Just been reading through the Sage Advice Compendium and came across the following entries which appear to contradict each other -
Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons?
Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack.
The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
Can a rogue/monk use Sneak Attack with unarmed strikes?
The Sneak Attack feature works with a weapon that has the finesse or ranged property. An unarmed strike isn’t a weapon, so it doesn’t qualify. In contrast, a rogue/ monk can use Sneak Attack with a monk weapon, such as a shortsword or a dagger, that has one of the required properties.
The answer to the first question states that "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" and "unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons."
The answer to the second question states that "An unarmed strike isn’t a weapon".
The answers appear to contradict each other, is that right?
Thanks in advance
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
I'm not sure that I understand the difference between "counts as a weapon" and "isn't a weapon" in a rules sense. Either it is, or it isn't.
I get the visual difference & what have you, though the intention seems on one hand to make Monks stand out from other characters making unarmed attacks whilst later removing that same distinction in the event that the monk character wants to be sneaky whilst not carrying weapons.
I may be confusing myself. I dunno. It's so late now it's actually early so maybe my brain just isn't engaging correctly!
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
A punch is considered "melee weapon attack" but ones fists are not considered weapons. Anything that triggers off of a "melee weapon attack" can trigger from a punch, kick, headbutt, claw, or bite. Anything that requires the presence of an actual weapon cannot. Its a fiddly wording and could have been done better, but it is technically different.
Unarmed strikes are decidedly not weapons, don't count as weapons, and don't have weapon properties (which is why they don't work with sneak attack).
The problem is there are only 4 types of attacks as described in the rules: melee weapon attack, ranged weapon attack, melee spell attack, and ranged spell attack.
Unarmed strikes are not weapons, but make melee weapon attacks. (Similarly there are some monsters and class features that make spell attacks, but are not spells).
Ok, I remain confused. Not sure what the difference hopes to achieve lol.
An attack is attack, damage is damage, being sneaky is being sneaky. I don't get why sneak attack is dependent holding a weapon. If anything, not using a weapon will cause less noise, thereby increasing how sneaky you are. I'd have thought that for that reason, sneak attack could be used.
Reckon it's something I'll permit as a homebrew rule if it ever comes up.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
Sneak attack requires the weapon have the Finesse or Ranged properties. Unarmed strikes, while considered melee weapon attacks, do not have those properties.
Ok, I remain confused. Not sure what the difference hopes to achieve lol.
An attack is attack, damage is damage, being sneaky is being sneaky. I don't get why sneak attack is dependent holding a weapon. If anything, not using a weapon will cause less noise, thereby increasing how sneaky you are. I'd have thought that for that reason, sneak attack could be used.
Reckon it's something I'll permit as a homebrew rule if it ever comes up.
You could consider that, with actual "weapons" that can inflict sneak attack damage, these weapons are designed in such a way as to be able to strike vital organs more effectively, can more easily slip through or pierce the armor to reach the fleshy interior, and slice up the Achilles tendon.
All slashing and piercing weapons can do the above, bludgeoning weapons are still effective, but that is represented through critical hits rather than sneak attack damage.
A good martial artist can target weak points in a different way, which is represented by allowing a d4+ for damage and through Stunning Strike. To my knowledge, no human has the strength and force to actually pierce through the chest, ribcage, etc. to strike the heart. Punching the liver or kidneys through the flesh is still not as fatal as piercing with a dagger, and again I would argue that an effective punch to the kidney would be a stunning strike or critical hit rather than sneak attack.
As far as noise, go get a 15 lb. slab of beef or pork, punch it with your fist, then stab it with your kitchen knife.
EDIT: Oh, easy references regarding noise. Rocky training by punching the carcass of a cow, and I won't post it but if you can stomach it and care to search, slaughterhouse footage where they stab the neck of pigs and cows.
An attack is attack, damage is damage, being sneaky is being sneaky. I don't get why sneak attack is dependent holding a weapon. If anything, not using a weapon will cause less noise, thereby increasing how sneaky you are. I'd have thought that for that reason, sneak attack could be used.
Sneak attack is not really about being sneaky, it is more about accuracy. In other games/editions the same feature is called backstab. It requires a weapon with the finnese or ranged properties to do. Unarmed strikes are not weapons and do not have any weapon properties.
I feel like I've been pretty through in my explanation on weapon attacks to have sufficiently anwered your original question.
Ok, I remain confused. Not sure what the difference hopes to achieve lol.
An attack is attack, damage is damage, being sneaky is being sneaky. I don't get why sneak attack is dependent holding a weapon. If anything, not using a weapon will cause less noise, thereby increasing how sneaky you are. I'd have thought that for that reason, sneak attack could be used.
