D&D 5E Are monk's unarmed attacks weapon attacks?

[Wik]

So, the party monk made the mistake of attuning to the intelligent +1 Short Sword of Vengeance. The rules say that "any attack made with a weapon besides the sword are at disadvantage".

Does that mean that the monk's unarmed attacks are at disadvantage? They are listed on the weapon table, and many unarmed monster attacks are declared as weapon damage, after all.

Thoughts?

 

[lumenbeing]

Nope

 

[jrowland]

The PHB errata covers this:

Melee Attacks (p. 195). The rule on
unarmed strikes should read as follows:
“Instead of using a weapon to make a
melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed
strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or
similar forceful blow (none of which count
as weapons). On a hit, an unarmed strike
deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 +
your Strength modifier. You are proficient
with your unarmed strikes.”

Unarmed strikes are not weapons, therefore "...any attack made with a weapon besides the sword..." does NOT have disadvantage as a result.

 

[Sword of Spirit]

An unarmed strike (monk or otherwise) is a weapon attack, but it is not a weapon. So technically there would be no penalty from the magic item.

If it were cursed, I'd apply the penalty to the monk anyway.

 

[Hriston]

So, the party monk made the mistake of attuning to the intelligent +1 Short Sword of Vengeance. The rules say that "any attack made with a weapon besides the sword are at disadvantage".

Does that mean that the monk's unarmed attacks are at disadvantage?

No, unarmed strikes are not weapons. You can use an unarmed strike instead of a weapon when making a melee weapon attack, but it is not a weapon.

They are listed on the weapon table,

They were removed from the table by the errata, which say they never should have been on the table in the first place, as they are not weapons.

and many unarmed monster attacks are declared as weapon damage, after all.

Natural weapons are still weapons.

 

[Scorpio616]

A curse is a curse, it works regardless of rules semantics.

 

[Kobold Stew]

The related (and to me, interesting) bit about this issue is that it evidently means that characters are not proficient in unarmed attacks unless something specifically makes them so: simple/martial weapon proficiency is not enough.

 

[bedir than]

iirc, no book present

A short sword is a monk weapon, so why use the unarmed attacks?

 

[Kobold Stew]

Martial arts' bonus action is an unarmed strike.
Flurry of blows gives two unarmed strikes.

 

[Hriston]

The related (and to me, interesting) bit about this issue is that it evidently means that characters are not proficient in unarmed attacks unless something specifically makes them so: simple/martial weapon proficiency is not enough.

According to the errata, you are proficient with your unarmed strikes.