| 3 people marked this as FAQ candidate. 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Recently I was making a Monk/Druid character, and it was brought to my attention that every single monk ability (unarmed strike, flurry of blows, monk bonus to AC and fast movement) could be construed by a GM with a jaundiced eye as being dependent on the monk's original form:
Take it away, Grick!
Polymorph: "While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form."
AC Bonus (Ex): "When unarmored and unencumbered, the monk adds his Wisdom bonus (if any) to his AC and his CMD. In addition, a monk gains a +1 bonus to AC and CMD at 4th level. This bonus increases by 1 for every four monk levels thereafter, up to a maximum of +5 at 20th level. These bonuses to AC apply even against touch attacks or when the monk is flat-footed. He loses these bonuses when he is immobilized or helpless, when he wears any armor, when he carries a shield, or when he carries a medium or heavy load."
Is the AC Bonus dependent on form? I think it's not a stretch to say yes, though YMMV.
This is fairly crippling, as it could also apply to Flurry, unarmed strike, stunning fist, fast movement, etc.
So I was wondering (in fact , I was hoping a number of you would faq this as well) if a monk/druid would lose all ability to kung-fu fight while wildshaped.
I personally vote that they can still use martial arts for 3 reasons.
1.) There is nothing in the monk's description that lends one to think that martial arts is form dependent.
2.) There is nothing in the rules preventing awakened animals from taking levels in monk and doing basically the same thing.
3.) The rule of cool! Kung fu grizzlys! Snake style using snakes! Dragon style using dragons! The possibilities are AWESOME!
prototype00
|
If you are thinking of going this route, make sure that you take a look at Feral Combat Training. you will need this to do the parts in 3, as the monk class ability states:
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. 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.
Without that feat, you would be unable to use any natural attacks with your Martial arts.
Well true enough, heppler. And the fact that they make provisions for natural attacks interacting with martial arts seems to indicate that the two are not incompatible (i.e. you don't lose the ability to headbutt someone just because you have claws).
Though, I was more wondering whether a monk when wildshaped would retain his unarmed strike damage and bonus to AC.
prototype00
A more neutral phrasing of your question could be:
"Which monk class features, if any, depend upon form for the purposes of Polymorph effects?"
1.) There is nothing in the monk's description that lends one to think that martial arts is form dependent.
Monk: "A student of martial arts, the monk trains his body to be his greatest weapon and defense."
2.) There is nothing in the rules preventing awakened animals from taking levels in monk and doing basically the same thing.
If the awakened animal was polymorphed into something else, it would have the same problems (or lack thereof) as the human monk who was polymorphed into something else.
A more neutral phrasing of your question could be:
"Which monk class features, if any, depend upon form for the purposes of Polymorph effects?"
I feel it's basically the same question, as you could theoretically make the argument that you made about every monk class ability, bar none.
Monk: "A student of martial arts, the monk trains his body to be his greatest weapon and defense."
Though, fair enough, you got me there. But what is stopping the monk from training his wildshaped body? It's not like he can't maintain it for hours at a stretch.
prototype00
The monks ability to use any part of their body: fists, feet, head, elbows, etc indicates that it is not form specific. Your T rex monk can tail quan do or headbut the badguys in the head.
The monks ability to use any part of their body: fists, feet, head, elbows, etc indicates that it is not form specific. Your T rex monk can tail quan do or headbut the badguys in the head.
Well, I think that the argument being put forth is that the T-rex's head/arms/elbows are not the monk's normal head/arms/elbows.
prototype00
Any creature with physical body can make an unarmed strike.
Have you asked why your DM is fighting you on this?
I should probably write a disclaimer that I'm not actually in a game at the moment, and that there is no DM cackling maniacally while I weep in a dark room.
It's just a discussion that me, Bardic Dave and Grick were having that I wanted to ask around about, thats all.
prototype00
|
|
The monks ability to use any part of their body: fists, feet, head, elbows, etc indicates that it is not form specific. Your T rex monk can tail quan do or headbut the badguys in the head.
Well that does actually change the question BNW. Since it specifies exactly which parts of the body can be used (fist, elbows, knees, and feet) what happens if the shape you take DOESN'T have all of those ?
