Can a monk use snap kick?

[kerbarian]

I had assumed that a monk could use the snap kick feat (Bo9S) for an extra unarmed strike, but I just noticed something in the wording. Snap kick triggers "When you make a melee attack with one or more melee weapons". So it looks like a monk using only unarmed strikes wouldn't get an extra attack from snap kick, since he's not using a "melee weapon".

Is there anything in the rules, though, that identifies a monk's unarmed strike as a melee weapon? Or, alternately, is there any way for a monk to deal his unarmed strike damage via a melee weapon?

 

[Cheiromancer]

Well, since a monk's unarmed strike obviously satisfies the prerequisite for the purpose of INA, it should count as a melee weapon for the purposes of this feat.

[edit] My answer is unnecessarily provocative: I apologize. But really, the issue you raise involves the same kind of interpretative difficulties as the "can monks take INA?" question. And _that_ question is debated interminably, both on these boards and elsewhere, to no one's satisfaction.

I'd say that if monks can take INA in your campaign, they can use this feat. And if they can't, they can't.

 

[shilsen]

Well, since a monk's unarmed strike obviously satisfies the prerequisite for the purpose of INA...

*backs away slowly, and then ducks and runs*

Get out! Get out! She's gonna blow!

 

[starwed]

Is there anything in the rules, though, that identifies a monk's unarmed strike as a melee weapon? Or, alternately, is there any way for a monk to deal his unarmed strike damage via a melee weapon?

Happily, there is no ambiguity here:

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.

This is under the section about how melee weapons are classified. The intro makes it clear that "light weapon" is a subcategory of "melee weapon."

This designation is a measure of how much effort it takes to wield a weapon in combat. It indicates whether a melee weapon, when wielded by a character of the weapon’s size category, is considered a light weapon, a one-handed weapon, or a two-handed weapon.

So there's RAW evidence for you. There's also the minor fact that you make melee attacks with an unarmed strike.

And here's even stronger evidence. From the seciton on unarmed strikes in combat:

Striking for damage with punches, kicks, and head butts is much like attacking with a melee weapon, except for the following:

In other words, an unarmed strike is treated exactly like a melee weapon, except for a finite list of explicitly declared exceptions.

Of course, CustServ has also stated explicitly that monk's can use Snap Kick, and in making a case to a DM I'd bring that up first, but there's no need to get bogged down in the same type of debate as INA.

 

[moritheil]

The answer really has nothing to do with INA - the INA issue is about whether or not a monk qualifies for a feat using the text that a monk's IUS is a natural weapon for the purposes of spells and effects; it's already established that the monk's IUS is a weapon, which is all that is needed here.

 

[kerbarian]

Happily, there is no ambiguity here:

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon.

Okay, that one's helpful. The other rules quotes are arguable, I think, but this one is pretty clear. The reasons I was thinking that an unarmed strike didn't count as a melee weapon are the glossary entry

"melee weapon: A handheld weapon designed for close combat."

And the weapon chart, which lists Unarmed Attacks and then, separately, Light Melee Weapons, One-Handed Melee Weapons, and Two-Handed Melee Weapons.