I love unarmed combat... - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 DarkChipmunk Mar 23, 2009 23:16:06	Unarmed, unarmored combat is one of my personal favorite ways to go. Relying almost exclusively on your own body for offense and defense has a certain incredibly satisfying way about it. To that end I would like to submit the following feats for public critique: Superior Unarmed Strike Benefit: Your unarmed strike is a superior melee weapon, which you are proficient in. It gains a +3 proficiency bonus and deals 1d8 base damage. Choose one of axe, flail, hammer, heavy blade, light blade, mace, pick, spear, or staff. Your unarmed strike is both a weapon of the unarmed group and the group of your choice. Your unarmed strike gains the Off-Hand property. You gain the use of the Create Technique and Transfer Technique rituals, even if you do not have the Ritual Casting feat.
#2 gregt_314 Mar 23, 2009 23:50:46	Too much? Yes. My first reaction is just wait for Monks in PHB3. In 4E, unarmed combat really needs a whole class based around it rather than just a couple of feats. BUT.... if you MUST do it with feats... A more reasonable break-up is to have a single feat to class your unarmed attack as a different weapon group, which should probably be limited to light blade or mace, another feat to give you proficiency with unarmed, and yet another feat to give you 1d6 damage on your unarmed attacks (not 1d8). Each one of these feats alone is comparable to existing feats from the PHB, and I can see a benefit to each one individually for at least one class build. With the feat you propose, for example, there is no reason EVER for Rogues not to take it, and declare their hands to be Light Blades that do 1d8 damage with a +3 prof bonus that they wield in their off-hand next to their other hand, especially when they get some free rituals thrown in. Wah-hey! Dual-wielding enchanted super-rapiers that can't be disarmed FTW! No, seriously, wait for the Monk. EDIT: Oh god, your feat as written would let you dual-wield spears and polearms. No, no, no.
#3 DarkChipmunk Mar 24, 2009 0:43:43	To my credit, I did leave off polearms from the list of choices, but I do see what you mean. Yes, I would wait, but I'm impatient. Very impatient, indeed. So I'll look at your advice of splitting them to smaller chunks, definitely.
#4 gregt_314 Mar 24, 2009 0:49:28	To my credit, I did leave off polearms from the list of choices, but I do see what you mean. Yes, I would wait, but I'm impatient. Very impatient, indeed. So I'll look at your advice of splitting them to smaller chunks, definitely. I mean, to give slightly less negative advice, do whatever your group finds fun. If all your players think these rules are awesome then you don't have a problem, go for it. But if you're looking for something that has general application, yes, definitely smaller chunks. An underpowered feat is always better than an overpowered one. Almost invariably what you think is underpowered is significantly more powerful in the right build than you had envisaged. (You left polearm off but the Heavy Blade group lets you wield a Glaive, which was what I was referring to. And axe will give you the... axe polearm, I forget what it's called.)

Post/Author/DateTime

Post

DarkChipmunk

Mar 23, 2009 23:16:06

Unarmed, unarmored combat is one of my personal favorite ways to go. Relying almost exclusively on your own body for offense and defense has a certain incredibly satisfying way about it. To that end I would like to submit the following feats for public critique:

Superior Unarmed Strike
Benefit: Your unarmed strike is a superior melee weapon, which you are proficient in. It gains a +3 proficiency bonus and deals 1d8 base damage. Choose one of axe, flail, hammer, heavy blade, light blade, mace, pick, spear, or staff. Your unarmed strike is both a weapon of the unarmed group and the group of your choice. Your unarmed strike gains the Off-Hand property. You gain the use of the Create Technique and Transfer Technique rituals, even if you do not have the Ritual Casting feat.

gregt_314

Mar 23, 2009 23:50:46

Too much?

Yes.

My first reaction is just wait for Monks in PHB3. In 4E, unarmed combat really needs a whole class based around it rather than just a couple of feats.

BUT.... if you MUST do it with feats...

A more reasonable break-up is to have a single feat to class your unarmed attack as a different weapon group, which should probably be limited to light blade or mace, another feat to give you proficiency with unarmed, and yet another feat to give you 1d6 damage on your unarmed attacks (not 1d8).

Each one of these feats alone is comparable to existing feats from the PHB, and I can see a benefit to each one individually for at least one class build.

With the feat you propose, for example, there is no reason EVER for Rogues not to take it, and declare their hands to be Light Blades that do 1d8 damage with a +3 prof bonus that they wield in their off-hand next to their other hand, especially when they get some free rituals thrown in. Wah-hey! Dual-wielding enchanted super-rapiers that can't be disarmed FTW!

No, seriously, wait for the Monk.

EDIT: Oh god, your feat as written would let you dual-wield spears and polearms. No, no, no.

DarkChipmunk

Mar 24, 2009 0:43:43

To my credit, I did leave off polearms from the list of choices, but I do see what you mean.

Yes, I would wait, but I'm impatient. Very impatient, indeed. So I'll look at your advice of splitting them to smaller chunks, definitely.

gregt_314

Mar 24, 2009 0:49:28

To my credit, I did leave off polearms from the list of choices, but I do see what you mean.

Yes, I would wait, but I'm impatient. Very impatient, indeed. So I'll look at your advice of splitting them to smaller chunks, definitely.

I mean, to give slightly less negative advice, do whatever your group finds fun. If all your players think these rules are awesome then you don't have a problem, go for it. But if you're looking for something that has general application, yes, definitely smaller chunks.

An underpowered feat is always better than an overpowered one. Almost invariably what you think is underpowered is significantly more powerful in the right build than you had envisaged.

(You left polearm off but the Heavy Blade group lets you wield a Glaive, which was what I was referring to. And axe will give you the... axe polearm, I forget what it's called.)