D&D 3E/3.5 Can a Monk use the Improved Natural Attack feat (from the MM 3.5)

[Bad Paper]

At level 1, a monk's unarmed damage is 1d6. At level 4, his damage goes from 1d6 to 1d8. This is essentially improving his "natural weapon". The monk gets this enhancement again at 8,12,16, and 20. From my perspective, this is like a chain of feats, and improved natural weapon is the equivalent of the feat the monk receives at level 4. So even if I were to allow it, the benefit would only help the monk for levels 1-3.

I would reduce this further and say that a level 1 monk has already had his unarmed damage improved in this manner. A level 1 monk has already benefitted from an improvement that overlaps with anything that Improved Natural Attack would have given. Why is it better? Because a monk can keep improving this, whereas you can only take INA once for any particular weapon.
INA is stupid. Go find a better feat.

 

[Land Outcast]

INA is stupid. Go find a better feat.

Player: But... there is no other feat that allows me to deal damage as a large monk... almost like the feat "empower unarmed strike", you know, even the (approx.) *1.5 multiplier...
*sigh*

 

[dvvega]

I personally agree with Patryn when he states that Monks cannot qualify for the feat. For they have no natural attacks.

They only have an attack from that is treated as a natural weapon for things that improve natural weapons (for example the Magic Fang spell).

However I must disagree with his assertion that the monk cannot use the feat if he otherwise qualifies for it.

Why? Because the feat changes a natural weapon by increasing its base damage die. The monk can pretend to have a natural weapon for effects that adjust natural weapons. Thus the feat can be used. It is the gaining of the feat that is the difficult thing with a standard monk.

In addition ... feats do not stay fixed as you improve in level/power. So the feat would improve the unarmed damage of a monk as they gain levels. Thus they will always be one damage die higher than the average monk. This is a good representation of a Stone Monkey style monk for example.

The trick is qualifying in the first place.

D

 

[Diirk]

Thats an interesting point. As a monks unarmed strike counts as both a manufactured and a natural weapon for the purposes of spells and effects, and as flurry is presumably an 'effect', does that mean that a monk can't use unarmed strikes (which count as natural weapons for this purpose, remember!) as part of a flurry ?

Personally, I think that improved unarmed strike provides too much benefit for a single feat. With a well built monk, its a single feat that can provide somewhere in the realms of 9ish extra average damage a hit or so (I forget the exact amount). It certainly does more damage than greater weapon specialization, and thats 2 feats.

The counter argument is generally 'Oh, but its ok, because monks suck.'

 

[Scion]

Personally, I think that improved unarmed strike provides too much benefit for a single feat. With a well built monk, its a single feat that can provide somewhere in the realms of 9ish extra average damage a hit or so (I forget the exact amount). It certainly does more damage than greater weapon specialization, and thats 2 feats.

either weapon focus or exotic weapon proficiency can both provide more damage than the weapon specialization or greater Not all feats are equal in power nor equal in use.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Thats an interesting point. As a monks unarmed strike counts as both a manufactured and a natural weapon for the purposes of spells and effects, and as flurry is presumably an 'effect', does that mean that a monk can't use unarmed strikes (which count as natural weapons for this purpose, remember!) as part of a flurry ?

It's an effect, but it's not an effect that enhances or improves a manufactured or natural weapon. It lets you use that weapon more often, but the weapon is unchanged.

As opposed to, say, Greater Magic Weapon, which grants the weapon an enhancement bonus to attack and damage.

-Hyp.

 

[Quasqueton]

On the subject of monks and feats from the MM:

Can a monk (or any character for that matter) with the Stunning Fist feat take Ability Focus to boost the save DC?

Ability Focus prerequisite is "special attack". I've seen Stunning Fist listed in the Special Attack line of a stat block (can't remember where, right now). I allowed the monk in my campaign to take it. Had he asked, I probably would have let him take Improved Natural Attack, too.

Quasqueton

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

I'd allow it Ability Focus on a Stunning Fist, yes.

And, heck, I'd probably let a monk (human or otherwise) take INA - generally speaking, I've never seen a monk that could out-beat anything except in a grapple, so I wouldn't have a balance-related problem with it.

 

[Sejs]

On the subject of monks and feats from the MM:

Can a monk (or any character for that matter) with the Stunning Fist feat take Ability Focus to boost the save DC?

Ability Focus prerequisite is "special attack". I've seen Stunning Fist listed in the Special Attack line of a stat block (can't remember where, right now). I allowed the monk in my campaign to take it.

Yes.

I actually believe that Stunning Fist and an Assassin's Death Attack are used as examples of such at some point even.

 

[dagger]

What about a duergar monk who enlarges himself in combat? I have a player doing this a lot right now.

I'd allow it Ability Focus on a Stunning Fist, yes.

And, heck, I'd probably let a monk (human or otherwise) take INA - generally speaking, I've never seen a monk that could out-beat anything except in a grapple, so I wouldn't have a balance-related problem with it.