Belier's Bite + nonlethal damage

[CrazyGnomes]

If a monk uses his unarmed strike to deal nonlethal damage, are they still able to inflict bleed damage with Belier's Bite?

If so, would the bleed damage be considered nonlethal?

Or in order to deal the bleed damage, are you required to be dealing lethal damage?

[VRMH]

"When you damage an opponent with an unarmed strike, you deal an extra 1d4 bleed damage."
Nonlethal damage is still damage, isn't it? But I don't think you can bleed nonlethally.

[CrazyGnomes]

VRMH wrote:

"When you damage an opponent with an unarmed strike, you deal an extra 1d4 bleed damage."

Nonlethal damage is still damage, isn't it? But I don't think you can bleed nonlethally.

That's where the problem comes up. The monk in question took the feat as an added mechanical boost in combat but for roleplaying reasons, has virtually never dealt lethal damage. So does his attempt at subduing his foe result in causing lethal bleed damage or can he just not use Belier's Bite when trying to avoid killing opponents?

[Martiln]

CrazyGnomes wrote:

VRMH wrote:

"When you damage an opponent with an unarmed strike, you deal an extra 1d4 bleed damage."

Nonlethal damage is still damage, isn't it? But I don't think you can bleed nonlethally.

That's where the problem comes up. The monk in question took the feat as an added mechanical boost in combat but for roleplaying reasons, has virtually never dealt lethal damage. So does his attempt at subduing his foe result in causing lethal bleed damage or can he just not use Belier's Bite when trying to avoid killing opponents?

I'd give him the choice, kinda like how you have the choice to use power attack or not.

[VRMH]

By a strict reading, the feat itself does not give an option. Is there a general rule that says you don't have to apply a feat?