Are Throwing Weapons Considered Melee, Ranged, or Both?

[Beenrak]

So I have been looking through the rules trying to figure out what feats (and rules) apply and do not apply to thrown weapons -- and it is seemingly very complex and perhaps contradictory?

Note: I am using the online SRD as evidence of my findings here, but this information is mimicked in the core rulebook as well.

The first question I encountered was: Are thrown melee weapons (e.g., the Hatchet) ranged weapons? If they are, that would mean that feats that list 'wielding a ranged weapon' apply to thrown weapons (e.g., Point-Blank Shot)

Based on the rules, I believe that thrown melee weapons do not count as ranged weapons. Under Equipment/Weapons, there are two clear sections labeled: Melee Weapons and Ranged Weapons. Javelins are listed as a Range weapon in this context, but a Hatchet is not. A Hatchet is a melee weapon that can be thrown. This seems to be backed up by the description of the Thrown weapon trait which explicitly differentiates melee weapons with the thrown trait and ranged weapons with the thrown trait.

OK -- so if a Hatchet is a melee weapon, then Point-Blank Shot does not apply. Does this mean however that I can throw a hatchet as part of a strike that says I must use a melee weapon? Double Slice says that you must be wielding two melee weapons and it allows you to make a strike with both weapons at the same target. It does not say that you must make melee strikes (e.g., Power Attack). Strike is designed to be ambiguous, stating that you can make melee or ranged attacks as part of a strike. Based on the wording, it would seem that you could throw two Hatchets as part of a double slice attack.

HOWEVER.... if you look at the Barbarian class ability Rage and the level 1 Barbarian feat Raging Thrower things get even messier. Rage says that you deal 2 additional damage with melee weapons (of which the Hatchet is), but Raging Thrower says that your rage bonus applies to thrown weapon attacks (of which, the Hatchet is capable of performing). Having an entire level 1 feat in order to gain your Rage bonus for thrown weapons seems to strongly indicate that thrown weapons (when thrown) are not considered melee weapons.

This leaves us in a weird place in that thrown weapons are not considered melee or ranged when throwing. I am a bit at a loss here... Weapon throwing has always been a favorite area of mine and trying to work out which rules actually apply is quite difficult. Does anyone have any insight?

[Lord_B]

Ranged weapons are the kind of vague term that game designers occasionally fail to get around to firmly defining.

"Ranged weapons don’t normally add an ability modifier to the damage roll, though weapons with the propulsive trait (page 283) add half your Strength modifier (or your full modifier if it is a negative number), and thrown weapons add your full Strength modifier."

This text treats thrown weapons as ranged weapons.

"Ranged and thrown weapons have a range increment."

In the bestiary, monsters with throwable melee weapons have the attack listed in both Melee and Ranged, for the two kinda of attacks. However, a thrown weapon is marked with the text "thrown x feet" instead of "range x feet". This is done irrespective of whether the weapon is a typical "ranged weapon" like a javelin or a typical "melee weapon" like a spear.

I'm pretty sure that any weapon, while being thrown, is considered a ranged weapon. Similarly, if you took a ranged weapon and started slapping people with it, it would count as if it were any other improvised melee weapon.

However, as an alternate ruling, perhaps the Raging Thrower feat is exclusively designed for the javelin, dart, and shuriken, and any melee weapon is always melee, and any ranged weapon is always ranged. I don't think it's what they went for, but I don't think it will break the game either.

[Beenrak]

So then your expectation is that it is more about the attack type than the weapon type.

So, if I intend to throw a hatchet I treat it as if I were 'wielding a ranged weapon' and if I intend to melee I treat it as if I were 'wielding a melee weapon'. I would therefore then qualify for both Point Blank Shot AND Double Slice if I were wielding two hatchets -- however could only use one or the other depending on if I was making melee or ranged attacks.

This is all very reasonable to me -- I just wish it was a little more explicit in the rules.

[Patrick "Varg" Meade]

Beenrak wrote:

So then your expectation is that it is more about the attack type than the weapon type.

So, if I intend to throw a hatchet I treat it as if I were 'wielding a ranged weapon' and if I intend to melee I treat it as if I were 'wielding a melee weapon'. I would therefore then qualify for both Point Blank Shot AND Double Slice if I were wielding two hatchets -- however could only use one or the other depending on if I was making melee or ranged attacks.

