IMO Monk weapons are based on nothing to do with any kind of Monk....using Asian style monks Glaives, Polearms, two weapon fighting, are all classical monk weapons. As are long swords...if you go friar Tuck style Staff's are both two handed and heavy weapons. Feats like GWM and Polearm Master should be available to Monks. This is why the 5e Monk is often rated with the beast master ranger as the worst classes in DnD. I like the idea of the Astral and Shadow Monk but you will have to multiclass them to make them competitive. Ki points are too few as well and are burned up even faster.
Are you sure you've read the right book? Because GWM and PAM are already available to Monks and Quearterstaff is a monk weapon to begin with (it has neither the two-handed nor the heavy ability). And Monks very often rank very high on class lists. Ki points are a resource just like spell slots, second wind or indominatable. Knowing when to use them for best effect is part of the game.
"Martial Arts
At 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property."
I know Staff's are allowed but they have the two handed property, staff's are boring to me glaives, and halberds have both the two handed and heavy property and are considered martial weapons. Not simple ones. I have been able to convince a DM to allow me to use a spear with two handed ability...a d8 but won't give me anything with reach or doesn't meet the above restrictions. PAM and GWM would not allow me to use my bonus action for flurry of blows in addition to the above according to several DM's. I think thats absurd.
1st of all, staff and spear don't have two-handed property. They have versatile property.
2nd, you don't need to convince DM to allow using spear. Spear is allowed by RAW. It is simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property.
The Greatclub is the only simple melee weapons that have the two-hand property.
IMO Monk weapons are based on nothing to do with any kind of Monk....using Asian style monks Glaives, Polearms, two weapon fighting, are all classical monk weapons. As are long swords...if you go friar Tuck style Staff's are both two handed and heavy weapons. Feats like GWM and Polearm Master should be available to Monks. This is why the 5e Monk is often rated with the beast master ranger as the worst classes in DnD. I like the idea of the Astral and Shadow Monk but you will have to multiclass them to make them competitive. Ki points are too few as well and are burned up even faster.
Are you sure you've read the right book? Because GWM and PAM are already available to Monks and Quearterstaff is a monk weapon to begin with (it has neither the two-handed nor the heavy ability). And Monks very often rank very high on class lists. Ki points are a resource just like spell slots, second wind or indominatable. Knowing when to use them for best effect is part of the game.
"Martial Arts
At 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property."
I know Staff's are allowed but they have the two handed property, staff's are boring to me glaives, and halberds have both the two handed and heavy property and are considered martial weapons. Not simple ones. I have been able to convince a DM to allow me to use a spear with two handed ability...a d8 but won't give me anything with reach or doesn't meet the above restrictions. PAM and GWM would not allow me to use my bonus action for flurry of blows in addition to the above according to several DM's. I think thats absurd.
Again, I feel that I must ask if you've actually read the right book. Quarterstaff lack both the two-handed and the heavy property. They are Versatile (1D8) and nothing else. The fact that you can't use both PAM and FoB doesn't change that you were wrong when you said that Monks don't have access to PAM and GWM. If you think that it's absurd not to allow five attacks at level five, that's your opinion. I would disagree with that since you are basically giving the Monk a second bonus action which no other class gets.
Spears are also already monk weapons, by the way.
As far as Ki points...a 6 lvl shadow monk has 6 ki points...if he uses pass without a trace or silence it uses two ki points each...so he has 4 left if he uses one of those. Flurry of blows and two stunning strike attempts and he's got one...that's one turn of combat....if he uses none of the spell abilities he's got two rounds of combat before he's out of ki points. That seems inadequate to me especially doing a d6 for dmg.
So let's go through what you just said. At 6th level you can shut down any spellcaster in the area of your silence spell, make four attacks and try to stun the target twice. That's pretty good for using a resource that recharges on a short rest. And as a shadow monk you also have free bonus action misty steps that give you advantage on attack rolls. I don't see how that is in any way inadequate. Compared to, say a Ranger who only has 6 spell slots in total and those recharge on long rests.
I'd love for you to show me highly reviewed monk classes vs other class reviews. The ones I've read or watched on Youtube all say nay. I loved the 1st Ed Monk and want to like this...I'm playing two multi class ones now even though I think aside from stunning strike most of they're abilities are less than par.