Your T-Rex Monk could probably Kick and maybe Knee but it doesn't have Fists or (realistically) Elbows and HeadButts aren't allowed for the improved monk damage/hit chance.
I can see where the questions are coming from here.
Well that does actually change the question BNW. Since it specifies exactly which parts of the body can be used (fist, elbows, knees, and feet) what happens if the shape you take DOESN'T have all of those ?
You only need one part (or at most 2) . Everything has a head doesn't it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
No monk class feature is dependent upon form. If you have a body, you can use that body as a weapon.
And that's about all I can say on this matter....calmly. This board sickens me sometimes/most of the time.
|
Technically, you can't use flurry of blows AND natural weapons in the same round, but could use natural weapons AS PART of your flurry of blows with the Feral Combat Training feat.
You may use unarmed strikes as primary weapons AND secondary natural attacks in the same full-round attack, though. Nothing in the rules about being unable to perform unarmed strikes while polymorphed.
Without Feral Combat Training, my ruling would be that your monk unarmed strike would not function as normal. You aren't unarmed while in your wild shape, you still have claws and teeth, and the animals body is designed to use those claws/teeth. However, this would only apply while you are wild shaped into an animal.
If you wild shaped into an elemental, as those can take on any form dependent on the elementals whim (IE, yours), your unarmed strikes would be able to work as written. However, this means no flurry of slam attacks. That just ain't happening.
Feral Training changes things around. You would choose a specific natural attack, and be able to flurry with it. This includes (shudder) slam attacks.
As for the AC bonus, that's a mind-over-body bonus. If you spent a solid week training to be used to being in a different body, I would say you are more than welcome to keep that bonus.
No monk class feature is dependent upon form. If you have a body, you can use that body as a weapon.And that's about all I can say on this matter....calmly. This board sickens me sometimes/most of the time.
If this board "sickens you" I'd hate to see what happens to you when you visit any other. Most, but I know not all, people on Paizo's forum are reasonably polite... other places I've been, not so much.
Any creature with physical body can make an unarmed strike.
Source?
All I know of is the entry on Natural Attack:
Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do. See the natural attacks by size table for typical damage values for natural attacks by creature size.
So creature without natural attacks can definitely make unarmed attacks, but that's it.
Also, if any creature could make unarmed attacks, why would incorporeal creatures be excluded? Source?
|
Any creature with physical body can make an unarmed strike.
Source?
All I know of is the entry on Natural Attack:
Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do. See the natural attacks by size table for typical damage values for natural attacks by creature size.So creature without natural attacks can definitely make unarmed attacks, but that's it.
Also, if any creature could make unarmed attacks, why would incorporeal creatures be excluded? Source?
Let me ask this: Can a PC with natural attacks make unarmed strikes?
Look, it's been this way since 3.5. There was even a WotC article in it's "Elite Opponents" article with a Fiendish Gelatinous Cube Monk.
You see, most creature do not use unarmed strikes, as their natural attacks are better, but that doesn't mean they can't.
If this board "sickens you" I'd hate to see what happens to you when you visit any other. Most, but I know not all, people on Paizo's forum are reasonably polite... other places I've been, not so much.
It has nothing to do with the board's politeness. This board is very polite. It has to do with the board's deep subconscious hatred of the monk and other underpowered, non-casting classes, which they'll deny deny deny, but their statements and assertions betray nearly every post they make.
Let me put it like this... how would you feel if you saw a bunch of people repeatedly kicking a 3-legged puppy? They greet you with smiles on your way by, then get back to the business at hand of hurting puppies.
|
|
If this board "sickens you" I'd hate to see what happens to you when you visit any other. Most, but I know not all, people on Paizo's forum are reasonably polite... other places I've been, not so much.It has nothing to do with the board's politeness. This board is very polite. It has to do with the board's deep subconscious hatred of the monk and other underpowered, non-casting classes, which they'll deny deny deny, but their statements and assertions betray nearly every post they make.
Let me put it like this... how would you feel if you saw a bunch of people repeatedly kicking a 3-legged puppy? They greet you with smiles on your way by, then get back to the business at hand of hurting puppies.
