Just a couple of premises that I think are true. Forgive me if my memory fails and please correct me if I am wrong.
Weapons can be ranged or melee. There are simple and martial weapons of each type. If a weapon is not simple or martial, it is improvised.
My question is about monk weapons. Are all monk weapons either shortswords or simple weapons (not two-handed, heavy). I am looking at the UA Astral Monk and its Astral Arms seem to count as Monk Weapons. Nothing states that the astral arms are either simple or martial. Are the astral arms therefore improvised monk weapons, or are they assumed to be de-facto simple weapons?
Second, I think everything I have read supports that "claw" and "bite" attacks, as wild shape druid, are considered improvised. Would it be too much to ask that improvised bite and claw attacks be counted as monk weapons along the lines of Astral Arms? I understand that maybe a GM one-off ruling, not RAW, but would it be fair?
I think a "tooth and nail" monk/ druid could be a cool multi-class.
There are also natural weapons. These mostly refer to monster attacks.
The kensei subclass specifically makes previously non-monk weapons into monk weapons.
The astral monk rules seem to be slightly lacking (playtest problems), the astral arms are (currently) typeless monk weapons. You are not even stated to be proficient with them (WTF WotC?). They are absolutely not assumed to be simple or improvised weapons. I would rule them to be closer to natural weapons/unarmed strikes (but that is a personal ruling).
As I mentioned earlier, monster attacks are natural weapons. Natural weapons are not monk weapons by default. Monsters can make unarmed strikes and all the rules and benefits that comes with that (like using monk damage die).
Wouldn't saying that the arms are monk weapons make monks proficient with them?
Nothing in the rules requires monk weapons to be a weapon you are proficient with or says you are proficient with them because they are monk weapons, so no.
A monk is proficient in simple weapons, shortswords, unarmed strikes (everyone is), as well as any other weapons (be they simple, matrial, natural, or improvisded) that they may be proficient in by virtue of their race or another class. Of that list, only simple melee weapons (edit: lacking the heavy and two-handed properties), shortswords, and unarmed strikes are "monk weapons." (Edit: unarmed strikes are not monk weapons, but a monk's martial arts features apply to attacks with unarmed strikes and/or monk weapons).
Kensei allows you to pick some additional weapons to become "kensei weapons": one simple or marital non-Heavy non-Special melee and one simple or martial non-Heavy non-Special ranged weapon (or, a Longbow even though it is Heavy). You gain proficiency in these chosen weapons, and they are added to the list of "monk weapons," and some other extra Kensei features attach as well.
The new UA provides the option to use an alternate list for monk weapons, which must be (1) a simple or martial weapon; (2) you must be proficient with the weapon; (3) the weapon must lack these properties: heavy, special, or two-handed. What's interesting is, Greatclub is currently a monk weapon but would not be an eligible weapon if you use the alternate list method, so you can't use the new UA to add darts without losing greatclubs. :p I believe that Greatclub, Light Crossbow, and Shortbow are the only items that were excluded from the list of eligible monk weapons by virtue of including two-handed in the new UA feature. (edit: whoops, I missed that two-handed is already forbidden in the base monk martial arts feature, nevermind that!)
It is very ambiguous exactly what sort of weapon the Arms of the Astral Self are. Unarmed Strikes that have a reach of 10? Probably not, since the feature feels the need to specify that you can attack with them as a bonus action (which would already be the case if they were unarmed strikes). Natural Weapons that you are proficient with? Improvised Weapons that you are proficient with? Something else? Personally I think that were this class to be released, they should probably write those arms to just be an enhancement to the reach/damage type of your unarmed strikes, the same way that Fangs of the Fire Snake works for the Four Elements monk.
