D&D 5E I need some help with a few basic rules clarifications

[Hawk Diesel]

Some distinctions that come to mind:
Weapons can be disarmed; fists cannot.
Weapons can be silvered or enchanted or made of cold iron, etc.

I would argue that fists can be disarmed, you just can't pick them back up and use them afterwards (at least not without a regenerate spell). Additionally, what about magic rings, bracelets, or even brass knuckles? Those are all ways that a fantasy setting could allow for enchantments with unarmed strikes or making the as effective as certain special materials (cold iron, silver, adamantine, byeshk, ect).

But while there are these minor discrepancies, it does not change the fact that an unarmed strike or natural weapon can effectively be used in every way the weapons could. If I am wielding a shortsword in one hand, why could I strike with a second shortsword in my off-hand but not with a fist, kick, or headbutt? Not only is this kind of fighting widely portrayed in cinema, but it is also realistic and effective. Also, how does a second shortsword count as a light weapon, but not my fist? It is literally lighter than if I had a shortsword in it.

This is one of those problems where the mechanics get in the way of or otherwise obfuscate what would otherwise be reasonable or realistic. Like I get where a weapon would be needed for something like the defensive duelist feat (see above with disarming a fist) but that is such a niche instance. In the larger scheme, there is no real distinction, except in damage/lethality.

 

[Ratskinner]

Maybe ask your DM for stats on brass knuckles?

 

[Rya.Reisender]

I would argue that fists can be disarmed, you just can't pick them back up and use them afterwards (at least not without a regenerate spell).

I'm sure the players didn't expect their PCs getting their hands cut off when they agreed with the DM to use the optional disarming rule.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

I'm sure the players didn't expect their PCs getting their hands cut off when they agreed with the DM to use the optional disarming rule.

Depends on the group and highlights the importance of session 0. I've been in groups where that would be ok, and other where it wouldn't.

Additionally disarm does not need to be literal. Ever hit your hand or foot funny to where it went to sleep or got numb? That cpuld be a version of "disarming" an unarmed strike. Maybe it takes a round to pass, or you need to take an action to rub thw numbness out.

 

[Jawsofhana]

Hey there! Welcome to the boards! Here's some XP!

One of the things that it took me a while to realize is that my concept did not always have to be represented by the mechanics, but that I could rather "reskin" the mechanics to look the way I wanted.

As a relevant example for you, it seems you want to do some two weapon fighting but you want to use your fists. And it sounds like you want to do this by the rules. But obviously, it's no fun fighting with fist that deal 1 + Str/Dex damage (or in your case 1d4 + Str/Dex damage since you have Tavern Brawler).

So, first question is... do you have the Dual Wielder feat? If so, use two rapiers. If not, use two shortswords.

Now hear me out, because I know you're probably thinking, "Why would I do that? I want to use my FISTS!

And yes, you can still do this. Because let me ask you... what makes a shortsword a shortsword? Or a rapier a rapier? Because see, I can take a weapon that deals 1d6 damage, has the light and finesse properties, and reimagine it as a gauntlet. Or a punch dagger. Or brass knuckles. There is nothing saying that a weapon that deals 1d6 damage with the light and finesse property HAS to be a shortsword. We have just all agreed that these mechanics should be shaped into a shortsword. But you can reimagine it anyway you want.

So I would suggest talking to your DM about:

1) requesting to retrain the Tavern Brawler feat into something else (unless you really want it for more than the 1d4 unarmed strike damage). The stat bump or Dual Wielder feat would be better.

2) Requesting to reskin shortswords or rapiers into brass knuckles (or something similar). As long as you have proficiency with the weapon and don't change the mechanics, its effectively the same thing. If is also easy to request for the weapon to deal bludgeoning damage rather than slashing or piercing, since each of those damage types are equal to one another. The only difference is what is thematically appropriate for the weapon.

This would give you an effective finesse weapon to use with your sneak attacks, give you the thematic image of using your fist to deal the damage, and remain very close to the rules.



I would say an unarmed strike can count for two weapon fighting, but not for the Dual Wielder feat since it specifically states you need to wield two weapons.

Edit: Nope. While silly, the Two Weapon Fighting specifies the off-hand attack must be a light melee weapon, which unarmed strike does not count for.



You would only get three attacks if you have the Extra Attack feature (such as being a level 5 fighter) and you use your attack action and a bonus action to get all three attacks.



No. You can only give away an attack from your main attack action, since Commander's Strike also requires a bonus action to give the attack to an ally. Since you need the bonus action for the maneuver, you couldn't also take the bonus action for an attack.



Yes, you can only make one sneak attack a round, unless you go with the Scout (a rogue archetype that allows for a second sneak attack in a round).

Thank you.

I figured I could just use two daggers, or one dagger in the off-hand. But I guess that you'd need one dagger in each hand to get the actual possibility for the bonus attack. I was also under the impression that you gained an extra bonus action to make the attack, but now I understand how it works.

With level 5 battle master, I have enough bonus actions to burn anyway. So it might not be that big a deal. I just want to not unknowingly cheat the rules. Should probably have chosen something else than two weapon fighting feat. I can live with it, though. Nice for the surprise attack round. Since it is possibly 3 crits with stat bonus. Even though it's just 6-9 base damage, plus the sneak attack.

The dm has already allowed me to count the fists as light finesse weapons. She doesn't seem to think it affects the game much, should anyone with no unarmed skills try to fight the same way.

The feats are Tavern Brawler, Two Weapon Fighter and Grappler.

The disarm and push attacks are both DC17 str. saving throws, which also seems fun to use. If only for those "This is Sparta" moments.

The general idea is to be able to sneak up on people, grab them, and say "sleep". But it's a diciplined military fighter, not some zen monk from some mountain order.
He is also skilled with other weapons, and can adapt situations. Think of Gannicus, from Spartacus, when he ditches his shortswords, in order to bash the opponents head in with his bare hands. Or when he uses grappling in the blindfight at the market. Negating the disadvantage rolls for being blind.

Thank you very much for clarifying.

 

[Rya.Reisender]

With level 5 battle master, I have enough bonus actions to burn anyway.

Probably just bad phrasing, but to emphasize this again: No matter what, you always only have one bonus action per round.

From the basic rules:

You can take only one bonus action on your turn, so you
must choose which bonus action to use when you have
more than one available.

Nothing in the rules gives you extra bonus actions - it just gives you more options on what to do with your one bonus action.