Then please just tell us so right from the beginning next time, as you just looked like you were insulting everyone who just came to give a rules answer to a fellow roleplayer. If you have an objection, feel free to express it ; hateful insinuation will only lead to people flagging your posts.
Rules wise: I see no issue.
Logically: A martial artist masters their own body shape. Their skill is based on knowledge of their own center of gravity, the length of their limbs, their strength and physical ability. Changing form would throw that all off.
I'd argue that he/she'd have to be in a form similar enough to their natural form.
So he/she could kung fu as an ape, or bear, etc, but not as a squid, or ant etc.
If this board "sickens you" I'd hate to see what happens to you when you visit any other. Most, but I know not all, people on Paizo's forum are reasonably polite... other places I've been, not so much.It has nothing to do with the board's politeness. This board is very polite. It has to do with the board's deep subconscious hatred of the monk and other underpowered, non-casting classes, which they'll deny deny deny, but their statements and assertions betray nearly every post they make.
Let me put it like this... how would you feel if you saw a bunch of people repeatedly kicking a 3-legged puppy? They greet you with smiles on your way by, then get back to the business at hand of hurting puppies.
Let's be fair, a puppy is a living creature that can feel pain.
The monk is a class shoe-horned back into D&D to appease martial arts fans when 3.0 showed up.
They stick out like a sore thumb. You have 10 classes who are western themed and then BAM, 1 eastern themed class.
I still use them in my games, but I do take the time to heavily "de-east" them before hand so they fit with everyone else better.
I don't hate them, but they are the one weird kid at the party.
The only thing FCT does is allow that natural weapon to be used in a FoB or for any feat that has IUS as a prereq (style feats most often). It has no bearing on whether you can unarmed strike or not. By RAW any creature can use unarmed strikes and you can make unarmed strikes in any form, but again, it would be sub par most times for any "base creature" (no feat means AoO, lesser damage than natural weapons, no rider effects like poison/etc). But classes and class abilities are exceptions to the norm so these cases where they might not be come up occasionally. IUS has no clause about polymorph or base form and not working.
Chances are unless you have a rider effect from a natural weapon you are far better served to ignore them as a monk, your IUS will do much better damage as you level up and FCT ends up being a wasted feat.
As an elemental, if they took FCT (slam), yeah Flurry of Slam would work.
Heck, monk/druid is already kind of nerfing itself, why wouldn't you let IUS work?
|
|
If this board "sickens you" I'd hate to see what happens to you when you visit any other. Most, but I know not all, people on Paizo's forum are reasonably polite... other places I've been, not so much.It has nothing to do with the board's politeness. This board is very polite. It has to do with the board's deep subconscious hatred of the monk and other underpowered, non-casting classes, which they'll deny deny deny, but their statements and assertions betray nearly every post they make.
Let me put it like this... how would you feel if you saw a bunch of people repeatedly kicking a 3-legged puppy? They greet you with smiles on your way by, then get back to the business at hand of hurting puppies.
Let's be fair, a puppy is a living creature that can feel pain.
The monk is a class shoe-horned back into D&D to appease martial arts fans when 3.0 showed up.
They stick out like a sore thumb. You have 10 classes who are western themed and then BAM, 1 eastern themed class.
I still use them in my games, but I do take the time to heavily "de-east" them before hand so they fit with everyone else better.
I don't hate them, but they are the one weird kid at the party.
There has been on version of D&D that did not have the monk in it, it was the basic book 2nd ed AD&D. It was instead introduced as a package for the priest. Brian Blume gave us the original monk based off of the martial arts from The Destroyer books (at least from what I have read) in the original 1974 D&D as part of the Blackmoor supplement, and then as a main class in the 1st ed AD&D.
Although, I do like the name given to them 1977 version where they where a "mystic", much less confusion on character. Much less "Eastern" flavored.
I take it that you also do not like the Ninja and Samurai? What about the gunslinger?
(mostly just curious on those)
I can agree with StreamOfTheSky though, it is not just monks, at times this board gets down on all the melee classes.
To the OP:
Now, for the RAW answer to the question, there is nothing stopping the monk from using unarmed strikes instead of natural weapons and using heir abilities. Now, personally I think that there should be a minor minus to it (as they learn) but a character who can do this (druid/monk) is already giving up class levels of the monk to druid and should be able to learn to adjust their monk abilities in a new body shape. Remember, a multiclass like this did not just one day say "look, I can change shape" but from an RP point of view has been learning how as they go. They should be good with adapting their combat to a different body shape.
I vote rule of cool monks can do whatever as a waterbuffalo if they choose, but...
"Polymorph: "While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form."
would the monk unarmed strike be affected by the bolded part? My gut says no, it's a class ability but you are liable to run into DM's that would not allow. Most of said DM's would by miserable you made something that can change shape in the first place.
I vote rule of cool monks can do whatever as a waterbuffalo if they choose, but...
"Polymorph: "While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form."
would the monk unarmed strike be affected by the bolded part? My gut says no, it's a class ability but you are liable to run into DM's that would not allow. Most of said DM's would by miserable you made something that can change shape in the first place.
Unarmed strikes are most decidedly not natural attacks, as natural attacks cannot be used in FoB (without some help from feats). In some circumstances they can be treated as manufactured or natural weapons for effects (IE spells) but that doesn't make them either.
Actually there is nothing saying they you can't make unarmed strikes with them. You just can't use them as a natural attack, and make unarmed strikes with them because one follow BAB, and the other does not.
Actually there is nothing saying they you can't make unarmed strikes with them. You just can't use them as a natural attack, and make unarmed strikes with them because one follow BAB, and the other does not.
RAW you are correct, but with quite a few limitations.
An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike. Unarmed strikes do not count as natural weapons (see Combat). The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.
http://paizo.com/paizo/faq/v5748nruor1g1#v5748eaic9ozd
Important parts being you can't use natural weapons as monk weapons or to deploy special attacks that would normally require you to use a monk weapon (FoB is the only thing I can find in the core class with that distinction, ki strike cannot be used with monk weapons per description, stunning fist cannot be used with monk weapons either BUT with FCT it can be used with the natural weapon per the feat).
Other than that if you were to use a natural attack in a normal attack routine as an "unarmed strike" you'd have to use your unarmed strike damage from the monk table and be "stuck" doing blunt damage (weapons table for unarmed strike).
The other side of the coin is, FCT doesn't seem to explicitly allow you to use your improved damage from the monk unarmed strike class ability (it doesn't have a prereq of IUS) and not sure if a class ability counts as "an effect that augments an unarmed strike." The FAQ treats it as a weapon in and of itself.
I already knew about he natural attack thing. Unarmed strikes not counting as natural attacks is not the same as using the limb for used for natural attack to be used as an unarmed strike.
In order to use ki based attacked the weapon must have the ki focus enhancement.
Ki Focus: The magic weapon serves as a channel for the wielder's ki, allowing her to use her special ki attacks through the weapon as if they were unarmed attacks. These attacks include the monk's ki strike, quivering palm, and the Stunning Fist feat (including any condition that the monk can apply using this feat). Only melee weapons can have the ki focus ability.
K, we really need to bring this discussion back to the issue that the original poster wanted clarified. The question stems from the fact that the rules on polymorph effects specifically call out class features dependent on form to be lost when you polymorph, regardless of the form of the creature whose shape you are assuming. Conceptually, this is an attempt to represent that certain class features work by augmenting the natural form of the character that possesses them. If the character alters his form via a polymorph effect, he loses those class features.
In the case of the monk, if improved unarmed damage is a class feature dependent on form, it doesn't matter if the form you're polymorphing into also has humanoid like limbs with which you could make unarmed strikes: you would still lose the improved unarmed damage upon changing shape (again, that's operating on the assumption that improved unarmed damage is a class feature based on form, something about which there is legitimate disagreement).
Question: What is a form dependent class feature? There is no hard and fast RAW on this, though the polymorph rules do distinguish between a class feature that premanently grants claws (dependant on form) and one that can temporarily grant claws X times a day (not dependent on form). Can anybody think of a single class feature that is unambiguously dependent on form? I cannot, although IMO there are a few strong candidates:
–Dragon Disciple's Natural Armour bonus
–Monk's improved unarmed damage
-Monk's X body features (e.g. Diamond Body)
–Storm Druid's "Eyes of the Storm" and "Storm Voice" features,
What do you guys think of the above list of class features? Do they function by permanently augmenting the form/body of the character that possesses them, thus becoming inexorably linked to the natural form of that character? Or do they function through some other means? If they aren't dependent on form, can you think of any class features that are?