Your bite and claw attacks (or any other attack provided by your wildshape beast form) are not improvised weapon attacks, they are natural weapon attacks that your beast is proficient in. The fact that wildshape gives you the skill and saving throw proficiencies of your wildshape form but not its weapon proficiencies is almost certainly an oversight that should be errata'd, because otherwise when making a Bear's Bite or Claw attack you should be doing so with a -2 to hit compared to the Beast's statblock, which is definitely not RAI. Either way, having natural weapons count as monk weapons would probably spike your damage much higher than a pure monk or a pure druid by letting your flurry after big 2d6+ attacks like Bear's Claw, so I wouldn't think that should be an easy gimme. Maybe a monk subclass will come along that is designed to synergize or replicate wildshape?
A monk is proficient in simple weapons, shortswords, unarmed strikes (everyone is), as well as any other weapons (be they simple, matrial, natural, or improvisded) that they may be proficient in by virtue of their race or another class. Of that list, only simple melee weapons, shortswords, and unarmed strikes are "monk weapons." (Edit: unarmed strikes are not monk weapons, but a monk's martial arts features apply to attacks with unarmed strikes and/or monk weapons).
Kensei allows you to pick some additional weapons to become "kensei weapons": one simple or marital non-Heavy non-Special melee and one simple or martial non-Heavy non-Special ranged weapon (or, a Longbow even though it is Heavy). You gain proficiency in these chosen weapons, and they are added to the list of "monk weapons," and some other extra Kensei features attach as well.
The new UA provides the option to use an alternate list for monk weapons, which must be (1) a simple or martial weapon; (2) you must be proficient with the weapon; (3) the weapon must lack these properties: heavy, special, or two-handed. What's interesting is, Greatclub is currently a monk weapon but would not be an eligible weapon if you use the alternate list method, so you can't use the new UA to add darts without losing greatclubs. :p I believe that Greatclub, Light Crossbow, and Shortbow are the only items that were excluded from the list of eligible monk weapons by virtue of including two-handed in the new UA feature.
The current, PHB monk feature does not let 2-handed weapons be monk weapons, so greatclubs are already not monk weapons and the UA variant rule doesn't change that. The UA rule lets martial and ranged weapons be monk weapons without having to go kensei (which still has the benefit of using 2-handed and longbows as well as getting new proficiencies).
It is very ambiguous exactly what sort of weapon the Arms of the Astral Self are. Unarmed Strikes that have a reach of 10? Probably not, since the feature feels the need to specify that you can attack with them as a bonus action (which would already be the case if they were unarmed strikes). Natural Weapons that you are proficient with? Improvised Weapons that you are proficient with? Something else? Personally I think that were this class to be released, they should probably write those arms to just be an enhancement to the reach/damage type of your unarmed strikes, the same way that Fangs of the Fire Snake works for the Four Elements monk.
The "fangs of the fire snake" idea might be better than how it currently works.
Your bite and claw attacks (or any other attack provided by your wildshape beast form) are not improvised weapon attacks, they are natural weapon attacks that your beast is proficient in. The fact that wildshape gives you the skill and saving throw proficiencies of your wildshape form but not its weapon proficiencies is almost certainly an oversight that should be errata'd, because otherwise when making a Bear's Bite or Claw attack you should be doing so with a -2 to hit compared to the Beast's statblock, which is definitely not RAI. Either way, having natural weapons count as monk weapons would probably spike your damage much higher than a pure monk or a pure druid by letting your flurry after big 2d6+ attacks like Bear's Claw, so I wouldn't think that should be an easy gimme. Maybe a monk subclass will come along that is designed to synergize or replicate wildshape?
Druid wildshape says you get all the beast's features. This includes its actions and (natural) weapon proficiencies. The sentences that mention skills and saves are to add your proficiencies to the beast's, not the other way around. I don't think they will ever make a subclass designed specifically to benefit from multiclassing. I also don't think natural weapons need to count as monk weapons (it will lead to more shenanigans than it is worth).
Natural attacks (claws, bite, etc.) are unarmed strikes, and are eligible for Martial Arts.
