A monk should be attacking quickly (and do, their class is designed for that). how about this. A weapon that deals 1d8 damage, and can deal an additional 1d4 by grappling on a hit. Is that overpowered at sacrifice to a fighting style? Considering you can use a quarterstaff (1d8, is finesse), I would say that puts the fighter who takes this style on par with the monk.
I would love a good non Monk brawler/grappler and your absolutely correct that Monks should not be the only option unarmed combat. I don't see why there isn't a Fighter or Barbarian archetype the fills the strength based Unarmed Combat niche. The Unarmed Fighting Style is a good start but it only does part of the job required in my opinion.
Every time they try people complain about it replacing the monk.
Because every time they dramatically over-correct. They always end up introducing things that make Monk--the H2H specialist--a diminished quantity.
Nobody cares if a Fighter can specialize to be an effective H2H combatant. We care when something as minor as a fighting style or feat overshadows the theme & performance of an entire base class.
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.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that one class being allowed to do something means another class that can do the same thing is no longer useful. [Redacted]
A fighter with Unarmed Fighting can throw a d6 punch, or a d8 punch if they double-fist it. They can also deal a d4 when they start a grapple or hit somebody with an attack while the target is grappled. That's what they can do. A Monk can:
-Use Dex instead of Strength for unarmed and monk-weapon attacks, if they like. -Deal enhanced damage with their martial arts attacks, mathematically equaling or beating the fighter's damage output. -Throw an unarmed attack as a bonus action if it punches/monk-weapon's as its main action -Ignore armor and defend itself with nothing more than its raw stats using Unarmored Defense. -Move a great deal faster than a fighter can, traversing terrain the fighter would find impassable. -Deal magical damage with its bare fists -Swat arrows/bolts/sling bullets/actual bullets out of the air with their bare hands -Fistfight inside a Wall of Fire without taking damage
And that's ignoring Ki, any subclass options, and the back half of the monk's class features. The Fighter gets to deal more raw damage with a Strength-based punch from levels 1 to 10 and has better grappling. The monk is a freaking anime superhero. The fighter being able to throw a punch you actually have to worry about and being able to wrassle decently does not diminish the monk.
It just means that people who want a big swole wrasslin' facepuncher finally have an option, because monks are not that thing.
Anime Superhero: yes. John Cena: no.
Notes: Please refrain from personal commentary. Thank you!
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that one class being allowed to do something means another class that can do the same thing is no longer useful. [Redacted]
I have said no such thing, nor anything even remotely close to [this]. [Redacted]
Notes: Please refrain from personal commentary. Thank you!
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.
Then tell us: how, exactly, does this fighting style "diminish" the monk? In what way is the monk a less desirable class because of the existence of this fighting style? What's your argument here, and what's your proposal for fixing it?
A fighter with Unarmed Fighting can throw a d6 punch, or a d8 punch if they double-fist it. They can also deal a d4 when they start a grapple or hit somebody with an attack while the target is grappled. That's what they can do. A Monk can:
-Use Dex instead of Strength for unarmed and monk-weapon attacks, if they like. -Deal enhanced damage with their martial arts attacks, mathematically equaling or beating the fighter's damage output. -Throw an unarmed attack as a bonus action if it punches/monk-weapon's as its main action -Ignore armor and defend itself with nothing more than its raw stats using Unarmored Defense. -Move a great deal faster than a fighter can, traversing terrain the fighter would find impassable. -Deal magical damage with its bare fists -Swat arrows/bolts/sling bullets/actual bullets out of the air with their bare hands -Fistfight inside a Wall of Fire without taking damage
And that's ignoring Ki, any subclass options, and the back half of the monk's class features. The Fighter gets to deal more raw damage with a Strength-based punch from levels 1 to 10 and has better grappling. The monk is a freaking anime superhero. The fighter being able to throw a punch you actually have to worry about and being able to wrassle decently does not diminish the monk.
It just means that people who want a big swole wrasslin' facepuncher finally have an option, because monks are not that thing.
Anime Superhero: yes. John Cena: no.
So the base conclusion I think is that monk is still monk and this just offers a new style of fist combat that isn’t monk, but monk still gets a ton of cool monk stuff and fighter still has there cool fighter stuff. Nice
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Marvarax andSora (Dragonborn) The retired fighter and WIP scholar - Glory
Brythel(Dwarf), The dwarf with a gun - survival at sea
Jaylin(Human), Paladin of Lathander's Ancient ways - The Seven Saints (Azura Claw)
Urselles(Goblin), Cleric of Eldath- The Wizard's challenge
Viclas Tyrin(Half Elf), Student of the Elven arts- Indrafatmoko's Defiance in Phlan
You arguably can't 1d8 once grappling, because it states you need two free hands, so once you are grappling you only do 1d6 damage+the 1d4. We need clarity on this, but I think that this was considered when balancing this Fighting Style. Also i think it needs to be considered that you may not be able to use some maneuvers, because they separately state "weapon attack" and "melee weapon attack", which to me means you must be wielding a weapon for a former, but not for the latter. I think that this Fighting Style is completely balanced and does not at all interfere with the Monk's abilities as an unarmed fighter. I wish people wouldn't be so quick to shoot things down, because I like this and want to use it.
