So with the release of TCoE I was looking into building a monk of the astral self. I figured going 17 levels monk is good enough and was considering what to multi class into. So I was thinking that rogue would be good, so you don't have to waist ki to get bonus action dash and disengage, as well as getting access to sneak attack.
Reading the requirements for sneak attack, it requires a ranged or finesse attack.
Looking at the Monk's martial arts feature, the RAW unarmed strikes and monk weapons can use Dex for attack and damage, just like finesse, but aren't finesse.
Now I know most DMs would probably let you get the sneak attack, but I wanted to know was this a RAI to not let monk unarmed strikes be finesse, but the worded work around.
Edit: for clarification sneak attack requires a ranged or finesse weapon attack per the rogue class feature.
Unarmed strikes as described in the make an attach section of the rules aren't weapon attacks.
RAW and I guess RAI unarmed strikes could never trigger sneak attack originally.
So why not write it that way: martial arts giving unarmed strikes and monk weapons finesse
They're not weapons and so they can't have the finesse property - and also can't be used to Sneak Attack.
Sneak Attack
Beginning at 1st level, you know how to strike subtly and exploit a foe’s distraction. Once per turn, you can deal an extra 1d6 damage to one creature you hit with an attack if you have advantage on the attack roll. The attack must use a finesse or a ranged weapon.
The monk’s Martial Arts feature was carefully worded to prevent unintended combinations; this is why the feature does not treat unarmed strikes as a finesse weapon, since that could have unforeseen consequences in future material about finesse weapons that is appropriate for, say, a rapier or a dagger but not an unarmed strike.
Part of my thinking i know comes from playing 3.5, were the Monk's unarmed strikes we considered natural weapons and not manufactured weapons, because there was a difference.
So I was thinking about what makes a weapon a weapon in 5e... Even the playable races that have "natural weapons" state you can use your "claws, bite, horns, ect" as an unarmed strike that deals normally 1d4 damage instead of the 1 damage...
So with then calling it a natural weapon there, mechanically isn't a weapon still. Which bothers me because the feature literally calls it a weapon, but isn't mechanically...
But I was thinking that maybe the Monk's martial arts should read something like:
Due to a Monk's training in unarmed strikes and monk weapons, they have learned to harness their natural weapons causing their bodies themselves to be forged into weapons with the finesse property and follows the martial arts damage die progression...
Now I know a monk can get sneak attacks with all the finesse weapons that are monk weapons, like daggers and that. It just seems like a flavor fail to not mechanically let them with unarmed strikes...
I'd say flavor wise it only seems odd the Way of Shadow Monk can't synergize sneak attack (aka backstab in earlier editions) via some trope like Vulcan neck pinch, neck break, or chop to the solar plexus. I mean outside of "ninja" lore martial arts aren't really about being sneaky ... in fact, especially with some of the D&D power sets, martial arts are down right exhibitionist. Now I'm thinking Monk enhancing a College of Swords Bard which goes in the complete opposite direction of what you're going for.
Monk weapons are short swords and all simple weapons without the heavy or special tags, that includes the club, great club, Mace, hammer etc - none of which could possibly be considered finesse weapons. They are blunt, brute force weapons.
Monk weapons are short swords and all simple weapons without the heavy or special tags, that includes the club, great club, Mace, hammer etc - none of which could possibly be considered finesse weapons. They are blunt, brute force weapons.
Monk weapons are short swords and all simple weapons without the heavy or special tags, that includes the club, great club, Mace, hammer etc - none of which could possibly be considered finesse weapons. They are blunt, brute force weapons.
No I didn't. They are finesse weapons as you said. I specifically gave examples of weapons that are NOT finesse weapons. I assumed that the phrase 'that includes'would make it clear that I wasn't listing all simple weapons. To give all simple weapons the finesse tag would be really silly. Every single rogue player in existence would take a monk level just so they could get finesse bludgeoning weapons to use against creatures with vulnerability to bludgeoning damage. A lot of rogues have high Wisdom too, meaning that they could possibly get a better AC using the Monk's unarmoured defence feature rather than studded leather and dex. A starting rogue with an 18 Dex and leather armour gets AC 15, a 1/1 rogue / monk would get 14 +Wisdom so even a Wisdom of 12 gives the same AC and a trap/perception based rogue could begin with a 17/18 AC
Finesse is a property of a weapon. And unarmed strikes are not weapons.
The monk being able to use DEX instead of strength for attack is a class feature so they are not the same even though they have similar effect. Though even non-finesse monk weapons still use DEX because its a class feature.
But it can be confusing since unarmed strikes qualify as a “melee weapon attack” but not an “attack with a melee weapon“
And as banksmj pointed out they were try to avoid unintended consequences or just keep certain multiclass dips for exactly the OP’s reason
Monk weapons are short swords and all simple weapons without the heavy or special tags, that includes the club, great club, Mace, hammer etc - none of which could possibly be considered finesse weapons. They are blunt, brute force weapons.
I'll agree with yo on maces and great clubs, but watch a Bruce Lee movie or check out some modern martial artists using nunchaku or eskrima sticks if you think that the club isn't a finesse weapon.
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.
Escrima and nunchaku are more of a balanced baton - the weight is light and evenly distributed, we use them in the club I train with, they are definitely more about speed and precision than brute strength. A club on the other hand is more like a baseball bat, and the weight distribution is all at the impact end so the usage is different. I think of them as a lump of wood, the leg of a table or a golf club, something that prehistoric cavemen would use. I mean yes, they are all bludgeoning weapons, but anyone can pick up a baseball bat and swing it at another person, they are simple and imprecise - but the same cannot be said about nunchaku.
Escrima and nunchaku are more of a balanced baton - the weight is light and evenly distributed, we use them in the club I train with, they are definitely more about speed and precision than brute strength. A club on the other hand is more like a baseball bat, and the weight distribution is all at the impact end so the usage is different. I think of them as a lump of wood, the leg of a table or a golf club, something that prehistoric cavemen would use. I mean yes, they are all bludgeoning weapons, but anyone can pick up a baseball bat and swing it at another person, they are simple and imprecise - but the same cannot be said about nunchaku.
The Player's Handbook explicitly states that weapons like nunchaku and escima count as clubs.
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.
Well they say you can re-flavor the club as those and use those stats (Not finesse) not that they are exactly the same
edit: you get to use your Dex as they are monk weapons but not for sneak attack. If escrima and nunchaku were official weapons maybe they would be finesse, but that’s not the case
The Player's Handbook explicitly states that weapons like nunchaku and escima count as clubs.
No it doesn’t, it says that if you want to use other weapons then you can chose the most similar weapon in the weapon list and use that weapons stats but reflavoured to look like the weapon you want to use. So nunchaku would be closer to a club than a light hammer or a javelin or a hand axe. This is to make it quick and simple, in order to prevent having the huge lists of weapons tables that other editions have.
Wouldn't nunchaku be more analogous to a flail? I think on this forum someone actually pointed out they are derived from an agricultural flail ... I think it was in the epic scythe thread. Martial as opposed to simple because of degree of training, though I guess that would be out of the Monk's grasp, so to speak, unless you worked around it.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Nunchaku are definitely a light weapon, and flails are not. Though you definitely need finesse to use a flail because it's more about being able to swing it without hitting yourself- the chain is what puts the force into the blows, not your muscles (and that's if the flail is even a real weapon to begin with, there's some dispute).
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.
They do, but European records of actual flails being used as weapons indicate that for the most part, two-handed flails with long handles and only a small chain were used (primarily by peasants but there are a couple of depictions of knights also employing them), but the documentation on the use of the one-handed flail featured in the 5E PHB is so scant that it quite possibly never actually happened in the real world.
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's great to see people were talking about this, and I was looking back on one of my old characters that 8 played for about 2 years in a PF1 game. He was a Brawler (fight and monk mixed class) with the sky alt class features of snakebite striker, which gave him sneak attack, who then used the prestige class assassin (because of the character I based him off was an assassin) ... So I've always liked the combo of unarmed strikes and sneak attack.