Improvised weapons are generally not eligible for Martial Arts. If the improvised weapon is sufficiently similar to an existing weapon, the DM can allow it to be treated as if it were the existing weapon. If that weapon is one in which you have proficiency, and meets the other prerequisites, it can be considered a monk weapon eligible for Martial Arts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
They are not. An unarmed strike is not a weapon and does 1+str damage by definition (unless subject to a specific exception), and monster bites/claws are called out as “natural weapon”s in the MM introduction. There are SA rulings on it too, but even RAW they are not unarmed strikes.
Arms of the Astral Self: The arms are monk weapons and have a reach of 10 feet.
That doesn't seem ambiguous to me. They are monk weapons and have a reach of 10 feet.
I think you misunderstood the question as it relates to Arms of the Astral Self. Serf wasn't questioning whether they're monk weapons or what their reach is, that's clear. The first half of his post questioned whether they were "improvised weapons", "simple weapons," or something else (like "natural weapons" or "unarmed strikes"). The answer appears to be that the UA write up doesn't define what sort of weapon they are yet.
They are not. An unarmed strike is not a weapon and does 1+str damage by definition (unless subject to a specific exception), and monster bites/claws are called out as “natural weapon”s in the MM introduction. There are SA rulings on it too, but even RAW they are not unarmed strikes.
I did not say they were weapons; they aren't. We're talking about PC/NPC races, not standard template monsters. MM stat blocks are a completely separate thing with rules that are not cross-applicable.
A PC with class levels (or a custom NPC with levels), whom has natural weapons from their race, uses their natural weapon as an unarmed strike. This unarmed strike is eligible for Martial Arts.
Aarakocra, Lizardfolk, Tabaxi, Loxodon, Centaur, and Minotaur all have natural weapons which are explicitly called out as being used for unarmed strikes. I am not aware of any player races with natural weapons that aren't unarmed strikes.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Ah I see, you misunderstood the conversation. OP is talking about multiclass monk/druids which have a natural weapon in the beast's stat block, not the enhanced unarmed strikes granted by certain races. Yes, you are correct that those races have features which enhance their unarmed strikes, but those are not the same sort of "claw" as the Natural Weapons listed in beast statblocks that a wildshaped druid would be using.
If the PC has the same natural weapon as the form of their Wild Shape, as a character's features remain applicable, it is still an unarmed strike.
I.e., a Lizardfolk Monk/Druid shifts into a Brown Bear, their Bite attack still counts.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
It is literally a different weapon, that unfortunately shares the same name. It really doesn't transform a Natural Weapon into an Unarmed Strike. But you're free to rule it a different way in your games. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
It really does. From the Druid class on Wild Shape:
You retain the benefit of any features from your class, race, or other source and can use them if the new form is physically capable of doing so. However, you can’t use any of your special senses, such as darkvision, unless your new form also has that sense.
You retain all features that the new form is physically capable of using. Special senses (if you wanna get weird and put racial unarmed strikes in this bucket) also carry over if the new form has the same thing.
Lizardfolk have Bite which counts as an unarmed strike for the purpose of Martial Arts applicability. Bears have Bite. A wildshaped Lizardfolk Monk/Druid makes Bite attacks that qualify for Martial Arts.
Aarakocra have Talons. Bears do not. No Talon unarmed strikes for the Aarakocra as a bear, but another beast form that does have Talons qualifies.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would ask you to point to where in the rules text you are getting the impression that a lizard's bite gives it proficiency in bite natural attacks, or where there is any mention of changing sizes/shapes modifying the damage dice provided in your racial features, or anything at all that links those two "bites"... but I already know that you aren't really talking about RAW [REDACTED]
If the beast you wildshape into has the anatomy to perform a the natural weapon attack of your race (bite, talon, etc), it can. But it uses the damage dice of that feature/unarmed strike, it does not make the beast's natural weapons of the same name count as unarmed strikes.
I would ask you to point to where in the rules text you are getting the impression that a lizard's bite gives it proficiency in bite natural attacks, or where there is any mention of changing sizes/shapes modifying the damage dice provided in your racial features, or anything at all that links those two "bites"... but I already know that you aren't really talking about RAW, you're just holding out your RAF/RAI opinion like its relevant.
