| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I'm planning a monk character that uses "monk of the empty hand" and "weapon adept (quarterstaff)" archetypes.
The idea is that the empty hand can flurry with any two-handed weapon and treat it as a quarterstaff; and the weapon adept archetype would provide weapon focus and weapon specialization to the quarterstaff. By my reading that means he can find a +1 flaming scythe in the loot and wield it as a +1 flaming quarterstaff; and from level 6 onwards get a +2 (weapon specialization) bonus on the damage rolls too.
Does this work the way I intend?
To complicate the discussion:
Although the two archetypes mesh in terms of class abilities: weapon adept archetype grants "At 2nd level, a weapon adept gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat with one of his monk weapons." And the monk of the empty hand loses proficiency in all weapons and instead treats everything as an improvised weapon. So this raises the question whether the basic premise is even do-able based on improvised weapon equivalencies.
Not necessarily by raw - as that requires picking a monk weapon. But arguably the intention is to pick a weapon that can be flurried by the monk. In which case the thing works out again.
|
I'm planning a monk character that uses "monk of the empty hand" and "weapon adept (quarterstaff)" archetypes.
The idea is that the empty hand can flurry with any two-handed weapon and treat it as a quarterstaff; and the weapon adept archetype would provide weapon focus and weapon specialization to the quarterstaff. By my reading that means he can find a +1 flaming scythe in the loot and wield it as a +1 flaming quarterstaff; and from level 6 onwards get a +2 (weapon specialization) bonus on the damage rolls too.
Does this work the way I intend?
I would say no, as the two archetypes are clearly opposite of each other.
The only exception might be shuriken, as "Monks of the empty hand are proficient with the shuriken only."
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
The abilities for the Weapon Adept can only be used on a monk weapon and the only one available to a Monk of the Empty Hand is the shuriken. Quaterstaff is removed from the list of monk weapons and can't be used for the Weapon Adept abilities. The rules for Monk of the Empty hand state "a light weapon functions as a light hammer, a one-handed weapon functions as a club, and a two-handed weapon functions as a quarterstaff". Notice the wording is functions as a and doesn't say it counts as a. Thus the improvised weapon does not count as a monk weapon. If you notice the flurry of blows for the Monk of the Empty Hand calls for improvised weapons and not monk weapons.
Weapon Adept
Perfect Strike - monk weapon, only shuriken is available
Way of the Weapon Master - monk weapon, only shuriken is available
Maybe that just changes the tune of the argument:
- APG, weapon adept, p115: "At 2nd level, a weapon adept gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat with one of his monk weapons."
- And from Core the definition of a monk weapon, p145: "A monk weapon can be used by a monk to perform a flurry of blows"
You could argue that this allows a monk of the empty hand (and only him) to be a weapon adept (improvised weapon). Since he can use an improvised weapon to flurry and the requirement for weapon adept is that a monk weapon (flurry-able weapon) is used.
Maybe that just changes the tune of the argument:
- APG, weapon adept, p115: "At 2nd level, a weapon adept gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat with one of his monk weapons."
- And from Core the definition of a monk weapon, p145: "A monk weapon can be used by a monk to perform a flurry of blows"
You could argue that this allows a monk of the empty hand (and only him) to be a weapon adept (improvised weapon). Since he can use an improvised weapon to flurry and the requirement for weapon adept is that a monk weapon (flurry-able weapon) is used.
I don't think it works that way. All monk weapons can be used in a flurry, but not all things used in a flurry are monk weapons. For instance, a monk's unarmed strike is not a monk weapon.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Maybe that just changes the tune of the argument:
- APG, weapon adept, p115: "At 2nd level, a weapon adept gains Weapon Focus as a bonus feat with one of his monk weapons."
- And from Core the definition of a monk weapon, p145: "A monk weapon can be used by a monk to perform a flurry of blows"
You could argue that this allows a monk of the empty hand (and only him) to be a weapon adept (improvised weapon). Since he can use an improvised weapon to flurry and the requirement for weapon adept is that a monk weapon (flurry-able weapon) is used.
Doesn't change the tune at all.
- flurry of blows from Monk of the Empty Hand is only for unarmed and improvised
- Weapon Adept specifically calls for a monk weapon, only one available is shuriken
- the improvised weapons are not counted as monk weapons, they function as a certain type of weapon. if you notice a light hammer and club are called out, definitely not weapons with the monk quality. a monk is not even normally proficient with a light hammer
To determine the size category and appropriate damage for an improvised weapon, compare its relative size and damage potential to the weapon list to find a reasonable match.
It seems they went ahead and listed the reasonable match for the player, to prevent munchkinesque arguments...
RAW, I think it doesn't work.
In my game, I would allow this mesh to work with the weapon adept choosing "improvised weapons".