I already knew about he natural attack thing. Unarmed strikes not counting as natural attacks is not the same as using the limb for used for natural attack to be used as an unarmed strike.
In order to use ki based attacked the weapon must have the ki focus enhancement.
Ki Focus: The magic weapon serves as a channel for the wielder's ki, allowing her to use her special ki attacks through the weapon as if they were unarmed attacks. These attacks include the monk's ki strike, quivering palm, and the Stunning Fist feat (including any condition that the monk can apply using this feat). Only melee weapons can have the ki focus ability.
Not touching equipment, too many doors open and much further off topic than needed for the discussion. I was using class abilities and the feat most pertinent to the question of how IUS would work with natural attacks and a monk/druid wildshaped.
If the monk/druid had majority monk levels, it wouldn't be worth the feat (damage from US is going to be much better and more reliable with FoB).If they had majority druid levels it *might* be worth the feat investment. Depends on the number of natural attacks available and rider effects (free trips, grabs, poison, rends, etc) but you will be leashed to particular forms depending on the FCT you choose.
Regardless, unarmed strike should be available any form you are in (assuming some form of locomotion and not inanimate objects via polymorph any object). IUS is a feat and it isn't form dependant. The monks abilities just expand on the base feat for all intents and purposes.
Heck ANY creature can make unarmed strikes, they'll just suffer AoO for doing so, unless they have the feat. As most any animal also has a natural weapon (often more than one) that also does better damage and free proficiency, IUS would be a complete and total waste... until enough monk levels get factored in (with a few exceptions of forms).
K, the thread has gotten seriously derailed. Please make another thread about whether animals can use Unarmed Strikes, or whether Natural Attacks can be used to deliver Ki abilities. That's not what this thread is about.
This thread is about whether the improved unarmed damage feature of the monk is a class feature dependent on form, and what ramifications the answer to question that might have for a polymorphing monk. This thread has nothing to do with Natural Attacks or Feral Combat Training at all. More broadly, this is also a thread about how to define the term "class feature dependent on form".
PLEASE READ THIS POST FOR A CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THE OP WAS ASKING ABOUT
Thank you.
K, the argument is seriously derailed. Please make another thread about whether animals can use Unarmed Strikes, or whether Natural Attacks can be used to deliver Ki abilities. That's not what this thread is about.
This thread is about whether the improved unarmed damage feature of the monk is a class feature dependent on form, and what ramifications that might have for a polymorphing monk. More broadly, this is also a thread about how to define the term "class feature dependent on form".
Thank you.
Actually, I had asked whether the Unarmed strike ability of the monk is useable in wildshape (which does include the ability to actually make unarmed strikes via the improved unarmed strike feat), why would you want to separate the two (improved unarmed strike and improved unarmed damage)?
prototype00
Edit: Also, for the sake of asking, since people seem to be putting it in their replies, is there any reason of balance why a monk should be unable to use class abilities while wildshaped?
K, the argument is seriously derailed. Please make another thread about whether animals can use Unarmed Strikes, or whether Natural Attacks can be used to deliver Ki abilities. That's not what this thread is about.
This thread is about whether the improved unarmed damage feature of the monk is a class feature dependent on form, and what ramifications that might have for a polymorphing monk. More broadly, this is also a thread about how to define the term "class feature dependent on form".
Thank you.
Actually, I had asked whether the Unarmed strike ability of the monk is useable in wildshape (which does include the ability to actually make unarmed strikes via the improved unarmed strike feat), why would you want to separate the two (improved unarmed strike and improved unarmed damage)?
prototype00
Edit: Also, for the sake of asking, since people seem to be putting it in their replies, is there any reason of balance why a monk should be unable to use class abilities while wildshaped?
Alright, so I shouldn't have used the term "improved unarmed damage".
