Simple Q&A D&D 3.5 (by RAW) XXI

[willpell]

Not at all. The only similarity is that you get the same penalty as for two weapons when one is a light one. The obvious difference is that you are talking about two unarmed attacks and not two attacks with weapons, the other is that both unarmed attacks get the full STR mod to damage, while the off-hand weapon only gets 1/2 STR.

But a monk's unarmed strike counts as a weapon, and so he gets the same effect from Flurry of Blows that he would get if he used the Two-Weapon Fighting action to make two unarmed strike attacks (both of which would get his full STRMOD) and had the TWF feat to reduce the penalties to -2/-2. Other characters can't duplicate this feat with their unarmed strikes because they're not monks, but the only thing that's unique to the monk in this scenario is the way his unarmed strike works; if a DM-created light weapon dealt 1d6 lethal or nonlethal bludgeoning and always added your STR bonus regardless of handedness, a character wielding two such weapons would function exactly like a monk doing two unarmed strikes (except that the monk could be kicking instead of punching while holding a mahogany armoire in his hands).

[Andezzar]

But a monk's unarmed strike counts as a weapon,

No:

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

and so he gets the same effect from Flurry of Blows that he would get if he used the Two-Weapon Fighting action to make two unarmed strike attacks (both of which would get his full STRMOD) and had the TWF feat to reduce the penalties to -2/-2.

You can't make two attacks with an unarmed strike unless you get iteratives or use Flurry of Blows.

Other characters can't duplicate this feat with their unarmed strikes because they're not monks, but the only thing that's unique to the monk in this scenario is the way his unarmed strike works; if a DM-created light weapon dealt 1d6 lethal or nonlethal bludgeoning and always added your STR bonus regardless of handedness, a character wielding two such weapons would function exactly like a monk doing two unarmed strikes (except that the monk could be kicking instead of punching while holding a mahogany armoire in his hands).

Even if it works similarly or exactly in the same way, it does not mean that it is the same thing.

[willpell]

No:
You can't make two attacks with an unarmed strike unless you get iteratives or use Flurry of Blows.

Re: A 456
Yes, you can.

There would appear to be a contradiction here. This was the entire point of my original question, and Curmudgeon indicated it was fine.

A 456 Yes.

Two-weapon fighting rules require you to have a second weapon available for off hand attacks, and one of those can be an unarmed strike. In 3.5 D&D with the removal of 3.0 Ambidexterity from the game, "main hand" and "off hand" are weapon access categorizations, and neither of these are required to actually involve a hand. You could, for instance, attack with a boot blade as your "main hand" weapon, and a head butt as your "off hand" weapon. Your Monk with a nunchaku could attack with any available part of their body for unarmed strikes; they don't need a free hand for that.

The above rules are pertinent to all classes fighting with two weapons, including (partly) unarmed. "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack" simply means there is no difference in effectiveness between a Monk's "main hand" and "off hand" unarmed attacks, and thus full STR bonus is added to damage regardless of the weapon access categorization.

I thought this was only true during Flurry of Blows? You're saying that if my monk has a longsword in one hand and a light shield in the other (don't ask how he became proficient), he can attack with the longsword and with a kick (taking -2/-2 if he has TWF and -4/-8 otherwise) and add his full Strength bonus to both attacks? But if he attacks with the longsword and bashes with the shield, the shield only gets half his Strength bonus?

You're missing the word "unarmed" there.

Not sure what you mean here. Where I said "kick", read it as "unarmed strike with a non-hand". You yourself said I can use an unarmed strike along with a weapon.

Re: A 456
Yes, you can.

There, that should be the entire conversation.

Even if it works similarly or exactly in the same way, it does not mean that it is the same thing.

I said "essentially", and you're getting into semantics. "It is the same thing" is true for all practical purposes, even if it isn't technically accurate.

[Curmudgeon]

There would appear to be a contradiction here. This was the entire point of my original question, and Curmudgeon indicated it was fine.

