Weapon Focus unarmed strike

[ShadowChemosh]

Originally Posted by risner

BTW, I'm so sick of these debates ... "it is up to the DM".

Just had to add I totally agree. We all know at the end its up to the DM but for PFS or HL it would be nice to have the official way.

Originally Posted by artemisent420

I think i'm going to uninstall HL and reinstall it. Does anyone know if they will make me get another license? It is on the same pc.

You can do this but like Mathais said I would make sure you have NO .user files that could some how be causing an issue. Otherwise you won't have to get a new license but you will have to activate it again.

The other thing is you could attach your character (ie .por file) to here and we could then take a quick look. As others have said I just tested a Monk and Weapon Focus seems to work fine. Even tested it then with Flurry of Blows community add-on and it still worked fine.

So its very strange that your not getting it to apply.

[bodrin]

I've just checked the Prd and Brass Knuckles magnify the Unarmed Strike allowing lethal damage instead of non lethal.
Therefore weapon focus' bonus to Unarmed Attack should apply to Brass Knuckles when worn.
RAW it even lists Brass Knuckles under the simple weapons unarmed attacks chart!
So in this case it shouldn't be up to the DM.

[artemisent420]

I was able to get it working fine now that i have removed add on when i added them back on it seems to be fine now. Also i did get the flurry of blows add on. Is the add on supposed to give your flurry of blows with weapons also? It is only showing flurry of blows with unarmed strike.

[risner]

Originally Posted by bodrin

RAW it even lists Brass Knuckles under the simple weapons unarmed attacks chart!
So in this case it shouldn't be up to the DM.

Tell that to the DM's.

I've had this discussion (debate on the RAW) too many times. More than I can count, since I have played 33 PFS sessions as a Monk and before that with another character another 18 games.

Let me just say that it isn't that simple. The meaning of the RAW is not even close to clear which way it goes, and Paizo explicitly will not clarify when directly asked about the issue.

Originally Posted by artemisent420

I was able to get it working fine now that i have removed add on when i added them back on it seems to be fine now. Also i did get the flurry of blows add on. Is the add on supposed to give your flurry of blows with weapons also? It is only showing flurry of blows with unarmed strike.

If you use my add on, you need to add an adjustment to select which weapon you want the Flurry to display.

[bodrin]

Originally Posted by risner

Tell that to the DM's.

I've had this discussion (debate on the RAW) too many times. More than I can count, since I have played 33 PFS sessions as a Monk and before that with another character another 18 games.

Let me just say that it isn't that simple. The meaning of the RAW is not even close to clear which way it goes.

In this case then let's follow the old D20 ruling from wizards then "Text trumps table!"

Quoted directly from the book!

Brass Knuckles : These close combat weapons are designed to fit comfortably around the knuckles, narrowing the contact area and therefore magnifying the amount of force delivered by a punch. They allow you to deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks. You may hold, but not wield, a weapon or other object in a hand wearing brass knuckles. You may cast a spell with a somatic component while wearing brass knuckles if you make a concentration check (DC 10 + the level of the spell you're casting). Monks are proficient with brass knuckles and can use their monk unarmed damage when fighting with them.

The bold parts are pretty conclusive as to the intent of Brass Knuckles! There is no defining term that explicitly says you are now attacking armed!

In point of fact it specifically states that you can't wield a weapon whilst wearing them, therefore the unarmed Brass Knuckle attack takes precedent over armed attacks.

[risner]

Originally Posted by bodrin

IThe bold parts are pretty conclusive as to the intent of Brass Knuckles!

In point of fact it specifically states that you can't wield a weapon whilst wearing them, therefore the unarmed Brass Knuckle attack takes precedent over armed attacks.

Again, that is not conclusive. In either case, the way they are implemented in HL doesn't match any one consistent interpretation.

Especially since it says "these close combat weapons", which explicitly says the same as "this weapon is not the same as unarmed strike weapon"

[risner]

My primary point, is that since the release of the APG, this debate. The one we are having right now. It has been a near weekly thing at the Paizo site, and I'm about sick of it.

There isn't anything to be said at a game table to convince one DM of your view if you don't share his view, because there is no line that confirms one way or the other. The weapon needs a line as crystal clear as "any feats or effects that benefit unarmed strike also benefit brass knuckles" or something like "attacks with this weapon use the unarmed strike weapon" or something similar.

The line you quote "They allow you to deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks." only means "these weapons allow someone to make unarmed attacks without provoking attacks of opportunities."

[bodrin]

Okay.
I have my opinion and I'll argue the counterpoint with anyone.
However I agree that rehashing a debate becomes tiresome, so I'll forgo anymore comments regarding these unarmed attack damage enhancing weapons until such time as Paizo officially answers the enigma!

[risner]

Quick google found a revevant thread that addresses my view (and some of these, despite the fact they won't add errata or faq to clarify) are why I have my views:

SKR talking on how Cestus/Brass Knuckles are not Unarmed Strike attacks
SKR says they are 100% not like Unarmed Strikes