| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
The question mostly revolves around this clause about performing a combat maneuver:
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus. Add any bonuses you currently have on attack rolls due to spells, feats, and other effects. These bonuses must be applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver. The DC of this maneuver is your target's Combat Maneuver Defense. Combat maneuvers are attack rolls, so you must roll for concealment and take any other penalties that would normally apply to an attack roll.
I am mostly concerned with an unarmed combatant who has Improved Unarmed Strike. I am not concerned with someone using a +X weapon that has the Trip ability.
So, what do you think about whether the following effects? Would they apply or not?:
1. Pale Green Prism (+1 competence bonus on attack rolls, saves, skill checks, and ability checks)
2. Greater Magic Weapon (enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls)
3. Amulet of Mighty Fists (an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on attack and damage rolls with unarmed attacks and natural weapons)
4. Fighter Weapon Training Class Feature (Close, Monk or Natural Weapon Groups) (+x bonus on attack and damage rolls)
5. Bless (+1 morale bonus on attack rolls)
6. Inspire Courage (+1 competence bonus on attack and weapon damage rolls)
7. Prayer (+1 luck bonus on attack rolls, weapon damage rolls, saves, and skill checks)
I may have missed some. But, if you are fighting unarmed and have Improved Unarmed Strike, what "spells, feats, and other effects" add to your CMB? I have read SKR's Paizo Blog but this didn't really clear anything up for unarmed.
If it matters, for reference these are things that add to CMD:
A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD. Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD. A flat-footed creature does not add its Dexterity bonus to its CMD.
1, 5, 6, and 7) Yes, these give you general attack bonuses and a Combat Maneuver is an attack.
2-4) Only for weapon usable combat maneuvers (ie: Trip, Sunder, or Disarm).
Nos. 1, 5, 6, and 7 are blanket bonuses that would help with any combat maneuver.
Nos. 2 to 4 only help with disarm, sunder, trip, dirty trick, and reposition maneuvers.
The Dueling enchant from Pathfinder Society Field Guide lists a number of maneuvers that do or do not utilize your weapon.
(Sunder was conspicuously absent from the list either way, but it should definitely count as something utilizing the weapon.)
I've houseruled that anything that helps with unarmed strikes helps with grappling, but, again, that's a houserule.
Gauss: Are Unarmed Strikes usable in Combat Maneuvers like Grapple?
Zhangar: I found the same thing due to a gear suggestion in another thread. It still doesn't really answer the question if Unarmed Strike can be used in a Grapple Combat Maneuver though. I guess I would agree that I can see an implication that it isn't explicit about anything outside of that enchantment. I think the enchantment was made with normal weapons in mind rather than Unarmed Strikes.
Consider, for instance, the Dan Bong. That is a weapon that can be used in a Grapple Combat Maneuver. This implies that weapons CAN be used in Combat Maneuvers. So by that logic, would an Unarmed Strike be usable in a Combat Maneuver?
The Grapple combat maneuver is not eligible for weapon bonuses (that includes unarmed strikes). So, no, any bonuses that apply to Unarmed Strikes do not apply to a grapple unless the ability states it does.
Gauss: Read the example of the Dan Bong linked above, please.
So, I guess my question is that if Dan Bong sets a precedent for weapons being usable in a grapple or if it is an exception to the rule?
I guess since I have always believed that you can complete Combat Maneuvers with Unarmed Strikes (what other game term is there for using your body to complete an attack?) that I believe that the Dan Bong is just a Manufactured Weapon that allows you to use it as part of the grapple Combat Maneuver. Just like while normally you would use an Unarmed Strike to complete a Trip you can use the Manufactured Weapon of a Scythe to make that Trip instead.
Aydin D'Ampfer, as a general rule the only Combat Maneuvers that are eligible for weapon bonuses are Trip, Disarm, and Sunder. You are the one that linked the blog on it so why are you telling me that I am wrong?
Saying that specific weapons have a grapple bonus and thus I am wrong is like saying that I am wrong if I say that Ranged weapons do not threaten because there is a feat that allows them to threaten. Yes, there may be exceptions, see the exception.
Lune, the Dan Bong does not set a precedent, it provides an exception. There is a difference. In any case, read the blog (and it's related thread) that Aydin provided. It should answer all your questions.
Gauss: I did read the blog. It doesn't clear up much from an unarmed perspective.
Is it just your opinion that the Dan Bong is an exception rather than setting a precedent? Let me ask that a different way: how many exceptions does it take to make it a precedent rather than several exceptions?
I guess what I am getting at is that the only things saying that you cannot make grapple Combat Maneuvers are an item enhancement description and conjecture made from a developer's blog (he doesn't outright say that you aren't making grapple checks with your unarmed strike). It doesn't make a very strong case. It would be different if a Dev said outright that Unarmed Strikes are completely incapable of making grapple Combat Maneuvers.
As an example: Can you get the Dueling enhancement from Pathfinder Society Field Guide (which specifically states that it can not give it's bonus to your grapple checks) added to your Dan Bong (which specifically states it can be used in a grapple)?
Could you also add that same enhancement to an Amulet of Mighty Fists? If so... how would that work?
Lune, Im really not sure what you are looking for here. You will not find any universal enabling text that allows you to use Unarmed Strike bonuses in a grapple.
You will find that the Blog and the FAQ both state that the only combat maneuvers that normally benefit are Disarm, Sunder, and Trip.
Based on that, the Dan Bong is an exception to the 'normally' part.
From there, it is GM fiat...talk to your GM.
Gauss: It is the "normally" bit that I am concerned with. I would rather not have to deal with GM fiat. I would rather it be explicitly stated one way or the other. Even the "normally" part isn't based on anything written in the rules for Combat Maneuvers. Its based on some text for an item (which is in DIRECT opposition from text of another item) and a Dev Blog that doesn't talk much about unarmed Combat Maneuvers.
Since you didn't answer it in my last post:
Can you get the Dueling enhancement from Pathfinder Society Field Guide (which specifically states that it can not give it's bonus to your grapple checks) added to your Dan Bong (which specifically states it can be used in a grapple)?
EvilTwinSkippy: Already aware of it but thanx for the tip. :) Unfortunately I do not own the book (and not going to buy it for just that trait) and this character is for PFS.
Lune, Magic 8ball says: ask your GM. The rules do not cover this.
As for "normally", the FAQ says this and the FAQ is a clarification of this particular rule. Whether the clarification itself needs clarification....LOL
Perhaps I missed the FAQ entry on Unarmed Strikes and grappling?
I did actually find this part which is interesting:
Trip Weapons: If you want to make a trip combat maneuver, do you have to use a weapon with the trip special feature?No. When making a trip combat maneuver, you don't have to use a weapon with the trip special feature--you can use any weapon. For example, you can trip with a longsword or an unarmed strike, even though those weapons don't have the trip special feature.
Note that there is an advantage to using a weapon with the trip special feature (a.k.a. a "trip weapon") when making a trip combat maneuver: if your trip attack fails by 10 or more, you can drop the trip weapon instead of being knocked prone.On a related note, you don't have to use a weapon with the disarm special feature (a.k.a. a "disarm weapon") when making a disarm combat maneuver--you can use any weapon.
Note: This is a revision of this FAQ entry based on a Paizo blog about combat maneuvers with weapons. The previous version of this FAQ stated that using a trip weapon was the only way you could apply weapon enhancement bonuses, Weapon Focus bonuses, and other such bonuses to the trip combat maneuver roll. The clarification in that blog means any weapon used to trip applies these bonuses when making a trip combat maneuver, so this FAQ was updated to omit the "only trip weapons let you apply these bonuses" limitation.
Does that not seem to indicate that you could do the same for grapple Combat Maneuvers?
Also, just reading the next entry in the FAQ it talks about Magic Fang affecting Unarmed Strike which is similar to question above about Greater Magic Weapon. In the FAQ it says, "Therefore, a creature's unarmed strike is its entire body...". That leads me to question what part of your entire body are you using to perform a grapple Combat Maneuver? I am thinking that regardless of the answer that this clause means that it would get the bonus from Magic Fang if the above clause is true.
Is my logic flawed here?
Here is the FAQ that states "Disarm, sunder, and trip are normally the only kinds of combat maneuvers in which you’re actually using a weapon to perform the maneuver, and therefore the weapon’s bonuses apply to the roll."
C'mon, Gauss. It is like you are purposefully looking past what I wrote.
I am reading what you write and I can see your point. Please read my last post. Normally can mean a lot of different things. You can see in my last post that before the clarification made in the FAQ that only Trip weapons used to apply the enhancement bonuses to trip Combat Maneuvers. Now they are saying you get those bonuses with any weapon. That includes Unarmed Strike.
By that logic why would you not get the bonus to the Grapple Combat Maneuver as well?
Why do you think that a Dan bong can be used to grapple?
