D&D 5E Martial arts for other classes

[cbwjm]

Wow, that feat is pretty powerful.

It is 1 and 1/3 other feats as it gives all the benefits of Martial Adept and 1/3 of Tavern Brawler. PLUS it makes Unarmed Strikes Finesse Weapons so not only can you use Dex for attack and damage, but you can now sneak attack, use Two-weapon fighting, Dueling and Two-Weapon Fighting Styles, etc. etc.

That is really good for 1 feat!

That's true, I hadn't thought through the implications of making them simple finesse weapons. I wasn't too worried about it stealing from martial adept since it has a curated list of maneuovres, but thinking about it, if what you want is on that list, why would anyone take martial adept.

 

[Greg K]

Please Delete. I actually posted a reply to one person.

 

[DND_Reborn]

Currently there is a thread about unarmed attacks not counting as weapons and It's actually kind of interesting that this has popped up as I've recently been thinking about making subclasses that provide unarmed combat ability for other classes.

LOL I'll be watching this thread with extreme interest. I am curious what people come up with.

 

[Greg K]

you can now use Two-weapon fighting, Dueling and Two-Weapon Fighting Styles, etc. etc.

That's true, I hadn't thought through the implications of making them simple finesse weapons. I wasn't too worried about it stealing from martial adept since it has a curated list of maneuovres, but thinking about it, if what you want is on that list, why would anyone take martial adept.

It has been a while since I have looked at the feat, but one difference, is that your unarmed attack damage is d4 and the maneuvers can only be used with unarmed strikes.
Also from my understanding, unarmed attacks are not actual melee weapons and, therefore, do not apply to the two weapon fighting and the two weapon fighting style as two weapon fighting specifies held weapons in each hand.
Now, granted as I am not playing or running 5e, and have not even looked at the 5e rules in a while, there may be more that I am missing.

 

[SkidAce]

It has been a while since I have looked at the feat, but one difference, is that your unarmed attack damage is d4 and the maneuvers can only be used with unarmed strikes. Also from my understanding, unarmed attacks are not actual melee weapons and, therefore, do not apply to the two weapon fighting and the two weapon fighting style as two weapon fighting specifies held weapons in each hand.
Now, granted as I am not playing or running 5e, and have not even looked at the 5e rule in a while, there may be more that I am missing.

There may still be flaws with it, but it plays well in our campaign. Probably could tighten up the wording.

There was no intention for it to work with sneak attack. (Edit: or the fighting styles)

Its basically meant to be an unarmed martial adept. And you pick maneuvers based on your "style"

 

[AkaKageWarrior]

"Martial Arts", hmmm, let me spoil your party (and be the smartass).
Using weapons is "Martial Arts", and far more effective than unarmed strikes.
Believe me, I tried it (only in training!).
Gimme a good kitchen knife and I could probably kill a real world karate champion.

Anyway, real-world-smartassery aside, I think the tavern brawler feat does exactly the right thing.

The above mentioned feat is also okay, except for the finesse thing.
Dexterity to damage is a big mistake of 5e IMO.
Again something I learned from my martial arts (weaponless) training:
If I had to go to a (not only fist-) fight and I could take some guys from my gym, I would take the heavyweight guys with me, not the lightweights. Mass hits harder. Period.
Oops, even more smartassery...

 

[Salthorae]

"Martial Arts", hmmm, let me spoil your party (and be the smartass).
Using weapons is "Martial Arts", and far more effective than unarmed strikes.
Believe me, I tried it (only in training!).
Gimme a good kitchen knife and I could probably kill a real world karate champion.

Anyway, real-world-smartassery aside, I think the tavern brawler feat does exactly the right thing.

The above mentioned feat is also okay, except for the finesse thing.
Dexterity to damage is a big mistake of 5e IMO.
Again something I learned from my martial arts (weaponless) training:
If I had to go to a (not only fist-) fight and I could take some guys from my gym, I would take the heavyweight guys with me, not the lightweights. Mass hits harder. Period.
Oops, even more smartassery...

I think the Dex to damage is supposed to be "hitting vitally more accurately" concept. So, sure mass hits harder, but high dex will punch your throat and cut off your air supply while str will give you a body blow that might knock the wind out of you.

I don't mind it outside of the fact that it just piled onto Dex's god stat status as best for saves + init + AC + att/dmg + some of the best skills, etc.

 

[Hawk Diesel]

Warlock Pact Boon or Invocation: Eldritch Touch. You gain the ability to deal force damage with unarmed strikes, and an appropriate damage die. Your unarmed strikes can count as weapons in any context where it’s beneficial.

Sorry, I'm picturing a warlock (played by Harrison Ford) aggressively touching someone with their index finger, and that person getting knocked out.

 

[Salthorae]

Sorry, I'm picturing a warlock (played by Harrison Ford) aggressively touching someone with their index finger, and that person getting knocked out.

Haha!

Now I'm picturing him from Temple of Doom ripping people's beating hearts out. He made a Pact with Kali!

 

[doctorbadwolf]

Sorry, I'm picturing a warlock (played by Harrison Ford) aggressively touching someone with their index finger, and that person getting knocked out.

Why sorry? That’s hilarious!

Besides, it’s not like I’d change a design suggestion of something just because some folks might get silly associations with it.