The Basic rules treat the unarmed strike as a melee simple weapon attack with no properties, that deals 1 bludgeoning damage.
My doubts:
- Since a punch to the face can be a matter of physical vigor as well as a slap to the face can be a quick movement, shouldn't the unarmed strike be finesseable?
- Should we consider the unarmed strike as one-handed or two-handed? Meaning, shouldn't it be a light weapon? That's not like you become a Monk if you do that, it's still 1 dumb point of damage, but if you, for instance, grow talons and your melee unarmed strike now deals 1d4 damage, do you attack one or two times? I find it weird that a dagger is quicker than an empty hand.
What do you think?
1 + Str.
And no, it's really not finess. Poking someone in the eye could be finess, simply touching them might be finess, but to do any kind of physical damage you need force.
It is 1-handed, but not a light weapon, so you can't dual wield them. That part is a bit odd IMO.
Talons and such could be light weapons, same as a dagger.
Dagger isn't so much as quicker, but i poking someone with your finger simply won't do any damage.
Well, my point is, poking someone in the eye should be an acceptable form of unarmed strike (and I'm gonna allow it if that eventuality presents itself).
But yes, my bigger issue is the absence of a "light" property. A boxeur can pack two punches in a row even if he's not as much of a martial artist as a monk.
I have no problem with houseruling finesse for unarmed strikes. It's never going to be over-powered.
docdoom77 wrote:
Emanuele_Galletto wrote:
Emanuele_Galletto wrote:
FFSAA wrote:
Emanuele_Galletto wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote:
The eye poke might actually be a contest.
iserith wrote:
Mearls just told me (on twitter) that they avoided the light property because it felt wrong for non-monks to do flurry of blows.
Odd, because I don't think anyone is going to be jumping all over 1 base bludgeoning damage when dual-wielding. (I'm presuming the monk will have a proper damage die because monk.)
Emanuele_Galletto wrote:
iserith wrote:
Emanuele_Galletto wrote:
Emanuele_Galletto wrote:
Seems like an attempt to get power for free. I don't see reason to change it to finesse. I only requires a one level of monk or possibly a feat so its not like it is a huge cost. Not to mention the dueling fighting style would give you +2 damage to both attacks at level 5 (or 10 if your using the warrior subclass.)
In a world where unarmed strikes are finesse weapons, lightweight boxers would beat the crap out of heavyweight boxers (as they would do the same damage, and have higher AC).
Since we live in the real world, we know this to not be true. Size matters in a fist fight. When a str 8 dex 18 guy can by default beat up someone of the same level with str 18, I know the system is too unrealistic for me.
Ahglock wrote:
ChrisCarlson wrote: