Try again <sigh> Monks and Improve Natural Attack

[Slaved]

All the weapons you can trip with note in their description "This weapon can be used to make trip attacks". Unarmed Strike's description says nothing of the sort.

Does it have to?

TRIP
You can try to trip an opponent as an unarmed melee attack. You can only trip an opponent who is one size category larger than you, the same size, or smaller.

 

[Artoomis]

...You're making an unarmed attack with an unarmed strike, whose description does not include the ability to trip... unlike every weapon which can be used to trip.

-Hyp.

An "unarmed strike" in not weapon. It is very much like one, but it is not one. It does need a "Trip" ability described as "Trip" weapons do because it is NOT a physical weapon.

"You can try to trip an opponent as an unarmed melee attack." An "unarmed strike" [/b]is[/b] an unarmed melee attack.

Done. Simple, eh? Do not try and make this harder than it is.

Note that you do NOT provoke an AoO for tripping when you have Improved Unarmed Strike!

"You are considered to be armed even when unarmed —that is, you do not provoke attacks or opportunity from armed opponents when you attack them while unarmed."

"Making a Trip Attack
Make an unarmed melee touch attack against your target. This provokes an attack of opportunity from your target as normal for unarmed attacks. "

Cool, eh?

 

[Infiniti2000]

Artoomis, these two statements of yours directly contradict each other.

Not all unarmed melee attacks are unarmed strikes, but all unarmed strikes are unarmed melee attacks.

Unarmed Attack = Unarmed Strike. There is no distinction.

What gives? Which one do you support?

 

[Artoomis]

Artoomis, these two statements of yours directly contradict each other.

What gives? Which one do you support?

I changed my mind.

In any case, you most certainly can use any of your monk's unarmed attacks to trip someone, and you will not provoke an AoO when you do so.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Does it have to?

Certainly.

"You can try to trip an opponent as an unarmed melee attack."

So, what are the things we can do as an unarmed melee attack?

1. Use unarmed strike to deal damage.
2. Attempt to trip our opponent.
3. Initiate a grapple.
4. Anything else that's defined...

-Hyp.

 

[Slaved]

Certainly.

Why? I do not find the list you gave after this as at all convincing or helpful on the subject from a rules basis.

 

[Legildur]

Why? I do not find the list you gave after this as at all convincing or helpful on the subject from a rules basis.

Further down in the trip description it says the following:

Avoiding Attacks of Opportunity
If you have the Improved Trip feat, or if you are tripping with a weapon (see below), you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity for making a trip attack.

and

Tripping with a Weapon
Some weapons can be used to make trip attacks. In this case, you make a melee touch attack with the weapon instead of an unarmed melee touch attack, and you don’t provoke an attack of opportunity.

While unarmed strike = unarmed attack, the reverse is not universally true. For example, notice that the Weapon Focus feat description lists unarmed strike and grapple as two separate options.

 

[Slaved]

Further down in the trip description it says the following:

None of those answer the question though. They dont even go against anything in the thread relating in the other direction.

 

[Kem]

Hmm.

The rule for feinting is in the PH. The FAQ is an attempt at clarifying rules found in the PH.

Actually, that question is not about Feinting. It just has feinting in it. As such I can accept it just fine as an error because the person providing the answer was answering a different question, not one about feinting.

Had the question itself involved Feinting, or if Feinting was important for the answer, THEN I might have an issue with it. But it wasn't. It was a side comment that doesn't even change the answer provided if it was standard action instead of move action.

 

[Legildur]

Actually, that question is not about Feinting. It just has feinting in it. As such I can accept it just fine as an error because the person providing the answer was answering a different question, not one about feinting.

Had the question itself involved Feinting, or if Feinting was important for the answer, THEN I might have an issue with it. But it wasn't. It was a side comment that doesn't even change the answer provided if it was standard action instead of move action.

Ahhh, so you choose to be selective about which parts of the FAQ you use because you acknowledge parts of it have errors. Now then, how do we know which parts have errors?