are unarmed attacks simple weapons? [Archive] - Wizards Community

are unarmed attacks simple weapons? [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
G_Mancer
02-08-07, 10:38 AM if you are proficiant with simple weapons, are yu proficiant with unarmed attacks? on the tapble in the PHB, unarmed attacks are a sucatogory of simple weapons-thisis why i ask.
and when i say unarmed attacks i mean all unarmed attacks,including gauntlets and stuff. not specific to just unarmred strikes.
Neutronium_Dragon
02-08-07, 10:55 AM Everyone and everything is proficient with their unarmed strikes and natural weapons unless stated otherwise, regardless of what weapon proficiencies they have.
RavenDrake
02-08-07, 11:08 AM The unarmed strike(and by extension the gauntleted strike) are akin to natural weapons in that all humanoid (by shape, not just type) creatures can make unarmed strikes with "proficiency". That is, they suffer no penalties on the to hit roll, but deal non-lethal damage and provoke attacks of opportunity when used.

Other "unarmed" attacks (such as the Spiked Gauntlet or Armour Spikes) are relevent to the weapon category of the item that proveds the attack. The Spiked Gauntlet is a Simple weapon. Characters not specific with that particular weapon(such as Wizards) who attempt to use it suffer a -4 non-proficiency penalty. The same is true of Armour Spikes, Armour Blades, or other weapons which grant an "unarmed attack".
Zumarai
02-08-07, 11:32 AM Apparently, monks are not proficient with Unarmed Strike.
tiluvias99
02-08-07, 04:00 PM Everyone and everything is proficient with their unarmed strikes and natural weapons unless stated otherwise, regardless of what weapon proficiencies they have.Untrue. Look in your monster manual. Notice that, under the humanoid type features, proficiency with natural weapons is absent, while present for nearly every other tytpe.
inkeyeshasthecoolestart
02-08-07, 04:06 PM Everyone is proficient with unarmed strikes. Unamrmed Strike isnt the same thing as a natural weapon. Humans dont have natural weapons which why they don't have natural weapon proficinecy.
SALDAR
02-09-07, 12:30 AM From the SRD under Weapons in the Equipment section:
"Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons: Anybody but a druid, monk, rogue, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of mainly simple weapons and possibly also some martial or even exotic weapons. A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls."

Unarmed strikes and gauntlets are simple weapons, so if you are proficient with simple weapons then yes. As noted, not everyone is proficient with unarmed strikes, notably druids, monks, rogues, and wizards.

Apparently, monks are not proficient with Unarmed Strike.
At least not with the simple weapon listed on the weapons table. If they were this would be redundent since they have a class feature called Unarmed Strike.
Thomar_of_Uointer
02-09-07, 12:38 AM Anybody but a druid, monk, rogue, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons.

There's your answer. (Improved Unarmed Strike grants no proficiency, it just negates the penalty for lethal damage. And there's no mention of proficiency in the monk's class abilities.) All creatures are proficient with unarmed strikes, and suffer no penalties, because it would be silly for monks to be nonproficient with their man weapon.
Zumarai
02-09-07, 04:53 AM because it would be silly for monks to be nonproficient with their man weapon.

Of course it's silly, but even the designers have admitted they goofed, and that by RAW monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes.
RavenDrake
02-09-07, 10:26 AM What?! Where on earth did you get that Zumarai? I mean that exact quote you used, because I was under the impression that all humanoids were proficient with thier unarmed strikes.
SALDAR
02-09-07, 10:58 AM As written monks do not need to be proficient with the simple weapon of unarmed strike. Why? Because they have a class feature that replaces proficiency with that weapon.

If the designers admittedly goofed, why have they not put unarmed strike on the monk's weapon proficiency list in the errata, as they did with the sap on the rogue's list?
jaelis
02-09-07, 01:08 PM If the designers admittedly goofed, why have they not put unarmed strike on the monk's weapon proficiency list in the errata, as they did with the sap on the rogue's list?

Because no sane person would make a monk take a nonproficiency penalty.

