D&D 5E Katar Monks viable?

[faria]

Unarmed just seems so boring. Are monks wielding katars viable? How would I go about building one?

Would it be better to have a katar in just one hand or better to have katars in both hands? Can the 'extra unarmed attacks' from spent ki be kicks instead of punches?

What kind of benefits would I get if I dual-classed monk/rogue with katars?

 

[SpaceOtter]

For the katar I'd use shortsword stats, so it's perfectly viable. Both are piercing, bladed weapons of the same relative length, and the shortsword is classified as a "monk weapon" too.

"Unarmed attacks" are just that, "unarmed attacks" so yes, that covers punches, kicks, headbutts, elbow and knee strikes, etc. It's all down to flavour, so yes, those "extra unarmed attacks" can take multiple forms.

Also, remember that "monk weapons" e.g. simple weapons and shortswords benefit from the Monk's Martial Arts ability, so they also do the increased damage that ability grants as the monk levels up. The type of damage will still obviously be different though.

 

[Paraxis]

There would be no point in having the second katar, martial arts bonus attack needs to be unarmed, so one katar attack and normally one unarmed attack, when you spend ki one katar and two unarmed.

If you multiclass rogue check with your DM that he is cool with you using unarmed strikes with sneak attack. By a strict reading of RAW unarmed strikes and most monk weapons are not "finesse" so can't be used with sneak attack, but I think most DM's would be cool with it.

 

[SpaceOtter]

There is one compelling reason to have a second katar: it looks amazing. Besides, given that the unarmed attacks can just as easily be kicks, etc. it's not like you necessarily need the second hand free. Plus, if you really don't want to touch the critter you're beating on, and you get disarmed, it's always nice to have a second weapon on-hand so to speak. I know the system doesn't impose action costs on drawing weapons, etc. but it's still cool.