Monks wearing armor ... what penalties ?

[Brekki]

I understand the things about Wis to AC, level AC bonus and heightened movement, but ...

A monk wearing armor loses some abilities, including "favorable multiple unarmed attacks per round" ... is this the improved unarmed attack bonus chart, or also the ability to use "flurry of blows" ?

Furthermore, "her special abilities all face the arcane spell failure chance the armor type normally imposes" ... what does this mean ? Does this apply to the monks supernatural, extraordinary or spell-like abilities ? ... some of them or all of them, maybe even including the monks abilities outside these types ?

 

[Kraedin]

It means that a monk looses the favorable attack progression.

For example, a monk with a UAB of +15 normally gets attacks at +15/+12/+9/+6/+3. A monk wearing armor with a UAB of +15 would attack at +15/+10/+5.

The next bit means that any special abilities, that is, exceptional, supernatural, or spell-like abilities granted by the monk class require a spell failure roll.

 

[Brekki]

thx for the reply


Why would evasion (ex) call for a roll ? It states it can be used in light armor and is the same as the ability from the rogue, which doesn't need an arcane spell failure roll ...

Has anyone read anything "official" or Q&A about this ?

 

[Kraedin]

That means that if the monk is choosing to wear Heavy or Medium armor, evasion doesn't work at all, while if the monk chooses to wear Light armor, it works with a failure chance.

Why the difference from the rogue? Because the rogue's abilities aren't mystical, and the rogue is trained to use light armor, while the monk is not.

 

[Destil]

thx for the reply


Why would evasion (ex) call for a roll ? It states it can be used in light armor and is the same as the ability from the rogue, which doesn't need an arcane spell failure roll ...

Has anyone read anything "official" or Q&A about this ?

Indeed. The spell failure only really makes sense for spell-like and supernatural abilities like wholeness of body, empty body and such. Stuff like dimond body and perfect self would still work, simply because it dosn't make any sense that armor changes your type, or affects your metelabisim. Since the arcane spell failure is only mentioned for 'special abilities', per the rules everything would be affected. But common sense should really over-ride this, and thus it's primarly up to the DM...

But once he's wearing heavy armor he can't use evasion, no question there. This only works in light or no armor. You don't need a roll, because it's simply not allowed.

 

[Kraedin]

The Monk class description is the most error-ridden one in the PHB, so yes, the DM has to work when a player uses one.

I'll just list off some of the problems:

• The monk is not listed as having simple weapon profieciency (unarmed strike), and I have been unable to find a rule stating that unarmed strike is a natural weapon. This means that a monk is not profiecent with unarmed strike.
• Evasion issues, above.
• After 9th level the monks "running ability" is a supernatural one. (Not the monk's high walking speed.) Also, the monk's ability to run suffers a spell failure chance in armor.
• The perfect self entry indicates a outsider is an "extraplanar creature", which is not true, the description talks about "enchanted creatures", which is not a defined term, and indicates that protection from alignment spells repel "enchanted creatures", which is not true.

 

[CRGreathouse]

*The monk is not listed as having simple weapon profieciency (unarmed strike), and I have been unable to find a rule stating that unarmed strike is a natural weapon. This means that a monk is not profiecent with unarmed strike.
*Evasion issues, above.
*After 9th level the monks "running ability" is a supernatural one. (Not the monk's high walking speed.) Also, the monk's ability to run suffers a spell failure chance in armor.
*The perfect self entry indicates a outsider is an "extraplanar creature", which is not true, the description talks about "enchanted creatures", which is not a defined term, and indicates that protection from alignment spells repel "enchanted creatures", which is not true.

Unarmed strikes aren't simple weapons, they're natural weapons. All creatures are proficient with natural weapons (MM introduction). See magic fang, among other places, to find that unarmed strikes are natural weapons -- as if it wasn't obvious.

I don't think there's a problem with evasion.

Monk speed increase should be described as running ability -- think of how fast 50 ft per 6 seconds is, even if it's walking for them! Again, intent is clear and flavor works nicely.

I don't have my PH at the moment, so I can't debate the semantics of perfect self.

 

[Kraedin]

PHB, Glossary:

natural weapon: A creature's body part the deals normal damage in combat. Natural weapons include teeth, claws, horns, tails, and other appendages.

No mention of unarmed strike in the definition of natural weapon. Also, unarmed strikes don't do normal damage, so are excluded from this definition.

Monster Manual, pg. 7

Natural Weapons:These include teen, claws, sting, and the like. The entry gives the number of attacks along with the weapon. The first listing is for the creature's primary weapon, with an attack bonus including modifications for size and Strength (for melee attacks) or Dexterity (for ranged attacks). A creature with the Weapon Finesse feat can use its Dexterity modifier on melee attacks.
The remaining weapons are secondary and have -5 to the attack bonus, no matter how many there are. Creatures with the Multiattack feat suffer only a -2 penalty to secondary attacks.
All of the following assumes the creature makes a full attack and employs all its natural weapons. If a creature instead choses the attack option, it uses its primary attack bonus.
Unless noted otherwise, natural weapon threaten critical hits on a natural attack roll of 20.

Monster Manual, pg. 7

Natural Weapons: A creature's primary attack damage includes its full Strength modifier (one and a half times its Strength bonus if it is the creature's sole attack). Secondary attacks add only one-half the creature's Strength bonus.
If the attacks also cause some special effect other than damage, that information is given here.
Unless noted otherwise, creatures deal double damage on critical hits. (Section describing bite, claw, rake, gore, slap, slam, and sting attacks ommited.)

Still no mention of unarmed strike, and lots of rules that don't apply to it. (Unless you belive a monk gets one and a half times its Strength bonus, as it has only one attack?)

Now, take a look at Table 7-4 in the PHB. There, on the table of simple melee weapons, is "strike, unarmed."

PHB, pg. 85

Simple Weapon Proficiency (General)
You understand how to use all types of simple weapons in combat (see Table 7-4:Weapons, page 98, for a list of simple weapons.
Benifit: You make attack rolls with simple weapons normally.
Normal:A character who uses a weapon without being proficient with it suffers a -4 penalty on attack rolls.
Special: All characters except for druids, monks, rogues, and wizards are automatically proficient with all simple weapons.
A wizard who casts the spell Tenser's transformation on herself gains proficiency with all simple weapon for the duration of the spell.

Looks like you need this feat to be proficient with simple weapons, which unarmed stike is included with.

So: unarmed strikes are not natural weapons and require simple weapon proficiency to use.

Therefore, monks are not proficient when using unarmed strikes.

 

[IceBear]

It doesn't take a big leap in logic to conclude that an unarmed strike is either an "other appendage" or "and the like".

You must be playing with strict rules lawyers as it's pretty obvious to me that the spirit of the rules is that an unarmed strike is a natural attack.

IceBear

 

[Brekki]

It is actually the other way around ... claws/bite etc are unarmed attacks

PHB page 140 under "Armed" Unarmed Attacks.

Even if monks are not proficient in the Unarmed Strike in the normal weapon table. They have an Unarmed Strike of their own that is much better ... why would they want to be able to do 1d3 of subdual damage ??