Thos who complain about monks are almost often the kind of people who focus only on pure damage output while ignoring other aspects of combat or the game in general. So sure, if that is all you care about, ye sthere are better options than monks. But the class as awhole is very good. Either way, quarterstaffs and spears are monk weapons and Monks already have access to both PAM and GWM.
As a DM I would tell my players that play Monk, their racial weapons(ex. Dwarf, Elf) and/or any feat that grant weapon proficiencies(Weapon Master) will count as a Monk weapon as long as that weapon isn't Heavy and/or Two Handed. I think this should be limited to proficiencies gained when leveling in Monk, not any multiclass gains.
If your character has been training since childhood, why shouldn't they know how to adabt their Fighting Style to these weapons.
A Dwarf using a Warhammer or an Elf using a Longsword as a Monk weapon isn't something that I think is OP. What do you guys think?
I do the same. If someone has a cool idea with a monk using a whip. They just get that proficency. Why should you limit it to only simple weapons and short swords? I already use that rule in my games. Not at all op.
It does sort of invalidate one of the bigger draws of Kensei. Might not be an issue for you, but I'd understand if one player who specifically took the Kensei path to be able to use a long sword as a monk weapon got upset over a random wood elf shadow monk getting the same benefit on grounds of race.
In DND beyond the darts still use a d4 for the damage even thought I'm a level 10 Hand monk Protaction Aasimar. But my DM has approved that i get to use my Martial Arts die. This is up to each DM in my opinion. If a DM want to play RAW then it is stated in the PHB that monk weapons are Simple weapons and shortswords. That includes ranged simple weapons. Allthought to benifit from the Martial Arts damage die the weapon can't have the two-handed property. That would then exclude shortbow, light crossbow and greatclub. But not darts and slings.
Kensei monks still get a little benifit in the form of "magical attacks" on not just Unarmed attacks.
At 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property.
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a shield:
You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons.
You can roll a d4 in place of the normal damage of your unarmed strike or monk weapon. This die changes as you gain monk levels, as shown in the Martial Arts column of the Monk table.
When you use the Attack action with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon on your turn, you can make one unarmed strike as a bonus action. For example, if you take the Attack action and attack with a quarterstaff, you can also make an unarmed strike as a bonus action, assuming you haven’t already taken a bonus action this turn.
Certain monasteries use specialized forms of the monk weapons. For example, you might use a club that is two lengths of wood connected by a short chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter, straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in the Weapons section.
could it be possible to use prostetic limbs, such as arms or hands and use them as your monk weapon ?
Prosthetic Limb says it functions identically to the part it replaces while it is attached. So, it will count as a regular limb for the purposes of martial arts. Unless you're talking about using it as a bludgeoning weapon unattached?
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
hmmm no not bludgeoning exactly sort of like the same as brass knuckles, so maybe bludgeoning
What I meant was: Are you attached to the prosthetic limb and using it like part of your body, or is it detached from you and wielded as a weapon separate from your body?
If it is attached to you and replacing a missing limb, you treat it exactly as you would treat a regular unarmed strike, meaning you can use your Martial Arts feature with it. If it is not attached to you it's more like an improvised club.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Since "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" - Sage Advice Compendium (Class Features), does this mean that such strikes can be used for the 'Brace' maneuver (See Fighter Battle Master) for example? My initial thought was yes, but then I noted that under that maneuver, it says "...with the melee weapon you’re wielding". I feel that a weapon must be used, not simply a weapon-like, damage source (fist, shin, head etc.)
Since "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" - Sage Advice Compendium (Class Features), does this mean that such strikes can be used for the 'Brace' maneuver (See Fighter Battle Master) for example? My initial thought was yes, but then I noted that under that maneuver, it says "...with the melee weapon you’re wielding". I feel that a weapon must be used, not simply a weapon-like, damage source (fist, shin, head etc.)
Does anyone else have a 'take' on this?
Unarmed strikes are a type of weapon attack that are generally made without a weapon. There is no weapon you are wielding, technically, unless you are tabaxi or another class that allows you to use "natural weapons" for unarmed strikes.
Basically, a character cannot wield their fists as a weapon. It would make more sense if there were limits to what you could do while wielding weapons, but I can't think of a single instance by RAW that states any such limitations. It's a silly wrinkle in the rules that frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense when interacting with certain abilities.
