Unarmed build without using monk


Advice


Has anyone put together builds for unarmed fighters or unarmed rogues? I've got a player looking for a "bruiser" but would like to avoid the orient. I'm not too key on non-core rules, myself, but I'd like to find a way to help him out.


Depends on a few things. If you are willing to take just one little level of monk and go 19 fighter you can still be great. Otherwise, althought I believe it has said it is officially disallowed, ask your DM if he'll let you take Improved Natural Weapon (Unarmed Strike), and as soon as you can buy a monk's robe. You will need a high strength and a high dex, and two weapon fighting. Then just take imp/greater grapple. All weapon focus and weapon spec, and weapon training in "close" which includes unarmed strike.

For raw damage you will likely be far ahead of the monk, you just won't have all the neat skills and supernatural abilities, but that doesn't sound like your cup of tea anyway.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

meatrace is actually wrong.

If you try to recreate the monk with a fighter, then you'll come up with something second rate.

But if you want to play a fighter that punches people. Then you can have significant damage output. Sure it's only 1d3 - but that doesn't matter with the +20 that you add from high strength, specialization, power attack, and weapon training. Ideally use gauntlets, so you do not need improved unarmed strike and can enchant the gauntlets (this makes bypassing DR much easier as well compared to the monk).

I play a dwarven barbarian who primarily wields a great greataxe (or glaive to you and me) - but he's also equipped himself with two custom gauntlets called BEER and MEAD. The one is a +1 cold-iron gauntlet and the other a +1 mithral gauntlet. At level 7 the damage from a gauntlet attack works out to be 1d3 + 12. Pretty respectable.


A permanent enlarged person would go a long way, too. The Adventurer's Armory has a plethora of weapons suited in aiding unarmed fighters.


Yes, it's easy enough to create a fighter who can compete with a monk in terms of unarmed damage. The key feats are Two-Weapon Fighting, Double Slice, and the other usual suspects (Power Attack, Weapon Specialization, etc.).

Varthanna wrote:
A permanent enlarged person would go a long way, too.

Not for a fighter. 1d3 -> 1d4 is a puny difference.


Not for a fighter. 1d3 -> 1d4 is a puny difference.

Ah, I meant to quote the post involving INA and the Monk's Robe. Then it is worthwhile (and strength and reach are always good for a fighter). 1d3 becomes 1d8 becomes 2d6 becomes 3d6.


LoreKeeper wrote:

meatrace is actually wrong.

If you try to recreate the monk with a fighter, then you'll come up with something second rate.

But if you want to play a fighter that punches people. Then you can have significant damage output. Sure it's only 1d3 - but that doesn't matter with the +20 that you add from high strength, specialization, power attack, and weapon training. Ideally use gauntlets, so you do not need improved unarmed strike and can enchant the gauntlets (this makes bypassing DR much easier as well compared to the monk).

I play a dwarven barbarian who primarily wields a great greataxe (or glaive to you and me) - but he's also equipped himself with two custom gauntlets called BEER and MEAD. The one is a +1 cold-iron gauntlet and the other a +1 mithral gauntlet. At level 7 the damage from a gauntlet attack works out to be 1d3 + 12. Pretty respectable.

Bur, what? How am I wrong? Nothing you said contradicts what I said, in fact that's pretty much what I was getting at. Your damage dice will be lower, but you'll have so many adds it won't matter. Damage will be higher with a fighter build, but you'll lose monk special features...which don't seem to matter to the OP.

Just because you wear a monk's robes it doesn't mean you're attempting to recreate a monk, it is merely a mechanical advantage to your actual damage dice. Why wouldn't you wear that?


Varthanna wrote:
Ah, I meant to quote the post involving INA and the Monk's Robe. Then it is worthwhile (and strength and reach are always good for a fighter). 1d3 becomes 1d8 becomes 2d6 becomes 3d6.

To me, the big advantage of using a fighter with unarmed combat is that you can use enchanted gauntlets (made out of cold iron or adamantine or whatever, and which are generally cheaper than an Amulet of Mighty Fists) whereas monks can't. Of course, if you can convince your GM that you can improve your unarmed strike with Improved Natural Attack, then maybe you can convince him that you can make a monk's unarmed strike with a gauntlet as well.

