Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Imaro" data-source="post: 6862031" data-attributes="member: 48965">I think you're missing my point. unarmed attacks in and of themselves have certain advantages that weapons don't... how do you account for that?  It's not about how often these advantages come into play (since this will vary depending on the particular DM, playstyle, scenario, etc (it's great that you never take the PC's equipment, don't require them to leave it behind when meeting the Baron, etc... but it's also a pretty common fantasy trope)... but rather the fact that the advantage(s) exist and in a general since need a balancing factor when I've taken it upon myself to increase unarmed damage but haven't compensated the players who are weapon wielders and now find them self at a disadvantage?The magic weapon suggestion is a separate (since they are totally under the purview of the DM) issue and one that is easily solvable so IMO is a non-issue.EDIT: Here's another question for you... with both an increase in damage and magical enhancements (plus the fact that one can never be disarmed, can take their "weapon" into places weapons aren't allowed, etc.) Why would a monk ever choose to use anything but unarmed combat?  Now we've eliminated meaningful choice (trade off of damage for greater versatility) and made one choice the obvious one.</blockquote>