Can monks get improved natural attack?

[Slaved]

No, PCs may not take feats from the Monster Manual unless they are playing monstrous races

That was easy...

Only monstrous races can craft constructs? That sucks

 

[pawsplay]

No, PCs may not take feats from the Monster Manual unless they are playing monstrous races

That was easy...

So anything other than human, then? Got it.

 

[pawsplay]

This is slightly off topic, but does a non-monk character with Improved Unarmed Strike count as a natural weapon or manufactured weapon? Logic says it'll be a natural weapon but D&D rules don't always stick with logic.

Logic would not say that, because it is not a natural weapon. A weapon is armed, and an unarmed strike is... unarmed. Monks are a special case.

 

[Deset Gled]

2. Read narrowly, "effects" is a very limited term. Feats have effects (or not, it matter not to this choice), but are not in and of themselves effects or, even if they are, the prerequisites for them are not.

I subscribe to the "Feats are effects, Prerequisites are not" school of thought. The monk's unarmed strike can be treated as a natural weapon, but it is not one. Thus, a monk does not meet the prerequisite of having a natural weapon. I personally believe this is the most literally accurate reading of the rules (not saying anything about the intent or logic of the rules). However, one of the weird effects of this ruling is that a race with a natural weapon could take INA and appy it to their Unarmed Strike, even though a human cannot.

 

[starwed]

The feat was intended to be given to monsters. I know that saying "this feat is for monsters only" is a poor argument. The line between a monster and a character is blurred or non-existant in 3E/3.5 and that's as it should be.

The only time this feat has ever come up in a game I run, the PC was a bugbear anyway. So I said yes (especially since the bugbear levels/LA reduced his unarmed damage in the first place.)

 

[Borlon]

I subscribe to the "Feats are effects, Prerequisites are not" school of thought. The monk's unarmed strike can be treated as a natural weapon, but it is not one. Thus, a monk does not meet the prerequisite of having a natural weapon. I personally believe this is the most literally accurate reading of the rules (not saying anything about the intent or logic of the rules). However, one of the weird effects of this ruling is that a race with a natural weapon could take INA and appy it to their Unarmed Strike, even though a human cannot.

QFT

 

[Nail]

Can a monk's unarmed attack be affected by the improved natural attack feat (MM page 304), and does a monk's unarmed attack qualify for the natural weapon prerequisite of the feat?

No. Unarmed Strike is not a natural attack; it just can be affected by spells an items as if it was.

 

[pawsplay]

If a feat is an effect, and a monk's attack can be treated as one, then a monk's attack can be treated as a natural weapon for the purposes of INA. Thus, while you are treating it as one, the monk does qualify.

It does not say anywhere that a monk has to be currently experiencing any effect for which it would be advantgeous to have their attack treated as a natural weapon, in order for their strike to be treated as a natural weapon for that effect. It's just the same as dwarf treating the waraxe as a martial weapon, whether or not he actually owns one or is even proficient with martial weapons.

IF the feat is an effect THEN the monk treats his strike as a natural weapon for purposes of it. Thus, a monk does have the prerequisite.

 

[(Psi)SeveredHead]

Improved Natural Attack [General]
The creature's natural attacks are more dangerous than its size and type would otherwise dictate.
Prerequisite: Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit: Choose one of the creature’s natural attack forms. The damage for this natural weapon increases by one step, as if the creature’s size had increased by one category: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

No. Unarmed Strike is not a natural attack; it just can be affected by spells an items as if it was.

There are core spells that specifically describe fists and such as natural attacks, as does the Kensai PrCl.

This is slightly off topic, but does a non-monk character with Improved Unarmed Strike count as a natural weapon or manufactured weapon? Logic says it'll be a natural weapon but D&D rules don't always stick with logic.

IMHO, its a natural weapon.

My reading of the rules as a whole regarding natural weapons & PC races (monk description, feats, key spells, Kensai description, etc.) leads me to the opinion that what the monk's "Unarmed Strike" language adds to their abilities is to be affected by spells and effects that would normally be limited to manufactured weapons, since their unarmed strikes are already natural weapons.

Thus. the Monk and only the Monk has an unarmed strike that scales up with level advancement, and is also the only class that can treat its unarmed strikes as manufactured weapons.