Unarmed Fighting Style allows you to attack with your unarmed strikes for 1d8 + STR.
Monk states that "You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons".
Unarmed Fighting Style changes your unarmed strikes, it does not grant you a additional type of unarmed strike, it IS a unarmed strike.
Edit: Also, what's more specific? You add STR to damage for unarmed strikes, or "You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes"
Already explained that as a feat it's still iffy cause it's like a 1d4 to 1d8 at best, +2 average damage. So it comes out to be okay.
Actually, both are optional. "Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit. If you aren’t wielding any weapons or a shield when you make the attack roll, the d6 becomes a d8" or you "can" use the abilities of Martial Arts that you quoted. Both replace the basic unarmed strike, so they are both alternatives to choose from, not additions that overlap.
An example of this is natural weapons. Some races have natural weapons that can then make unarmed attacks, allowing martial arts to blend with them. That is the exception though. Generic natural weapons from something like an Alter Self spell doesn't play with Martial Arts because it is an alternative to the generic unarmed strike, not a different way of making what is still a generic unarmed strike like those racial abilities.
Via Crawford's explanation: "Rules on unarmed strikes have no bearing on natural weapons. Some exceptional things in the game count as both unarmed strikes and natural weapons. For example, a tabaxi's claws are natural weapons that can make unarmed strikes."
Recall, you "can" use the abilities of Martial Art.
That's a plural s. You can choose to use Dex, choose to use martial die, etc. They are all separate features of Martial Arts. This is why when you use a quarterstaff you can attack with DEX without using the martial arts d4 die.
Natural weapons do not count, for we talking unarmed strikes not natural weapons.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
literally the first 3 words states it's a monk weapon.
Edit: The quarterstaff is another weapon that carries specific language telling you to use Strength. Your point?
My point is that the Quarterstaff is a Monk weapon, as per description. I also draw a line between the fighting style and Martial Arts. The style I see as a boxing type training you have, which allows you to get your full strength into a punch. The Martial arts strikes are significantly different in how they are performed, thus the difference. The other "point" was made, that it wouldn't fly at my table and now you have a more detailed explanation why I treat the 2 as different. I also can't for the life of me, figure out why anyone would ever want to play a Fighter like he was a Monk. Why lower your damage potential so much?
Also, the first 3 words state it is an unarmed strike, which is available to anyone with arms, not just Monks.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Yes, the abilities of Martial Arts obviously can overlap with each other, they are subheadings of the same ability. That is not true of Martial Arts and other abilities that change the base unarmed strike.
Im using Natural Weapons as an example of something else that changes the base unarmed strike, and so does not overlap with Martial Arts.
My point is that the Quarterstaff is a Monk weapon, as per description.
My point that the Unarmed Strikes is a Monk weapon, as per... it being the description of both the feat and the Martial Arts. Nothing states that it isn't a monk weapon. Also nowhere in the description of quarterstaff does it actually say it's a monk weapon, it only stats so in the Martial Arts ability, just like how the Martial Arts ability states that the unarmed strikes are monk weapons.
The style I see as a boxing type training you have, which allows you to get your full strength into a punch...
What I see is that if you want to use a entire feat to add a avg of +2 damage, then sure you can go though special training to enhance your unarmed strikes further.
Onto Kronzypantz
Yes, the abilities of Martial Arts obviously can overlap with each other, they are subheadings of the same ability. That is not true of Martial Arts and other abilities that change the base unarmed strike.
You know what also change the damage of a base weapon? Literally any weapon. There is no exception made for unarmed strikes specifically. In addition, if I have a magic dagger, that is still legible for Martial Arts even though it changes the base monk weapon strike.
Im using Natural Weapons as an example of something else that changes the base unarmed strike, and so does not overlap with Martial Arts.
Reminder, natural weapons do not change the base unarmed strike, they are a completely separate weapon. You can make a unarmed strike that uses Martial Arts via a natural weapon, but then you are not using said natural weapon. (Just like how I can make a unarmed strike "with" a greatsword by kicking my foe in the face, but then I'm not using said greatsword). (Edit: I actually haven't done the research to confirm this, I just kinda assumed. Still probably true but just in case I'll cross it out anyways)
Yes, the abilities of Martial Arts obviously can overlap with each other, they are subheadings of the same ability. That is not true of Martial Arts and other abilities that change the base unarmed strike.
You are all getting caught on by this, which is a rule that does not actually exist. No where does it state this, and reminder all monk weapons and unarmed strikes are treated the same for the purposes of martial arts. There is no exception made for a quarterstaff versus a unarmed strike.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
There won't be a consensus on this, obviously. Some of us view the Unarmed fighting style (which is actually a style that you can steal from a Fighter using a feat) as a separate type of fighting than Martial Arts. Others simply see unarmed and feel than all unarmed strikes are exactly the same. I think MMA fighters a boxers would disagree, but let's not bring expert opinion in here.
