Sacred Weapon mentions that any weapon selected as a Weapon Focus can be used, and Weapon Focus specifies that Unarmed Strike can be selected as a Focus. I'm not sure if that works with Sacred Weapon, I figure Warpriests aren't meant to fight unarmed.

Looking at the Sacred Fist archetype, I see that both of those weapon abilities are replaced. But that leaves me with a question: With so many Minor Blessings saying "touch one weapon" targeting weapons rather than attacks, is this archetype (by not holding a weapon) unable to use these blessings on itself? Is there an alternative interpretation of this text, or should a Sacred Fist just be aware of this limitation while picking Blessings?


Unarmed strikes are a type of weapon. They are listed in the weapons table, they are statted like weapons, and they are always available for any effect that allows you to choose a weapon, like Weapon Focus. This is quite consistent throughout the rules. (Whether they are manufactured weapons or natural weapons gets a lot more confusing, since they use a weird mix of the rules for each.)

Warpriests are welcome to use unarmed strikes if they like, but it behooves them to take Improved Unarmed Strike if they want to do so—just like every other class that doesn’t get it automatically. They aren’t particularly “meant” to use unarmed strikes—they would get Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat if they were—but they also weren’t particularly “meant” to not use unarmed strikes. It is an option for them the same as it is for most classes. (Worth noting, however: though absolutely a valid choice, unarmed strikes are usually a weak choice, because of the need to spend a feat just to do so competently, and because of the difficulties in magically enhancing them.)

I would strongly advise not to get terribly picky about “touching” a weapon vs. “holding” a weapon and so on. The authors at Paizo are almost never that precise—and when they are, they call it out specifically.

  • \$\begingroup\$ If the Blessing said that it affects the weapon you are "holding" would it be clear that it would apply to unarmed strikes? \$\endgroup\$
    – Jory O
    Jul 20 '17 at 15:53
  • \$\begingroup\$ @JoryO Like I said, do not focus so much on non-game-term word choice like that. Whether they say “hold” or “wield” or “touch” a weapon, what they mean is “you have it ready to use.” For unarmed strikes, that’s always. \$\endgroup\$
    – KRyan
    Jul 20 '17 at 16:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.