I'm unclear on the interaction between a Cestus and Monk's Unarmed attacks. I found a post where a developer states that the monk can't use there Monk Unarmed damage with a Cestus, which seems odd, but that at least is clear.
What I am unclear about is the other interactions of a unarmed attack and a Cestus, IE Ki pool and the unarmed feats(Scorpion Style, Elemntal Fist, etc). Do they work together?
Also when you do an unarmed strike do you do the 1d3 that a normal person does, or do you do the 1d4 that a Cestus does?
1d4 Damage,
You can't use any ki abilities that require an unarmed strike unless that weapon has the ki weapon property, or feats that allow you to use weapons as though they were unarmed strikes for the purpose of those abilities.
So you can't Stunning Fist or Quivering Palm.
However, some monk abilities don't require an unarmed strike, such as elemental fist. So double check every ability for their trigger requirements.
As always, this is the RAW interpretation, feel free to talk to your GM about modifying this for your own games. (Indeed, I see no problem with allowing the use of Unarmed Strike Damage, or even channeling monk abilities.)
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.
So is the bolded part simply flavor text? I mean it certainly seems as if you are in no way attacking with an unarmed attack with a cestus by your interpretation or SKR's about monk unarmed damage.
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.So is the bolded part simply flavor text? I mean it certainly seems as if you are in no way attacking with an unarmed attack with a cestus by your interpretation or SKR's about monk unarmed damage.
Normal damage as in not nonlethal damage. The damage done while using cestii is listed in the APG (1d4 for a Medium creature).
As far as I know, the brass knuckles are the only weapon that scale with monk unarmed strike damage. If the cestus scaled the same way, they'd be far superior than brass knuckles or even a normal unarmed strike because of the 19-20 crit range.
Normal damage as in not nonlethal damage. The damage done while using cestii is listed in the APG (1d4 for a Medium creature).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.So is the bolded part simply flavor text? I mean it certainly seems as if you are in no way attacking with an unarmed attack with a cestus by your interpretation or SKR's about monk unarmed damage.
But I'm already considered armed, why if I'm considered armed am I doing something that's maybe kinda sorta like unarmed damage?
Maybe I'm thinking too much about it, but in the description of a longsword it doesn't say "you are considered armed and your unarmed damage does 1d8", so I'm just trying to understand if that statement is merely fluff, or actually has some meaning.
As far as I know, the brass knuckles are the only weapon that scale with monk unarmed strike damage. If the cestus scaled the same way, they'd be far superior than brass knuckles or even a normal unarmed strike because of the 19-20 crit range.
I understand that the developers have stated that your Monk Unarmed damage doesn't work with a cestus.
Normal damage as in not nonlethal damage. The damage done while using cestii is listed in the APG (1d4 for a Medium creature).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.So is the bolded part simply flavor text? I mean it certainly seems as if you are in no way attacking with an unarmed attack with a cestus by your interpretation or SKR's about monk unarmed damage.But I'm already considered armed, why if I'm considered armed am I doing something that's maybe kinda sorta like unarmed damage?
Maybe I'm thinking too much about it, but in the description of a longsword it doesn't say "you are considered armed and your unarmed damage does 1d8", so I'm just trying to understand if that statement is merely fluff, or actually has some meaning.
It's the same wording as the gauntlet. The intent is 'you're not holding a weapon in your hand, you are using your hand (covered with cestus or a gauntlet), therefore you are unarmed, as these weapons cannot be taken from you in a Disarm maneuver, but you do damage as if you were holding a weapon'. In less words.
That doesn't make a lot of sense, but I suppose that could be right. It just seems like a really unclear statement.
That doesn't make a lot of sense, but I suppose that could be right. It just seems like a really unclear statement.
Generally speaking an unarmed attack provokes an AoO, an armed attack doesn't. As already stated, unarmed attacks typically deal non lethal damage. This weapon isn't meant for a monk, it's meant for a fighter or other class that wants to have the option of fighting without a "weapon" (a brawler type) but doesn't want to waste feats to do so. I guess because you want it to work another way is where the lack of clarity comes in?
The cestus is a monk weapon, so there may have been some thinking that monks might use it.
It's also a simple light weapon, it doesn't fall under the unarmed portion of the weapon chart, so it's clear that you are armed when using it.
Again, my confusion is simply in the statement "your unarmed attacks deal normal damage" and if that interacts with some of the feats that talk about making unarmed strikes.
|
That doesn't make a lot of sense, but I suppose that could be right. It just seems like a really unclear statement.
The other thing to remember is that the cestus are not only designed for a monk. For someone who is not a monk, a punch does 1d3 non-lethal damage and generates an attack of opportunity against you. Give that same person a cestus and they are now capable of doing 1d4 lethal damage and do not provoke an attack of opportunity.
This can save you in case you are disarmed in a fight and need to keep threatening that wizard near by you so that they have a harder time casting (at least until you can draw your backup weapon or recover your main).
The cestus is a monk weapon, so there may have been some thinking that monks might use it.