This is all very reasonable to me -- I just wish it was a little more explicit in the rules.

I don't have any official insight, of course, but I don't think the hatchets would qualify for Point-Blank Shot.

The hatchets are Melee Weapons, that happen to be capable of making Ranged Attacks/Ranged Strikes. I don't think you can treat it as if they are a ranged weapon. So if it says you have to wield a Ranged Weapon, I just don't think the hatchets qualify. For example, I don't think Paizo would consider thrown hatchets qualifying for the Ranger's Penetrating Shot feat, based on the description of shooting clear through a creature.

I do think you can absolutely throw both hatchets for Double Slice, for the reasons you suggest.

[masda_gib]

I had the same questions yesterday but the thread got lost. Here
So this is very interessting for me.

I also would guess that the intention for hatchets is that they are melee while wielded but count as ranged weapons when thrown. Otherwise Raging Thrower makes not much sense.

I wish the text of the thrown trait would be clarified.

[Beenrak]

masda_gib wrote:

I had the same questions yesterday but the thread got lost. Here

So this is very interessting for me.

I also would guess that the intention for hatchets is that they are melee while wielded but count as ranged weapons when thrown. Otherwise Raging Thrower makes not much sense.

I wish the text of the thrown trait would be clarified.

Wow we really covered similar ground heh. Yea its very confusing. I've brought it up here, on reddit, and at my work and it seems that people are somewhat divided on rules as written (it is a melee weapon, and therefore works with double slice) or rules as intended (its a ranged weapon when thrown, and works with ranged weapon feats).

No matter which side you pick, there are outliers that don't make much sense (such as the barbarian feats). Either way, thrown weapons really did not get a lot of love in the core rulebook :(

[Rek Rollington]

We know from dev comments (probably Mark) that for the purposes of feat requirements is that any weapon you hold in two hands is a two-handed weapon even if it provides no mechanical benefit (like using two hands on a short sword). By the same logic any weapon you are using for ranged attacks is a ranged weapon at that moment.

Edit: Found it

Mark Seifter wrote:

graystone wrote:

Mark Seifter wrote:

Two-handed weapon vs weapon in two hands was very confusing in PF1 (I still think one of the FAQs about that in general contradicts another FAQ about lances); we don't have both of those in PF2. If you are using it two hands, you are using it in two hands. If you are using it in one hand, you are using it in one hand. That is the thing we will check.

I'm curious why brutal shove requires a two handed weapon then. Wouldn't requiring "you are wielding a weapon in two hands" instead help prevent confusion, especially from returning PF1 players?

In the equipment chapter, we make it clear that requirements like that work with any such weapon in two hands, whether it requires two hands like a greatsword, has the two-hand trait like a bastard sword, or you just did it for fun with a longsword or the like.

I checked the equipment chapter and while it does describe what Mark mentions above it makes no mention of Ranged weapons. It’s specifically about one and two handed weapons. But I think it would follow the same design principle unless it leads to something overpowered in which case you enforce the “too good to be true” rule.

[shroudb]

I think pf2 does a great job at defining thrown weapons:

There are melee thrown weapons (like throwing axe)
And there are also ranged thrown weapons (like darts)

Thrown Trait by itself doesn't change the type of weapon.

What it does is allowing Melee thrown weapons to be used in Ranged Strikes
And
Allowing Ranged thrown weapons to use Strength stat in damage.

So, if you have a feat saying "melee weapon" it works with melee thrown weapons.
If the feat instead says "melee attack/strike" then it can't be used with a thrown attack (since the trait changes the type of attack)

[masda_gib]

shroudb wrote:

I think pf2 does a great job at defining thrown weapons:

There are melee thrown weapons (like throwing axe)
And there are also ranged thrown weapons (like darts)

Thrown Trait by itself doesn't change the type of weapon.

What it does is allowing Melee thrown weapons to be used in Ranged Strikes
And
Allowing Ranged thrown weapons to use Strength stat in damage.

So, if you have a feat saying "melee weapon" it works with melee thrown weapons.
If the feat instead says "melee attack/strike" then it can't be used with a thrown attack (since the trait changes the type of attack)

I agree that it does a good job at defining the weapons. But it does a bad job of clarifying what feats and features you can use with thrown weapons.

For example the barbarians Rage says:
"You deal 2 additional damage with melee weapons and unarmed attacks."
By your reading that includes melee thrown weapons when you throw them, right? But what does Raging Thrower do then?

