I'm A Banana
Potassium-Rich
So, I'm building a Thri-Kreen Ranger (with Monk multiclass feats) in the CB, and it seems like this should be okay, but the CB isn't quite doing things right, so I figured I'd check with the braintrust here.
It seems that I should be able to get the Unarmed Strike capability, and then wield it in both hands (since it's off-hand). As a ranger, since a lot of my powers use more than one attack, and require me to wield two weapons, I'd like to "dual weild" unarmed strikes.
Balance-wise, it should be fine (it doesn't seem any more potent than dual-wielding any other d8/+3 weapon, at the cost of a feat no less), and the Unarmed Strike is specifically called out as being off-hand.
It would also seem to me that the unarmed strike is considered kind of both wielding and not wielding a weapon, no? A monk with an unarmed strike in their hand is considered not to have a weapon in their hand, it appears (US even mentions that you must have "a hand free" to use it), but also that it IS a weapon...
Just trying to get the numbers straight on this one, thanks!
It seems that I should be able to get the Unarmed Strike capability, and then wield it in both hands (since it's off-hand). As a ranger, since a lot of my powers use more than one attack, and require me to wield two weapons, I'd like to "dual weild" unarmed strikes.
Balance-wise, it should be fine (it doesn't seem any more potent than dual-wielding any other d8/+3 weapon, at the cost of a feat no less), and the Unarmed Strike is specifically called out as being off-hand.
It would also seem to me that the unarmed strike is considered kind of both wielding and not wielding a weapon, no? A monk with an unarmed strike in their hand is considered not to have a weapon in their hand, it appears (US even mentions that you must have "a hand free" to use it), but also that it IS a weapon...
Just trying to get the numbers straight on this one, thanks!