Since "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" - Sage Advice Compendium (Class Features), does this mean that such strikes can be used for the 'Brace' maneuver (See Fighter Battle Master) for example? My initial thought was yes, but then I noted that under that maneuver, it says "...with the melee weapon you’re wielding". I feel that a weapon must be used, not simply a weapon-like, damage source (fist, shin, head etc.)
Does anyone else have a 'take' on this?
Unarmed strikes are a type of weapon attack that are generally made without a weapon. There is no weapon you are wielding, technically, unless you are tabaxi or another class that allows you to use "natural weapons" for unarmed strikes.
Basically, a character cannot wield their fists as a weapon. It would make more sense if there were limits to what you could do while wielding weapons, but I can't think of a single instance by RAW that states any such limitations. It's a silly wrinkle in the rules that frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense when interacting with certain abilities.
there is one potential instance. That of casting spells. nOw this is mitigated a bit by being able to cast spells one handed. So a 2 handed weapon not being actively wielded or a one handed weapon/shield while the other hand is empty gets around the casting issue. but when both are full with a shield and a weapon then you can't cast without something like War Caster. The fact that the monk's hands don't count as weapons means they are always in a position to be able to cast spells. however this only actually matters to something like the 4 elements monk and the occasional spell on another subclass because Monks multiclass poorly since they are always wanting more monk levels for the gains over various levels so it's not a situation that usually comes up for monks in the first place to realize the interaction when applying to unarmed strikes.
Since "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" - Sage Advice Compendium (Class Features), does this mean that such strikes can be used for the 'Brace' maneuver (See Fighter Battle Master) for example? My initial thought was yes, but then I noted that under that maneuver, it says "...with the melee weapon you’re wielding". I feel that a weapon must be used, not simply a weapon-like, damage source (fist, shin, head etc.)
Does anyone else have a 'take' on this?
Unarmed strikes are a type of weapon attack that are generally made without a weapon. There is no weapon you are wielding, technically, unless you are tabaxi or another class that allows you to use "natural weapons" for unarmed strikes.
Basically, a character cannot wield their fists as a weapon. It would make more sense if there were limits to what you could do while wielding weapons, but I can't think of a single instance by RAW that states any such limitations. It's a silly wrinkle in the rules that frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense when interacting with certain abilities.
there is one potential instance. That of casting spells. nOw this is mitigated a bit by being able to cast spells one handed. So a 2 handed weapon not being actively wielded or a one handed weapon/shield while the other hand is empty gets around the casting issue. but when both are full with a shield and a weapon then you can't cast without something like War Caster. The fact that the monk's hands don't count as weapons means they are always in a position to be able to cast spells. however this only actually matters to something like the 4 elements monk and the occasional spell on another subclass because Monks multiclass poorly since they are always wanting more monk levels for the gains over various levels so it's not a situation that usually comes up for monks in the first place to realize the interaction when applying to unarmed strikes.
While you are correct and I 100% agree with you on the details of this, if this is the reasoning behind the RAW then it is hilariously narrow. That's a criticism of the rules logic, not your argument FWIW. (Also, if that is the case, you could make the case that a Tabaxi's "natural weapon" claws would disallow them to cast spells at all, since they are constantly wielding weapons in each hand.)
Since "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" - Sage Advice Compendium (Class Features), does this mean that such strikes can be used for the 'Brace' maneuver (See Fighter Battle Master) for example? My initial thought was yes, but then I noted that under that maneuver, it says "...with the melee weapon you’re wielding". I feel that a weapon must be used, not simply a weapon-like, damage source (fist, shin, head etc.)
Does anyone else have a 'take' on this?
Unarmed strikes are a type of weapon attack that are generally made without a weapon. There is no weapon you are wielding, technically, unless you are tabaxi or another class that allows you to use "natural weapons" for unarmed strikes.
Basically, a character cannot wield their fists as a weapon. It would make more sense if there were limits to what you could do while wielding weapons, but I can't think of a single instance by RAW that states any such limitations. It's a silly wrinkle in the rules that frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense when interacting with certain abilities.
there is one potential instance. That of casting spells. nOw this is mitigated a bit by being able to cast spells one handed. So a 2 handed weapon not being actively wielded or a one handed weapon/shield while the other hand is empty gets around the casting issue. but when both are full with a shield and a weapon then you can't cast without something like War Caster. The fact that the monk's hands don't count as weapons means they are always in a position to be able to cast spells. however this only actually matters to something like the 4 elements monk and the occasional spell on another subclass because Monks multiclass poorly since they are always wanting more monk levels for the gains over various levels so it's not a situation that usually comes up for monks in the first place to realize the interaction when applying to unarmed strikes.