It's also a simple light weapon, it doesn't fall under the unarmed portion of the weapon chart, so it's clear that you are armed when using it.
Again, my confusion is simply in the statement "your unarmed attacks deal normal damage" and if that interacts with some of the feats that talk about making unarmed strikes.
"Normal" damage is lethal damage for weapons. Unarmed attacks typically deal the abnormal non lethal damage. They felt the need to call out in the rules (to make sure I guess) that when using the cestus you deal "normal" lethal damage with it. It is an exception to the rule that unarmed strikes deal non lethal (as is the unarmed combat feat for that matter).
If it had been intended to use the monks progression, it would have been noted in the item description and probably have a little number or symbol next the the damage die which would point to something stating that effect.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
From the text for Gauntlet
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. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of gauntlets.
Nothing about normal damage.
From the text for Spiked Gauntlet
An attack with a spiked gauntlet is considered an armed attack. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of spiked gauntlets.
Again, nothing about normal damage, or abnormal damage.
You're right about dealing monk damage, that does receive a note in brass knuckles.
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.
I just don't get why they mention unarmed twice in cestus. The consensus seems to be that if you are using a cestus your attacks in no way count as a unarmed strike.
It is an unarmed attack even though it has some exceptions (lethal/ no AoO). The reason they would call it an unarmed attack repeatedly is so you know it still counts for abilities and feats that trigger or modify unarmed attacks. The feat that causes your unarmed attacks to do elemental damage for instance. If the cestus was a "weapon" and not specifically called out to be an unarmed strike, it wouldn't work with that feat. Because they call it out as an unarmed strike, ding, it works.
It is an unarmed attack even though it has some exceptions (lethal/ no AoO). The reason they would call it an unarmed attack repeatedly is so you know it still counts for abilities and feats that trigger or modify unarmed attacks. The feat that causes your unarmed attacks to do elemental damage for instance. If the cestus was a "weapon" and not specifically called out to be an unarmed strike, it wouldn't work with that feat. Because they call it out as an unarmed strike, ding, it works.
So you're saying that a cestus is an unarmed attack?
While wearing a cestus, you are considered armed and your unarmed attacks deal normal damage.
I'd love for that to be the case, for the monk players out there (I think cestus are much more monk-like than brass knuckles, for example)... but I'm pretty sure that's squarely in house-rule territory. Being "Armed" is kind of a yes-or-no thing. I don't see where a monk would be able to, for example, use their monk damage with the cestus.
Monk's cant use there unarmed damage with a cestus, if you do a search for cestus you'll find a post by one of the developers that states that. That being said, they specifically mention unarmed attacks and unarmed strikes. So my confusion, was when something like scorpion strike mentions needing to do an unarmed strike, does a cestus fill that requirement. Needless to say, still confused.
Monk's cant use there unarmed damage with a cestus, if you do a search for cestus you'll find a post by one of the developers that states that. That being said, they specifically mention unarmed attacks and unarmed strikes. So my confusion, was when something like scorpion strike mentions needing to do an unarmed strike, does a cestus fill that requirement. Needless to say, still confused.
That's my understanding, that monks can't use their unarmed damage with cestus, because they're considered to be using a weapon. That being the case, let's look at Scorpion Style.
You can perform an unarmed strike that greatly hampers your target's movement.Prerequisite: Improved Unarmed Strike.
Benefit: To use this feat, you must make a single unarmed attack as a standard action. If this unarmed attack hits, you deal damage normally, and the target's base land speed is reduced to 5 feet for a number of rounds equal to your Wisdom modifier unless it makes a Fortitude saving throw (DC 10 + 1/2 your character level + your Wis modifier).
I'd say that a strict reading of this says that the monk couldn't do this with Cestus. That having been said, they could use other parts of their body (feet, head, elbows, knees, etc) to fight Scorpion Style... but they wouldn't get any benefit of the Cestus. This kind of thing is what the Amulet of Mighty Fists is for.
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.So if the cestus isn't an unarmed attack, does this mean that if I hit someone with my knees I can consider my knees piercing? An attack with a cestus is still an unarmed attack, but it deals normal damage and doesn't provoke attacks of opportunity.
That being said, it will work with Scorpion style.
I think it's reasonable to assume that, in order to use the qualities of a weapon, you would have to attack with the weapon. A dual-wielding fighter with a club (bludgeoning) and a dagger (piercing/slashing) doesn't get to make all of their attacks as bludgeoning when fighting a skeleton (who has DR 5/bludgeoning). Basic logic dictates that kneeing someone wouldn't be considered piercing because of something you were wearing on your hand. Similarly, that knee attack would be considered unarmed, and be eligible for monk damage (or Scorpion Style).
If a cestus attack was considered unarmed, then the monk would be able to do their unarmed damage with them... and there wouldn't be the specific language stating that you are, in fact, armed. A monk can use Scorpion style while wearing cestas, just like they could while holding a quarterstaff... they just can't use those weapons for the attack.
Brass knuckles directly state that they use Monk unarmed damage. They also are considered unarmed attacks, but you aren't considered armed while using them.
