Monks, flurry, and weapon finesse

[pbd]

Monks can use weapon finesse with their unarmed flurry. Can they use weapon finesse with other weapons with which they can flurry?

I am thinking about the quarterstaff primarily here, but this may be more applicable to those that allow non-standard special monk weapons.

Also, as an aside, did monks get weapon finesse for free in 3.0?

thanks

 

[Peter Gibbons]

Monks can use weapon finesse with their unarmed flurry. Can they use weapon finesse with other weapons with which they can flurry?

Yes.

I am thinking about the quarterstaff primarily here, but this may be more applicable to those that allow non-standard special monk weapons.

Quarterstaves are not light weapons. You cannot use Weapon Finesse with a quarterstaff.

Also, as an aside, did monks get weapon finesse for free in 3.0?

No, they did not.

 

[pbd]

I should have worded that better. I meant weapons for which weapon finesse could not normally be used, but the quarter staff example fits that.

 

[Hypersmurf]

Quarterstaves are not light weapons. You cannot use Weapon Finesse with a quarterstaff.

Although there's argument about the off-end when using it as a double weapon.

-Hyp.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Although there's argument about the off-end when using it as a double weapon.

-Hyp.

If weapon finesse (off-end of a quarterstaff) a possible choice in 3.0?

pbd, the answer is still no. You can only take weapon finesse (in 3.0) with light weapons, or those specific exceptions.

 

[pbd]

I should have proofread my original post a little better. our game is 3.5, the question about 3.0 was not really related, sorry.

 

[Hypersmurf]

If weapon finesse (off-end of a quarterstaff) a possible choice in 3.0?

Not sure - is Martial Weapon Proficiency (bastard sword)?

-Hyp.

 

[Infiniti2000]

I should have proofread my original post a little better. our game is 3.5, the question about 3.0 was not really related, sorry.

No problem, it was just confounding the issue. The answer is still no -- you can't use weapon finesse with a staff because it's a two-handed weapon, not a light weapon. The debate Hyp refers to comes from the terminology for double weapons, where the penalties for attacking with the other end are applied as if it were a light weapon. If that reasoning seems okay to you, then go for it and allow weapon finesse to apply to the other end of a double weapon. I personally don't think it's unbalanced to allow it, though I'd argue that per the rules weapon finesse doesn't apply.

 

[Hypersmurf]

I personally don't think it's unbalanced to allow it, though I'd argue that per the rules weapon finesse doesn't apply.

Restricting the double weapon effects to penalties related to two-weapon fighting and to Power Attack means, of course, that a double weapon adds 1.5x/.5x Str bonus to damage, and gets a +4 bonus to Disarm and Sunder checks with both ends...

If the text in the Power Attack feat regarding double weapons is read to be a general rule rather than a rule applicable only to the Power Attack feat, however, the double weapon adds 1x/.5x Str bonus to damage, gets a +0/-4 bonus/penalty to Disarm and Sunder checks, and has a finessible off-end.

-Hyp.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Restricting the double weapon effects to penalties related to two-weapon fighting and to Power Attack means, of course, that a double weapon adds 1.5x/.5x Str bonus to damage, and gets a +4 bonus to Disarm and Sunder checks with both ends...

If you restrict it to TWF and PA, how does it apply to disarm and sunder? Also, I don't know what you mean to imply by "Disarm and Sunder checks with both ends...." Are you suggesting that you can disarm or sunder only one half of a double weapon? Please point out the rules for that.

If the text in the Power Attack feat regarding double weapons is read to be a general rule rather than a rule applicable only to the Power Attack feat, however...

I'm not a big fan of reading text in an obscure place as a general rule for other areas, particularly text in parentheses which means that the text was obviously only intended for the section in which it exists (i.e. power attack). It's called context. In this case, if you take the parenthetical statement out of context, you can end up with some really bizarre interpretations.