|
I am very unsure about the Metal Fist ability of the Metal subdomain. Is it an unarmed strike? Is it a natural weapon? Can I use magic weapon or magic fang on them? Do these really allow you to two weapon fight with just an unarmed strike? If I have Feral combat training, can I use this ability on the selected natural attack?
I am very confused.
I am very unsure about the Metal Fist ability of the Metal subdomain. Is it an unarmed strike?
"As a swift action, you can turn your fists into metal for 1 round, allowing you to make unarmed strikes that deal 1d6 points of bludgeoning damage plus your Strength modifier."
So, yes.
Is it a natural weapon?
No, it's just a modification to your normal Unarmed Strike, which is not a Natural Weapon (or else anyone could get an extra attack with their Unarmed Strike at a -5 any time they full attack).
Can I use magic weapon or magic fang on them?
"Magic fang gives one natural weapon or unarmed strike of the subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls."
So, again, yes.
Do these really allow you to two weapon fight with just an unarmed strike?
Well, it allows you to dual wield Unarmed Strikes--it's not the same unarmed strike, it's two different ones (so you'd need two Magic Fangs to get both).
If I have Feral combat training, can I use this ability on the selected natural attack?
I am very confused.
Yes, since it is an effect that augments an unarmed strike.
I think the key here is that this is not a "new" weapon, it's just a modification of an unarmed strike (or rather, two unarmed strikes).
You usually cannot two weapon fight using two unarmed strikes. As far as the rules are concerned, no creature has two unarmed strikes, ever.
As such, I was confused if they were actually unarmed strikes, and could be affected by things like an amulet of mighty fists. It seems to break rules.
On the contrary, I believe everyone has effectively limitless unarmed strikes.
|
|
On the contrary, I believe everyone has effectively limitless unarmed strikes.You usually cannot two weapon fight using two unarmed strikes. As far as the rules are concerned, no creature has two unarmed strikes, ever.
As such, I was confused if they were actually unarmed strikes, and could be affected by things like an amulet of mighty fists. It seems to break rules.
No, your body is the unarmed strike, and as there are no creatures with two bodies, there are no two unarmed strikes. This ability creates an exception.
No, your body is the unarmed strike, and as there are no creatures with two bodies, there are no two unarmed strikes.
I disagree. The Monk's Unarmed Strike is their entire body, but a normal unarmed strike is never described that way. In fact, when the Metal Fist ability clearly tells you that you have at least two unarmed strikes (since you can dual wield them), I don't see how you could possibly argue that you have only one.
Would the Wooden Fist ability of the plant domain work the same? Could they be combined?
They work the same, at least in that they modify your unarmed strikes. And, yes, you could combine them; I don't see any reason you couldn't.
|
|
No, your body is the unarmed strike, and as there are no creatures with two bodies, there are no two unarmed strikes. This ability creates an exception.Where did you get that from? Please provide a link to the source.
Give me an example other than this ability of anyone two weapon fighting with only unarmed strikes. This is because you are attacking with a part of your body not designed for combat, and though you have many of those, you can only attack with it once. I could have four arms, but only one unarmed strike.
Give me an example other than this ability of anyone two weapon fighting with only unarmed strikes.
I'm not really sure the "there are no example characters that utilize this sub-par option" angle is the best way to prove the option does not exist.
There are a hell of a lot of character options that no example characters use, but that doesn't mean they can't be done. I'm sorry, I just don't see evidence for what you're suggesting.
And I'm not saying, "You're absolutely wrong!" I just don't see the evidence. I've had this debate about how many unarmed strikes people have since 3.0 came out and I have always thought the only reasonable interpretations were for a single unarmed strike or a limitless number of them. Seeing no evidence for a single one, I have always gone with limitless.
Just to be sure, are we suggesting that a person could mutiweapon fight with foot, foot, fist, fist, head?
No, you can't take multi-weapon fighting unless you have at least three hands (and an Alchemist with the extra arms thing wouldn't let you qualify, either, since they explicitly don't give you extra attacks).
I just punched a punchingbag multiple times in the past 6 seconds. Your argument is invalid.
I've gone through the combat rules multiple times, being a martial guy. I have never seen a rule that disallows multiple unarmed attacks, unless it was a standard action. If you can use both your hands to stabs someone with two daggers, I don't see why you can't use both hands to punch.
I'm not sure how you look, but I'm PRETTY sure I'm using two hands to type right now.
a round takes 6 seconds so...
Damn. I can't believe I actually did that. LOL.
I believe all the questions to this thread were answered in the book of blue magic (3.5), or what was it called (with the metal, you might want to include the book of vile darkness too)?
Really, could someone please change the title to something like "metal fists"?
|
This has been gone over before. Your unarmed strike is one weapon. You cannot wield more than unarmed strike. As such, you cannot two weapon fight with unarmed strikes.
No. That's stupid.
"Simple Weapons => (Simple) Unarmed Weapons => Unarmed Strike."
"An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon."
