That would be an incorrect reading of it I believe. You don't need ASCII or programming knowledge for this; you need grammar. The commas in that sentence are separating out a nonrestrictive appositive. They are clarifying the "you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite" part of the feat description by adding an additional type of effect that you can add to the weapon.
My point about the ASCII was that I don't have a way to actually diagram the sentence in a readable way on the forums. Let's see if I can make this make sense without drawing an actual diagram.
The problem is that it's a compound direct object of the verb "apply", but both of the objects are the noun "effects":
"You can apply effects (DO #1) [as well as] effects (DO #2)"
DO #1 is modified by "of feats" (prepositional phrase)
The object of the preposition ("feats") is then modified by the restrictive relative clause "that have IUS as a prereq".
DO #2 is modified by the restrictive relative clause "that augment IUS".
The way the sentence is constructed, there is no way to make the second relative clause apply to "feats" because the author repeated the word "effects" after the "as well as". Now, this is a good thing, because the author was expanding the realm beyond just that of feats, but it's also a bad thing because it actually excludes "feats" from the "augment unarmed strike" condition.
While it is theoretically possible to make the first relative clause ("that have IUS as a prereq") apply to DO #1, that's a very unusual construction at best (personally, I'd mark that as a misplaced modifier), and it doesn't make any sense in context.
Right it's augmenting the way you throw your unarmed strike, aka your effect on the weapon. Thus you can treat the Ascetic weapon as if it was an unarmed strike and augment it like you would your unarmed strike. So since you can now punch differently, you can swing differently.
Basically Ascetic style makes the weapon an unarmed strike for everything but pummeling style and other such worded things.
I was speaking on how Weapon Finesse in particular affects your weapons, not Ascetic Strike.
Ascetic Strike is the opposite of how I described Weapon Finesse working; it directly affects the way a weapon works by allowing it to take on some of the aspects of an unarmed weapon. So, even though Vine Strike can only be cast on unarmed strikes and natural weapons, if you have Ascetic Style (temple sword), you're allowed to cast it on temple swords as well. If you have the Adder Strike feat, you can use it to lace your temple sword with poison. If you have Jabbing Style and a means to use multiple style feats simultaneously, you can flurry with nothing but temple swords and every successful strike beyond the first deals an additional 1d6.
But once again, this is why Imbaticus used the wording he did, confusing as it is, stating that Weapon Finesse doesn't effect unarmed strikes, but rather light weapons. What he meant is that, if an unarmed strike wasn't a light weapon, it wouldn't be affected. Normally this wouldn't be a problem, but with Ascetic Style, you can essentially use one-handed, two-handed, and ranged unarmed strikes. For example, choosing temple sword gives you what is, in essence, a one-handed unarmed strike. This is the reason the "light weapons, not unarmed strikes" distinction is important. Weapon Finesse affects unarmed strikes merely on account of them being defined as light weapons; if they were light weapons, Weapon Finesse wouldn't affect them, therefore if there is something that counts as an unarmed strike but not as a light weapon (as is the case with any non-light weapon you choose to be affected by Ascetic Strike), it won't work for it. Going along these lines, you cannot apply Weapon Finesse to your temple swords even if you take Ascetic Style (temple sword) because, despite counting as unarmed strikes, they are not light weapons, nor are they in the list of exceptions for Weapon Finesse.
There are a couple of ways to get Dex to attack on them, though. If you're allowed 3pp, you could take the Lighten Weapon and Improved Lighten Weapon feats. The former allows you to either treat a weapon as a size category smaller or as a lower handedness for a -2 penalty on attack rolls, while the latter removes that penalty from the former. This would allow your temple swords to be treated as light weapons, and therefore be allowed to benefit from Weapon Finesse.
Another feat would be Slashing Grace. It allows you to treat any light or one-handed slashing weapon (which temple swords are) as a one-handed piercing weapon (allowing it to work with things like swashbuckler deeds and impaling critical), but it also allows you to add Dex instead of Str to your damage. The problem with this is that, not only are you still using Str for your attack rolls, but you're not able to use this on a flurry, which I assume is the reason to take ascetic style and jabbing style.
One more option is Martial Versatility. This expands a single feat to affect a weapon group rather than an individual weapon. So if you, for example, took Ascetic Style (temple sword) and Martial Versatility (Ascetic Style). Now you can not only use Ascetic Style with every monk weapon, but also with every heavy blade. Or if you took Ascetic Style (kusarigama), you'd be able to apply it to monk weapons, double weapons, and flail weapons. This is also limited though, since it'll only be useful with human brawlers or with human monks with at least 4 fighter levels. Martial Mastery will just let you spread every feat that applies on a specific weapon to spread to its fighter groups, as if you have Martial Versatility for every feat, but that's sealed behind 16 fighter levels.
Right it's augmenting the way you throw your unarmed strike, aka your effect on the weapon. Thus you can treat the Ascetic weapon as if it was an unarmed strike and augment it like you would your unarmed strike. So since you can now punch differently, you can swing differently.