TWF lets you make an off hand unarmed strike if your main hand attack is with a manufactured weapon. It also lets you make an off hand manufactured weapon attack if your main hand attack is an unarmed strike. This was what was answered in your original question. However, you cannot use two-weapon fighting rules with only unarmed attacks.

The only contradiction is in your attempt to equate two different attack forms, one of which is illegal by RAW.

In that case, it just dawned on me that a first-level Monk's Flurry of Blows is essentially Two-Weapon Fighting with two unarmed strikes (and the feat of the same name being replaced by the Flurry class feature), is that correct?

Since TWF with only unarmed strikes is disallowed, this is not "essentially" anything but sowing confusion.

[willpell]

However, you cannot use two-weapon fighting rules with only unarmed attacks.

How do you know that? I saw no such clarification; if your main-hand "weapon" can be an unarmed strike, and your off-hand "weapon" can be an unarmed strike, what on earth makes you think you can't do both of those things at once?

[Curmudgeon]

How do you know that? I saw no such clarification; if your main-hand "weapon" can be an unarmed strike, and your off-hand "weapon" can be an unarmed strike, what on earth makes you think you can't do both of those things at once?

It's a good idea to look at links when someone (repeatedly) provides them as a resource.

Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon.

You must have two weapons to use the two-weapon fighting rules. You only have a single unarmed strike. You are not allowed alternate use of that single weapon as both "main hand" and "off hand" weapon for TWF any more than you're allowed to switch a single weapon between hands (using Quick Draw) for TWF.

[cd4]

Q461 If I have two natural claw attacks does the feat Pisonic Fist boost one or both of my claws?

Q462 Apart from making the will save, what methods exist for a raging barbarian to ignore a Calm Emotions spell or the Serenity power (CP)?

[Andezzar]

A 462

For the spell there is always immunity to mind-affecting effects (Protection from Alignment, Mind-Blank etc.)

[qwertyu63]

Q463

Do you have to be a wizard to write spellbook pages that a wizard can use? Assume you can make any skill checks required.

[willpell]

It's a good idea to look at links when someone (repeatedly) provides them as a resource.

I did. It provided no clarification on unarmed strikes whatsoever, save for the fact that it counts as a light weapon. And thus it follows logically that two of them count as two light weapons. I can't fathom why you are so certain that every character is not capable of two unarmed strikes; I have never once seen any rule in the book that says "A character's entire body provides only one unarmed strike". They do say something like "a character can make an unarmed strike", but they also say stuff like "a character can make a melee attack with a weapon"; this sort of language is far from ironclad.

Absent rules clarity, we must default to common sense, and common sense says that if you can use an unarmed strike as a one-handed (light) weapon, you can use two of them as two such weapons.

You must have two weapons to use the two-weapon fighting rules.

Right, your unarmed strike and your other unarmed strike. Just as you can have a sword in each hand - that's two weapons - so you can use the two hands themselves. If one of them counts as a weapon for game purposes, then the other does too.

You only have a single unarmed strike.

That's what I thought in the first place, but if you can use unarmed strikes interchangeably with one-handed weapons, it doesn't make any sense to say that you can't use two of them. How can it be that you can be fighting two guys, stabbing one with a sword and punching the other in the face, and then (next round) switch the sword to your other hand and stab the second guy with the sword and punch the first guy in the face, and then (one more round later) when you drop the sword suddenly you're not capable of punching them both in the face?

[Curmudgeon]

Re: A 456

And thus it follows logically that two of them count as two light weapons. I can't fathom why you are so certain that every character is not capable of two unarmed strikes; I have never once seen any rule in the book that says "A character's entire body provides only one unarmed strike".

Here's a rule for you. The spell Magic Weapon applies to a single weapon touched. If you have two identical swords in your left and right hands and cast this on the right hand sword it would have different properties than the left hand sword. If you cast this spell on a Monk it affects their single unarmed strike; their right and left hands and all other body parts are affected because they're only one weapon and never have different weapon properties. You cannot boost just a Monk's right hand separately any more than you can boost only a sword's right edge: it's not a separate weapon, half of a double weapon, or anything else distinguishable by game mechanics ─ just a part of a single weapon.