Also "sneak attack" didn't mean being sneaky to me per say... Because of growing up playing 3.5, it was classified as precision damage so I've always thought of sneak attack as persistent damage even in 5th edition rules. And so to me, a monk who uses a fist can land precision damage...
Also I personally think that a monk's unarmed strike can be any of the three damages of budgeting piercing or slashing.... Just look at the tiger style martial arts from China that's about ripping and clawing people (slashing). And I can't think of a specific style, but you have gouging attacks which are poking your fingers into eyes and other soft tissue (pricing)...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So with the release of TCoE I was looking into building a monk of the astral self. I figured going 17 levels monk is good enough and was considering what to multi class into. So I was thinking that rogue would be good, so you don't have to waist ki to get bonus action dash and disengage, as well as getting access to sneak attack.
Reading the requirements for sneak attack, it requires a ranged or finesse attack.
Looking at the Monk's martial arts feature, the RAW unarmed strikes and monk weapons can use Dex for attack and damage, just like finesse, but aren't finesse.
Now I know most DMs would probably let you get the sneak attack, but I wanted to know was this a RAI to not let monk unarmed strikes be finesse, but the worded work around.
Edit: for clarification sneak attack requires a ranged or finesse weapon attack per the rogue class feature.
Unarmed strikes as described in the make an attach section of the rules aren't weapon attacks.
RAW and I guess RAI unarmed strikes could never trigger sneak attack originally.
So why not write it that way: martial arts giving unarmed strikes and monk weapons finesse
They're not weapons and so they can't have the finesse property - and also can't be used to Sneak Attack.
As for why.... *shrug*
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
https://dnd.wizards.com/articles/unearthed-arcana/modifying-classes
Part of my thinking i know comes from playing 3.5, were the Monk's unarmed strikes we considered natural weapons and not manufactured weapons, because there was a difference.
So I was thinking about what makes a weapon a weapon in 5e... Even the playable races that have "natural weapons" state you can use your "claws, bite, horns, ect" as an unarmed strike that deals normally 1d4 damage instead of the 1 damage...
So with then calling it a natural weapon there, mechanically isn't a weapon still. Which bothers me because the feature literally calls it a weapon, but isn't mechanically...
But I was thinking that maybe the Monk's martial arts should read something like:
Due to a Monk's training in unarmed strikes and monk weapons, they have learned to harness their natural weapons causing their bodies themselves to be forged into weapons with the finesse property and follows the martial arts damage die progression...
Now I know a monk can get sneak attacks with all the finesse weapons that are monk weapons, like daggers and that. It just seems like a flavor fail to not mechanically let them with unarmed strikes...
I'd say flavor wise it only seems odd the Way of Shadow Monk can't synergize sneak attack (aka backstab in earlier editions) via some trope like Vulcan neck pinch, neck break, or chop to the solar plexus. I mean outside of "ninja" lore martial arts aren't really about being sneaky ... in fact, especially with some of the D&D power sets, martial arts are down right exhibitionist. Now I'm thinking Monk enhancing a College of Swords Bard which goes in the complete opposite direction of what you're going for.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Monk weapons are short swords and all simple weapons without the heavy or special tags, that includes the club, great club, Mace, hammer etc - none of which could possibly be considered finesse weapons. They are blunt, brute force weapons.
You're forgetting the Dagger - and the Shortsword is finesse.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
No I didn't. They are finesse weapons as you said. I specifically gave examples of weapons that are NOT finesse weapons. I assumed that the phrase 'that includes' would make it clear that I wasn't listing all simple weapons. To give all simple weapons the finesse tag would be really silly. Every single rogue player in existence would take a monk level just so they could get finesse bludgeoning weapons to use against creatures with vulnerability to bludgeoning damage. A lot of rogues have high Wisdom too, meaning that they could possibly get a better AC using the Monk's unarmoured defence feature rather than studded leather and dex. A starting rogue with an 18 Dex and leather armour gets AC 15, a 1/1 rogue / monk would get 14 +Wisdom so even a Wisdom of 12 gives the same AC and a trap/perception based rogue could begin with a 17/18 AC
Oh I see - you were replying to ChronoRift. A quote would have helped with the context there. Nevermind then.
