Talk:Hand-To-Hand (3.5e Feat)
From D&D Wiki
Cool concept. However, Ambidexterity isn't a feat in the 3.5 rule set. Also, not all creatures do 1d3 with an unarmed strike. The damage is dependent upon the size of the creature (I believe a size small creature does 1d2). Also, what is an "unarmed DC throw"? Perhaps I'm missing something obvious, but I honestly don't know what that means.
I would suggest modifying the wording to read as follows:
Benefit: Your unarmed strikes do 1d6 instead of their normal die. If your unarmed strikes already do 1d6 (or more) they instead increase the damage dice by by one category (per the table in the DMG). --Skwyd 12:40, 7 September 2007 (MDT)
- Thanks much for the advice- I wasn't aware that Ambidexterity isn't a feat in 3.5, and I'm always open to suggestions. I'm also aware that my wording gets a little weird sometimes. (It looked right in my head, I swear!) Have updated the feat according to suggestions. --The Archivist 06:56, 13 September 2007 (MDT)
- What do you think could be done to this feat to make it interesting and different? --Green Dragon 22:22, 18 September 2007 (MDT)
- Well, I looked at the Improved Natural Attack feat and it looks like the prerequisite is having a Natural Weapon. According to the SRD: "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." So I would think that it is reasonable to presume that having the Improved Unarmed Strike feat would also count as a Natural Weapon. So that makes the two feats in question essentially identical except that Improved Natural Attack has a BAB+4 requirement.
- There is something that I was pondering as I read this feat again. The phrasing about gaining additional attacks if you have the Two-Weapon Fighting feat struck me as odd. It should say something like "If you take a full-round attack action, you gain an additional attack as if you were using a light off-hand weapon (-2 to all attacks that round)." The current phrasing talks about attacking twice and that isn't consistent with the phrasing of other feats and abilities.
- So, I don't know how to change the feat to make it more interesting. It seems the goal was simply to improve the damage of the unarmed attack. It also appears there is already a feat that does it. Maybe the feat could increase the damage one step and also give a +1 bonus to Grapple checks for opponents of your size category or smaller? Just my 3.5 cents again. --Skwyd 09:27, 19 September 2007 (MDT)
- The original idea behind the feat was not simply to take CQC up a step- I'm not even sure what the original idea was anymore, it's been changed so much. I wrote it originally with extremely bad wording and little idea as to how the unarmed combat system works, and now I'm trying to make it fit better since I actually know how. To all those with ideas: if you have them, don't just say them here, please- implement them. I'm still trying to polish off that gigantic setting I got myself into and as a result I find less and less time for this. Any and all help is appreciated. --The Archivist 10:18, 28 September 2007 (MDT)