|
Not sure if there is a hard and fast rule for this, but I would say no, though the polymorphed natural attacks may be better anyway.
Unarmed Strikes do not have to be fists or feet, per se, but can be headbutts, elbows, tails smacks, shoulder slam, or whatever, all of which a tiger is able to physically make. Especially as they still have the mind of the Monk. They might even do more damage in the alternate form if they are large.
Then again, the DM might just say no, for their own reasons. Spellcasters often lose the ability to cast spells, thogh not the actual spellcasting ability in general, fighters lose the benefits of weapon/armor training, etc. . .
hmm flurry of tail whips, Id like to see that in action.
I think UAS would still be available...
NORMAL Animals would be unproficient in it (they only have Nat. Wpn profiiency),
but could attack with UAS at penalty if they wanted/were trained to do so.
I think UAS would still be available...
NORMAL Animals would be unproficient in it (they only have Nat. Wpn profiiency),
but could attack with UAS at penalty if they wanted/were trained to do so.
They could, and they would get iterative attacks if their BAB was high enough. However, all their natural attacks would become secondary, which would severely hurt most animals' DPR.
There isn't any clear rules on this, and if seen it ruled either way.
Personally I wouldn't allow unarmed attacks for most animals (or animal-like creatures).
And I don't really like the idea of transferring the monk unarmed damage to a non-humanoid. Eventhough the monk in tiger suit is thinking and able to do stuff a normal tiger wouldn't, I don't see his martial arts training, as something that is so easily transferred to an entirely different form.
For the reasons HaraldKlak stated I also think that a monk's FoB ability depends on his original form and is therefore lost when polymorphed into a non-humanoid (heck, maybe even when polymorphed into a humanoid).
As the owner of a house cat, I can absolutely testify that animals can make unarmed attacks.
My 3 maine coons all play with us, both with and without claws. The oldest, who's 18 lbs, plays with my wife all the time and slaps her hands with his paws. He doesn't use his claws, he just bats her hand (hard enough to bruise them sometimes).
I can easily imagine a tiger reaching out with one 8 inch wide paw and smacking something HARD. And as fast as my youngest cat can bat at things, I can see him doing it as a FoB attack, hitting with the same paw five or six times in 2 seconds, much less 6. :)
I'd say the Monk could use his monk abilities just fine.
Additionally, I tend to rule on the side of letting people use their freaking class abilities unless the rules say they can't, unless it's a very broken thing, which this isn't.
This is one best left up to individual GMs; unarmed strikes are not considered natural attacks by the core rules, but they could be considered equipment, as that is the closest thing to any true classification that the RAW provides. It's a gray area, no matter how one looks at it.
All creatures capable of making attacks have unarmed strikes.
|
kung fu panda.
monk levels are not form dependant, neither are bab or base saves. polymorph changes none of that.
monk druids are scary.
Monk + UMD + something that allows you to cast one of the elemental body spells.
Monk medium fire elemental:
+4 dex, +3 natural AC, burn* (since burn just states the listed damage, I would guess it would be the monks base damage)
In the description of flurry of blows it says:
"A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."
So he cannot use his claws or fangs for flurrying.
However, dependent on the form, I'd possibly allow doing flurry of blows, applying the monks normal unarmed damage, not the animals natural weapons - I regard flurry of blows as an ability a monk draws from his chi gong mastery which basically a discipline of the mind. (<-- not RAW)
As the raccoon in mdt's post I imagine such an act as hits with the paw not using the claws or something like that.
@Name Violation: What are the advantages of a Druid Monk besides saving on wild armor?
In the description of flurry of blows it says:
"A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."
So he cannot use his claws or fangs for flurrying.However, dependent on the form, I'd possibly allow doing flurry of blows, applying the monks normal unarmed damage, not the animals natural weapons - I regard flurry of blows as an ability a monk draws from his chi gong mastery which basically a discipline of the mind. (<-- not RAW)
As the raccoon in mdt's post I imagine such an act as hits with the paw not using the claws or something like that.@Name Violation: What are the advantages of a Druid Monk besides saving on wild armor?
I'm glad I wasn't drinking anything when I read that, I'd have gotten it all over my monitor. :) :) :)
