D&D 3E/3.5 DnD 3.5 - Monks and size increases

[Crownless King]

What, exactly, is your goal? I ask, because there may be more than one method to achieve it.

So, is it increasing damage/blow? Increasing reach? Roleplay considerations?

And, while we're at it, which books can you use?

My goal is to maximize my damage per strike the fastest way possible, while decreasing the insane attack roll penalty.

Sizing to my unarmed strikes would be the fastest way to Colossal++ since i can do it as a swift action so i wouldnt need a sorc to cast any buffs like wallop or take pots which provoke AoOs. By lvl 11 with a monks belt and Superior unarmed strike, i can Reach 2d10, and with the size increases, 24D8.

So right now im looking into how to decrease my attack roll from the -12 that i have from the weapon size increase. If i can find a way to increase MY size then that would cancel some of it...anyway yeah i can use any book pretty much, so long as i can find the PDF for it. Also I dont have a Caster in the group, so no spells pretty much, unless I can get it in Pot form.

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

INA may not work with monks, since it's not clear that Unarmed Strikes are natural attacks. WotC has been ambiguous about this, but it would make most sense if they are not.

That being said, I allow it to work because it makes the game more fun.

It's unclear if unarmed attacks in general can benefit as natural weapons. It's indisputable RAW (and as far as I'm concerned a class feature for the weakest core class in the game) that a monk can treat his unarmed strike as a natural weapon.

"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."

Monk :: d20srd.org

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

Also I dont have a Caster in the group, so no spells pretty much, unless I can get it in Pot form.

Mighty Wallop and Greater mighty Wallop can both be cast on targets besides the caster, just as with Magic Weapon, so getting potions of that shouldn't be a problem.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Well, you can...

1. take one of the various paths to gain a Polearm as a Monk Weapon and boost the hell out of its enhancements.
2. take levels in Kensai to get the +8Str boost and the enhancements to weapon of choice
3. get your hands on Expansion or Enlarge Person magic
4. take levels in Sorcerer (w/Ascetic Mage) and get Arcane Strike to improve both to hit and damage bonuses
5. take levels in Shiba Protector to add your Wis bonus to Att/Dam (that's on top of other bonuses)

 

[Dandu]

It's unclear if unarmed attacks in general can benefit as natural weapons. It's indisputable RAW (and as far as I'm concerned a class feature for the weakest core class in the game) that a monk can treat his unarmed strike as a natural weapon.

"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."

Monk :: d20srd.org

Is a feat an effect? If you can't cite a definition that say so, it's not indisputable.

 

[Michael Silverbane]

Is a feat an effect? If you can't cite a definition that say so, it's not indisputable.

The benefit of a feat is an effect, as demonstrated by the Toughness feat...

Toughness [General]
Benefit: You gain +3 hit points.
Special: A character may gain this feat multiple times. Its effects stack.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Lets not get into citing definitions, PLEASE. PLEASE. PLEASE.

Unarmed Strikes are defined in the PHB as successful attacks, which- 1) many people think is ridiculous and yet 2) several emails to WotC CustServ backs up the PHB definition. Essentially, WotC used a little aggressive copy editing and conflated an unarmed attack & unarmed strike (they can be used as synonyms, after all), but skipped a step, resulting in the confusing language in the PHB.

Here's the secret: the game's designers WERE NOT LAWYERS* OR ENGLISH PROFESSORS. They used language that, at times, is ambiguous & confusing.

They never really defined "effect" in terms that would include certain mechanics and exclude others in no uncertain terms. Simply put, "effect" is vague and undefined.

Suffice it to say, though, that given that WotC themselves have used Monks with INA in their products, they, at least, consider this valid.


* And even lawyers get imprecise with language sometimes. When I was in law school, my Criminal Law (a first year class) prof had been one of the guys who had worked on the most recent revision. At one point, a fellow student- a foreign national whose 3rd language was English- pointed out that a particular law had ambiguous language, and put forth her interpretation. He looked at it for 5 minutes...then said he had a call to make to his fellow drafters on the revision committee.

 

[Dandu]

Your point about not needing to rules lawyer is valid. It also further illustrates the fact that it is not indisputable that an Unarmed Strike is a natural attack.

Suffice it to say, though, that given that WotC themselves have used Monks with INA in their products, they, at least, consider this valid.

WotC has also put out Abjurant Champions who get an AC increase to Mage Armor which does not qualify for the benifit, Sorcerer6/Fiend Blooded X characters who do not qualify for Fiend Blooded's skill prerequisites, and Masters of the Nine with too few maneuvers known to take the prestige class, among other erroneous example character.

If we are going to refer to WotC as a monolithic entity instead of adopting the stance that it is individual employees who consider Monks using INA valid, and who made the poor example characters above.

The benefit of a feat is an effect, as demonstrated by the Toughness feat...

Unfortunately, as demonstrated by the Improved Natural Attack feat, there are benefits without the word "effect" being used.

Improved Natural Attack [General]

Prerequisite

Natural weapon, base attack bonus +4.
Benefit

Choose one of the creature’s natural attack forms. The damage for this natural weapon increases by one step, as if the creature’s size had increased by one category: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
A weapon or attack that deals 1d10 points of damage increases as follows: 1d10, 2d8, 3d8, 4d8, 6d8, 8d8, 12d8.
This feat may be taken multiple times, but each time it applies to a different natural attack.

 

[Dannyalcatraz]

Your point about not needing to rules lawyer is valid. It also further illustrates the fact that it is not indisputable that an Unarmed Strike is a natural attack.

A monk's unarmed strike IS a natural attack for the purposes of spells/effects that target natural attacks, by virtue of the RAW of that passage in the Monk's class features.

The only questions remaining are

1. What is the definition of "effect?" That question is never truly defined by WotC, but by looking at other texts- as seen in the Toughness feat- we see that in some places, at least, "effects" are granted by Feats. In law, one thing we do when we don't have a true definition of a word in the law we're examining, we look to other uses of the word in other areas of law. Once a word is defined within a section, that is assumed to be the definition for that section, barring a contrary definition within that section. Again, WotC uses "effect" to describe the benefits of certain feats. In NO feat is language used that indicates that the benefit of a feat is NOT an effect, but something else mechanically. Even in your counterexample, "effect" is simply not used- it is not redefined as something else.
2. Does any other class so qualify? My personal take on THAT is "no." No other class has that language or anything resembling it. Even the 3.5 revision of Oriental Adventures- written by James Wyatt, the product's creator- gives the Shaman only the level-based increase in unarmed strike damage like the Monk. It does not mention treatment of the Shaman's strikes as manufactured or natural weapons.

WotC has also put out Abjurant Champions who get an AC increase to Mage Armor, Sorcerer6/Fiend Blooded X characters who do not qualify for Fiend Blooded's skill prerequisites, and Masters of the Nine with too few maneuvers known to take the prestige class, among other things.

WotC's products do contain numerous errors- that's indisputable- but again, those errors are indicative of one of my personal bugaboos, a lack of proofreading.

IME, when you contact them about PC design errors, they admit them...and suggest you correct them as you see fit. In the course of my correspondence with them, never have they ever suggested or admitted that a Monk with INA is an error.

 

[Dandu]

A monk's unarmed strike IS a natural attack for the purposes of spells/effects that target natural attacks, by virtue of the RAW of that passage in the Monk's class features.

Apologies, I misphrased my statement. It should have been more specifically stated as the unarmed strike not indisputably qualifying as a natural attack by RAW for the effects of the INA feat.