So as said the new unarmed fighting style is a bit too strong here is the text for it
"Unarmed Fighting
Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you strike with two free hands, the d6 becomes a d8.
When you successfully start a grapple, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to the grappled creature. Until the grapple ends, you can also deal this damage to the creature whenever you hit it with a melee attack."
Now alot of people will look at this and go "its fine" but its very VERY powerful for monks, take one level of fighter and then you have a level 3 monk that can make 3 1d8+dex attacks at a very low level, monks start off with 1d4 for there monk damage and ot builds up to 1d10, they get the 1d8 damage at level 11 so it's level 11 unarmed monk damage at level 1, a level 6 monk will be able to 4 attacks with d8s witch is crazy strong at that level considering a fighter of the same level will only be able to do 3 attacks (5 with action surge but that's a one and done thing, monks can do flurry of blows up to 5 times if they take the one level in fighter)
Using this style would hinder monks. Their martial arts is superior since this fighting style specifically says Strength in the damage modifier. The d8 is a 2 handed attack (ala the James T Kirk hit) so the most a level 6 monk could do is 1d8+1d8+1d6 +1d6 (with flurry of blows) which is what they do already using a bo staff (versatile), but also it is a strength-based attack so they would have to apply their strength mod to the damage roll for those unarmed attacks, if they have 8 strength take 1 damage off each hit, they roll a 1, the did 0 damage with that hit. They would better off using their martial arts which applies their dexterity to the damage which should be higher than their strength.
At level 11 with 3 attacks, a Fighter could hit 3 times for d8+ strength per hit, the monk would be doing the same thing with their martial arts but adding their dex mod to damage.
Why sacrifice your dexterity and a level in a class to grant you a fighting style that does nothing for you? If you have high strength as a monk, then just attack normally using your strength mod for damage for your martial arts.
Using this style would hinder monks. Their martial arts is superior since this fighting style specifically says Strength in the damage modifier. The d8 is a 2 handed attack (ala the James T Kirk hit) so the most a level 6 monk could do is 1d8+1d8+1d6 +1d6 (with flurry of blows) which is what they do already using a bo staff (versatile), but also it is a strength-based attack so they would have to apply their strength mod to the damage roll for those unarmed attacks, if they have 8 strength take 1 damage off each hit, they roll a 1, the did 0 damage with that hit. They would better off using their martial arts which applies their dexterity to the damage which should be higher than their strength.
At level 11 with 3 attacks, a Fighter could hit 3 times for d8+ strength per hit, the monk would be doing the same thing with their martial arts but adding their dex mod to damage.
Why sacrifice your dexterity and a level in a class to grant you a fighting style that does nothing for you? If you have high strength as a monk, then just attack normally using your strength mod for damage for your martial arts.
well monks martial arts feature says "You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons" as well as " ou can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table." because the unarmed fighter saying nothing about YOU HAVE TO USE STRENGTH and they are just basic unarmed attacks you can do the 1d8 for damage and use dex furthermore and the martial arts feature says using the monk table damage is optional, also the d8 is NOT, I repeat NOT a two handed attack it says "If you strike with two free hands the d6 becomes a d8" TWO FREE HANDS meaning the 1d6 damage is if you have a item in one of your hands like a shield or sword but when you are holding NOTHING the damage becomes a d8 so long as the monk keeps there hands free each unarmed strike will be a d8 including the bonus attacks. I checked and doubled checked it lol.
The issue here is that the new fighting style specifically calls out that you use strength, if your gm says you can apply dex, then yes it does improve the low level monk play, which is the majority of play. Is it overpowered? It is a damage increase, but you would still need to follow all the restrictions on martial arts such as no armor and no shields, and you are needing to delay your monk features by a level or two depending on whether you are going Fighter or Ranger. Also the fact it requires two free hands does, typically by raw, mean you can't have things in your hands like a weapon, though that point is a bit moot considering 1d8 is the same damage as you would get from one anyway. The grapple bit doesn't really matter in this case since your already so MAD that having strength high enough to consistently make opposed athletics is a bit of a pipe dream.
I already covered the strength issue Minoke, ALL unarmed attacks specifically calls for strength including basic ones that deal 1+ strength and it includes special unarmed attacks that come from a race such as tabaxi claws or lizardfolk bite. The monk feature martial arts also specifically says (and I am copy pasting this and I am getting sick of re explaining a basic monk rule)
"You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons"
As unarmed fighting modifies your basic unarmed attacks and nothing else about it of you have one level in monk you can use your dexterity modifier in place of your strength for ANY AND ALL UNARMED ATTACKS OR ATTACKS WITH MONK WEAPONS and there is no place in the the fighting styles text that say YOU MUST USE STRENGTH FOR THE ATTACK AND DAMAGE ROLLS, further more any feature that says "you can you _______ ability scores in place of ___________ ability score for the attack and damage rolls" takes priority over that attacks default ability score.
