How does "Improved Natural Attack" work with a Monk

[Artoomis]

Yeah, it's clear that they are not natural weapons. They are just treated as one for certain spells and effects.

A prerequisite for a feat is not a spell or effect.

What's an "effect?" If raising the damage dice by one category is an "effect," than, for the purposes of this feat, the monk's unarmed attack qualifies.

It certainly seems like an effect "that enhance(s) or improve(s) ... natural weapons" to me, thus the feat is available for monks because the monk's unarmed attack is treated as a natural weapon.

 

[jarlaxlecq]

What's an "effect?" If raising the damage dice by one category is an "effect," than, for the purposes of this feat, the monk's unarmed attack qualifies.

It certainly seems like an effect "that enhance(s) or improve(s) ... natural weapons" to me, thus the feat is available for monks because the monk's unarmed attack is treated as a natural weapon.

so assuming the DM goes for it, because bottom line its up to him to OK something like this. What kind of damage would a monk (medium size) do?

 

[Artoomis]

so assuming the DM goes for it, because bottom line its up to him to OK something like this. What kind of damage would a monk (medium size) do?

The same as monk (large size). If you look at the table, I think you'll find it shows the damage going up one "unit."

If the DM does not go for it, he's not following the core rules. Of course, that's his choice.

On the other hand, a DM might go along with the view that the monk already has this feat, and then some, and thus deny it.

Finally, someone implied that a fighter take an exotic weapon proficiency to increase the damage die of a weapon - I'm not sure that's true generally, but it's certainly true in some cases. This is precisely the same effect, and so would seem to be fine from a game-balance view.

 

[Caliban]

What's an "effect?" If raising the damage dice by one category is an "effect," than, for the purposes of this feat, the monk's unarmed attack qualifies.

It certainly seems like an effect "that enhance(s) or improve(s) ... natural weapons" to me, thus the feat is available for monks because the monk's unarmed attack is treated as a natural weapon.

Sure, the feat will work on the monks unarmed strike if they can take it, but qualifying for the feat is not an effect.

You have to meet the prerequisites and take the feat before you can get the effect of the feat, being eligible for the effect the feat produces does not help you qualify for the feat itself.

 

[Scion]

Does the feat grant an effect that enhances natural weapons? If so then the unarmed attack counts as a natural attack for that feat.

All you have to do is look at the feat and say, 'what is it going to do?' If it does something that qualifies then the monks unarmed attack qualifies as a prereq for it. It isnt looking at it backwards or anything like that anymore than casting magic fang which works the exact same way.

 

[Artoomis]

Sure, the feat will work on the monks unarmed strike if they can take it, but qualifying for the feat is not an effect.

You have to meet the prerequisites and take the feat before you can get the effect of the feat, being eligible for the effect the feat produces does not help you qualify for the feat itself.

That's like saying the Magic Fang spell won't work on a monk because he fails to meet the spell's requirement of having a natural weapon. It should be obvious that this would be looking at it the wrong way.

In this case you must first look to see the effect being generated - if it is to enhance or improve a natural weapon, than the monk's unarmed attack counts as a natural weapon.

So, for feats, first look to see if it is an effect that will enhance or improve a natural weapon, if so, the monks unarmed attack qualifies. The same is true for manufactured weapons.

 

[jarlaxlecq]

That's like saying the Magic Fang spell won't work on a monk because he fails to meet the spell's requirement of having a natural weapon. It should be obvious that this would be looking at it the wrong way.

In this case you must first look to see the effect being generated - if it is to enhance or improve a natural weapon, than the monk's unarmed attack counts as a natural weapon.

So, for feats, first look to see if it is an effect that will enhance or improve a natural weapon, if so, the monks unarmed attack qualifies. The same is true for manufactured weapons.

Magic Fang works with being a monk right? I was under the assumtion that it did.

 

[Artoomis]

Magic Fang works with being a monk right? I was under the assumtion that it did.

Yes, and that's my point. If that works, so should a feat that improves a natural weapon.

 

[jarlaxlecq]

Yes, and that's my point. If that works, so should a feat that improves a natural weapon.

So what would happen if you have that feat and then the mage of the party casts Enlarge on you. Would you be doing damage as a Huge Creature?

 

[Artoomis]

So what would happen if you have that feat and then the mage of the party casts Enlarge on you. Would you be doing damage as a Huge Creature?

Yes. Cool, eh?