with the tip or the sharp edge of a sword doesn't mean that the pommel and hilt are not also pieces of it.

Personally, I'm annoyed that it doesn't have head on that list. Head-butts are awesome and pretty effective if you do it right.

[Darrin]

I understand that part. However, I have seen many people post about applying weapon enhancements such as Brilliant Energy or Sizing to the entire Monk, because "Monks treat their entire body as a weapon". I don't see how they are coming to that conclusion.

aka the "Morph Ball (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128988)" trick. Most of those posts are T.O., or "Theoretical Optimization", based mainly on the idea that the rules for unarmed strikes are vague and confusing, and since no one can agree, a quantum superposition exists where their interpretation can possibly be true.

From what I understand, anyone who tries these tricks in actual play either gets shut down immediately by the DM, or gets books thrown at their head.

[whibla]

Since there is exactly one Unarmed Strike for a given Monk...

That is certainly the commonly held interpretation, but, while monks can probably use all the help they can get, it is not the only interpretation.

Now, it is safe to say that a monk's unarmed strike is their primary attack form, based on the +1x Str damage applied to all damage rolls. However, it is entirely possible to have multiple instances of a primary attack - for example 2 claws, or 5 heads.

Additionally, the fact that they can use any part of their body as a weapon doesn't mean that they count as a single weapon, for the purposes of being enchanted. Both ends of a staff are part of the same weapon, yet they have to be enchanted seperately. A double axe is one weapon, yet the heads are treated separately.


and that Unarmed Strike can use various parts (it doesn't specify a limit of body parts) of a Monk's body, there is no other option than to apply it to the full body.

Of course there is another option. You apply it to specified parts. Those parts are enchanted. The rest are not.

As for there being no specified limit on body parts, as the OP pointed out, that is clearly incorrect. You may choose to interpret "attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet" differently, but most humanoids have exactly two fists, two elbows, two knees, and two feet. If you are inclined to be more 'liberal', and allow this to mean any body part at all then you've veered right over into house-rule territory, and left RAW behind.


If you would have applied the enchantment only to the Monk's fists, for example, how could he use that enchantment when he attacks with his elbows?

Obviously they can't. No more than a dragon with one claw enchanted with Magic Fang can count his other claws as enchanted, or his bite, or his tail slap, or his wings. If a monk wants to attack with an enchanted elbow jab the simplest RAW solution would be to enchant his elbow. Won't help him make a magical punch, or an enchanted kick, but them's the breaks.


But, you see, he should, because it's the same Unarmed Strike.

Nope, well, maybe, but it's a different unarmed strike. The one he made last attack or last round was a separate unarmed strike to the one he made this time. A kick is not a punch, is not an elbow jab, is not a knee to the groin.


In short, it isn't written directly, but it's a logical leap.

One person's logical leap is another's moment of madness. Logic can be applied to the situation to argue for either case. The 'correct' answer is not necessarily the one that most people agree with. Of course, that's why I put correct in inverted commas. What works in your game is right for your game.

Before I finish playing D'sA, I can actually see a small benefit from treating each body part as a separate weapon. Everyone seems to focus on the down-side, more spells / enchantments needed. However, this can be as much a positive - your brilliant energy fist might not be able to damage that golem, but your construct bane foot certainly can. And undead virtually dissolve to a quick knee in the nethers from your knee of disruption. :smallamused:

[/D'sA]

[Cespenar]

With all due respect, I'm not going to answer those because I don't like to get into "sentence by sentence" arguments. I'll leave that to the rules lawyers, but all I can say is that by RAW there is one and exactly one Unarmed Strike for each character, and your interpretation, even if it would make more sense, doesn't fit RAW.

I personally, on the other hand, would choose to use your interpretation sooner than I would use the RAW one. For what it's worth.

[Keld Denar]

It's not just a monk that can attack with their feet/elbows/head/pelvis. Check out the combat chapter of the PHB, under Standard Action Attacks.


Unarmed Attacks

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

Anyone can do it, but only monks can get spells cast on them like Magic Weapon due to the manufactured/natural weapon transparency they have.

[The Redwolf]

aka the "Morph Ball (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=128988)" trick. Most of those posts are T.O., or "Theoretical Optimization", based mainly on the idea that the rules for unarmed strikes are vague and confusing, and since no one can agree, a quantum superposition exists where their interpretation can possibly be true.

From what I understand, anyone who tries these tricks in actual play either gets shut down immediately by the DM, or gets books thrown at their head.

Actually, I'm playing a warforged monk here in a couple months and the DM thought my idea to have any magic items actually be enchantments on his body was awesome.

[Darrin]

Actually, I'm playing a warforged monk here in a couple months and the DM thought my idea to have any magic items actually be enchantments on his body was awesome.

Ah. Then you're already aware that Throwing + Returning are mandatory.

Say it with me: "ROCKET PUNCH! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10269424&postcount=24)"

[Curmudgeon]

Rocket punch? That's not nearly as much fun as the throwing, returning, head butt. :thog:

[The Redwolf]

Ah. Then you're already aware that Throwing + Returning are mandatory.

Say it with me: "ROCKET PUNCH! (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=10269424&postcount=24)"

Actually I've been inspired heavily by the Burning Gundam...like, more than is healthy, and since it's Pathfinder I'm using the Monk of the Four Winds archetype which gives me scaling elemental fist and some other good thematic stuff. A friend is playing a psion and he does plan to throw me at the enemy sometimes though, he said I would deal 16d6 upon impact, so I'm looking forward to that.

[Hyde]

With all due respect, I'm not going to answer those because I don't like to get into "sentence by sentence" arguments. I'll leave that to the rules lawyers, but all I can say is that by RAW there is one and exactly one Unarmed Strike for each character, and your interpretation, even if it would make more sense, doesn't fit RAW.

I personally, on the other hand, would choose to use your interpretation sooner than I would use the RAW one. For what it's worth.

I think you ( and maybe some other people) are missing the obvious problem.


Brilliant energy, the enchantment, makes it so the object enchanted not only passes through inorganic substances, but in fact cannot interact with them at all. So if a monk's entire body is counted as a brilliant energy weapon, then indeed the monk could phase through matter at will.

And don't even start with "well his clothes would stop it" otherwise the monk's sleeve would get in the way of his "brilliant elbow jab"

By similar token, with sizing, you have a monk that can be whatever size he needs, whenever he needs to be that size.


Granted, these are ridiculous examples- that would be entirely valid interpretations of RAW as given by your "everything is a weapon" idea.


Accept that the rule is vague, and there are certain things to consider whichever way you decide to interpret it.

Frankly, the fact that the monk uses a ki pool explains it for me. The monk's natural weapon is in fact the ki force he projects, rather than the actual physical strike, and is by extension what is enchanted.

Well, that's what I choose to go with, anyway.

[whibla]

With all due respect, I'm not going to answer those because I don't like to get into "sentence by sentence" arguments. I'll leave that to the rules lawyers, but all I can say is that by RAW there is one and exactly one Unarmed Strike for each character, and your interpretation, even if it would make more sense, doesn't fit RAW.

I personally, on the other hand, would choose to use your interpretation sooner than I would use the RAW one. For what it's worth.

Some of my favourite down the pub debates have included the phrase "with all due respect". Sounds good, anyway... :smallwink:

I would personally say that by RAW there is exactly one class ability called Unarmed Strike. Other than that, and the description of what it does, I'd not say there was only one unarmed strike. You might not have noticed the lack of capitalisation in my original post, but it was there.

I must admit, I am curious as to where exactly my interpretation doesn't fit RAW. When playing D'sA I do try at least to come up with a coherent and logical argument.

As for it being my interpretation... I wouldn't go that far... :smallbiggrin:

[Kelb_Panthera]

I've always ruled it that the monk's unarmed attack, whichever body part he uses, is only a weapon at the moment he uses it to attack. This explains how something like brilliant energy doesn't allow the monk to walk through a mountain, and sizing doesn't allow the monk to change his size at will. It also explains why the unarmed strike isn't a valid target for sundering.

I do occasionally make exceptions for the rule of cool though :smallcool:

[Curmudgeon]

Brilliant energy, the enchantment, makes it so the object enchanted not only passes through inorganic substances, but in fact cannot interact with them at all. So if a monk's entire body is counted as a brilliant energy weapon, then indeed the monk could phase through matter at will.
Where are you getting that "at will" idea from? Brilliant Energy isn't an on/off property. The Brilliant Energy Monk wouldn't interact with nonliving matter at all, and would immediately sink toward the core of the earth, never to be seen again ─ unless they grabbed onto a tree root (living matter) on the way.

[Starbuck_II]

Where are you getting that "at will" idea from? Brilliant Energy isn't an on/off property. The Brilliant Energy Monk wouldn't interact with nonliving matter at all, and would immediately sink toward the core of the earth, never to be seen again ─ unless they grabbed onto a tree root (living matter) on the way.

Well, if they wore living clothes or boots (like those 70's shows with goldfish in them) would kep them from sinking.

[Kelb_Panthera]

Well, if they wore living clothes or boots (like those 70's shows with goldfish in them) would kep them from sinking.