Also by that reading you can use Double Slice to throw 2 melee thrown weapons but not two darts. Is that intended?

[Franz Lunzer]

Yeah, maybe it would have made more sense for Rage to say: "You deal 2 additional damage with melee attacks."

Same for Double Slice, which probably should have specified melee strikes.

[shroudb]

masda_gib wrote:

shroudb wrote:

I think pf2 does a great job at defining thrown weapons:

There are melee thrown weapons (like throwing axe)
And there are also ranged thrown weapons (like darts)

Thrown Trait by itself doesn't change the type of weapon.

What it does is allowing Melee thrown weapons to be used in Ranged Strikes
And
Allowing Ranged thrown weapons to use Strength stat in damage.

So, if you have a feat saying "melee weapon" it works with melee thrown weapons.
If the feat instead says "melee attack/strike" then it can't be used with a thrown attack (since the trait changes the type of attack)

I agree that it does a good job at defining the weapons. But it does a bad job of clarifying what feats and features you can use with thrown weapons.

For example the barbarians Rage says:
"You deal 2 additional damage with melee weapons and unarmed attacks."
By your reading that includes melee thrown weapons when you throw them, right? But what does Raging Thrower do then?

Also by that reading you can use Double Slice to throw 2 melee thrown weapons but not two darts. Is that intended?

it could be that indeed what they wanted was the base rage to apply to stuff like thrown axes, that's quite iconic after all.

but if you want to use rage with stuff like javelins and darts, you need a feat to do so.

Same thing with double slice.

looking at what is melee thrown (axes, hammers, etc) as opposed to what is ranged thrown (darts, javelins, etc) there is a clear distinction on the "bulkiness" (not in game terms lol) of the weapons themselves as well.

[Liir]

Below are my thoughts on this, I’d be curious if anyone finds an ability that doesn’t make sense following these rules:

If the ability requires a melee weapon, it requires a melee weapon performing a melee strike.
If the ability requires a ranged weapon, it requires a ranged weapon performing a ranged strike.
If the ability specifies a thrown weapon, it requires a weapon (ranged or melee) with the thrown trait performing a ranged strike.
If the ability specifies a required weapon, it works as above based on the type of weapon in the requirements.

If the ability specifies a melee strike, you can perform it with any melee weapon.
If the ability specifies a ranged strike, you can perform it with any ranged weapon or a melee weapon with the thrown trait.
If the ability specifies a thrown strike, you can perform it with either a ranged weapon with the thrown trait or a melee weapon with the thrown trait.

Examples with the abilities mentioned in the first post:

Point Blank Shot: requires ranged weapon (and thus the text only applies to ranged weapons making ranged strikes).
Double Slice: requires melee weapons (and thus the text only applies to melee weapons making melee strikes)
Rage: requires melee weapons (and thus the text only applies to melee strikes)
Raging Thrower: specifies thrown weapons (and thus the text only applies to weapons with the thrown trait performing ranged strikes)

[masda_gib]

Thanks for your thoughts, Liir. I too think that's how it is supposed to work, reading al the feats and abilities.

It is just really confusing and a bit of clarification somewhere in the rules would have been nice.

Some feats like Power Attack have the clear wording "melee strikes". And then there is Rage and Double Slice that just require strikes with melee weapons and really nothing in the rules excludes thrown melee weapons with these wording (although in think RAI they are excluded). :/

[Beenrak]

Liir I think that is at least consistent within the rules -- but it also means that there are not many feats that actually modify thrown weapons.

Looking through the following classes, these are the feats that seem to follow the rules you put forward:
* Barbarian: Raging Hurler, Knockback, Brutal Critical
* Fighter: Incredible Aim(+Incredible Ricochet)
* Ranger: Hunter's Aim(+Targeting Shot), Quick Draw, Deadly Aim, Far Shot

I suppose this is a reasonable list, but it still feels a bit off to me.

[Zwordsman]

Answered something similiar on reddit but I don't have my quotes anymore.

Somewhere in chapter 9 it talks about ranged attack rolls. In that whole section it mentions ranged weapons make ranged attack rolls and melee weapns make melee attack rolls.
Which more or less creates a general rule that ranged=ranged melee-melee (attack/weapon type). And also says that Ranged weapons have Range (increments). Meaning if it has a ranged increment and does a ranged attack roll. Its a ranged weapon.

