Unarmed ponderings

[Spacehamster]

Can you dual wield your hands? As in could you use your bonus action to attack with your offhand fist? Without the STR mod unless dual wielding style ofc?

[Hytheter]

No. TWF calls for light weapons held in both hands. Your firsts are not light weapons (or even weapons at all) and you aren't holding them in your hands because they are your hands.

[Spacehamster]

No. TWF calls for light weapons held in both hands. Your firsts are not light weapons (or even weapons at all) and you aren't holding them in your hands because they are your hands.

Understand it from a rules perspective, but damn do I get a funny picture in my head, of a city filled with people with their offhand tied to their side with rope or chains and then some city official that comes and unties said ropes if you are a monk. xD

[Jak]

I mean, in the original print, unarmed strike was listed in the weapons table. According to that, you could, but only if you have the dual wielder feat.

There's been errata that says it wasn't supposed to be on the table, but honestly, that was a dumb errata. And dumb rulings break verisimilitude for me.

Therefore, sure, if you have dual wielder.

[Spacehamster]

I mean, in the original print, unarmed strike was listed in the weapons table. According to that, you could, but only if you have the dual wielder feat.

There's been errata that says it wasn't supposed to be on the table, but honestly, that was a dumb errata. And dumb rulings break verisimilitude for me.

Therefore, sure, if you have dual wielder.

And if for example you play a tortle or tabaxi you have claws and they count as weapons so those work by raw as well with dw feat?

[Jak]

And if for example you play a tortle or tabaxi you have claws and they count as weapons so those work by raw as well with dw feat?

Pretty sure yes, actually. Natural weapons are weapons. Maybe they count was simple? Not sure.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Pretty sure yes, actually. Natural weapons are weapons. Maybe they count was simple? Not sure.

If it's not on the weapon table it has no properties unless whatever trait/feature/spell you get it from grants then.

For example, compare Shadow Blade with Flame Blade or Alter Self. Shadow Blade is given a full assortment of properties, Flame Blade is only listed as similar in size and shape to a scimitar so there's an argument for improvised weapons to make an attack that isn't a spell attack and alter self makes you proficient with unarmed strikes and makes your new natural weapon +1 and magical.

[Hytheter]

Understand it from a rules perspective, but damn do I get a funny picture in my head, of a city filled with people with their offhand tied to their side with rope or chains and then some city official that comes and unties said ropes if you are a monk. xD

:smallamused:

For what it's worth, I'd probably allow it in a home game. As long as you go to town hall for a punch license, first. ;)

[Unoriginal]

Can you dual wield your hands? As in could you use your bonus action to attack with your offhand fist? Without the STR mod unless dual wielding style ofc?

Unarmed strikes don't specifically use your hands, they use, well, any part of the body without weapons.

So you can't dual wield your fists anymore that you can dual wield your head and your left foot.

[JLandan]

I never understood why you couldn't hold a bow in your off-hand and punch someone with your fist for an opportunity attack. Or use a two-hand weapon and make a kick as a bonus attack.

I've always thought unarmed strike, fist, kick, whatever, should not be a melee weapon, but should still have the light property, as if it were a weapon.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I never understood why you couldn't hold a bow in your off-hand and punch someone with your fist for an opportunity attack.
You can? Two-Handed weapons don't require both your hands at all times, only when attacking.


Or use a two-hand weapon and make a kick as a bonus attack.
This is a bit more difficult to manage, but a Monk can do it with a versatile weapon or a Greatclub with Dedicated Weapon.


I've always thought unarmed strike, fist, kick, whatever, should not be a melee weapon, but should still have the light property, as if it were a weapon.
What would be the point of it then, the only thing being "light" is used for requires that it be considered a weapon.

[JLandan]

You can? Two-Handed weapons don't require both your hands at all times, only when attacking.

Actually both hands must be holding or be themselves light weapons to do two-hand fighting. Bow isn't a light weapon and neither is unarmed strike.



This is a bit more difficult to manage, but a Monk can do it with a versatile weapon or a Greatclub with Dedicated Weapon.

A Monk yes, but no one else. Not even with the Dual Wielding feat, because unarmed strike is not a weapon.



What would be the point of it then, the only thing being "light" is used for requires that it be considered a weapon.

