2 Weapon and Unarmed Combat discrepencies [Archive] - Wizards Community

2 Weapon and Unarmed Combat discrepencies [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
JhyarelleNightwind
01-20-07, 05:00 PM It's been aske before, but I cant find the post for this topic.

If you fight unarmed do you need TWF in order to use both arms (punches, elbows) or legs (kicks, knees) in combat. If you are the weapon, why do you need TWF in unarmed melle combat?

If you use a dagger in one hand (primary) and punch with the other hand (secondary) or kick with Imp Unarmed Strike, do you still need TWF in order to execute the punch or kick? Will it encur high pennalties to throw the punch or kick.

These are for the non monks who like to settle things old school and go fists to cuffs. I say that if you have experience fighting unarmed it's considered that you have TWF for the purose of fighting unarmed.

Weapon in in one hand and fighting unarmed with the other is still up in the air for me. If you heard this before sorry, but it still nags at me that if you can throw a punch with one hand, why cant you do the same with the other in d20 mechanincs with out incuring high penalties on the attack roll. In non martial art fights like boxing two to three hits can occur in round of combat. How can this be done in D&D?
paladin2019
01-20-07, 05:21 PM If you fight unarmed do you need TWF in order to use both arms (punches, elbows) or legs (kicks, knees) in combat. If you are the weapon, why do you need TWF in unarmed melle combat?

Yes. A member of any core PC race has one unarmed attack. To make a second one requires iteractive attacks (to use the one more often) or two-weapon fighting (lower case to distinguish this as the rules rather than the feat) to get the off-hand attack.

If you use a dagger in one hand (primary) and punch with the other hand (secondary) or kick with Imp Unarmed Strike, do you still need TWF in order to execute the punch or kick? Will it encur high pennalties to throw the punch or kick.

No, noone needs Two-Weapon Fighting to fight with two weapons. It just helps. A lot!

These are for the non monks who like to settle things old school and go fists to cuffs. I say that if you have experience fighting unarmed it's considered that you have TWF for the purose of fighting unarmed.

You can house-rule that, but it's not RAW or BTB.
Lady Maedhros
01-20-07, 06:10 PM Unarmed is just generally very ugly mechanically. The thing to remember, despite the nonsense in the kensai PrC about "enchanting both fists separately" or whatever, is that your whole body, with an unarmed strike, is one weapon. Fist, elbow, knee, headbutt, whatever, it's all the same.

If you're fighting with just your unarmed strike, you can treat it like a two-handed weapon, using Power Attack and whatever - this represents your ability to put your whole torso behind your fist or your whole body behind a roundhouse kick and just whale away.

If you're fighting with another weapon and your unarmed strike, you treat it like any other natural weapon, getting a single off-hand attack at -5 with only half your Str - this represents your ability to slice a guy into pieces with your longsword and then quickly kick him in the leg as you're moving away.

Weirdly, a monk can two-weapon fight and flurry if she's got a nunchaku or whatever in her hand, because she now has two weapons - her body and her stick-on-a-rope - which is why Improved Unarmed Strike is just a sloppy concept and needs massive cleanup and simplification.
fatal error
01-20-07, 06:15 PM Weirdly, a monk can two-weapon fight and flurry if she's got a nunchaku or whatever in her hand, because she now has two weapons - her body and her stick-on-a-rope - which is why Improved Unarmed Strike is just a sloppy concept and needs massive cleanup and simplification.

A Monk can two-weapon fight and flurry with just unarmed strikes. In the case of unarmed combat, two-weapon fighting is making a strike with two different body parts in roughly the same time it would take a normal person to make one attack.
paladin2019
01-20-07, 06:17 PM If you're fighting with another weapon and your unarmed strike, you treat it like any other natural weapon, getting a single off-hand attack at -5 with only half your Str - this represents your ability to slice a guy into pieces with your longsword and then quickly kick him in the leg as you're moving away.

No, you use the rules for two-weapon fighting. Most humanoids lack a natural weapon, which is why they attack unarmed. Natural weapon attacks are armed attacks and do not provoke attacks of opportunity, unlike unarmed strikes.

Weirdly, a monk can two-weapon fight and flurry if she's got a nunchaku or whatever in her hand, because she now has two weapons - her body and her stick-on-a-rope - which is why Improved Unarmed Strike is just a sloppy concept and needs massive cleanup and simplification.

No, monks cannot use the rules for two-weapon fighting while flurrying. They do not have off-hands in this instance. The nunchaku is one of the special monk weapons so an attack with it may be part of the normal flurry of blows routine. If a monk is using a non-monk weapon as a main weapon, then a normal (for a monk) unarmed strike may be included as an off-hand weapon in the attack routine.
PhaedrusXY
01-20-07, 06:31 PM No, monks cannot use the rules for two-weapon fighting while flurrying. They do not have off-hands in this instance. Yes they can. Go read the FAQ.
paladin2019
01-20-07, 06:48 PM Yes they can. Go read the FAQ.