And if you really want to get technical if your going to keep saying "specifically calls out that you use strength" so do the text in most weapons monks use like the quaterstaff, spears and clubs they SPECIFICALLY calls for strength for there attack and damage rolls so by the logic that monks cant use dexterity for basic unarmed attacks then that would also apply to any weapons they can use that normally call for strength as well witch is fale. Things like the monks martial arts or the hexblades hex warrior features take priority for the ability score used for the weapons (or unarmed attacks) they govern UNLESS the text in said weapon says "you MUST use strength for the attack and damage rolls". Now having said that please point out in my copy pasted text of the unarmed fighter where it says "YOU MUST USE STRENGTH FOR THE ATTACK AND DAMAGE ROLLS OF YOUR UNARMED STRIKES USING THIS FIGHING STYLES"
I really dont have this problem talking with people at my table about this sort of thing because we all know the rules extreme well.
I don't think it matters either way to be honest because neither side of the argument is technically wrong. Getting all bent out of shape because alternative points of view proposed as possible fact, when factually none of you are incorrect, is a bad way to accept constructive criticism when it should just be a discussion and not a debate. It -can- be overpowered if interpreted the way the OP suggested, but at the very same time a DM (or even some players) can just as readily say you have to use Strength and aren't able to use the Monk DEX bonus or the Martial Arts feature to supplement it regardless of which specificity takes precedence.
As UA material goes I don't think it is too overpowered but at the same time it does seem a little off kilter when put into context with the situation Monks present. There are a plethora of cantrips and attacks even from level 1-3 that can, on average, accumulate a similar amount of damage per turn under the right circumstances.
Actually level 1-3 there are not too many spells that can out do that kind of damage and the .most damage you can do with a cantrip is 1d10+cha (if your a warlock) or 1d12 witch is not alot, with the fighting style with monks, as stated before, us there level 11 damage witch at level 1 is a total of 1d8+dexterity twice (assuming point buy a miminum of 3) and after 2 its three times advrage damage for level 1 would be 14 damage and after level 1 monk its 21 damage per round, considering most creatures for that level have less than 20 hp the monk will be one round killing everything in there path
I still think you're looking at this a bit too narrowly especially for a single class. It really doesn't seem as overpowered as you want it to be when, in fact and to address a previous point, some cantrips have secondary effects and weapons can do the same amount of damage per round with average rolls. Plus there is the point to make with Action Economy so we don't overlook the fact that other classes have features which give them decent-or-better DPR by some unfounded standard.
I found a post that actually very directly addresses how, even getting slightly higher damage dice earlier on, another class can still reap similar if not better benefits.
Yeah this fighting style is a little too strong. But I don't think monk is threatened by the existence of this style, just by it's power. (See conclusion)
By level 5 a monk can make 3 1d6+DEX attacks without KI. At that same level, a fighter can do 2 1d8+STR attack, but if they grapple the target first, they do 2 1d6+1d4+STR attacks. Even assuming a minimum +2 modifier, monk does 2.5 - 3.5 more damage (and the gap widens for higher modifiers).
At level 11, the monk's die gets bigger and the fighter gets an extra attack. Now assuming both classes have equal modifiers, the fighter can match or out perform (by 1.5 damage when grappling) the monk (when not using ki).
But that is just for unarmed damage. Honestly, it is still suboptimal compared to using weapons (except maybe for the grapple damage, which you can still do while wielding a longsword for more damage). Unarmed fighting is .5 damage stronger than dueling by grappling instead of using a shield.
Actually, the more I look at the numbers, the better balanced it seems. I'm impressed. I retract my previous statement.
