Multiattack + Monk [Archive] - Wizards Community

Multiattack + Monk [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
DeathlessJuan
03-21-08, 03:18 PM I know that monk's unarmed strikes are treated as both manufactured and natural weapons for spells and effects that enhance them.

RAW, this would not allow a monk to take Multiattack if he possessed two additional natural weapons (ie, 2 claw attacks + unarmed strikes).

What are your thoughts on the matter?

EDIT: If this has been discussed before, can I get a link? Thanks
Mojo_Rat
03-21-08, 06:45 PM You can always make a natural attack at -5 as a secondary attack. In the case of a creature witht wo claws it works like this

1 hand is assmed to be used up making the unarmed strikes, and the other can be clawed with so a level 8 monk with Flurry would be

Primary +5 +5 +0
Secondary Claw 0
DeathlessJuan
03-21-08, 06:56 PM Well, a monk can make an unarmed strike with any part of his body. This is why a monk can use a two handed quarter staff and still smack someone with his flurry of blows (unarmed strike). Knees, elbows, shins, feet, headbutts, etc can be used as unarmed strikes (any part of a monk's body)

My main worry is the -5 for secondary natural attacks

Flurry: Unarmed strike + 2 claw attacks (ie, kick + kick + claw + claw) would look like this (assume BAB = 0 without any modifiers) -2/-2/-7/-7.

Getting multiattack will reduce this to -2/-2/-4/-4, which is a lot better than without it.

Is getting multiattack with a monk with 2 claw attacks worth it? At lvl 20, it could like like this, +15/+15/+15/+10/+5 and +13/+13 (or +10/+10 without multiattack)

Would any DM's allow a monk to take Multiattack, assuming the unarmed strike meets the requirement of 1 natural weapon (it doesnt, but hypothetically)?
G_Mancer
03-21-08, 08:45 PM oops
blade265
03-21-08, 09:26 PM IMO, no to the use of claws and bite with flurry of blows as they are not classed as special monk weapons for FoB's.
dman11235
03-21-08, 10:33 PM RAW no but I'd let all natural weapon to be used in flurry. And yes a monk could take Multi-attack, but it would do him no good unless he had a natural weapon such as a claw or bite. Since the US follows the weapon mechanic for striking things, stuff that affect weapon attacks would work on it, but MA wouldn't.
groveborn
03-22-08, 06:59 PM The Monk's unarmed strikes count as natural weapons, so yeah, one could benefit. It's just not worth it. One could also use two weapon fighting combined with a flurry, which is nearly the same.
dman11235
03-22-08, 10:07 PM Nearly the same....but better. And you can't benefit from it since your unarmed strike is not a secondary natural attack. It is a natural attack, but only for certain things. And it's not a primary or secondary natural attack at any time, it's a manufactured weapon for the purposes of attacks.
groveborn
03-22-08, 10:23 PM Nearly the same....but better. And you can't benefit from it since your unarmed strike is not a secondary natural attack. It is a natural attack, but only for certain things. And it's not a primary or secondary natural attack at any time, it's a manufactured weapon for the purposes of attacks.

I don't recall reading anything that says this. I recall seeing that it counts as both. It's definitely a natural weapon. This is mentioned several times throughout the rules.

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.

This is obviously speaking to any effect at all that can enhance either.
dman11235
03-23-08, 01:13 AM Well, does it get iterative attacks? Yes. Can you use it as a secondary weapon without a penalty to your primary? No. Therefore, it does not count as a natural attack for the purposes of attack sequence, and thus you will not benefit from taking this feat unless you have a natural attack other than an US.

USs have always been troublesome in the rules. I have made it my mission to clear up confusion. Well, sort of. I guess my true mission is PEACHing, but this is sort of a secondary mission.
blade265
03-23-08, 06:48 AM An unarmed strike is not a natural weapon, nor is it a manufactured weapon, it is an unarmed strike. The only time it is classed as a natural weapon or a manufactured weapon is "for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons". The only time that it is classed as either one is when you need to enhance/improve your unarmed strike.
Suspect_Unusual
03-23-08, 02:07 PM An unarmed strike is not a natural weapon, nor is it a manufactured weapon, it is an unarmed strike. The only time it is classed as a natural weapon or a manufactured weapon is "for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons". The only time that it is classed as either one is when you need to enhance/improve your unarmed strike.

Magic Fang specifically calls unarmed strikes natural weapons without the "for this spell" qualifier. Magic Weapon, for unarmed strikes, directs you to Magic Fang. This is for a non-monk unarmed strike.

