Finesse Punches

[stewstew5]

Is there any way to get the finesse modifier on an unarmed strike? (I’m looking for finesse specifically not adding dexterity)

[Joe the Rat]

In short: No.

Longer answer: Not in the current rules. A DM may decide to allow Martial Arts punches to count as finesse for sneak attack, but that is purely house ruling.

[Unoriginal]

Is there any way to get the finesse modifier on an unarmed strike? (I’m looking for finesse specifically not adding dexterity)

What Joe the Rat said is 100% accurate, and pretty much all that there is to say about it.

[Grey Watcher]

(I’m looking for finesse specifically not adding dexterity)

Wait, in what situation is that distinction important, since the Finesse propery is "you can use Dex instead of Str"?

[Yunru]

Wait, in what situation is that distinction important, since the Finesse propery is "you can use Dex instead of Str"?

Sneak Attack is the first thing I can think of.

[nickl_2000]

Sneak Attack is the first thing I can think of.

That is one situation and defensive duelist is the other one. I believe that is it.

[stewstew5]

Sneak Attack is the first thing I can think of.

Pretty much

[Man_Over_Game]

Or anything that mentions "Weapon" but not "Weapon Attack". A few examples:


Weapon buff spells
Duelist Fighting Style
Kensei Weapons

[KorvinStarmast]

Is there any way to get the finesse modifier on an unarmed strike? (I’m looking for finesse specifically not adding dexterity) Play a monk. Not sure why you are making this harder than necessary.
Ah, just saw the follow up.
Nope. First response covered it all.

[Bjarkmundur]

There's always the Weapon X Program (https://vignette.wikia.nocookie.net/xmenmovies/images/0/00/LadyDeathstrikePromo1-X2.jpg/revision/latest?cb=20151227155811)

[Unoriginal]

They were careful to not make so the Rogue could easily get a powerful second attack to go with their Sneak Attack.

[Grod_The_Giant]

They were careful to not make so the Rogue could easily get a powerful second attack to go with their Sneak Attack.
Eh. Even if you take a Monk dip, it's only ~2-4 points better than just using a shortsword in your off-hand and TWF-ing. Even at level 2 (worst case), that's a pretty fair benefit to get from a one-level dip, especially since it means you can't wear armor or use a rapier.

[Man_Over_Game]

They were careful to not make so the Rogue could easily get a powerful second attack to go with their Sneak Attack.

This. It's very intentional, considering Monks already have the most early game burst damage, and Rogues come up a close second. They wanted to avoid resourceless, burst damage potential with builds that can Disengage easily, and I think that's the reasoning behind fists not being compatible with Sneak Attack.

[stoutstien]

This. It's very intentional, considering Monks already have the most early game burst damage, and Rogues come up a close second. They wanted to avoid resourceless, burst damage potential with builds that can Disengage easily, and I think that's the reasoning behind fists not being compatible with Sneak Attack.
Agreed but I don't think they considered all the other crap they ended up letting slide.
With both sneak attack and ki being directly tied to each class lv progression I've yet to see where allowing unarmed sneak attack to be a problem.

[Unoriginal]

Agreed but I don't think they considered all the other crap they ended up letting slide.
With both sneak attack and ki being directly tied to each class lv progression I've yet to see where allowing unarmed sneak attack to be a problem.

Sneak Attack with Fluffy of Blows?

[Misterwhisper]

Sneak Attack with Fluffy of Blows?

So what?

You are still only getting one sneak attack on your turn.

ex.

Level 5:

Normal rogue:

1d6 + 4 Shortsword
3d6 sneak attack

Roughly 18 damage that costs you nothing
Bonus action off hand shortsword if you missed your main attack can add another 1d6
Roughly 21.5 damage and all it costs you is a bonus action if you have to use it.


Monk 1 Rogue 4

1d6 + 4 short sword
2d6 sneak attack
1d4 + 4 unarmed strike

roughly 20.5

So it is less damage than just being a rogue normally
Also, now you can't use a shield if you ever get trained in it
have to have a good wisdom to make up for the fact you can't use armor anymore
Your sneak attacks are a level behind


Monk is not worth losing levels in to take rogue for more than maybe 2 levels for cunning action
Rogue is not worth losing sneak attack and levels in to take all the issues with monk for a bonus action attack you could have just taken anyway

[stoutstien]

So what?

You are still only getting one sneak attack on your turn.

ex.

Level 5:

Normal rogue:

1d6 + 4 Shortsword
3d6 sneak attack

Roughly 18 damage that costs you nothing
Bonus action off hand shortsword if you missed your main attack can add another 1d6
Roughly 21.5 damage and all it costs you is a bonus action if you have to use it.


