Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The 50th Anniversary, "Unarmed Strike", "Natural Weapon", and "Melee Weapon Attack"
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Yaarel" data-source="post: 8413330" data-attributes="member: 58172"><p>It is awesome that the 50th Anniversary of D&D is also the 10-Year Anniversary of D&D 5e, specifically.</p><p></p><p>I cant wait!</p><p></p><p>The designers mentioned that they are already working on an anniversary edition that will update the core books.</p><p></p><p>It seems like the edition will include any updates as well as some of the popular options that have become available during the years of 5e so far.</p><p></p><p>The anniversary core books look to be a thoughful, high quality, product.</p><p></p><p>Beautiful.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Among issues that I hope the books update is the terminology relating to unarmed strikes, such as "melee-weapon attack" versus "melee weapon attack", and a vague notion that an unarmed strike isnt a "weapon", and so should be removed from the Weapons table in the Players Handbook. But some how it is a "natural weapon", such as in the Alter Self spell.</p><p></p><p>Honestly, I find this whole issue so convoluted and confusing, I keep on forgetting what the problems are and what the solution is. I need to research the texual issues and the semi-official rulings all over again, each time the issue of weapon-enhancing an unarmed strike comes up. I should have researched the issues − yet again − now, before starting this thread. Then I would be able to explain clearly what the problem is!</p><p></p><p>But the problem is, unarmed strike remains a problem even after all these years of 5e.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>In some ways, unarmed strike is an obscure corner case, that rarely shows up. The standard unarmed strike only deals 1 hit point of damage! Few use it.</p><p></p><p>But the need for clarification (and simplification!) is important to me for two main reasons.</p><p></p><p>Most important, the issue involves gaming rules and self-evident "natural" English, to make the game easier to understand and use. Obviously, a rules system as complex and open-ended as D&D 5e occasionally needs technical jargon with specific rules-contexted meanings. But "melee-weapon attack" versus "melee weapon attack" seems a less helpful technicality. I still dont understand what terrible overpowered abuse would happen if magically weapon-enhancing unarmed strikes. If a Paladin uses fists to "smite", that seems ok mechanically, even flavorfully fun! (Heh, I dont remember if Paladin smite is actually one of the unarmed-related issues or not.) There seems to be no reason for the astonishing convolution of gaming terminology. D&D is such a complex system, it requires a commitment to "keep it as simple as possible but not simpler", in order for a wider public (including me) to comprehend it, play it, and enjoy it.</p><p></p><p>The first reason is simplify the mechanics of unarmed strike for rules playability. The second reason is flavor.</p><p></p><p>I love the unarmed unarmored warrior archetype. International fightsports, Norse wrestling, Japanese ninja, Brazilian martial arts, and so on, are awesome! I want more of it in D&D. I welcome the recent options of the unarmed combat Fighting Style for the Fighter class.</p><p></p><p>I vaguely remember back when. The 4e Swordmage disappointed me because its magic didnt apply to unarmed strike. Why not?! It is awesome to make magical spell attacks using ones own body as a weapon. Conceptually, this is a possibility that should be a normal option.</p><p></p><p>For me, unarmed strike is a normal part of my D&D experience. I want it to work better − and more straightforwardly.</p><p></p><p></p><p>Toward a solution. I want.</p><p></p><p>• An "unarmed strike" is a "natural weapon".</p><p>• An "unarmed strike" is a "melee weapon", a weapon having melee range.</p><p>• Magic for a "weapon" or "melee weapon" applies to unarmed strike.</p><p></p><p>Where the unarmed strike occurs in the Weapons table, and where the Alter Self spell casually synonymizes "unarmed strike" and magically enhanced "natural weapon", the original intent of the 5e Players Handbook seems to be that the unarmed strike is a normal weapon, like a sword or an arrow.</p><p></p><p>I cannot understand why there needs to be something so confusing instead of the natural English.