The FAQ states that a Monk's unarmed strike qualifies the monk for Improved Natural Attack even if he doesn't have any other natural weapons. Multiattack's prerequisite is 3 natural attacks. IF we take the FAQ as correct, then IF a monk has two other natural attacks, he qualifies for Multiattack using his unarmed strike as a natural weapon, due to precedent from both core magic and FAQ-based interpretation.

Is this undeniably true? No, this takes a FAQ ruling that was fairly controversial in its day and utilizes it as precedent. Is it balanced? Yeah, probably - secondary natural weapons, as a general rule, do not pack much of a punch, and that's true even when the secondary natural attack is at a mere -2 to attack instead of -5. The monk had to pay, in some way, to get those two natural attacks... letting him use a feat to increase his chance to hit with a fairly weak attack (especially combined with flurry of blows, which decreases attack by an additional -2) doesn't strike me as such a horrible thing.

*shrug*
DeathlessJuan
03-24-08, 01:46 PM Thanks for your responses. They were very helpful. My DM has house ruled that an unarmed strike is a natural attack, even though it would normally provoke an AoO and since a Monk can deal lethal damage with this attack, I could use Multiattack with it.

So, my character is level 5 with a BAB of +3, dex 22 = +6 to attack and small size gives another +1. Total attack bonus = +10 with weapon finesse. Using Flurry = +8/+8 and tacking on multiattack nets me +8/+8/+6/+6.

This is great for a level 5 character, even if his unarmed strikes do 1d4+1 and natural 1d3+1. So I have a small character that can scratch you to death. Sweet. Now, to get pounce and improved multiattack

EDIT: If anyone wanted to know my build. Whisper Gnome + Bone Creature Dragon Shaman 2/ Rogue 1 / Monk 1, taking multiattack and Ascetic rogue. Fractional BAB variant and multiclass exp penalties apply. I took Dragon Shaman to get Vigor (fast healing 1) since I'm undead and to get Skill Focus (move silently) for free
groveborn
03-24-08, 04:55 PM Thanks for your responses. They were very helpful. My DM has house ruled that an unarmed strike is a natural attack, even though it would normally provoke an AoO and since a Monk can deal lethal damage with this attack, I could use Multiattack with it.

So, my character is level 5 with a BAB of +3, dex 22 = +6 to attack and small size gives another +1. Total attack bonus = +10 with weapon finesse. Using Flurry = +8/+8 and tacking on multiattack nets me +8/+8/+6/+6.

This is great for a level 5 character, even if his unarmed strikes do 1d4+1 and natural 1d3+1. So I have a small character that can scratch you to death. Sweet. Now, to get pounce and improved multiattack

EDIT: If anyone wanted to know my build. Whisper Gnome + Bone Creature Dragon Shaman 2/ Rogue 1 / Monk 1, taking multiattack and Ascetic rogue. Fractional BAB variant and multiclass exp penalties apply. I took Dragon Shaman to get Vigor (fast healing 1) since I'm undead and to get Skill Focus (move silently) for free

Monks do not provoke AoO with their unarmed strikes. They have Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat, which prevents that AoO.
DeathlessJuan
03-24-08, 06:54 PM Monks do not provoke AoO with their unarmed strikes. They have Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat, which prevents that AoO.

Aye. I must not have been clear in my post. That was this reason that my DM ruled that the "Unarmed Strike" ability of the monk (IE, improved unarmed strike feat) counted as a natural weapon. Manufactured Weapons / natural weapon do not provoke AoO's and since Improved unarmed strike eliminated that from a creatures 'unarmed attack' then it was basically a 'natural weapon'.
dman11235
03-25-08, 01:33 AM Wait, what? The HR wasn't required. It already is so.
DeathlessJuan
03-25-08, 11:44 AM Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)?

I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread.
jaelis
03-25-08, 11:55 AM I agree that since the Multiattack feat does not improve your unarmed strike, you shouldn't able to treat your unarmed strike as a natural weapon to qualify for it.

But that is slicing things pretty thin. The rules and FAQ seem to simply treat a monk's unarmed strike as a natural weapon for the purpose of everything but how attacks are resolved. I'd probably just go with that.
groveborn
03-26-08, 11:36 AM Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)?

I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread.