The one thing anyone who knows and understands the classes would likely agree on is that only one race (Variant Human) would have even a remotely intelligent reason to pick that, since picking a feat means your already stressed MAD Monk will miss out on bringing up the stats that he needs to do his thing best. Purely flavor, with no min/max benefit to it. There's no reason to not let someone play a less than optimal build if they want, but don't try to say it's a better way when every other aspect of the class makes it not.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Talk to your Players.Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
If you had an alternative ability from another class or feature that allowed you to replace the dagger's damage but it required using strength, it wouldn't mesh with the martial arts ability to use dex or strength. Martial Arts interacts with overriding the weapon's rules regarding either its modifier source or its damage dice, it doesn't interact with another competing feature that changes those things. You can change unarmed strikes damage in a similar fashion by either pressing the Fighting style's button regarding damage calculation, or the martial arts button regarding calculation damage, but not both.
No where does it state that in order to use the fighting style you require Strength.
The main issue is yeah what Falwith states
Some of us view the Unarmed fighting style (which is actually a style that you can steal from a Fighter using a feat) as a separate type of fighting than Martial Arts. Others simply see unarmed and feel than all unarmed strikes are exactly the same.
This is the main argument. However it doesn't hold up, since RAW they are the same. The thing about the Strength doesn't hold up either, since it uses the exact same wording that a normal not fighting style unarmed strike uses.
"On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier."
versus
"unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit."
Move on a hit to the start, and remove the can and you literally (almost) get the exact same text for a normal unarmed strike.
"On a hit, unarmed strikes deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier"
I can kinda see where your coming from with the whole MMA boxer thing versus Martial Arts, but i feel like this taking this as a feat is sort of like taking both MMA and Martial Arts and combining the two to be more effective. Can that actually happen irl? Eh probably not lol I'm going to be honest but it's the reasoning I use to justify this.
Edit: added link and made it more clear. Also note what I said earlier, that Martial Arts does not make any exception for things that change the damage of a unarmed strike. As long as it's a unarmed strike, it counts for Martial Arts no (currently existing) exceptions.
Martial Arts overrides the base damage for unarmed strikes. It does not replace the damage for other feats that replace the damage calculations for unarmed strikes (such as Alter Self's natural weapons which override unarmed strikes damage calculations).
I've been working for over a month trying to find a viable strategy for a Monk, but I have come to the conclusion that they have been nerfed into the void.
They are now completely outclassed by a STYLE of fighter with the Optional Fighting Style: Unarmed Combat
Here is this claim again. Outclassed by a fighting style! The unarmed fighter vs the unarmed monk. Let's actually look at the math levels 1 through 20. The hit chances are more or less identical so let's ignore that.
Monk: 2d4 + 6 for 11 aDPR. Fighter: 1d8+3 for an average of 7.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 2d4 + 6 for 11 aDPR. Fighter: 1d8+3 for an average of 7.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 2d4 + 6 for 11 aDPR. Fighter: 1d8+3 for an average of 7.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 2d4 + 8 for 13 aDPR. Fighter: 1d8+4 for an average of 8.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d6 + 12 for 22.5 aDPR. Fighter: 2d8+8 for an average of 17. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d6 + 12 for 22.5 aDPR. Fighter: 2d8+10 for an average of 19. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d6 + 12 for 22.5 aDPR. Fighter: 2d8+10 for an average of 19. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d6 + 15 for 25.5 aDPR. Fighter: 2d8+10 for an average of 19. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d6 + 15 for 25.5 aDPR. Fighter: 2d8+10 for an average of 19. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d6 + 15 for 25.5 aDPR. Fighter: 2d8+10 for an average of 19. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d8 + 15 for 28.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. TIE!
Monk: 3d8 + 15 for 28.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. TIE!
Monk: 3d8 + 15 for 28.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. TIE!
Monk: 3d8 + 15 for 28.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. TIE!
Monk: 3d8 + 15 for 28.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. TIE!
Monk: 3d8 + 15 for 28.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. TIE!
Monk: 3d10 + 15 for 31.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d10 + 15 for 31.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d10 + 15 for 31.5 aDPR. Fighter: 3d8+15 for an average of 28.5. Advantage Monk.
Monk: 3d10 + 15 for 31.5 aDPR. Fighter: 4d8+20 for an average of 38. Advantage Fighter.
So without using Ki, the monk is at least as good as the Fighter but in most levels, better than. But we're not done! Monks can use Ki points to turn misses into hits or attack an additional time!
The Fighter will do a d8 Unarmed+Str with both hands free. The Monk will start out with a d4+Str OR Dex until he eventually gets a d8+Str OR Dex at ELEVENTH LEVEL
You're ignoring the monk getting a free attack using the bonus action. Per attack, the fighter is better until 11. The monk gets 3 attacks though at level 5.