And what happens when you pass level 11 and move up to the d10's with Martial Arts? Now the Fighting Style isn't as useful for Monk's, but it still remains useful to other classes. I don't think that the problem is with the damage dice itself, but more so the language of the Fighting Style needs to be less vague. I for one appreciate the initial concern because it will help me as a DM prevent players from abusing the Fighting Style and also find ways which we can suggest improvements. Something like requiring the use of both hands simultaneously during the strike to gain the d8 bonus (for any class) is amenable in this case, given how Monks can very easily get a good amount of unarmed strikes in per turn if they burn up their Ki. Maybe a level restriction on the type of damage die you get too just to match the Monk's Martial Arts table. Even very specifically noting that the STR bonus must absolutely use STR and cannot be substituted by any class feature. Try to think of it how Extra Attacks don't stack, or that you can only benefit from one type of Unarmored Defense from a class; This new Fighting Style could certainly use more specificity in its language to prevent issues of interpretation but that is exactly what we're here to do for UA material.
There are very VERY few games in witch a player gets past level 11 so most adventures will get steam rolled by 1d8+dex/str four times each round, hell 1d6+dex/str 4 times is really strong as is, assuming point buy and the player went to 18 dex/str that is 24 damage, now changing it to 1d8 changes things alot, that 2 or more damage per round makes a huge difference in combat.
is there anything about the unarmed fighting style that makes your attacks MAGICAL like a monks’?
if not. I have zero problem with it. If yes. Then it kinda defeats purpose of anyone EVER playing a monk, unless you’re starting at level like.. 13. When monks start becoming useful outside of the super low levels. Which is needed away by this fighting style.
the fact that it’s str based vs dex based means nothing. The important distinction is monks punches are magical.
I had a similar gut reaction at first. it certainly looks way over powered. but after crunching some numbers i don't think it would OP after all.
The average value of a d4 and a d8 is 2.5, and 4.5 respectively. That means this fighting style is basically an upgrade of +2 damage to every attack. sounds pretty good.
But at level 4 a monk will get to increase their dexterity ability score, increasing both their damage output and the likelihood of a hit. So it comes down to +2 damage per attack or +1 damage per attack and +1 to attack roll. This seems like a reasonable trade off and I could see people going either way with it.
Sure, the multi-classer will get the ability increase score at the next level, but by then we have a level 5 monk. At level 5 the monk damage die increases to 1d6 (3.5) and can do 2 attack. So now their dex scores are the same, but the difference is 3.5 per attack vs 4.5, meaning the damage increase is still only +1 on average, and the multi-classer still has not gotten their extra attack, making them at a severe disadvantage.
And when they finally level up and get that extra attack, they are still only adding +1 to the damage of every attack. Sure they get 3 or 4 attacks, but I don't think that's enough to unbalance the game. it's about as good as your standard magic sword. less good actually, because a +1 sword adds 1 to both attack and damage, while this only adds it to damage.
I think that this could be a viable and interesting build, but It doesn't sound broken to me.
Nowhere in the text does it specify whether it is magical or not but we can very reasonably assume that they do not count as magical since most things is this game will specify that particular feature. Even UA material tends to have a good grip on that.
So in reference to this feature, it reads as "Your unarmed strikes count as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage."
This does not specify you need use the martial arts attacks, merely that you are not attacking with a weapon. They count as magical after getting this 6th level monk feature.
There are very VERY few games in witch a player gets past level 11 so most adventures will get steam rolled by 1d8+dex/str four times each round, hell 1d6+dex/str 4 times is really strong as is, assuming point buy and the player went to 18 dex/str that is 24 damage, now changing it to 1d8 changes things alot, that 2 or more damage per round makes a huge difference in combat.
Aside from One-shots or campaigns, both homebrew and prewritten, that could start you off at level 10+, I suppose you're right. It is still bold to assume so largely that a potential +1 or +2 to damage, based on a one die-type increase that we're not for certain is going to function as you've suggested, is absolutely gamebreaking. There is evidence to contrast it as not that strong. You're trying to propose your interpretation as the only possible truth and that is not how a discussion like this will work. It is fleeting from the constructive manner by which the community can discern whether or not the UA material is in fact too overpowered to be functional, which it doesn't seem to be based on a lot of other evidence, and to this end it seems it is balanced well enough as a Fighting Style. Also, you don't need to repeat yourself, we get it, everyone can read previous posts; repeating yourself for the sake of your own argument doesn't help support your position, and citing official material multiple times doesn't either, as it is not infallible in every regard. I suggest finding alternative evidence to help your case like these other folks have done, that way we can move forward.
So in reference to this feature, it reads as "Your unarmed strikes count as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage."
This does not specify you need use the martial arts attacks, merely that you are not attacking with a weapon. They count as magical after getting this 6th level monk feature.
