Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Nyaricus" data-source="post: 2883751" data-attributes="member: 35678">Tetsubo, I think I have to agree with on all levels of your inital argument. I'd just liek to take a little tangent with it (as in continue the tirade against this dumb rule-call).A Natural Weapon - what is this? Well, it's a part of somethings body which can be used as a weapon and isn't manufactured - a fist is a natural weapon, a gauntlet is a manufactered one. An Unarmed Strike - what is this? Well, this is a part of your body you have trained to use as a weapon and isn't manufactured - you are &quot;unarmed&quot;. By definition, you are also &quot;unarmed&quot; even if you sport horns, or razor-sharp teeth, because you do not have &quot;arms&quot;, &quot;weapons&quot;; manufactred weapons to be exact.So, in the end, these are one and the same. But how do we deal with the feat &quot;Improved Unarmed Strike&quot; - it doesn't seem to mesh well in this new vision. Why? Well here's why. In the monk build, you get IUS for free @ 1st, but a creature with claws and a bite attack (a lizardfolk, say - and lets just forget LA for a sec here) wouldn't need that feat - his own weapons are more effective. But, in lieu of IUS, giveing a free feat wouldn't be fair, under the rules. Why? Well, his own weaposn are more effective.A human monk 1 gets IUS and a 1d6 attack. A lizardfolk 1 gets a free feat (or, in the DM is mean, gets the useless IUS), and a 1d8 attack. It's not fair.So, we need to revise IUS before getting into this. Any ideas?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Nyaricus, post: 2883751, member: 35678"] [b]Tetsubo[/b], I think I have to agree with on all levels of your inital argument. I'd just liek to take a little tangent with it (as in continue the tirade against this dumb rule-call). A Natural Weapon - what is this? Well, it's a part of somethings body which can be used as a weapon and isn't manufactured - a fist is a natural weapon, a gauntlet is a manufactered one. An Unarmed Strike - what is this? Well, this is a part of your body you have trained to use as a weapon and isn't manufactured - you are "unarmed". By definition, you are also "unarmed" even if you sport horns, or razor-sharp teeth, because you do not have "arms", "weapons"; [i]manufactred[/i] weapons to be exact. So, in the end, these are one and the same. But how do we deal with the feat "Improved Unarmed Strike" - it doesn't seem to mesh well in this new vision. Why? Well here's why. In the monk build, you get IUS for free @ 1st, but a creature with claws and a bite attack (a lizardfolk, say - and lets just forget LA for a sec here) wouldn't need that feat - his own weapons are more effective. But, in lieu of IUS, giveing a free feat wouldn't be fair, under the rules. Why? Well, his own weaposn are more effective. A human monk 1 gets IUS and a 1d6 attack. A lizardfolk 1 gets a free feat (or, in the DM is mean, gets the useless IUS), and a 1d8 attack. It's not fair. So, we need to revise IUS before getting into this. Any ideas? [/QUOTE]

Verification