Weaponwand and a monk's unarmed strike


Rules Questions


To start, the relevant texts:

Weaponwand:
When you cast this spell on a weapon, you cause a portion of the weapon to open like the skin of a partially peeled apple, revealing a space large enough to insert a single wand within. As part of the spell’s casting, you can insert a single wand into the weapon, at which point the weapon returns to its original form with the wand held inside of it without negatively impacting the weapon’s integrity. For the spell’s duration, a character who wields the transmuted weapon is also considered to be wielding the wand as well. You can attack normally with the weapon or use the weapon as if it were the encased wand. If the effect created by the wand requires an attack roll to successfully strike a foe, you may make the attack roll as if you were making an attack with the weapon at its highest bonus (including any bonuses the weapon would normally receive) rather than just a normal attack with the wand—doing so does not allow you to add the weapon’s damage to the wand’s attack roll, but instead allows you to use your skill with the weapon to boost your chance of hitting with the spell.

At the end of the spell’s duration, the encased wand is ejected from the weapon. If you have a free hand, you may catch the weapon as a free action; otherwise, the wand drops to the ground. If the weapon housing the wand is broken or destroyed during the duration of weaponwand, the encased wand is similarly broken or destroyed.

Monk - Unarmed Strike:
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.

Now, this brings to mind a rather disturbing visual, but my question would be: Could a caster\monk cast Weaponwand on his 'unarmed strike' weapon and insert a wand into, say, his hand?

Technically, Weaponwand is an 'enhancement' to the weapon, and the monk's unarmed strike is considered a weapon, so to me it looks like all qualifications are being met. And Weaponwand states specifically that it does not "negatively impact" the weapon's integrity (i.e., its health).


I'd allow it. Seems awesome.

Sczarni

Seems legit to me. Also, you don't even have to just impart it into his Hands, it could be anywhere on his body as he can kick, headbutt, etc.

Sounds like a really neat idea and it seems to line up with RAW.

I am not 100% sure though and the idea feels off.


@Kazumetsa: I sort of agree; it seems like it is most likely intended for a true manufactured weapon.

I'm working on a cross-class magus\monk concept, focusing on using Elemental Touch, and if I can use Weaponwand to basically stow a wand of that then I have both hands free for attacking.


Kazumetsa Raijin wrote:
Seems legit to me. Also, you don't even have to just impart it into his Hands, it could be anywhere on his body as he can kick, headbutt, etc.

That's one way to build a unicorn I guess...


If alchemists can absorb items into their hand with a touch...


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Ok, so, what you need to do is take craft magic wand, and craft your wands so that you have 3 10 inch adamantine blades on the end of the wand. Then cast weapon wand and make sure the 3 blades are sticking out between each knuckle.

Then cast Regeneration on yourself...

Then cast Rage on yourself...


RAW there is a bit of problems:

1) Weaponwand doesn't exactly "enhance or improve" manufactured weapons. It creates an effect that is seperate from the weapon itself. As such it might be in violation of the rules for the monk's unarmed strike:
"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."

2) The spell requires you to wield the weapon: " For the spell’s duration, a character who wields the transmuted weapon is also considered to be wielding the wand as well."
As you are not wielding an unarmed strike, you are not wielding the wand.

These aside, it could be cool, and not overtly problematic, as the monk could easily be wielding a wand and kicking instead. So I would probably allow it.


HaraldKlak wrote:
These aside, it could be cool, and not overtly problematic, as the monk could easily be wielding a wand and kicking instead. So I would probably allow it.

So...why waste a spell?

Sczarni

HaraldKlak wrote:

RAW there is a bit of problems:

1) Weaponwand doesn't exactly "enhance or improve" manufactured weapons. It creates an effect that is seperate from the weapon itself. As such it might be in violation of the rules for the monk's unarmed strike:
"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."

2) The spell requires you to wield the weapon: " For the spell’s duration, a character who wields the transmuted weapon is also considered to be wielding the wand as well."
As you are not wielding an unarmed strike, you are not wielding the wand.

These aside, it could be cool, and not overtly problematic, as the monk could easily be wielding a wand and kicking instead. So I would probably allow it.

How is it that a Monk cannot Wield his own IUS? Please do explain.

Last time I checked on the RAW of things, Wield simply meant to Use the Held Weapon. Our whole body is a weapon and is Held all the time considering we're attached to many parts of it, which is also why Monks are considered Armed at all times. We Wield it quite often when we strike our foes.

Anyways, if you could find a definition in the RAW for Enhance or Improve to share the differences, that'd be nice and more believable. Not to say this combination works, or that I'm for or against it, but it's always nice to post RAW links and quotes.


You are definitely wielding an unarmed strike. Any weapon with which you're able to make an attack is being wielded, even if it is simply your body.

That said, the only reason why 'manufactured weapon' comes into play at all is because the spell seems like it's meant for use on manufactured weapons. The spell doesn't actually say that anywhere, however.

By RAW, I do believe it would work.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Rules Questions / Weaponwand and a monk's unarmed strike All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.