arkangel111
2014-09-13, 07:40 PM
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.
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.