Mega Yahtzee Thread:
Highest 41: brocker2001 (#11,285).
Yahtzee of 2's: Emmber (#36,161).
Lowest 9: JoeltheWalrus (#312), Emmber (#12,505) and Dertinus (#20,953).
Finesse is a property of a weapon. And unarmed strikes are not weapons.
The monk being able to use DEX instead of strength for attack is a class feature so they are not the same even though they have similar effect. Though even non-finesse monk weapons still use DEX because its a class feature.
But it can be confusing since unarmed strikes qualify as a “melee weapon attack” but not an “attack with a melee weapon“
And as banksmj pointed out they were try to avoid unintended consequences or just keep certain multiclass dips for exactly the OP’s reason
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
I'll agree with yo on maces and great clubs, but watch a Bruce Lee movie or check out some modern martial artists using nunchaku or eskrima sticks if you think that the club isn't a finesse weapon.
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.
Escrima and nunchaku are more of a balanced baton - the weight is light and evenly distributed, we use them in the club I train with, they are definitely more about speed and precision than brute strength. A club on the other hand is more like a baseball bat, and the weight distribution is all at the impact end so the usage is different. I think of them as a lump of wood, the leg of a table or a golf club, something that prehistoric cavemen would use. I mean yes, they are all bludgeoning weapons, but anyone can pick up a baseball bat and swing it at another person, they are simple and imprecise - but the same cannot be said about nunchaku.
While the power-gamer in me gets excited about the idea of unarmed strikes being finesse weapons, the adult in me understands why they're not.
I'm okay with it, as I tend to enjoy well-balanced games a LOT more than out-of-control number fests.
;)
The Player's Handbook explicitly states that weapons like nunchaku and escima count as clubs.
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.
Well they say you can re-flavor the club as those and use those stats (Not finesse) not that they are exactly the same
edit: you get to use your Dex as they are monk weapons but not for sneak attack. If escrima and nunchaku were official weapons maybe they would be finesse, but that’s not the case
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
No it doesn’t, it says that if you want to use other weapons then you can chose the most similar weapon in the weapon list and use that weapons stats but reflavoured to look like the weapon you want to use. So nunchaku would be closer to a club than a light hammer or a javelin or a hand axe. This is to make it quick and simple, in order to prevent having the huge lists of weapons tables that other editions have.
Wouldn't nunchaku be more analogous to a flail? I think on this forum someone actually pointed out they are derived from an agricultural flail ... I think it was in the epic scythe thread. Martial as opposed to simple because of degree of training, though I guess that would be out of the Monk's grasp, so to speak, unless you worked around it.
Jander Sunstar is the thinking person's Drizzt, fight me.
Nunchaku are definitely a light weapon, and flails are not. Though you definitely need finesse to use a flail because it's more about being able to swing it without hitting yourself- the chain is what puts the force into the blows, not your muscles (and that's if the flail is even a real weapon to begin with, there's some dispute).
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.
They do, but European records of actual flails being used as weapons indicate that for the most part, two-handed flails with long handles and only a small chain were used (primarily by peasants but there are a couple of depictions of knights also employing them), but the documentation on the use of the one-handed flail featured in the 5E PHB is so scant that it quite possibly never actually happened in the real world.
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's great to see people were talking about this, and I was looking back on one of my old characters that 8 played for about 2 years in a PF1 game. He was a Brawler (fight and monk mixed class) with the sky alt class features of snakebite striker, which gave him sneak attack, who then used the prestige class assassin (because of the character I based him off was an assassin) ... So I've always liked the combo of unarmed strikes and sneak attack.
Also "sneak attack" didn't mean being sneaky to me per say... Because of growing up playing 3.5, it was classified as precision damage so I've always thought of sneak attack as persistent damage even in 5th edition rules. And so to me, a monk who uses a fist can land precision damage...
Also I personally think that a monk's unarmed strike can be any of the three damages of budgeting piercing or slashing.... Just look at the tiger style martial arts from China that's about ripping and clawing people (slashing). And I can't think of a specific style, but you have gouging attacks which are poking your fingers into eyes and other soft tissue (pricing)...