Improved monk attack

[Sir ThornCrest]

what defines a natural weapon? they arent unnatural weapons

The monk needs as much help as he can get, causing 3.5 points of damage more per blow at 12th level...?...at 12th level who cares about 3.5 hit points of damage. Are you saying its over powering them? Comparing them to a fighter that gets +4 with 2 feats doesnt work, the fighter has like what 5 or more combat feats than a monk at this level.....his weapons are 1d10 or more + str + specialization +++ tin combat the monk is no comparison to a fighter...

 

[Egres]

The monk needs as much help as he can get, causing 3.5 points of damage more per blow at 12th level...?...at 12th level who cares about 3.5 hit points of damage. Are you saying its over powering them? Comparing them to a fighter that gets +4 with 2 feats doesnt work, the fighter has like what 5 or more combat feats than a monk at this level.....his weapons are 1d10 or more + str + specialization +++ tin combat the monk is no comparison to a fighter...

The question is: why should we compare the monk with the fighter?

 

[Crothian]

Wasn't this arguement and answer already ruled on by the trusted people of the FAQ or some such like that? This seems so familar, I recall it being ruled that monks attacks were not natural weapons.

 

[Mordane76]

Wasn't this arguement and answer already ruled on by the trusted people of the FAQ or some such like that? This seems so familar, I recall it being ruled that monks attacks were not natural weapons.

I've been reading through the FAQ trying to find such a reference, but I haven't so far. I've found snippets that allude to this being their point of view about the matter, but none that outright says it.

 

[Sir ThornCrest]

Diirk#12 post on this thread made mention of comparing a fighter with Monk.

I like the idea of monks, unarmored butt kicker. But for a class that is solely a melee combatant they dont cause good damage their ac blows in mid to later levels if you have a high wis and dex then its ok at best but not for a toe to toe guy, they have limited combat feats, dont get me wrong they like any other class if they roll good their great. I just saw my friend play one from 4th to 12th level and right around 9th he was crying "all I do is run around fast and annoy the enemy"

The question is: why should we compare the monk with the fighter?

 

[CRGreathouse]

Here's how I handle it:

Suppose a fighter took Improved Natural Attack with his unarmed strike. This is legitimate under the rules, as a normal unarmed strike is just a natural attack (and doesn't function like a manufactured weapon at times, like the monk's attacks). If the fighter's human, his damage goes from 1d3 to 1d4.

If he takes a monk level later, his 1d6 damage will replace the 1d4. In the same way, a monk won't gain any benefit from this feat, since his class damage is already better than what he'd get from the feat. The monk class doesn't care what the underlying damage is; it just replaces it once it's better.

 

[Doctor Shaft]

Empty Hand Mastery

For those unaware, in the campaign Oriental Adventures, there are other "unarmed" feats that you can take (many of which are extremely interesting and fun for monks, like Defensive Throw).

In addition, they have "School Masteries" that you can earn by following certain feat progressions. For Empty Hand mastery, a monk has to take a bunch of feats that normally would have no real benefit to the class when in combination, but the overall effect is that you increase your damage-dice one level, just like Improved Natural Attack... only much more costly.

Knowing this information, I'd say that it makes a pretty good argument that since 3.0... unarmed strikes very well probably weren't considered natural weapons. Or... if that's not true... well I don't think PC's are 'supposed' to take feats from the Monster Manuals, etc., anyway (do you allow your PC's to also take Ability Focus for the Stunning Fist abilities).

In terms of the hit dice being two high or unbalanced... I couldn't disagree more.

You presented averages for damage, which is cool and informative. But you also completely left out the part about a Fighter's generally superior AC and AB. Monks, even just using core, standard rules, have always had higher damage averages than fighters to a degree, and they've also always hit far less often, and get hit more often.

This isn't to say that monks are poor at higher levels. While I would agree that Improved Natural Attack is a bit of a gimme feat for monks, we could also go through the many books with feats and come up with interesting fighter damaging combinations as well. So I still don't believe a monk getting more damage progression is that out of whack. They've always relied on getting multiple attacks and, when actually hitting, creating devestating effects like stunning, or doing lots of damage.

At the end of the day, a monk only has a Rogue BAB progression with extra stacking attacks when using Flurry of Blows (which clearly gets helped out by a Monk's Belt if you just allow monks to pick up whatever magical equipment they want in your campaign).

 

[Diirk]

Comparing a monk to a fighter is pointless.. at the end of the day we're talking about a single feat with negligable prerequisites that gives up to +9 average damage to each hit with absolutely no downside. There is no other feat anywhere that comes even remotely close to this power level without a significant cost.

 

[Evilhalfling]

I think I would build improved natural attack into a single monk style - similar to empty hand mastery. Could someone post the prequsits?
Otherwise it looks like a DM judgement call and I think the posted damage comparisons have convinced me against it.
Hmm although someone is writting up a halfling monk, I might allow him to take it as a varient, which merely increases his damage to medium.

 

[Egres]

Here's how I handle it:

Suppose a fighter took Improved Natural Attack with his unarmed strike. This is legitimate under the rules, as a normal unarmed strike is just a natural attack (and doesn't function like a manufactured weapon at times, like the monk's attacks). If the fighter's human, his damage goes from 1d3 to 1d4.
.

Actually, Unarmed Strikes aren't Natural Weapons, and the term "Natural Attack" isn't defined by the RAW.

Look at the Main 3.5 FAQ:

A natural weapon
(any natural weapon) is neither an unarmed strike nor a special
monk weapon