While you are correct and I 100% agree with you on the details of this, if this is the reasoning behind the RAW then it is hilariously narrow. That's a criticism of the rules logic, not your argument FWIW. (Also, if that is the case, you could make the case that a Tabaxi's "natural weapon" claws would disallow them to cast spells at all, since they are constantly wielding weapons in each hand.)
Except that they aren't because of the Nature of Natural weapons and the fact that the Tabaxi's feature for clawing people actually calls it out as an Unarmed Strike that is made with said natural weapons. Implying that their natural weapons actually share the same characteristics of empty hands rather than wielded weapons. Natural Weapons also carry the same wierd dichotomy where you can't wield a part of your own body just like fists do, which may be part of it as well.
I know this doesn't really apply to the original post since Tasha's only came out somewhat recently, but in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything there's an optional Monk feature called "Dedicated Monk Weapon" that says:
2nd-level monk feature
You train yourself to use a variety of weapons as monk weapons, not just simple melee weapons and shortswords. Whenever you finish a short or long rest, you can touch one weapon, focus your ki on it, and then count that weapon as a monk weapon until you use this feature again.
If you wanted to use a naginata or something similar you could reskin a spear to remain within rules as written. That said, I think the limit of heavy and special properties is a bit silly, at least for the kensei now that every monk can use a longsword or something similar.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
1st of all, staff and spear don't have two-handed property. They have versatile property.
2nd, you don't need to convince DM to allow using spear. Spear is allowed by RAW. It is simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property.
The Greatclub is the only simple melee weapons that have the two-hand property.
Again, I feel that I must ask if you've actually read the right book. Quarterstaff lack both the two-handed and the heavy property. They are Versatile (1D8) and nothing else. The fact that you can't use both PAM and FoB doesn't change that you were wrong when you said that Monks don't have access to PAM and GWM. If you think that it's absurd not to allow five attacks at level five, that's your opinion. I would disagree with that since you are basically giving the Monk a second bonus action which no other class gets.
Spears are also already monk weapons, by the way.
So let's go through what you just said. At 6th level you can shut down any spellcaster in the area of your silence spell, make four attacks and try to stun the target twice. That's pretty good for using a resource that recharges on a short rest. And as a shadow monk you also have free bonus action misty steps that give you advantage on attack rolls. I don't see how that is in any way inadequate. Compared to, say a Ranger who only has 6 spell slots in total and those recharge on long rests.
Sure. Here's something that took me literally mere seconds to google:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5a6HDhNMZXQ
Thos who complain about monks are almost often the kind of people who focus only on pure damage output while ignoring other aspects of combat or the game in general. So sure, if that is all you care about, ye sthere are better options than monks. But the class as awhole is very good. Either way, quarterstaffs and spears are monk weapons and Monks already have access to both PAM and GWM.
In DND beyond the darts still use a d4 for the damage even thought I'm a level 10 Hand monk Protaction Aasimar. But my DM has approved that i get to use my Martial Arts die. This is up to each DM in my opinion. If a DM want to play RAW then it is stated in the PHB that monk weapons are Simple weapons and shortswords. That includes ranged simple weapons. Allthought to benifit from the Martial Arts damage die the weapon can't have the two-handed property. That would then exclude shortbow, light crossbow and greatclub. But not darts and slings.
Kensei monks still get a little benifit in the form of "magical attacks" on not just Unarmed attacks.
You are proficient in darts, yes, but Martial Arts only applies to melee weapons.
Tasha may disagree with you in her new book XD.
I wouldn't mind.
Yapp. It seems like the limitation for Martial Arts die is to melee attacks. Thanks for the clarification
These are the rules taken from dndbeyond https://www.dndbeyond.com/classes/monk#MartialArts-227.
Martial Arts
At 1st level, your practice of martial arts gives you mastery of combat styles that use unarmed strikes and monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simple melee weapons that don’t have the two-handed or heavy property.