So for me it depends on if you consider Throwing a specific that overrides that. Or if you consider throwing to just do what it says on the tin giving it a ranged increment and ability to throw as a ranged attack(It doesn't really make any other changes to the weapon). So when you use the ranged attack with the weapon with a range increment its a ranged weapon.

So any ability/magic that specifies "ranged attack" or "ranged weapon" would work with a throwing one. But not anything that requires a reload speed (0 or not).

but my brain is too tired for me to dig up any specific quotes on that right now.
So this might not be helpful

[shroudb]

Zwordsman wrote:

Answered something similiar on reddit but I don't have my quotes anymore.

Somewhere in chapter 9 it talks about ranged attack rolls. In that whole section it mentions ranged weapons make ranged attack rolls and melee weapns make melee attack rolls.
Which more or less creates a general rule that ranged=ranged melee-melee (attack/weapon type). And also says that Ranged weapons have Range (increments). Meaning if it has a ranged increment and does a ranged attack roll. Its a ranged weapon.

So for me it depends on if you consider Throwing a specific that overrides that. Or if you consider throwing to just do what it says on the tin giving it a ranged increment and ability to throw as a ranged attack(It doesn't really make any other changes to the weapon). So when you use the ranged attack with the weapon with a range increment its a ranged weapon.

So any ability/magic that specifies "ranged attack" or "ranged weapon" would work with a throwing one. But not anything that requires a reload speed (0 or not).

but my brain is too tired for me to dig up any specific quotes on that right now.
So this might not be helpful

The Thrown trait speaks specifically that different things happen to melee thrown and to different thrown.

especially considering the "range".

As you point out:
everything with "base" range is a range weapon
everything without is a melee weapon.

that's also how ranged and melee weapons are seperated.

But the thrown trait also says, for melee weapons, that with the trait you can make a "range attack with this weapon".

it doens't change it to a ranged weapon.

IMO:

since it's a brand new edition, if they wanted all thrown weapons to be ranged, they would have made them ranged, so i think it's deliberate that some are melee and some are ranged, i mean, they went out of their way to make different applications of the thrown trait for each of them, so if it wasn't intentional, then why would they bother to do so and not just lump them all together in one nice category of their own and be done with it.

[masda_gib]

Zwordsman wrote:

Somewhere in chapter 9 it talks about ranged attack rolls. In that whole section it mentions ranged weapons make ranged attack rolls and melee weapns make melee attack rolls.

Which more or less creates a general rule that ranged=ranged melee-melee (attack/weapon type). And also says that Ranged weapons have Range (increments). Meaning if it has a ranged increment and does a ranged attack roll. Its a ranged weapon.

Sadly, it doesn't say that, neither in the Equipment nor in the Rules section. And it even says "Ranged and thrown weapons each have a listed range increment...", countering the "range increment = ranged weapon" thought (that I would have liked since it would clear that up).

[graystone]

masda_gib wrote:

"range increment = ranged weapon"

It's how it's listed: ranged weapons have it listed under the basic weapon stats and thrown have it attached to the thrown trait [thrown 10']. So thrown melee weapons don't have a range increment, the thrown trait does.

On the main topic, I'd say thrown melee weapons never stop being melee weapons: IMO, use the equipment listings for that is melee and ranged. IE, if I look for a dagger, I find it under melee weapons, simple weapons so no matter what I do with it it's going to be a simple, melee weapon.

[Quandary]

While all weapons (when thrown) may be "ranged attacks", (even without thrown trait, they could be thrown as improvised weapons)
I don't see anything that would make "melee weapons" with thrown trait count as "ranged weapons" by RAW.
So if a mechanic doesn't intend to narrowly restrict scope to only "ranged weapons" (some of which are thrown),
it should instead reference "ranged attack", which covers any normal attack that is at range, not melee.
It seems like quite a bit of rules text may not be following this, if my understanding of plausible intent is accurate.

[Squiggit]

This exact same issue was a pretty common thread on the RQ forum for PF1, wish they would have been a little more precise here.

[Beenrak]

shroudb wrote:

since it's a brand new edition, if they wanted all thrown weapons to be ranged, they would have made them ranged, so i think it's deliberate that some are melee and some are ranged, i mean, they went out of their way to make different applications of the thrown trait for each of them, so if it wasn't intentional, then why would they bother to do so and not just lump them...