Give me a link or a page. The document is too poorly formatted to expect another to easily find cited rulings.
Lady Maedhros
01-20-07, 08:22 PM No, you use the rules for two-weapon fighting. Most humanoids lack a natural weapon, which is why they attack unarmed. Natural weapon attacks are armed attacks and do not provoke attacks of opportunity, unlike unarmed strikes.

Nope, an unarmed strike doesn't provoke an AoO when you're a monk (or any character with IUS). It's an armed attack, "both a natural and manufactured weapon" or whatever the phrasing is, which is why you can greater magic fang or greater magic weapon it.

Give me a link or a page. The document is too poorly formatted to expect another to easily find cited rulings.

Try page 13.
"To add an off-hand attack to a flurry of blows, stack whatever two-weapon penalty the monk has with the penalty (if any) from the flurry. ... If the off-hand attack is a weapon, that weapon isn't available for use in the flurry. For example, a 4th-level monk with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat and a Strength score of 14 decides to use a flurry of blows and decides to throw in an off-hand attack as well..." blah blah examplecakes...

"If the monk in our example has two sais to use with the flurry, plus the off-hand attack, she can use both in the flurry (in which case she must make the off-hand attack with an unarmed strike) or one sai for the off-hand and one with the flurry. The sai used in the off-hand attack is not available for the flurry and vice versa."

You might not think it, but you'll find this info under the "monk" topic.

Note that the evidence for my claim that IUS is a swirling morass of insanity, mechanically, only continues to mount ever higher as this thread progresses.
paladin2019
01-20-07, 08:56 PM Nope, an unarmed strike doesn't provoke an AoO when you're a monk (or any character with IUS).

An unarmed strike provokes and attack of opportunity. The fact that feats and class abilities can protect against this does not change the basic rule.

It's an armed attack, "both a natural and manufactured weapon" or whatever the phrasing is, which is why you can greater magic fang or greater magic weapon it.An unarmed strike is specifically unarmed. The monk's unarmed attack class feature has a special exception to allow more spells than just magic fang to apply to it. However this class feature does not change the monk's unarmed strike into an armed one.

...

Great, another FAQ'd up example of "yep, the rules say this, but I'm the Sage and I don't think it should work that way" :rolleyes:

I love the FAQ
Lady Maedhros
01-21-07, 01:04 AM Some stuff

So... you're just kind of here to disagree with everybody, then, official or otherwise. Okay. Carry on, then. As I believe the OP's issue has been addressed, I shall leave you to your superior understanding of D&D. :tiphat:

