Where is the Invisible Fist alternative?
Thinking out loud, trading 1d6 SA (and three levels of skill point, so you'll be rogue 15 with some more, just use items to boost skills, and one special ability: you only need two special abilities: crippling strike and skill mastery) will put the damage at 6d8+8d6 (with the Kama even), then (cheese, I know) GMWhallop on your unarmed strike will get you up to 22d8+8d6 SA. And this works for halflings too. Throwing scorpion kamas.....master thrower.....all that damage (minus a couple more SA) as touch attacks....Or 16d8 for only one level of FotF (and keep one more SA dice and special ability with no MT levels). Only problem with this is getting enough scorpion kamas and remaining hidden. There may be real potential here...
and can you show me where it says Unarmed Strikes "cant" be used for itterative attacks and Off hand attacks... especially since the FAQ said You Must Use Unarmed Strikes (or Monk weapons) with FoB and that you "can" use Unarmed Strikes as Off-hand attacks with FoB... what is so confusing about that.
That is the burden of proof fallacy. also you mince words here. It does not suggest that unarmed strikes are in a different category here than other special monk weapons. In fact, where is this quote from?
...attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons...
The SRD. Under the FoB entry. Note the....almost exact....similarity to the FAQ....
And you know what? I will still show that you only have one unarmed strike.
Look at the weapon entry. Does it say that it's a double weapon? No? There's your answer.
the FAQ IS RAW, as is Errata... both Are Official adjustments from WoTC for the D&D 3.5 game.
Both may be official, but only the books themselves and the Errata are RAW. The FAQ is a more trustworthy source of info than, say, CustServ, but it has been wrong in the past (including times where it blatantly contradicts the rules). Also, the FAQ is not rules, it is merely interpretations of the rules. Only the books are the actual rules, and the Errata changes what is in the books. Therefore, the FAQ is not RAW. Read:
Rules As
Written.