Monk's will get that regardless of whether or not they take the fighting style. If the fighting style itself made unarmed strikes magical just for the sake of it, that might be a little too much.
i see literally. No benefit to it as being more powerful or whatever than monks at all. Zero.
i do see the fighting style as a nice flavor thing for character RP and such, for if you wanted to create essentially a luchador or a Steve Irwin or an “animal mask- Genzo” from the seasonal anime’s this season, etc.
This fighting style is nearly identical mechanically to fighting with a quarter staff. That doesn't seem that OP to me. Even with the small amount of grappling damage.
And I think the martial arts "DEX instead of STR" applies to all unarmed attacks the monk can use. There's no such thing as a "Martial arts attack" Martial Arts is a modifier for your unarmed attacks. Including those granted by unarmed fighting style.
So as said the new unarmed fighting style is a bit too strong here is the text for it
"Unarmed Fighting
Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier. If you strike with two free hands, the d6 becomes a d8.
When you successfully start a grapple, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to the grappled creature. Until the grapple ends, you can also deal this damage to the creature whenever you hit it with a melee attack."
Now alot of people will look at this and go "its fine" but its very VERY powerful for monks, take one level of fighter and then you have a level 3 monk that can make 3 1d8+dex attacks at a very low level, monks start off with 1d4 for there monk damage and ot builds up to 1d10, they get the 1d8 damage at level 11 so it's level 11 unarmed monk damage at level 1, a level 6 monk will be able to 4 attacks with d8s witch is crazy strong at that level considering a fighter of the same level will only be able to do 3 attacks (5 with action surge but that's a one and done thing, monks can do flurry of blows up to 5 times if they take the one level in fighter)
Using this style would hinder monks. Their martial arts is superior since this fighting style specifically says Strength in the damage modifier. The d8 is a 2 handed attack (ala the James T Kirk hit) so the most a level 6 monk could do is 1d8+1d8+1d6 +1d6 (with flurry of blows) which is what they do already using a bo staff (versatile), but also it is a strength-based attack so they would have to apply their strength mod to the damage roll for those unarmed attacks, if they have 8 strength take 1 damage off each hit, they roll a 1, the did 0 damage with that hit. They would better off using their martial arts which applies their dexterity to the damage which should be higher than their strength.
At level 11 with 3 attacks, a Fighter could hit 3 times for d8+ strength per hit, the monk would be doing the same thing with their martial arts but adding their dex mod to damage.
Why sacrifice your dexterity and a level in a class to grant you a fighting style that does nothing for you? If you have high strength as a monk, then just attack normally using your strength mod for damage for your martial arts.
well monks martial arts feature says "You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons" as well as " ou can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table." because the unarmed fighter saying nothing about YOU HAVE TO USE STRENGTH and they are just basic unarmed attacks you can do the 1d8 for damage and use dex furthermore and the martial arts feature says using the monk table damage is optional, also the d8 is NOT, I repeat NOT a two handed attack it says "If you strike with two free hands the d6 becomes a d8" TWO FREE HANDS meaning the 1d6 damage is if you have a item in one of your hands like a shield or sword but when you are holding NOTHING the damage becomes a d8 so long as the monk keeps there hands free each unarmed strike will be a d8 including the bonus attacks. I checked and doubled checked it lol.
The issue here is that the new fighting style specifically calls out that you use strength, if your gm says you can apply dex, then yes it does improve the low level monk play, which is the majority of play. Is it overpowered? It is a damage increase, but you would still need to follow all the restrictions on martial arts such as no armor and no shields, and you are needing to delay your monk features by a level or two depending on whether you are going Fighter or Ranger. Also the fact it requires two free hands does, typically by raw, mean you can't have things in your hands like a weapon, though that point is a bit moot considering 1d8 is the same damage as you would get from one anyway. The grapple bit doesn't really matter in this case since your already so MAD that having strength high enough to consistently make opposed athletics is a bit of a pipe dream.
I already covered the strength issue Minoke, ALL unarmed attacks specifically calls for strength including basic ones that deal 1+ strength and it includes special unarmed attacks that come from a race such as tabaxi claws or lizardfolk bite. The monk feature martial arts also specifically says (and I am copy pasting this and I am getting sick of re explaining a basic monk rule)
"You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons"
As unarmed fighting modifies your basic unarmed attacks and nothing else about it of you have one level in monk you can use your dexterity modifier in place of your strength for ANY AND ALL UNARMED ATTACKS OR ATTACKS WITH MONK WEAPONS and there is no place in the the fighting styles text that say YOU MUST USE STRENGTH FOR THE ATTACK AND DAMAGE ROLLS, further more any feature that says "you can you _______ ability scores in place of ___________ ability score for the attack and damage rolls" takes priority over that attacks default ability score.