Lune, you may use any weapon for Disarm, Sunder, or Trip combat maneuvers. The qualities of the weapon are not relevant. The Blog and FAQ states this.
Dan Bong is an exception, it specifically states you get a bonus to grapple checks when using it to grapple with.
I am not looking past what you wrote, you are missing the point. The point is that Dan Bong is an exception and you are trying to make connections where none exist. There is no exception for Unarmed Strikes.
1) ANY weapon can be used (and the weapon bonuses used) for Disarm, Sunder, or Trip combat maneuvers. The weapon does not need to have a special property.
2) Trip weapons (and only Trip weapons) can also be used (and the weapon bonuses used) for Drag and Reposition combat maneuvers.
3) Some weapons (such as the Dan Bong) may be an exception to the above statements.
4) Unarmed Strikes do not have an exception.
5) Your GM can rule any way he wants, talk to your GM.
It really cannot get any clearer.
If the Dan Bong cannot be used to grapple, than the ability it has is useless. Now, the other question is this: Does the weilder of the Dan Bong still suffer the -4 penalty for not having both hands open? This is another element of grappling with a weapon that has not been clarified, ever.hese short, blunt sticks are held in the hands to enhance unarmed martial techniques.
Benefit: They provide the wielder with the ability to lock an opponent and target Pressure Points that grant her a +2 bonus on her combat maneuver to grapple.
Now, does unarmed strike have similar language?
Now, does unarmed strike have similar language?
Of course not. But while you are making the assumption that means that you cannot use it in a grapple, I am making the assumption that you can but you just do not get the +2 bonus that the weapon gives innately.
Gauss: Let me change the topic up a bit here.
For your 1 - Does that mean that if a Monk has an Amulet of Mighty Fists that the enhancement bonuses to that weapon (Unarmed Strike) can be used for the Combat Maneuvers that you mentioned?
Aydin D'Ampfer, in the Blog you linked.
Lune, yes. The monk can use any Unarmed Strike bonuses, including the enhancement bonus, for Disarm, Sunder, and Trip combat maneuvers.
BTW, it is your starting assumption that is the problem.
Start with the assumption that the only combat maneuvers that can have ANY weapon applied to them are Disarm, Sunder, and Trip. Then all else will fall into place.
Unarmed Strike is a weapon, it doesn't ever stop being a weapon. It is just not a manufactured weapon (which is not relevant to whether or not you can use a weapon for various combat maneuvers).
Start with the assumption that the only combat maneuvers that can have ANY weapon applied to them are Disarm, Sunder, and Trip. Then all else will fall into place.
Well, you are correct there. The problem is that this is not spelled out in the rules anywhere and it should be. As a player, having to dig through Dev Blogs, FAQs, obscure weapons and obscure weapon enhancements to get to an answer seems like too much. This is especially true because I think this is a fairly common question.
I'm still not certain that we have arrived at the intended conclusion. I know you are certain of your viewpoint and I am not trying to debunk your theory. Even the part you are talking about with Unarmed Strikes being a weapon but not a Manufactured Weapon isn't completely true. They are counted as a Manufactured Weapon "for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons". Which makes things like the above mentioned Dueling enhancement a bit confusing if applied to Improved Unarmed Strikes via an Amulet of Mighty Fists. From what I understand this does work but only for certain maneuvers according to your understanding?
Still pretty confused on how that would work if you instead enchanted a Dan Bong...
Lune, yes, they count as a Manufactured Weapon.
What I was trying to say is that whether they count as a manufactured weapon or not does not matter to Combat Maneuvers. (I was tired when I said it and didnt say it right.)
Now, it may matter to specific effects that affect Combat Maneuvers but that is entirely different.
It seems that once you understand how Combat Maneuvers work the problem you have is how does certain items and weapon properties work (rather than how do Combat Maneuvers work).
"Dueling" is a specific magic weapon property with specific rules.
"Dan Bong" is a specific weapon with specific (and poorly written) rules.
I suggest searching for threads that are specific to those items.
Gauss: I knew what you meant. You meant that it doesn't matter what kind of weapon they are as some Combat Maneuvers do not use weapons or the use of the weapon is incidental to the CMB modifiers.
I can dig on that. But it doesn't really make logical sense to me WHY that should be.
As an example: It is established that when using an unarmed strike or a weapon with the Trip ability. I suppose this makes sense as what else would you be tripping them with if you were unarmed? You would be using some part of your body to trip them, right?