The Fighter acquires the Extra Attack Feature as the Monk does at Level 5, but ultimately beat the Monk by having Action Surge at Level 2.
Additionally, the fighter will have a THIRD attack at Level 20. Add to that Action Surge 2 at Level 17 and he wins. The Monk only has Flurry of Ineffectual blows.
Let's just look at 10 rounds where the monk uses flurry of blows every round while the fighter uses action surge once.
11. Monk: 4d8 + 20 for 38 aDPR for 10 rounds. 380 damage total. Fighter: 6d8+30 for an average of 57 in round 1 and 28.5 for 9 rounds. 313.5 Damage. Advantage Monk.
The fighter will have SEVEN Ability Score Increases/Feats over his 20 Levels. The Monk will have FOUR Ability Score Increase/Feats over his 20 Levels.
Advantage Fighter.
The Fighter will have 200 pts Max HP and the Monk has a 160 pts Max HP. That isn't even counting that the fighter has a preferred stat being Constitution.
True. But you're ignoring Diamond Soul, and Patient Defense. The Fighter can take more damage but the Monk will take less.
The Fighter has a maximum movement of 30 feet. The Monk can move a maximum of 60 feet. FINALLY, one win.
With step of the wind, that goes up to 120. It's actually a huge win.
A large CHUNK of the Monks other features are more feel good than anything, but do have some small merit:
Deflect Missiles would be great IF the Monk could effectively use Long Range Weapons. It ultimately makes him a target that just needs to be beaten to death in person.
Slow Fall MIGHT have a use. But how many times are you going to fall into a bear trap?
Stunning Strike would be a BIG win, but it is limited by the requirement for Ki which is also needed for Flurry of Blows and any other special feature the Monk has.
These are all great features. What makes the monk great is that all of these things are options. I really don't think I've run out of ki since level 8. You have plenty and they come back on a short rest.
Stillness of Mind. If it were that important wouldn't it have been easier to be an Elf instead of waiting until 7th Level? You wouldn't even have to waste one of your actions then.
Elves have a feature that keeps them from being charmed. Fear is still something they'd have to deal with. It is a knock against Stillness of Mind that it requires an action. It's still a useful feature when it's useful.
Purity of Body. At 10th level if you have survived, you finally get immunity to disease and poison. But you still have soft d6 hands.
This is one small thing that adds up to all the other things that makes monks very difficult to kill. The damage dice is smaller than the fighter's with Unarmed Fighting but the monk is still doing more damage than the unarmed fighter.
Tongue of Sun and Moon. Great. You can talk to everyone. Maybe it will help with begging for your life while your Fighter brother over there just got Indomitable 2!
Tongue of the Sun and Moon is a good social feature. Obviously no real combat use.
You're right, at 13 the fighter gets Indomitable 2 and it's a good feature. But wait one more level and the Monk gets Diamond Soul which is a much better feature. It's basically an unlimited Indomitable + proficiency in ALL saving throws.
You FINALLY made it to 15th level and you have acquired Timeless Body! Great you don't age and don't eat or drink. Tell me how that is going to keep you out of the dragon's stomach?
This is honestly a fluff feature. It doesn't really do all that much mechanically.
EIGHTEENTH LEVEL you just got an invisibility spell or a way to escape to the Astral Plane where Githyanki can kill you.
It's actually greater invisibility that also gives resistance to all damage except force. That is incredible.
Being able to go to the Astral Plane is more just interesting than good in combat. Not everything needs to be combat focused.
Here is the most damning thing about them: Good luck finding a magic item to salvage these weak and pathetic creatures. The Loot tables are NOT in your favor.
Loot tables are not in the monks favor and this is actually a big knock against them. But it's a problem for the Unarmed fighter too.
Now you can argue that the Monk has high mobility and high survivability in a combat and is meant to be a back line skirmisher or that you are doing it for the aesthetic or roleplay purposes. But if you are playing the HERO of a story, wouldn't you like to actually be able to take out the enemy?
Monks have plenty of tools that empower the monk to deal respectable damage.
HOW can a Monk compete with fighter with the Unarmed Combat option? Convince me I'm wrong.
Yes, the abilities of Martial Arts obviously can overlap with each other, they are subheadings of the same ability. That is not true of Martial Arts and other abilities that change the base unarmed strike.
You are all getting caught on by this, which is a rule that does not actually exist. No where does it state this, and reminder all monk weapons and unarmed strikes are treated the same for the purposes of martial arts. There is no exception made for a quarterstaff versus a unarmed strike.
Those saying they can't overlap are actually the ones that are getting caught up on a rule that doesn't exist.
For Starters Martial arts is a group of effects to things. It is not all or nothing.
Second of all. The fighting style is building upon the most general rules for unarmed combat. Not Martial arts. They are building on the fact that All unarmed strikes are strength based.
