Okay, I'm probably missing something obvious here, because:
A monk of the empty hand treats normal weapons as improvised weapons
and:
Starting at 1st level, a monk of the empty hand can make a flurry of blows using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with an improvised weapon. He may not make a flurry of blows with any other weapons, including special monk weapons.
But since he treats all weapons as improvised weapons, doesn't that mean he can use flurry with any weapon?
Yar!
The wording is unclear, but I believe the intent was for normal weapons (longsword, sai, crossbows, etc) to be treated as Improvised (-4 penalty to use), while improvised weapons (ladder, chair, umbrella, etc) are treated as normal. These improvised weapons (ladder, chair, umbrella, etc) can be used in a flurry, but normal weapons (longsword, say, crossbow, etc - which are treated as improvised in regards to the penalties associated with "improvised weapons") cannot.
~P
Okay, I'm probably missing something obvious here, because:
A monk of the empty hand treats normal weapons as improvised weaponsand:
Starting at 1st level, a monk of the empty hand can make a flurry of blows using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with an improvised weapon. He may not make a flurry of blows with any other weapons, including special monk weapons.But since he treats all weapons as improvised weapons, doesn't that mean he can use flurry with any weapon?
Yes. But, if you read the full version of the first quote:
A monk of the empty hand treats normal weapons as improvised weapons with the following equivalencies (substituting all of their statistics for the listed weapon): 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.
So a monk of the empty hand can flurry with a greatsword (for example), but he treats it like a quarterstaff; it's no better for him than flurrying with a ladder or a potted plant.
Yar.
*points at hogarth*
Hooray for having all the relevant information, and not partial quotes.
~P
Yes. But, if you read the full version of the first quote:A monk of the empty hand treats normal weapons as improvised weapons with the following equivalencies (substituting all of their statistics for the listed weapon): 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.So a monk of the empty hand can flurry with a greatsword (for example), but he treats it like a quarterstaff; it's no better for him than flurrying with a ladder or a potted plant.
My question isn't whether it's effective, it's whether you can do it at all.
The problem is the second sentence in the Flurry description. It serves no purpose unless it is specifically barring normal weapons, as Pirate suggested. Considering word counts are usually so tight on these, it seems unusual to have a completely unnecessary sentence in the archetype.
As written, it appears to me that a monk of the empty hand can flurry with everything but shuriken. And if that's what they meant, it's a weird way to write it.
The problem is the second sentence in the Flurry description. It serves no purpose unless it is specifically barring normal weapons, as Pirate suggested. Considering word counts are usually so tight on these, it seems unusual to have a completely unnecessary sentence in the archetype.
I agree that it's mostly redundant. I wouldn't say completely redundant though; the first sentence says that he can flurry with X and Y, and the second sentence says that he can only flurry with X and Y. I'm sure there's a way to say it elegantly in a single sentence (e.g. an "if and only if" clause), but I can't think of one at the moment.
It means that he cannot use monk weapons in a flurry per their normal statistics, only as if they were a light hammer, club, or quarterstaff, as appropriate.
It means that he cannot use monk weapons in a flurry per their normal statistics, only as if they were a light hammer, club, or quarterstaff, as appropriate.
So if I'm a monk of the empty hand, I can flurry with anything I can hold in one or two hands, as long as it isn't a shuriken. Right?
Well, if shuriken count as light weapons, you could use them as a light hammer, and flurry with them too. But yeah, that's pretty much the size of it.
|
To me what this means is that he is essentially "trained" at using improvised weapons as his weapons. He is "untrained" with using all other weapons. So its like the opposite effect.
Imagine Jackie Chan in any of his movies using a ladder, bucket, etc. He is very proficient in using unconventional weapons. When it comes to conventional weapons, he takes a -4 (He doesn't like bladed weapons and feels he might cut himself or hurt others with them so he uses them sideways, ie hits with the flat of the blade).
What I feel is that this template essentially flips improvised weapons with normal weapons for the rules. It just provides a base for each type of normal weapon for damage type and amount, ie 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.
As far as flurrying goes, a monk cannot flurry with any weapon he or she is not proficient with. A flurry constitute years of training and knowledge with his weapons which allow him to gain extra attacks. In this case since improvised weapon are his "normal weapons", and normal weapons are "improvised weapons", he cannot flurry with his version of improvised weapons, ie all normal weapons.
To me what this means is that he is essentially "trained" at using improvised weapons as his weapons. He is "untrained" with using all other weapons. So its like the opposite effect.
That would make sense, except that he's not actually proficient in improvised weapons. He still needs the Catch Off-guard feat to use them without penalty. And with that feat, the penalty for normal-cum-improvised weapons also goes away. But they remain improvised weapons, and therefore eligible for flurry.
Another bit of weirdness: if the monk then takes a level of Fighter and gains simple and martial weapon proficiencies, he can no longer flurry with normal weapons. I'm not aware of any other classes or archetypes that lose the ability to do something just by gaining proficiency.
He can still flurry with them, by using them as improvised weapons rather than what they really are. As long as a Monk of the Empty Hand is smacking people with the flat and hilt of the longsword, rather than actually cutting and stabbing with it, he's using it improvised and can flurry with it.
Another bit of weirdness: if the monk then takes a level of Fighter and gains simple and martial weapon proficiencies, he can no longer flurry with normal weapons. I'm not aware of any other classes or archetypes that lose the ability to do something just by gaining proficiency.
It's not at all clear (a) what "normal weapons" are and (b) whether a multi-classed empty hand monk can ignore his "normal weapons are improvised weapons" ability when it suits him.
He can still flurry with them, by using them as improvised weapons rather than what they really are. As long as a Monk of the Empty Hand is smacking people with the flat and hilt of the longsword, rather than actually cutting and stabbing with it, he's using it improvised and can flurry with it.
That's interesting. I hadn't considered the idea of choosing to use them "wrong." But I think you're absolutely right. It's basically the same as choosing to do non-lethal damage with a lethal weapon.
Do the weapons still count as said weapons, for things like Weapon Focus?
No and I don't think improvised weapons can be enchanted either.
so if you using said flaming great sword as a quarterstaff you don't benefit from the flaming property
Do the weapons still count as said weapons, for things like Weapon Focus?
No and I don't think improvised weapons can be enchanted either.
so if you using said flaming great sword as a quarterstaff you don't benefit from the flaming property
This is wrong, or the ability to give stuff the bane property later on in the Archetype wouldnt work :)
If it worked the way you suggest the Archetype would be totally useless unable to hit stuff at higher levels.
Edit: as a funny note i saw they can take throw anything. One of these guys could flurry with tanglefoot bags or alchemist fire.. which i find funny for some reason.