Well to be fair, the book does not have a 'mixed' section. A Hatchet is listed under Melee Weapon because it is primarily a melee weapon. Its range is minimal and not the primary use of the weapon -- its a bonus. I think Hatchet does belong in the 'melee weapon' category. I also think however, that it should count as a ranged weapon for the purposes of feat prerequisites when you are using it to make a ranged attack.

[Beenrak]

Not counting the actual rules as written for a moment -- it seems logical to me that all 'thrown weapons' should fall under the same category with respect to feats.

Why would Point Blank Shot -- something designed to do more damage if you are close to the target -- work for a javelin but not a thrown spear. They are functionally identical except that since a javelin is designed for throwing, it is easier to throw it farther.

Rules as written Far Shot doubles ANY range increment (presumably even an improvised thrown weapon). So my training allows me to throw ANYTHING further than a normal person -- yet me being at 'point blank range' (which is inherently less powerful for melee thrown weapons due to their shorter range increment) would not increase my damage. Its an odd inconsistency that I do not believe is intended.

[masda_gib]

Beenrak wrote:

Not counting the actual rules as written for a moment -- it seems logical to me that all 'thrown weapons' should fall under the same category with respect to feats.

Why would Point Blank Shot -- something designed to do more damage if you are close to the target -- work for a javelin but not a thrown spear. They are functionally identical except that since a javelin is designed for throwing, it is easier to throw it farther.

Rules as written Far Shot doubles ANY range increment (presumably even an improvised thrown weapon). So my training allows me to throw ANYTHING further than a normal person -- yet me being at 'point blank range' (which is inherently less powerful for melee thrown weapons due to their shorter range increment) would not increase my damage. Its an odd inconsistency that I do not believe is intended.

Yes, this. And Double Slice lets you throw two short spears, but not two javelins. Because javelins obviously are harder to throw. :)

[Beenrak]

Looks like this made it into the errata!

Page 283: In the definition for the thrown weapon trait, change the first sentence to “You can throw this weapon as a ranged attack, and it is a ranged weapon when thrown.”

[Zwordsman]

Yep. Though I wonder if that means certain runes won't work now?

Wounding for instance, is melee weapon only, which used to work on throwing knives/starknives. But with this, I wonder if the rune would "shut off" when thrown and turn back on when stabbing w ith it?

[masda_gib]

Yeah, I'm glad this was clarified. :)

As for runes, yes those that work only on melee weapons shut of when thrown. A bit sad but clear.
My question is if I can put ranged weapon runes on them that work only when thrown.

[albadeon]

masda_gib wrote:

Yeah, I'm glad this was clarified. :)

As for runes, yes those that work only on melee weapons shut of when thrown. A bit sad but clear.
My question is if I can put ranged weapon runes on them that work only when thrown.

It all depends on when the process checks for whether or not the item the rune is applied to is an appropriate item. At the moment, the runes all say "etched onto xxx", which seems to imply that the check happens during the etching process. I've been unable to find any mention of "this rune stops working, if the weapon type changes".

Right now, I don't really see anything preventing a wounding rune from being applied to a melee dagger and still work if said dagger temporarily turns into a ranged weapon by being thrown.

I have no idea if that's how it is intended, however.

[Gisher]

My instinct is to use the same rules as for a Shifting weapon.

CRB, p 585 wrote:

The weapon’s runes and any precious material it’s made of apply to the weapon’s new shape. Any property runes that can’t apply to the new form are suppressed until the item takes a shape to which they can apply.

So melee-only runes wouldn't work when a weapon is thrown.

[Zwordsman]

Which is super depressing because Wounding throwing daggers is just so cool.
(and also helped damage output for my Persist Dam Build. Which is a weird build admitidly)

[albadeon]

Gisher wrote:

My instinct is to use the same rules as for a Shifting weapon.

CRB, p 585 wrote:

The weapon’s runes and any precious material it’s made of apply to the weapon’s new shape. Any property runes that can’t apply to the new form are suppressed until the item takes a shape to which they can apply.

So melee-only runes wouldn't work when a weapon is thrown.

I'm not convinced that that is the case. The Shifting rune really only interacts with damage type dealt (at least with the currently published runes), so as to prevent a bludgeoning weapon causing persistent bleed or having it cut off a head, etc, since you can only shift a one-handed melee weapon into another one-handed melee weapon with it (or two-handed into another two-handed).