Liberty's Edge

Umm.. I think people need to re-read the description of gauntlet.

D20PFSRD wrote:
This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack.

It quite clearly states the with the exception of making your damage lethal, you are considered unarmed.

You still need improved unarmed strike to use it without AoO, but since it only modifies your unarmed strike (rather than replacing it) you could gauntlets as a monk. The only downside is that you would have to use your fists to get the enchantment bonuses (as opposed to knees, headbutts, et al.)

As far as Monk vs. Fighter, I agree that the Fighter would make a better offensive unarmed build for sure, but the monk has (arguably) better defensive options. The way D&D usually goes, the fighter wins because offense is generally more useful (unless the DM allows taunting).

I'd probably go with fighter for the unarmed build unless you plan on being more of a special-forces style "I can do anything a little" character, in which case I'd go with rogue and get improved feint. Since you said "bruiser" I'm going to stay with the "Fighter" suggestion, using feats for combat maneuvers and TWF.


StabbittyDoom wrote:
Umm.. I think people need to re-read the description of gauntlet.[..]

I'm not your GM, so I'm not sure why you're trying to convince me. :-)


meatrace wrote:
LoreKeeper wrote:

meatrace is actually wrong.

If you try to recreate the monk with a fighter, then you'll come up with something second rate.

But if you want to play a fighter that punches people. Then you can have significant damage output. Sure it's only 1d3 - but that doesn't matter with the +20 that you add from high strength, specialization, power attack, and weapon training. Ideally use gauntlets, so you do not need improved unarmed strike and can enchant the gauntlets (this makes bypassing DR much easier as well compared to the monk).

I play a dwarven barbarian who primarily wields a great greataxe (or glaive to you and me) - but he's also equipped himself with two custom gauntlets called BEER and MEAD. The one is a +1 cold-iron gauntlet and the other a +1 mithral gauntlet. At level 7 the damage from a gauntlet attack works out to be 1d3 + 12. Pretty respectable.

Bur, what? How am I wrong? Nothing you said contradicts what I said, in fact that's pretty much what I was getting at. Your damage dice will be lower, but you'll have so many adds it won't matter. Damage will be higher with a fighter build, but you'll lose monk special features...which don't seem to matter to the OP.

Just because you wear a monk's robes it doesn't mean you're attempting to recreate a monk, it is merely a mechanical advantage to your actual damage dice. Why wouldn't you wear that?

Sorry, I didn't mean it like that - I meant that trying to recreate a monk (a la two-weapon fighting feats, monk robes, etc) is inefficient in terms of feat-resources; in that case it is better to just be a monk and play the flavor appropriate to the character concept.

I'm saying that its perfectly viable to skip the twoweapon-fighting tricks and go straight full-plate and gauntlets (or similar "thug" weapon, the Adventurer's Armory presents a few). Make the magic enhancements work for you - rather than the monk robes. Use springattack and cleave to build the fisticuffs and bruiser concepts.


Since you said your willing to consider non-core material, here's an old 3.5 feat you might want to take a look at. (Note it was designed for dwarves, but I'm adapting it here because there's nothing wrong with any race using it.)

Hammerfist: Clasping your hands together, you strike your foe with the full force of your body in a hammer-blow.

Benefit: You can make unarmed attacks as a two-handed attack, benefiting from strength and Power Attack as though wielding a two-handed weapon.

Special: You can not use Flurry or Two-weapon fighting while using this feat.

The Exchange

kyrt-ryder wrote:

Since you said your willing to consider non-core material, here's an old 3.5 feat you might want to take a look at. (Note it was designed for dwarves, but I'm adapting it here because there's nothing wrong with any race using it.)

Hammerfist: Clasping your hands together, you strike your foe with the full force of your body in a hammer-blow.

Benefit: You can make unarmed attacks as a two-handed attack, benefiting from strength and Power Attack as though wielding a two-handed weapon.