If unarmed strike was considered to have the light property as if a weapon, it could be used for off-hand attacks in conjunction with a light weapon or another unarmed strike, or any weapon with Dual Wielding.

[Unoriginal]

Actually both hands must be holding or be themselves light weapons to do two-hand fighting. Bow isn't a light weapon and neither is unarmed strike.

You can attack with a non-light weapon or an unarmed strike while you're holding a bow, a two-handed weapon, or another weapon you're not using. So you can use an unarmed strike for an opportunity attack even if you're holding a bow.

[ProsecutorGodot]

Actually both hands must be holding or be themselves light weapons to do two-hand fighting. Bow isn't a light weapon and neither is unarmed strike.
You said as an opportunity attack, that thing you do as a reaction when someone provokes it. Did you not actually mean the actual game term "opportunity attack" but instead some type of surprise attack based on them not being ready for an unarmed strike to follow an attack with a weapon?


A Monk yes, but no one else. Not even with the Dual Wielding feat, because unarmed strike is not a weapon.
It's not strictly exclusive to Monk, though it's not something you can do on command. GWM can also do this, if they kill or crit on their main swing they can make an unarmed strike using the bonus action attack. Unarmed strikes are "melee weapon attacks" even if they aren't attacks with a melee weapon.

I believe EK War Magic also qualifies (once again, a "weapon attack" but not a weapon) so if you use your action to cast something like Green Flame Blade you can use the bonus action from War Magic to make an unarmed strike.


If unarmed strike was considered to have the light property as if a weapon, it could be used for off-hand attacks in conjunction with a light weapon or another unarmed strike, or any weapon with Dual Wielding.
But you said they aren't weapons? Even if you give your fists the light property it does nothing unless you also classify them as weapons for general purposes because Two-Weapon Fighting isn't looking for "light" it's looking for "light" and "weapon".

[JLandan]

You said as an opportunity attack, that thing you do as a reaction when someone provokes it. Did you not actually mean the actual game term "opportunity attack" but instead some type of surprise attack based on them not being ready for an unarmed strike to follow an attack with a weapon?


It's not strictly exclusive to Monk, though it's not something you can do on command. GWM can also do this, if they kill or crit on their main swing they can make an unarmed strike using the bonus action attack. Unarmed strikes are "melee weapon attacks" even if they aren't attacks with a melee weapon.

I believe EK War Magic also qualifies (once again, a "weapon attack" but not a weapon) so if you use your action to cast something like Green Flame Blade you can use the bonus action from War Magic to make an unarmed strike.


But you said they aren't weapons? Even if you give your fists the light property it does nothing unless you also classify them as weapons for general purposes because Two-Weapon Fighting isn't looking for "light" it's looking for "light" and "weapon".

I wrote "light as if a weapon" to indicate it would have the light property for conditions requiring specifically a "light weapon", but not other conditions requiring only "weapon". I guess I wrote it too confusing... apologies.

[ProsecutorGodot]

I wrote "light as if a weapon" to indicate it would have the light property for conditions requiring specifically a "light weapon", but not other conditions requiring only "weapon". I guess I wrote it too confusing... apologies.

You'd have to be more specific, the easiest way to avoid potential unintended consequences would be too change the two weapon fighting feature to include unarmed strikes. I wouldn't personally do this but it's easier than trying to explain to someone why their "light weapon" fists don't count as a weapon.

[strangebloke]

Honestly the whole tree of "weapon attack," "melee weapon attack," "melee weapon attack without a weapon" etc. is just obnoxious, easily the jankiest thing in 5e, to the point that have the time I think the devs forget how it works.

Unarmed strikes don't qualify for TWF. If you had a """club"""" in each hand, reflavored as brass knuckles, it would work though. Does this make sense? No. But its only the first of many problems.

[KorvinStarmast]

Can you dual wield your hands? As in could you use your bonus action to attack with your offhand fist? Without the STR mod unless dual wielding style ofc?
Please remember: Unarmed strikes include kicks and head buts.

Your Unarmed Attacks are not a single punch, they are roughly six seconds worth of fighting that allows you to land a blow or two as a result of you taking the attack action.

You are describing a non problem.