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>I hope the 50th Anniversary core books simplify the terminology for "unarmed strike", "natural weapon" and "melee weapon", so that it is once again obvious to use. Whatever problems caused the terminology to convolute, I hope the core books resolve them consistently and elegantly.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Yaarel, post: 8413330, member: 58172"] It is awesome that the 50th Anniversary of D&D is also the 10-Year Anniversary of D&D 5e, specifically. I cant wait! The designers mentioned that they are already working on an anniversary edition that will update the core books. It seems like the edition will include any updates as well as some of the popular options that have become available during the years of 5e so far. The anniversary core books look to be a thoughful, high quality, product. Beautiful. Among issues that I hope the books update is the terminology relating to unarmed strikes, such as "melee-weapon attack" versus "melee weapon attack", and a vague notion that an unarmed strike isnt a "weapon", and so should be removed from the Weapons table in the Players Handbook. But some how it is a "natural weapon", such as in the Alter Self spell. Honestly, I find this whole issue so convoluted and confusing, I keep on forgetting what the problems are and what the solution is. I need to research the texual issues and the semi-official rulings all over again, each time the issue of weapon-enhancing an unarmed strike comes up. I should have researched the issues − yet again − now, before starting this thread. Then I would be able to explain clearly what the problem is! But the problem is, unarmed strike remains a problem even after all these years of 5e. In some ways, unarmed strike is an obscure corner case, that rarely shows up. The standard unarmed strike only deals 1 hit point of damage! Few use it. But the need for clarification (and simplification!) is important to me for two main reasons. Most important, the issue involves gaming rules and self-evident "natural" English, to make the game easier to understand and use. Obviously, a rules system as complex and open-ended as D&D 5e occasionally needs technical jargon with specific rules-contexted meanings. But "melee-weapon attack" versus "melee weapon attack" seems a less helpful technicality. I still dont understand what terrible overpowered abuse would happen if magically weapon-enhancing unarmed strikes. If a Paladin uses fists to "smite", that seems ok mechanically, even flavorfully fun! (Heh, I dont remember if Paladin smite is actually one of the unarmed-related issues or not.) There seems to be no reason for the astonishing convolution of gaming terminology. D&D is such a complex system, it requires a commitment to "keep it as simple as possible but not simpler", in order for a wider public (including me) to comprehend it, play it, and enjoy it. The first reason is simplify the mechanics of unarmed strike for rules playability. The second reason is flavor. I love the unarmed unarmored warrior archetype. International fightsports, Norse wrestling, Japanese ninja, Brazilian martial arts, and so on, are awesome! I want more of it in D&D. I welcome the recent options of the unarmed combat Fighting Style for the Fighter class. I vaguely remember back when. The 4e Swordmage disappointed me because its magic didnt apply to unarmed strike. Why not?! It is awesome to make magical spell attacks using ones own body as a weapon. Conceptually, this is a possibility that should be a normal option. For me, unarmed strike is a normal part of my D&D experience. I want it to work better − and more straightforwardly. Toward a solution. I want. • An "unarmed strike" is a "natural weapon". • An "unarmed strike" is a "melee weapon", a weapon having melee range. • Magic for a "weapon" or "melee weapon" applies to unarmed strike. Where the unarmed strike occurs in the Weapons table, and where the Alter Self spell casually synonymizes "unarmed strike" and magically enhanced "natural weapon", the original intent of the 5e Players Handbook seems to be that the unarmed strike is a normal weapon, like a sword or an arrow. I cannot understand why there needs to be something so confusing instead of the natural English. I hope the 50th Anniversary core books simplify the terminology for "unarmed strike", "natural weapon" and "melee weapon", so that it is once again obvious to use. Whatever problems caused the terminology to convolute, I hope the core books resolve them consistently and elegantly. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
The 50th Anniversary, "Unarmed Strike", "Natural Weapon", and "Melee Weapon Attack"
Top