Regardless, the ability to make an unarmed strike is not something granted by a monk class feature. Everybody can make an unarmed strike, regardless of class. In the opinion of some posters, animals/creatures without fists/legs cannot make unarmed strikes. Introducing that argument to this thread is merely muddying the waters though.
The ability to do extra damage with your fists, elbows etc. however, IS a monk class feature. Therefore, it would be affected by the polymorph rules that disallow class features dependent on form (if it is such a class feature).
The question you really want answered is whether the monk's unarmed strike feature is dependent on form, not whether animals can make unarmed stirkes.
Sidenote: in my opinion, animals can make unarmed strikes. That's really neither here nor there though.
EDIT: Prototype, I'd be interested in hearing your thoughts on this post I made earlier
K, the thread has gotten seriously derailed. Please make another thread about whether animals can use Unarmed Strikes, or whether Natural Attacks can be used to deliver Ki abilities. That's not what this thread is about.
This thread is about whether the improved unarmed damage feature of the monk is a class feature dependent on form, and what ramifications the answer to question that might have for a polymorphing monk. This thread has nothing to do with Natural Attacks or Feral Combat Training at all. More broadly, this is also a thread about how to define the term "class feature dependent on form".
PLEASE READ THIS POST FOR A CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THE OP WAS ASKING ABOUT
Thank you.
I'm sorry but the reality is, the answer the OP is looking for hinges on certain mechanics. IUS is a feat that allows for US' to be made without provoking attacks. IUS is expanded upon by the monk class and also what allows the monk class to do most of its combat abilities. For the monk to use those abilities we need to know if the form they are changing to is capable of making US'. If it can, the monk should able to use their abilities in the new form, they still have the feat and a body to attack with... Unarmed strike is a universal weapon, pretty much any creature can use it (though most if not all would be stupid to do so when natural attacks are the better free option).
As any creature can use an US, any form the monk takes should be capable of taking advantage of their class abilities.
K, the thread has gotten seriously derailed. Please make another thread about whether animals can use Unarmed Strikes, or whether Natural Attacks can be used to deliver Ki abilities. That's not what this thread is about.
This thread is about whether the improved unarmed damage feature of the monk is a class feature dependent on form, and what ramifications the answer to question that might have for a polymorphing monk. This thread has nothing to do with Natural Attacks or Feral Combat Training at all. More broadly, this is also a thread about how to define the term "class feature dependent on form".
PLEASE READ THIS POST FOR A CLARIFICATION ON WHAT THE OP WAS ASKING ABOUT
Thank you.
I'm sorry but the reality is, the answer the OP is looking for hinges on certain mechanics. IUS is a feat that allows for US' to be made without provoking attacks. IUS is expanded upon by the monk class and also what allows the monk class to do most of its combat abilities. For the monk to use those abilities we need to know if the form they are changing to is capable of making US'. If it can, the monk should able to use their abilities in the new form, they still have the feat and a body to attack with... Unarmed strike is a universal weapon, pretty much any creature can use it (though most if not all would be stupid to do so when natural attacks are the better free option).
As any creature can use an US, any form the monk takes should be capable of taking advantage of their class abilities.
This logic is not sound, for obvious reasons. Observe:
Assumption: The dragon disciple's improved natural armour is a class feature dependent on form (just roll with this for now, whether or not you agree)
Scenario: A dragon disciple uses beast shape ii to assume the form of a large animal (+2 natural armour).
Your logic:
The dragon disciple class feature grants natural armour.
The form it is assuming has natural armour.
The new form is therefore capable of possessing natural armour.
Therefore, the dragon disciple keeps his form dependent class feature that grants him natural armour.
What the rules actually say:
The dragon disciple loses ALL class features dependent on form when polymorphing. Period.
---
Now, we can have an argument about whether the DD natural armour is actually dependent on form, but that doesn't change the internal logic of the rules,
EDIT:
I realize this explanation was somewhat convoluted. Allow me to try again.
The rules on polymorph state that if a class feature is one "dependent on form" then it is lost when you polymorph. The question of importance is therefore "is the monk's improved unarmed strike feature dependent on form?".