Basically Ascetic style makes the weapon an unarmed strike for everything but pummeling style and other such worded things.
I was speaking on how Weapon Finesse in particular affects your weapons, not Ascetic Strike.
Ascetic Strike is the opposite of how I described Weapon Finesse working; it directly affects the way a weapon works by allowing it to take on some of the aspects of an unarmed weapon. So, even though Vine Strike can only be cast on unarmed strikes and natural weapons, if you have Ascetic Style (temple sword), you're allowed to cast it on temple swords as well. If you have the Adder Strike feat, you can use it to lace your temple sword with poison. If you have Jabbing Style and a means to use multiple style feats simultaneously, you can flurry with nothing but temple swords and every successful strike beyond the first deals an additional 1d6.
But once again, this is why Imbaticus used the wording he did, confusing as it is, stating that Weapon Finesse doesn't effect unarmed strikes, but rather light weapons. What he meant is that, if an unarmed strike wasn't a light weapon, it wouldn't be affected. Normally this wouldn't be a problem, but with Ascetic Style, you can essentially use one-handed, two-handed, and ranged unarmed strikes. For example, choosing temple sword gives you what is, in essence, a one-handed unarmed strike. This is the reason the "light weapons, not unarmed strikes" distinction is important. Weapon Finesse affects unarmed strikes merely on account of them being defined as light weapons; if they were light weapons, Weapon Finesse wouldn't affect them, therefore if there is something that counts as an unarmed strike but not as a light weapon (as is the case with any...
Unarmed strikes are light weapons, right there in the table.
My weapon is being treated as an unarmed strike, aka a light weapon.Since my weapon is being treated as a light weapon I can weapon finesse it, because weapon finesse is changing how I use unarmed strikes, and I can carry that over to my weapon.
Unarmed strikes are light weapons, right there in the table.
My weapon is being treated as an unarmed strike, aka a light weapon.
Since my weapon is being treated as a light weapon I can weapon finesse it, because weapon finesse is changing how I use unarmed strikes, and I can carry that over to my weapon.
It's being treated as an unarmed strike, not as a light weapon. Or are you saying this feat would also allow you to wield a seven-branched sword in each hand? Or apply Piranha Strike in place of Power Attack on your kusarigama? Or use the Sly Draw feat with a tri-point double-edged sword? Could you use Disguise Weapon to make a Medium temple sword look like a Medium brass dagger, or use Hide Weapon to hide a quarterstaff?
When you apply this feat, it doesn't gain the qualities of an unarmed strike, it is simply allowing you to apply some feats and effects that normally you couldn't. Those temple swords are still one-handed; taking Ascetic Style does not suddenly make them light weapons just because they are being treated as unarmed strikes for a certain purpose. Not being given any of the traits thereof. It's simply allowing you to eschew a single required trait of the chosen weapon (that being the fact that it isn't your fist). I can only word this so many ways before I start sounding like Mojo Jojo.
I'm... not sure how much more simply I can put it.
If I willfully misread the rules to allow for Weapon finesse simply because of Ascetic Style, things can get interesting.
I'm looking forward to using 7branch swords with Ascetic Style on my rogue, while doing lethal damage to:
trigger enforcer (because ua strikes are non-lethal)
triggering Sap Mastery (because UA strikes are bludgeoning and non-lethal)
twf w/ 2h weapons in each hand (because ua strikes are light)
all based on dex from weapon finesse!!!
I'm... not sure how much more simply I can put it.
I think I do, or differently, at any rate.
A Ascetic style greatsword is functionally an unarmed attack.
It just so happens to be an unarmed attack that is 2 Handed, and therefore isn't a light attack, and therefore can't be finessed.
Unarmed attacks can't be finessed just because they're unarmed attacks, they can be finessed because they're light. If your unarmed attack looses the ability to be light, it also can't be finessed.
I think at this point everyone just needs to accept that some people think Ascetic Style contains a hidden rider that converts the weapon into a LIGHT unarmed attack, and other don't, and neither group are very likely to change their minds.
That's the problem with the wording of "augments unarmed." We don't have any set definition in game what this entails.
If I willfully misread the rules to allow for Weapon finesse simply because of Ascetic Style, things can get interesting.
I'm looking forward to using 7branch swords with Ascetic Style on my rogue, while doing lethal damage to:
trigger enforcer (because ua strikes are non-lethal)
triggering Sap Mastery (because UA strikes are bludgeoning and non-lethal)
twf w/ 2h weapons in each hand (because ua strikes are light)
all based on dex from weapon finesse!!!
Well if you're not doing non-lethal damage then you wont be trigger enforcer.
Since you're not doing non-lethal you're not triggering sap mastery.
I'm not sure that 2wf is augmenting unarmed strikes. But if you can give a good explanation as to how it's augmenting them then I guess so.
I'm... not sure how much more simply I can put it.
I think I do, or differently, at any rate.
A Ascetic style greatsword is functionally an unarmed attack.
It just so happens to be an unarmed attack that is 2 Handed, and therefore isn't a light attack, and therefore can't be finessed.