Right, your unarmed strike and your other unarmed strike. Just as you can have a sword in each hand - that's two weapons - so you can use the two hands themselves.

"Hand" is not a separate weapon listed in either the Equipment chapter or in the Monk class description; similarly, weapon "edge" is not a separate weapon. Unarmed strike is a listed weapon. To have two unarmed strikes you need two bodies.

A 461

The power affects a single natural weapon, not a group.

A 463 Yes.

Adding Spells to a Wizard’s Spellbook

Wizards can add new spells to their spellbooks through several methods.

The rules exclusively limit this capability to Wizards. Anyone can write (grocery list, poem, or whatever) in a spellbook, but if it's not written by a Wizard it can't be a Wizard spell.

[Zale]

Q 264: Do Half-Elves trance or sleep?

[OMG PONIES]

A 462 (partial): While it doesn't allow you to ignore them, the Mad Foam Rager feat from PHB II allows you to delay the effect of "a single attack, spell, or ability used against you" until the end of your next turn. Of course, I don't know whether a psionic power counts as an ability in this context.

[Kuulvheysoon]

Q 464: Do Half-Elves trance or sleep?

No. Trancing is a trait unique to elves (that half-elves do not receive), much like detecting secret doors.

A 462 (partial): While it doesn't allow you to ignore them, the Mad Foam Rager feat from PHB II allows you to delay the effect of "a single attack, spell, or ability used against you" until the end of your next turn. Of course, I don't know whether a psionic power counts as an ability in this context.

All powers are technically psi-like abilities, so yes, this would apply.

[deuxhero]

Q465 Is the fire damage from a Flaming Sap non-lethal?

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Q 466a Are PCs creatures? If not, what are they?

Q 466b Suppose a PC Human Wizard casts Alter Self to turn into a Tren, whose stat block contains Claw/Claw/Bite. Can the PC use this in a full attack, or is he restricted to attacks based on BaB?

Either way, please, provide as much direct textual evidence as possible.

[Kuulvheysoon]

A 465

No. The Flaming property on a vanilla sap deals fire damage.

A 466a

Yes, PCs count as creatures.

A 466b

The aforementioned wizard would be able to use all three attacks as a full round action, taking a -5 penalty on the secondary attack(s). The primary attack is the one(s) specified in the 'Attack' option.

From the d20 SRD

Full Attack

This line shows all the physical attacks the creature makes when it uses a full-round action to make a full attack. It gives the number of attacks along with the weapon, attack bonus, and form of attack (melee or ranged). The first entry is for the creature’s primary weapon, with an attack bonus including modifications for size and Strength (for melee attacks) or Dexterity (for ranged attacks). A creature with the Weapon Finesse feat can use its Dexterity modifier on melee attacks. The remaining weapons are secondary, and attacks with them are made with a -5 penalty to the attack roll, no matter how many there are. Creatures with the Multiattack feat take only a -2 penalty on secondary attacks. The damage that each attack deals is noted parenthetically. Damage from an attack is always at least 1 point, even if a subtraction from a die roll reduces the result to 0 or lower.

A creature’s primary attack damage includes its full Strength modifier (1½ times its Strength bonus if the attack is with the creature’s sole natural weapon) and is given first. Secondary attacks add only ½ the creature’s Strength bonus and are given second in the parentheses.

Bolded portion is the relevant quoted section of the rules.

[GoodbyeSoberDay]

Q466a continued Does there exist textual evidence supporting 466a, that PCs are creatures?

[Kuulvheysoon]

Q466a continued Does there exist textual evidence supporting 466a, that PCs are creatures?

PHB - in the description for any of the common races, it mentions their size category, followed by this line (for humans, for example):

Medium: As Medium creatures, humans have no special bonuses or penalties due to their size.

Emphasis on the bolded text.

Q 467

What happens if you advance a prestige class separate spellcasting beyond effective 10th level (like, for example, a Wizard 3/Temple Raider 7/Mystic Theurge 10)?