You arguably can't 1d8 once grappling, because it states you need two free hands, so once you are grappling you only do 1d6 damage+the 1d4. We need clarity on this, but I think that this was considered when balancing this Fighting Style. Also i think it needs to be considered that you may not be able to use some maneuvers, because they separately state "weapon attack" and "melee weapon attack", which to me means you must be wielding a weapon for a former, but not for the latter. I think that this Fighting Style is completely balanced and does not at all interfere with the Monk's abilities as an unarmed fighter. I wish people wouldn't be so quick to shoot things down, because I like this and want to use it.
There are a few Sage Advice on the subject because for some reason they chose some unfortunate words.
But all Unarmed Strikes, regardless of class or fighting style, are 'Melee Weapon Attacks' (the other options for this are 'Ranged Weapon Attack', 'Melee Spell Attack', 'Ranged spell attack' so seeing them all together sometimes helps clarify the intention)
Now if something says it modifies 'the weapon' then it wont work. because fists are not 'weapons'
the dice modifier for monk is not what makes martial arts so good for them. Monks get a lot of other shit. This would be like saying that the cleric makes the wizard useless, because they prepare from their entire spell list, while the wizard prepares from a book.
the dice modifier for monk is not what makes martial arts so good for them. Monks get a lot of other shit. This would be like saying that the cleric makes the wizard useless, because they prepare from their entire spell list, while the wizard prepares from a book.
While I agree with the sentiment, I think you would be hard pressed to find a player willing to play a monk if they only did 1 + Dex Mod in damage lol
The maneuvers say both "weapon attack" and "melee weapon attack" though. Two different wordings in the same subset of abilities I would have to imagine mean two different things. I asked Jeremy Crawford for a clear answer on this; I hope he sees it and answers. Either way I think people are overstating the strength of the fighting style.
There are four kinds of "Attack Roll": Melee weapon, ranged weapon, melee spell, and ranged spell. Unarmed attacks are a "Melee Weapon" attack roll and an unarmedf strike qualifies for anything that requires a "Melee Weapon" attack roll.
Your naked monkey paws do not, however, count as 'weapons', which means that any buff or ability which specifically requires you to be holding a weapon does not function on your naked monkey paws short of DM fiat.
This is a result of unfortunate wording choices from Wizards, who are terrible at their jobs and should really know better, but the breakdown is generally well established and understood at this point via multiple tweets and Sage Advice thingumies.
Everyone saying that fists don't do magical damage unless you take 6 levels in Monk - I know its more on the DM to offer it (so ask!) but all unarmed (even natural armed druids!) can use Insignia of Claws to not only add +1 to attacks but also make them magical!
Yes I know it says "Weapon damage" and some interpretations say unarmed isn't weapons. But that's being more than a bit rigid in my opinion. And as I said, it could just be nulled with "fist weapons" with only the grapple damage lost.
Unarmed Attacks are strictly not weapons, hence the monk having a class feature that overrides this.
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike
Too bad an empty hand balled up into a fist doesn’t count as a Light Weapon.
Two-W e a p o n F i g h t i n g
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.
A monk should be attacking quickly (and do, their class is designed for that). how about this. A weapon that deals 1d8 damage, and can deal an additional 1d4 by grappling on a hit. Is that overpowered at sacrifice to a fighting style? Considering you can use a quarterstaff (1d8, is finesse), I would say that puts the fighter who takes this style on par with the monk.
I would love a good non Monk brawler/grappler and your absolutely correct that Monks should not be the only option unarmed combat. I don't see why there isn't a Fighter or Barbarian archetype the fills the strength based Unarmed Combat niche. The Unarmed Fighting Style is a good start but it only does part of the job required in my opinion.
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
Every time they try people complain about it replacing the monk.
Using a weapon is not fulfilling the Unarmed brawling/grappling idea very well
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The monk uses the weapon in this situation
Because every time they dramatically over-correct. They always end up introducing things that make Monk--the H2H specialist--a diminished quantity.
Nobody cares if a Fighter can specialize to be an effective H2H combatant. We care when something as minor as a fighting style or feat overshadows the theme & performance of an entire base class.
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.
Except it does no such thing.
You seem to be under the mistaken impression that one class being allowed to do something means another class that can do the same thing is no longer useful. [Redacted]
A fighter with Unarmed Fighting can throw a d6 punch, or a d8 punch if they double-fist it. They can also deal a d4 when they start a grapple or hit somebody with an attack while the target is grappled. That's what they can do. A Monk can:
-Use Dex instead of Strength for unarmed and monk-weapon attacks, if they like.
-Deal enhanced damage with their martial arts attacks, mathematically equaling or beating the fighter's damage output.
-Throw an unarmed attack as a bonus action if it punches/monk-weapon's as its main action
-Ignore armor and defend itself with nothing more than its raw stats using Unarmored Defense.
-Move a great deal faster than a fighter can, traversing terrain the fighter would find impassable.
-Deal magical damage with its bare fists
-Swat arrows/bolts/sling bullets/actual bullets out of the air with their bare hands
-Fistfight inside a Wall of Fire without taking damage
And that's ignoring Ki, any subclass options, and the back half of the monk's class features. The Fighter gets to deal more raw damage with a Strength-based punch from levels 1 to 10 and has better grappling. The monk is a freaking anime superhero. The fighter being able to throw a punch you actually have to worry about and being able to wrassle decently does not diminish the monk.
It just means that people who want a big swole wrasslin' facepuncher finally have an option, because monks are not that thing.
Anime Superhero: yes.
John Cena: no.
Please do not contact or message me.
[Redacted]
I have said no such thing, nor anything even remotely close to [this]. [Redacted]
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.
All right.
Then tell us: how, exactly, does this fighting style "diminish" the monk? In what way is the monk a less desirable class because of the existence of this fighting style? What's your argument here, and what's your proposal for fixing it?
Please do not contact or message me.
So the base conclusion I think is that monk is still monk and this just offers a new style of fist combat that isn’t monk, but monk still gets a ton of cool monk stuff and fighter still has there cool fighter stuff. Nice
Marvarax and Sora (Dragonborn) The retired fighter and WIP scholar - Glory
Brythel(Dwarf), The dwarf with a gun - survival at sea
Jaylin(Human), Paladin of Lathander's Ancient ways - The Seven Saints (Azura Claw)
Urselles(Goblin), Cleric of Eldath- The Wizard's challenge
Viclas Tyrin(Half Elf), Student of the Elven arts- Indrafatmoko's Defiance in Phlan
You arguably can't 1d8 once grappling, because it states you need two free hands, so once you are grappling you only do 1d6 damage+the 1d4. We need clarity on this, but I think that this was considered when balancing this Fighting Style. Also i think it needs to be considered that you may not be able to use some maneuvers, because they separately state "weapon attack" and "melee weapon attack", which to me means you must be wielding a weapon for a former, but not for the latter. I think that this Fighting Style is completely balanced and does not at all interfere with the Monk's abilities as an unarmed fighter. I wish people wouldn't be so quick to shoot things down, because I like this and want to use it.
There are a few Sage Advice on the subject because for some reason they chose some unfortunate words.
But all Unarmed Strikes, regardless of class or fighting style, are 'Melee Weapon Attacks' (the other options for this are 'Ranged Weapon Attack', 'Melee Spell Attack', 'Ranged spell attack' so seeing them all together sometimes helps clarify the intention)
Now if something says it modifies 'the weapon' then it wont work. because fists are not 'weapons'
the dice modifier for monk is not what makes martial arts so good for them. Monks get a lot of other shit. This would be like saying that the cleric makes the wizard useless, because they prepare from their entire spell list, while the wizard prepares from a book.
While I agree with the sentiment, I think you would be hard pressed to find a player willing to play a monk if they only did 1 + Dex Mod in damage lol
She/Her Player and Dungeon Master
The maneuvers say both "weapon attack" and "melee weapon attack" though. Two different wordings in the same subset of abilities I would have to imagine mean two different things. I asked Jeremy Crawford for a clear answer on this; I hope he sees it and answers. Either way I think people are overstating the strength of the fighting style.
The clear answer has been given before.
There are four kinds of "Attack Roll": Melee weapon, ranged weapon, melee spell, and ranged spell. Unarmed attacks are a "Melee Weapon" attack roll and an unarmedf strike qualifies for anything that requires a "Melee Weapon" attack roll.
Your naked monkey paws do not, however, count as 'weapons', which means that any buff or ability which specifically requires you to be holding a weapon does not function on your naked monkey paws short of DM fiat.
This is a result of unfortunate wording choices from Wizards, who are terrible at their jobs and should really know better, but the breakdown is generally well established and understood at this point via multiple tweets and Sage Advice thingumies.
Please do not contact or message me.
Thank you for the clarification. I feel like there is a better way for them to describe attacks so that there is no confusion, but I myself don't have the solution. Speaking of Sage advice, this is what I found: https://www.sageadvice.eu/2015/09/06/what-specifically-does-melee-weapon-attack-mean/
Whenever there is an exception to a rule then it causes confusion, so I guess that is the problem that needs to be fixed.
Everyone saying that fists don't do magical damage unless you take 6 levels in Monk - I know its more on the DM to offer it (so ask!) but all unarmed (even natural armed druids!) can use Insignia of Claws to not only add +1 to attacks but also make them magical!
Unarmed Attacks are strictly not weapons, hence the monk having a class feature that overrides this.
Too bad an empty hand balled up into a fist doesn’t count as a Light Weapon.
Two-W e a p o n F i g h t i n g
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.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting