Unarmed Rogue AV & MP (Look its a monk!)

[Foxman]

Using a magic item from the Adventures Vault and a new class power from the Martial Power book it appears we can make a psedo-monk using a rogue.

For you consideration:

BELT OF THE BRAWLER
Adventures Vault
Your punch packs a wallop when this belt is about your waist.
Level: 3
Price: 680 gp
Item Slot: Waist
Property: Make improvised attacks (included unarmed attacks) as if you were armed with a club.

RUTHLESS RUFFIAN
Appears in Martial Power
You are proficient with the club and the mace, and you can use those weapons with Sneak Attack or any rogue power that normally requires a light blade. If you use a club or a mace to deliver an attack that has the rattling keyword, add your Strength modifier to the damage roll.

So - using your unarmed attacks as if they were with a club, and you are treated as if you were using a Light Blade while using a club. So in theory you can sneak attack and use rogue light blade powers while unarmed...

Pretty nifty! Looks almost like a monk to me

[DracoSuave]

Interesting concept is interesting.

[evilgenius8000]

Neat. Too bad you can't enchant your fists :P

[Drakhar]

Ah but you can. Spiked Gauntlets are Unarmed weapon type, which means they are used for Unarmed attacks

[RefinedBean]

Let's keep this thread low-key, or else WotC will read and decide they don't need to make an actual Monk class.

Reflavor the Sneak Attack as a pressure-point strike and away we go!

[DracoSuave]

Spiked Guantlets aren't an Improvised Weapon, so it wouldn't work with the item. Unarmed Attack is a specific type of Improvised weapon, with the unarmed weapon-type, but not all unarmed weapon-type attacks are Improvised Weapons. Spiked Guantlet is a Simple Weapon.

[Drakhar]

Originally Posted by DracoSuave

Spiked Guantlets aren't an Improvised Weapon, so it wouldn't work with the item. Unarmed Attack is a specific type of Improvised weapon, with the unarmed weapon-type, but not all unarmed weapon-type attacks are Improvised Weapons. Spiked Guantlet is a Simple Weapon.

So what your saying is that even though the belt says included unarmed attacks, and you're using an unarmed weapon to make the attack (Keep in mind Spiked gauntlets take up your hand slot not weapon slot when enchanted) that you are in fact, not making an unarmed attack with it.

[Gruns]

Originally Posted by evilgenius8000

Neat. Too bad you can't enchant your fists :P

Just make up a generic item and fix that!
Ki Handwraps
Lvl 1 +1 360gp
Lvl 2 +2 520gp
Lvl 3 +3 etc etc etc up to +6
Item Slot: Hands
Property: Add this item's Enhancement Bonus to Unarmed Attack rolls and Damage rolls.
Critical: 1d6 per plus.

And then you can spice it up a bit...
Crescent Handwraps of the Jade Initiate
Lvl 10 +2 5,000GP
Item Slot: Hands
Property: Add this item's Enhancement Bonus to Unarmed Attack rolls and Damage rolls.
Critical: 1d6 per plus, and the target is knocked Prone.
Power(Daily): Free Action. Use this power when you hit with an unarmed attack. The target is Weakened (Save Ends)

Crescent Handwraps of the Jade Apprentice
Lvl 20 +4 125,000GP
Item Slot: Hands
Property: Add this item's Enhancement Bonus to Unarmed Attack rolls and Damage rolls.
Critical: 1d6 per plus, and the target is knocked Prone.
Power(Daily): Free Action. Use this power when you hit with an unarmed attack. The target is Dazed (Save Ends)

Crescent Handwraps of the Jade Master
Lvl 30 +6 3,125,000GP
Item Slot: Hands
Property: Add this item's Enhancement Bonus to Unarmed Attack rolls and Damage rolls.
Critical: 1d6 per plus, and the target is knocked Prone.
Power(Daily): Free Action. Use this power when you hit with an unarmed attack. The target is Stunned (Save Ends)

Later!
Gruns

[yesnomu]

Originally Posted by DracoSuave

Spiked Guantlets aren't an Improvised Weapon, so it wouldn't work with the item. Unarmed Attack is a specific type of Improvised weapon, with the unarmed weapon-type, but not all unarmed weapon-type attacks are Improvised Weapons. Spiked Guantlet is a Simple Weapon.

Maybe by RAW, but I can't think of a DM that'd be enough of a jerk to disallow it.

Nice find, OP!

[weem]

After looking at this for a while and writing some stuff out, it is this initial description of the Ruthless Ruffian that cuts all other investigations short...

RUTHLESS RUFFIAN (Martial Power)----------
You are proficient with the club and the mace, and you can use those weapons with Sneak Attack or any rogue power that normally requires a light blade. If you use a club or a mace to deliver an attack that has the rattling keyword, add your Strength modifier to the damage roll.

To me, this pretty clearly states that if you use those weapons (and those weapons only, otherwise more would be listed), then you can sneak attack with those two weapons, or use a rogue power with those two weapons that would otherwise require a light blade.

The Belt description says "Make improvised attacks (included unarmed attacks) as if you were armed with a club."

"as if you were"... aka you aren't armed with a club. I would not rule that when you fight in a way that would equate to club damage, you are indeed fighting with a club. You need to make that jump in order to make this all work, and it's not a jump I would make - and I think that is why it is worded this way "As if you were" - they are basically saying "you aren't wielding a club".

"As if you were" armed with a club DOES NOT EQUAL being armed with a club.


That is how I read it currently in my highly distracted state. My mind could be changed for sure if I saw something more I might be missing, but at the moment I don't see it.

IF you get by this point, nothing else I see prevents this from working as the OP is stating. I in fact have that particular argument written out, but at this point it doesn't mean much so I have kept it out.


---edit---

BTW - If I had a player that wanted to use this as the OP intended, I would allow it. I just don't think the rules intend it to be this way.

[Gruns]

Originally Posted by weem

(Snip)

"As if you were" armed with a club DOES NOT EQUAL being armed with a club.

(Snip)

Umm.. Of course it does. At least as far as anything that cares about whether or not your are attacking with a club is concerned... Otherwise, what is the point of saying it? If Belt of the Brawler wanted you to simply deal 1d6 damage with +2 proficiency with unarmed attacks, they'd have said that. I'm not sure I understand why you think it wouldn't apply here...
Later!
Gruns

[Saeviomagy]

I can't see how you'd read it to be any other way than the OP stated.

Personally I think there should be a feat that says "Choose a melee weapon, your unarmed strike now counts as that weapon for all purposes, including (but not limited to) damage, proficiency bonus, enchanting and the number of hands it takes to wield. Your unarmed strike cannot make a ranged attack.", and that would open up monk-like attacks to every class that uses a melee weapon.

[weem]

@Saeviomagy

I can't see how you'd read it to be any other way than the OP stated.

I explained how, so you have indeed seen it. You may not agree with it (as I'm sure you don't) but it's there With that said, just remember my original comment...

That is how I read it currently in my highly distracted state. My mind could be changed for sure if I saw something more I might be missing, but at the moment I don't see it.

-- that's how I saw it last night during my first take

@Gruns

Umm.. Of course it does. At least as far as anything that cares about whether or not your are attacking with a club is concerned... Otherwise, what is the point of saying it? If Belt of the Brawler wanted you to simply deal 1d6 damage with +2 proficiency with unarmed attacks, they'd have said that. I'm not sure I understand why you think it wouldn't apply here...

Hmmm... yea, I don't know... I guess I was looking at it in the most simple way...

It says "When you use those weapons" (club or mace) - and we're talking about using Spiked Gauntlets (not a club or mace). The Belt does not say anything (to me) that would lead me to believe it is over-riding that simple statement. It says "as if you were using" which to me says "you aren't using".

They may have worded it that way so that it would be clear (yea right) that your fists were still pounding out damage as opposed to, say, slicing or piercing... or perhaps it was so that it was clear that it was not magical damage... or perhaps so that it would be clear the damage could still be increased by a damage category in the case of use by a Bugbear/Minotaur, etc. Who knows.

I don't know, I'm not WoTC and I'm just throwing out thoughts/impressions as they come to me as I mentioned above and as I also stated, a ruling for my games has not been set in stone in this case and in fact I would allow it as the OP posted (even if it seemed to me it was not the intention).

I was explaining it to a friend last night that as far as damage output it didn't really matter to me as there are other ways (obviously) to achieve the same damage output - I don't see (yet) anything overpowered, etc that would keep this off my table.

With that said, I can see your point, why would they not then just say it did extra damage.

[weem]

One more thing...

@Saeviomagy

Personally I think there should be a feat that says "Choose a melee weapon, your unarmed strike now counts as that weapon for all purposes, including (but not limited to) damage, proficiency bonus, enchanting and the number of hands it takes to wield. Your unarmed strike cannot make a ranged attack.", and that would open up monk-like attacks to every class that uses a melee weapon.

I like this as a rogue playing player (2 rogues in 2 different campaigns). As a DM, I'm not so sure I like the idea of potentially increasing already high weapon damages (using a Maul perhaps) when using Bugbears, etc AND being able to add in Sneak Attack damage, etc.

[-Avalon-]

Add to that a magical shuriken, and Voila!!

A NINJA!!!!