Used in hand-to-hand combat, a melee attack allows you to attack a foe within your reach. A melee attack typically uses a handheld weapon such as a sword, a warhammer, or an axe. A typical monster makes a melee attack when it strikes with its claws, horns, teeth, tentacles, or other body part. A few spells also involve making a melee attack.
Most creatures have a 5-foot reach and can thus attack targets within 5 feet of them when making a melee attack. Certain creatures (typically those larger than Medium) have melee attacks with a greater reach than 5 feet, as noted in their descriptions.
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons). On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier. You are proficient with your unarmed strikes.
We can do this all day.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I am aware that you are willing to do this all day, even though you're advocating for something that is explicitly not RAW. Like I said, "okay".
Nothing you've quoted there says (or even implies) that the melee attacks of monsters using claws, horns, teeth, tentacles, or other body parts are unarmed strikes, any more than it implies that melee attacks using handheld weapons are unarmed strikes. And the Monster Manual conclusively demonstrates that you are cherry picking, and that a monster's claws are "natural weapons" not "unarmed strikes."
Melee and Ranged Attacks
The most common actions that a monster will take in combat are melee and ranged attacks. These can be spell attacks or weapon attacks, where the “weapon” might be a manufactured item or a natural weapon, such as a claw or tail spike.
This is not a good faith argument you are making about RAW. Nothing is stopping you from saying that a race with an unarmed strike bite gets some added bonus when wildshaped as a beast with a natural weapon bite, but there is exactly zero textual support for such a feature, so please do not sidetrack the conversation about what the RAW interaction is.
A Lizardfolk Druid/Monk using Wild Shape to become a Brown Bear has a Bite attack that is an Unarmed Strike eligible for use with Martial Arts. Fact.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just a couple of premises that I think are true. Forgive me if my memory fails and please correct me if I am wrong.
Weapons can be ranged or melee. There are simple and martial weapons of each type. If a weapon is not simple or martial, it is improvised.
My question is about monk weapons. Are all monk weapons either shortswords or simple weapons (not two-handed, heavy). I am looking at the UA Astral Monk and its Astral Arms seem to count as Monk Weapons. Nothing states that the astral arms are either simple or martial. Are the astral arms therefore improvised monk weapons, or are they assumed to be de-facto simple weapons?
Second, I think everything I have read supports that "claw" and "bite" attacks, as wild shape druid, are considered improvised. Would it be too much to ask that improvised bite and claw attacks be counted as monk weapons along the lines of Astral Arms? I understand that maybe a GM one-off ruling, not RAW, but would it be fair?
I think a "tooth and nail" monk/ druid could be a cool multi-class.
FOR SERF AND SOVEREIGN!
@Serf2Sove #5eOGL
VIEW HERE AND FOLLOW FOR FREE, UNIQUE CONTENT
https://forum.rpg.net/index.php?threads/serf2sove-5eogl.851074/
There are also natural weapons. These mostly refer to monster attacks.
The kensei subclass specifically makes previously non-monk weapons into monk weapons.
The astral monk rules seem to be slightly lacking (playtest problems), the astral arms are (currently) typeless monk weapons. You are not even stated to be proficient with them (WTF WotC?). They are absolutely not assumed to be simple or improvised weapons. I would rule them to be closer to natural weapons/unarmed strikes (but that is a personal ruling).
As I mentioned earlier, monster attacks are natural weapons. Natural weapons are not monk weapons by default. Monsters can make unarmed strikes and all the rules and benefits that comes with that (like using monk damage die).
Wouldn't saying that the arms are monk weapons make monks proficient with them?
Nothing in the rules requires monk weapons to be a weapon you are proficient with or says you are proficient with them because they are monk weapons, so no.
