AoOs and "Unarmed Attacks"

[PallentisLunam]

I was reading another thread and I had a thought. If a character is engaged in melee with an opponent and the character in question is wielding a weapon that threatens their opponent, i.e. not a ranged weapon, and they make an unarmed attack, such as a punch or a kick, without the benefit the improved unarmed strike feat, do they provoke an AoO from their opponent?

[Hal0Badger]

As far as I know, answer should be "yes". Unarmed melee attacks, without the feat "Improved Unarmed Attack", would provoke AoO, if the opponents is considered "armed".

[PallentisLunam]

That seems kinda silly. Yeah I know a useless argument against RAW but still... the rules make reference to "attacking unarmed" but what if you have a weapon and decide to use an unarmed strike anyways? You still provoke?

[Curmudgeon]

Yes, you still provoke, because attacking in a way that's uncomfortable for you means you're letting your guard down.

[PallentisLunam]

It's not really a matter of it being uncomfortable. First attacking with a weapon with which you are not proficient does not provoke an AoO and second any class that is proficient with all simple weapons is proficient with unarmed strikes.

The wording in the srd seems to indicate that you provoke an AoO because you don't threaten your opponent. However if you are holding a weapon you do threaten your opponent you a just not using that threat to make the attack.

[Curmudgeon]

It's not just a matter of proficiency. Even those proficient with unarmed strike still provoke AoOs when they use them, unless they have Improved Unarmed Strike.
Benefit: You are considered to be armed even when unarmed —that is, you do not provoke attacks or opportunity from armed opponents when you attack them while unarmed. However, you still get an attack of opportunity against any opponent who makes an unarmed attack on you.
That's why I expressed it as "uncomfortable for you", which is distinct from non-proficient.

[Psyren]

It's not really a matter of it being uncomfortable. First attacking with a weapon with which you are not proficient does not provoke an AoO and second any class that is proficient with all simple weapons is proficient with unarmed strikes.

The wording in the srd seems to indicate that you provoke an AoO because you don't threaten your opponent. However if you are holding a weapon you do threaten your opponent you a just not using that threat to make the attack.

By that logic, if you are wearing armor spikes you should be able to fire a bow while in melee without provoking. The fact that you happen to have a weapon you can threaten with does not mean you don't provoke from using some other weapon.

[PallentisLunam]

Okay, I see your points. I was just trying to make sure I understood why. Although the language in Improved Unarmed Strike still refers to "armed and unarmed" it doesn't seem to take into account the idea of holding a sword and kicking someone in the knee.

But I don't really have an answer for the bow senario

[SangoProduction]

Well, think about it this way - I've got a sword. I've got much better reach than if you tried to close in for a strike with the fist, and you aren't in the most defensive position if you are trying to throw a kick my way, and don't really do much if you are remaining light on your toes to avoid getting hit. I just chop your leg with the sword, you do nothing, end of discussion.

Beyond exceptional training (ie. taking the feat) is required to make unarmed strikes not result in that situation. I can't fathom "how" they do it, but it's a fantasy game, who cares. (Don't get me wrong, there are some grappling techniques in historical martial arts, but they specifically involve grappling, not trying to actually hit someone.)

[PallentisLunam]

Actually if you want to discuss historical techniques there are several treatises from medieval and renaissance Europe that discuss kicks when armed with swords. Those kicks were usually directed at the knee or below and only attempted when the swords were bound high. The problem is D&D's combat is alittle to abstract not enough nuts and bolts for stuff like that to be anything but flavor text.

What I'm getting is that, while suboptimal, the idea can be applied but not by just anyone.