Reckon it's something I'll permit as a homebrew rule if it ever comes up.
Two things (which have already been pointed out, but bear repeating):
Sneak Attacks are sadly misnamed. They have very little to do with being sneaky (only relation is that if you're sneaky, you get Advantage on your attack, which allows you to use Sneak Attack), and more to do with being able to strike with precision and be highly effective (a sort of "super critical hit", which would also be a bad name, since Sneak Attacks can crit as well). You can perform Sneak Attacks as a Rogue if you have Advantage on your attack, or if your target has a hostile creature within 5'. Being sneaky is not a requirement. (Swashbuckler Rogues get an additional condition which allows them to Sneak Attack, but that's neither here nor there.)
There are two orthogonal categories of attacks, with two types in each. An attack can be either a "weapon" attack or a "spell" attack. "Weapon" attacks are sadly misnamed, too. Maybe "physical" would be a better name, I dunno. But every attack is either a "weapon" attack or a "spell" attack. The other category is "ranged" vs "melee", which is much better named (although Reach could confuse the issue a bit, and does in at least one case: the prone condition, which affects not "ranged" vs "melee", but rather "within 5 feet" vs "over 5 feet"... an attack with a melee weapon against a prone target can get Disadvantage, if the weapon has a Reach higher than 5' and the attack is made from over 5' away). Attacks with swords, maces, punches, kicks, headbutts, etc. are all "weapon" attacks and "melee" attacks (hence "melee weapon attack"). Attacks with bows, crossbows, darts, etc. are all "weapon" attacks and "ranged" attacks (hence "ranged weapon attack"). Shocking Grasp, Vampiric Touch, etc. are all "spell" attacks and "melee" attacks (hence "melee spell attack"). Scorching Ray, Chromatic Orb, etc. are all "spell" attacks and "ranged" attacks (hence "ranged spell attack"). "Attacks" which don't involve rolling to hit, but rather a Saving Throw, or just directly dealing damage, are not attacks (so Magic Missile, Toll the Dead, etc. are not attacks, in the mechanical, rules sense). Finally, there are some "special" attacks which break the rules, like Grapples and Shoves.
So: unarmed attacks are "melee weapon attacks" (because they're not "spell" attacks, and they're not "ranged" attacks), but they are not "attacks with a melee weapon", because there is no weapon involved. They, therefore, cannot be candidates for Sneak Attack, because that requires a weapon with the finesse property, or a ranged weapon, and unarmed attacks use no weapon. (Note that this also means you can't use a javelin, handaxe, or spear to make a Sneak Attack, because even when you throw them, although you're performing a "ranged weapon attack", you're not performing an "attack with a ranged weapon", since those are not ranged weapons, but rather melee weapons with the thrown property, and Sneak Attack requires a finesse or ranged weapon, not merely a "ranged weapon attack".)
it is clunky, if simply because these questions come up frequently. That being said; I find it helpful to interpret the sneak attack weapon restrictions to be there for the simple reason that in order to take advantage of a fleeting opportunity to "backstab" in a combat situation, the rogue must be prepared with the right tools. There should be circumstances where the rogue just can't exploit his enemies weakness.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jesus Saves!... Everyone else takes damage.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Just been reading through the Sage Advice Compendium and came across the following entries which appear to contradict each other -
Can a monk use Stunning Strike with an unarmed strike, even though unarmed strikes aren’t weapons?
Yes. Stunning Strike works with melee weapon attacks, and an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack.
The game often makes exceptions to general rules, and this is an important exception: that unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons.
Can a rogue/monk use Sneak Attack with unarmed strikes?
The Sneak Attack feature works with a weapon that has the finesse or ranged property. An unarmed strike isn’t a weapon, so it doesn’t qualify. In contrast, a rogue/ monk can use Sneak Attack with a monk weapon, such as a shortsword or a dagger, that has one of the required properties.
The answer to the first question states that "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" and "unarmed strikes count as melee weapon attacks despite not being weapons."
The answer to the second question states that "An unarmed strike isn’t a weapon".
The answers appear to contradict each other, is that right?
Thanks in advance
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
They seem to, but don't. Basically a weapon attack is not the same as an attack with a weapon.
In the rules terminology they chose to use "weapon attack" means non-spell attack.
I'm not sure that I understand the difference between "counts as a weapon" and "isn't a weapon" in a rules sense. Either it is, or it isn't.
I get the visual difference & what have you, though the intention seems on one hand to make Monks stand out from other characters making unarmed attacks whilst later removing that same distinction in the event that the monk character wants to be sneaky whilst not carrying weapons.
I may be confusing myself. I dunno. It's so late now it's actually early so maybe my brain just isn't engaging correctly!