[willpell]

You cannot boost just a Monk's right hand separately any more than you can boost only a sword's right edge: it's not a separate weapon, half of a double weapon, or anything else distinguishable by game mechanics ─ just a part of a single weapon.

Okay, I understand now, thank you.

To have two unarmed strikes you need two bodies.

Neat! Now I know what my next project will be....

No. Trancing is a trait unique to elves (that half-elves do not receive), much like detecting secret doors.

He asked "do they trance or sleep", so "no" is not the correct answer. They sleep.

All powers are technically psi-like abilities,...

Where is this established? Is it likewise true that all spells are spell-like abilities?

[Andezzar]

Repost

Q 432

Can you safely enter a Rope Trick, secure Shelter or Mage's Magnificent Mansion carrying a Bag of Holding or Handy Haversack?

If the above is true, what happens if you open either of the the aforentioned containers?

[willpell]

Q468
Question on the applicability of templates. The Half-Celestial template can be applied to any nonevil creature, and it changes the creature's alignment to good. Do the template's benefits disappear if the character's actions during the game change him to evil? Or does being "naturally" Good as a result of his template prohibit him from such actions?

[qwertyu63]

Q469
If you take a page out of a wizard's spellbook (as in literately remove it), could some other wizard use it to prepare spells? Assume this other wizard can make the skill checks, and that it is a first level spell, and so fits on one page.

[Urpriest]

Repost



If the above is true, what happens if you open either of the the aforentioned containers?

A 432

Nothing. No special interaction is listed for any of the above.

[Urpriest]

Q468
Question on the applicability of templates. The Half-Celestial template can be applied to any nonevil creature, and it changes the creature's alignment to good. Do the template's benefits disappear if the character's actions during the game change him to evil? Or does being "naturally" Good as a result of his template prohibit him from such actions?

A 468
Templates only check for applicability when applied (hence why you can use multiple type-changing templates to get from one type to another). A Half-Celestial is Always Good, which per the Monster Manual Glossary means that Half-Celestials may change alignment but only in rare and unique cases.

[willpell]

A 468
Templates only check for applicability when applied (hence why you can use multiple type-changing templates to get from one type to another). A Half-Celestial is Always Good, which per the Monster Manual Glossary means that Half-Celestials may change alignment but only in rare and unique cases.

Heh, the more "rare and unusual" the circumstance is, the harder some Special Snowflake will campaign to get to be the 14,000th consecutive "sole exception" (also known as "Drizzt Syndrome"). What I'm looking at here is the idea of a Half-Celestial who changes to Neutral through their actions, and then applies the Half-Fiend template (there are various spells and powers and whatnot that make this possible, though at least most are temporary). The implications of that are probably beyond the scope of this thread though.

[Andezzar]

Nothing. No special interaction is listed for any of the above.

So you are saying since neither of the spells create a bag of holding or a portable hole, bringing any of those into the extradimensional space created by the spell is safe, since there is no rule how they will interact?
There is this bit though:

Note: It is hazardous to create an extradimensional space within an existing extradimensional space or to take an extradimensional space into an existing one.

Q470

Are there any rules for the internal dimensions for bags of holding, Handy haversacks etc.? could you for example fit a 30ft x 1 ft x 1ft cuboid into a bag of holding if it weighs less than 250 lbs?

Are the openings of the containers a limitation for the size of an item? If so what are they for the compartments of a Handy Haversack?

[Menteith]

Q471
Does the Trapsmith PrC from Dungeonscape suffer from Arcane Spellcasting Failure when wearing light armor?

[Mightypickle]

A471
No, I don't believe Arcane Spellcasting Failure applies here. The class says it casts arcane spells as a Bard does, and Bards may cast freely while wearing light armor.

[Curmudgeon]

A 470 No.

Any container described as nondimensional doesn't have interior dimensions, just weight and volume limits. As for size limits for the openings, you'll need to take that up with your individual DM because the rules don't provide any guidance. Anything up to what would fit into the compartment openings of a mundane backpack is fine, and beyond that it's a matter for DM discretion.