D&D (2024) The Damage of Unarmed Strikes

[Minigiant]

Something got me wondering real quick.

In most movies, comics, and cartoons (western and anime), warriors tend to have a decent punch and kick.

I was thinking, should every warriror class be given a dice for their unarmed strike? Nothing crazy. a 1d4.

It's not a major combat boost. Not even a minor one. But it's simple and allows martial classes to punch and slam dudes. Since Feats are currently mandatory, feats can be used to upgrade this. Tavern Brawler would still be worth getting. Same with Unarmed Fighting Fighting Style.

Monks would still be unique as the only ones that can US with DEX, bonus action US, and have an automatically upgrading US.

 

[Branduil]

1+Str mod. damage has always felt weird in 5e. It should be 1d4, but I guess they didn't want it to step on the toes of the club? Just make it 1d4 since club still has the advantage of being light, and give clubs the Thrown (10) property

 

[DeviousQuail]

1d4+Str for anyone with martial weapon prof and 1+Str for those without could work. It may be just as damaging as some weapons but you'd still want a weapon because most fighting styles, feats, and some class abilities only work with weapons.

 

[Yaarel]

Maybe group unarmed 1 damage with simple weapons, and 1d4 with martial weapons. So anyone that has "all martial weapons" gains the unarmed 1d4 as well.

 

[Charlaquin]

I’m ambivalent about this. One one hand, I think 1+Str damage is too weak to be worthwhile in most situations. On the other feel like 1d4 unarmed strikes really devalues simple weapons like clubs and daggers. I kinda think maybe it’s fine that an unarmed strike really isn’t a viable offensive tactic for those who aren’t specialized in it in some way (such as the feat, fighting style, or monk class). And especially with shoves and grapples getting rolled into unarmed striking, I think it might be fine for unarmed combat to be more about controlling opponents than damaging them unless you spend character building resources to make your unarmed strikes more lethal. But in that case, 1d4 seems pretty weak for a whole feat investment, even with the small boost of rerolling 1s. So, after talking (err… typing) through it, I think where I’m at is, leave the basic unarmed strike at 1+Str, but make the feat (and possibly the fighting style - we’ll have to see if that gets an update) a bit stronger.

 

[Charlaquin]

Maybe group unarmed 1 damage with simple weapons, and 1d4 with martial weapons. So anyone that has "all martial weapons" gains the unarmed 1d4 as well.

I don’t think they want to put unarmed strike in the weapon list, because it’s not a weapon. But I do like the idea of martial weapon proficiency upgrading your unarmed strikes to d4s. Maybe also have it upgrade the die size of “natural weapons” from race.

 

[Minigiant]

I’m ambivalent about this. One one hand, I think 1+Str damage is too weak to be worthwhile in most situations. On the other feel like 1d4 unarmed strikes really devalues simple weapons like clubs and daggers. I kinda think maybe it’s fine that an unarmed strike really isn’t a viable offensive tactic for those who aren’t specialized in it in some way (such as the feat, fighting style, or monk class). And especially with shoves and grapples getting rolled into unarmed striking, I think it might be fine for unarmed combat to be more about controlling opponents than damaging them unless you spend character building resources to make your unarmed strikes more lethal. But in that case, 1d4 seems pretty weak for a whole feat investment (even with the small boost of rerolling 1s. So, after talking (err… typing) through it, I think where I’m at is, leave the basic unarmed strike at 1+Str, but make the feat (and possibly the fighting style - we’ll have to see if that gets an update) a bit stronger.

The issue to me is you don't get enough fighting styles and feats to logically pick up a Unarmed fighting boost.

A level 10 Fighter with a 1+STR punch just feels wrong. Every fighter, ranger, paladin, and barbarian should be punching for more that 6 damage and able to crit punch.

 

[CleverNickName]

I voted "no" but I should clarify. It's not because I think your 1d4 suggestion is good or bad, it's just because I don't think it will ever matter to me and my gaming group. I can't even remember the last time someone in our group even used an unarmed strike...I'm sure our monk must have, several times, but that's not what we're talking about here. Same goes for the Tavern Brawler adjustments, I've never seen a player choose that feat...not even for a one-shot game.

So in my opinion, I'd file this under "not broken/don't fix."

 

[Branduil]

Thinking about it some more, and my solution is just to make Unarmed Strike a Martial weapon that does 1d4 damage. This makes sense because anyone can throw a punch, but you need real training to effectively fight unarmed (proficiency bonus to attack).

 

[NaturalZero]

A level 10 Figghter with a 1+STR punch just feels wrong. Every fighter, ranger, paladin, and barbarian should be punching for more that 6 damage and able to crit punch.

This reminds me of how dumb I felt the BAB system was in 3e. The monk's whole deal was hitting with fists, but any guy with full BAB was more likely to land a punch.