These two facts are important when saying if they can be used together or not.
Let me Break it down based upon these two important factors. We'll start with the fighting style since it's simpler.
Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit. If you aren't wielding any weapons or a shield when you make the attack roll, the d6 becomes a d8.
At the start of each of your turns, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to one creature grappled by you.
There are two parts to the fighting style here.
The first Part has an A and B section. Section A changes the general unarmed damage from 1d4+strength(errata'd from 1+str) for all unarmed strikes to a higher damage die. Part B adds in a caveat that under certain conditions of being completely empty handed it upgrades further. The Die change is all this power does.
Part 2 now gives you an automatic damage component while being grappled.
This is all very straight forward. This is the exactly all the specific does over the general in regards to unarmed damage. Nothing more. NOthing less. It doesn't lock into anything that wasn't locked in by the general rule.
Now for Martial Arts.
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren't wearing armor or wielding a shield.
You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons.
You 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.
When you use the Attack action with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon on your turn, you can make one unarmed strike as a bonus action. For example, if you take the Attack action and attack with a quarterstaff, you can also make an unarmed strike as a bonus action, assuming you haven't already taken a bonus action this turn.
There are three parts here going on. I'll go through them in order.
First of all Martial Arts let's you use Dexterity or strength for anything that is considered unarmed or a monk weapon regardless of weapon property it possesses. Martial arts doesn't care as long as it qualifies as one of these two. This does not in any way conflict with the specificity of the fighting style. It's altering something other than the damage die which is all the fighting style does. So it is compatible with the fighting style. It's a case of two specific things altering different parts of the same thing.
The second part is where there is potential conflict. They both alter the damage die. The fighting style but set amounts by certain conditions and only those conditions. However the Martial Arts version actually solves this conflict by the way it is written. It is stated as an optional alteration to the specificity giving you a choice which resolves the conflict by allowing you to still use the specified die change that the Fighting Style gives you.
The third part is a bonus action attack with the restrictions that it has to be unarmed and it can only be triggered by using the attack action first. Again there is no conflict. But this is an important stipulation to Martial Arts that the Fighting style does not have that needs to be accounted for. There is no natural bonus action attack with unarmed strikes and the Fighting style does not grant one in any way. Unarmed Strikes also do not naturally qualify for two weapon fighting. They are not considered light weapons. So the Fighting Style is actually restricted in the number of hits it can make to a greater degree than Martial Arts is because Martial arts in it's specificity makes allowance for the fact that your using what is not naturally capable of two weapon fighting by giving it an ability that acts similarly to such with it's own restrictions.
The arguments of conflict and that it's one or the other are thus working off of specificities and rules that do not exist and there is no issue.
With that said. The fighting Style is mostly useless for the Monk because they already have access to d8 weapons that also count as monk weapons which means the only damage dice that are less are going to be the bonus action damage dice Meaning they are actually doing the same damage as the fighter for the attacks that the fighter has plus they are doing additional damage the fighter cannot do. meaning the fighting style is a poor imitation and a fighters back up weapon at best if you have a fighting style to spare for some reason with it's only redeeming quality being a small bit of automatic damage built in if you lean really heavily into the grappling.
Also. It's not a knock against Monks that the loot tables are not in their favor. Many loot tables have things like Rings of Protection, Bracers of Defense and other items that can actually strengthen the AC of a monk and They also have just as much access to things that can do things like beef up their con instead of using their ASI's and have slightly more reason to request them from a party and a party may be more inclined to give them since they don't get as much in the way of things like weapons. There is a lot more to loot tables, particularly magical loot tables than just weapons and armor and fighters often have to give a pass on those things and hope they come around again to get the weapons and armor that they need to augment themselves instead or make preparations to deal without such things, which is actually doable.
...I'm sorry.. this is kind of an odd argument comparing the Monk to a Fighter. There's more to a class than just DPS, and Monk also has more room for style with the use of Ki points.
The thing about Martial Arts vs Unarmed Fighting Style from fighter is that Unarmed Strikes are Unarmed Strikes, regardless of where the buff comes from. I agree that the concept of Natural Weapons is a head scratcher and very gray as written, but it has been voiced in Sage Advice multiple times. If you don't like how it or anything else is ruled, you can just make a House Ruling and play it as you wish. It's not like you need to stick a Game Genie in put a code in, you just choose to ignore that rule.... BUT... as RAW, Natural weapons are NOT Unarmed Strikes except for the two or three times it is written SPECIFICALLY on that racial description.
As written, there is no reason that Martial Arts and Unarmed Fighting Style can't work together if you assume the ruling for Martial Arts is written out of play by something else (which it is not).
As written, there is no reason that Martial Arts and Unarmed Fighting Style can't work together if you assume the ruling for Martial Arts is written out of play by something else (which it is not).
