Hi to everyone!
I have a question:
"Attempting to disarm a foe while unarmed imposes a –4 penalty on the attack"
But if i have the improved unarmed strike talents, i suffer anyway of the penalties (-4) to my disarm attack?
Improved unarmed strike - you are considered to be armed even when unarmed...
You'd still suffer then -4 penalty even with improved unarmed strike. Usually when attempting to disarm someone unarmed your trying to grab their item/weapon away from them rather then like punch it out of their hands.
Disarm states that you suffer a -4 penalty when you try to disarm someone while not armed. IUS states you are always armed. So no penalty to the monk disarming you with his special training.
|
You'd still suffer then -4 penalty even with improved unarmed strike. Usually when attempting to disarm someone unarmed your trying to grab their item/weapon away from them rather then like punch it out of their hands.
“Armed” Unarmed Attacks: Sometimes a character's or creature's unarmed attack counts as an armed attack. A monk, a character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat, a spellcaster delivering a touch attack spell, and a creature with natural physical weapons all count as being armed (see natural attacks).
Note that being armed counts for both offense and defense (the character can make attacks of opportunity).
The definition of being armed without a weapon is the same regardless of whether your making a regular attack or using a combat maneuver like disarm, sunder, or trip. The -4 penalty is eliminated for an armed character and a monk (or character with unarmed strike) is considered armed.
Personally I'd see that as against the intention of Improved Unarmed Strike,
Because we never see monk like characters wanting to disarm their opponent while they are fighting unarmed...
|
Because we never see monk like characters wanting to disarm their opponent while they are fighting unarmed...
Personally I don't see the likes of Jet Lee or Jackie Chan wondering around medieval Europe either, but that's not really relevant.
I suppose Keno at the end of Ninja Turtles 2: The Secret of the Ooze did kick that little vial of ooze out of Shredder's hand right after the Turtles were done dancing with Vanilla Ice, so you've got a point.
Hi to everyone!
I have a question:
"Attempting to disarm a foe while unarmed imposes a –4 penalty on the attack"
But if i have the improved unarmed strike talents, i suffer anyway of the penalties (-4) to my disarm attack?
If you have Improved Unarmed Strike, you are no longer considered unarmed and do not take the -4 penalty.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I don't see the likes of Jet Lee or Jackie Chan wondering around medieval Europe either, but that's not really relevant.
Personally, I don't see the likes of dragons or gelatinous cubes wandering around medieval Europe, either.
I'd say that IUS and a monk count as armed, and can swipe weapons all the live-long day. It's a lot of fun, really.
|
|
I'd say that IUS and a monk count as armed, and can swipe weapons all the live-long day. It's a lot of fun, really.
Well don't forget that there was never was a rule against it, just that they'd have a -4 penalty. With the rules as people seem to want it, now monks (or anyone with Improved Unarmed Strike) can just grab whatever they want out of people's hands with no penalty. I guess that's a kind of Kung Fu feel to it. "Snatch the pebble from my hand, and don't worry about the -4 modifier the other people have to deal with."
Honestly, monks should be carrying around some weapons anyway. Pretty sure they've got a few that had the disarm trait. +2 for the win.
I'd say that IUS and a monk count as armed, and can swipe weapons all the live-long day. It's a lot of fun, really.Well don't forget that there was never was a rule against it, just that they'd have a -4 penalty. With the rules as people seem to want it, now monks (or anyone with Improved Unarmed Strike) can just grab whatever they want out of people's hands with no penalty. I guess that's a kind of Kung Fu feel to it. "Snatch the pebble from my hand, and don't worry about the -4 modifier the other people have to deal with."
Honestly, monks should be carrying around some weapons anyway. Pretty sure they've got a few that had the disarm trait. +2 for the win.
Kung Fu monks!?!?!?! Really though that's kind of the point isn't it?
