D&D 5E Monk unarmed strike count as weapons?

[CapnZapp]

The errata says:
“Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an un-armed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons). On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier. You are proficient with your unarmed strikes.”

It's intent is clear. "Instead of X you can do Y" is the same as "You can do Y instead of X".

Reversing the sentence, it reads "You can use an un-armed strike to make a melee weapon attack instead of using a weapon".

Thus unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks for the purposes of the OP's question. Or would do if the DM wasn't being strangely obstinate.

The issue arises because of the phrase "melee weapon attack" but it exists to differentiate between melee attacks from spells ("melee spell attacks") and from not-spells (hence "melee weapon attack").

I'm not sure what other term would cover it, tbh. "Melee physical attack", maybe? Though that sounds strange.

Simpler to acknowledge that, while you can use your fists (or head, elbow, knee, foot) as a weapon (by using them to physically attack someone), it doesn't make them an actual weapon.

Sorry, but your post makes for a poster example of what's strange and complicated about that errata.

This is not directed at you, but after reading your post anybody should realize how unfortunately technical and counter to 5th edition's overall design philosophy it is.

 

[pemerton]

I agree that there is something a bit counterintuitive about making a melee weapon attack without using a melee weapon.

 

[The Grassy Gnoll]

The main reasons the unarmed strike has them tied in linguistic knots are:

- the majority of non-spell attacks and combat abilities are intended to be only used when wielding an actual weapon in hand, such as Duelling Fighting Style (this is why the word "weapon" is used in the term "melee weapon attack").

- the proclivities of certain people who would insist that, were unarmed strikes counted as weapons, it should be possible to silver or enchant your fists (this is why the errata specifically states "none of which count as weapons").

- and this is why we can't have nice things.

 

[Krachek]

As the title says. Just wondering in regards to the wording on stunning strikes and how they interact with the combat styles if you MC as a fighter.

Honestly I think rules get messy there.
Stunning strike use ki to stun with weapon,
Open hand technique use ki to various effect with unarmed strike grant by furry of blow.
bzzzz.
Not the better intuitive rule.