A monk is proficient in simple weapons, shortswords, unarmed strikes (everyone is), as well as any other weapons (be they simple, matrial, natural, or improvisded) that they may be proficient in by virtue of their race or another class. Of that list, only simple melee weapons (edit: lacking the heavy and two-handed properties), shortswords,
and unarmed strikesare "monk weapons." (Edit: unarmed strikes are not monk weapons, but a monk's martial arts features apply to attacks with unarmed strikes and/or monk weapons).Kensei allows you to pick some additional weapons to become "kensei weapons": one simple or marital non-Heavy non-Special melee and one simple or martial non-Heavy non-Special ranged weapon (or, a Longbow even though it is Heavy). You gain proficiency in these chosen weapons, and they are added to the list of "monk weapons," and some other extra Kensei features attach as well.
The new UA provides the option to use an alternate list for monk weapons, which must be (1) a simple or martial weapon; (2) you must be proficient with the weapon; (3) the weapon must lack these properties: heavy, special, or two-handed.
What's interesting is, Greatclub is currently a monk weapon but would not be an eligible weapon if you use the alternate list method, so you can't use the new UA to add darts without losing greatclubs. :p I believe that Greatclub, Light Crossbow, and Shortbow are the only items that were excluded from the list of eligible monk weapons by virtue of including two-handed in the new UA feature.(edit: whoops, I missed that two-handed is already forbidden in the base monk martial arts feature, nevermind that!)It is very ambiguous exactly what sort of weapon the Arms of the Astral Self are. Unarmed Strikes that have a reach of 10? Probably not, since the feature feels the need to specify that you can attack with them as a bonus action (which would already be the case if they were unarmed strikes). Natural Weapons that you are proficient with? Improvised Weapons that you are proficient with? Something else? Personally I think that were this class to be released, they should probably write those arms to just be an enhancement to the reach/damage type of your unarmed strikes, the same way that Fangs of the Fire Snake works for the Four Elements monk.
Your bite and claw attacks (or any other attack provided by your wildshape beast form) are not improvised weapon attacks, they are natural weapon attacks that your beast is proficient in. The fact that wildshape gives you the skill and saving throw proficiencies of your wildshape form but not its weapon proficiencies is almost certainly an oversight that should be errata'd, because otherwise when making a Bear's Bite or Claw attack you should be doing so with a -2 to hit compared to the Beast's statblock, which is definitely not RAI. Either way, having natural weapons count as monk weapons would probably spike your damage much higher than a pure monk or a pure druid by letting your flurry after big 2d6+ attacks like Bear's Claw, so I wouldn't think that should be an easy gimme. Maybe a monk subclass will come along that is designed to synergize or replicate wildshape?
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The current, PHB monk feature does not let 2-handed weapons be monk weapons, so greatclubs are already not monk weapons and the UA variant rule doesn't change that. The UA rule lets martial and ranged weapons be monk weapons without having to go kensei (which still has the benefit of using 2-handed and longbows as well as getting new proficiencies).
The "fangs of the fire snake" idea might be better than how it currently works.
Druid wildshape says you get all the beast's features. This includes its actions and (natural) weapon proficiencies. The sentences that mention skills and saves are to add your proficiencies to the beast's, not the other way around. I don't think they will ever make a subclass designed specifically to benefit from multiclassing. I also don't think natural weapons need to count as monk weapons (it will lead to more shenanigans than it is worth).
Natural attacks (claws, bite, etc.) are unarmed strikes, and are eligible for Martial Arts.