And if you really want to get technical if your going to keep saying "specifically calls out that you use strength" so do the text in most weapons monks use like the quaterstaff, spears and clubs they SPECIFICALLY calls for strength for there attack and damage rolls so by the logic that monks cant use dexterity for basic unarmed attacks then that would also apply to any weapons they can use that normally call for strength as well witch is fale. Things like the monks martial arts or the hexblades hex warrior features take priority for the ability score used for the weapons (or unarmed attacks) they govern UNLESS the text in said weapon says "you MUST use strength for the attack and damage rolls". Now having said that please point out in my copy pasted text of the unarmed fighter where it says "YOU MUST USE STRENGTH FOR THE ATTACK AND DAMAGE ROLLS OF YOUR UNARMED STRIKES USING THIS FIGHING STYLES"
I really dont have this problem talking with people at my table about this sort of thing because we all know the rules extreme well.
I don't think it matters either way to be honest because neither side of the argument is technically wrong. Getting all bent out of shape because alternative points of view proposed as possible fact, when factually none of you are incorrect, is a bad way to accept constructive criticism when it should just be a discussion and not a debate. It -can- be overpowered if interpreted the way the OP suggested, but at the very same time a DM (or even some players) can just as readily say you have to use Strength and aren't able to use the Monk DEX bonus or the Martial Arts feature to supplement it regardless of which specificity takes precedence.
As UA material goes I don't think it is too overpowered but at the same time it does seem a little off kilter when put into context with the situation Monks present. There are a plethora of cantrips and attacks even from level 1-3 that can, on average, accumulate a similar amount of damage per turn under the right circumstances.
Loading...
Watch DnD Shorts on youtube.
Chief Innovationist, Acquisitions Inc. The Series 2
Successfully completed the Tomb of Horrors module (as part of playing Tomb of Annihilation) with no party deaths!
Actually level 1-3 there are not too many spells that can out do that kind of damage and the .most damage you can do with a cantrip is 1d10+cha (if your a warlock) or 1d12 witch is not alot, with the fighting style with monks, as stated before, us there level 11 damage witch at level 1 is a total of 1d8+dexterity twice (assuming point buy a miminum of 3) and after 2 its three times advrage damage for level 1 would be 14 damage and after level 1 monk its 21 damage per round, considering most creatures for that level have less than 20 hp the monk will be one round killing everything in there path
I still think you're looking at this a bit too narrowly especially for a single class. It really doesn't seem as overpowered as you want it to be when, in fact and to address a previous point, some cantrips have secondary effects and weapons can do the same amount of damage per round with average rolls. Plus there is the point to make with Action Economy so we don't overlook the fact that other classes have features which give them decent-or-better DPR by some unfounded standard.
I found a post that actually very directly addresses how, even getting slightly higher damage dice earlier on, another class can still reap similar if not better benefits.
And what happens when you pass level 11 and move up to the d10's with Martial Arts? Now the Fighting Style isn't as useful for Monk's, but it still remains useful to other classes. I don't think that the problem is with the damage dice itself, but more so the language of the Fighting Style needs to be less vague. I for one appreciate the initial concern because it will help me as a DM prevent players from abusing the Fighting Style and also find ways which we can suggest improvements. Something like requiring the use of both hands simultaneously during the strike to gain the d8 bonus (for any class) is amenable in this case, given how Monks can very easily get a good amount of unarmed strikes in per turn if they burn up their Ki. Maybe a level restriction on the type of damage die you get too just to match the Monk's Martial Arts table. Even very specifically noting that the STR bonus must absolutely use STR and cannot be substituted by any class feature. Try to think of it how Extra Attacks don't stack, or that you can only benefit from one type of Unarmored Defense from a class; This new Fighting Style could certainly use more specificity in its language to prevent issues of interpretation but that is exactly what we're here to do for UA material.
Loading...
Watch DnD Shorts on youtube.
Chief Innovationist, Acquisitions Inc. The Series 2
Successfully completed the Tomb of Horrors module (as part of playing Tomb of Annihilation) with no party deaths!
There are very VERY few games in witch a player gets past level 11 so most adventures will get steam rolled by 1d8+dex/str four times each round, hell 1d6+dex/str 4 times is really strong as is, assuming point buy and the player went to 18 dex/str that is 24 damage, now changing it to 1d8 changes things alot, that 2 or more damage per round makes a huge difference in combat.
