I don't think so... But if you have bracers of armor you can affix trickets on they
I don't think so... But if you have bracers of armor you can affix trickets on they
Bracers of Armor let you attach Armor Trinkets(Light armor. Are there trinkets that only work on medium/heavy?)
I haven't found a way to use weapon trinkets with Natural attacks/Unarmed. But it's something I really haven't looked into.
And I rolled a Monk up. Should probably check that out.
I suppose you could wear a bracelet?
Unarmed strikes have their own weapon profiles, so they are definitely weapons.
Oh, and i believe dante meant Handwraps rather than bracers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I suppose you could wear a bracelet?
Unarmed strikes have their own weapon profiles, so they are definitely weapons.Oh, and i believe dante meant Handwraps rather than bracers.
Even worse. The Handwraps do not list Trinkets at all unless an errata came along that I don't know about. Which is entirely possible.
Until then, the GM in me would probably allow for some bracelet or even the Handwraps to be used to hang/attach trinkets to. 1 handed weapon trinkets only though.
The rules are contradictory on the subject and need clarification.
Unarmed An unarmed attack uses your body rather than a manufactured weapon. An unarmed attack isn’t a weapon, though it’s categorized with weapons for weapon tables and weapon groups, and it might have weapon traits. Because it’s a part of your body, an unarmed attack can’t be Disarmed. It also doesn’t take up a hand, though a fist or other grasping appendage follows the same rules as a free-hand weapon.
OTOH,
UNARMED ATTACKS
You can Strike with your fist or another body part, calculating your attack and damage rolls in the same way you would with a weapon. This counts as a simple weapon, so almost all characters start out trained in unarmed attacks. Use the statistics for a fist even if you’re kicking, kneeing, or attacking with another part of your body. Some ancestry feats, class features, class feats, and spells give access to special, more powerful unarmed attacks.
I tend to believe the first one because they go out of their way to say "weapon or unarmed attack" all over the place, which would be pagespace-eating redundancy if unarmed attacks were weapons. But YMMV.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If it's not a weapon, they are excluding monks, animal totem barbarians, wild shape druids, and so on from an entire category of magic items explicitly created to be useful to fighty types. I doubt that was the intention.
It definitely needs clarification, but if they make the wrong decision or don't clarify it I'm just going to end up allowing trinkets attached to bracelets / handwraps / animal companion collars / etc anyway.
|
The rules are contradictory on the subject and need clarification.
Unarmed An unarmed attack uses your body rather than a manufactured weapon. An unarmed attack isn’t a weapon, though it’s categorized with weapons for weapon tables and weapon groups, and it might have weapon traits. Because it’s a part of your body, an unarmed attack can’t be Disarmed. It also doesn’t take up a hand, though a fist or other grasping appendage follows the same rules as a free-hand weapon.OTOH,
UNARMED ATTACKS
You can Strike with your fist or another body part, calculating your attack and damage rolls in the same way you would with a weapon. This counts as a simple weapon, so almost all characters start out trained in unarmed attacks. Use the statistics for a fist even if you’re kicking, kneeing, or attacking with another part of your body. Some ancestry feats, class features, class feats, and spells give access to special, more powerful unarmed attacks.I tend to believe the first one because they go out of their way to say "weapon or unarmed attack" all over the place, which would be pagespace-eating redundancy if unarmed attacks were weapons. But YMMV.
I would say that the citations are just speaking about different things with the same name (Breaking the law of identity? That's a shame!).
The page 183 is a definition of a weapon trait, named "unarmed". Some weapons have this trait and some do not. Note that all the animals have their attacks without "unarmed" trait (bug or feature?).
The page 178 speaks about an unarmed attack as an option of attacking with the "noncombat" parts of your body, e.g. weapon. So that you technically treat them as fists (which has an "unarmed" trait).
So an unarmed attack without an "unarmed" trait is technically a weapon. The only issue (or feature?) is that without the "unarmed" trait a creature can be disarmed. Break the claws and knock out teeth! Sounds reasonable.
|
|
and all natural weapons inherit all the "unarmed" traits, including.. "unarmed".