[Sorinth]

Honestly the whole tree of "weapon attack," "melee weapon attack," "melee weapon attack without a weapon" etc. is just obnoxious, easily the jankiest thing in 5e, to the point that have the time I think the devs forget how it works.

Unarmed strikes don't qualify for TWF. If you had a """club"""" in each hand, reflavored as brass knuckles, it would work though. Does this make sense? No. But its only the first of many problems.

Honestly I'm not even sure how intentional that stuff was. It comes across as different authors trying to same the same thing but being different people have slight differences in how they wrote it.

To the OP, if you wanted to have a boxer type character that isn't a monk then I'd have no problem allowing dual wielding your fists. I think the main reason that unarmed strikes are treated differently is that they didn't want to give everyone a BA kick attack.

[strangebloke]

Honestly I'm not even sure how intentional that stuff was. It comes across as different authors trying to same the same thing but being different people have slight differences in how they wrote it.

To the OP, if you wanted to have a boxer type character that isn't a monk then I'd have no problem allowing dual wielding your fists. I think the main reason that unarmed strikes are treated differently is that they didn't want to give everyone a BA kick attack.

Oh, sure. I'm not sure for example that devs had any notion STRogues would have been possible, or that Dex barbarians wouldn't be. And if you look at how weirdly worded newer additions like the Eldritch Claw Tattoo are (uses a completely different wording for reach) I don't think this problem is going away.

[Skrum]

And if for example you play a tortle or tabaxi you have claws and they count as weapons so those work by raw as well with dw feat?

In the upcoming Monsters of the Multiverse natural weapons for these races is going away; they'll have unarmed strikes that deal 1dX damage. So if you have a build that takes advantage of tortles, etc., having natural weapons, well, enjoy it while it lasts

[Rynjin]

Every now and then I come across a post like this that informs me about something minor, weird, and janky about 5e I wasn't aware of before.

You were always able to TWF with unarmed strikes in previous editions, so I figured it just worked the same way.

[Unoriginal]

You were always able to TWF with unarmed strikes in previous editions, so I figured it just worked the same way.

In which previous editions were you able to do that?

[Skrum]

In which previous editions were you able to do that?

3.5 for sure. Not familiar with 4th.

[Keltest]

For what its worth, the unarmed fighting style gives you a larger damage die to your unarmed strikes if you arent wielding a weapon or shield (ie both hands are free) which would further indicate that the unarmed attacks are not boxing but full body martial arts, even if you arent a monk.

[Rynjin]

In which previous editions were you able to do that?

3.5 and Pathfinder for sure. 2nd and 4th edition maybe? I'm not 100% on that one since TWFing was wonky in 2e from what I can tell, and I've rarely touched 4e.

Edit: Cracking open the rulebook real fast, in 4e Unarmed Strikes are also explicitly weapons, which is the primary thing that changed in 5e. I'm not sure 4e even has two-weapon fighting.

The way Flurry works in 3.PF is literally just "the Monk gets TWFing for free and it scales with level" (explicitly on PF, reusing the same wording in 3.5), but you can do it manually on any character.


Flurry of Blows (Ex)
When unarmored, a monk may strike with a flurry of blows at the expense of accuracy. When doing so, she may make one extra attack in a round at her highest base attack bonus, but this attack takes a -2 penalty, as does each other attack made that round. The resulting modified base attack bonuses are shown in the Flurry of Blows Attack Bonus column on Table: The Monk. This penalty applies for 1 round, so it also affects attacks of opportunity the monk might make before her next action. When a monk reaches 5th level, the penalty lessens to -1, and at 9th level it disappears. A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows.

When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham). She may attack with unarmed strikes and special monk weapons interchangeably as desired. When using weapons as part of a flurry of blows, a monk applies her Strength bonus (not Str bonus × 1½ or ×½) to her damage rolls for all successful attacks, whether she wields a weapon in one or both hands. The monk can’t use any weapon other than a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows.

In the case of the quarterstaff, each end counts as a separate weapon for the purpose of using the flurry of blows ability. Even though the quarterstaff requires two hands to use, a monk may still intersperse unarmed strikes with quarterstaff strikes, assuming that she has enough attacks in her flurry of blows routine to do so.


Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action.