I am not entirely familiar.
is there anything about the unarmed fighting style that makes your attacks MAGICAL like a monks’?
if not. I have zero problem with it. If yes. Then it kinda defeats purpose of anyone EVER playing a monk, unless you’re starting at level like.. 13. When monks start becoming useful outside of the super low levels. Which is needed away by this fighting style.
the fact that it’s str based vs dex based means nothing. The important distinction is monks punches are magical.
Blank
I had a similar gut reaction at first. it certainly looks way over powered. but after crunching some numbers i don't think it would OP after all.
The average value of a d4 and a d8 is 2.5, and 4.5 respectively. That means this fighting style is basically an upgrade of +2 damage to every attack. sounds pretty good.
But at level 4 a monk will get to increase their dexterity ability score, increasing both their damage output and the likelihood of a hit.
So it comes down to +2 damage per attack or +1 damage per attack and +1 to attack roll. This seems like a reasonable trade off and I could see people going either way with it.
Sure, the multi-classer will get the ability increase score at the next level, but by then we have a level 5 monk. At level 5 the monk damage die increases to 1d6 (3.5) and can do 2 attack. So now their dex scores are the same, but the difference is 3.5 per attack vs 4.5, meaning the damage increase is still only +1 on average, and the multi-classer still has not gotten their extra attack, making them at a severe disadvantage.
And when they finally level up and get that extra attack, they are still only adding +1 to the damage of every attack. Sure they get 3 or 4 attacks, but I don't think that's enough to unbalance the game. it's about as good as your standard magic sword. less good actually, because a +1 sword adds 1 to both attack and damage, while this only adds it to damage.
I think that this could be a viable and interesting build, but It doesn't sound broken to me.
Yep monks unarmed attacks count as magical starting at level 6
You are misreading it.
the fighting style. Do those count as magical? If not. Monk pisses on it.
Blank
Nowhere in the text does it specify whether it is magical or not but we can very reasonably assume that they do not count as magical since most things is this game will specify that particular feature. Even UA material tends to have a good grip on that.
Loading...
Watch DnD Shorts on youtube.
Chief Innovationist, Acquisitions Inc. The Series 2
Successfully completed the Tomb of Horrors module (as part of playing Tomb of Annihilation) with no party deaths!
So in reference to this feature, it reads as "Your unarmed strikes count as magical for the purposes of overcoming resistance and immunity to nonmagical attacks and damage."
This does not specify you need use the martial arts attacks, merely that you are not attacking with a weapon. They count as magical after getting this 6th level monk feature.
Aside from One-shots or campaigns, both homebrew and prewritten, that could start you off at level 10+, I suppose you're right. It is still bold to assume so largely that a potential +1 or +2 to damage, based on a one die-type increase that we're not for certain is going to function as you've suggested, is absolutely gamebreaking. There is evidence to contrast it as not that strong. You're trying to propose your interpretation as the only possible truth and that is not how a discussion like this will work. It is fleeting from the constructive manner by which the community can discern whether or not the UA material is in fact too overpowered to be functional, which it doesn't seem to be based on a lot of other evidence, and to this end it seems it is balanced well enough as a Fighting Style. Also, you don't need to repeat yourself, we get it, everyone can read previous posts; repeating yourself for the sake of your own argument doesn't help support your position, and citing official material multiple times doesn't either, as it is not infallible in every regard. I suggest finding alternative evidence to help your case like these other folks have done, that way we can move forward.
Monk's will get that regardless of whether or not they take the fighting style. If the fighting style itself made unarmed strikes magical just for the sake of it, that might be a little too much.
Loading...
Watch DnD Shorts on youtube.
Chief Innovationist, Acquisitions Inc. The Series 2
Successfully completed the Tomb of Horrors module (as part of playing Tomb of Annihilation) with no party deaths!
The fighting style is non magical. Got it.
i see literally. No benefit to it as being more powerful or whatever than monks at all. Zero.
i do see the fighting style as a nice flavor thing for character RP and such, for if you wanted to create essentially a luchador or a Steve Irwin or an “animal mask- Genzo” from the seasonal anime’s this season, etc.
Blank
This fighting style is nearly identical mechanically to fighting with a quarter staff. That doesn't seem that OP to me. Even with the small amount of grappling damage.
And I think the martial arts "DEX instead of STR" applies to all unarmed attacks the monk can use. There's no such thing as a "Martial arts attack" Martial Arts is a modifier for your unarmed attacks. Including those granted by unarmed fighting style.