| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Unarmed attacks are explicitly not weapons.
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.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think OP was asking should, not is.
Strict RAW foxfire definitely doesn't count, as it fits none of those categories.
But I don't see any particular reason why it (or leshy seed pods) would break if you could SA with them.
Why Paizo wrote the feature that way, who knows. Their treatment of unarmed combat this edition is odd.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Gisher is right. So sadly no.
To be fair at the time that rule was written there were no ranged unarmed attacks. There are several now.
A reasonable GM might choose to allow it, but it would be a house rule.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Given both that Foxfire is not agile or finesse and nor is it a weapon, I would say that Sneak Attack doesn't apply. It is fitting if you imagine it as a magical attack (though it explicitly isn't).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To be fair at the time that rule was written there were no ranged unarmed attacks.
Well, Wild Winds stance is in the CRB to give monks a ranged unarmed attack.
Well, Wild Winds stance is in the CRB to give monks a ranged unarmed attack.
To be fair at the time that rule was written there were no ranged unarmed attacks.
I stand corrected. Though that is rather special, an ongoing effect of a focus spell. I guess probably also the spiritual weapon spell for a favoured weaponn of fist.
I guess the question then is whether there's a good reason all of these abilities omit ranged unarmed attacks specifically or if it's an oversight in the language.
|
I'm pretty sure this is intentional, much like the other weaknesses baked into the many other special Unarmed Attacks.
They're not meant to be more powerful than other traditional weapons and to be honest, Foxfire is already rocking the line between good and too good as it stands when compared to other Ranged Weapons.
Unarmed attacks are explicitly not weapons.
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.
Gisher is right. So sadly no.
To be fair at the time that rule was written there were no ranged unarmed attacks. There are several now.
A reasonable GM might choose to allow it, but it would be a house rule.
You are right, Unarmed attack is not weapons but Sneak Attack applies to Unarmed Attacks too:
When your enemy can’t properly defend itself, you take advantage to deal extra damage. If you Strike a creature that has the flat-footed condition with an agile or finesse melee weapon, an agile or finesse unarmed attack, or a ranged weapon attack, you deal an extra 1d6 precision damage. For a ranged attack with a thrown melee weapon, that weapon must also be agile or finesse.
But Foxfire is not Agile or Finesse so can't be used as Sneak Attack but for this reason, not because it's unarmed:
A crack of your tail sparks wisps of blue energy. Choose either electricity or fire when you gain this feat. You gain a foxfire ranged unarmed attack with a maximum range of 20 feet. The attack deals 1d4 damage of the chosen type (no ability modifier is added to the damage roll). Your foxfire attack is in the sling weapon group. Like other unarmed attacks, you can improve this attack with handwraps of mighty blows.
Given both that Foxfire is not agile or finesse and nor is it a weapon, I would say that Sneak Attack doesn't apply. It is fitting if you imagine it as a magical attack (though it explicitly isn't).
It's more likely a Ki attack. Because you can improve it with handwraps of mighty blows.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
They're not meant to be more powerful than other traditional weapons and to be honest, Foxfire is already rocking the line between good and too good as it stands when compared to other Ranged Weapons.
Say what now? It's neat but "too good"? It's a d4 with no bonus to it and a max range of 20' instead of a range increment... IMO, it's VERY hard to see the "too good" side.
If someone wants to do a ranged unarmed sneak attack it can be done with monk dedication with Wild Winds stance. But I admit waste 3 class feats and is a late game option.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Is it? D4 damage with no ability modifier and a 20-foot max range (not range increment) isn't great.
It has the inherent advantage of an unarmed attack (i.e. not needing a hand and always being available to you), but in terms of its combat capabilities, I can't imagine trying to build a character around it between its low range and low damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
YuriP, I think the point being made was while Foxfire is a ranged attack, it is not a Ranged Weapon attack and therefore doesn't qualify under the '...or a ranged weapon attack...' section of the sneak attack rules.
There and 3 OR you can Sneak Attack if:
- an agile or finesse melee weapon; or- an agile or finesse unarmed attack; or
- ranged weapon attack
That's what allow a char to use sneak attack with ranged weapons without agile or finesse. So in same way you can use it with ranged unarmed attack when they are agile + unarmed or finesse + unarmed. There nothing prohibiting or restricting it to be melee.
But still can't be used with Foxfire even being an unarmed attack it's neither agile or finesse and as u said even being ranged it's also not a weapon.
But I admit I was thinking the mistake is about the most people thinks that unarmed attacks are always agile or finesse because almost them have one of these two traits. I was understating as was that that being pointed in question not because it's a ranged attack.