With thrown weapons, there's really no fundamental reason why it would be illogical for a thrown knife, e.g., to have the same effect as a melee knife when applying any of the currently available runes. The only reason I can think of is power balance, but that's a totally different issue from the shifting rune, so I don't buy the "it must work the same way" intuition just yet :).

As an aside, using the same logic, the shifting rune in general interacts weirdly with (not only) the thrown/ranged issue: Apply it to a bastard sword, turn it into a dagger, throw the dagger, it turns back into the bastard sword en route to the target (since it's no longer a melee weapon when thrown). If you're a rogue untrained in the bastard sword, what attack roll modifier do you use? How much damage is done on a hit? Does the bastard sword stop flying in mid-air?

[Zwordsman]

Huh that is a good point.

It is far easier to judge Rune application upon Etching.

--
though why does the bastard sword revert? I don't thin it reverts until its commanded to right?
---

Another compelling reason to only count it upon Etching is that otherwise you do get the wierd situations where you "have space" for runes depending in certain modes. Which also comes up with the transformation thingy.

Basically if a rune didnt apply when used in one method (or when transformed) it would make it "open" which just causes weird issues...

so
I'm in the camp of "qualifies upon etching" and would allow the wounding throwing weapons.
or even Wounding (or some other melee rune) when improvised weapon thrown.

but I am biased in that I want improvise weapons to work (and they changed stuff too recently to make those work. They count as simple weapons for profienciy now).
So.. seems like thats the cleanest method?

[Squiggit]

Quote:

Another compelling reason to only count it upon Etching is that otherwise you do get the wierd situations where you "have space" for runes depending in certain modes

Not necessarily.

Runes could count on etching but just simply not work if you use them 'wrongly'. i.e. a wounding dagger is still a wounding dagger, but the wounding portion has no effect when it's used as a ranged weapon.

I feel like if Paizo ever issues another clarification that will be the answer.

[Zwordsman]

Now I wonder if that means no throwing with twin takedown via knives or Leashy acorns and that wind monk stance

[Ventnor]

Zwordsman wrote:

Now I wonder if that means no throwing with twin takedown via knives or Leashy acorns and that wind monk stance

You can't use Twin Takedown with unarmed attacks of any kind (including Leshy Seedpods and Wind Crash unarmed strikes) no matter what, since they aren't weapons, but I think making ranged strikes using throwing weapons is theoretically possible using that feat.

[Zwordsman]

oooh right. that weird unarmed thing..

Huh. So except for flurry I guess you can't unarmed leshy combo...

(and now I need to go look up what if anything occurs with a monk leshy...
wounding tiger seedpods sound funny)

[shroudb]

Ventnor wrote:

Zwordsman wrote:

Now I wonder if that means no throwing with twin takedown via knives or Leashy acorns and that wind monk stance

You can't use Twin Takedown with unarmed attacks of any kind (including Leshy Seedpods and Wind Crash unarmed strikes) no matter what, since they aren't weapons, but I think making ranged strikes using throwing weapons is theoretically possible using that feat.

Didn't twin takedown had a "reload 0" clause?

That would make it usable only with shuriken from the throwing weapons, which you could already since they were always "ranged".

[Zwordsman]

Twin Takedown
Requirements You are wielding two melee weapons, each in a different hand.

Reload 0 one was.. Hunted shot I think

[Ravingdork]

Zwordsman wrote:

oooh right. that weird unarmed thing.

I keep seeing references to this on these boards, but nobody ever cites the source. What is it that says unarmed attacks don't count as weapons?

[Fuzzy-Wuzzy]

Ravingdork wrote:

Zwordsman wrote:

oooh right. that weird unarmed thing.

I keep seeing references to this on these boards, but nobody ever cites the source. What is it that says unarmed attacks don't count as weapons?

CRB page 278, Weapons, Unarmed Attacks wrote:

Almost all characters start out trained in 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. Unarmed attacks can belong to a weapon group (page 280), and they might have weapon traits (page 282). However, unarmed attacks aren’t weapons, and effects and abilities that work with weapons never work with unarmed attacks unless they specifically say so.

[Zwordsman]

Near as I can tell. Handwraps of M.Blows won't help either. They classify as a weapon for runes (and has specific langauge for transfering them to unarmed) but sadly no for feat.

So i guess except for Monk feat that call it out, very few feats work then