D&D (2024) The Damage of Unarmed Strikes

[CleverNickName]

Better question: why shouldn't everyone do d4 damage?

From what I can tell, the argument is: should the damage of a punch equal the damage of a club? Or to look at it from a different angle, if a character who deals 1d4 damage with a punch decides to pick up a club, does he still do 1d4 damage with it?

 

[GMforPowergamers]

Something got me wondering real quick.

In most movies, comics, and cartoons (western and anime), warriors tend to have a decent punch and kick.

I was thinking, should every warriror class be given a dice for their unarmed strike? Nothing crazy. a 1d4.

It's not a major combat boost. Not even a minor one. But it's simple and allows martial classes to punch and slam do. Since Feats are currently mandatory, feats can be used to upgrade this. Tavern Brawler would still be worth getting. Same with Unarmed Fighting Fighting Style.

Monks would still be unique as the only ones that can US with DEX, bonus action US, and have an automatically upgrading US.

in current games I give everyone unarmed strike finesse so you can use str or dex but still keep it as 1+stat mod

 

[GMMichael]

From what I can tell, the argument is: should the damage of a punch equal the damage of a club? Or to look at it from a different angle, if a character who deals 1d4 damage with a punch decides to pick up a club, does he still do 1d4 damage with it?

I'd be interested to see the argument that empirically shows a faster life-to-death rate of a club fight versus a brawl.

Also, this conversation shouldn't be limited to punches. Only boxers limit themselves to punching.

 

[CleverNickName]

I'd be interested to see the argument that empirically shows a faster life-to-death rate of a club fight versus a brawl.

Also, this conversation shouldn't be limited to punches. Only boxers limit themselves to punching.

Oh I'm just a casual observer in this argument...I'm not really participating. I've never seen the issues that others have been describing, on either side of this debate, so I'm just hanging out in the balcony with the rest of the hecklers.

"He says he can punch harder than a club!"
"Harder? I barely know her!"
HUAH HAUH HAUH!!!

 

[Kobold Stew]

Yes; I'd also like to see it count as a finesse weapon for the purposes of Sneak Attack: allow the Brute Rogue to punch his way to glory.

 

[Yaarel]

I'd be interested to see the argument that empirically shows a faster life-to-death rate of a club fight versus a brawl.

Also, this conversation shouldn't be limited to punches. Only boxers limit themselves to punching.

A "club" might include a baseball bat, albeit a bat is probably a greatclub or mace. Maybe a versatile club, 1d6.

A "club" definitely includes a police baton.

Unarmed strikes include kicking and choking. The proficiency of the striker, including where to aim and so on, all matters, when deciding the 1d4 damage, or anywhere from 1 to 1d8.

 

[the Jester]

It depends who is punching.

Sure. If you're a monk, I'm fine with it.

 

[Benjamin Olson]

I think martials should all learn more fighting styles as they progress, and if they want to choose one to augment their unarmed fighting then more power to them.

 

[pnewman]

Better question: why shouldn't everyone do d4 damage?

Because Commoners have 4 hit points, and untrained brawlers of average strength rarely kill each other.

 

[Stalker0]

It depends who is punching.

I can’t think of many fighters that if having the choice of being armed…would choose not to be armed.

I don’t mind the unarmed strike doing more damage but it shouldn’t be equal to a weapon. So a d3 seems good, dagger is still better but not crazy so, and the unarmed strike carries a bit of weight to it