Yeah, the fact that this is being argued over is a bit silly. It's been discussed in other threads on this very forum that the two can coexist and mesh fairly well (since Fighting Initiate would allow you to trade out your Fighting Style at level 12).
Unarmed Fighting: - Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit.
Martial Arts: - You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons.
The Unarmed Fighting style only changes the amount of base damage on your Unarmed Strikes. Martial Arts changes your modifier. Both can exist together, since the "general" rule is that unarmed strikes do 1+STR damage, specialized via Unarmed Fighting to be 1d6+STR and further specialized via Martial Arts to be 1d6+DEX. Specific overrides general, and these two specific rules affect different aspects of unarmed strikes. No toe-stepping.
100% agree.. despite the fact that my initial comment was poorly worded, that was whay i was trying to say lol
Oh yeah, I didn't think otherwise. Just read the rest of this thread and was surprised to see so much litigation over something I feel like is somewhat clear!
...I'm sorry.. this is kind of an odd argument comparing the Monk to a Fighter. There's more to a class than just DPS, and Monk also has more room for style with the use of Ki points.
Seeing people tyring to use it to give a little more power to the monk, though not worth the cost to do it, at least makes sense. Which is where most of the discussions come from. But yes this need to try and mis-state its power to try and hate on the monk some more is kind of silly. Which is why I basically just debunked the parts that people were trying to use and mostly left it at that.
Oh yeah, I didn't think otherwise. Just read the rest of this thread and was surprised to see so much litigation over something I feel like is somewhat clear!
Yeah I am partly to blame for not explaining it well and kind of unintentionally derailing the thread. Didn't expect this much backlash about it. It's like, half on-topic cause the thread is about the fighting style so I have that excuse.
Fighting Initiate is a really bad use of a feat. Consider taking that vs 2 dex. If you're at 16 dex, going to 18 on the level 4 ASI it effectively gives you +1 damage per hit anyway.
Option 1 - Taking the feat at level 4 to give you Unarmed Fighting Style.
Level 1-3, your attacks hit for an average of 2.5+3=5.5
Level 4, your attacks hit for an average of 4.5+3=7.5
Levels 5-7, the average per attack is still 7.5
Levels 8-10,the average per attack is 4.5+4 = 8.5
Level 11, the average per attack is still 4.5+4 = 8.5
Option 2 - Taking an ASI at level 4 for 2 dex.
Level 1-3, your attacks hit for an average of 2.5+3=5.5
Level 4, the average per attack is 2.5 + 4 for an average of 6.5
Levels 5-7, the average per attack is 3.5+4 = 7.5
Levels 8-10, the average per attack is 3.5+5 = 8.5
Level 11, the average per attack is still 4.5+5 = 9.5
After level 11 and beyond it's completely moot as your martial arts dice will be a d8 or d10 either way. Taking the feat is only better at level 4. That's not even taking into account the 1 AC and +1 to attack rolls that comes from the +2 Dex ASI. It also doesn't consider the fact that you could be using a spear or quarterstaff and the main attacks are doing 1d8 anyway. That basically means the average damage in a round increases by 1 at level 4 and doesn't do anything beyond that.
What about Variant Human?!
Option 3 - Variant Human takes the fighting style at level 1 with a feat.
Levels 1-3, the average per attack is 4.5 + 3 for an average of 7.5
Levels 5-7, the average per attack is 4.5+4 = 8.5
Levels 8-10, the average per attack is 4.5+5 = 9.5
Level 11, the average per attack is still 4.5+5 = 9.5
In this case, it's still not worth taking. You're going to be using a spear or quarterstaff anyway. Your racial feat basically gives you an average damage increase per round of 1 from your bonus action attack. 2 if you use flurry of blows. Instead you could have taken Crusher which is amazing. Or Mobile to be even more mobile. Or Sentinel or Mage Slayer to weaponize your reaction. Or any number of better feats.
TL:DR: Don't take Fighting Initiate for Unarmed Fighting as a monk, ever. It's awful.
Actually, both are optional. "Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit. If you aren’t wielding any weapons or a shield when you make the attack roll, the d6 becomes a d8" or you "can" use the abilities of Martial Arts that you quoted. Both replace the basic unarmed strike, so they are both alternatives to choose from, not additions that overlap.
An example of this is natural weapons. Some races have natural weapons that can then make unarmed attacks, allowing martial arts to blend with them. That is the exception though. Generic natural weapons from something like an Alter Self spell doesn't play with Martial Arts because it is an alternative to the generic unarmed strike, not a different way of making what is still a generic unarmed strike like those racial abilities.
Via Crawford's explanation: "Rules on unarmed strikes have no bearing on natural weapons. Some exceptional things in the game count as both unarmed strikes and natural weapons. For example, a tabaxi's claws are natural weapons that can make unarmed strikes."
Recall, you "can" use the abilities of Martial Art.