Whether wizards are proficient with their unarmed strikes is maybe a more interesting question, since one could see ruling it either way.
tarkin
02-09-07, 01:59 PM The feat Improved Unarmed Strike should be considered to make you proficient with it.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
G_Mancer 02-08-07, 10:38 AM	if you are proficiant with simple weapons, are yu proficiant with unarmed attacks? on the tapble in the PHB, unarmed attacks are a sucatogory of simple weapons-thisis why i ask. and when i say unarmed attacks i mean all unarmed attacks,including gauntlets and stuff. not specific to just unarmred strikes.
Neutronium_Dragon 02-08-07, 10:55 AM	Everyone and everything is proficient with their unarmed strikes and natural weapons unless stated otherwise, regardless of what weapon proficiencies they have.
RavenDrake 02-08-07, 11:08 AM	The unarmed strike(and by extension the gauntleted strike) are akin to natural weapons in that all humanoid (by shape, not just type) creatures can make unarmed strikes with "proficiency". That is, they suffer no penalties on the to hit roll, but deal non-lethal damage and provoke attacks of opportunity when used. Other "unarmed" attacks (such as the Spiked Gauntlet or Armour Spikes) are relevent to the weapon category of the item that proveds the attack. The Spiked Gauntlet is a Simple weapon. Characters not specific with that particular weapon(such as Wizards) who attempt to use it suffer a -4 non-proficiency penalty. The same is true of Armour Spikes, Armour Blades, or other weapons which grant an "unarmed attack".
Zumarai 02-08-07, 11:32 AM	Apparently, monks are not proficient with Unarmed Strike.
tiluvias99 02-08-07, 04:00 PM	Everyone and everything is proficient with their unarmed strikes and natural weapons unless stated otherwise, regardless of what weapon proficiencies they have.Untrue. Look in your monster manual. Notice that, under the humanoid type features, proficiency with natural weapons is absent, while present for nearly every other tytpe.
inkeyeshasthecoolestart 02-08-07, 04:06 PM	Everyone is proficient with unarmed strikes. Unamrmed Strike isnt the same thing as a natural weapon. Humans dont have natural weapons which why they don't have natural weapon proficinecy.
SALDAR 02-09-07, 12:30 AM	From the SRD under Weapons in the Equipment section: "Simple, Martial, and Exotic Weapons: Anybody but a druid, monk, rogue, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. Barbarians, fighters, paladins, and rangers are proficient with all simple and all martial weapons. Characters of other classes are proficient with an assortment of mainly simple weapons and possibly also some martial or even exotic weapons. A character who uses a weapon with which he or she is not proficient takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls." Unarmed strikes and gauntlets are simple weapons, so if you are proficient with simple weapons then yes. As noted, not everyone is proficient with unarmed strikes, notably druids, monks, rogues, and wizards. Apparently, monks are not proficient with Unarmed Strike. At least not with the simple weapon listed on the weapons table. If they were this would be redundent since they have a class feature called Unarmed Strike.
Thomar_of_Uointer 02-09-07, 12:38 AM	Anybody but a druid, monk, rogue, or wizard is proficient with all simple weapons. There's your answer. (Improved Unarmed Strike grants no proficiency, it just negates the penalty for lethal damage. And there's no mention of proficiency in the monk's class abilities.) All creatures are proficient with unarmed strikes, and suffer no penalties, because it would be silly for monks to be nonproficient with their man weapon.
Zumarai 02-09-07, 04:53 AM	because it would be silly for monks to be nonproficient with their man weapon. Of course it's silly, but even the designers have admitted they goofed, and that by RAW monks are not proficient with unarmed strikes.
RavenDrake 02-09-07, 10:26 AM	What?! Where on earth did you get that Zumarai? I mean that exact quote you used, because I was under the impression that all humanoids were proficient with thier unarmed strikes.
SALDAR 02-09-07, 10:58 AM	As written monks do not need to be proficient with the simple weapon of unarmed strike. Why? Because they have a class feature that replaces proficiency with that weapon. If the designers admittedly goofed, why have they not put unarmed strike on the monk's weapon proficiency list in the errata, as they did with the sap on the rogue's list?
jaelis 02-09-07, 01:08 PM	If the designers admittedly goofed, why have they not put unarmed strike on the monk's weapon proficiency list in the errata, as they did with the sap on the rogue's list? Because no sane person would make a monk take a nonproficiency penalty. Whether wizards are proficient with their unarmed strikes is maybe a more interesting question, since one could see ruling it either way.
tarkin 02-09-07, 01:59 PM	The feat Improved Unarmed Strike should be considered to make you proficient with it.