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
A punch is considered "melee weapon attack" but ones fists are not considered weapons. Anything that triggers off of a "melee weapon attack" can trigger from a punch, kick, headbutt, claw, or bite. Anything that requires the presence of an actual weapon cannot. Its a fiddly wording and could have been done better, but it is technically different.
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!
Unarmed strikes are decidedly not weapons, don't count as weapons, and don't have weapon properties (which is why they don't work with sneak attack).
The problem is there are only 4 types of attacks as described in the rules: melee weapon attack, ranged weapon attack, melee spell attack, and ranged spell attack.
Unarmed strikes are not weapons, but make melee weapon attacks. (Similarly there are some monsters and class features that make spell attacks, but are not spells).
Which is why my oath of ancients paladin hates creatures with spell like attacks that aren't spells.......
Ok, I remain confused. Not sure what the difference hopes to achieve lol.
An attack is attack, damage is damage, being sneaky is being sneaky. I don't get why sneak attack is dependent holding a weapon. If anything, not using a weapon will cause less noise, thereby increasing how sneaky you are. I'd have thought that for that reason, sneak attack could be used.
Reckon it's something I'll permit as a homebrew rule if it ever comes up.
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
Basic answer: Your punch counts does damage, but it isn't a weapon.
D&D is a game for nerds... so I guess I'm one :p
Ahh, but has your confusion changed from "what do the rules say?" to "why do the rules say that?"
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!
Sneak attack requires the weapon have the Finesse or Ranged properties. Unarmed strikes, while considered melee weapon attacks, do not have those properties.
You could consider that, with actual "weapons" that can inflict sneak attack damage, these weapons are designed in such a way as to be able to strike vital organs more effectively, can more easily slip through or pierce the armor to reach the fleshy interior, and slice up the Achilles tendon.
All slashing and piercing weapons can do the above, bludgeoning weapons are still effective, but that is represented through critical hits rather than sneak attack damage.
A good martial artist can target weak points in a different way, which is represented by allowing a d4+ for damage and through Stunning Strike. To my knowledge, no human has the strength and force to actually pierce through the chest, ribcage, etc. to strike the heart. Punching the liver or kidneys through the flesh is still not as fatal as piercing with a dagger, and again I would argue that an effective punch to the kidney would be a stunning strike or critical hit rather than sneak attack.
As far as noise, go get a 15 lb. slab of beef or pork, punch it with your fist, then stab it with your kitchen knife.
EDIT: Oh, easy references regarding noise. Rocky training by punching the carcass of a cow, and I won't post it but if you can stomach it and care to search, slaughterhouse footage where they stab the neck of pigs and cows.
Sneak attack is not really about being sneaky, it is more about accuracy. In other games/editions the same feature is called backstab. It requires a weapon with the finnese or ranged properties to do. Unarmed strikes are not weapons and do not have any weapon properties.
I feel like I've been pretty through in my explanation on weapon attacks to have sufficiently anwered your original question.
Two things (which have already been pointed out, but bear repeating):
So: unarmed attacks are "melee weapon attacks" (because they're not "spell" attacks, and they're not "ranged" attacks), but they are not "attacks with a melee weapon", because there is no weapon involved. They, therefore, cannot be candidates for Sneak Attack, because that requires a weapon with the finesse property, or a ranged weapon, and unarmed attacks use no weapon. (Note that this also means you can't use a javelin, handaxe, or spear to make a Sneak Attack, because even when you throw them, although you're performing a "ranged weapon attack", you're not performing an "attack with a ranged weapon", since those are not ranged weapons, but rather melee weapons with the thrown property, and Sneak Attack requires a finesse or ranged weapon, not merely a "ranged weapon attack".)
I get what people are saying, though honestly it feels clunky and pedantic.
Happy to accept that's just how it is but honestly I can't help but think it needs amending as the exclusion doesn't make sense.
Thanks everyone for your time, hope you all have a great day.
53845/TEN - Warforged Diplomatic Assassin : Raam - Aasimar Death Domain Cleric, Doom Guide of Kelemvor
The exclusion of attacks made without a weapon from being a weapon doesnt make sense?
Which even if unarmed strikes were weapons, they still dont have the finnese or ranged properties so they still wouldn't trigger sneak attack.
it is clunky, if simply because these questions come up frequently. That being said; I find it helpful to interpret the sneak attack weapon restrictions to be there for the simple reason that in order to take advantage of a fleeting opportunity to "backstab" in a combat situation, the rogue must be prepared with the right tools. There should be circumstances where the rogue just can't exploit his enemies weakness.
Jesus Saves!... Everyone else takes damage.