Only until the fish became non-living because of the weight of a person standing on them. :smalltongue:

[The Redwolf]

Only until the fish became non-living because of the weight of a person standing on them. :smalltongue:

I thought the same thing.

[whibla]

Only until the fish became non-living because of the weight of a person standing on them. :smalltongue:

Pfft, then borrow the druid's socks. They've got more mould growing on them than an expensive cheese... :smallyuk:

[kitcik]

Twin dwarf (in the genetically small sense, not the D&D race sense) mimic boots.

[Hyde]

Well, if they wore living clothes or boots (like those 70's shows with goldfish in them) would kep them from sinking.

literally the next sentence of my post answers why this is wrong.

And I was under the impression that most things came with an on/off switch unless otherwise specified.

[eggs]

literally the next sentence of my post answers why this is wrong.
You mean there is a fault in a scenario in which a martial artist must deck himself out with fish to avoid careening through the ground toward the earth's core?

[Curmudgeon]

And I was under the impression that most things came with an on/off switch unless otherwise specified.
You're mistaken. That selectability happens only if the magic property states so.

Flaming

Upon command, a flaming weapon is sheathed in fire. The fire does not harm the wielder. The effect remains until another command is given.
Brilliant Energy

A brilliant energy weapon has its significant portion transformed into light, although this does not modify the item’s weight. It always gives off light as a torch (20-foot radius). A brilliant energy weapon ignores nonliving matter. Brilliant Energy is always on.

[dextercorvia]

literally the next sentence of my post answers why this is wrong.

And I was under the impression that most things came with an on/off switch unless otherwise specified.

He didn't say that clothing would stop the brilliant energy monk (BEM hereafter) from phasing through non-living matter, because most clothing is non-living matter, and would not stay on at all. Therefore normal clothes would not prevent anything. He suggested using fish to keep the BEM from falling through the earth.

Only things with an activation can be turned on and off. Brilliant Energy does not have an activation.

[Starbuck_II]

Only until the fish became non-living because of the weight of a person standing on them. :smalltongue:

I don't think Brillant energy has weight.
Weight is tied to mass. Brillant energy has no mass. Therefore monks wouldn't crush the fish. :smallbiggrin:

[dextercorvia]

I don't think Brillant energy has weight.
Weight is tied to mass. Brillant energy has no mass. Therefore monks wouldn't crush the fish. :smallbiggrin:

Brilliant Energy does not change the weight of the weapon, therefore the BEM would have his original weight.

Also, massless projectiles have difficulties of their own.

[Augmental]

Look, monks need all the help they can get. Sure, an Unarmed Swordsage shouldn't be able to enchant themselves with Sizing, but the monk really needs to be thrown a bone.

[Hyde]

You're mistaken. That selectability happens only if the magic property states so.
Brilliant Energy is always on.

Ah got it backwards.

And yes, fish shoes. sorry, I misread that.

[The Glyphstone]

I will defend to my death the right to play a grossly obese Monk who beats people to death with his belly fat.

[dextercorvia]

That would truly be Morbid Obesity.

[holywhippet]

Brilliant energy, the enchantment, makes it so the object enchanted not only passes through inorganic substances, but in fact cannot interact with them at all. So if a monk's entire body is counted as a brilliant energy weapon, then indeed the monk could phase through matter at will.


How exactly do you even get a brilliant energy monk though? Is there a spell that applies it to a weapon? You can enchant a monk's "weapons" like a normal weapon since they have to be masterwork.

[Darrin]

How exactly do you even get a brilliant energy monk though? Is there a spell that applies it to a weapon? You can enchant a monk's "weapons" like a normal weapon since they have to be masterwork.

Kensai PRC or Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) are the two usual methods.

[Aurenthal]

Now I'm thinking how a monk with his head enchanted like: Flaming Dancing +5. It's a nice image... Or not...

[dextercorvia]

Kensai PRC or Necklace of Natural Attacks (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/fc/20060707a) are the two usual methods.

Doesn't Kensai have the problem that it tells you to treat unarmed strikes from different parts of the body as separate weapons for the purpose of enchantment?

[holywhippet]

Hmm, does that mean you could get a hulking hurler to toss your monk who has a returning enchantment?

[Keld Denar]

There is also the Brilliant Blade spell (and Mass version) in SpC that gives a manufactured weapon that property. Due to a monk's special manufactured/natural transparency WRT their UAS, they would be a valid target for the spell.

I wonder if it could be used offensively to banish the offending monk to the center of the earth...

