Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 brokenoakleys Mar 30, 2008 21:19:50	Characters with Combat Martial Arts feat are considered armed. They are allowed to do both lethal AND non-lethal damage. Question: If combat martial artists attempt to do non-lethal damage, do they have to take a -4 to hit penalty? The description of the feat itself is silent on this. From a game balance point of view it would seem to make sense, otherwise there would be little point in taking the brawling feat (which only allows for non-lethal damage, and it unarmed therefore provoking AO's). Thanks to everyone who has answered my many arcane rules questions.
#2 nodaisho Mar 30, 2008 21:37:26	Well, the advantage to brawl is that it has many ways to up the damage, so you can go for one-hit KOs or massive damage, if you use the brass knuckles. AoOs only matter when fighting people with melee weapons, and that largely depends on whether your GM allows AoOs to be made with pistol whips and rifle butts. I wouldn't think that the person has to take a penalty to do non-lethal, think about it this way: anyone can do nonlethal damage. CMA allows you to fight efficiently enough not to provoke an AoO, and allows you to hit in a manner that can do lethal damage (hitting the right areas in the right manner), but there is no real change to how you would attack to do nonlethal, where as if you were hitting someone with a dagger pommel, you swing differently, same with hitting someone with the flat of a longsword.
#3 backstabbist Mar 30, 2008 21:40:15	My take on it, YMMV, CMA makes your status Armed, but with a weapon that can do both Lethal & NonLethal damage. The -4 penalty for attempting to do NonLethal damage with a Lethal weapon doesnt apply, the weapon already has the option to do NonLethal
#4 brokenoakleys Apr 01, 2008 1:37:59	Good points, both of you. You've got me convinced CMA should be able to deal non-lethal w/o incurring a penalty. But that got me thinking about something else: what if a character takes both brawling and CMA? Should they be able to deal 1d6 non-lethal (instead of 1d4), get a +1 competence bonus and still be considered armed?
#5 eldermount Apr 01, 2008 1:59:21	I know you already know the answer to that question, from what you posted in this thread.
#6 kjakan Apr 01, 2008 6:30:01	In my opinion, Combat Martial Arts (and the improved versions, the Martial Artist class feature Living Weapon) are separate of the Brawl and Improved Braw feats. That being said, there is no reason why CMA cannot not be used with the Brawl/Improved Brawl sub-feats, though Knockout Punch and Improved Knockout Punch are usually better with Brawl. Streetfighting is a good damage add to CMA, and Improved Feint is good for any occasion. Likewise, a Brawler might find the improved criticals provided by Improved and Advanced CMA useful. These are only tied to unarmed combat, not to the CMA feat. -K
#7 backstabbist Apr 01, 2008 12:40:03	CMA lets you make Armed attaks without using a weapon. Brawl is for Unarmed attacks. Brawl Benefit: When making an unarmed attack, the character receives a +1 competence bonus on attack rolls, and the character deals nonlethal damage equal to 1d6 + his or her Strength modifier. Normal: Unarmed attacks normally deal nonlethal damage equal to 1d3 + Strength modifier When using Brawl modify your Unarmed Attacks, but applying CMA to that attack makes it Armed, and disqualifies it. Combat Martial Arts Prerequisite: Base attack bonus +1. Benefit: With an unarmed strike, the character deals lethal or nonlethal damage (the character’s choice) equal to 1d4 + the character’s Strength modifier. The character’s unarmed attacks count as armed, which means that opponents do not get attacks of opportunity when the character attacks them unarmed. The character may make attacks of opportunity against opponents who provoke such attacks. Normal: Without this feat, a character deals only 1d3 points of nonlethal damage. Unarmed attacks normally provoke attacks of opportunity, and unarmed combatants cannot normally make attacks of opportunity. When using CMA your make Armed Attacks, Brawl cannot be used on armed attacks. Chicken, Egg, Dont matter which comes first, no Brawl + CMA
#8 TheRealOrion Apr 01, 2008 17:23:48	I'm a little leary of reading the word "armed" that literally in Brawl. The implication would seem to be that Brawlers are always "unarmed," and therefore always provoke attacks of opportunity, yes? Somehow, that seems wrong. It seems to me that "armed" in that case just means when making an unarmed strike (the name of the attack), not when making an attack in which you are not considered 'armed' for game purposes. I agree that Brawl doesn't make you 'armed,' but I don't think it prohibits it.
#9 backstabbist Apr 01, 2008 17:44:16	The implication would seem to be that Brawlers are always "unarmed," and therefore always provoke attacks of opportunity, yes? Yes. Brawling does provoke AoO from those that threaten, which doesnt include other Brawlers or unarmed attack makers. ClawClawBite is natural weapon, hence armed & threatens squares, and may AoO a brawler. Brawlers do not threaten, so folks can stand in front of a brawler & shoot him in the face without fear of the brawler getting to AoO. By declaring CMA, a person is considered Armed and threatens squares. If a brawler makes unarmed attacks in the threat of our CMA guy, the CMA gets to take the AoO. Brawling is for fighting Unarmed guys. CMA is for fighting Armed guys, or guys considered Armed (like NaturalWeapon or CMA) The presense of a weapon has very little to do with being armed. Lethal & NonLethal are irrelevant.
#10 TheRealOrion Apr 01, 2008 19:19:55	Oh, okay. Yeah, that actually makes sense.
#11 nodaisho Apr 01, 2008 19:22:13	I suppose, though, someone could have both, and use either unarmed or armed attacks, unarmed higher damage ones against people that don't have melee weapons, and armed against ones that do and for AoOs. Like how when you have to worry about getting hit, you would be making quick efficient hits, where as if you didn't, you could make a big western-style rocking roundhouse (you know, where he pretty much swings his whole body?). I wouldn't think someone would be only able to use one in a round, he could use CMA to drop a guy with a sword and then brawl to stun or KO the guy using a glock. edit: Backstabbist, did you just paraphrase cooper on that part about being armed, or was that unintentional?
#12 TheRealOrion Apr 01, 2008 20:49:39	Seems reasonable that you could use either Brawl or CMA for any given attack. The first might provoke an AoO, and the next might now.
#13 backstabbist Apr 01, 2008 21:28:47	N ow this is a bit of tricky subjective opinion, Mixing CMA & Brawl attacks in a round. On the surface, it would seem logical that you could. And depending if the last attack was CMA or not would set your Threaten for AoO their turn. I would not grant full round Armed if mixing Brawl & CMA, understanding the timing of all activities dependant on Armed status would be important to see if events happen in or out of the CMA parts of the combat round Cooper? Alice or Colonel? I've read a ton of Cooper & Ayoob over the years, maybe my brain is leaking some on the keyboard. ... but then, I was humming Poison from the Trash albulm just the other day.
#14 nodaisho Apr 03, 2008 2:59:51	Colonel, while Alice can be pretty funny, I was thinking about Jeff Cooper saying that having a gun no more makes you armed than having a piano makes you a musician.
#15 backstabbist Sep 02, 2009 19:34:58	After some thought on the matter, I am revising my HR position from my last post: Mixing weaponless Armed & Unarmed attacks Houserule: At the end of your turn, make an Opposed Knowlege Tactics checks against each opponent engaging you to retain 'Armed' status till your next turn