The flaw in your logic however, is that you're looking at the properties of the polymorphed form of the monk to answer this question. Instead, you should be looking at the properties of the class feature itself in isolation to determine whether it is based on form or not. What form the monk might assume has nothing to do with the inherent properties of his basic class features.
While under the effects of a polymorph spell, you lose all extraordinary and supernatural abilities that depend on your original form (such as keen senses, scent, and darkvision), as well as any natural attacks and movement types possessed by your original form. You also lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.
The italic is the part you keep pushing, the bold is the RAW my apparently "flawed" position is from. I believe the only flaw was you not reading the entire paragraph. Even if it was lost, RAW says you get the ability back if the new form has the capability.
As for what or what not is based on form, I work with RAW. You have a passage stating class features depending on form are lost. Even assuming they are lost (I'm not in that camp), I have a passage stating if the new form is capable, they get those abilities restored and are able to use them. Nothing in the core class ability write up states the monks abilities are shape specific. The only thing you have is a clause probably included to cover class granted senses as a back up to the EX/SU clause right before it.
Even if I were to argue RAW/RAI (which I don't because RAW says the form restores abilities if it could use them), you are trying to use a clause as a blanket statement/general rule, taking it further than it was spelled out in the polymorph school.
Ah, read what the bolded part says again:
"Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form"
"If they are possessed", NOT "if they can be used" as you erroneously stated. So if the new form has a claw attack and the old form had a claw attack, then you still have a claw attack. That doesn't mean however that if the new form can make unarmed strikes and the old form had some sort of special improved unarmed strike dependent on form that you get to keep the special improved unarmed strike; it merely means you get to keep the ability to make unarmed strikes at all.
Ooo, a clarification from James Jacobs! He endorses my logic as to how the polymorph section rules text is supposed to be interpreted, but he also gives a very narrow definition of "dependent on form", in keeping with StreamOfTheSky.
So if I'm reading him correctly, according to James Jacobs (and frankly, that's good enough for me) the monk/druid build is a go. Hope that helps, prototype!
Hi James! Got some questions on the polymorph rules:PRD wrote:
[When affected by a polymorph effect you] lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.
Question 1: In your opinion, which of the following class features "depend upon form"?–Dragon Disciple's Ability Score increases
–Dragon Disciple's Natural Armour Increases
-Rogue's Iron Gut talent
–Monk's Diamond Body
–Monk's Improved Unarmed Strike Feature
-Storm Druid's Eyes of the Storm
–Storm Druid's Stormvoice
–Paladin's Divine HealthQuestion 2: If none of the above features depend on form, can you give an example of a class feature that does?
Question 3: What does the last sentence in the quoted text mean? Can you give an example of the kind of scenario in which this rule might be invoked?
Question 4: If the monk's improved unarmed damage (gained through the improve unarmed strike class feature) is dependent on form, does he lose the improved damage if the form he is polymorphing into is capable of making unarmed strikes? Let's say a dwarf monk/druid uses thousand faces to become a gnome? Let's say that same monk/druid wild shapes into an ape? A human shaped fire elemental?
-----
Also, one more related question: Can creatures that normally attack with natural attacks make unarmed strikes? i.e. can a T-Rex make an unarmed strike with its feet (for the appropriate damage die) instead of a bite attack?
Thanks!
1) The following class features would be lost when you polymorph: Dragon Disciple's natural armor bonuses. That is all.2) There's not many. Most of the things that fall into this category are things that you possess from your race, and even then mostly for non-core races.
3) If you have wings, you loose those wings when you polymorph, but if you polymorph into a form with wings, you "regain" the power. In my opinion, that last sentence is a bit of over-explanation...
4) As long as you have a physical body, you can always opt to make unarmed strikes, be they punches or kicks or body slams or head butts or whatever.
Bonus Answer) Yes, but they gain no bonus to unarmed strike damage if they do so. For the vast majority of creatures, switching to an unarmed strike is a poor choice, since doing so reduces their damage in most cases, switches that damage to nonlethal damage, and provokes attacks of opportunity.
|
|
Ooo, a clarification from James Jacobs! He endorses my logic as to how the polymorph section rules text is supposed to be interpreted, but he also gives a very narrow definition of "dependent on form", in keeping with StreamOfTheSky.