Special: You can not use Flurry or Two-weapon fighting while using this feat.

So that's why the Kirk attack is so darned effective! I always wondered.

Anyway, if that feat is allowed for any race, you've got a pretty good setup going. Just build a typical 2h weapon fighter that specializes in unarmed strikes, you'll need Improved Unarmed Strike but other than that it should be obvious.

Without that, you've still got enough feats to make a pretty effective TWF unarmed fighter, it seems pretty straightforward.


You should also consider taking a dip into barbarian. Bonus to strength, and there are quite a few rage powers that mesh well with unarmed fighting, such as unexpected strike, knockback, and animal fury.

I can't name the feat from memory, but there is one in the pathfinder campaign book that gives your unarmed attacks properties such as adamantine or magic for the purposes of DR. Hamatula strike from cheliax companion adds 1d4 bleed damage to
unarmed strikes.


The Cestus in the Adventurer's Armory is a 1d3/1d4 19-20/x2 crit threat. weapon that counts as armed. So no attacks of Opportunity with it, it can also be used as a Blunt or Piercing weapon. it has the drawback of using your hands more difficult.

Fighter build would rely on strength and armor, full plate with armored spikes, making close combat weapons your main fighter set, improved critical, TWF, power attack etc. Add improved Grapple in there to you you a monster, grapple, pin, punch.

Ranger Build, TWF set-up, more difficult to do since the lower armor, but with medium armor and higher dex, shouldn't be too much of a problem.

Barbarian Build the lack of feats would make this build more difficult, and would no where near compare to the monk or a two-handed barbarian build.

Paladin Build, hmmm, Cestus as their holy weapon...interesting..."I smite thee with my fists!"


Xaaon of Korvosa wrote:
Paladin Build, hmmm, Cestus as their holy weapon...interesting..."I smite thee with my fists!"

That quote was in the back of my mind from when I started following this thread.

Have to look into such a build.


3.5 material
the Book of nine swords :

- Superior Unarmed strike, will increase the base damage

- Snap kick, much like an extras off hand attack whenever you use an attack action.

Complete Champion :

- Fist of the forest prestige class, excellent for a barbarian bruiser.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Rulebook, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Remco Sommeling wrote:


3.5 material
the Book of nine swords :

- Superior Unarmed strike, will increase the base damage

That is basically all the OP will need to shine. Gauntlets to bypass DR and not have to spend money on the ridiculously overprized Amulet of Mighty Fisting are mandatory, too.


magnuskn wrote:
Remco Sommeling wrote:


3.5 material
the Book of nine swords :

- Superior Unarmed strike, will increase the base damage

That is basically all the OP will need to shine. Gauntlets to bypass DR and not have to spend money on the ridiculously overprized Amulet of Mighty Fisting are mandatory, too.

Unless I'm mistaken Superior Unarmed Strike requires Improved Unarmed Strike (could be wrong though, I'm AFB at the moment)

Dark Archive

kyrt-ryder wrote:
magnuskn wrote:
Remco Sommeling wrote:


3.5 material
the Book of nine swords :

- Superior Unarmed strike, will increase the base damage

That is basically all the OP will need to shine. Gauntlets to bypass DR and not have to spend money on the ridiculously overprized Amulet of Mighty Fisting are mandatory, too.
Unless I'm mistaken Superior Unarmed Strike requires Improved Unarmed Strike (could be wrong though, I'm AFB at the moment)

improved unanrmed strike, and a BAB of 3 or 6


Rhewtani wrote:
I've got a player looking for a "bruiser" but would like to avoid the orient.

Play a monk and not make him oriental. They don't need to have names like "Furious Monkey", they don't need to wear jammies, they don't need to quote stuff like "You need to step forward before you can step forward."

If you're just in it for the violence, you're in it for the violence.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Rhewtani wrote:
Has anyone put together builds for unarmed fighters or unarmed rogues? I've got a player looking for a "bruiser" but would like to avoid the orient. I'm not too key on non-core rules, myself, but I'd like to find a way to help him out.

Ok. Pet peeve.