Same as meshing Urban Ranger and Guide -- RAW, the guide's Terrain Bond ability would do nothing; in my game, Terrain Bond works with any of the ranger's favored communities.
@Thomas LeBlanc:
Okay, would your reading of RAW allow this: at level 1 the character takes weapon proficiency (quarterstaff) as his level 1 feat. Can he now proceed to be a monk of the empty hand and weapon adept (quarterstaff)?
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Okay, would your reading of RAW allow this: at level 1 the character takes weapon proficiency (quarterstaff) as his level 1 feat. Can he now proceed to be a monk of the empty hand and weapon adept (quarterstaff)?
Yessirey! But he can't use it for the Monk of the Empty Hand abilities that call for an improvised weapon or flurry with it.
Yessirey! But he can't use it for the Monk of the Empty Hand abilities that call for an improvised weapon or flurry with it.
Even if he is improvised weapon wielding a quarterstaff that functions as a quarterstaff? And how come?
|
Yessirey! But he can't use it for the Monk of the Empty Hand abilities that call for an improvised weapon or flurry with it.Even if he is improvised weapon wielding a quarterstaff that functions as a quarterstaff? And how come?
Since there is nothing stopping you from using a weapon in a way it is not intended, I see no problem with doing this.
Not entirely related, but since many aren't aware of it:
Thank you James Jacobs! As posted by him
The monk of the empty hand treats improvised weapons as if she were proficient in them, and can wield normal weapons as improvised weapons. This effectively has the same end effect as the Catch Off-Guard feat, but isn't a feat and thus doesn't use up a feat slot since it's a variant class ability. Thus, they do not take a nonproficient penalty when using improvised weapons. The text is not as clear as it could have been, I guess, but hopefully common sense can step in to bolster that if someone doesn't read this post?(We COULD have simply said, "The monk of the empty hand gains "Catch Off-Guard" as a bonus feat, I guess, but that would have lost the flavor bit about how they often wield normal weapons as improvised weapons.)
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Yessirey! But he can't use it for the Monk of the Empty Hand abilities that call for an improvised weapon or flurry with it.Even if he is improvised weapon wielding a quarterstaff that functions as a quarterstaff? And how come?
A quarterstaff wielded by a Monk of an Empty Hand works as a quarterstaff but he is not proficient with it. As the rules say, it functions as a quarterstaff but does not count as a quarterstaff. If you took weapon proficiency with the quarterstaff, it is no longer treated as an improvised weapon.
Just because you're proficient with a weapon does not mean you're not able to use it in an improvising manner - like wielding a longsword by holding its blade and hammering with the pummel. To the best of my knowledge the associated weapon feats (like weapon specialization) still apply to your weapon if you use it in a non-traditional manner.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Just because you're proficient with a weapon does not mean you're not able to use it in an improvising manner - like wielding a longsword by holding its blade and hammering with the pummel. To the best of my knowledge the associated weapon feats (like weapon specialization) still apply to your weapon if you use it in a non-traditional manner.
Because such objects are not designed for this use, any creature that uses an improvised weapon in combat is considered to be nonproficient with it and takes a –4 penalty on attack rolls made with that object.
I would rule using/gripping a weapon incorrectly counts as an improvised weapon. Which means you are not proficient with it and thus not eligible for weapon focus and specialization, since they say you must be proficient with the weapon to apply the feats.
As James Jacobs explained: "The monk of the empty hand treats improvised weapons as if she were proficient in them, and can wield normal weapons as improvised weapons."
So the monk of the empty hand *can* proficiently wield a sword by holding it by the blade. And as such weapon focus and weapon specialization should work (for him).
Unless you rather allow a blanket weapon focus (improvised) and weapon specialization (improvised) - which frankly seems considerably more powerful.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
As James Jacobs explained: "The monk of the empty hand treats improvised weapons as if she were proficient in them, and can wield normal weapons as improvised weapons."
So the monk of the empty hand *can* proficiently wield a sword by holding it by the blade. And as such weapon focus and weapon specialization should work (for him).
Unless you rather allow a blanket weapon focus (improvised) and weapon specialization (improvised) - which frankly seems considerably more powerful.
I saw his explanation. Yes, you are proficient using a sword held by the blade due to the Monk of the Empty Hand, but it functions as a club, does not count as a longsword or count as a club, which would be necessary for feats. And since it is treated as a club, you would not get the weapon focus(longsword) or weapon specialization(longsword).
EDIT: weapon focus (improvised) is not allowable by rules since you are selecting a group of weapons and not a single weapon.
does not count as a longsword or count as a club, which would be necessary for feats. And since it is treated as a club, you would not get the weapon focus(longsword) or weapon specialization(longsword).
Now that is a really hair-fine distinction between functions and counts - is there rules precedent for this distinction as you portray it? I can quite conceive them being used synonymously or at least not prohibit feats.