Faq, rules of the game, general consensuses. Ok, maybe not the last.
DeathlessJuan
03-26-08, 11:57 AM Unless you can pull out a specific 'in book' reference to a monk's unarmed strike being counted as a natural weapon (other than the quote I posted earlier, which doesn't apply to multiattack), then it will remain nothing but a house rule that everyone (or almost everyone) uses.

I do not mean to sound abrasive if it comes across in that way, but I am a stickler for rules. As written or as intended, when written is not clear enough. I do not want to look back and wince in surprise when I find out I have been playing incorrectly as I recount past experiences with my character. As long as I know its a house rule, I am fine with that.
Suspect_Unusual
03-26-08, 11:41 PM Unless you can pull out a specific 'in book' reference to a monk's unarmed strike being counted as a natural weapon (other than the quote I posted earlier, which doesn't apply to multiattack), then it will remain nothing but a house rule that everyone (or almost everyone) uses.

I do not mean to sound abrasive if it comes across in that way, but I am a stickler for rules. As written or as intended, when written is not clear enough. I do not want to look back and wince in surprise when I find out I have been playing incorrectly as I recount past experiences with my character. As long as I know its a house rule, I am fine with that.

Magic Weapon calls an unarmed strike a natural weapon, and has no qualification in it that states it is such ONLY for the spell.

An unarmed strike is most certainly not a manufactured weapon. Weapons seem to be differentiated as either a natural weapon or manufactured weapon.

There's no specific place where it states an unarmed strike IS a natural weapon (except in the Magic Weapon and Magic Fang spell description,s which you don't seem to find convincing, despite the lack of a "for this spell only" qualifier), but there's a great deal of implication that it is so, including the more obvious similarity to natural weapons than to manufactured weapons.

The game can't explicitly state everything that can easily be inferred. I'd argue that the inference is pretty clear all on it's own, but others might disagree. In this case, it actually DOES explicitly state what an unarmed strike is (it's a natural weapon), in the Magic Weapon and Magic Fang spell descriptions.
risner
03-27-08, 12:00 AM I know that monk's unarmed strikes are treated as both manufactured and natural weapons for spells and effects that enhance them.

RAW, this would not allow a monk to take Multiattack if he possessed two additional natural weapons (ie, 2 claw attacks + unarmed strikes).

What are your thoughts on the matter?

EDIT: If this has been discussed before, can I get a link? Thanks

You can't take (even a monk) Multiattack without having 3 or more natural weapons. A monk with 2 claws has only 2 natural weapons.

Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)?

I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread.

There is no rule except in the Monk class abilities. The only other place unarmed is grouped with natural weapons is in some spells, which only consider them natural for the purpose of the spell.

I will admit this is a heavily debated topic tho, so you will find people that feel strongly on both sides, so it is best to ask your dm because the RAW is absolutely not clear on the matter.
Suspect_Unusual
03-27-08, 12:06 AM Where does it state it only considers unarmed strikes natural weapons for the purposes of those spells?

I don't see the text in Magic Fang OR Magic Weapon stating so...
Mojo_Rat
03-27-08, 12:15 AM It sounds like the Op's DM has house ruled on the matter of the whole thing but I wanted to add.

Unarmed strike by itself is no qualification for multitattack. Its a Single 'weapon' Weather natural or not. Although claws used as a secondary attack probly qualifies. But it would only boost the secondary attack (in the example claws)

Lastly for some reason that Is not entirely clear. While you can technically attack with any bodypart All the FAQ examples that I have seen show that you have to give up one of your claw attacks. Presumably it is being used in the unarmed strike part of the attack and so cant be used for the claws.
risner
03-27-08, 04:19 AM Where does it state it only considers unarmed strikes natural weapons for the purposes of those spells?

I don't see the text in Magic Fang OR Magic Weapon stating so...

Your only support is inside a spell and spells by design break normal rules.

There isn't anything in any other part of the rules that equates Unarmed Strike to Natural Weapon and they are handled extraordinarily differently all throughout the rules.

This has been heavily debated in the past and unfortunately there isn't anything that proves either side in the rules, the errata, or the FAQ. So it comes down to a DM call.
jaelis
03-27-08, 07:57 AM Magic Weapon calls an unarmed strike a natural weapon, and has no qualification in it that states it is such ONLY for the spell.

So you would say on that basis that anyone (not just a monk) could take INA for their unarmed strike? I think the FAQ discussion contradicts that, since it specifically calls out the monks special ability as letting her do it.
Frozen Yakman
03-27-08, 09:18 AM Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)?

I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread.

Your DM is the official source.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
DeathlessJuan 03-21-08, 03:18 PM	I know that monk's unarmed strikes are treated as both manufactured and natural weapons for spells and effects that enhance them. RAW, this would not allow a monk to take Multiattack if he possessed two additional natural weapons (ie, 2 claw attacks + unarmed strikes). What are your thoughts on the matter? EDIT: If this has been discussed before, can I get a link? Thanks
Mojo_Rat 03-21-08, 06:45 PM	You can always make a natural attack at -5 as a secondary attack. In the case of a creature witht wo claws it works like this 1 hand is assmed to be used up making the unarmed strikes, and the other can be clawed with so a level 8 monk with Flurry would be Primary +5 +5 +0 Secondary Claw 0
DeathlessJuan 03-21-08, 06:56 PM	Well, a monk can make an unarmed strike with any part of his body. This is why a monk can use a two handed quarter staff and still smack someone with his flurry of blows (unarmed strike). Knees, elbows, shins, feet, headbutts, etc can be used as unarmed strikes (any part of a monk's body) My main worry is the -5 for secondary natural attacks Flurry: Unarmed strike + 2 claw attacks (ie, kick + kick + claw + claw) would look like this (assume BAB = 0 without any modifiers) -2/-2/-7/-7. Getting multiattack will reduce this to -2/-2/-4/-4, which is a lot better than without it. Is getting multiattack with a monk with 2 claw attacks worth it? At lvl 20, it could like like this, +15/+15/+15/+10/+5 and +13/+13 (or +10/+10 without multiattack) Would any DM's allow a monk to take Multiattack, assuming the unarmed strike meets the requirement of 1 natural weapon (it doesnt, but hypothetically)?
G_Mancer 03-21-08, 08:45 PM	oops
blade265 03-21-08, 09:26 PM	IMO, no to the use of claws and bite with flurry of blows as they are not classed as special monk weapons for FoB's.
dman11235 03-21-08, 10:33 PM	RAW no but I'd let all natural weapon to be used in flurry. And yes a monk could take Multi-attack, but it would do him no good unless he had a natural weapon such as a claw or bite. Since the US follows the weapon mechanic for striking things, stuff that affect weapon attacks would work on it, but MA wouldn't.
groveborn 03-22-08, 06:59 PM	The Monk's unarmed strikes count as natural weapons, so yeah, one could benefit. It's just not worth it. One could also use two weapon fighting combined with a flurry, which is nearly the same.
dman11235 03-22-08, 10:07 PM	Nearly the same....but better. And you can't benefit from it since your unarmed strike is not a secondary natural attack. It is a natural attack, but only for certain things. And it's not a primary or secondary natural attack at any time, it's a manufactured weapon for the purposes of attacks.
groveborn 03-22-08, 10:23 PM	Nearly the same....but better. And you can't benefit from it since your unarmed strike is not a secondary natural attack. It is a natural attack, but only for certain things. And it's not a primary or secondary natural attack at any time, it's a manufactured weapon for the purposes of attacks. I don't recall reading anything that says this. I recall seeing that it counts as both. It's definitely a natural weapon. This is mentioned several times throughout the rules. 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. This is obviously speaking to any effect at all that can enhance either.
dman11235 03-23-08, 01:13 AM	Well, does it get iterative attacks? Yes. Can you use it as a secondary weapon without a penalty to your primary? No. Therefore, it does not count as a natural attack for the purposes of attack sequence, and thus you will not benefit from taking this feat unless you have a natural attack other than an US. USs have always been troublesome in the rules. I have made it my mission to clear up confusion. Well, sort of. I guess my true mission is PEACHing, but this is sort of a secondary mission.
blade265 03-23-08, 06:48 AM	An unarmed strike is not a natural weapon, nor is it a manufactured weapon, it is an unarmed strike. The only time it is classed as a natural weapon or a manufactured weapon is "for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons". The only time that it is classed as either one is when you need to enhance/improve your unarmed strike.
