1

I have an unarmed fighter with the Eldritch Claw Tattoo making their unarmed strikes +1 magical attacks. This being the case, how does this interact with the Unarmed Fighting fighting style which deals 1d4 to a grappled target? Would it be 1d4+1 magical damage?

V2Blast
  • 49,864
  • 10
  • 220
  • 304
iScreamsalad
  • 91
  • 4

1 Answers1

4

Sadly it doesn't.

The Eldritch Claw Tattoo says:

Magical Strikes. While the tattoo is on your skin, your unarmed strikes are considered magical for the purpose of overcoming immunity and resistance to nonmagical attacks, and you gain a +1 bonus to attack and damage rolls with unarmed strikes.

But the Combat Style says:

Unarmed Fighting. Your unarmed strikes can deal bludgeoning damage equal to 1d6 + your Strength modifier on a hit. If you aren't wielding any weapons or a shield when you make the attack roll, the d6 becomes a d8.

At the start of each of your turns, you can deal 1d4 bludgeoning damage to one creature grappled by you.

Sadly the 1d4 don't seems like a unarmed strikes to me, but ask the GM. It doesn't look like a game breaker and you have already invested a Combat style and an attuned magic item .

KorvinStarmast
  • 143,146
  • 34
  • 471
  • 760
Federico Matonte
  • 950
  • 4
  • 16
  • 1
    Might be a RAW vs RAI/RoC scenario. DM seems like a cool guy I'll run it by them. Thanks! – iScreamsalad May 31 '22 at 14:40
  • 2
    @iScreamsalad - I strongly doubt it's RAI either. It seems clear that the damage you do from grappling a creature is not an unarmed strike (or any kind of attack), especially as it has a different damage die to the preceding paragraph. As such I see no reason or argument for expecting it to benefit to modifiers to unarmed strikes. – Andrzej Doyle May 31 '22 at 15:06
  • Fair. I'll make my case for RoC then and accept what ever judgement comes to pass. Thanks for the input! – iScreamsalad May 31 '22 at 15:08