I agree however that the weapon would be nice since it does add into your ability to disarm.
|
|
Well he was in the US because he killed that guy with a spear when he pulled out or used that gun. Right through the throne/chair thing if I remember right. I have no idea if I'm remembering right though, since it's been ages since I saw Kung Fu.
With the list of weapons that monks get, I always feel sad for the class cause everyone wants to go around punching things it seems like. Almost never see someone wielding anything unless they took like a feat to use spears. Maybe it's just the people I've gamed with but it seems to be a wider spread problem. Just what's wrong with a monk's ability to wield weapons that people seem to always choose not to?
Because the weapons are generally worse than the monk's unarmed strike. Damage talks.
Because the weapons are generally worse than the monk's unarmed strike. Damage talks.
See Scorpian Kama. Allows monks US damage. But agree with the sentiment of the statement.
|
|
Because the weapons are generally worse than the monk's unarmed strike. Damage talks.
Yup that about sums it up.
I think you might start seeing monks using a sai or other monk weapons for the combat maneuver bonus now they are much more viable tactics though.
Personally I have always considered house-ruling that a monk flagged weapon, when used by a monk does the same damage as a monks unarmed strike. I just feel a monk would be more likely to have weapons enchanted instead of being stuck with amulet of mighty fists. Would also be nice to see peoples faces when a monk sunders your longsword with nunchaku's that deal 2d10 damage :)
For me a monk weapon is just an extension of the monks body and one weapon that is badly missed from the monks arsenal is the Jo stick (a reach weapon).
For me a monk weapon is just an extension of the monks body and one weapon that is badly missed from the monks arsenal is the Jo stick (a reach weapon).
Not to quibble but my Jo stick comes in at only 4 feet... hardly a reach weapon. I would be more likely to agree if you said the standard Bo staff, which at six feet long is more than capable of being used as a reach weapon (something I would like to see present in D&D). Actually I would probably allow the quarter staff to be used as a reach weapon too considering its length.
The staff and the spear are two of the most versatile weapons in the world and it's a shame that D&D doesn't give them their due in that regard.
"Attempting to disarm a foe while unarmed imposes a –4 penalty on the attack"
But if i have the improved unarmed strike talents, i suffer anyway of the penalties (-4) to my disarm attack?
The one distinct advantage of not using a weapon is that you automatically pick up the weapon if you succeed. I might allow a monk to disarm someone without taking the -4 penalty, but that means they don't get to pickup the weapon automatically.
The one distinct advantage of not using a weapon is that you automatically pick up the weapon if you succeed. I might allow a monk to disarm someone without taking the -4 penalty, but that means they don't get to pickup the weapon automatically.
I was agreeing with the other people above in allowing Improved Unarmed Strike to negate the -4 penalty, until I saw this comment. This is a real advantage: the rules state that "if you successfully disarm your opponent without using a weapon, you may automatically pick up the item dropped." (p. 199)
This presumes that the disarming combatant (let's presume it's a monk) is not only trying to strike it out of the opponent's hand, but also simultaneously trying to grab it. For this advantage, an armed combatant who has a high CMB and is fighting an opponent with an uber-magical sword, just might drop his own unremarkable sword and try to grab the opponent's sword: the prize justifies the -4 penalty.
Personally I'd see that as against the intention of Improved Unarmed Strike, just as I'd see it odd to see a wizard attempting to chill touch something out of someone's hand to negate a -4 penalty.
So the answer ends up being, ask your DM. If your the DM, decide for yourself.
Yes, that would be a cheesy manipulation of the rules. However, I looked up the rule for touch spells which says: "Touching an opponent with a touch spell is considered an armed attack and therefore does not provoke attacks of opportunity."
The person playing the spellcaster would need to finagle a way to touch the actual "opponent," which suggests it's not the weapon itself.
So I don't think that, if the -4 penalty were to be ignored by the IUS feat, it must necessarily be ignored by touch spells also. (And of course as a GM I would disallow this as cheese anyway.)
And still no clear answer :(