Doubtfull.
1) Fist is a fist 1d4 B (Agile, finesse, nonlethal, unarmed) and claw is a claw 1d6 slashing (agile, finesse).2) There is no term "natural weapons" and no inherit trait rules.
3) Barbarian totem forms have "unarmed" trait explicitely, others do not.
double slice explicitly states 2 wielded melee weapons.
graceful poise (double strike's enhancement) explictly states "if the 2nd double slice attack was with an unarmed attack"
Not exactly. It says
"While in this stance, if you make your second Strike from Double Slice with an agile weapon or agile unarmed attack..."It does not say that agile unarmed attack comes from Double slice as I understand. Let me use brackets: "While in this stance, if you make your second Strike from (Double Slice with an agile weapon) or (agile unarmed attack)..."
as an example, savage slice, which should be a wild druid feat, works on a melee weapon... well, is the claw, which is "unarmed" a melee weapon? no one knows.
As I said, claw do not have "unarmed" trait. So it is a weapon, and can be used with this feat.
But that is my interpretation and FAQ from the designers would be appreciated :- )
|
|
your double slice break down makes no sense whatsoever.
I did not say anything about Double slice. We are speaking about Graceful poise, which is ill-worded.
you can't willy nilly put brackets and commas into sentences, that changes their whole meaning.
Yes and this is exaclly the problem. There are no brackets commas or whatsoever when we need them so badly. We both see the problem and I suggest a solution that do not break the logic of the rules.
hence, for double slice, "unarmed" is a wielded melee weapon.
there's no refuting that as RAW.
I say the same, but not only for Double slice. An unarmed attack is a weilded melee weapon. If it do not have "unarmed" trait in its entry.
But "fist" weapon refers to atatcks "with any part of your body" and that includes claws, teeth and the like.
Yes, unless this part of the body explicitely has an entry with its own damage and traits. Just read further "Some ancestry feats, class features, class feats, and spells give access to special, more powerful unarmed attacks". After that you get something like "claw 1d6(agile, finesse)", nothing in common with fist. Note that no "inherence" is in the rules, but "substitution" is everywhere (IMHO).
Furthermore, we can clearly see every single "animal" companion having his "natural attacks (for lack of better term) be labelled as Unarmed attack.
They are said to be unarmed for the purpose of proficiency, but they do not have "unarmed" in traits.
So, you want to tell me that "monster" lion's claws are treated like Wielded weapons and "Animal companion" lion's claws are treated as unarmed?
Again no. They both do not have "unarmed" traits so they are both weapons. There were even some issues if you do not treat the animal companion armed with weapon. I do not remember where exactly.
|
|
we don't need commas
if you ADD commas you change what the feat does.
if you DON'T add a comma, and leave it as it is, it works as it does now: it allows double slice to be used with unarmed.
The problem is that without commas the feat becomes doubtfull.
Furthermore, to be strickt, the Graceful poise does not say that you can do an unarmed attack. It says "if you make an unarmed attack". It is out of concern if you are able to do that or not.By the way I do not say that Double slice can not be used with unarmed attacks (feel free to use claws). It can not be used with weapons with "unarmed" trait.
And unarmed attacks have no mention about traits whatsoever in their description.
Yes, because the trait is a different thing and that is what I am speaking about. Unarmed attack is a name of the paragraph that describes unarmed Strikes -- a way of attacking, a weapon, that uses the statistics of the fist. But every weapon have special traits, describing its properties. And among possible traits we find an "unarmed" trait, that is not related to unarmed attacks and Strikes.
By your interpetation, you can't "unarmed attack" with your fist since it's a completely different thing. Which doesn't makes any sense.
The rules specifically say that you make unarmed attacks with your fists.
What I get from the whole "unarmed" thing, is exactly like the old "Ally" issue: Unarmed counts as a wielded weapon WHEN it makes sense to do so.
Sounds the same as using commas :- ) It is all up to GM after all.