Unarmed attacks can't be finessed just because they're unarmed attacks, they can be finessed because they're light. If your unarmed attack looses the ability to be light, it also can't be finessed.
I think at this point everyone just needs to accept that some people think Ascetic Style contains a hidden rider that converts the weapon into a LIGHT unarmed attack, and other don't, and neither group are very likely to change their minds.
There's not any other kind of unarmed strike except light unarmed strikes.
Unarmed strikes are light weapons, right there in the table.
My weapon is being treated as an unarmed strike, aka a light weapon.
Since my weapon is being treated as a light weapon I can weapon finesse it, because weapon finesse is changing how I use unarmed strikes, and I can carry that over to my weapon.It's being treated as an unarmed strike, not as a light weapon. Or are you saying this feat would also allow you to wield a seven-branched sword in each hand? Or apply Piranha Strike in place of Power Attack on your kusarigama? Or use the Sly Draw feat with a tri-point double-edged sword? Could you use Disguise Weapon to make a Medium temple sword look like a Medium brass dagger, or use Hide Weapon to hide a quarterstaff?
When you apply this feat, it doesn't gain the qualities of an unarmed strike, it is simply allowing you to apply some feats and effects that normally you couldn't. Those temple swords are still one-handed; taking Ascetic Style does not suddenly make them light weapons just because they are being treated as unarmed strikes for a certain purpose. Not being given any of the traits thereof. It's simply allowing you to eschew a single required trait of the chosen weapon (that being the fact that it isn't your fist). I can only word this so many ways before I start sounding like Mojo Jojo.
I'm... not sure how much more simply I can put it.
And
Oh for...! What both of you are forgetting, is that ascetic style says you can apply effects as if attacks with the chosen weapon are unarmed strikes. No where does it say they become unarmed strikes for the purpose of all rules. What chess pawn and I are saying is that this wording is similar to the wording in slashing grace that treats the selected weapon as a one handed piercing weapon for any feat or class ability that requires such. Slashing grace does not actually change the dmg type of your weapon. Similarly ascetic style doesn't change your sword into a fist, it just allows you to use the sword with the ease and training of your unarmed strikes.If I willfully misread the rules to allow for Weapon finesse simply because of Ascetic Style, things can get interesting.
I'm looking forward to using 7branch swords with Ascetic Style on my rogue, while doing lethal damage to:
trigger enforcer (because ua strikes are non-lethal)
triggering Sap Mastery (because UA strikes are bludgeoning and non-lethal)
twf w/ 2h weapons in each hand (because ua strikes are light)
all based on dex from weapon finesse!!!
This is pretty much exactly in line with what I was saying regarding Weapon Finesse. Ascetic Style simply allows you to use a weapon in a different way. You said it yourself, it doesn't change that a weapon is one-handed or two-handed rather than light, so if a feat affects light weapons but not specifically unarmed strikes, it won't work with Ascetic Style because you're essentially treating your weapon as an unarmed strike, not treating it as having an unarmed strike's properties. This contrasts Slashing Grace because you're given a specific handedness and damage type you can use with it (so you can, for example, use a light slashing weapon for the feat and it'll be treated as 1H and piercing).
It's one of those situations where a specific call-out is necessary. What I mean by that is, it needs to specifically say it affects unarmed strikes, or else it won't work with Ascetic Strike (unless of course it is a feat with IUS as a prerequisite). If it affects light weapons, it would affect actual unarmed strikes, yes, but not because they are unarmed strikes, but rather because they are light weapons. Feats like Weapon Finesse don't check for if your weapon is an unarmed strike.
I'm... not sure how much more simply I can put it.
I think I do, or differently, at any rate.
A Ascetic style greatsword is functionally an unarmed attack.
It just so happens to be an unarmed attack that is 2 Handed, and therefore isn't a light attack, and therefore can't be finessed.
Unarmed attacks can't be finessed just because they're unarmed attacks, they can be finessed because they're light. If your unarmed attack looses the ability to be light, it also can't be finessed.
I think at this point everyone just needs to accept that some people think Ascetic Style contains a hidden rider that converts the weapon into a LIGHT unarmed attack, and other don't, and neither group are very likely to change their minds.
Hit the nail on the head, dude. That's exactly what I was trying to say. And you're right in that the main point of contention seems to come down to whether treating a weapon as an unarmed strike also treats it as a light weapon for the same purposes. It seems that this isn't going to even be a productive discussion any longer unless it's specifically to define RAW for the interaction between Ascetic Style and feats/spells/abilities that affect light weapons but not specifically unarmed strikes.
I do need to note that you can't Ascetic Style with a greatsword, though; it requires the weapon to be in the monk fighter weapon group and to be melee.
Very well summarized!
Still missing my list of monk weapons that, thanks to the liberal finesse reading, would be considered:
light, non-lethal, close, and bludgeoning.
Rules end all my fun :)
I came here wondering if I could use Ascetic Style to finesse a kusarigama, and after reading the entire thread, I am no closer to a definitive answer! :D