Is there a way to attack with Dex using unarmed strikes while wearing armor?

[CMCC]

Those damn monks and their ridiculous restrictions.

[Greywander]

Yes, it's called homebrew.

Here's a simple monk tweak to make this possible: only armor you aren't proficient in restricts Martial Arts and Unarmored Movement (up to you whether this includes shields or not). Monks by default don't get armor proficiency, and most monks would probably rather not wear armor anyway since they'll get more AC unarmored once they max their DEX and WIS. But this does make STR monks or monk dips work a bit better.

Heck, casters can cast in armor so long as they're proficient. Why can't monks use their cool kung fu moves in armor if they're proficient?

Edit: You could also look for a race with a natural weapon with the finesse property, but I don't think one currently exists.

[Rev666]

If you're allowed to play a blood hunter then Order of the Lycan can use dex for unarmed strikes and are allowed to use armour at the same time.

[CMCC]

Heck, casters can cast in armor so long as they're proficient. Why can't monks use their cool kung fu moves in armor if they're proficient?

.

...because WoTC insist on making monks awful.

[Unoriginal]

...because WoTC insist on making monks awful.

"Not being able to use DEX-keyed features while in the armor that has no benefit from DEX and requires STR means you're awful."

Why would a Monk want to use DEX attacks while in heavy armor?

[CMCC]

"Not being able to use DEX-keyed features while in the armor that has no benefit from DEX and requires STR means you're awful."

Why would a Monk want to use DEX attacks while in heavy armor?

Any...any armor.


The answer is... the same reason wizards and sorcerers would want to wear heavy armor.

[Greywander]

"Not being able to use DEX-keyed features while in the armor that has no benefit from DEX and requires STR means you're awful."

Why would a Monk want to use DEX attacks while in heavy armor?
Because that's not all that Martial Arts does? Not to mention Unarmored Movement?

Because they're not wearing heavy armor, they're wearing magical light/medium armor they found?

Because they're a dwarf or Armorer and don't need STR for heavy armor?

[sithlordnergal]

No...but there is a way to use Wisdom for all your Unarmed Strikes while wearing armor. Arms of the Astral Self states that you can use Wisdom in place of Strength or Dexterity when you make an Unarmed Strike, and you can use the ability while you're wearing armor. If you take a single level of Fighter you can get Armor proficiency and the Unarmed Fighting Style, which lets you deal 1d8 with all your Unarmed Strikes, provided you're not using a weapon or shield.

[Amechra]

Why would you want to invest in Dexterity if you're just going to wear heavy armor? No, seriously, why wouldn't you just grab the Unarmed Fighting style and use Strength?

(I get the sense that the real reason that this thread exists is because you wanted to complain about Monks, though. Which is valid, even though I disagree with your assessment of the class.)

[CMCC]

Why would you want to invest in Dexterity if you're just going to wear heavy armor? No, seriously, why wouldn't you just grab the Unarmed Fighting style and use Strength?

(I get the sense that the real reason that this thread exists is because you wanted to complain about Monks, though. Which is valid, even though I disagree with your assessment of the class.)

I mean this in the nicest way possible, but everything you wrote is wrong.

It’s ALL armor.

I want to make a Dex build that uses fists and wears armor. It’s very odd to me that this isn’t possible. It’s silly.

I did not write this to complain about monks. I wrote this to get an answer to my question.

[CMCC]

No...but there is a way to use Wisdom for all your Unarmed Strikes while wearing armor. Arms of the Astral Self states that you can use Wisdom in place of Strength or Dexterity when you make an Unarmed Strike, and you can use the ability while you're wearing armor. If you take a single level of Fighter you can get Armor proficiency and the Unarmed Fighting Style, which lets you deal 1d8 with all your Unarmed Strikes, provided you're not using a weapon or shield.

This is helpful. Thanks. Armorer basically does the same for intelligence but the gauntlets are considered weapons.

[heavyfuel]

Heck, casters can cast in armor so long as they're proficient. Why can't monks use their cool kung fu moves in armor if they're proficient?

Because WotC hates martials :smallamused:

But yeah, Monk and Barbarian losing access to (some of) their core features because of armor and casters not is probably because they were designed by different people, who weren't necessarily in direct communication with one another. I remember reading an interview where, pretty sure it was Mearls, but definitely someone on the inside, that said they started making the classes together, but it got too confusing with so many opinions about so many things, so they divided the team.

[sithlordnergal]

This is helpful. Thanks. Armorer basically does the same for intelligence but the gauntlets are considered weapons.

Not a problem, I have an idea for a Monk that uses a greatsword and wears heavy armor myself. So I fully understand the minor annoyances of the Monk's armor restrictions.

[CMCC]

Because WotC hates martials :smallamused:

But yeah, Monk and Barbarian losing access to (some of) their core features because of armor and casters not is probably because they were designed by different people, who weren't necessarily in direct communication with one another. I remember reading an interview where, pretty sure it was Mearls, but definitely someone on the inside, that said they started making the classes together, but it got too confusing with so many opinions about so many things, so they divided the team.

Barbarian restrictions make much more sense. Imagine if rage didn’t work with medium armor. That would be the equivalent. Terrible.

[Greywander]

Barbarian restrictions make much more sense. Imagine if rage didn’t work with medium armor. That would be the equivalent. Terrible.
But why don't several barbarian features work in heavy armor? It just seems like such a pointless restriction. Barbarians don't even get proficiency with heavy armor, they're not going to wear it anyway. There are a number of spells that casters could potentially make use of while wearing armor they aren't proficient with, so it makes sense to restrict spellcasting, but martials are basically boned if they're wearing nonproficient armor, and getting that proficiency requires an investment, so it's not like it's free.

[CMCC]

But why don't several barbarian features work in heavy armor? It just seems like such a pointless restriction. Barbarians don't even get proficiency with heavy armor, they're not going to wear it anyway. There are a number of spells that casters could potentially make use of while wearing armor they aren't proficient with, so it makes sense to restrict spellcasting, but martials are basically boned if they're wearing nonproficient armor, and getting that proficiency requires an investment, so it's not like it's free.

Agreed. My point is just that barbarians make more sense than monks in this regard - not that they make complete sense as they are currently constructed.

Both are bottom of the barrel classes imo. Barbarians are better than monks though.