You gain the following benefits while you are unarmed or wielding only monk weapons and you aren’t wearing armor or wielding a shield:
Certain monasteries use specialized forms of the monk weapons. For example, you might use a club that is two lengths of wood connected by a short chain (called a nunchaku) or a sickle with a shorter, straighter blade (called a kama). Whatever name you use for a monk weapon, you can use the game statistics provided for the weapon in the Weapons section.
hi, question.
could it be possible to use prostetic limbs, such as arms or hands and use them as your monk weapon ?
Prosthetic Limb says it functions identically to the part it replaces while it is attached. So, it will count as a regular limb for the purposes of martial arts. Unless you're talking about using it as a bludgeoning weapon unattached?
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
hmmm no not bludgeoning exactly sort of like the same as brass knuckles, so maybe bludgeoning
What I meant was: Are you attached to the prosthetic limb and using it like part of your body, or is it detached from you and wielded as a weapon separate from your body?
If it is attached to you and replacing a missing limb, you treat it exactly as you would treat a regular unarmed strike, meaning you can use your Martial Arts feature with it. If it is not attached to you it's more like an improvised club.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
aaah no its attached, okey thank you for the info ^^
Hi all,
Since "an unarmed strike is a special type of melee weapon attack" - Sage Advice Compendium (Class Features), does this mean that such strikes can be used for the 'Brace' maneuver (See Fighter Battle Master) for example? My initial thought was yes, but then I noted that under that maneuver, it says "...with the melee weapon you’re wielding". I feel that a weapon must be used, not simply a weapon-like, damage source (fist, shin, head etc.)
Does anyone else have a 'take' on this?
Unarmed strikes are a type of weapon attack that are generally made without a weapon. There is no weapon you are wielding, technically, unless you are tabaxi or another class that allows you to use "natural weapons" for unarmed strikes.
Basically, a character cannot wield their fists as a weapon. It would make more sense if there were limits to what you could do while wielding weapons, but I can't think of a single instance by RAW that states any such limitations. It's a silly wrinkle in the rules that frankly doesn't make a whole lot of sense when interacting with certain abilities.
Wouldn’t a naginate be a reskin of a glaive?
there is one potential instance. That of casting spells. nOw this is mitigated a bit by being able to cast spells one handed. So a 2 handed weapon not being actively wielded or a one handed weapon/shield while the other hand is empty gets around the casting issue. but when both are full with a shield and a weapon then you can't cast without something like War Caster. The fact that the monk's hands don't count as weapons means they are always in a position to be able to cast spells. however this only actually matters to something like the 4 elements monk and the occasional spell on another subclass because Monks multiclass poorly since they are always wanting more monk levels for the gains over various levels so it's not a situation that usually comes up for monks in the first place to realize the interaction when applying to unarmed strikes.
While you are correct and I 100% agree with you on the details of this, if this is the reasoning behind the RAW then it is hilariously narrow. That's a criticism of the rules logic, not your argument FWIW. (Also, if that is the case, you could make the case that a Tabaxi's "natural weapon" claws would disallow them to cast spells at all, since they are constantly wielding weapons in each hand.)
Except that they aren't because of the Nature of Natural weapons and the fact that the Tabaxi's feature for clawing people actually calls it out as an Unarmed Strike that is made with said natural weapons. Implying that their natural weapons actually share the same characteristics of empty hands rather than wielded weapons. Natural Weapons also carry the same wierd dichotomy where you can't wield a part of your own body just like fists do, which may be part of it as well.
I know this doesn't really apply to the original post since Tasha's only came out somewhat recently, but in Tasha's Cauldron of Everything there's an optional Monk feature called "Dedicated Monk Weapon" that says:
2nd-level monk feature
You train yourself to use a variety of weapons as monk weapons, not just simple melee weapons and shortswords. Whenever you finish a short or long rest, you can touch one weapon, focus your ki on it, and then count that weapon as a monk weapon until you use this feature again.
The chosen weapon must meet these criteria:
• The weapon must be a simple or martial weapon.
• You must be proficient with it.
• It must lack the heavy and special properties.
If you wanted to use a naginata or something similar you could reskin a spear to remain within rules as written. That said, I think the limit of heavy and special properties is a bit silly, at least for the kensei now that every monk can use a longsword or something similar.