...then why does this same logic not work for grapple? If you are unarmed what are you grappling with? I think any answer would be something that you can unarmed strike with.
Honestly, Dirty Trick makes even less sense than the above two for allowing unarmed strike bonuses to apply being that I can often see not using your body at all for completing that maneuver. Like throwing sand in someone's eyes, pulling their shirt over their head, etc. I could see it applying sometimes (stooges finger to the eyes routine, stomping on their foot, etc), though.
It really bothers the logical part of my brain. Even in SKR's Dev Blog he mentions, "Of course, the GM is free to rule that in certain circumstances, a creature can apply weapon bonuses for these maneuvers, such as when using a sap in a dirty trick maneuver to hit an opponent in a sensitive spot." I can see that for Dirty Trick. But for Grapple, I think his exceptions would be my rule. To me any time you are grappling you are using your body. And since when you have an AoMF or Magic Fang cast on you it enchants your whole body to me it seems that the enhancement bonus should apply.
I mean... right? Did my logic fail there somewhere? Should I just stop trying to apply logic to Pathfinder and shut up?
Lune, you have some inaccuracies in your last post.
1) Any weapon can be used to trip, not just unarmed strikes or weapons with the trip ability.
There is ZERO difference between tripping with an Unarmed Strike and a Longsword. Both gain any weapon related bonuses to the trip attempt.
2) You cannot use weapon bonuses, including Unarmed Strike bonuses, in a Dirty Trick unless you have an exception stating that you can or your GM rules that you can in a specific situation (such as the Sap example that SKR stated).
This is simple.
1) The only Combat Maneuvers that generally benefit from weapon bonuses are Disarm, Sunder and Trip.
2) Drag and Reposition gain weapon bonuses if the weapon has the Trip special ability.
3) For all else, it is GM fiat or specific equipment/ability exceptions as to whether it applies or not.
Aydin D'Ampfer, how is there even a debate on whether Unarmed Strike is a weapon? It is a weapon. It is in the weapons list.
People do debate on what kind of weapon it is, but that does not ever stop it from being a weapon.
Gauss: I think that is untrue. I mean, I think you were right maybe at one time but something must have changed along the way. Look at the Dueling enhancement. That enhancement specifically states that it applies to Dirty Trick Combat Maneuvers. It says, "If you’re using the additional combat maneuvers in the Advanced Player’s Guide, this also includes any dirty trick maneuvers that utilize the weapon, as well as reposition combat maneuvers, but not drag or steal combat maneuvers." In fact, it goes so far as to say, "Note that this luck bonus stacks with the weapon’s enhancement bonus, which in and of itself adds to CMB checks normally." Now, I know from the conversation we have had that one can take "normally" to mean different things. But if the first bit of text is any indication then you CAN use weapon bonuses to Dirty Trick.
Now, I'm sure you will say that this is the one exception but I do not see it that way. If you wanted to get a bonus on your weapon that helped improve your CMB, which enhancement would you get? If you don't answer Dueling I call you a liar. ;) I think that means that this is less the exception and more enhancement that matters most.
Lune, you are confusing exceptions with the general rules.
Once again, you cannot use weapons, AS A GENERAL RULE, with Dirty Tricks unless the GM states you can in a specific situation. If you can find a GENERAL RULE that states otherwise, please show it.
Dueling is not a general rule, it is a specific rule for a specific enhancement. Ie. an exception.
Pathfinder is built upon exceptions. Dueling allows you to use a weapon for dirty tricks. Without it, you cannot use the weapon for dirty tricks (without the GM specifically allowing you to).
I so totally just called that. Read my second paragraph in my last post, Gauss. You can only use the excuse that something is an "exception" to a rule so many times before that rule is no longer a rule.
I gave an exception and SKR mentioned exceptions in his post as well.
Anyway, you can tote your rule all you like. Since I was specifically talking about putting Dueling on an Amulet of Mighty Fists I think that breaks your rule right there. Am I wrong? Do I get to use unarmed strike on dirty trick now?
Lune, I don't care if Dueling allows you to use a weapon for Dirty Trick or not. A magic item is NOT a general rule. You can argue it defines a general rule all you want but it doesn't.
Heck, feats, magic items, etc regularly break the main rules or 'indicate' that the main rule does something that it doesn't.
Example: Pre-errata Prone Shooter did this, it removed a -4 penalty to shooting a crossbow while prone. A penalty that DIDN'T EXIST.