That's a plural s. You can choose to use Dex, choose to use martial die, etc. They are all separate features of Martial Arts. This is why when you use a quarterstaff you can attack with DEX without using the martial arts d4 die.
Natural weapons do not count, for we talking unarmed strikes not natural weapons.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
My point is that the Quarterstaff is a Monk weapon, as per description. I also draw a line between the fighting style and Martial Arts. The style I see as a boxing type training you have, which allows you to get your full strength into a punch. The Martial arts strikes are significantly different in how they are performed, thus the difference. The other "point" was made, that it wouldn't fly at my table and now you have a more detailed explanation why I treat the 2 as different. I also can't for the life of me, figure out why anyone would ever want to play a Fighter like he was a Monk. Why lower your damage potential so much?
Also, the first 3 words state it is an unarmed strike, which is available to anyone with arms, not just Monks.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
Yes, the abilities of Martial Arts obviously can overlap with each other, they are subheadings of the same ability. That is not true of Martial Arts and other abilities that change the base unarmed strike.
Im using Natural Weapons as an example of something else that changes the base unarmed strike, and so does not overlap with Martial Arts.
My point that the Unarmed Strikes is a Monk weapon, as per... it being the description of both the feat and the Martial Arts. Nothing states that it isn't a monk weapon. Also nowhere in the description of quarterstaff does it actually say it's a monk weapon, it only stats so in the Martial Arts ability, just like how the Martial Arts ability states that the unarmed strikes are monk weapons.
What I see is that if you want to use a entire feat to add a avg of +2 damage, then sure you can go though special training to enhance your unarmed strikes further.
Onto Kronzypantz
You know what also change the damage of a base weapon? Literally any weapon. There is no exception made for unarmed strikes specifically. In addition, if I have a magic dagger, that is still legible for Martial Arts even though it changes the base monk weapon strike.
Reminder, natural weapons do not change the base unarmed strike, they are a completely separate weapon. You can make a unarmed strike that uses Martial Arts via a natural weapon, but then you are not using said natural weapon. (Just like how I can make a unarmed strike "with" a greatsword by kicking my foe in the face, but then I'm not using said greatsword).(Edit: I actually haven't done the research to confirm this, I just kinda assumed. Still probably true but just in case I'll cross it out anyways)Thus the two are not comparable.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
You are all getting caught on by this, which is a rule that does not actually exist. No where does it state this, and reminder all monk weapons and unarmed strikes are treated the same for the purposes of martial arts. There is no exception made for a quarterstaff versus a unarmed strike.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
There won't be a consensus on this, obviously. Some of us view the Unarmed fighting style (which is actually a style that you can steal from a Fighter using a feat) as a separate type of fighting than Martial Arts. Others simply see unarmed and feel than all unarmed strikes are exactly the same. I think MMA fighters a boxers would disagree, but let's not bring expert opinion in here.
The one thing anyone who knows and understands the classes would likely agree on is that only one race (Variant Human) would have even a remotely intelligent reason to pick that, since picking a feat means your already stressed MAD Monk will miss out on bringing up the stats that he needs to do his thing best. Purely flavor, with no min/max benefit to it. There's no reason to not let someone play a less than optimal build if they want, but don't try to say it's a better way when every other aspect of the class makes it not.
Talk to your Players. Talk to your DM. If more people used this advice, there would be 24.74% fewer threads on Tactics, Rules and DM discussions.
If you had an alternative ability from another class or feature that allowed you to replace the dagger's damage but it required using strength, it wouldn't mesh with the martial arts ability to use dex or strength. Martial Arts interacts with overriding the weapon's rules regarding either its modifier source or its damage dice, it doesn't interact with another competing feature that changes those things. You can change unarmed strikes damage in a similar fashion by either pressing the Fighting style's button regarding damage calculation, or the martial arts button regarding calculation damage, but not both.
No where does it state that in order to use the fighting style you require Strength.
The main issue is yeah what Falwith states
This is the main argument. However it doesn't hold up, since RAW they are the same. The thing about the Strength doesn't hold up either, since it uses the exact same wording that a normal not fighting style unarmed strike uses.
"On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier."
versus
"unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit."
Move on a hit to the start, and remove the can and you literally (almost) get the exact same text for a normal unarmed strike.
"On a hit, unarmed strikes deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier"
I can kinda see where your coming from with the whole MMA boxer thing versus Martial Arts, but i feel like this taking this as a feat is sort of like taking both MMA and Martial Arts and combining the two to be more effective. Can that actually happen irl? Eh probably not lol I'm going to be honest but it's the reasoning I use to justify this.
Edit: added link and made it more clear. Also note what I said earlier, that Martial Arts does not make any exception for things that change the damage of a unarmed strike. As long as it's a unarmed strike, it counts for Martial Arts no (currently existing) exceptions.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Martial Arts overrides the base damage for unarmed strikes. It does not replace the damage for other feats that replace the damage calculations for unarmed strikes (such as Alter Self's natural weapons which override unarmed strikes damage calculations).
