Can a monk take Improved Natural Attack?: The Poll!

[Shadowdweller]

I think that by a rigid interpretation of semantics: No. But I think rigid interpretations of D&D semantics are the height of idiocy, and fail to achieve the intent of the rules. So I would allow it as a DM.

Certainly from a balance perspective, monks do not seem to be in danger of hogging the limelight. The only possible balance consideration I can forsee in allowing the feat is that, in some cases, it raises average damage more than Weapon Specialization, which is just about the ONE (well, one of three in 3.5) thing unique to the Fighter class.

Actually, as I read the rules, it potentially increases a monk's average unarmed damage by a fairly significant amount. Since 1d10 (avg 5.5) becomes 2d8 (avg 9), that means a high level monk's strikes (2d10, avg 11) increase by 7 each (4d8, avg 18) for the price of a single feat.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Now, my answer is assuming you are asking how I would rule it in my campaign.

I'm with CGoat's DM here:

he describes the improved Natural attack as a critter with larger teeth or bigger claws... hence the larger damage.

That is how I use the Improved Natural Attack in my campaign. I would allow (say) a lizardman to take this feat in order to get larger jaws or claws, BUT it would have no effect on his monkish unarmed combat damage, only on his bite or claw damage.

So that is how I would handle it .

Cheers

 

[Lord Pendragon]

I voted no. I'm assuming we mean a human monk, who doesn't otherwise have natural attacks and is counting on the "a monk's unarmed attack is considered both a natural and manufactured weapon for the purposes of spells and effects yadda yadda" clause to justify qualifying for the feat.

RAW, I do not believe a monk qualifies, and therefore a monk cannot take the feat.

If it were in my game, and a monk wanted to take the feat, I'd probably House Rule it to be possible. As has been mentioned, the monk isn't going to turn into a game-breaker as a result of this feat. But I do not believe that's the way the game, as written, works.

 

[fuindordm]

I voted No, but more because I think it will be misapplied. IMO, the feat represents an improvement in one of your specific natural weapons--claws, teeth, sting, tail bash, etc. It's a little bit physical evolution of the weapon, and a little bit specialization in the weapon.

I think a monk could take the feat, but it would represent an increase in his ability to attack with one appendage only--an Iron Fist, if you like. So I would give them the increased damage on only one attack
per round. If they flurry, they're attacking with all their free limbs--fists, feet, head butt. I just don't see the
monk using a single fist over and over like a jackhammer in a flurry of blows.

Ben

 

[Starglim]

I dislike the tendency to allow natural attacks to become monk attacks, so anything that increases the confusion between these two is a bad thing. Mechanically, it's probably not a big deal.

 

[Pinotage]

Voted Yes, even in the case of human monks. Feats can be considered effects, as Scion has indicated, and I don't think prerequisites should be separate from benefits when describing feats.

Pinotage

 

[glass]

It seems there are a number of people on this board who either have literacy issues or no respect for the wishes of others.

Except you didn't wish, you demanded (and a SHOUTED demand at that). Unless you are a mod, you don't get to dictate the content of other peoples posts.

EDIT: Plane Sailing does get to, however, so I'll shut up now.


glass.

 

[TheEvil]

Except you didn't wish, you demanded (and a SHOUTED demand at that). Unless you are a mod, you don't get to dictate the content of other peoples posts.

EDIT: Plane Sailing does get to, however, so I'll shut up now.


glass.

Actually, I was using caps to make sure that no one missed it. I also said please in the opening post to the poll. Much good as it did me...
Thank you Plane Sailing. I really don't want this to get bogged down in another can to - can not argument. That seems to drive off everyone else.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I'll bet you anything that if you do a knew poll and asked if people were assuming a human monk, more than 90% would say they were.

Accepted. Oh, and given that this poll, despite the vague wording, is less than 70% in favor, you lose. I'll accept a donation in the sum of US$50 (or 2-3 hours of volunteer work) to the American Red Cross or your charity of choice.

 

[apesamongus]

If they flurry, they're attacking with all their free limbs--fists, feet, head butt. I just don't see the
monk using a single fist over and over like a jackhammer in a flurry of blows.

Well, if he were holding a kama in that hand the rules explicitly allow him to use it for every single attack.