Superior Unarmed Strike Confusion

[GhengisConrad]

{{scrubbed}}

2 questions:

1) Is Superior Unarmed Strike a fighter Feat? Howabout a martial monk feat?

2) "Instead if you are a monk, deal 4 levels higher".... do I have to? I mean, if I only dipped slightly into monk for like 2 levels... can I then use the regular Unarmed Strike? What if I am a 'martial monk'... not a 'monk' monk...?

{{scrubbed}}

[Captnq]

1) No, and No.

2) DM's call. Technically, it's as a monk, 4 levels higher. But isn't your unarmed strike based on your monk damage? Add a monk belt, and you got what? +8 levels?

I don't know what build you'd have where you wouldn't be stacking onto the monk damage anyways, if you were taking a monk dip, I mean.

And note, it does not apply to natural attacks, only unarmed strikes. Since a monk's unarmed strikes are natural attacks, use improved natural attack instead. Then again, I suppose the two would stack.

[Dr. Azkur]

Since a monk's unarmed strikes are natural attacks, use improved natural attack instead. Then again, I suppose the two would stack.

A monk's unarmed strikes ARE NOT natural attacks, ever, they are considered manufactured weapons. Natural attacks are those made only by natural weapons, such as claws, tail, tentacles, etc.

[Phelix-Mu]

A monk's unarmed strikes ARE NOT natural attacks, ever, they are considered manufactured weapons. Natural attacks are those made only by natural weapons, such as claws, tail, tentacles, etc.

I may be wrong, but I think you will find that the monk entry mentions that they can be considered both for the purposes of effects that target one or the other.

From PHB 41:

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).

Emphasis mine.

[CIDE]

The web article even mentions the Improved Natural Attack feat works on Monk's damage.

[phlidwsn]

Also, for a printed example, Dragon Magic has the Fanged Ring that grants Improved Natural Attack(Unarmed Strike), among other things(DM 101).

[GhengisConrad]

So totem avatar bound to the shoulders would be pretty cool there too eh?

[Chronos]

Unarmed strikes are always natural weapons. A monk's unarmed strikes also count as manufactured weapons, but they're still natural.

And it's a known dysfunction with SUS that taking monk levels can cause your damage to decrease. By the RAW, this isn't optional, but I can't imagine a DM who would enforce that.

[GhengisConrad]

but I can't imagine a DM who would enforce that.

You're talking to him. And I can introduce you to an entire table that agrees.

The books text is a character in our game. With its flaws and all. It's lack of reasonability almost becomes an endearing quality over time.

[Elxir_Breauer]

Fortunately for everyone thinking that Superior Unarmed Strike causes reduced damage as a monk, there is a note under the table...

Special: If you are a Monk, you instead deal damage as a Monk four levels higher.

[Coidzor]

Fortunately for everyone thinking that Superior Unarmed Strike causes reduced damage as a monk, there is a note under the table...

Special: If you are a Monk, you instead deal damage as a Monk four levels higher.

So you're suggesting becoming an Ex-Monk in order to get Superior Unarmed Strike in its base form instead of as a modification to one's monk unarmed strike progression?

[Elxir_Breauer]

I'm honestly not sure what you're getting at there, but I meant that it seemed as though everyone thought taking SUS LOWERED your damage as a Monk, rather than treating you as a Monk four levels higher than current actual Monk levels. My apologies if it was confusing, the way I posted it.

Edit: Also, no I don't think that would work, since you'd still have Monk levels, even if you couldn't progress further as an Ex-Monk.

[Vaz]

You're talking to him. And I can introduce you to an entire table that agrees.

The books text is a character in our game. With its flaws and all. It's lack of reasonability almost becomes an endearing quality over time.

It's anything but, in my eyes.

Anyhow, different strokes, different folks I guess.

[Coidzor]

I'm honestly not sure what you're getting at there, but I meant that it seemed as though everyone thought taking SUS LOWERED your damage as a Monk, rather than treating you as a Monk four levels higher than current actual Monk levels. My apologies if it was confusing, the way I posted it.

Edit: Also, no I don't think that would work, since you'd still have Monk levels, even if you couldn't progress further as an Ex-Monk.

If your character is level 20 and dipped into Monk for 2 levels, and so count as a 6th level Monk for unarmed strike damage, that's much less advantageous than just having the unarmed strike damage that Superior Unarmed Strike gives to a 20th level character. The OP was asking if there was any way by RAW to just take the damage progression of Superior Unarmed Strike instead of the weaker buff to existing, low level monk unarmed strike progression.

I rather doubt it would fly with most DMs as well, but it is one of those amusing technicalities that might come up.

[Elxir_Breauer]

So yeah, it would indeed be a loss in damage potential, depending on the DM. I would say the higher damage potential would prevail, but then I tend to be somewhat more lenient on my players.

[Khanjar]

I may be wrong, but I think you will find that the monk entry mentions that they can be considered both for the purposes of effects that target one or the other.

From PHB 41:


Emphasis mine.

The monk's unarmed strike is the most convoluted attack mode in D&D. All unarmed strikes (including the monk's) are considered manufactured weapons (specifically a light weapon) as seen below:



Unarmed Strike
A Medium character deals 1d3 points of nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike. A Small character deals 1d2 points of nonlethal damage. A monk or any character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat can deal lethal or nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes, at her option. The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike.



Then see the following:



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.

A monk also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown on Table: The Monk. The unarmed damage on Table: The Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage.