Agreed. Brass Knuckles differ from Cestus in two significant ways:
- At no point in the description does Brass Knuckles say that you are armed, unlike the Cestus/
- Brass Knuckles can be found in the weapons table under "Unarmed Attacks", whereas Cestus is considered a Light Melee weapon on the same chart.
Therefore, Brass Knuckles can be used with Scorpion Style, whereas Cestus cannot.
I'm unclear on if one of the qualities of the weapon is 'your unarmed attack deal normal damage' and what that means.
Taking a look at Elemental Fist, because it's a different ability:
You empower your strike with elemental energy.Prerequisites: Con 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, base attack bonus +8.
Benefit: When you use Elemental Strike pick one of the following energy types: acid, cold, electricity, or fire. On a successful hit, the attack deals damage normally plus 1d6 points of damage of the chosen type. You must declare that you are using this feat before you make your attack roll (thus a failed attack roll ruins the attempt). You may attempt an Elemental Fist attack once per day for every four levels you have attained (see Special), and no more than once per round.
Special: A monk of the four winds receives Elemental Fist as a bonus feat at 1st level, even if he does not meet the prerequisites. A monk may attempt an Elemental Fist attack a number of times per day equal to his monk level, plus one more time per day for every four levels he has in classes other than monk.
Nowhere in this text does it say that Elemental Fist is required to be an unarmed attack. The closest we have is that Improved Unarmed Strike is a prerequisite. RAI, it probably does need to be an unarmed strike, but not necessarily according to RAW.
I'm unclear on if one of the qualities of the weapon is 'your unarmed attack deal normal damage' and what that means.
That phrase appears nonsensical to me, since, when using a cestus, you're considered armed. I think that's meant to be descriptive of how a cestus is used.
This is definitely an item that could use revision/clarification in future releases.
I fail to see how the Elemental Fist entry means that a cestus attack isn't considered an unarmed attack and how it wouldn't work with Scorpion style.
I ask that if you are using that to prove your point, please explain the connection.
I was looking at Elemental Fist as a separate question, since they are two separate abilities. That has nothing to do with the cestus question, since nowhere in Elemental Fist states that it has to be an unarmed attack.
Cestus is considered an armed attack because it says so in the description.
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.
You are considered armed when wearing cestus, due to the bolded part above. It doesn't really get any clearer than that.
It seems a case of RAW being confusing, and RAI being that the Cestus shouldn't be the default weapon on monks, so it doesn't work with unarmed attacks.
Maybe an editing error, they were originally going to make them unarmed only, then switched to the 'considered armed' rules, and forgot to take out references to unarmed strike. If you take out the unarmed part, you get"If you are proficient with a cestus, your strikes may deal bludgeoning or piercing damage." Why they would need to say such, since the weapon data already indicates it does B/P damage, I don't know.
Okay. I apologize then.I was looking at Elemental Fist as a separate question, since they are two separate abilities. That has nothing to do with the cestus question, since nowhere in Elemental Fist states that it has to be an unarmed attack.
Apology accepted. I'm really glad this isn't devolving into some kind of flames. I really hate when that happens.
If it is so clear-cut that it is not considered an unarmed strike, why is this line mentioned:
If you are proficient with a cestus, your unarmed strikes may deal bludgeoning or piercing damage.If a cestus attack is not considered an unarmed attack, what is the purpose of this line?
I would guess that's an editing error on the part of Paizo. Sean Reynold's statement that we should strike "unarmed" from the description of Cestus.
Cestus shouldn't refer to "unarmed" attacks at all. Just strike "unarmed" and "rather than nonlethal damage" from its description and it'll be clear than monks don't use their unarmed damage with this weapon, it always does the listed damage.
I don't think it's that big of a stretch to apply Sean's logic to the whole situation. If "unarmed" and "rather than nonlethal damage" are removed, the situation goes away, and Cestus is just another monk weapon.
Hmmm... Well, I don't think it's that big of a stretch to consider a cestus capable of Scorpion striking either. Apparently this is a nuance that, in light of SKR's statement, probably needs to be addressed.
Though I always saw the cestus as a weapon a fighter would take so he didn't have to use an amulet of mighty fists to have enchanted fists but still fight unarmed.
It's absolutely not a stretch to consider that, but it would be a house-ruling to allow Scorpion Style with Cestus. Honestly, I don't see why a monk character couldn't use cestus, considering the modern equivalent of loaded/sap gloves.
I'd be okay with doing that in my games... but it's not RAW.
I'm actually using the cestus exactly like you described in a Kingmaker game right now - a Longspear (reach) using cleric, wearing Cestus so that he can deal with close enemies. Cestus is really better as a non-monk weapon - it increases damage for a non-monk character, but doesn't take up a space that a weapon/shield/rod/staff/wand/chicken/whatever could use. On it's own merits, it's a good weapon. It's just less so for a monk.
Monks can always use Brass Knuckles, enchant the heck out of 'em, and still get all of their unarmed abilities... so there's ways to get what the player wants.