Taking a magic item effect out of a splatbook and saying that the main rule works a given way because of the magic item rule is not conducive to a rules discussion.
Splat rules can provide exceptions, agree with, raise questions, and prove a rule, but they cannot disprove a rule. Especially not one that the Paizo Devs have specifically stated works a certain way.
Until you understand that there is really no point in continuing this discussion with you.
Bob Bob Bob: Actually I do not think that leaves Dirty Trick solely in the realm of GM fiat. I think a lot of that Combat Maneuver rests in the hands of a creative player. I'm not going to give examples ad nauseum but I haven't had problems at table so far with giving convincing descriptions of Dirty Tricks that are done with my unarmed strikes. If the "weapon" is Improved Unarmed Strike and Improved Unarmed Strike is basically your whole body then I think it is harder to come up with ones that AREN'T done with unarmed strikes.
But then, I anticipate this conversation going very anecdotal soon. So, I guess I'll just say that I do not think that it rests solely in the hands of a GM but heavily in the hands of a creative player as well.
Just because you can use any part of your body for an unarmed strike, doesn't mean everything you do with your body is an unarmed strike. You don't use an "unarmed strike" to turn a door knob.
Just because you can use any part of your body for an unarmed strike, doesn't mean everything you do with your body is an unarmed strike. You don't use an "unarmed strike" to turn a door knob.
I do. But I just hate doors. ;)
Lune, I don't care if Dueling allows you to use a weapon for Dirty Trick or not. A magic item is NOT a general rule. You can argue it defines a general rule all you want but it doesn't.
I did not ever say that it is a general rule. Not sure where the aggression is coming from.
Taking a magic item effect out of a splatbook and saying that the main rule works a given way because of the magic item rule is not conducive to a rules discussion.
Once again, I didn't say that the magic item changed the general rule.
However, I would say that it is just as conducive to a rules discussion as pointing at a Dev blog that only talks about unarmed strikes and doesn't directly target this discussion isn't all that conducive either. The original question in this post is what adds to CMB and that blog doesn't even mention CMB once.
Until you understand that there is really no point in continuing this discussion with you.
I'm not twisting your damn arm to keep you here, Gauss. You got something better to do, go do it. Don't pretend like I should be honored for you to have graced my thread with your presence. You wanna be constructive? Groovy. Stay. You wanna attack points I didn't make? Well, I doubt this is the place for you.
Bob Bob Bob: Hey, lemme take my try at bolding that same text.
You can attempt to hinder a foe in melee as a standard action. This maneuver covers any sort of situational attack that imposes a penalty on a foe for a short period of time. Examples include kicking sand into an opponent's face to blind him for 1 round, pulling down an enemy's pants to halve his speed, or hitting a foe in a sensitive spot to make him sickened for a round. The GM is the arbiter of what can be accomplished with this maneuver, but it cannot be used to impose a permanent penalty, and the results can be undone if the target spends a move action. If you do not have the Improved Dirty Trick feat or a similar ability, attempting a dirty trick provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
Who do you think is making that stuff (the bolded bits) up? I'm pretty sure that is the player.
The GMs that I play with reward creative players and their descriptions. I'm betting you are that kind of person too. I think there is a big difference between a player saying, "I use Dirty trick to sicken him." and a player saying, "I use Dirty Trick to jump on his grundle and use my high heels to grind a bit." Don't you?
As I said, I don't want to turn this thread into a series of anecdotal stories and hypothetical scenarios. My point is that whether the GM is going to allow something to be delivered with an unarmed strike or not does not solely rest in the hands of the GM. That is different than him being the final arbiter. That is just restating rule 0. Of course he is. He always is. But what he bases his decision on is in the hands of the player.
And, in an attempt to bring the thread back inline with the topic...
If one has a +1 Dueling Amulet of Mighty Fists what would this item give bonuses to?
I would allow to apply to a kick in the crotch but not throwing sand or pantsing.
Durngrun: I agree. :) How about hitting someone above their eye and splitting their skin so blood gets in it? (only if used sparingly)
Durngrun: I agree. :) How about hitting someone above their eye and splitting their skin so blood gets in it? (only if used sparingly)
This is already a spell brow gasher
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The question of whether grappling uses the "unarmed strike" weapon (and therefore its dependent bonuses, such as an AoMF) has come up before, and the Pathfinder Design Team ruled that it does not use the unarmed strike weapon and does not gain such bonuses, just as the aforementioned FAQ Blog suggests.
Weapons which explicitly have the ability to affect a grapple are special exceptions.