Why not? It says it does and nothing is stopping it from overlapping.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Here is this claim again. Outclassed by a fighting style! The unarmed fighter vs the unarmed monk. Let's actually look at the math levels 1 through 20. The hit chances are more or less identical so let's ignore that.
So without using Ki, the monk is at least as good as the Fighter but in most levels, better than. But we're not done! Monks can use Ki points to turn misses into hits or attack an additional time!
You're ignoring the monk getting a free attack using the bonus action. Per attack, the fighter is better until 11. The monk gets 3 attacks though at level 5.
Let's just look at 10 rounds where the monk uses flurry of blows every round while the fighter uses action surge once.
11. Monk: 4d8 + 20 for 38 aDPR for 10 rounds. 380 damage total. Fighter: 6d8+30 for an average of 57 in round 1 and 28.5 for 9 rounds. 313.5 Damage. Advantage Monk.
Advantage Fighter.
True. But you're ignoring Diamond Soul, and Patient Defense. The Fighter can take more damage but the Monk will take less.
With step of the wind, that goes up to 120. It's actually a huge win.
These are all great features. What makes the monk great is that all of these things are options. I really don't think I've run out of ki since level 8. You have plenty and they come back on a short rest.
Elves have a feature that keeps them from being charmed. Fear is still something they'd have to deal with. It is a knock against Stillness of Mind that it requires an action. It's still a useful feature when it's useful.
This is one small thing that adds up to all the other things that makes monks very difficult to kill. The damage dice is smaller than the fighter's with Unarmed Fighting but the monk is still doing more damage than the unarmed fighter.
Tongue of the Sun and Moon is a good social feature. Obviously no real combat use.
You're right, at 13 the fighter gets Indomitable 2 and it's a good feature. But wait one more level and the Monk gets Diamond Soul which is a much better feature. It's basically an unlimited Indomitable + proficiency in ALL saving throws.
This is honestly a fluff feature. It doesn't really do all that much mechanically.
It's actually greater invisibility that also gives resistance to all damage except force. That is incredible.
Being able to go to the Astral Plane is more just interesting than good in combat. Not everything needs to be combat focused.
Loot tables are not in the monks favor and this is actually a big knock against them. But it's a problem for the Unarmed fighter too.
Monks have plenty of tools that empower the monk to deal respectable damage.
See literally everything I said.
Those saying they can't overlap are actually the ones that are getting caught up on a rule that doesn't exist.
For Starters Martial arts is a group of effects to things. It is not all or nothing.
Second of all. The fighting style is building upon the most general rules for unarmed combat. Not Martial arts. They are building on the fact that All unarmed strikes are strength based.
These two facts are important when saying if they can be used together or not.
Let me Break it down based upon these two important factors. We'll start with the fighting style since it's simpler.
There are two parts to the fighting style here.
The first Part has an A and B section. Section A changes the general unarmed damage from 1d4+strength(errata'd from 1+str) for all unarmed strikes to a higher damage die. Part B adds in a caveat that under certain conditions of being completely empty handed it upgrades further. The Die change is all this power does.
Part 2 now gives you an automatic damage component while being grappled.
This is all very straight forward. This is the exactly all the specific does over the general in regards to unarmed damage. Nothing more. NOthing less. It doesn't lock into anything that wasn't locked in by the general rule.
Now for Martial Arts.
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren't wearing armor or wielding a shield.
There are three parts here going on. I'll go through them in order.
First of all Martial Arts let's you use Dexterity or strength for anything that is considered unarmed or a monk weapon regardless of weapon property it possesses. Martial arts doesn't care as long as it qualifies as one of these two. This does not in any way conflict with the specificity of the fighting style. It's altering something other than the damage die which is all the fighting style does. So it is compatible with the fighting style. It's a case of two specific things altering different parts of the same thing.
The second part is where there is potential conflict. They both alter the damage die. The fighting style but set amounts by certain conditions and only those conditions. However the Martial Arts version actually solves this conflict by the way it is written. It is stated as an optional alteration to the specificity giving you a choice which resolves the conflict by allowing you to still use the specified die change that the Fighting Style gives you.
The third part is a bonus action attack with the restrictions that it has to be unarmed and it can only be triggered by using the attack action first. Again there is no conflict. But this is an important stipulation to Martial Arts that the Fighting style does not have that needs to be accounted for. There is no natural bonus action attack with unarmed strikes and the Fighting style does not grant one in any way. Unarmed Strikes also do not naturally qualify for two weapon fighting. They are not considered light weapons. So the Fighting Style is actually restricted in the number of hits it can make to a greater degree than Martial Arts is because Martial arts in it's specificity makes allowance for the fact that your using what is not naturally capable of two weapon fighting by giving it an ability that acts similarly to such with it's own restrictions.