"Light: A light weapon is used in one hand. It is easier to use in one's off hand than a one-handed weapon is, and can be used while grappling (see Combat). Add the wielder's Strength modifier to damage rolls for melee attacks with a light weapon if it's used in the primary hand, or half the wielder's Strength bonus if it's used in the off hand. Using two hands to wield a light weapon gives no advantage on damage; the Strength bonus applies as though the weapon were held in the wielder's primary hand only. An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon."
"Unarmed strikes do not count as natural weapons (see Combat)."
"The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls."
Source : Core Rulebook.
|
|
No, two weapon fighting using only unarmed strikes. I know they are light weapons. I just did not know you could attack twice with unarmed strikes using two weapon fighting. If there was a NPC in a module or something, anything. I could show it to my dm, and would let him know that it is doable. This would actually help me with a build.
|
|
No, two weapon fighting using only unarmed strikes. I know they are light weapons. I just did not know you could attack twice with unarmed strikes using two weapon fighting. If there was a NPC in a module or something, anything. I could show it to my dm, and would let him know that it is doable. This would actually help me with a build.
Of course you can two weapon fight with unarmed strikes.You always could.I don´t know if this helps but here are a few examples of rules that specifically require you to do just that.
-Adder strike:As a swift action, you can apply one dose of contact or injury poison to two body parts that you use for unarmed strikes. You must still protect yourself against exposure to contact poisons you apply in this way.
-greater Brawler: While raging, the barbarian is treated as if she has Two-Weapon Fighting when making unarmed strike attacks
|
|
Again, the proof is right up there. He just has to read his rulebook.
Unarmed strikes are light weapons ; and can you TWF with light weapons ? Yes. So you can by RAW, period. Nothing complicated.
Characters using unarmed strikes suffer usually enough without having in addition to deal with the whole "one attack per round" blasphemy.
Again, the proof is right up there. He just has to read his rulebook.
Unarmed strikes are light weapons ; and can you TWF with light weapons ? Yes. So you can by RAW, period. Nothing complicated.
Characters using unarmed strikes suffer usually enough without having in addition to deal with the whole "one attack per round" blasphemy.
You are totally missing the issue. He's wrong, but it's not outrageous that he is--this is not a simple issue.
There was never a question of whether or not you could TWF with an unarmed strike, there was a question of whether or not any given person possesses more than a single Unarmed Strike.
It's about whether you can dual wield an Unarmed Strike and another unarmed strike, not whether or not you can wield an Unarmed Strike and a Greatsword or something else like that.
I think the Brawler rage power thing is probably the very best proof, but there's no place in the text where it says explicitly: "you have an unlimited number of unarmed strikes," so the confusion is perfectly understandable.
/me files this under "unfortunately named thread #69."
|
|
There was never a question of whether or not you could TWF with an unarmed strike, there was a question of whether or not any given person possesses more than a single Unarmed Strike.
How am I getting it wrong ? Obviously you do have more than one. Elbow, knee, foot, punch, headbutt, heck, even the ass, belly or sexual attributes may be used as unarmed weapons.
Obviously you do have more than one. Elbow, knee, foot, punch, headbutt, heck, even the ass, belly or sexual attributes may be used as unarmed weapons.
Because that part is not actually obvious at all. Just because they can all be used as unarmed attacks doesn't necessarily mean they aren't all different striking surfaces of the same weapon.
I mean, a double-bladed Axe is not two weapons just because you can cut with the left side and the right.
So, again, yes, you have a limitless number of Unarmed Attacks and you can dual wield them. But the fact that you have two fists, some knees, a pair of elbows, etc., is irrelevant, because they might all be part of one whole.
In other words, this came down to whether or not your entire body was a single unarmed strike, or whether any given striking surface was its own unarmed strike, and it's never explicit, so misunderstanding that is perfectly reasonable.
Edit: I'm curious, blackbloodtroll, how would this help you with a build? Dual Wielding a pair of unarmed strikes is almost always going to be worse than using actual weapons, even just Armor Spikes are usually better.
RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32, 2011 Top 16
|
I think the best example of using multiple unarmed strikes is a monk flurry of blows...that specifically describes the ability as if it were using two weapon fighting. If you're not a monk, you have to use the feat chain to allow for that, monks just get that as part of their flurry class ability.
|
|
Yeah, that is what I was talking about, attacking twice with an unarmed strike through two weapon fighting. This would allow certain combat maneuvers to be performed twice in one round. I am not talking about iterative attacks either, though now there are more chances. I just always saw it as one weapon. I know I got a lot of "are you stupid" responses, but I still appreciate the knowledge gained. As stated, I believe it was a dm ruling that got it stuck in my head as RAW. I still would like to see an example, if it exists. I never bother my dm with rules disagreements without as many examples as I can get my hands on.
That's time we could be gaming.
Yup. Multiple combat maneuvers are allowed too. My favorite has to be ReachTripFullAttack when done with a whip and Enlarge Person.