Suspect_Unusual 03-23-08, 02:07 PM	An unarmed strike is not a natural weapon, nor is it a manufactured weapon, it is an unarmed strike. The only time it is classed as a natural weapon or a manufactured weapon is "for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons". The only time that it is classed as either one is when you need to enhance/improve your unarmed strike. Magic Fang specifically calls unarmed strikes natural weapons without the "for this spell" qualifier. Magic Weapon, for unarmed strikes, directs you to Magic Fang. This is for a non-monk unarmed strike. The FAQ states that a Monk's unarmed strike qualifies the monk for Improved Natural Attack even if he doesn't have any other natural weapons. Multiattack's prerequisite is 3 natural attacks. IF we take the FAQ as correct, then IF a monk has two other natural attacks, he qualifies for Multiattack using his unarmed strike as a natural weapon, due to precedent from both core magic and FAQ-based interpretation. Is this undeniably true? No, this takes a FAQ ruling that was fairly controversial in its day and utilizes it as precedent. Is it balanced? Yeah, probably - secondary natural weapons, as a general rule, do not pack much of a punch, and that's true even when the secondary natural attack is at a mere -2 to attack instead of -5. The monk had to pay, in some way, to get those two natural attacks... letting him use a feat to increase his chance to hit with a fairly weak attack (especially combined with flurry of blows, which decreases attack by an additional -2) doesn't strike me as such a horrible thing. shrug
DeathlessJuan 03-24-08, 01:46 PM	Thanks for your responses. They were very helpful. My DM has house ruled that an unarmed strike is a natural attack, even though it would normally provoke an AoO and since a Monk can deal lethal damage with this attack, I could use Multiattack with it. So, my character is level 5 with a BAB of +3, dex 22 = +6 to attack and small size gives another +1. Total attack bonus = +10 with weapon finesse. Using Flurry = +8/+8 and tacking on multiattack nets me +8/+8/+6/+6. This is great for a level 5 character, even if his unarmed strikes do 1d4+1 and natural 1d3+1. So I have a small character that can scratch you to death. Sweet. Now, to get pounce and improved multiattack EDIT: If anyone wanted to know my build. Whisper Gnome + Bone Creature Dragon Shaman 2/ Rogue 1 / Monk 1, taking multiattack and Ascetic rogue. Fractional BAB variant and multiclass exp penalties apply. I took Dragon Shaman to get Vigor (fast healing 1) since I'm undead and to get Skill Focus (move silently) for free
groveborn 03-24-08, 04:55 PM	Thanks for your responses. They were very helpful. My DM has house ruled that an unarmed strike is a natural attack, even though it would normally provoke an AoO and since a Monk can deal lethal damage with this attack, I could use Multiattack with it. So, my character is level 5 with a BAB of +3, dex 22 = +6 to attack and small size gives another +1. Total attack bonus = +10 with weapon finesse. Using Flurry = +8/+8 and tacking on multiattack nets me +8/+8/+6/+6. This is great for a level 5 character, even if his unarmed strikes do 1d4+1 and natural 1d3+1. So I have a small character that can scratch you to death. Sweet. Now, to get pounce and improved multiattack EDIT: If anyone wanted to know my build. Whisper Gnome + Bone Creature Dragon Shaman 2/ Rogue 1 / Monk 1, taking multiattack and Ascetic rogue. Fractional BAB variant and multiclass exp penalties apply. I took Dragon Shaman to get Vigor (fast healing 1) since I'm undead and to get Skill Focus (move silently) for free Monks do not provoke AoO with their unarmed strikes. They have Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat, which prevents that AoO.
DeathlessJuan 03-24-08, 06:54 PM	Monks do not provoke AoO with their unarmed strikes. They have Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat, which prevents that AoO. Aye. I must not have been clear in my post. That was this reason that my DM ruled that the "Unarmed Strike" ability of the monk (IE, improved unarmed strike feat) counted as a natural weapon. Manufactured Weapons / natural weapon do not provoke AoO's and since Improved unarmed strike eliminated that from a creatures 'unarmed attack' then it was basically a 'natural weapon'.
dman11235 03-25-08, 01:33 AM	Wait, what? The HR wasn't required. It already is so.
DeathlessJuan 03-25-08, 11:44 AM	Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)? I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread.
jaelis 03-25-08, 11:55 AM	I agree that since the Multiattack feat does not improve your unarmed strike, you shouldn't able to treat your unarmed strike as a natural weapon to qualify for it. But that is slicing things pretty thin. The rules and FAQ seem to simply treat a monk's unarmed strike as a natural weapon for the purpose of everything but how attacks are resolved. I'd probably just go with that.
groveborn 03-26-08, 11:36 AM	Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)? I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread. Faq, rules of the game, general consensuses. Ok, maybe not the last.
DeathlessJuan 03-26-08, 11:57 AM	Unless you can pull out a specific 'in book' reference to a monk's unarmed strike being counted as a natural weapon (other than the quote I posted earlier, which doesn't apply to multiattack), then it will remain nothing but a house rule that everyone (or almost everyone) uses. I do not mean to sound abrasive if it comes across in that way, but I am a stickler for rules. As written or as intended, when written is not clear enough. I do not want to look back and wince in surprise when I find out I have been playing incorrectly as I recount past experiences with my character. As long as I know its a house rule, I am fine with that.
Suspect_Unusual 03-26-08, 11:41 PM	Unless you can pull out a specific 'in book' reference to a monk's unarmed strike being counted as a natural weapon (other than the quote I posted earlier, which doesn't apply to multiattack), then it will remain nothing but a house rule that everyone (or almost everyone) uses. I do not mean to sound abrasive if it comes across in that way, but I am a stickler for rules. As written or as intended, when written is not clear enough. I do not want to look back and wince in surprise when I find out I have been playing incorrectly as I recount past experiences with my character. As long as I know its a house rule, I am fine with that. Magic Weapon calls an unarmed strike a natural weapon, and has no qualification in it that states it is such ONLY for the spell. An unarmed strike is most certainly not a manufactured weapon. Weapons seem to be differentiated as either a natural weapon or manufactured weapon. There's no specific place where it states an unarmed strike IS a natural weapon (except in the Magic Weapon and Magic Fang spell description,s which you don't seem to find convincing, despite the lack of a "for this spell only" qualifier), but there's a great deal of implication that it is so, including the more obvious similarity to natural weapons than to manufactured weapons. The game can't explicitly state everything that can easily be inferred. I'd argue that the inference is pretty clear all on it's own, but others might disagree. In this case, it actually DOES explicitly state what an unarmed strike is (it's a natural weapon), in the Magic Weapon and Magic Fang spell descriptions.
risner 03-27-08, 12:00 AM	I know that monk's unarmed strikes are treated as both manufactured and natural weapons for spells and effects that enhance them. RAW, this would not allow a monk to take Multiattack if he possessed two additional natural weapons (ie, 2 claw attacks + unarmed strikes). What are your thoughts on the matter? EDIT: If this has been discussed before, can I get a link? Thanks You can't take (even a monk) Multiattack without having 3 or more natural weapons. A monk with 2 claws has only 2 natural weapons. Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)? I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread. There is no rule except in the Monk class abilities. The only other place unarmed is grouped with natural weapons is in some spells, which only consider them natural for the purpose of the spell. I will admit this is a heavily debated topic tho, so you will find people that feel strongly on both sides, so it is best to ask your dm because the RAW is absolutely not clear on the matter.
Suspect_Unusual 03-27-08, 12:06 AM	Where does it state it only considers unarmed strikes natural weapons for the purposes of those spells? I don't see the text in Magic Fang OR Magic Weapon stating so...
Mojo_Rat 03-27-08, 12:15 AM	It sounds like the Op's DM has house ruled on the matter of the whole thing but I wanted to add. Unarmed strike by itself is no qualification for multitattack. Its a Single 'weapon' Weather natural or not. Although claws used as a secondary attack probly qualifies. But it would only boost the secondary attack (in the example claws) Lastly for some reason that Is not entirely clear. While you can technically attack with any bodypart All the FAQ examples that I have seen show that you have to give up one of your claw attacks. Presumably it is being used in the unarmed strike part of the attack and so cant be used for the claws.
risner 03-27-08, 04:19 AM	Where does it state it only considers unarmed strikes natural weapons for the purposes of those spells? I don't see the text in Magic Fang OR Magic Weapon stating so... Your only support is inside a spell and spells by design break normal rules. There isn't anything in any other part of the rules that equates Unarmed Strike to Natural Weapon and they are handled extraordinarily differently all throughout the rules. This has been heavily debated in the past and unfortunately there isn't anything that proves either side in the rules, the errata, or the FAQ. So it comes down to a DM call.
jaelis 03-27-08, 07:57 AM	Magic Weapon calls an unarmed strike a natural weapon, and has no qualification in it that states it is such ONLY for the spell. So you would say on that basis that anyone (not just a monk) could take INA for their unarmed strike? I think the FAQ discussion contradicts that, since it specifically calls out the monks special ability as letting her do it.
Frozen Yakman 03-27-08, 09:18 AM	Can you point to an official source that states Unarmed Strike counts as a natural weapon, other than for spells or effects that enhance it (which multiattack is neither)? I was unable to find such a source so that was the reason for the thread. Your DM is the official source.