It is not a balance issue - a monk of the empty hand wields a greataxe or greatsword as a 1d6 weapon; so having a way to get weapon focus normally as a feat; or weapon specialization using the weapon adept archetype is by no means an unwarranted possibility.
Furthermore a monk of the empty hand should be able to at least take some form of weapon focus. Just because he can wield anything as a weapon doesn't mean that he cannot wield chairs particularly well. So how would that work in your framework? Weapon focus (chair) would not work, as it functions as a club for the monk and "chair" is not a valid weapon choice for the feat.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
Furthermore a monk of the empty hand should be able to at least take some form of weapon focus. Just because he can wield anything as a weapon doesn't mean that he cannot wield chairs particularly well. So how would that work in your framework? Weapon focus (chair) would not work, as it functions as a club for the monk and "chair" is not a valid weapon choice for the feat.
Why should they? Life isn't always fair. A Monk of the Empty Hand can take Weapon Focus, but for unarmed strike and shuriken. The focus on the class seems to be able to always use any weapon. Disarm a guard and take his sword = BAM, instant club. The ability of the Monk of the Empty Hand means any weapon is deadly in his hands rather than the small selection a monk normally has. Granted they may not be as cool, but that is alleviated by being able to change the damage type at 3rd level, at 6th level with Improvised Weapon Mastery, and then the Ki Weapons ability at 5th. Those abilities by themselves are pretty powerful. And in my opinion grant him greater weapon skills than most of the other monk archetypes.
First let me thank you for your input - I do appreciate the discourse.
Why should they?
Because there is no precedent that I know of for an attack type that cannot be improved with Weapon Focus.
Weapon Focus (weapon) - legit
Weapon Focus (grapple) - legit
Weapon Focus (ray) - legit
Weapon Focus (touch) - legit
It is a complete break from form to have a single archetype that performs attacks that does not benefit from weapon focus for its attacks. (Other than unarmed and shuriken, which are incidental, rather than the focus of the archetype).
Nope; Weapon Focus specifically requires a weapon to focus on. "Improvised weapon" is a HUGE category of weapons... an analogy would be taking Weapon Focus (slashing weapons). Best you could do, I suppose, would be to pick the type of improvised weapon you'd be using most often and take the Weapon Focus in that feat—say, Weapon Focus (broken bottle) or Weapon Focus (folding chair).
If the monk took Weapon Focus in an actual weapon, he'd only gain the bonuses when using THAT weapon, not a weapon that emulates the weapon.
From the second part, I infer that a monk of the empty hand can take proficiency in quarterstaff, and weapon focus in quarterstaff, and wield the quarterstaff (in a non-traditional manner) to flurry it with weapon focus applied.
|
RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
From the second part, I infer that a monk of the empty hand can take proficiency in quarterstaff, and weapon focus in quarterstaff, and wield the quarterstaff (in a non-traditional manner) to flurry it with weapon focus applied.If the monk took Weapon Focus in an actual weapon, he'd only gain the bonuses when using THAT weapon, not a weapon that emulates the weapon.
You can not flurry with a real quarterstaff after you have taken proficiency with it. Because it would no longer be an improvised weapon and thus not eligible for the Monk of the Empty Hand FoB.
You could use a quarterstaff if you were proficient with it for the Weapon Adept abilities. Because it is a real monk weapon not an improvised weapon emulating (functioning as) a monk weapon.
Since you keep asking James questions, why not ask him about the original question in the thread? Or are you afraid your min/max munchkinesque idea be shot down officially?
Since you keep asking James questions, why not ask him about the original question in the thread? Or are you afraid your min/max munchkinesque idea be shot down officially?
Actually that was part of the questions I asked, he just didn't talk about it.
It's great to see that monks have progressed to the point that playing one is considered munchkinesque. Top5 watchout! Though, I doubt wanting to take an archetype is munchkinising - they are (supposed to be) balanced for such purposes. Benefits gained from weapon adept are at the cost of losses elsewhere.
I've already conceded that you cannot wield a greatsword as an improvised quarterstaff and get the benefits of of weapon focus (quarterstaff). I think the rules have largely been sorted out. And there is not a lot of min-maxing that can be done.
What the two of us now disagree upon is whether you get Weapon Focus and Weapon Specialization benefits to a weapon that is used in an improvised manner. Consider: even if the monk of the empty hand had proficiency in the quarterstaff, he can still wield it in an improvised manner to flurry with it. And I contend that the training that the feats represent still function on a weapon if it is used in a non-traditional manner.