When doing so, he may make one additional attack, taking a –2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. These attacks can be any combination of unarmed strikes and attacks with a monk special weapon (he does not need to use two weapons to utilize this ability).

For the purpose of these attacks, the monk’s base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.

At 8th level, the monk can make two additional attacks when he uses flurry of blows, as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

At 15th level, the monk can make three additional attacks using flurry of blows, as if using Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.

(PF added a clause that the Monk counts as full BaB instead of 3/4 during a Flurry as well).

Unarmed strikes are always considered a Light weapon in both systems.

Funnily enough, the Unchained Monk instead works closer to the 5e Monk.



At 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When making a flurry of blows, the monk can make one additional attack at his highest base attack bonus. This additional attack stacks with the bonus attacks from haste and other similar effects. When using this ability, the monk can make these attacks with any combination of his unarmed strikes and weapons that have the monk special weapon quality. He takes no penalty for using multiple weapons when making a flurry of blows, but he does not gain any additional attacks beyond what’s already granted by the flurry for doing so. (He can still gain additional attacks from a high base attack bonus, from this ability, and from haste and similar effects).

At 11th level, a monk can make an additional attack at his highest base attack bonus whenever he makes a flurry of blows. This stacks with the first attack from this ability and additional attacks from haste and similar effects.

[Unoriginal]

3.5 and Pathfinder for sure. 2nd and 4th edition maybe? I'm not 100% on that one since TWFing was wonky in 2e from what I can tell, and I've rarely touched 4e.

Edit: Cracking open the rulebook real fast, in 4e Unarmed Strikes are also explicitly weapons, which is the primary thing that changed in 5e. I'm not sure 4e even has two-weapon fighting.

The way Flurry works in 3.PF is literally just "the Monk gets TWFing for free and it scales with level" (explicitly on PF, reusing the same wording in 3.5), but you can do it manually on any character.





(PF added a clause that the Monk counts as full BaB instead of 3/4 during a Flurry as well).

Unarmed strikes are always considered a Light weapon in both systems.

Funnily enough, the Unchained Monk instead works closer to the 5e Monk.

But could/can you Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strikes without Flurry of Blow in 3.PF?

Because 5e also has the "you can do the equivalent of Two-Weapong Fighting with unarmed strike if you're a Monk" thing, it's just the Martial Arts feature rather than the Flurry of Blow one.

[ProsecutorGodot]

But could/can you Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strikes without Flurry of Blow in 3.PF?

Because 5e also has the "you can do the equivalent of Two-Weapong Fighting with unarmed strike if you're a Monk" thing, it's just the Martial Arts feature rather than the Flurry of Blow one.

I'm by far not an expert on 3.PF but I do own the PHB for 3.5e.

It says specifically, an unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. It counts as both a weapon and has the light property, so I believe you can. The Two-Weapon Fighting section also make exceptions for off-handing your unarmed strike to always be considered light.

So even in 3.5e it was important that unarmed strike was considered both a weapon and light.

[Unoriginal]

I'm by far not an expert on 3.PF but I do own the PHB for 3.5e.

It says specifically, an unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. It counts as both a weapon and has the light property, so I believe you can. The Two-Weapon Fighting section also make exceptions for off-handing your unarmed strike to always be considered light.

So even in 3.5e it was important that unarmed strike was considered both a weapon and light.

I'm confused. What does the 3.5 Flurry of Blow feature does, then, if Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strike is already something anyone can do even without the feature?

[strangebloke]

I'm confused. What does the 3.5 Flurry of Blow feature does, then, if Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strike is already something anyone can do even without the feature?

two weapon fighting is default feat-locked, but you can use unarmed strikes in conjunction with it. Flurry is effectively 'free' twf that only works with unarmed strikes.

[ProsecutorGodot]

two weapon fighting is default feat-locked, but you can use unarmed strikes in conjunction with it. Flurry is effectively 'free' twf that only works with unarmed strikes.

Is it default locked? I think the feat reduces the (very severe) penalties but no one is actually prevented from fighting in this way without it. The table shows that the "normal penalties" are -6/-10 but with the feat the penalty is -4/-4 or -2/-2 if your offhand is light and you have the feat. This lines up with the Monk's Flurry of Blows feature that states their penalties at base are -2.

I suppose with penalties that high it is effectively a locked option, I can't see why you'd ever bother trying.

