I think some people may be interpreting "that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons" as something that applies to effects but not spells. For that to be the case though, it would need to be "spells OR effects", not spells AND effects.
I think I might start looking through spells and effects to see if there are any that work for the monk solely because of that natural or manufactured weapon text. It might be interesting to see if that text actually does something for the monk.
Oh, and can't we all just get along? If not, can we shift it to a format that will allow me to profit off of ticket sales and/or pay per view?
I have seen some posts suggesting that the extra attack granted by the Haste spell is not an "effect" because there is no line beginning "Effect:" in that spell. I would suggest that the term "effect" in the description of the monk's unarmed strike has to be interpreted more liberally unless somebody can provide an example of a spell containing a line beginning with "Effect:" that actually does affect a weapon. As best I can tell, all such spells bring something into existence rather than affecting an object that is already present.
Oh, and can't we all just get along?
Of course we can.
Zombie Apocalypse.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Honestly I kinda gave up on trying to read all of the arguments of this thread. I just wanted to get this out there.
It seems to me that this whole problem started because the designers (back in 3.x) wanted to prevent rules-lawyers from taking advantage of the spell. Really what the spell should say is simply: "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack."
"But it doesn't tell you what to make that extra attack with!"
Really? If that is a problem for you then you really shouldn't be playing role-playing games.
Any reasonable person should be able to divine what the intent of the rule is. There is a reason that RPGs have always had a GM. The main one being so that there would be an impartial judge that can make rulings on things that are not clear. The really shouldn't be one of them though.
Sorry if this has already been touched on. Like I said, I couldn't stand reading through over 100 posts of rules minutia.
I think some people may be interpreting "that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons" as something that applies to effects but not spells. For that to be the case though, it would need to be "spells OR effects", not spells AND effects.That target weapons. It certainly applies to spells as well. That much is clear. It has to specifically enhance or improve the weapon though, which haste doesn't. Really...if you read the thread this is covered in like the first 10 posts, verbatim.
I was only pointing out that some people may be applying that rider ONLY to effects. As written, those conditions apply to spells AND effects. I'm not even making any sort of argument here. I'm just pointing out that it looks like some people are doing this.
I have seen some posts suggesting that the extra attack granted by the Haste spell is not an "effect" because there is no line beginning "Effect:" in that spell. I would suggest that the term "effect" in the description of the monk's unarmed strike has to be interpreted more liberally unless somebody can provide an example of a spell containing a line beginning with "Effect:" that actually does affect a weapon. As best I can tell, all such spells bring something into existence rather than affecting an object that is already present.
There is such a spell, Strong Jaw. Monks are the only creature that can increase the damage dice of their Unarmed Strike via Strong Jaw, because Strong Jaw specifically uses the words, "you enhance the power of that creature's natural attacks" in the description. Since Strong Jaw enhances natural attacks, it can be used on a Monk's Unarmed Strikes, an only a Monk's Unarmed Strikes because they have a unique Unarmed Strike.
You cannot apply special abilities to Unarmed Strikes with Magic Item creation directly to unarmed strikes, which is what the bolded part says must be applicable in order for the effect to be applied.So, you're saying that the amulet of mighty fists text is lying?
At what point was I lying? I listed a very important caveat to the Amulet of Mighty Fists text.
The RAW text says you can apply any special weapon abilities to the Amulet of Mighty Fists instead of enhancement bonuses, provided that the special weapon abilities can be applied to Unarmed Strikes. However, RAW also says that special weapon abilities or enhancements cannot be (directly) applied to natural weapons or creature limbs, like what Natural Attacks and Unarmed Strikes are, via Item Creation, the sole method to obtain such properties.
Lying would not be the best term to use; heck, I'd even go as far to say that it's not even the proper term in any form, since I am not lying about anything, and neither is the text. "Inconsistent" or "Contradictory" would be the most appropriate terminology, since RAI most likely demonstrates that such properties should be applicable to that item. However, like the RAW regarding Haste for Monks, the same is applied to Speed for Unarmed Strikes via Amulet of Mighty Fists.
Either way, RAW basically says Monks can go in a hole and die and the game can do without them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Oh boy!
Will a sysop please block this thread?
This actually happens in just about every thread that Ashiel, myself and Ciretose all contribute to.
Ashiel makes a post.
Ciretose nerd rages on Ashiel.
I nerd rage on Ciretose.
It's a loop that goes around, and around, and around, and arounds... and it will continue to do so until Ciretose stops his crusade to discredit Ashiel as a poster and a human being.
|
Oh boy!