Improvised weapons are generally not eligible for Martial Arts. If the improvised weapon is sufficiently similar to an existing weapon, the DM can allow it to be treated as if it were the existing weapon. If that weapon is one in which you have proficiency, and meets the other prerequisites, it can be considered a monk weapon eligible for Martial Arts.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
They are not. An unarmed strike is not a weapon and does 1+str damage by definition (unless subject to a specific exception), and monster bites/claws are called out as “natural weapon”s in the MM introduction. There are SA rulings on it too, but even RAW they are not unarmed strikes.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
That doesn't seem ambiguous to me. They are monk weapons and have a reach of 10 feet.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I think you misunderstood the question as it relates to Arms of the Astral Self. Serf wasn't questioning whether they're monk weapons or what their reach is, that's clear. The first half of his post questioned whether they were "improvised weapons", "simple weapons," or something else (like "natural weapons" or "unarmed strikes"). The answer appears to be that the UA write up doesn't define what sort of weapon they are yet.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
I did not say they were weapons; they aren't. We're talking about PC/NPC races, not standard template monsters. MM stat blocks are a completely separate thing with rules that are not cross-applicable.
A PC with class levels (or a custom NPC with levels), whom has natural weapons from their race, uses their natural weapon as an unarmed strike. This unarmed strike is eligible for Martial Arts.
Aarakocra, Lizardfolk, Tabaxi, Loxodon, Centaur, and Minotaur all have natural weapons which are explicitly called out as being used for unarmed strikes. I am not aware of any player races with natural weapons that aren't unarmed strikes.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
Ah I see, you misunderstood the conversation. OP is talking about multiclass monk/druids which have a natural weapon in the beast's stat block, not the enhanced unarmed strikes granted by certain races. Yes, you are correct that those races have features which enhance their unarmed strikes, but those are not the same sort of "claw" as the Natural Weapons listed in beast statblocks that a wildshaped druid would be using.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
If the PC has the same natural weapon as the form of their Wild Shape, as a character's features remain applicable, it is still an unarmed strike.
I.e., a Lizardfolk Monk/Druid shifts into a Brown Bear, their Bite attack still counts.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
It is literally a different weapon, that unfortunately shares the same name. It really doesn't transform a Natural Weapon into an Unarmed Strike. But you're free to rule it a different way in your games. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
It really does. From the Druid class on Wild Shape:
You retain all features that the new form is physically capable of using. Special senses (if you wanna get weird and put racial unarmed strikes in this bucket) also carry over if the new form has the same thing.
Lizardfolk have Bite which counts as an unarmed strike for the purpose of Martial Arts applicability. Bears have Bite. A wildshaped Lizardfolk Monk/Druid makes Bite attacks that qualify for Martial Arts.
Aarakocra have Talons. Bears do not. No Talon unarmed strikes for the Aarakocra as a bear, but another beast form that does have Talons qualifies.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I would ask you to point to where in the rules text you are getting the impression that a lizard's bite gives it proficiency in bite natural attacks, or where there is any mention of changing sizes/shapes modifying the damage dice provided in your racial features, or anything at all that links those two "bites"... but I already know that you aren't really talking about RAW [REDACTED]
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
If the beast you wildshape into has the anatomy to perform a the natural weapon attack of your race (bite, talon, etc), it can. But it uses the damage dice of that feature/unarmed strike, it does not make the beast's natural weapons of the same name count as unarmed strikes.
PHB Chapter 9: Melee Attacks
We can do this all day.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.
I am aware that you are willing to do this all day, even though you're advocating for something that is explicitly not RAW. Like I said, "okay".
Nothing you've quoted there says (or even implies) that the melee attacks of monsters using claws, horns, teeth, tentacles, or other body parts are unarmed strikes, any more than it implies that melee attacks using handheld weapons are unarmed strikes. And the Monster Manual conclusively demonstrates that you are cherry picking, and that a monster's claws are "natural weapons" not "unarmed strikes."
This is not a good faith argument you are making about RAW. Nothing is stopping you from saying that a race with an unarmed strike bite gets some added bonus when wildshaped as a beast with a natural weapon bite, but there is exactly zero textual support for such a feature, so please do not sidetrack the conversation about what the RAW interaction is.
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
Dude, you are incorrect, and making sweeping generalizations about me. This is 100% RAW.
You don't know what fear is until you've witnessed a drunk bird divebombing you while carrying a screaming Kobold throwing fire anywhere and everywhere.