[strangebloke]

Is it default locked? I think the feat reduces the (very severe) penalties but no one is actually prevented from fighting in this way without it. The table shows that the "normal penalties" are -6/-10 but with the feat the penalty is -4/-4 or -2/-2 if your offhand is light and you have the feat. This lines up with the Monk's Flurry of Blows feature that states their penalties at base are -2.

I suppose with penalties that high it is effectively a locked option, I can't see why you'd ever bother trying.

Ah, you are correct, apologies. The general rule in 3.5 is, absolutely nothing is good unless you specialize in it via feats or class features or spells. I didn't even consider the non-feat version of TWF, because as you say, its very bad. Even the feat version is terrible, and flurry of blows was more commonly known in optimization circles as "flurry of miss."

[greenstone]

I never understood why you couldn't hold a bow in your off-hand and punch someone with your fist for an opportunity attack. Or use a two-hand weapon and make a kick as a bonus attack.

I'm guessing it is because that would lead to every single PC and moster using a bonus action every single round to attempt a kick or punch. All that would do is slow the game down.

[Rynjin]

I'm confused. What does the 3.5 Flurry of Blow feature does, then, if Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strike is already something anyone can do even without the feature?

Essentially, it gives the Monk Two-Weapon Fighting, and all Feats in the chain (Improved/Greater Two-Weapon Fighting) for free, along with essentially Double Slice (allowing you to add your full Str to damage with your "off-hand"), without needing to meet the prerequisites for Dex (15/17/19) or BaB (+1, +6, +11).

So long story short, 4 Feats without needing to meet prereqs.

It's better in Pathfinder since it also boosts your BaB to full, raising your attack bonus considerably at some levels. It's still...not great, honestly.

[Unoriginal]

two weapon fighting is default feat-locked, but you can use unarmed strikes in conjunction with it. Flurry is effectively 'free' twf that only works with unarmed strikes.



I suppose with penalties that high it is effectively a locked option, I can't see why you'd ever bother trying.


Ah, you are correct, apologies. The general rule in 3.5 is, absolutely nothing is good unless you specialize in it via feats or class features or spells. I didn't even consider the non-feat version of TWF, because as you say, its very bad. Even the feat version is terrible, and flurry of blows was more commonly known in optimization circles as "flurry of miss."


Essentially, it gives the Monk Two-Weapon Fighting, and all Feats in the chain (Improved/Greater Two-Weapon Fighting) for free, along with essentially Double Slice (allowing you to add your full Str to damage with your "off-hand"), without needing to meet the prerequisites for Dex (15/17/19) or BaB (+1, +6, +11).

So long story short, 4 Feats without needing to meet prereqs.

It's better in Pathfinder since it also boosts your BaB to full, raising your attack bonus considerably at some levels. It's still...not great, honestly.

Just so we're on the same page here: Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed attacks is technically possible without being a Monk in 3.X, but it is too terrible to consider doing it without 4 prerequisites-locked feats, but even then it's terrible, and even the Flurry of Blow version is bad? And even with the improved vesion in Pathfinder the Monk's Flurry of Blow (which is better than the unarmed Two-Weapon Fighting) is not great?

I don't know for you, but I honestly prefer the 5e way of doing it. Better a "no" than "you can, but it's going to be too annoying to bother" IMO.

[Rynjin]

Just so we're on the same page here: Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed attacks is technically possible without being a Monk in 3.X, but it is too terrible to consider doing it without 4 prerequisites-locked feats, but even then it's terrible, and even the Flurry of Blow version is bad? And even with the improved vesion in Pathfinder the Monk's Flurry of Blow (which is better than the unarmed Two-Weapon Fighting) is not great?

I don't know for you, but I honestly prefer the 5e way of doing it. Better a "no" than "you can, but it's going to be too annoying to bother" IMO.

I dislike the 5e version of Flurry. Unchained Monk Flurry is the best Flurry implementation we've ever had IMO. No muss, no fuss, just one extra attack (with no penalty!) on a full attack, and a couple more as you level.

[Psyren]

I too dislike 5e flurry. Like everything else cool monks get to do it costs ki, and you can only do it with unarmed strikes. At least in PF you could flurry with ninja stars and the like. It didn't eat your swift action either.

