Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kaladon7779 08-20-07, 07:59 AM	OK lastnight during our gaming session we had a disbute about the Battle Fist and the monk character that is using it. It says that the battle fist is a +1 enhancement bonus and that +1 bonus applies to unarmed attacks as well as the slam that a warforged can do. So I'm playing the artificer and I wanted to put infusion "Bane" on his battle fist which would bump the enhancement bonus to +2 and give Bane to a creater type. Now here's the disbute. Our GM says that the +2 bonus and the Bane bonus only applies to slams. And the regular +1 bonus on the Battle Fist would apply to Unarmed Attacks. I explained lastnight to the group that the bane ability and the enhancement bonus would apply to everything becouse by RAW the +1 bonus on it already applies to unarmed attacks, So If I were to make a +5 Battle Fist it would be no different. But the GM and another player says that i'm wrong on that. becouse it says in the Battle Fist description that the battle fist's +1 bonus applies to the Unarmed attacks, and I said right but if the battle fist was a +5 then the description would say +5 bonus applies to the unarmed attacks. Then they said that the Monk's unarmed attacks are classified as knee's, elbows, kicks, headbutts and not just a punching. And I said right but the battle fist says for monks that it increases there unarmed attacks by 1 size catagory, so by RAW it covers all of that already. Could we get some help on this topic please.
Drag0nUL 08-20-07, 09:06 AM	From the ECS (pag.268): '(battlefist) versions with higher enhancement bonus are not uncommon' and 'a warforged monk [...] can add the battlefist's enhancement bonus to his unarmed attack and damage rolls' So, according to RAW, a monk used any enhancements a battlefist has in his unarmed strikes.
Kaladon7779 08-20-07, 09:29 AM	So, according to RAW, a monk used any enhancements a battlefist has in his unarmed strikes. Now how about infusions from artificers? like Say Bane, does that apply to the monks Unarmed Stikes also?
Kid SixXx 08-20-07, 10:11 AM	Now how about infusions from artificers? like Say Bane, does that apply to the monks Unarmed Stikes also? Given the oft debated rule: A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons working in conjunction with the Battlefist rule, I would assume that you would be correct in your logic, unless the spell description for Bane specifically says otherwise. The caveat being that a reasonable DM will probably enforce skill usage in this matter. An artificer isn't a biologist or a sage from induction. Since most Bane effects are targeted against specific types of creatures, it's reasonable to force an artificer to make a DC Skill check vs. an appropriate amount of difficulty to see whether or not the artificer can craft the appropriate Bane effect against the target in question. Bane infusions are pretty powerful in the early goings. The above house rule keeps Bane from being mutually abused by players and DMs, as well as enforces skill use. No sense in taking ranks in skills if you're going to be allowed to metagame and "autoknow" everything.
Drag0nUL 08-20-07, 10:16 AM	Now how about infusions from artificers? like Say Bane, does that apply to the monks Unarmed Stikes also? That might be a slight problem, since the book only states that the enhancement bonus applies, nothing about special abilities. Although as a DM I would allow this as I don't consider a very significant boost to an already sub-par class. However, in the PHB (pag 41) it states that monk unarmed strikes can be considered manufactured weapons for the purpose of spells that improve them. So instead of saying 'I cast bane on the battlefist' just say 'I cast bane on his unarmed strikes'. The effect would be the same, but this time it will be supported by the letter of the rules.
Kaladon7779 08-20-07, 10:43 AM	That might be a slight problem, since the book only states that the enhancement bonus applies, nothing about special abilities. This is where you're wrong, a special ability does apply to the monks unarmed stikes. It says in the battle fist that it increases the monks Unarmed Strikes by 1 size catagory larger, that is a special ability. So what is to stop other abilities from infusions or If I were to craft a Battle Fist with a special Ability on it from working with the Monks Unarmed Strikes, or you know what for anybody that takes the Improved Unarmed Strike Feat. I Monks unarmed strikes figured out that i can just cast an infusion on his unarmed strikes and call it a day. Now my question is the battle fist for other people not just monks.
Drag0nUL 08-20-07, 11:17 AM	This is where you're wrong, a special ability does apply to the monks unarmed stikes. It says in the battle fist that it increases the monks Unarmed Strikes by 1 size catagory larger, that is a special ability. So what is to stop other abilities from infusions or If I were to craft a Battle Fist with a special Ability on it from working with the Monks Unarmed Strikes, or you know what for anybody that takes the Improved Unarmed Strike Feat. I meant magical special abilities, not the damage increase which is inherent to the battlefist. As I stated before, I agree that you should get to add everything a battlefist has to both your slam and your unarmed strikes. However there is a fair share of DM's that think 'unless it is explicitly said you can do it, you can't'.