For arguments sake, consider a fighter specializing in longswords. He's got weapon training. He's got specialization and focus. He's the run-of-the-mill sword guy. Now, I think it is perfectly reasonable to allow a fighter to reverse-grip his sword to use it as a hammer (for bludgeoning damage). This is obviously an improvised use of the weapon and incurs a -4 penalty to attacks. However, the fighter still retains his training, focus and specialization bonuses as he's just that intimately familiar with swords. At least in my understanding. See for example the Mordstreich from the German swordmastery school.
Now that is a really hair-fine distinction between functions and counts - is there rules precedent for this distinction as you portray it? I can quite conceive them being used synonymously or at least not prohibit feats.
Under the normal improvised weapon rules, an equivalent weapon is used to determine damage, but the improvised weapon is still an improvised weapon; for instance, it still only threatens a crit on a 20 and can't have better than a 10-foot range increment, no matter what weapon it is "equivalent" to. In this case I don't think weapon-specific feats or abilities would carry over; a skewer is not a dagger, the DM just uses the dagger's statistics as a point of comparison to decide what the skewer's damage should be.
I think it could be argued that the Empty Hand monk's "proficiencies" section is intended to be an expansion of this, meaning that you don't ACTUALLY treat his improvised weapons as hammers, clubs, or quarterstaffs. You just use those to decide what the improvised weapon's statistics are. This IS conjecture, however; the wording in the Monk of the Empty Hand's description is a bit stronger (with wording like "treats as" and "equivalency"), and it's not 100% clear that his improvised weapons should not be treated as those weapons for purposes of feats or abilities that the monk possesses.
I personally would definitely allow you to play this character and have it work the way you want, but that's not a judgment of the rules as written, just of what I think is balanced and reasonable.
Empty Handed Quarterstaffs Adepts? I'm almost too afraid to ask, but I'm curious: What exactly would they wield the staves with? Not with their hands, since they're empty.
Now that is a really hair-fine distinction between functions and counts - is there rules precedent for this distinction as you portray it? I can quite conceive them being used synonymously or at least not prohibit feats.
Under the normal improvised weapon rules, an equivalent weapon is used to determine damage, but the improvised weapon is still an improvised weapon; for instance, it still only threatens a crit on a 20 and can't have better than a 10-foot range increment, no matter what weapon it is "equivalent" to. In this case I don't think weapon-specific feats or abilities would carry over; a skewer is not a dagger, the DM just uses the dagger's statistics as a point of comparison to decide what the skewer's damage should be.
I think it could be argued that the Empty Hand monk's "proficiencies" section is intended to be an expansion of this, meaning that you don't ACTUALLY treat his improvised weapons as hammers, clubs, or quarterstaffs. You just use those to decide what the improvised weapon's statistics are. This IS conjecture, however; the wording in the Monk of the Empty Hand's description is a bit stronger (with wording like "treats as" and "equivalency"), and it's not 100% clear that his improvised weapons should not be treated as those weapons for purposes of feats or abilities that the monk possesses.
I personally would definitely allow you to play this character and have it work the way you want, but that's not a judgment of the rules as written, just of what I think is balanced and reasonable.
Thanks - though let me add that James Jacobs specifically mentioned that, for example, weapon focus (quarterstaff) won't work for the monk of the empty hand when he's wielding *not* a quarterstaff. (So wielding a longbow as an improvised quarterstaff will not work with the feat.)
The last thing that is unresolved (and what me and LeBlanc are arguing on) is whether the monk can take proficiency and focus in quarterstaff; get the +1 to attack and still flurry it as an improvised weapon at the same time.
Thanks - though let me add that James Jacobs specifically mentioned that, for example, weapon focus (quarterstaff) won't work for the monk of the empty hand when he's wielding *not* a quarterstaff. (So wielding a longbow as an improvised quarterstaff will not work with the feat.)
The last thing that is unresolved (and what me and LeBlanc are arguing on) is whether the monk can take proficiency and focus in quarterstaff;...
Sorry, I missed that; must not have been reading the thread carefully enough.
In that case, well.. James did strongly imply that the actual form of the object ("broken bottle" or "folding chair") should be the basis of any Weapon Focus-type feats.
I'm not sure if Weapon Focus (improvised quarterstaff) is the same as Weapon Focus (quarterstaff). On the other hand, we've established that it doesn't count as anything else for purposes of weapon feats, so if an improvised quarterstaff counts as anything, it's as a quarterstaff.
Personally, I would say that Weapon Focus (quarterstaff) does actually mean Weapon Focus (any weapon which is mechanically treated as a quarterstaff). To say otherwise is a gross violation of action-movie-logic.
lol - the action movie must be abided by!
It depends on what you mean; because for an empty handed monk to get focus for "free" with all two-handed weapons he wields is too good; so Weapon Focus (any weapon which is mechanically treated as a quarterstaff) would be too strong an option.
But if my GM is fine with allowing weapon focus (quarterstaff) to apply to an actual quarterstaff that is flurried in an unconventional manner, then I'm fine with it all.