[Rynjin]

Yeah. My literal only gripe with Unchained Flurry is that using it with a weapon is objectively better than unarmed since you get 1.5x Str to damage for less investment, but at least that means that the ability is strong for once, and it opens up variety.

[strangebloke]

I dislike the 5e version of Flurry. Unchained Monk Flurry is the best Flurry implementation we've ever had IMO. No muss, no fuss, just one extra attack (with no penalty!) on a full attack, and a couple more as you level.

....on a full attack, which means no movement for that turn, yeah?

HARD pass.

[Rynjin]

....on a full attack, which means no movement for that turn, yeah?

HARD pass.

Sort of. Unchained Monk also gets Style Strikes, which notably includes Flying Kick. It basically lets them start their Full Attack at around 15, 20, 30 feet away from people (the latter at higher levels) and jump that distance to initiate the attack, so they're also very mobile.


Flying Kick: The monk leaps through the air to strike a foe with a kick. Before the attack, the monk can move a distance equal to his fast movement bonus. This movement is made as part of the monk’s flurry of blows attack and does not require an additional action. At the end of this movement, the monk must make an attack against an adjacent foe. This movement may be between attacks. This movement provokes an attack of opportunity as normal. The attack made after the movement must be a kick.

The "movement may be between attacks" bit is also very cool.

[Psyren]

Sort of. Unchained Monk also gets Style Strikes, which notably includes Flying Kick. It basically lets them start their Full Attack at around 15, 20, 30 feet away from people (the latter at higher levels) and jump that distance to initiate the attack, so they're also very mobile.



The "movement may be between attacks" bit is also very cool.

I'll add to this that Unchained Monks can teleport and full-attack, fly, shoot energy blasts, and access numerous utility powers all on the same build. 5e is better than 3.5 (low bar) but it doesn't even come close to the unchained version.

[Unoriginal]

I dislike the 5e version of Flurry. Unchained Monk Flurry is the best Flurry implementation we've ever had IMO. No muss, no fuss, just one extra attack (with no penalty!) on a full attack, and a couple more as you level.

The question wasn't about 5e Flurry, though, it was about Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strike.


I too dislike 5e flurry. Like everything else cool monks get to do it costs ki

Martial Arts don't cost ki, and it's pretty cool.

[Psyren]

Martial Arts don't cost ki, and it's pretty cool.

It was when 5e debuted, but now bonus action attacks are a dime a dozen. Time for an upgrade.

[Rynjin]

The question wasn't about Flurry, though, it was about Two-Weapon Fighting with unarmed strike.

More of an open statement on my end, but true enough.

On TWFing: I don't really like 5e's implementation of TWFing regardless, and I doubt many others find it very impactful either; certainly not to the point I'd expect there are many people searching for how to make a TWFing non-Monk unarmed character. Unless it has gotten severe upgrades since I last checked, TWFing is really only useful for Rogues since it's not a true second attack, it's just an additional weapon die of damage. Not exactly impressive stuff, since most of the stuff I know of besides Sneak Attack that can really explosively impact the target off of a regular attack require you to expend your Bonus Action anyway (eg. Smite)

[Hytheter]

It was when 5e debuted, but now bonus action attacks are a dime a dozen.

Are they? I can't even think of any examples outside the PHB. I don't doubt there are some but I don't see them as being cheap or widely available.

[Psyren]

Are they? I can't even think of any examples outside the PHB. I don't doubt there are some but I don't see them as being cheap or widely available.

I'll wait till you place those goalposts before engaging. Can you not think of any, or can you, but you don't consider them to be "cheap"/"widely available?"

[ProsecutorGodot]

I'll wait till you place those goalposts before engaging. Can you not think of any, or can you, but you don't consider them to be "cheap"/"widely available?"

The burden of proof is on you when you make such a statement, not for others to wrack their brains for examples to disprove an open statement.

Could you please list your dime a dozen bonus action attacks?

[Gurgeh]

The only non-PHB examples I can think of are tied to full-casters (circle of Stars) or pet subclasses (artillerist, battle smith, drakewarden), very few of which would be wanting to engage in TWF in the first place.

[Psyren]

The burden of proof is on you when you make such a statement, not for others to wrack their brains for examples to disprove an open statement.

