D&D 5E Are monks proficient in Unarmed Strikes?


log in or register to remove this ad

CapnZapp

Legend
Yeah, I've read that.

To completely bork a simple concept just because a quirk of how monster language is phrased is weaksauce.

Very weak sauce.

If that's what made them panic enough to issue such half-baked errata, I recommend everyone (that's able to) to ignore this errata completely.

I mean, it's much easier and far more natural to simply go "of course unarmed attacks don't punch through magic resistance".
 

Coredump

Explorer
this incredibly convoluted change was made.

Thanks

If that's what made them panic enough to issue such half-baked errata, I recommend everyone (that's able to) to ignore this errata completely.
.

I don't get this, I don't see anything convoluted or half-baked about this. To me it makes a lot more sense than it did before.

A 'weapon' is a thing, and item, a tool for destruction. When someone says "I found a crate of weapons", no one expects to see a bunch of cut off hands and feet and knees. A 'weapon' is a gun, or knife, or club, or sword, or..... Thus it makes sense to make a 'weapon attack' with an actual weapon. When you cast Magic Weapon, its on an actual weapon. When you 'silver a weapon', its adding silver to an actual weapon. When you fight with 'two weapons', it means a knife and sword, or two whips, or whatever.... it doesn't mean a boxing match.

An Unarmed Strike is called such because you are *unarmed*, meaning you have no 'arms', meaning you have no weapons. To try and claim that a 'weaponless attack' is somehow really a weapon.... that is convoluted. It is non-sensical to insist that a 'weaponless attack'(AKA Unarmed Strke) is a type of weapon.

So, to me at least, that all makes sense. But we also all know that a fist (or elbow, or foot, etc) can also be used to cause damage, similar to how a weapon works. Hence the rule/errata clarifying that you can use an Unarmed Strike when making a Melee Weapon Attack. That seems to follow everyone's common experiences and knowledge.... I don't see how that is at all convoluted.
 

Azurewraith

Explorer
I don't get this, I don't see anything convoluted or half-baked about this. To me it makes a lot more sense than it did before.

A 'weapon' is a thing, and item, a tool for destruction. When someone says "I found a crate of weapons", no one expects to see a bunch of cut off hands and feet and knees. A 'weapon' is a gun, or knife, or club, or sword, or..... Thus it makes sense to make a 'weapon attack' with an actual weapon. When you cast Magic Weapon, its on an actual weapon. When you 'silver a weapon', its adding silver to an actual weapon. When you fight with 'two weapons', it means a knife and sword, or two whips, or whatever.... it doesn't mean a boxing match.

An Unarmed Strike is called such because you are *unarmed*, meaning you have no 'arms', meaning you have no weapons. To try and claim that a 'weaponless attack' is somehow really a weapon.... that is convoluted. It is non-sensical to insist that a 'weaponless attack'(AKA Unarmed Strke) is a type of weapon.

So, to me at least, that all makes sense. But we also all know that a fist (or elbow, or foot, etc) can also be used to cause damage, similar to how a weapon works. Hence the rule/errata clarifying that you can use an Unarmed Strike when making a Melee Weapon Attack. That seems to follow everyone's common experiences and knowledge.... I don't see how that is at all convoluted.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/weapon?s=t

According to the dictionary anything can be a weapon. Isn't that what happens when you attain the highest rank in a martial art form you sign a register saying your body is now a lethal weapon? I could be wrong but that's how I understand it
 




CapnZapp

Legend
Coredump, you don't need to get it, you just need to get that others don't.

Other than that, the previous few replies speak volumes.
 

Arial Black

Adventurer
I don't get this, I don't see anything convoluted or half-baked about this. To me it makes a lot more sense than it did before.

A 'weapon' is a thing, and item, a tool for destruction. When someone says "I found a crate of weapons", no one expects to see a bunch of cut off hands and feet and knees. A 'weapon' is a gun, or knife, or club, or sword, or..... Thus it makes sense to make a 'weapon attack' with an actual weapon. When you cast Magic Weapon, its on an actual weapon. When you 'silver a weapon', its adding silver to an actual weapon. When you fight with 'two weapons', it means a knife and sword, or two whips, or whatever.... it doesn't mean a boxing match.

An Unarmed Strike is called such because you are *unarmed*, meaning you have no 'arms', meaning you have no weapons. To try and claim that a 'weaponless attack' is somehow really a weapon.... that is convoluted. It is non-sensical to insist that a 'weaponless attack'(AKA Unarmed Strke) is a type of weapon.

So, to me at least, that all makes sense. But we also all know that a fist (or elbow, or foot, etc) can also be used to cause damage, similar to how a weapon works. Hence the rule/errata clarifying that you can use an Unarmed Strike when making a Melee Weapon Attack. That seems to follow everyone's common experiences and knowledge.... I don't see how that is at all convoluted.

Agreed. This also illustrates why 'improvised weapons' are not weapons either. You don't open a crate of, say, candlesticks and exclaim that you have found a stash of weapons!

...unless you are in the library with Doctor Black while playing Cluedo...
 

Coredump

Explorer
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/weapon?s=t

According to the dictionary anything can be a weapon. Isn't that what happens when you attain the highest rank in a martial art form you sign a register saying your body is now a lethal weapon? I could be wrong but that's how I understand it
Your link does not agree with you..... The definition says any "instrument or device"..... Which would be a knife, not an elbow.
 

Remove ads

AD6_gamerati_skyscraper

Remove ads

Upcoming Releases

Top