GreenKnight91's page

By your definition, Metal Strikes doesn't do anything and is purely flavour text, since it makes no mention of traits at all.

How come "counts as" is stronger than "is made out of" in your reading lol?

I'm not saying that Metal Strikes does nothing. It specifically defines that "unarmed attacks" are "TREATED" as those metals. Similar to Metal-Veined Strike.

A bit of my reasoning comes from watching the conversations around whether or not the traits of Slag May and Hag Claws apply together. They are both claw attacks. However, the consensus is that no, you have to pick which claw attack you are doing. Your Slag May won't have agile from Hag Claws, and your Hag Claws won't have grapple from Slag May. And for some reason, the community also says that means Hag Claws are not cold iron from Slag May, but they would be from Metal Strikes or Metal-Veined Strike.

Feel free to direct me to resources to refute that, as I'd love to do a very animal like iron hag build, even before I knew about Clawdancer.

But does it really remove the trait?

Let's see:
Slug May:

Quote:

You have thick, sturdy claws made of cold iron that grow naturally from your body

How does that differ from saying "you have a longsword made of cold iron"?

Sudden Charge doesn't have the Cold Iron trait, it only gains it because your longsword is made out of cold iron.

So, why wouldn't an unarmed attack made with a Cold Iron body part function exactly the same, giving the trait to the attack?

I think the issue with your example is the difference in wording. For sudden charge, it actually doesn't modify the strike. In fact, it says you make a melee Strike as part of the maneuver, but doesn't impact the rules of that strike. It's just a way of doing 3 actions for the price of 2.

If you end your movement within melee reach of at least one enemy, you can make a melee Strike against that enemy

Meanwhile, the stances are about the strike themselves, with rules about the kind of attack. They give "frenzied claw unarmed attacks" and "spinning talon unarmed attacks", which implies it may be the case that they are different from "claw unarmed attacks" *edit- fixed word order* without the frenzied name modifier. It at least could use clarification. Looking at weapons, a War Flail is not a Flail, so a Daikitsu war cleric can't use a war flail as a favored weapon.

Let's take a look at monk:

Metal Strikes:

Quote:

Your unarmed attacks are treated as cold iron and silver.

Doesn't this add the trait to the attack? Why is this treated differently than:

Quote:

You have thick, sturdy claws made of cold iron that grow naturally from your body

?

The difference between these is the wording. The Monk specifically adds those traits to unarmed attacks (which would be the case for "claw unarmed attacks" of, say, the Slag May, as well as the "Frenzied claw unarmed attacks" and "spinning talon unarmed attacks" of the clawdancer. Meanwhile, that is a flavor descriptor, while the rule is "You gain a claw unarmed attack." I can see both reasonings, but one is more explicit of adding it to all unarmed attacks vs the other where it may just be this attack. After looking over the Catfolk Aggravating Claws wording, I'm leaning a bit more towards your end, at least for claw attacks. So long as everyone is on the same page of a "frenzied" is just flavor text. Otherwise, it feels like it needs clarification of the context.

On a side note, I'd like it to work, but I'm curious how the conversation will go with my local GM's with the rules interpretation.