Will a sysop please block this thread?
This actually happens in just about every thread that Ashiel, myself and Ciretose all contribute to.
Ashiel makes a post.
Ciretose nerd rages on Ashiel.
I nerd rage on Ciretose.
It's a loop that goes around, and around, and around, and arounds... and it will continue to do so until Ciretose stops his crusade to discredit Ashiel as a poster and a human being.
As a human being?
Seriously?
Dude...
|
Oh boy!
Will a sysop please block this thread?
This actually happens in just about every thread that Ashiel, myself and Ciretose all contribute to.
Ashiel makes a post.
Ciretose nerd rages on Ashiel.
I nerd rage on Ciretose.
It's a loop that goes around, and around, and around, and arounds...
Aaaahh, ménage à trois. Magnifique!
Have you hugged your monk today?
(snuggles a monk and all his cares fade away)
|
|
No post, no statement, no group of words Ashiel could ever say, will ever be deemed 'right' or 'correct' by you.
Dude.
I have said Ashiel is right quite a few times. You can go through my posts if you like to check. I think even he would admit that. Ashiel is quite often right, and I am pretty sure he isn't waiting for me to go "Yeah, this is one you got right!" each time he is.
He also posts a lot of things about exploits and loopholes as if they are just how everyone plays, and as if they are as accepted as PFS rules when they aren't. He just posted a Monk build with genie wish binding ability boosts at 13th level, listed under WBL as spellcasting expenses.
And when he does that, or derails a discussion by saying something controversial so someone will ask "How did you do that" it is annoying. Particularly in a thread with a discussion I had been enjoying.
If you want to stand by your man and protect him from the internets, feel free. But you should go back and read what you just posted and ask who is the one who is obsessed.
Just sayin'
|
|
Aaaahh, ménage à trois. Magnifique!Oh boy!
Will a sysop please block this thread?
This actually happens in just about every thread that Ashiel, myself and Ciretose all contribute to.
Ashiel makes a post.
Ciretose nerd rages on Ashiel.
I nerd rage on Ciretose.
It's a loop that goes around, and around, and around, and arounds...
I call big spoon!
Aaaahh, ménage à trois. Magnifique!Oh boy!
Will a sysop please block this thread?
This actually happens in just about every thread that Ashiel, myself and Ciretose all contribute to.
Ashiel makes a post.
Ciretose nerd rages on Ashiel.
I nerd rage on Ciretose.
It's a loop that goes around, and around, and around, and arounds...
This reminds me of one of my favorite (PG-13) webcomics.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How dare you besmirch the name of the one true lord of D&D? Prepare yourself, heathen!
| 9 people marked this as a favorite. |
What is wrong with pointing out that while it seems to be intended that Haste works on unarmed strike, the way it is currently worded means that there is some ambiguity and this ambiguity should hopefully be cleared up next time they do errata? Can't we have incremental improvement of the language of the rules where rough spots are identified?
The problem is, as Jon Stewart famously said on Crossfire, "You're hurting America." Or in this case, the game hobby.
Haste clearly works with unarmed strike. The intent is clear, the language, while imperfect, also definitely makes it happen. An unarmed strike is either a natural or manufactured weapon; getting an extra attack is absolutely "improving" or "enhancing" an unarmed strike.
The only way someone could possibly read it otherwise is if they were stubbornly intent on trying to find a justifcation for not letting it work and had an uncanny ability to drown out all common sense.
These people are a#*#+*#s. You do not game with such people. It's that simple. If not haste + unarmed, they'll surely find some other technical way to screw people over, it's how they get their jollies in life.
But by making threads like this, you legitimize their bs. You make it seem as if it's actually a question, up for debate. And you encourage unbearably lengthy rules to weed out the slightest, faintest, most ridiculous ambiguity and a dizzyingly aggressive cascade of errata for the most minute, pointless of s**t.
But it's even worse still, as you create a self-fulfilling prophecy. Once the devs DO respond to such trivial crap and make changes, it then means future pointless rules dramas are affected.
"Have they said anything yet?"
"Nope. But they did for [insert previous stupid argument], so until they do for this, we really can't be sure what the intent is."
"Right. Setting precedents is a b**** like that."
I'm just going to leave The Ten Commandments of Practical Optimization here. Because they just ring so true, and everyone should read them. For, they may be written in regards to player optimizing, but many of them are in fact good basic life lessons on etiquitte, common sense, and behavior.
For example, I find #6 heavily relevant to this topic.
Everybody's human. You're human; I'm human; the folks at WotC are human. Sometimes, humans make mistakes.
That shouldn't be seen as an opportunity to break the game.
Take the Vigilante from Complete Adventurer, for instance. Anyone out there seriously believe that his rather abrupt jump from 1 third level spell at level 6 to 20 at level 7 is NOT a mistake?
There are two ways to deal with a mistake like this: a sensible way, and a silly way.
The sensible way: "Hmm. There's a column for fourth level spells with no numbers in it, and a column for third level with numbers that can't be right in it. Clearly, this was a typesetting error, and the second digit in the third level spells column is supposed to be in the fourth level spells column."
The silly way: "Rules are rules! The rulebook says 20 third level spells at seventh level! If you do it any other way, you're houseruling! I'm gonna make some GREAT builds based on this rule!"
Basing a build on an obvious mistake isn't optimizing; it's silly.
Modified to fit this situation:
Everybody's human. You're human; I'm human; the folks at Paizo are human. Sometimes, humans make mistakes.
That shouldn't be seen as an opportunity to ruin a player's fun.
Take the Haste spell from core, for instance. Anyone out there seriously believe that not making it explicit that it does apply to unarmed is NOT a mistake?
There are two ways to deal with a mistake like this: a sensible way, and a silly way.
The sensible way: "Hmm. It applies to natural weapons and manufactured weapons. Unarmed Strikes are arguably one, the other, both, or something else depending... But there are no weapon classifications aside from natural and manufactured in any part of the rules whatsoever. Clearly, this was just an oversight, and unarmed strike is obvously one of the two types (or both if monk) and it works fine."
The silly way: "Rules are rules! The rulebook says natural or manufactured, and nowhere does it flat out say unarmed is either (except for monks, but I'm gonna ignore that, cause f*** monks, seriously)! If you do it any other way, you're houseruling! I'm gonna love seeing my player's sad panda face when i inform him of this rule!"
Basing a ruling on an obvious mistake isn't being fair and impartial; it's vindictive and silly.
So again, please stop hurting America....err...the gaming hobby.
:(
the best post ever
Now I'll go barricade the doors and windows before Aratrok and the other 495 cultists turn up with pitchforks and flaming torches :)
Only if Hitler GM'ed a group of Nazis would a Monk not be allowed to get an extra attack from Haste!
Oh... Did I just lose?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Actually Stream, Paizo went out of their way to make 3 weapon categories. Manufactured, Natural and Unarmed Strikes. Every instance in the rules that I could find, separates Unarmed Strike from Manufactured and Natural Weapons with the exception of the spell Align Weapon, which refers to Unarmed Strikes as Natural Weapons.
I made a thread about this awhile back, and I linked it up thread. When you start looking through the rules, you start realize, Unarmed Strike is a weapon category that consists of itself, and no other weapon. Because Paizo went out of their way to prevent cheese from happening with Unarmed Strikes, there are some rather stupid consequences.
For instance, the spell Protect from Good/Law/Chaos/Evil prevents creatures with the warded alignment type from hitting a warded creature with their Natural Weapons. So a Cleric with Protection from Evil is protected from being hit by a Demons Claws. But since Paizo went out of their way to separate Unarmed Strikes from Natural Weapons to the point that Unarmed Strikes are not Natural Weapons, a Demon can simply opt to not claw a warded creature, and instead just punch them.
Of course, this only happens if you take a literal interpretation of the rules. I think any sane GM would disallow an Unarmed Strike from being able to cross the Protection spell.
I don't think anyone here is actually arguing that we have to play with Haste and Unarmed Strikes not working together. We're simply pointing out that the rules do not allow Haste and Unarmed Strikes to work together, due to an oversight in the language.
That's it. It's simply an oversight. I doubt it was intentional, it was simply a mistake.
Only if Hitler GM'ed a group of Nazis would a Monk not be allowed to get an extra attack from Haste!
Oh... Did I just lose?
I wondered when Godwin would be invoked.
[Edit] Thanks for making me Lose.
Here's a cookie for you:
** spoiler omitted **
Sorry. It just seemed to be the way things were headed. :)
Oooohhh... A cookie!
<*BOOM*>
How dare you besmirch the name of the one true lord of D&D? Prepare yourself, heathen!
Prepare for trouble, and make it double
To protect the Lord Ashiel from criticization,To bring forth our Lord's loving salvation,
To denounce the evils of Ciretose and Co.
To give to gamers all He may know.
Cultist #1, Cultist #496
The Ashiel Cult sets forth with the aid of flight,
Convert now, or face our might!
MEOWTH, that's right!
I can't believe I just went there...
You're going to give me an inflated ego, but now I have to clean up the spat milk from my laughter. But...this is awesome. I appreciate it in any sense, and I laughed heartily. <(^-^)>How dare you besmirch the name of the one true lord of D&D? Prepare yourself, heathen!Prepare for trouble, and make it double
To protect the Lord Ashiel from criticization,
To bring forth our Lord's loving salvation,
To denounce the evils of Ciretose and Co.
To give to gamers all He may know.Cultist #1, Cultist #496
The Ashiel Cult sets forth with the aid of flight,
Convert now, or face our might!MEOWTH, that's right!
I can't believe I just went there...
At the end of the day no matter how much you want to believe that your reading of the rule is right, it's not that cut and dry so it's obvious that the designers need to clear up all the confusion.
I disagree. I think these rules are, in fact, cut and dry. I think anyone arguing that, by RAW, Haste allows for an additional Unarmed Strike attack is simply presenting their wishful thinking and/or homebrew rules as RAW, which is incorrect.
By RAW, it's very clear that, like Tels says, Unarmed Strikes have been systematically separated into their own "category" of weapon. There are manufactured weapons, there are natural weapons, and there are unarmed strikes.
Also by RAW, the spell Haste does not make room in it's wording for Unarmed Strikes.
Now, just because something is RAW doesn't make it a good rule. This is such a case. The current wording of the Haste spell is unnecessarily specific and needs to change for the betterment of the system as a whole. But denying RAW because it's bad doesn't do anything to help fix the problem.
There is such a spell, Strong Jaw. Monks are the only creature that can increase the damage dice of their Unarmed Strike via Strong Jaw, because Strong Jaw specifically uses the words, "you enhance the power of that creature's natural attacks" in the description. Since Strong Jaw enhances natural attacks, it can be used on a Monk's Unarmed Strikes, an only a Monk's Unarmed Strikes because they have a unique Unarmed Strike.If unarmed strike =/= natural attack i do not see how that spell would work on monks
"Laying a hand upon an allied creature's jaw, claws, tentacles, or other natural weapons, you enhance the power of that creature's natural attacks. Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is. If the creature is already Gargantuan or Colossal-sized, double the amount of damage dealt by each of its natural attacks instead. This spell does not actually change the creature's size; all of its statistics except the amount of damage dealt by its natural attacks remain unchanged."
there is no a single reference to unarmed strikes.
Because of the Monk's Unarmed Strike class ability. It's been quoted often enough in this thread, but I'll go ahead and quote it too.
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.
Haste enhances a creature, while Strong Jaw enhances a creature's natural weapons. Since it enhances natural weapons, it trigger's the Monk's Unarmed Strike ability.
As far as I am aware, a Monk is the only class that has that unique Unarmed Strike rule. Every other creature in the game uses the basic Unarmed Strike which is neither a Manufacture Weapon, nor is it considered a Natural Weapon.
A Fighter, Barbarian, Ranger, Cavalier, Paladin etc. that uses Unarmed Strikes can't be the target of a Strong Jaw spell. But a Monk can.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes FAQs are used not because the wording is unclear, but because something needs to be changed. Antagonize is still a broken feat, but it was even more broken before.
[Edit] Also, we never really did get that Charm Person thing cleared up did we? They skirted it in the FAQ a little while ago, but never actually answered the question.
@ WWWW
Except there is nothing irrational about his "houserule." RAW, you can't even really add special effects to AoMF (including Speed) unless they can be applied to Unarmed Strikes, which guess what? None can, because none are. The RAW for that is contradictory; for it to even function, the wording must be changed. This, meaning it's just an Unarmed/Natural Attack enhancer. Does that make sense for AoMF? Not at all, but RAW is contradictory to the obvious RAI.
The same concept can easily be applied to this. Haste unable to affect Monk Unarmed Attacks, by RAW, is legal. Haste unable to affect Monk Unarmed Attacks, by RAI, is ridiculous, and even in terms of game balance, it makes no sense to enforce the rule when there is no reason why they shouldn't get the effect; this interpretation, is what we are arguing for, and is not "blithely ignoring rules".
From the PRD:
Unarmed Strike:
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
From the PRD:
Haste:
The transmuted creatures move and act more quickly than normal. This extra speed has several effects.
When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a speed weapon, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)
Is haste a spell? Yes. Therefore it works.
So, how is it that anyone can read that the monk doesn't get an extra attack with haste?
Likewise, Flurry of Blows doesn't have a caveat that states it doesn't work with haste, so why wouldn't that work?
Likewise, Flurry is "effectively" TWF. There is no place in the rules that says that someone using TWF doesn't get an extra attack from haste.
So, without a SPECIAL RULE that states: "Monks cannot use haste with their unarmed strikes or when using Flurry of Blows", there is absolutely NO RULE that prohibits them from benefiting from getting the extra attack from haste.
In fact, if any errata really needs to be put forth, it should be that the text of haste be clarified by including unarmed strike specifically--for those people who are going out of their way to exclude it.
I see you have skipped my post. An unarmed strike is not a manufactured nor a natural weapon, nor is it targeted by the spell. The target is given a subset of weapons he is allowed to use with the spell, and IUS does not fit. If it were written more like a paladin's smite which does not call out a specific subset of weapons then it would work.
For instance, the spell Protect from Good/Law/Chaos/Evil prevents creatures with the warded alignment type from hitting a warded creature with their Natural Weapons. So a Cleric with Protection from Evil is protected from being hit by a Demons Claws. But since Paizo went out of their way to separate Unarmed Strikes from Natural Weapons to the point that Unarmed Strikes are not Natural Weapons, a Demon can simply opt to not claw a warded creature, and instead just punch them.....
I never noticed that. That just means I need to summon an outsider that comes with a manufactured weapon such as a bearded devil or that babau demon.
This is a great example by the way. :)
There is such a spell, Strong Jaw. Monks are the only creature that can increase the damage dice of their Unarmed Strike via Strong Jaw, because Strong Jaw specifically uses the words, "you enhance the power of that creature's natural attacks" in the description. Since Strong Jaw enhances natural attacks, it can be used on a Monk's Unarmed Strikes, an only a Monk's Unarmed Strikes because they have a unique Unarmed Strike.If unarmed strike =/= natural attack i do not see how that spell would work on monks
"Laying a hand upon an allied creature's jaw, claws, tentacles, or other natural weapons, you enhance the power of that creature's natural attacks. Each natural attack that creature makes deals damage as if the creature were two sizes larger than it actually is. If the creature is already Gargantuan or Colossal-sized, double the amount of damage dealt by each of its natural attacks instead. This spell does not actually change the creature's size; all of its statistics except the amount of damage dealt by its natural attacks remain unchanged."
there is no a single reference to unarmed strikes.
Because unarmed strikes are treated as natural weapon for the purpose of effects that enhance natural attacks. Haste does not enhance the weapon. It enchances the weilder, but he does not get the extra attack unless he uses a natural weapon or a manufactured weapon per RAW.
In other words unarmed strikes count as natural attacks when the natural attack is itself being enhanced by the spell. Being mentioned does not equal being being enhanced.
|
|
Sometimes FAQs are used not because the wording is unclear, but because something needs to be changed. Antagonize is still a broken feat, but it was even more broken before.
[Edit] Also, we never really did get that Charm Person thing cleared up did we? They skirted it in the FAQ a little while ago, but never actually answered the question.
Yeah that was weird. They did a whole post to clarify it and I felt like it was still kind of unclear after the clarification.
I initially read it as validating my position, but when I re-read it I could see how it could be read the other way.
Kind of disappointing, but at least an effort was made.
For instance, the spell Protect from Good/Law/Chaos/Evil prevents creatures with the warded alignment type from hitting a warded creature with their Natural Weapons. So a Cleric with Protection from Evil is protected from being hit by a Demons Claws. But since Paizo went out of their way to separate Unarmed Strikes from Natural Weapons to the point that Unarmed Strikes are not Natural Weapons, a Demon can simply opt to not claw a warded creature, and instead just punch them.....
I never noticed that. That just means I need to summon an outsider that comes with a manufactured weapon such as a bearded devil or that babau demon.
This is a great example by the way. :)
On a side note, it might be wise for them to change the wording of the protection from line to include "unarmed attacks" which is a grouping that includes both unarmed strikes AND natural weapons. Tels is absolutely right that demons can punch a warded individual 'till the cows come home. XD
Also, Erinyes are a favorite summon of mine 'cause their bow-attacks ignore pesky protections as well. ^.^
It does if you want it to, and the other camp seems ridiculous.
Monks are supposedly weak, so it might be amusing to put in a monk faction whose members all seems to attack at blinding speed whenever encountered. The adventurers must find out why?
Why? Because they are all high on haste potions, from a hidden magic spring at their temple. Now we have an adventure idea and the dm says sure, haste on. Resolution, ommmmm.