[VGLordR2]

Wow, this thread really exploded. I'm still not convinced that a Monk can apply Brilliant Energy or other enhancements to their entire bodies. The arguments are stretching it at best. And I'm still not seeing where a Monk can use any body part for an attack. I only see elbows, feet, knees, and feet (and headbutts from IUS description).

[dextercorvia]

There is also the Brilliant Blade spell (and Mass version) in SpC that gives a manufactured weapon that property. Due to a monk's special manufactured/natural transparency WRT their UAS, they would be a valid target for the spell.

I wonder if it could be used offensively to banish the offending monk to the center of the earth...

It doesn't even require manufactured weapons.

[Curmudgeon]

And I'm still not seeing where a Monk can use any body part for an attack. I only see elbows, feet, knees, and feet (and headbutts from IUS description).
You must really like feet. :smallbiggrin:

Here's the official definition (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/glossary&term=Glossary_dnd_unarmedstrike&alpha=U):
unarmed strike

A successful blow, typically dealing nonlethal damage, from a character attacking without weapons. A monk can deal lethal damage with an unarmed strike, but others deal nonlethal damage.
You will note that this does not require, or restrict use to, any specific body parts. You seem to be confusing examples with a limiting specification. The Glossary definition merely requires not using weapons.

[VGLordR2]

You must really like feet. :smallbiggrin:


I have two of them, after all. :smalltongue:


You will note that this does not require, or restrict use to, any specific body parts. You seem to be confusing examples with a limiting specification. The Glossary definition merely requires not using weapons.

No wonder I couldn't figure it out. That was a source that I didn't check, and it requires quite a bit more than a casual reading, or even a fairly scrutinous one. Thanks for clearing that up, Curmudgeon. I honestly believe that I never would have spotted that on my own.

[Hyde]

Wow, this thread really exploded. I'm still not convinced that a Monk can apply Brilliant Energy or other enhancements to their entire bodies. The arguments are stretching it at best. And I'm still not seeing where a Monk can use any body part for an attack. I only see elbows, feet, knees, and feet (and headbutts from IUS description).

You've hit the nail on the head.

If you go with the loose construction reading of the rule (entire body enchant funtimes) you end up with some rather ridiculous considerations. As a DM, this is probably not an interpretation you want to go with. As a player, this is something you want to convince (read: trick) your DM into allowing.

If you go with the the strict construction of the rule (only the examples listed) you may argue that each "natural weapon" needs be enchanted separately, unless otherwise specified (amulet of natural blah blah blah).
This can become rather cost prohibitive for the monk in question.

As with most things, the best ruling is somewhere in the middle.

Edit: the secondary point to this post that I forgot to explicitly state being: Our examples are ridiculous to highlight the ridiculousness that is the first interpretation of the rule.

[crazyhedgewizrd]

Doesn't Kensai have the problem that it tells you to treat unarmed strikes from different parts of the body as separate weapons for the purpose of enchantment?

You can just pay an extra 10% per body part to get the enchantment to effect that area. So 2 fists, 2 feet, 2 elbows and 2 knees cost 170% of the XP cost

[Curmudgeon]

If you go with the loose construction reading of the rule (entire body enchant funtimes) you end up with some rather ridiculous considerations. As a DM, this is probably not an interpretation you want to go with.
As a DM, that is exactly the interpretation I want: it follows the rules strictly; there's nothing "loose" about it. An unarmed strike is one weapon, as listed on the Weapons Table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#tableWeapons). There are no table entries for fist, foot, head, or other striking surfaces, just as there are no table entries for left edge, right edge, or whatever surfaces of a manufactured weapon. Excepting the special rules of the Kensai prestige class, you cannot have different properties for your right punch striking surface than your left kick striking surface. A Monk's unarmed strike benefits uniformly from Magic Weapon (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/magicWeapon.htm), without consideration of body parts, exactly as a manufactured weapon benefits uniformly from the same spell without consideration of individual edges.

[dextercorvia]

You can just pay an extra 10% per body part to get the enchantment to effect that area. So 2 fists, 2 feet, 2 elbows and 2 knees cost 170% of the XP cost

What If I wan't my monk to attack with pelvic thrusts or belly fat? I just don't see why Kensai made the distinction. It actually implied that each fist is a separate weapon, which I think is part of the problem people have with accepting Unarmed Strike for what it is.

[Certified]

I will defend to my death the right to play a grossly obese Monk who beats people to death with his belly fat.

This tactic doesn't necessary end well. (http://subatomicbrainfreeze.typepad.com/.a/6a00d8345233f369e201156fcb08eb970c-800wi)

[kitcik]

Google up Fistbeard Beardfist - he attacks with his (have you guessed it yet?) beard.