The arguments of conflict and that it's one or the other are thus working off of specificities and rules that do not exist and there is no issue.
With that said. The fighting Style is mostly useless for the Monk because they already have access to d8 weapons that also count as monk weapons which means the only damage dice that are less are going to be the bonus action damage dice Meaning they are actually doing the same damage as the fighter for the attacks that the fighter has plus they are doing additional damage the fighter cannot do. meaning the fighting style is a poor imitation and a fighters back up weapon at best if you have a fighting style to spare for some reason with it's only redeeming quality being a small bit of automatic damage built in if you lean really heavily into the grappling.
Also. It's not a knock against Monks that the loot tables are not in their favor. Many loot tables have things like Rings of Protection, Bracers of Defense and other items that can actually strengthen the AC of a monk and They also have just as much access to things that can do things like beef up their con instead of using their ASI's and have slightly more reason to request them from a party and a party may be more inclined to give them since they don't get as much in the way of things like weapons. There is a lot more to loot tables, particularly magical loot tables than just weapons and armor and fighters often have to give a pass on those things and hope they come around again to get the weapons and armor that they need to augment themselves instead or make preparations to deal without such things, which is actually doable.
...I'm sorry.. this is kind of an odd argument comparing the Monk to a Fighter. There's more to a class than just DPS, and Monk also has more room for style with the use of Ki points.
The thing about Martial Arts vs Unarmed Fighting Style from fighter is that Unarmed Strikes are Unarmed Strikes, regardless of where the buff comes from. I agree that the concept of Natural Weapons is a head scratcher and very gray as written, but it has been voiced in Sage Advice multiple times. If you don't like how it or anything else is ruled, you can just make a House Ruling and play it as you wish. It's not like you need to stick a Game Genie in put a code in, you just choose to ignore that rule.... BUT... as RAW, Natural weapons are NOT Unarmed Strikes except for the two or three times it is written SPECIFICALLY on that racial description.
As written, there is no reason that Martial Arts and Unarmed Fighting Style can't work together if you assume the ruling for Martial Arts is written out of play by something else (which it is not).
Yeah, the fact that this is being argued over is a bit silly. It's been discussed in other threads on this very forum that the two can coexist and mesh fairly well (since Fighting Initiate would allow you to trade out your Fighting Style at level 12).
Unarmed Fighting:
- Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit.
Martial Arts:
- You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons.
The Unarmed Fighting style only changes the amount of base damage on your Unarmed Strikes. Martial Arts changes your modifier. Both can exist together, since the "general" rule is that unarmed strikes do 1+STR damage, specialized via Unarmed Fighting to be 1d6+STR and further specialized via Martial Arts to be 1d6+DEX. Specific overrides general, and these two specific rules affect different aspects of unarmed strikes. No toe-stepping.
100% agree.. despite the fact that my initial comment was poorly worded, that was whay i was trying to say lol
Oh yeah, I didn't think otherwise. Just read the rest of this thread and was surprised to see so much litigation over something I feel like is somewhat clear!
Seeing people tyring to use it to give a little more power to the monk, though not worth the cost to do it, at least makes sense. Which is where most of the discussions come from. But yes this need to try and mis-state its power to try and hate on the monk some more is kind of silly. Which is why I basically just debunked the parts that people were trying to use and mostly left it at that.
Yeah I am partly to blame for not explaining it well and kind of unintentionally derailing the thread. Didn't expect this much backlash about it. It's like, half on-topic cause the thread is about the fighting style so I have that excuse.
if I edit a message, most of the time it's because of grammar. The rest of the time I'll put "Edit:" at the bottom.
Fighting Initiate is a really bad use of a feat. Consider taking that vs 2 dex. If you're at 16 dex, going to 18 on the level 4 ASI it effectively gives you +1 damage per hit anyway.
After level 11 and beyond it's completely moot as your martial arts dice will be a d8 or d10 either way. Taking the feat is only better at level 4. That's not even taking into account the 1 AC and +1 to attack rolls that comes from the +2 Dex ASI. It also doesn't consider the fact that you could be using a spear or quarterstaff and the main attacks are doing 1d8 anyway. That basically means the average damage in a round increases by 1 at level 4 and doesn't do anything beyond that.
What about Variant Human?!
In this case, it's still not worth taking. You're going to be using a spear or quarterstaff anyway. Your racial feat basically gives you an average damage increase per round of 1 from your bonus action attack. 2 if you use flurry of blows. Instead you could have taken Crusher which is amazing. Or Mobile to be even more mobile. Or Sentinel or Mage Slayer to weaponize your reaction. Or any number of better feats.
TL:DR: Don't take Fighting Initiate for Unarmed Fighting as a monk, ever. It's awful.