Monks don't need light weapons, they need Monk weapons, i.e. simple weapons without Heavy or Two-Handed plus shortswords. Light is for if you feel like dual wielding, and most of the time your Martial Arts bonus punch is going to be worth more damage than an offhand weapon attack without a damage modifier.
Monks don't need light weapons, they need Monk weapons, i.e. simple weapons without Heavy or Two-Handed plus shortswords. Light is for if you feel like dual wielding, and most of the time your Martial Arts bonus punch is going to be worth more damage than an offhand weapon attack without a damage modifier.
This part I understood. I am looking for Monk Weapons that are Finesse so I can sneak attack + unarmed strike with each damage type.
Heh, that was the point I was trying to make. By RAW you're SOL, but there's no pressing reason you can't houserule things like clubs, maces, hatchets, or the like to work with Sneak Attack. So long as you're still using one-handed melee weapons, you're not doing any more damage than you could with a rapier anyways so there's nothing inherently game-breaking in opening up Sneak Attack to other one-handed weapons. Especially if you're a monk using monk weapons in the first place.
Monks don't need light weapons, they need Monk weapons, i.e. simple weapons without Heavy or Two-Handed plus shortswords. Light is for if you feel like dual wielding, and most of the time your Martial Arts bonus punch is going to be worth more damage than an offhand weapon attack without a damage modifier.
This part I understood. I am looking for Monk Weapons that are Finesse so I can sneak attack + unarmed strike with each damage type.
Shortsword & Dagger are your only options. However, if you use the optional rules from Tasha’s Cauldron you can make any qualifying weapon a monk weapon for yourself, and the whip or scimitar would both qualify to get you slashing damage. Unarmed strikes already do bludgeoning.
Heh, that was the point I was trying to make. By RAW you're SOL, but there's no pressing reason you can't houserule things like clubs, maces, hatchets, or the like to work with Sneak Attack. So long as you're still using one-handed melee weapons, you're not doing any more damage than you could with a rapier anyways so there's nothing inherently game-breaking in opening up Sneak Attack to other one-handed weapons. Especially if you're a monk using monk weapons in the first place.
Right?! They are all 1d6 after all. I'd love to know the reasoning behind removing some of the weapons that counted for sneak attack and Monk weapons from 3.5 to 5e.
Heh, that was the point I was trying to make. By RAW you're SOL, but there's no pressing reason you can't houserule things like clubs, maces, hatchets, or the like to work with Sneak Attack. So long as you're still using one-handed melee weapons, you're not doing any more damage than you could with a rapier anyways so there's nothing inherently game-breaking in opening up Sneak Attack to other one-handed weapons. Especially if you're a monk using monk weapons in the first place.
Right?! They are all 1d6 after all. I'd love to know the reasoning behind removing some of the weapons that counted for sneak attack and Monk weapons from 3.5 to 5e.
Heh, that was the point I was trying to make. By RAW you're SOL, but there's no pressing reason you can't houserule things like clubs, maces, hatchets, or the like to work with Sneak Attack. So long as you're still using one-handed melee weapons, you're not doing any more damage than you could with a rapier anyways so there's nothing inherently game-breaking in opening up Sneak Attack to other one-handed weapons. Especially if you're a monk using monk weapons in the first place.
Right?! They are all 1d6 after all. I'd love to know the reasoning behind removing some of the weapons that counted for sneak attack and Monk weapons from 3.5 to 5e.
Heh, that was the point I was trying to make. By RAW you're SOL, but there's no pressing reason you can't houserule things like clubs, maces, hatchets, or the like to work with Sneak Attack. So long as you're still using one-handed melee weapons, you're not doing any more damage than you could with a rapier anyways so there's nothing inherently game-breaking in opening up Sneak Attack to other one-handed weapons. Especially if you're a monk using monk weapons in the first place.
Right?! They are all 1d6 after all. I'd love to know the reasoning behind removing some of the weapons that counted for sneak attack and Monk weapons from 3.5 to 5e.
Historically, there has been a hang up over 'Sneak attack' being 'Backstab,' i.e. needing a stabby weapon, on the theory that only stabby weapons can hit vitals.
"Vitals" aren't just organs or blood vessels though, they can be joints and ligaments and pressure points etc. Bludgeoning sneak attack makes sense. I would say reducing the damage for a bludgeoning finesse weapon to 1d4 would justify having less raw force behind the swing.
In prior versions I think nunchucks fulfilled this category, but nothing exists in 5e? Are there maybe batons or some other finesse weapon that deals bludgeon damage in an expansion I dunno about? Oh. Or by chance are there variant rules that make fists finesse weapons that deal bludgeon damage?
The only time I have seen the Nunchaku, was in AD&D's Oriental Adventures, and they did 1d6 damage.
In prior versions I think nunchucks fulfilled this category, but nothing exists in 5e? Are there maybe batons or some other finesse weapon that deals bludgeon damage in an expansion I dunno about? Oh. Or by chance are there variant rules that make fists finesse weapons that deal bludgeon damage?
The only time I have seen the Nunchaku, was in AD&D's Oriental Adventures, and they did 1d6 damage.
