do monks count as magical items?

[CyberThread]

If a Monk gets magic as a dr ability. Does that make a Monk a magIcal weapon?

[Forrestfire]

It does not. It makes their natural weapons "treated as magic weapons for the purpose of overcoming damage reduction." (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/specialAbilities.htm#damageReduction)

[Graypairofsocks]

I think it means that the monks natural attacks count as magic(for the purpose of bypassing DR), which was already gained around 16 levels ago.

[Metahuman1]

Which is a same, cause if they did count as a magic item, you could use the DMG guidelines to determine a price of them and sell them and there player could roll up another character that's more useful having given the party a WBL boost.

[Yanisa]

Well, monks do count as manufactured weapons and are supernatural. I guess magic item is a fitting descriptor of a monk. :smalltongue:

[NoACWarrior]

Which is a same, cause if they did count as a magic item, you could use the DMG guidelines to determine a price of them and sell them and there player could roll up another character that's more useful having given the party a WBL boost.

Why would you do that... Once the monk gets diamond body you can fling him or her around to destroy dungeon walls. And yay the monk will be useful in a barbarian's hands.

But that kidding aside, there was a cartoon duo who consisted of an ape like guy and a girl who turned into a diamond statue.
By RAW the entire monk is not magical when used as an improvised weapon, just the monk's natural weapons.

[Graypairofsocks]

Making one into a magic item might work better with a warforged monk though.

[Telonius]

If a bigger monk wielded him as a weapon, whose unarmed damage would you use? If that bigger monk were a Drunken Master, would the smaller Monk count as an improvised weapon?

[NoACWarrior]

If a bigger monk wielded him as a weapon, whose unarmed damage would you use? If that bigger monk were a Drunken Master, would the smaller Monk count as an improvised weapon?

Id probably say that the larger drunken master monk would be using the smaller monk as an improvised weapon based on the weight of said smaller monk. Then you'd really want to make an obese monk with greater than max load so the larger monk can do more damage.

[KillianHawkeye]

If a bigger monk wielded him as a weapon, whose unarmed damage would you use? If that bigger monk were a Drunken Master, would the smaller Monk count as an improvised weapon?

I don't know. Are monks proficient in "monk"?

[Rubik]

I don't know. Are monks proficient in "monk"?They're not even proficient with their own bodies, let alone anyone else's.

[Metahuman1]

Well, Druken master is proficent with Improvised weapons.

[Kennisiou]

I don't know. Are monks proficient in "monk"?

You don't become proficient in any improvised weapon, you use it as an improvised version of another weapon that makes sense and then use your proficiency with that weapon. A person using a chair as an improvised weapon never takes weapon proficiency: "chair" or weapon proficiency "improvised" but instead uses it as an improvised version of another weapon (although sometimes with some changes, like I believe you're able to use chairs to disarm foes but I can't think of any weapons you'd improvise using with a chair that are good for disarming, so it would be an odd case like "an improvised club that can make disarm attempts" or something).

If the monk uses the other monk as an improvised club he is proficient. An improvised heavy mace his is not. As an improvised unarmed strike he is proficient and uses his own unarmed strike damage, although I am not sure if you can use something as an improvised unarmed strike. If the other monk is a drunken master he does gain the bonus damage from wielding the other monk as an improvised weapon. Whether or not he can use a person as an improvised weapon has to do with willingness of the person, weight of person, and carrying capacity of person doing the wielding.

I've played games where improvised weapons and using people as such were relevant and those were the rules that were used. They may not be strictly RAW but they're close and where they're not RAW is more to fill in gaps in the vagueness of improvised weaponry rules. In one game "use as an improvised weapon" was something you could accomplish with a good enough grapple into pin assuming you had the strength to do so, but that is absolutely not RAW because what you can and cannot do while grappling is pretty strictly defined and "attack others with the guy you're grappling" is not one of those things.


Edit:

Well, Druken master is proficent with Improvised weapons.

Not actually true. People aren't proficient with improvised weapons and drunken master has no features that remove the penalties to hit for using an improvised weapon, they just get damage bonuses for using weapons that are improvised. It's kind of one of the problems with the class and a lot of DMs just handwave it away saying it was probably RAI for them to not have to deal with improvising hit penalties or just saying "rule of cool." I think if we're assuming people can be improvised weapons we can probably also assume rule of cool applies to the to-hit penalty on a drunken master using their friends as improvised weapons.

[rmnimoc]

If I had a monk's hand on a stick, would it still count as magic?

[Sir Chuckles]

If I had a monk's hand on a stick, would it still count as magic?

Are the Monk's hands still attached, and is he alive?

[rmnimoc]

Are the Monk's hands still attached, and is he alive?

Are either of those really necessary?

Also, define attached.
And alive.

[Kennisiou]

Are either of those really necessary?

Also, define attached.
And alive.

By RAW, the monk has that class features with his unarmed strikes. It's a feature of him, not of his hands. Just like the ability to cast spells belongs to the wizard, not their voice/hands/etc.