So if I'm reading him correctly, according to James Jacobs (and frankly, that's good enough for me) the monk/druid build is a go. Hope that helps, prototype!
** spoiler omitted **
...
At the end of the JJ response he said although you can make an unarmed strike as a creature polymorphed but you lose the increased damage and your unarmed strikes provoke. So it seems that you do lose the ability to kungfu fight polymorphed. Unless I am reading it wrong.
I do not read it that way. The question that he was answering there was:
Also, one more related question: Can creatures that normally attack with natural attacks make unarmed strikes? i.e. can a T-Rex make an unarmed strike with its feet (for the appropriate damage die) instead of a bite attack?
His answer is:
Bonus Answer) Yes, but they gain no bonus to unarmed strike damage if they do so. For the vast majority of creatures, switching to an unarmed strike is a poor choice, since doing so reduces their damage in most cases, switches that damage to nonlethal damage, and provokes attacks of opportunity.
So, the t-rex in the example would be able to make unarmed strikes with its feet, but would not have the improved unarmed strike feat, so it would provoke, and do nonlethal damage. Its damage would only be 1d8+11(str) nonlethal damage.
The monk t-rex would have the feat, and the bonus damage from being a monk.
Oh, another development:
According to James Jacobs, the spell Strong Jaw does not work on the monk's unarmed strike damage. Whether the spell Lead Blades works is less clear. I'm attempting to get that clarified.
At the end of the JJ response he said although you can make an unarmed strike as a creature polymorphed but you lose the increased damage and your unarmed strikes provoke. So it seems that you do lose the ability to kungfu fight polymorphed. Unless I am reading it wrong....Ooo, a clarification from James Jacobs! He endorses my logic as to how the polymorph section rules text is supposed to be interpreted, but he also gives a very narrow definition of "dependent on form", in keeping with StreamOfTheSky.
So if I'm reading him correctly, according to James Jacobs (and frankly, that's good enough for me) the monk/druid build is a go. Hope that helps, prototype!
** spoiler omitted **
Oh, you're right. I think that is what he's saying… it's hard to tell.
Clearly this video shows that Druids do no lose their skills as a Monk while shapeshifted.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ghgg_fukbvU&feature=fvwrel
|
|
Oh, another development:
According to James Jacobs, the spell Strong Jaw does not work on the monk's unarmed strike damage. Whether the spell Lead Blades works is less clear. I'm attempting to get that clarified.
I had to ask him about that (due to the monk IUS being counted as both natural weapons and manufactured weapons for spells and effects), and here is the answer that I got.
Quote:
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
I would have thought that this would allow spells like "strong Jaw" to effect.I suppose in theory that would indeed allow the combo to work.
Just show that combo to your friends who complain that the monk is underpowered, I guess.
Oh, you're right. I think that is what he's saying… it's hard to tell.
At the end of the JJ response he said although you can make an unarmed strike as a creature polymorphed but you lose the increased damage and your unarmed strikes provoke. So it seems that you do lose the ability to kungfu fight polymorphed. Unless I am reading it wrong.
@ Gignere & Bardic Dave, the example he gave was a straight from the bestiary as your question was simply listed as a T-rex having the capability to make an US which we already covered in this thread. It doesn't have the feat IUS (doing nonlethal and provokes AoO) like a monk would and directly above he stated the monks IUS feature as not being lost based on form. Nothing he said adds up to the loss of "kungfu" when a monk is polymorphed/wildshaped.
So.... It all works then? Allosaurus monk/druids doing 12d8 points of damage with strong jaw cast? As confirmed by JJ himself?
prototype00
So.... It all works then? Allosaurus monk/druids doing 12d8 points of damage with strong jaw cast? As confirmed by JJ himself?
prototype00
I don't believe he wants it to work, and given the end result I'm not horribly surprised. What it comes down to is RAW, it states it works (his "in theory" comment). Now will they change it? It probably depends on if it can be done without resorting to specific corner cases being called out (and all the verbage it entails).
Maybe a rule that limits the number of times a damage increase can be done (like twice, or two bumps from its normal damage). That way you could pick and choose which options you want to include or only the two biggest stay in effect (similar to magic stacking rules).