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
JhyarelleNightwind 01-20-07, 05:00 PM	It's been aske before, but I cant find the post for this topic. If you fight unarmed do you need TWF in order to use both arms (punches, elbows) or legs (kicks, knees) in combat. If you are the weapon, why do you need TWF in unarmed melle combat? If you use a dagger in one hand (primary) and punch with the other hand (secondary) or kick with Imp Unarmed Strike, do you still need TWF in order to execute the punch or kick? Will it encur high pennalties to throw the punch or kick. These are for the non monks who like to settle things old school and go fists to cuffs. I say that if you have experience fighting unarmed it's considered that you have TWF for the purose of fighting unarmed. Weapon in in one hand and fighting unarmed with the other is still up in the air for me. If you heard this before sorry, but it still nags at me that if you can throw a punch with one hand, why cant you do the same with the other in d20 mechanincs with out incuring high penalties on the attack roll. In non martial art fights like boxing two to three hits can occur in round of combat. How can this be done in D&D?
paladin2019 01-20-07, 05:21 PM	If you fight unarmed do you need TWF in order to use both arms (punches, elbows) or legs (kicks, knees) in combat. If you are the weapon, why do you need TWF in unarmed melle combat? Yes. A member of any core PC race has one unarmed attack. To make a second one requires iteractive attacks (to use the one more often) or two-weapon fighting (lower case to distinguish this as the rules rather than the feat) to get the off-hand attack. If you use a dagger in one hand (primary) and punch with the other hand (secondary) or kick with Imp Unarmed Strike, do you still need TWF in order to execute the punch or kick? Will it encur high pennalties to throw the punch or kick. No, noone needs Two-Weapon Fighting to fight with two weapons. It just helps. A lot! These are for the non monks who like to settle things old school and go fists to cuffs. I say that if you have experience fighting unarmed it's considered that you have TWF for the purose of fighting unarmed. You can house-rule that, but it's not RAW or BTB.
Lady Maedhros 01-20-07, 06:10 PM	Unarmed is just generally very ugly mechanically. The thing to remember, despite the nonsense in the kensai PrC about "enchanting both fists separately" or whatever, is that your whole body, with an unarmed strike, is one weapon. Fist, elbow, knee, headbutt, whatever, it's all the same. If you're fighting with just your unarmed strike, you can treat it like a two-handed weapon, using Power Attack and whatever - this represents your ability to put your whole torso behind your fist or your whole body behind a roundhouse kick and just whale away. If you're fighting with another weapon and your unarmed strike, you treat it like any other natural weapon, getting a single off-hand attack at -5 with only half your Str - this represents your ability to slice a guy into pieces with your longsword and then quickly kick him in the leg as you're moving away. Weirdly, a monk can two-weapon fight and flurry if she's got a nunchaku or whatever in her hand, because she now has two weapons - her body and her stick-on-a-rope - which is why Improved Unarmed Strike is just a sloppy concept and needs massive cleanup and simplification.
fatal error 01-20-07, 06:15 PM	Weirdly, a monk can two-weapon fight and flurry if she's got a nunchaku or whatever in her hand, because she now has two weapons - her body and her stick-on-a-rope - which is why Improved Unarmed Strike is just a sloppy concept and needs massive cleanup and simplification. A Monk can two-weapon fight and flurry with just unarmed strikes. In the case of unarmed combat, two-weapon fighting is making a strike with two different body parts in roughly the same time it would take a normal person to make one attack.
paladin2019 01-20-07, 06:17 PM	If you're fighting with another weapon and your unarmed strike, you treat it like any other natural weapon, getting a single off-hand attack at -5 with only half your Str - this represents your ability to slice a guy into pieces with your longsword and then quickly kick him in the leg as you're moving away. No, you use the rules for two-weapon fighting. Most humanoids lack a natural weapon, which is why they attack unarmed. Natural weapon attacks are armed attacks and do not provoke attacks of opportunity, unlike unarmed strikes. Weirdly, a monk can two-weapon fight and flurry if she's got a nunchaku or whatever in her hand, because she now has two weapons - her body and her stick-on-a-rope - which is why Improved Unarmed Strike is just a sloppy concept and needs massive cleanup and simplification. No, monks cannot use the rules for two-weapon fighting while flurrying. They do not have off-hands in this instance. The nunchaku is one of the special monk weapons so an attack with it may be part of the normal flurry of blows routine. If a monk is using a non-monk weapon as a main weapon, then a normal (for a monk) unarmed strike may be included as an off-hand weapon in the attack routine.
PhaedrusXY 01-20-07, 06:31 PM	No, monks cannot use the rules for two-weapon fighting while flurrying. They do not have off-hands in this instance. Yes they can. Go read the FAQ.
paladin2019 01-20-07, 06:48 PM	Yes they can. Go read the FAQ. Give me a link or a page. The document is too poorly formatted to expect another to easily find cited rulings.
Lady Maedhros 01-20-07, 08:22 PM	No, you use the rules for two-weapon fighting. Most humanoids lack a natural weapon, which is why they attack unarmed. Natural weapon attacks are armed attacks and do not provoke attacks of opportunity, unlike unarmed strikes. Nope, an unarmed strike doesn't provoke an AoO when you're a monk (or any character with IUS). It's an armed attack, "both a natural and manufactured weapon" or whatever the phrasing is, which is why you can greater magic fang or greater magic weapon it. Give me a link or a page. The document is too poorly formatted to expect another to easily find cited rulings. Try page 13. "To add an off-hand attack to a flurry of blows, stack whatever two-weapon penalty the monk has with the penalty (if any) from the flurry. ... If the off-hand attack is a weapon, that weapon isn't available for use in the flurry. For example, a 4th-level monk with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat and a Strength score of 14 decides to use a flurry of blows and decides to throw in an off-hand attack as well..." blah blah examplecakes... "If the monk in our example has two sais to use with the flurry, plus the off-hand attack, she can use both in the flurry (in which case she must make the off-hand attack with an unarmed strike) or one sai for the off-hand and one with the flurry. The sai used in the off-hand attack is not available for the flurry and vice versa." You might not think it, but you'll find this info under the "monk" topic. Note that the evidence for my claim that IUS is a swirling morass of insanity, mechanically, only continues to mount ever higher as this thread progresses.
paladin2019 01-20-07, 08:56 PM	Nope, an unarmed strike doesn't provoke an AoO when you're a monk (or any character with IUS). An unarmed strike provokes and attack of opportunity. The fact that feats and class abilities can protect against this does not change the basic rule. It's an armed attack, "both a natural and manufactured weapon" or whatever the phrasing is, which is why you can greater magic fang or greater magic weapon it.An unarmed strike is specifically unarmed. The monk's unarmed attack class feature has a special exception to allow more spells than just magic fang to apply to it. However this class feature does not change the monk's unarmed strike into an armed one. ... Great, another FAQ'd up example of "yep, the rules say this, but I'm the Sage and I don't think it should work that way" :rolleyes: I love the FAQ
Lady Maedhros 01-21-07, 01:04 AM	Some stuff So... you're just kind of here to disagree with everybody, then, official or otherwise. Okay. Carry on, then. As I believe the OP's issue has been addressed, I shall leave you to your superior understanding of D&D. :tiphat: