Can a monk take Improved Natural Attack? - Official answer

[Dimwhit]

Yup, that's our purpose. Thanks for finally realizing our hidden agenda.

No, I realized it a few pages back.

The rules forum is fun. I should spend more time in here...

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

Actually, I don't think it's poorly written at all. It seems pretty clear to me. Some people just don't like the ruling and are looking for ways to discredit it.

I happen to like the ruling and agree that it would not be unbalanced to allow it. I don't think that the RAW supports the ruling. Sorry about that.

 

[No Name]

As an avid monk fan, I truly wish that I could just read the INA feat and see the monk class referenced in there.

I have no qualms about reading the monk's unarmed strike class ability and rationalising that it only applies to things like casting of magic fang, magic weapon, bless weapon etc or the use of certain potions. After all, it is not a bite/claw/gore etc as natural attacks are defined in the MM.

However, equally I would happily (if I were a DM) rule that INA could apply. I don't think it does, and unfortunately I can't add any rules insight to this entertaining discussion that hasn't already been put forward.

No one has mentioned the martial arts styles from Oriental Adventures. The Fists of Iron (?) style required numerous feats to qualify for and effectively (there's that word again!) gave the same benefits as INA (upped unarmed strike by one die size).

IDHMBIFOM right now, but IIRC the prerequisites were the Power Attack, Improved Sunder, Eagle Claw and one or two other feats, and a minimum strength.

It seems to me that this approach is (albeit under 3.0e) significantly more costly to attain under the styles system than through one simple feat. That suggests to me that INA should not be available to monks as a general rule.

I too am a fan of the monk class. I find your reasoning valid, however, I think you are missing some relevant information. "Characters of all classes, however, can learn at least some of the techniques of martial arts..." (Oriental Adventures, p.79). What this says to me is that any class, even a wizard, could improve his unarmed strike damage by taking the required feats for Empty Hand Mastery. None of the feats required for EHM are monk specific (in relation to class abilities). Perhaps it is reasonable for a monk to attain something with one simple feat that would take another class several feats to acquire.

Some things are clear - humans do not have natural weapons, and even a human who takes Improved Unarmed Strike still does not change that fact. The much quoted text in the monk section seems to imply that monks are a special case; their unarmed strikes are considered natural weapons. Yet monk unarmed strikes also improve with BAB, similar to manufactured weapons. To me, it looks like monk unarmed strikes qualify as both. Also in my opinion, INA is not a game-breaking feat, although I would rule that it does not stack with EHM mentioned above.

I am in favor of monks taking INA.

 

[Pinotage]

I don't think that the RAW supports the ruling. Sorry about that.

You meant to say 'your interpretation of the RAW doesn't support the ruling'?

The RAW is open to interpretation just like anything else. It's not the ultimate authority on rules as many people make it out to be.

Pinotage

 

[turbo]

So he keeps the feat, but loses its effect. Again, I don't see why this is so hard.

It's hard, because you're confusing effects: the effect of the feat would be 'having the ability'--before he took the feat, the character didn't have the ability, and after he took the feat, he did have it; anything that he does with the ability, whether he uses it or not, whether it gets suppressed or not, has nothing to do with the feat: the anti-magic field does not suppress the feat's effect, because that would mean removing the ability.

 

[Ketjak]

Originally Posted by srd
IMPROVED SPELL RESISTANCE [EPIC]
Prerequisite: Must have spell resistance from a feat, class feature, or other permanent effect.
Benefit: The character’s spell resistance increases by +2.
Special: A character can gain this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.

That does indeed seem to say that feats are an effect, albeit a permanent one.

That does not follow, Artoomis. An effect generated by a thing is not the thing.

The AMF generated by a beholder's central eye is not the beholder's central eye. While saying "I am in the eye of the beholder" is poetic, it is not strictly true.

A wound generated by a sword is not the sword. We say "I have a wound in my arm inflicted by a sword," not "I have a sword in my arm" (unless, of course, the sword is still lodged there).

The effect generated by a thing is different from the thing.

The effect of the feat is not the feat. The bonus to initiative due to Improved Initiative is not Improved Initiative. Improved Initiative is a feat that grants the effect of +4 bonus on initiative checks. Similarly, Cleave grants its effect, and it has two prerequisites that must be met before the feat can be taken (STR 13+, Power Attack).

Identically, Improved Natural Attack grants its effect (natural weapon damage increases by one step) after the feat prerequisites (natural weapon, BAB) are met.

Just saying the monk's Improved Unarmed Strike is a natural weapon doesn't make it say so, since the rules do not say that it is. They do say that it is treated as one (and as a manufactured weapon) for the purposes of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons, not that it is one.

So the Improved Natural Attack feat cannot be gained by a human (or elf/dwarf/gnome/halfling/half-orc/half-elf) monk, since a human (et al.) monk doesn't have a natural attack. If a magic item (say, gloves of improved natural weapon) that grants the feat were employed, that monk certainly could benefit from the effect of the feat granted by the magic item.

Again, note that the thing (gloves of...) are not the effect (Improved Natural Attack feat or the feat's damage step increase effect).

Interestingly, a lizardfolk monk with the feat who dies and is reincarnated as a human monk cannot use his Improved Natural Attack feat, since he no longer has the prerequisites for the feat according to the SRD. So sad!

- Ket

 

[turbo]

Improved Initiative is a feat that grants the effect

The feat grants the effect when the feat is taken, as an effect of leveling up, which is the only time that the feat is ever interacted with: the character takes the feat, he has the ability, and that's it for the feat; it doesn't continually generate an effect; it is a one-time, permanent effect, which means that it is an effect, which means that the monk's unarmed strike counts as a natural weapon for it.

 

[Dimwhit]

Ketjak, you're the only one to provide a coherent reason for not allowing that feat. I still disagree with you, though. I think you're being way too literal-minded. Saying the feat isn't the effect is splitting hairs that shouldn't be split. They're one in the same, since the feat does not exist without the effect, just as just as a Charm spell would not exist without the charm effect.

 

[turbo]

A wound generated by a sword is not the sword. We say "I have a wound in my arm inflicted by a sword," not "I have a sword in my arm" (unless, of course, the sword is still lodged there).

This is a perfect demonstration of why so many people are fooled by the language: who believes the sword wields itself?--or that a feat is ever wielded???

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

The feat grants the effect when the feat is taken, as an effect of leveling up, which is the only time that the feat is ever interacted with: the character takes the feat, he has the ability, and that's it for the feat

Unless you happen to know a psion with Psychic Reformation.