Could you please list your dime a dozen bonus action attacks?

You mean feats like PAM and XBE, and subclasses outside the PHB are hard to get? Such wow?

[Gurgeh]

PAM and XBE are in the PHB and have existed for the whole of 5e's life. Bonus action attacks were already dime-a-dozen before any splatbooks came out, contrary to your claim earlier in the thread.

[Psyren]

PAM and XBE are in the PHB and have existed for the whole of 5e's life. Bonus action attacks were already dime-a-dozen before any splatbooks came out, contrary to your claim earlier in the thread.

My "claim earlier in the thread" is that I don't find Martial Arts to be all that impressive. Your rebuttal to that being it was never all that impressive from the get-go is an... interesting defense.

[Zhorn]

My "claim earlier in the thread" is that I don't find Martial Arts to be all that impressive. Your rebuttal to that being it was never all that impressive from the get-go is an... interesting defense.
It doesn't read like that was point they were getting at.
More abut this part here:


Martial Arts don't cost ki, and it's pretty cool.It was when 5e debuted, but now bonus action attacks are a dime a dozen. Time for an upgrade.
followed by


Are they? I can't even think of any examples outside the PHB. I don't doubt there are some but I don't see them as being cheap or widely available.I'll wait till you place those goalposts before engaging. Can you not think of any, or can you, but you don't consider them to be "cheap"/"widely available?"

You might not have meant to phrase it that way, but it comes across as agreeing that Martial Arts was good at the start of 5e, but ceased to be as a result of later book releases leading up to current day.

and so when pushed for examples


The burden of proof is on you when you make such a statement, not for others to wrack their brains for examples to disprove an open statement.

Could you please list your dime a dozen bonus action attacks?You mean feats like PAM and XBE, and subclasses outside the PHB are hard to get? Such wow?
referencing back to the PHB runs counter to your earlier post in which you've already posted indicating an agreement that at the debut of 5e (ie: just the PHB) it was good back at that time.

I'm guessing it was an honest miscommunication, but based on that it reads as though they are responding to things as you've worded them and perhaps not as you intended them to mean.

[Psyren]

I see. No, it was at best "adequate" at the start of 5e. As other classes have gotten better toys through subclasses however, monk has fallen behind.

[strangebloke]

I see. No, it was at best "adequate" at the start of 5e. As other classes have gotten better toys through subclasses however, monk has fallen behind.

This is if anything the opposite of true. Battlemaster and Eldritch knight are still 2 of the 4 best fighter subclasses, and have been since the start. Rogues have the AT, which is still(?) the best rogue subclass, and totem barbarian has always been one of the top barbarian subclasses. For monks, the shadow monk is, excluding specific builds that rely on multiclassing, way behind the mercy monk and kensei, and more of a peer to the middling subclasses like dragon/astral/open hand/etc. while 4e and open hand are medium strength at best and terrible at worst. Additionally, monks received more outright new class features in Tasha's than anyone, including the Ranger, and these features have been critical to a lot of the top builds. The flexibility of stats of new races heavily benefits monk as well, and many new races like loxodont and tortle open up entirely new playstyles for monk. Moreover, they actually have feats they can take for damage now thanks to crusher/piercer/slasher.

Finally, wrt magic item support... yeah, they're huge winners here too, relative to formerly. They can use weapons like longswords and bows more easily now, improving magic weapon access. They have had specific monk items released like the dragonhide belt that's now a must have, and all the tattoos are good for them.

Monks are in a way better place than on PHB release.

[Psyren]

Monks are in a way better place than on PHB release.

I'm not disputing that they've improved - but when you compare the kinds of subclasses and features they've gotten (exactly two unambiguously good ones in the form of Kensei and Mercy, and otherwise a slew of mixed to bad) compared to Rangers that can now be the party face or have a workable pet, Barbarians with actual tanking features, Rogues that can now eclipse them in the combat pillar in addition to the other two, and far more magical fighters like Echo and Rune to go alongside EK and AA, I don't think they've made up as much ground as the other martials in the grand scheme.

[Schwann145]

Simply; if you want a combat system that has any thought put into it more than the bare minimum, ya gotta look outside of 5e D&D.
They made this work. They didn't make this work good.