New Unarmed Feats

[fuzzy]

Blow of Steel
Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Str 13
Benefit: You may expend a use of Stunning Fist to deal 1d6 additional damage on a sucessful unarmed attack. This attack must be declared before the attack roll is made.

Ki Critical
Prerequisites: Ki Strike (magic), BAB +6, Stunning Fist, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike
Benefit: Your threat range is doubled on unarmed attacks. This does not stack with Improved Critical.

see version 2

 

[Velmont]

Blow of Steel
Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Str 13
Benefit: You may expend a use of Stunning Fist to deal 1d6 additional damage on a sucessful unarmed attack. This attack must be declared before the attack roll is made.

Seems pretty fine with me.

Ki Critical
Prerequisites: Ki Strike (magic), BAB +6, Stunning Fist, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike
Benefit: Your threat range is doubled on unarmed attacks. This does not stack with Improved Critical.

Why that feat when Improved Critical already exist? The only reason I see, it is t gain it sooner if you are a monk, which I don't see the need.

 

[JimAde]

Blow of Steel
Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Str 13
Benefit: You may expend a use of Stunning Fist to deal 1d6 additional damage on a sucessful unarmed attack. This attack must be declared before the attack roll is made.

This is nearly identical (if not exactly so) to the Iron Fist feat in Complete Warrior. So balance should not be an issue.

Ki Critical
Prerequisites: Ki Strike (magic), BAB +6, Stunning Fist, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike
Benefit: Your threat range is doubled on unarmed attacks. This does not stack with Improved Critical.

I'm with Velmont on this. Very similar to Improved Crit. Are we missing something?

 

[Rystil Arden]

I think it is pretty clear that the second feat exists merely to give monks Improved Crit sooner, so I would say no on the second, yes on the first. Not a judge, though.

 

[fuzzy]

Yeah, the idea of Ki Critical was to get Monk's threat range widened at the same time as all the other frontliners.

 

[Velmont]

I don't see it a necessity. All frontliners don't have to be equals. After all, the monk is the first frontline to have 2 attacks. The ranger have it at 2nd level (Combat Style) and all otehrs must spend feat to have it. And the monk is the only one that will become +0/+0 instead of -2/-2... Anyway, my point is what the point to have many different class if we want them all identical, and all with the best of each? And it is not that a big deal to have it 3 level laters...

 

[Knight Otu]

I have no problem with either of the feats. Yes.

 

[Bront]

I agree with all the other comments (Except apparently for KO's vote) that the 1st one seems fair (It's about in line with Psionic Weapon/Fist), and the second feat is unnessessary, as it only functions to make an existing feat available sooner than it otherwise might normaly be.

My suggestion instead, which I think might be more useful. Up the BAB REQ to +8, add Improved Critical (Unarmed), and the feat instead increases the critical multiplier of unarmed attacks by 1.

 

[LogicsFate]

Monks doing a potential x3, interesting, balanced by their set low crit range. I see to over reaching problem with it

 

[Velmont]

My suggestion instead, which I think might be more useful. Up the BAB REQ to +8, add Improved Critical (Unarmed), and the feat instead increases the critical multiplier of unarmed attacks by 1.

That make the feat more stronger, as 19/x3 is better than 18/x2, but at least it bring something new. But I'm trying to think to the high level monk who roll 3d20 for damage... that's can be a lot of damage... I must say that I don't know if it is a good idea for a feat.