Monk 1 Rogue 4

1d6 + 4 short sword
2d6 sneak attack
1d4 + 4 unarmed strike

roughly 20.5

So it is less damage than just being a rogue normally
Also, now you can't use a shield if you ever get trained in it
have to have a good wisdom to make up for the fact you can't use armor anymore
Your sneak attacks are a level behind


Monk is not worth losing levels in to take rogue for more than maybe 2 levels for cunning action
Rogue is not worth losing sneak attack and levels in to take all the issues with monk for a bonus action attack you could have just taken anyway

This. It increases average damage per round but does nothing for total damage.
Compared to Scag cantrips and war caster allowing reaction sneak attacks or action surge/ sentinel for the same effect.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Sneak Attack with Fluffy of Blows?
Well, yeah, a Rogue with Flurry is stronger than one without, but if you took two levels of Monk you didn't take two levels of Rogue. You get an extra attack 2/short rest for 1d4+3, but now you're 1d6 behind on Sneak Attack, and things like Uncanny Dodge and Reliable Talent are pushed back. You've traded consistency for burst damage; I don't see the issue.

[Misterwhisper]

Well, yeah, a Rogue with Flurry is stronger than one without, but if you took two levels of Monk you didn't take two levels of Rogue. You get an extra attack 2/short rest for 1d4+3, but now you're 1d6 behind on Sneak Attack, and things like Uncanny Dodge and Reliable Talent are pushed back. You've traded consistency for burst damage; I don't see the issue.

And lost your ability to use armor or a shield if you get proficiency
And the ability to do it with a rapier
And the ability to do it with ranged attacks

It is not even good burst damage.

[Talionis]

Wait, in what situation is that distinction important, since the Finesse propery is "you can use Dex instead of Str"?

I totally agree. Monk does make unarmed attacks finesse attacks. Finesse is just a key word. It’s zero a balance issue.

I see this as an utter misfire in 5e. 5e has fairly inane and counter intuitive differiation between finesse, melee, ranged attacks. It overly complicates for zero mechanical benefit.

[moonfly7]

I mean, arguably you can make punches using dex, lots of martial arts in real life rely on agility and other such dexy things rather than strength, why not let monks do it in 5e? Or just add a feat for it?

[Grod_The_Giant]

I mean, arguably you can make punches using dex, lots of martial arts in real life rely on agility and other such dexy things rather than strength, why not let monks do it in 5e? Or just add a feat for it?
Monks can use Dex for unarmed strikes and Monk weapons; the question is specifically about the Finesse quality to qualify for abilities like Sneak Attack which explicitly require a Finesse weapon. It's the sort of minor terminology quibble that 5e largely manages to avoid.

[JackPhoenix]

I mean, arguably you can make punches using dex, lots of martial arts in real life rely on agility and other such dexy things rather than strength, why not let monks do it in 5e? Or just add a feat for it?

That's.... exactly what monks do, though. Since the game was first released. Martial Arts doesn't have Finesse tag/weapon property/keyword, despite doing pretty much the same thing, which is what this thread is about, though... the keyword itself has some interaction with other abilities, like rogue's Sneak Attack. Which is exactly why Talionis is wrong with:


I totally agree. Monk does make unarmed attacks finesse attacks. Finesse is just a key word. It’s zero a balance issue.

It's the keyword that matters, not the result.

[Cynthaer]

I think it's clear that RAW and probably RAI is that Monk Unarmed Strikes can't apply Sneak Attack damage due to the lack of the Finesse keyword.

Based on the numbers people have shown, I think it's also perfectly fine to let players do it anyway.

[Man_Over_Game]

So what?

You are still only getting one sneak attack on your turn.

ex.

Level 5:

Normal rogue:

1d6 + 4 Shortsword
3d6 sneak attack

Roughly 18 damage that costs you nothing
Bonus action off hand shortsword if you missed your main attack can add another 1d6
Roughly 21.5 damage and all it costs you is a bonus action if you have to use it.


Monk 1 Rogue 4

1d6 + 4 short sword
2d6 sneak attack
1d4 + 4 unarmed strike

roughly 20.5

So it is less damage than just being a rogue normally
Also, now you can't use a shield if you ever get trained in it
have to have a good wisdom to make up for the fact you can't use armor anymore
Your sneak attacks are a level behind


Monk is not worth losing levels in to take rogue for more than maybe 2 levels for cunning action
Rogue is not worth losing sneak attack and levels in to take all the issues with monk for a bonus action attack you could have just taken anyway

Now that you mention it, it's kinda hard to justify why Monks can't Sneak Attack. Maybe it has something to do with a Level 6 Monk turning his unarmed strikes into Magical Damage (which then converts Sneak Attack), but that would mean getting a magical sneak attack by level 7. That's not a big deal.

So...I think you're right.