This general stance is also backed up by the itterative attack sequence only granted to manufactured weapons, natural weapons only get on attack per round buy default. Also, unarmed strike attacks can be used interchangably with special monk weapons in a flurry, which again implies that an unarmed strike is the equivalent of a manufactured weapon.

Then add on top of that, that if a monk has natural attacks of his own, he can add those ON TOP OF his unarmed strike attack routine, just like a monster with natural attacks and a manufactured weapon can slash you with a sword a bunch of times and then gore you with its horns.

That's my two cents as I see it anyway.

[Chronos]

Unarmed strike is always a weapon, but it is not always a manufactured weapon-- That's reserved for monks. Even for non-monks, though, it's still a weird natural weapon, in that it uses iteratives.

[Khanjar]

Unarmed strike is always a weapon, but it is not always a manufactured weapon-- That's reserved for monks. Even for non-monks, though, it's still a weird natural weapon, in that it uses iteratives.

As far as I can tell, even a peasant throwing a drunken haymaker is considered a manufactured light weapon. See the following exerpts about weapon categories on the general weapons page of d20SRD.




Light, One-Handed, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons
This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon’s size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.

Light
A light weapon is easier to use in one’s off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and it can be used while grappling. A light weapon is used in one hand. Add the wielder’s Strength bonus (if any) to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or one-half the wielder’s Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder’s primary hand only.

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.

One-Handed
A one-handed weapon can be used in either the primary hand or the off hand. Add the wielder’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with a one-handed weapon if it’s used in the primary hand, or ½ his or her Strength bonus if it’s used in the off hand. If a one-handed weapon is wielded with two hands during melee combat, add 1½ times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls.

Two-Handed
Two hands are required to use a two-handed melee weapon effectively. Apply 1½ times the character’s Strength bonus to damage rolls for melee attacks with such a weapon.



And also consider that it's listed on the weapon table (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/equipment/weapons.htm#tableWeapons). Granted it's in its own category but that's more of a proficiency thing. Pretty much any information you find on unarmed strikes (that of a monk or otherwise) lumps it in with manufactured weapons. They only point it's "considered a natural weapon for the purposes of" is to use magic to juice it up. i.e. Magic Fang

[Deophaun]

As far as I can tell, even a peasant throwing a drunken haymaker is considered a manufactured light weapon. See the following exerpts about weapon categories on the general weapons page of d20SRD.
By that logic, all natural weapons are considered manufactured light weapons due to this line in the Weapon Finesse feat:

Natural weapons are always considered light weapons.
Note: It doesn't say "for the purpose of Weapon Finesse" or something similar.

The fact that you had to qualify "light weapon" with the word "manufactured" also indicates that your conclusion does not follow, as the inclusion of that word implies that there are non-manufactured light weapons.

Edit: More support that "light weapon" != "manufactured weapon" from the feat section, this time Power Attack

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

[Khanjar]

Fair points.

I read in the FAQ (been a while, don't remember all the finer points) that unarmed strikes and the monk's flurry of blows just don't cleanly fit into either pre-existing categories of manufactured or natural weapons. They use some rules from each set and have lots of unique quirks (read baggage) of their own.

I'm mainly trying to point out that the weapon "unarmed strike" is more associated with manufactured weapons than natural weapons. The number of times rules are explained in terms of manufactured weapons far outweighs the ones where natural weapons are used as an example.

Can we agree that in general the unarmed strike is not rigorously defined (they probably figured nobody would use it past a L1 bar fight) in rules as either a manufactured or natural weapon; Also that if one is trying to explain it to a new player then pretending it's a light manufactured weapon is in general not a horrible approximation?

P.S. That brings me back to high-school physics and assuming that a horse is a sphere.

[Deophaun]

I read in the FAQ (been a while, don't remember all the finer points) that unarmed strikes and the monk's flurry of blows just don't cleanly fit into either pre-existing categories of manufactured or natural weapons. They use some rules from each set and have lots of unique quirks (read baggage) of their own.
This is very true. The unarmed strike is overly complicated in its implementation and needlessly confusing.

I'm mainly trying to point out that the weapon "unarmed strike" is more associated with manufactured weapons than natural weapons. The number of times rules are explained in terms of manufactured weapons far outweighs the ones where natural weapons are used as an example.
This isn't true. The rules refer to it directly as a natural weapon, albeit in obscure corners of the system, and only by its placement on tables can a reader infer that it's manufactured. Even if the table was saying it's a manufactured weapon, by RAW, text trumps tables.

Also that if one is trying to explain it to a new player then pretending it's a light manufactured weapon is in general not a horrible approximation?Fair enough, but simply because new players are unlikely to have the headspace available to also learn about natural attacks. If you have a player that knows how manufactured and natural weapons work, saying "natural weapon that uses your BAB attack" is the quickest explanation.

[Mithril Leaf]

Fair points.

I read in the FAQ (been a while, don't remember all the finer points) that unarmed strikes and the monk's flurry of blows just don't cleanly fit into either pre-existing categories of manufactured or natural weapons. They use some rules from each set and have lots of unique quirks (read baggage) of their own.

I'm mainly trying to point out that the weapon "unarmed strike" is more associated with manufactured weapons than natural weapons. The number of times rules are explained in terms of manufactured weapons far outweighs the ones where natural weapons are used as an example.

Can we agree that in general the unarmed strike is not rigorously defined (they probably figured nobody would use it past a L1 bar fight) in rules as either a manufactured or natural weapon; Also that if one is trying to explain it to a new player then pretending it's a light manufactured weapon is in general not a horrible approximation?

P.S. That brings me back to high-school physics and assuming that a horse is a sphere.

Assume a dozen monk spheres in a frictionless vacuum.