Can a monk with a disabled hand still get full attacks?

[cyberspaceghost]

Hello, I am currently running Rise of the Runelords: Fortress of the Stone Giants and my group came across a debate.

The groups 10th level Lizardfolk Monk rolled a critical fumble. My group uses the Gamemastery: Critical Fumble Deck and the monk pulled his Natural Attack fumble reading:

“Broken Nail: You take 1d4 points of damage and you cannot use this attack until healed”

The argument came in that being a monk, couldn’t he just switch from punching to kicking and tail attacks and still pull off his maneuvers?
Pathfinder gives no inforation on what happens to a monk that losses the use of a hand or foot.

[Firewarrior44]

Monk Unarmed Strike wrote:

A monk’s attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full.

He can attack with more or less any body part so it wouldn't interfere.

[Imbicatus]

An unarmed strike can be made with any part of the body and is not restricted by limbs. If you were missing a hand, you could kick, elbow strike, head butt, whatever.

That said, this is an optionial accessory, rule 0 applies.

[darkerthought7]

The above posters are correct. A monk can use virtually any body part for their unarmed strikes.

[DarkLCD]

I would agree with the others. Monks use their whole body. So a chipped nail won't affects his legs. Though if for some reason his legs and other arm are disabled (like bound) except for that one arm, then he couldn't attack.

Luckily he isn't just using his claws. Though if he had something like that with unarmed strike, I'd just remove any extra benefit the claws provide.

[Chess Pwn]

If he's unable to use that hand he was attacking with then he's fine to kick and stuff.
If he's unable to use that "attack" aka Unarmed strike, then no.

[Melkiador]

You really should have just drawn another more suitable card. Monks are weird and their natural attack isn't like most natural attacks.

[Claxon]

Unarmed Strikes aren't natural attacks so the GM chose the wrong entry on the card.

Of course, they behave a lot like natural attacks in some respects, but aren't.

Further, if the card did apply the rule would imply the he couldn't use any unarmed strike, which is a bit too much, and doesn't make sense as the monk could switch to flurry of kicks, flurry of headbutts, flurry of elbows, etcs. If he's allowed to switch what he's attacking with then there is practically no penalty.