Does having natural weapons prevent a wild-shaped monkmulticlassed druid/monk from using Martial Arts while in Wild Shape?

The monk's Martial Arts feature's benefits all require a monk to be "unarmed or only wielding monk weapons". Even if you're a Way of the Kensei monk, that only lets you add a couple of new simple or martial weapons to your monk weapon list.

The druid's Wild Shape forms all come wielding natural weapon attacks. Natural weapon attacks are not unarmed attacks, nor are they monk weapons, nor are they simple or martial weapons that can possibly be chosen by a kensei.

Therefore, it seems that a beast is never "unarmed", and thus can never use a druid/monk's martial arts benefits even if it wanted to choose to use unarmed strikes instead of its natural attacks.

Is this interpretation accurate? Or, can a beast choose not to "wield" it'sits teeth and claws?

ThisIf my reading of the rules is accurate, such a blanket prohibition on Martial Arts when one has natural weapons seems overly-restrictive; it would mean, for example, that a Minotaur can never be a monk, since they are "never unarmed."

I am explicitly not answeringaddressing the (already answered and very obvious) question of whether animals can make unarmed attacks. I am asking whether they can ever choose not to "wield" their own natural weapons, so as to be able to use martial arts in the first place.

Does having natural weapons prevent a wild-shaped monk from using Martial Arts?

The monk's Martial Arts feature's benefits all require a monk to be "unarmed or only wielding monk weapons". Even if you're a Way of the Kensei monk, that only lets you add a couple of new simple or martial weapons to your monk weapon list.

The druid's Wild Shape forms all come wielding natural weapon attacks. Natural attacks are not unarmed attacks, nor are they monk weapons, nor are they simple or martial weapons that can possibly be chosen by a kensei.

Therefore, a beast is never "unarmed", and thus can never use a druid/monk's martial arts benefits even if it wanted to choose to use unarmed strikes instead of its natural attacks.

Is this accurate? Or, can a beast choose not to "wield" it's teeth and claws?

This blanket prohibition on Martial Arts when one has natural weapons seems overly-restrictive; it would mean, for example, that a Minotaur can never be a monk, since they are "never unarmed."

I am explicitly not answering the (already answered and very obvious) question of whether animals can make unarmed attacks. I am asking whether they can ever choose not to "wield" their own natural weapons, so as to be able to use martial arts in the first place.

Does having natural weapons prevent a multiclassed druid/monk from using Martial Arts while in Wild Shape?

The monk's Martial Arts feature's benefits all require a monk to be "unarmed or only wielding monk weapons". Even if you're a Way of the Kensei monk, that only lets you add a couple of new simple or martial weapons to your monk weapon list.

The druid's Wild Shape forms all come wielding natural weapon attacks. Natural weapon attacks are not unarmed attacks, nor are they monk weapons, nor are they simple or martial weapons that can possibly be chosen by a kensei.

Therefore, it seems that a beast is never "unarmed", and thus can never use a druid/monk's martial arts benefits even if it wanted to choose to use unarmed strikes instead of its natural attacks.

Is this interpretation accurate? Or can a beast choose not to "wield" its teeth and claws?

If my reading of the rules is accurate, such a blanket prohibition on Martial Arts when one has natural weapons seems overly-restrictive; it would mean, for example, that a Minotaur can never be a monk, since they are "never unarmed."

I am explicitly not addressing the (already answered and very obvious) question of whether animals can make unarmed attacks. I am asking whether they can ever choose not to "wield" their own natural weapons, so as to be able to use martial arts in the first place.

clarified wording

Source Link

edited Nov 8, 2018 at 2:47

V2Blast

50.3k
10
223
306

Does having natural weapons prevent a wildshapedwild-shaped monk from using martial artsMartial Arts?

The monk's Martial arts featuresArts feature's benefits all require a monk to be "unarmed or only wielding monk weapons". Even if you're a kenseiWay of the Kensei monk, that only lets you add a couple of new simple or martial weapons to your monk weapon list.

WildshapeThe druid's Wild Shape forms all come wielding natural weapon attacks. Natural attacks are not unarmed attacks, nor are they monk weapons, nor are they simple or martial weapons that can possibly be chosen by a kensei. Therefor

Therefore, a beast is never "unarmed", and thus can never use a druid/monk's martial arts benefits even if it wanted to choose to use unarmed strikes instead of its natural attacks.

Is this accurate? Or, can a beast choose not to "wield" it's teeth and claws?

This blanket prohibition on martial artsMartial Arts when one has natural weapons seems overly-restrictive; it would mean, for example, that a Minotaur can never be a monk, since they are "never unarmed."

I am explicitly not answering the (already answered and very obvious) question of whether animals can make unarmed attacks. I am asking whether they can ever choose not to "wield" their own natural weapons, so as to be able to use martial arts in the first place.

Does having natural weapons prevent a wildshaped monk from using martial arts?

Martial arts features all require a monk to be "unarmed or only wielding monk weapons" Even if you're a kensei, that only lets you add a couple of new simple or martial weapons to your monk weapon list.

Wildshape forms all come wielding natural attacks. Natural attacks are not unarmed attacks, nor are they monk weapons, nor are they simple or martial weapons that can possibly be chosen by a kensei. Therefor, a beast is never "unarmed", and thus can never use a druid/monk's martial arts benefits even if it wanted to choose to use unarmed strikes instead of its natural attacks.

Or, can a beast choose not to "wield" it's teeth and claws? This blanket prohibition on martial arts when one has natural weapons seems overly-restrictive; it would mean, for example, that a Minotaur can never be a monk, since they are "never unarmed."

I am explicitly not answering the (already answered and very obvious) question of whether animals can make unarmed attacks. I am asking whether they can ever choose not to "wield" their own natural weapons, so as to be able to use martial arts in the first place.

Does having natural weapons prevent a wild-shaped monk from using Martial Arts?

The monk's Martial Arts feature's benefits all require a monk to be "unarmed or only wielding monk weapons". Even if you're a Way of the Kensei monk, that only lets you add a couple of new simple or martial weapons to your monk weapon list.

The druid's Wild Shape forms all come wielding natural weapon attacks. Natural attacks are not unarmed attacks, nor are they monk weapons, nor are they simple or martial weapons that can possibly be chosen by a kensei.

Therefore, a beast is never "unarmed", and thus can never use a druid/monk's martial arts benefits even if it wanted to choose to use unarmed strikes instead of its natural attacks.

Is this accurate? Or, can a beast choose not to "wield" it's teeth and claws?

This blanket prohibition on Martial Arts when one has natural weapons seems overly-restrictive; it would mean, for example, that a Minotaur can never be a monk, since they are "never unarmed."

I am explicitly not answering the (already answered and very obvious) question of whether animals can make unarmed attacks. I am asking whether they can ever choose not to "wield" their own natural weapons, so as to be able to use martial arts in the first place.