[TuggyNE]

Now, it is safe to say that a monk's unarmed strike is their primary attack form, based on the +1x Str damage applied to all damage rolls. However, it is entirely possible to have multiple instances of a primary attack - for example 2 claws, or 5 heads.

The fundamental problem with this argument is that monks do not gain extra attacks, as extra natural weapons (or double weapons) always grant; Flurry of Blows does not count, because it is optional and imposes the wrong penalties (flat -2 to all instead of flat -5 to extra, scales weirdly).

[ericgrau]

Lack of restriction isn't permission. It's ambiguous at best. Yeah I'm seeing this as a bit of a stretch. I think you could argue RAW for fists, elbows, knees, feet and nothing else unless it's explicitly listed somewhere else. The rest is simply unspecified. Not RAW nor against RAW. I think you could argue RAI for other reasonable body parts, but not unreasonable ones.

That said I'm confused why in theory-crafting returning is mandatory with throwing on enchantments, especially on the head. Think of the scouting opportunities if it doesn't return. Heck make it invisible too and balance it on the back of your walking hand. Or throw an eyeball since it's easier to carry.

[VGLordR2]

So, I had a little free time this morning, and I decided to make a list of all of the weapon special abilities that produce humorous effects when applied to a Monk's whole body. This list includes everything that I've read on various threads, as well as some things that I saw while looking through books.

Brilliant Energy: Glow like a torch and ignore nonliving matter.
Dancing: I can't even begin to comprehend how this works on a Monk.
Flaming: Because walking around coated in magical flames is awesome.
Flying: Gain a fly speed of 30 feet. The only downside is that you are treated as an animated object, and you lose your Intelligence score. Maybe there's a workaround by choosing yourself as your Item Familiar. :smalltongue:
Hideaway: Become infinitely small.
Illuminating: Shine like a torch
Metalline: Your body changes to adamantine, alchemical silver, cold iron, or ordinary steel.
Morphing: Transform into any light weapon.
Returning: Combine with Throwing to make yourself a +1 Throwing/Returning Monk.
Screaming: You produce a low hum when activated.
Shielding: Transform into a heavy steel shield.
Sizing: Change your size category. To anything.
Smoking: Your body emits smoke.
Throwing: Can you throw yourself? This could have funny applications.

Have I missed any other good ones?

[Curmudgeon]

So, I had a little free time this morning, and I decided to make a list of all of the weapon special abilities that produce humorous effects when applied to a Monk's whole body.
I think you've misunderstood the humorous nature of Sizing when applied to unarmed strike. (Note that with a Necklace of Natural Attacks this isn't limited to Monks.) Sizing changes the size of the weapon, not the size of the wielder. With unarmed strike you're both. So your body doesn't change in size, but all your striking surfaces do. Knobby McKnobStrike!

[animewatcha]

Don't forget misinterpretation of ghost touch. Some schools would have the monk be 'immune' to non-magical weapons and the 50% chance to +1 weapons sterf.

[crazyhedgewizrd]

Have I missed any other good ones?

Energy Aura: Can cover the whole body in elemental energy

[The Redwolf]

So, I had a little free time this morning, and I decided to make a list of all of the weapon special abilities that produce humorous effects when applied to a Monk's whole body. This list includes everything that I've read on various threads, as well as some things that I saw while looking through books.

Flaming: Because walking around coated in magical flames is awesome.


I'll actually be doing that soon thanks to my DM being cool with me enchanting myself. It's only because I'm a warforged, but still, it's neat.

[Drelua]

I've noticed an unexpected bonus to Dancing Monk.
The dancing weapon accompanies the person who activated it everywhere, whether she moves by physical or magical means. You can use it to teleport with people! Sorceress needs to get out of melee range? Just have her 'activate' :smallwink: you and you can go with her! Let's face it, you probably have to get out of there just as bad as she does if you're a monk.

Just get a permanencied Greater Magic Fang at CL 20 and a +1(?) dancing flaming brilliant energy metalling Necklace of Natural Attacks and you'll be terrifying! ... well, until you actually start fighting. :smallbiggrin:

[ThiagoMartell]

I think you've misunderstood the humorous nature of Sizing when applied to unarmed strike. (Note that with a Necklace of Natural Attacks this isn't limited to Monks.) Sizing changes the size of the weapon, not the size of the wielder. With unarmed strike you're both. So your body doesn't change in size, but all your striking surfaces do. Knobby McKnobStrike!

GOMU GOMU NO...

http://ardhybheler.files.wordpress.com/2011/03/luffy-gear-third_thumb4.jpg