No. Regardless of whether or not unarmed strikes with natural weapons count as attacks with weapons, Two-Weapon Fighting requires that you be holding the weapons in question.
If you want to make unarmed strikes as a bonus action, play a monk.
I am so confused to make a disctinction between those two type of attack.
Basicelly because of the bonus action ''two-weapon fighting''.(1)
Can a tabaxi because of his Natural melee Weapon can hit with a short sword and BA one Natural melee Weapon attack? (2)
Can a human because of his Unarmed Strike can hit with a short sword and BA one Unarmed Strike attack? (3)
In which way does the ''Martial Arts'' Monk class feature can draw a clear line here? (4)
Thanks in advance
No
No
No
Martial Arts is entirely irrelevant
To get right at the heart of the matter, Unarmed Strikes & Natural Weapons are never eligible for use with Two-Weapon Fighting. Unarmed Strikes are not weapons, and neither UAs nor NWs carry the Light weapon property. You do not ever get to use these with Two-Weapon Fighting.
Two-Weapon Fighting
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand. You don't add your ability modifier to the damage of the bonus attack, unless that modifier is negative.
If either weapon has the thrown property, you can throw the weapon, instead of making a melee attack with it.
Also worth noting is that while Natural Weapons are considered actual weapons, and even if you have the Dual Wielder feat (removing the Light restriction), they are still ineligible for use with Two-Weapon Fighting as they never count as being held in your hand(s).
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.
There's also some uncertainty over whether a "Natural Weapon" is really a game term with any significance in 5E. Some PC races describe their Unarmed Strikes being enhanced due to "natural weapons," but those attacks are still Unarmed Strikes. Many Monsters have melee attacks which use "natural weapons," but these aren't ever called "Natural Weapon attacks" or anything which would lend that any significance. Alter Self can grant you natural weapons... which are enhancements to your Unarmed Strikes. The Insignia of Claws may be the only thing anywhere which has an effect that specifically interacts with "natural weapons" separate from Unarmed Strikes... but it applies the exact same bonus to both natural weapons and Unarmed Strikes, so it's a distinction without a difference.
Long story short... I'm not sure it's worth trying to ask anything about a distinction, other than in the one narrow context of whether a Wildshaped Druid with Extra Attack from a multiclass can make multiple claw/bite/whatevernaturalweapon attacks without the Beast having a Multiattack feature allowing them to do so. The answer to that one is "yeah, probably, or at least why not?", but other than that, there's isn't much room for it to matter to a Tabaxi or Minotaur or any other PC race whether they're making an "Unarmed Strike" or an "attack using a Natural Weapon."
The Monk ability "Martial Arts" provides the option "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."
This emulates the Two-Weapon Fighting bonus action, specifically to allow monks to use an unarmed strike for an attack as a bonus action (all other classes would have to use a weapon for this extra attack).
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Hi,
I am so confused to make a disctinction between those two type of attack.
Basicelly because of the bonus action ''two-weapon fighting''.
Can a tabaxi because of his Natural melee Weapon can hit with a short sword and BA one Natural melee Weapon attack?
Can a human because of his Unarmed Strike can hit with a short sword and BA one Unarmed Strike attack?
In which way does the ''Martial Arts'' Monk class feature can draw a clear line here?
Thanks in advance
No. Regardless of whether or not unarmed strikes with natural weapons count as attacks with weapons, Two-Weapon Fighting requires that you be holding the weapons in question.
If you want to make unarmed strikes as a bonus action, play a monk.
To get right at the heart of the matter, Unarmed Strikes & Natural Weapons are never eligible for use with Two-Weapon Fighting. Unarmed Strikes are not weapons, and neither UAs nor NWs carry the Light weapon property. You do not ever get to use these with Two-Weapon Fighting.
Also worth noting is that while Natural Weapons are considered actual weapons, and even if you have the Dual Wielder feat (removing the Light restriction), they are still ineligible for use with Two-Weapon Fighting as they never count as being held in your hand(s).
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 has the merit of being very clear, thanks.
The ''light'' property is the key word to remind. Thank you!!
One more time I have to say that the community here is very proactive :)
There's also some uncertainty over whether a "Natural Weapon" is really a game term with any significance in 5E. Some PC races describe their Unarmed Strikes being enhanced due to "natural weapons," but those attacks are still Unarmed Strikes. Many Monsters have melee attacks which use "natural weapons," but these aren't ever called "Natural Weapon attacks" or anything which would lend that any significance. Alter Self can grant you natural weapons... which are enhancements to your Unarmed Strikes. The Insignia of Claws may be the only thing anywhere which has an effect that specifically interacts with "natural weapons" separate from Unarmed Strikes... but it applies the exact same bonus to both natural weapons and Unarmed Strikes, so it's a distinction without a difference.
Long story short... I'm not sure it's worth trying to ask anything about a distinction, other than in the one narrow context of whether a Wildshaped Druid with Extra Attack from a multiclass can make multiple claw/bite/whatevernaturalweapon attacks without the Beast having a Multiattack feature allowing them to do so. The answer to that one is "yeah, probably, or at least why not?", but other than that, there's isn't much room for it to matter to a Tabaxi or Minotaur or any other PC race whether they're making an "Unarmed Strike" or an "attack using a Natural Weapon."
dndbeyond.com forum tags
I'm going to make this way harder than it needs to be.
The Monk ability "Martial Arts" provides the option "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."
This emulates the Two-Weapon Fighting bonus action, specifically to allow monks to use an unarmed strike for an attack as a bonus action (all other classes would have to use a weapon for this extra attack).