Monks in D&D aren't necessarily oriental. Play an english-style monk. Monks in England were very much masters at arms. Play the Russian style CRUSH YOU monk w/ improved grapple and sunder, targeting limbs.

This player needs to learn that what your character tables say and how your character tables play out are two very different things and are completely determined by your own ability to play a character.

Not all monks are oriental wire fighters
Not all bards are frilly lute players
Not all wizards are stuffy bookworms
Not all rangers sleep in lean-tos out in the forest
Not all druids hug trees
Not all rogues lie, cheat, steal, and backstab (Though most are capable of it)
Not all clerics are healbots
Not all paladins are boy scouts
Not all barbarians are greatsword wielding fanatics
Not all sorcerors are glass cannons
Not all fighters - well these get pretty varied by default, actually.

Shadow Lodge

Quelian wrote:
Not all bards are frilly lute players

Whatever, you had me then lost me. ;-)

Sovereign Court

meatrace wrote:
LoreKeeper wrote:

meatrace is actually wrong.

...stuff...

Bur, what? How am I wrong? Nothing you said contradicts what I said, in fact that's pretty much what I was getting at. Your damage dice will be lower, but you'll have so many adds it won't matter. Damage will be higher with a fighter build, but you'll lose monk special features...which don't seem to matter to the OP.

Just because you wear a monk's robes it doesn't mean you're attempting to recreate a monk, it is merely a mechanical advantage to your actual damage dice. Why wouldn't you wear that?

The only major flaw in your argument I saw was Improved Natural Weapon. All the relevant threads lay underneath dead horses, so could be hard to find, but it's been pretty emphatically stated by devs that INW does not affect humanoid punch damage, be it from monk levels, IUS the feat, or by wearing various pieces of metal on your fists. INW is for gnashing teethes and pointy talons and wookies ripping your arms off, etc.


Remco Sommeling wrote:


3.5 material
the Book of nine swords :

- Superior Unarmed strike, will increase the base damage

- Snap kick, much like an extras off hand attack whenever you use an attack action.

Complete Champion :

- Fist of the forest prestige class, excellent for a barbarian bruiser.

I made a 3.5 Unarmed Barbarian (well he used Gauntlets, but still).

I had to scour a few dozen Dragon Magazines to make it work. Replace a few class features with other ones that give you Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Unarmed Strike, and some other benefits in the first few levels. Then aim for the Frostrager prestige class from Frostburn.

Sovereign Court

KaeYoss wrote:
Rhewtani wrote:
I've got a player looking for a "bruiser" but would like to avoid the orient.

Play a monk and not make him oriental. They don't need to have names like "Furious Monkey", they don't need to wear jammies, they don't need to quote stuff like "You need to step forward before you can step forward."

If you're just in it for the violence, you're in it for the violence.

This.

Just because it says "monk" on your character sheet doens't mean that you need to pretend to be Jet Li.

If you want to avoid monk all together, or just dip into monk for the unarmed damage, I would suggest rogue as the OP mentioned, or Paladin (for smite), or Barbarian (for rage powers). Basically ANYTHING but Fighter. The Fighter in Pathfinder benefits most from wielding a biggish weapon (not necessarily a 2 hander) and walking around in a tin can.


Keep in mind that monks CAN wear armor. They lose some abilities, but that's not automatically the end of the world.

Monk 2/Fighter 18 gets you evasion and some good saves, plus a better skill list and 1d6 per punch. And hey, yet more bonus feats. Wear light armor, and you're in great shape.


Belier's Bite from the Cheliax book is an absolute must have for unarmed fighters and monks. 1d4 bleed damage? Yes, please.


MisterSlanky wrote:
Quelian wrote:
Not all bards are frilly lute players
Whatever, you had me then lost me. ;-)

I actually made an Arcane Duelist/Dragon Disciple Bard who ended up having more HP than the Paladin/Fighter and was actually one of the front liners of the group by far. He was never cannon fodder or a frilly lute player

Scarab Sages

Four years later, I doubt anyone cares.

Silver Crusade

The Search-Fu is strong with that one.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Unarmed build without using monk All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.