Help to clarify a rule!!

[arkangel111]

So I recently joined a PFS group. Its different but I don't really have a choice since no one wants to start a group in spokane/CDA area. Anyways, it came up that someone is playing a Brawler, one of the newer classes. The person presented the idea that he could TWF without penalties and without feat investment because of the following...

A brawler is effectively a fighter/monk. and when referencing the Monks unarmed strike he found this... (bolded the important part)


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

So despite the fact that he is referencing the monk lines and not the brawler itself the coordinator could not find anything that specifically said he couldn't do it. Now the RAI to me says in bright, bold, dancing, singing letters that is not how it is meant to work, I mean after all its why they get flurry. The argument the guy used was that TWF applies to weapons, not unarmed attacks.

I am brand new to the group and really don't wanna rock the boat too much but this seems like a blatant abuse of the wording. Now granted when referencing the brawler that line is actually missing and I think does give me a little leeway to argue that even if its the case with monks it wouldn't be the same with brawler, however, this is PFS where the rules should apply at all tables anywhere you go.

So can someone give me a stronger argument that the brawler/monk cannot get free TWF because of that wording.

[Ken Murikumo]

The monk class feature for flurry of blows does state it works like TWF and that's for Flurry not using your default BAB. For Brawler you could conceivably attack with something other than your main hand without penalty whilst your main hand is occupied doing whatever it does when it's not in combat. That doesn't, however, grant you more attacks than your BAB/feats allow unless Brawler gets a flurry like ability (I honestly haven't thoroughly read the hybrid classes because they seem kinda meh)

Of course it's ultimately up to the DM to decide how it gets interpreted.

**Just read Brawler, real quick. They do get a flurry ability at 2nd level that gives them the effect of TWF, so and so forth.

[grarrrg]

So I recently joined a PFS group. Its different but I don't really have a choice since no one wants to start a group in spokane/CDA area. Anyways, it came up that someone is playing a Brawler, one of the newer classes. The person presented the idea that he could TWF without penalties and without feat investment because of the following...
So can someone give me a stronger argument that the brawler/monk cannot get free TWF because of that wording.

I'd submit that, technically, as written, a Monk can NEVER Two-Weapon Fight with Unarmed Attacks, because "there is no such thing as an Off-Hand attack" for Monks.
Off-Hand attacks do not exist, therefore TWF is impossible for Unarmed Monks.

More realistically, that line of Monk _only_ applies to the Damage of Off-hand weapons, as explained by the next sentence: "A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes." (underlined for referential-ness).
To-Hit is never mentioned, therefore it is unaffected (i.e. "The absence of a rule is not in and of itself a new rule") and normal TWF penalties apply.

Regarding Flurry, flurry is "special TWF" with certain restrictions/applications. It can only be used with limited weapons, but you can use the same weapon for all attacks. Note that even though a Monk 'uses Full Bab' when Flurrying, they still take a -2 To-Hit penalty, as if they were actually using Two Weapon Fighting.

As for how this interacts with Brawler:
It does not.
The Brawler does NOT say "use the Monk rules for stuff".
It lists out it's own rules and limitations, none of which negate TWF penalties.
The only thing their Flurry grants is Full-STR damage to all attacks, and can use the same weapon for all attacks.


The argument the guy used was that TWF applies to weapons, not unarmed attacks.
Unarmed attacks are treated as Manufactured Weapons according to the rules. Just about any rule that applies to a Manufactured Weapons also applies to Unarmed Strikes.
Unarmed Strikes (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/equipment---final/weapons/weapon-descriptions/strike-unarmed) (emphasis added):

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. Unarmed strikes do not count as natural weapons (see Combat). The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.

[Ken Murikumo]

The brawler class does specifically state which weapons apply to the class feature; as follows: unarmed, "close" fighter weapon group (gauntlet, heavy shield, light shield, punching dagger, sap, spiked armor, spiked gauntlet, spiked shield, and unarmed strike) and any "monk" weapon. So if he thinks being a brawler gives him a free pass at TWFing with scimitars or something, he's in clear violation of the rules.

[Necroticplague]

That line of bolded text clearly indicates he can't, say, use a sword and punch him as a secondary. However, the reverse is perfectly allowable: punch someone as his primary main-hand attack(s), then smack them with the weapons as offf0hands. Of course, you would take the penalties associated with such.