Kid SixXx 08-20-07, 12:25 PM	Now my question is the battle fist for other people not just monks. The Battlefist is a warforged componant. If you're asking if Warforged Monks are the only class that can use them, then no. Any Warforged can make use of a Battlefist, but a Monk will obviously make optimum use of one (or two). If you're asking if another race can make use of a Battlefist, then the answer is again, no. It is a componant designed specifically to enhance the abilities of a Warforged. The two exceptions being: 1) A humanoid that takes levels the Renegade Mastermaker PrC & receives Battlefist use at 1st level of the PrC. 2) A houserule that allows a humanoid that has Construct Grafts from FoE to attach a Battlefist to an arm graft. So what is to stop other abilities from infusions or If I were to craft a Battle Fist with a special Ability on it from working with the Monks Unarmed Strikes, or you know what for anybody that takes the Improved Unarmed Strike Feat. I've got no clue what you're trying to ask, so I'll approach this from a couple of angles. 1) That would depend on the item creation rules and your DM. I've always been under the impression that most Warforged componants are no longer crafted because either the secrets of their creation were lost, or if their crafting became outlawed when Warforged were given full citizenship via the Treaty of Thronehold. If your DM is a lore nazi, then he may forbid creation of a Battlefist altogether. If not, then the Battlefist is treated as a weapon, so there's nothing that says that it couldn't carry an additional enhancement such as Bane. 2) If you're asking if a Warforged Monk's unarmed strikes can be enhanced with a Bane effect while not wielding a Battlefist, that gets a bit sticky. I'd allow an infusion to work in accordance with the Unarmed Strike rule. If you're asking if a Warforged Monk can be enhanced so that his Unarmed Strikes always have a Bane effect then I'd have to say no. Warforged are able to have their composite plating enhanced as if it were armor, but don't seem to be able to have their appendages enhanced to as if they were magical weapons, so no icy burst punches or goblinoid bane kicks. The exception to this rule being the various tracery (Silver, Cold Iron, etc) feats that provide the appropriate DR to natural weapons or unarmed strikes as per the tracery.
Drag0nUL 08-20-07, 03:01 PM	To Kid SixXx: I think what Kaladon7779 is asking is: If you craft a let's say +2 flaming battelfist and attach it to a warforged monk or any other class with Imp. Unarmed Strike, that character will get: - Unarmed strike damage as if one size larger - +2 on attack and damage rolls with uanrmed strikes - But will he also get the flaming ability with his unarmed strikes?
DarkPawn 08-20-07, 03:21 PM	To Kid SixXx: I think what Kaladon7779 is asking is: If you craft a let's say +2 flaming battelfist and attach it to a warforged monk or any other class with Imp. Unarmed Strike, that character will get: - Unarmed strike damage as if one size larger - +2 on attack and damage rolls with uanrmed strikes - But will he also get the flaming ability with his unarmed strikes? I would see no problem with the battlefist adding this ability if it was permanently enchanted to do so. I'm not sure if this is official or more of a house rule but I wouldn't have a problem with it as a DM.
Nundahl 08-21-07, 06:35 AM	From a RAW perspective and from a DM's perspective, this is totally legal. You infuse the fist, and you're set. However, your DM clearly has an issue with this and wants to houserule that you can't. And you unfortunately need to convince him out of game or go with it, arguing in game will just slow things down and definitely not work. You should clear with him what other house rules he plans on throwing in however, as decisions like this could be crippling to your character plan. Remember that as an Artificer, your infusions work on the 'forged itself, so you could just slap it on him and he'll gain the Bane enchant to his knees, elbows, feet, fist, etc. Bane is a scary thing for DM's, you end up with a low level Monk dealing 1d8+2d6+1+str on every attack, and that gets pretty harsh, not to mention the follow-up slam. Its perfectly legitimate to rule that its just too powerful if your DM wants to, just work with him. End of the day, I don't agree with the limitation, but I understand it.
Kid SixXx 08-21-07, 06:40 AM	To Kid SixXx: I think what Kaladon7779 is asking is: If you craft a let's say +2 flaming battelfist and attach it to a warforged monk or any other class with Imp. Unarmed Strike, that character will get: - Unarmed strike damage as if one size larger - +2 on attack and damage rolls with uanrmed strikes - But will he also get the flaming ability with his unarmed strikes? Given the duality attributed to a Battlefist being treated as a weapon yet affecting Unarmed Strikes, I don't see why that shouldn't be so, although some DM's may only allow the bonuses to apply to only one attack during a FoB since the Battlefist bonuses probably shouldn't affect kicks or strikes with the hand not wearing the Battlefist. Dissecting that would make my head hurt though.
Legdiwena 09-06-07, 01:09 PM	Any bonus on the battlefist would apply as long as the unarmed strike was made with that component, correct?
Dragoloth 09-06-07, 02:51 PM	Just remember that a +1 battlefist with bane on it is a +3 weapon vs. the creature the bane is for.