Non-proficient Monks

[dascarletm]

I was looking through the SRD, and I noticed this little bit under improved unarmed strike...



A monk automatically gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat at 1st level. She need not select it.


Is this just ignored or is there some rules business that I don't know.

IUS does not give proficiency, bah!

[Deophaun]

What do you mean is it ignored? I don't know of anyone who says a monk's UAS cannot deal lethal damage, or that they provoke.

They still take the -4 penalty for non-proficiency though, assuming their race is humanoid.

[eggynack]

What do you mean is it ignored? I don't know of anyone who says a monk's UAS cannot deal lethal damage, or that they provoke.

They still take the -4 penalty for non-proficiency though, assuming their race is humanoid.
Indeed. Improved unarmed strike in no way grants proficiency, nor is it predicated on proficiency.

[CrazyYanmega]

Happy Monk Day, everyone!

Yup, that is correct. Good on you for noticing without someone telling you!

[eggynack]

Happy Monk Day, everyone!

Yup, that is correct. Good on you for noticing without someone telling you!
I dunno. I think this needs to both needs to hit a second page, and have someone claiming some wildly inaccurate thing about monks (monks are great anti-casters, monks are good with VoP, and so on), before it can be declared a full fledged monk day thread. As is, it's mostly just an asked and answered rules question thread.

[LTwerewolf]

I dunno. I think this needs to both needs to hit a second page, and have someone claiming some wildly inaccurate thing about monks (monks are great anti-casters, monks are good with VoP, and so on), before it can be declared a full fledged monk day thread. As is, it's mostly just an asked and answered rules question thread.

Monks are excellent buff targets once they get their SR and outsider type.

[Gnome Alone]

Any DM who does not either grant proficiency in unarmed strikes to monks via houseruling or politely ignore their un-proficiency via common sense is a robot sociopath.

This is a widely-believed fact.

[Sir Chuckles]

Any DM who does not either grant proficiency in unarmed strikes to monks via houseruling or politely ignore their un-proficiency via common sense is a robot sociopath.

This is a widely-believed fact.

Can the same be said about other classes who are not seemingly proficient with their fists? Wizard and Druid, I believe?

[eggynack]

Can the same be said about other classes who are not seemingly proficient with their fists? Wizard and Druid, I believe?
I probably wouldn't go as far as robot sociopaths on account of minor wizard/druid nerfs. Monks are somewhat unique in this category, in that they're a class specifically designed around punching stuff in the face, and yet they lack the ability to do that.

[Gnome Alone]

That would depend on whether the wizards and druids in question spend years specifically learning unarmed combat like monks do. Don't get me wrong, I understand why one might want a feat tax on monks; to make sure that no one will play them at all I mean, that they're not too powerful.

[HammeredWharf]

Can the same be said about other classes who are not seemingly proficient with their fists? Wizard and Druid, I believe?

I think they're fine. Hitting things with your fists efficiently can be more difficult than hitting them with a stick, so it makes sense, and those classes don't really need unarmed proficiency. Monks' unarmed ineptitude is special because it doesn't make sense and is the final final nail in their coffin.

[Deophaun]

Monks are somewhat unique in this category, in that they're a class specifically designed around punching stuff in the face, and yet they lack the ability to do that.
But they are pretty good at facing stuff in the fist, so it's not all bad.

[TuggyNE]

Can the same be said about other classes who are not seemingly proficient with their fists? Wizard and Druid, I believe?

Nah. No one* really cares about T1 classes getting the ability to fistfight well. For wizards it doesn't even make sense, and for druids it's not particularly important.

*For suitable definitions of "no one" and "really".

[Sir Chuckles]

Nah. No one* really cares about T1 classes getting the ability to fistfight well. For wizards it doesn't even make sense, and for druids it's not particularly important.

*For suitable definitions of "no one" and "really".

I think the Level 1 Wizard who met the unfortunate end at the paws of a house cat would beg otherwise.

[CrazyYanmega]

Well if he'd had Sleep and paid attention better, he wouldn't have this problem now, would he?

[Sir Chuckles]

Well if he'd had Sleep and paid attention better, he wouldn't have this problem now, would he?

+16 to Hide.

[Curmudgeon]

If you're just noticing problems with the Monk class, you might want to check out their Bonus Feat class feature. There are six feats there which Monks are allowed to select without meeting their usual prerequisites. They are not, however, given any license to use those feats they've selected.

[dascarletm]

bah, I coulda sworn IUS gives proficiency, egg on my face.

My only wish is that I could delete this here thread here.

[Chronos]

While it's true that nobody cares about wizards being proficient with their fists, it makes a difference for a druid. An ordinary lion, or a druid wildshaped into a lion, has a pounce routine of two claws at full, a bite at full -5, and two rakes at full -5. Give that druid (let's say he's 8th level) IUS and unarmed proficiency, though, and he has the option of US at full, US at full -5, 2 claws at full -5, bite at full -5, and 2 rakes at full -5. As it is, this requires two feats for the druid to pull it off effectively, and there's no sense reducing that feat tax to one.

[Ansem]

Monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes, this is a flaw that's unanimously waved away because it was 100% intended that they are.

[Glodart]

I am not an expert in 3.5 rules. OK never mind, I am one, but that' snot the point. I know some people are "by the book" here, but sometimes, the thing we need to do is use logic. And logic dictates that everyone with a brain and proper motor control is able to punch someone. I don't know who posted that they can't use the feats they've selected and I have neither the time nor the inclination to quote it, but nevertheless, again, use logic. Logic dictates that, if you have a feat, you can use it.

If this post sounds demeaning, I am sorry and I tell that it is not my intent to insult people, only correct this thread to the best of my ability to give a logical, common sense-using answer.

[Zombulian]

Yeah it's a fairly common disfunction that's brought up when talking about how bad monks are. But I was just thinking, aren't creatures usually auto-proficient with their natural weapons? Or is that just a common sense idea that I put in the game because it would make sense?

[Graypairofsocks]

IUS does not give proficiency, bah!

This is one if the many examples of the difference between RAW(rules as written) and RAI (rules as I think they are intended).

In some cases the RAW is obviously wrong(drown healing) and trying to use it may result in books being thrown(hopefully paperback)..

[HammeredWharf]

Yeah it's a fairly common disfunction that's brought up when talking about how bad monks are. But I was just thinking, aren't creatures usually auto-proficient with their natural weapons? Or is that just a common sense idea that I put in the game because it would make sense?

They are, but are Monk's fists natural weapons? They are "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", but are proficiency feats effects? Can Monks take Improved Natural Attack to improve their damage? What's the meaning of life? Are we asking too many questions?

[Zombulian]

They are, but are Monk's fists natural weapons? They are "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", but are proficiency feats effects? Can Monks take Improved Natural Attack to improve their damage? What's the meaning of life? Are we asking too many questions?

Haha. Well a group I used to play with let me take Imp Nat Attack for my fist, but I never thought twice about it.

[Vedhin]

I dunno. I think this needs to both needs to hit a second page, and have someone claiming some wildly inaccurate thing about monks (monks are great anti-casters, monks are good with VoP, and so on), before it can be declared a full fledged monk day thread. As is, it's mostly just an asked and answered rules question thread.

Monks can dodge spells sometimes! Plus, it's nearly impossible to hit a Monk! I'm including ACFs in this assessment.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: This thread seems to have served its purpose.