I've tried searching, but my results always end up being conjecture (usually pre-faq) or entirely outside the realm of my question:
Can I use Pummeling Style with Emei Piercers (or anything else)?
"Benefit: The ring prevents the wielder from being disarmed and turns unarmed strikes into piercing attacks."
I was afraid of that. I want to use pummeling style and an amulet of natural armor...but I have to use the slot on an amulet of mighty fists, bah!
The rules for the various "this weapon modifies your unarmed strikes" weapons are very inconsistent and confusing. There'll be GMs who interpret it differently than you, since the actual RAW is too contradictory to give a clear answer.
I found this before: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions#5 1
Basically Emei Piercers were the only weapons that MIGHT squeeze by.
I found this before: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions#5 1
Basically Emei Piercers were the only weapons that MIGHT squeeze by.
It is for unarmed strikes only now, just to clear that up.
I found this before: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2kqan&page=2?Adventurers-Armory-Questions#5 1
Basically Emei Piercers were the only weapons that MIGHT squeeze by.
It is for unarmed strikes only now, just to clear that up.
The FAQ still doesn't clarify weapons like the cestus that allow your unarmed strike to do certain types of damage. When is an unarmed strike not actually an unarmed strike? Or is an unarmed strike always an unarmed strike?
Benefit: While wearing a cestus, you are considered armed and your unarmed attacks deal normal damage. If you are proficient with a cestus, your unarmed strikes may deal bludgeoning or piercing damage. Monks are proficient with the cestus.
So does an unarmed strike that does piercing damage courtesy of a cestus qualify? What about when using Snake Style?
Can you use Pummelling Style when another style feat makes your fingers pointy sharp, but not when you wear what is effectively a glove with sharp, pointy bits on it?
I was afraid of that. I want to use pummeling style and an amulet of natural armor...but I have to use the slot on an amulet of mighty fists, bah!
Is this for PFS, because I honestly don't see why you couldn't have an Amulet of Mighty Fists & Natural Armor.
It's literally as easy as adding the Nat Armor costs to an AOMF in a home game.
It seems to me that if a weapon doesn't allow you to get your monk improved unarmed damage you also can't use it with pummeling style. As far as I'm aware there are no weapons that allow you to use your monks damage, despite indicating they modify an unarmed strike. They errata'd the few that initially appeared that should have worked.
At 5th level, a brawler's damage with close weapons increases. When wielding a close weapon, she uses the unarmed strike damage of a brawler 4 levels lower instead of the base damage for that weapon (for example, a 5th-level Medium brawler wielding a punching dagger deals 1d6 points of damage instead of the weapon's normal 1d4). If the weapon normally deals more damage than this, its damage is unchanged. This ability does not affect any other aspect of the weapon. The brawler can decide to use the weapon's base damage instead of her adjusted unarmed strike damage—this must be declared before the attack roll is made.
How do you think this interacts with Pummelling Style? A specific ability designed to link weapon damage with unarmed strike damage and for a class for which Pummelling style would appear to have been designed?
FAQ would pretty much limit you to unarmed strikes only That ability allows you to deal more damage with a weapon, it doesn't turn that weapon into an unarmed strike.
Well, unless you are a Brawler, using a weapon is only really needed or desired if you want to add an enchantment effect to your attack. I personally am going with the no weapons at all for my campaign, even if the reason I might make use of the feat is via an NPC the party might meet with and also possibly fight at some point (depends on their attitude, etc.).
I would have to say that if you feel the wording of some weapons leaves the ruling fuzzy to you do what you want with your campaign or if you are only a player, point your DM to this post and let them read and chime in on the subject. It's ultimately about fun over structure so the ruling on this is purely to keep future discussion on the subject moot.
Also, to play devil's advocate, the feat actually says it's to pool all your attack potential in one devastating punch so does that mean you need a free hand? Last I checked, Monks and Brawlers are able to attack with any part of their body, so a rules lawyer could say you need at least one free hand to perform this attack.
Just my $0.02
Also, unless you have a feat that a has mutltiple styles as a prerequisite, you can only use the feats of one style when in the stance for that particular style, only changing with a swift action.
Style Feats (from the PFOSD)
For centuries, great warriors have looked to nature and the multiverse to find inspiration in battle. Countless monastic and contemplative orders have crafted intricate unarmed fighting styles based on the deadliness and grace of natural and supernatural creatures. Although many such fighting techniques were created by secretive orders, they have since spread to practitioners the world over.
As a swift action, you can enter the stance employed by the fighting style a style feat embodies. Although you cannot use a style feat before combat begins, the style you are in persists until you spend a swift action to switch to a different combat style. You can use a feat that has a style feat as a prerequisite only while in the stance of the associated style. For example, if you have feats associated with Mantis Style and Tiger Style, you can use a swift action to adopt Tiger Style at the start of one turn, and then can use other feats that have Tiger Style as a prerequisite. By using another swift action at the start of your next turn, you could adopt Mantis Style and use other feats that have Mantis Style as a prerequisite.