IIRC, they were also present as monk weapons in 3rd Edition.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
It doesn’t break anything to change a dagger’s damage to bludgeoning and call it a blackjack or something like that, if your DM agrees.
while not a weapon in the current edition, Blackjacks are a weapon in past editions, and yes they were rogue weapons. But there is one issue they delt non-leathal damage. Which honestly if you wanted them abosulutly I would allow them in my game, but as a non-leathal sneak weapon.
Blackjacks are redundant in 5E because you can simply declare any melee weapon attack that reduces the target's hp to zero as being nonlethal.
While there is overlap with other weapons, the idea that something with a unique flavor and RP is redundant in a Role-Play Game is a weird stance to take, and if that is their reasoning, then they are wrong and should add Blackjacks back in, because they had several useful properties that do not currently exsist.
from the 3.0 SRD, Blackjack or Sap is the same weapon.
Martial Weapons
Cost
Dmg (S)
Dmg (M)
Critical
Range
Weight
Type
Special
Sap
1 gp
1d4
1d6
×2
—
2 lbs.
B
nonlethal
so using this, I can now easily make the homebrew weapon.
Blackjack aka Sap
1d4 Blugeoning
Finesse, Light, Nonlethal
Sap
2 lb.
1 GP
You will notice this weapon does several things differantly and is not redundent. It's a finesse sap weapon and nonleathal.
Monks don't need light weapons, they need Monk weapons, i.e. simple weapons without Heavy or Two-Handed plus shortswords. Light is for if you feel like dual wielding, and most of the time your Martial Arts bonus punch is going to be worth more damage than an offhand weapon attack without a damage modifier.
Please do not contact or message me.
This part I understood. I am looking for Monk Weapons that are Finesse so I can sneak attack + unarmed strike with each damage type.
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
Heh, that was the point I was trying to make. By RAW you're SOL, but there's no pressing reason you can't houserule things like clubs, maces, hatchets, or the like to work with Sneak Attack. So long as you're still using one-handed melee weapons, you're not doing any more damage than you could with a rapier anyways so there's nothing inherently game-breaking in opening up Sneak Attack to other one-handed weapons. Especially if you're a monk using monk weapons in the first place.
Please do not contact or message me.
Shortsword & Dagger are your only options. However, if you use the optional rules from Tasha’s Cauldron you can make any qualifying weapon a monk weapon for yourself, and the whip or scimitar would both qualify to get you slashing damage. Unarmed strikes already do bludgeoning.
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
I would definitely be on board with a 1d4 bludgeoning finesse weapon called a blackjack or sap.
Right?! They are all 1d6 after all. I'd love to know the reasoning behind removing some of the weapons that counted for sneak attack and Monk weapons from 3.5 to 5e.
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
Same. Why aren't fist finesse weapons is my real question. Out of everything in the game I figured the hand would be the most finesse weapon.
Oh... I was trying to multi-quote in the same post. Sorry all for the double post.
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
The reason was “streamlining.”
Creating Epic Boons on DDB
DDB Buyers' Guide
Hardcovers, DDB & You
Content Troubleshooting
:'(
"Life is Cast by Random Dice"
Burn my candle twice.
I have done my life justice
Against random dice.
"Vitals" aren't just organs or blood vessels though, they can be joints and ligaments and pressure points etc. Bludgeoning sneak attack makes sense. I would say reducing the damage for a bludgeoning finesse weapon to 1d4 would justify having less raw force behind the swing.
Whilst this is true - genius idea by the way! - a sling is not a monk weapon so they'd have to attack with strength 💁♂️
A Sling is a ranged weapon, so you use Dexterity for its attack and damage rolls, not Strength. All ranged weapons are eligible for Sneak Attack.
pronouns: he/she/they
The only time I have seen the Nunchaku, was in AD&D's Oriental Adventures, and they did 1d6 damage.
You can reskin any weapon (as long as your table agrees). Ie - I reskinned darts to be throwing stars. Nothing game changing that will break the it.
IIRC, they were also present as monk weapons in 3rd Edition.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
while not a weapon in the current edition, Blackjacks are a weapon in past editions, and yes they were rogue weapons. But there is one issue they delt non-leathal damage. Which honestly if you wanted them abosulutly I would allow them in my game, but as a non-leathal sneak weapon.
Blackjacks are redundant in 5E because you can simply declare any melee weapon attack that reduces the target's hp to zero as being nonlethal.
Find your own truth, choose your enemies carefully, and never deal with a dragon.
"Canon" is what's factual to D&D lore. "Cannon" is what you're going to be shot with if you keep getting the word wrong.
While there is overlap with other weapons, the idea that something with a unique flavor and RP is redundant in a Role-Play Game is a weird stance to take, and if that is their reasoning, then they are wrong and should add Blackjacks back in, because they had several useful properties that do not currently exsist.
from the 3.0 SRD, Blackjack or Sap is the same weapon.
so using this, I can now easily make the homebrew weapon.
You will notice this weapon does several things differantly and is not redundent. It's a finesse sap weapon and nonleathal.