An interesting difference between finesse and martial arts. Uses?

[Damon_Tor]

Finesse
When Making an Attack with a finesse weapon, you use your choice of your Strength or Dexterity modifier for the Attack and Damage Rolls. You must use the same modifier for both rolls.

Martial Arts
You can use Dexterity instead of Strength for the attack and damage rolls of your unarmed strikes and monk weapons.

Interesting that the Monk's ability doesn't require you to use the same score for both rolls.

In another thread we've been discussing giving yourself penalties to hit in order to miss on purpose, and here would be a way a monk could do so without losing damage: use str (-1) for the attack roll and dex (+5) for the damage roll.

The specific situation being discussed involves the drunken master's ability to turn a miss against himself into a hit against someone else.

EDIT: The other situation, where you use dex for the attack roll but str for the damage roll, could be used when trying to trigger an allied monk's Deflect Missiles ability, though there's probably less room for abuse with this one.

[Rukelnikov]

The first things that came to mind were Rage and Reckless Attack.

While I see what you mean about one of those features specifying "must use same for both rolls" and the other doesn't, the rest of the handbook doesn't seem to have been written with such a possibility in mind though.

If it works that way, I think the safest things to assume would be that both Barb features requires the Attack to be made with Strength, but you could use Dex for damage, this would allow an unarmed Darbarian to build for dex, trading attack bonus for AC, but not losing damage per attack.

[Damon_Tor]

If it works that way, I think the safest things to assume would be that both Barb features requires the Attack to be made with Strength, but you could use Dex for damage, this would allow an unarmed Darbarian to build for dex, trading attack bonus for AC, but not losing damage per attack.

Interesting.

So a monk/barbarian multiclass could focus on dex and con for AC and HP, make an attack using a monk weapon or unarmed strike and use str for the attack roll but dex for the damage. Str for the attack would let them use Reckless Attack (compensating for the lower hit rate) but they'd still get their rage damage plus their higher dexterity modifier for their damage.

[nickl_2000]

Not to rain on your parade here, but this is at best a pedantic argument. There is no way that the designers intended to allow a different stat to be used for attack verses damage. As far as I can remember there is not a single spell or ability that specifically does that in the game. So, if you believe that it is unclear you fall back on the standard of using the same stat mod for both.

There is no way I would allow this at any table I was DMing.

[Man_Over_Game]

Not to rain on your parade here, but this is at best a pedantic argument. There is no way that the designers intended to allow a different stat to be used for attack verses damage. As far as I can remember there is not a single spell or ability that specifically does that in the game. So, if you believe that it is unclear you fall back on the standard of using the same stat mod for both.

There is no way I would allow this at any table I was DMing.

It could only be used to make something weaker, though. I also wouldn't allow it, if only because it just slows down the game to think about it too much. If you want to deal less damage, I let you deal less damage. Problem solved.

Let people do whatever they want, unless:

It normally requires a feature, level or spell.
It makes the game more complicated for little gain.

[Rukelnikov]

It could only be used to make something weaker, though. I also wouldn't allow it, if only because it just slows down the game to think about it too much. If you want to deal less damage, I let you deal less damage. Problem solved.

Let people do whatever they want, unless:

It normally requires a feature, level or spell.
It makes the game more complicated for little gain.


I'm not entirely sure that's the case here, a BarbX/Monk1, could pump Dex and Con, starting with a 14 or 16 in Str, and rely on Reckless Attack, I think that could actually work.

Though, as I said before, I really doubt RAW works this way, its quite likely either Str for both or Dex for both, no mix-match.

[MrStabby]

At least 65% sure it wasn't intended... but who cares? It isn't OP, doesn't really step on anyone's toes and the cool options it opens up outweighs the downsides. Plus seems RAW.

At a first glance, I would allow it.

[Rukelnikov]

At least 65% sure it wasn't intended... but who cares? It isn't OP, doesn't really step on anyone's toes and the cool options it opens up outweighs the downsides. Plus seems RAW.

At a first glance, I would allow it.

Tbh, I'm leaning towards allowing it too.

Monk is one of the least MC friendly classes, and I've seen no MC Monk in 5e yet. So if this opens a tiny chance for more Monk dips its a win in my eyes.

[nickl_2000]

Tbh, I'm leaning towards allowing it too.

Monk is one of the least MC friendly classes, and I've seen no MC Monk in 5e yet. So if this opens a tiny chance for more Monk dips its a win in my eyes.

Shadow Monk 6/Rogue X is an absolute blast to play. I've played it.

[Rukelnikov]

Shadow Monk 6/Rogue X is an absolute blast to play. I've played it.

Yeah, and Monk1/MoonDruidX may work too, but I've yet to actually see an MC monk in play (granted I haven't played that much 5e, so I've only actually seen about 20-30 PCs)

[Aaron Underhand]

Yeah, and Monk1/MoonDruidX may work too, but I've yet to actually see an MC monk in play (granted I haven't played that much 5e, so I've only actually seen about 20-30 PCs)
I have seen "Kung Fu Panda" played... It works and isn't OP because of the loss of spell progression

[MaxWilson]

EDIT: The other situation, where you use dex for the attack roll but str for the damage roll, could be used when trying to trigger an allied monk's Deflect Missiles ability, though there's probably less room for abuse with this one.

Or when you're trying to wake up an ally from hypnosis/sleep/etc. without seriously hurting them and without having to spend a whole action on it. Instead you Attack them at +5+prof (you want to hit) but do only 1 damage (don't want to actually injure them) and then you spend your other attacks on monsters.

[Hytheter]

Or when you're trying to wake up an ally from hypnosis/sleep/etc. without seriously hurting them and without having to spend a whole action on it. Instead you Attack them at +5+prof (you want to hit) but do only 1 damage (don't want to actually injure them) and then you spend your other attacks on monsters.

You really should just be able to slap someone awake instead of slugging them with a full-force punch. Obviously the book doesn't give a rule for that, but I feel it's one of those cases that shouldn't need one.

[MaxWilson]

You really should just be able to slap someone awake instead of slugging them with a full-force punch. Obviously the book doesn't give a rule for that, but I feel it's one of those cases that shouldn't need one.

I think that's probably what the book refers to as "spending an action" to awaken somebody. It's unfortunate that the rules are set up in such a way that gently shaking someone awake is technically more time-consuming than stabbing them repeatedly, but as you say it would be reasonable for a DM to overrule the rules as written.

[nickl_2000]

I think that's probably what the book refers to as "spending an action" to awaken somebody. It's unfortunate that the rules are set up in such a way that gently shaking someone awake is technically more time-consuming than stabbing them repeatedly, but as you say it would be reasonable for a DM to overrule the rules as written.

You clearly have never tried to wake up my children when they are supposed to be getting ready for school. Doing it without hurting them takes WAY longer than 6 seconds.

[Rukelnikov]

You clearly have never tried to wake up my children when they are supposed to be getting ready for school. Doing it without hurting them takes WAY longer than 6 seconds.

I concur, aggressive wake up is definitely faster than the gentle one.

[Cynthaer]

It could only be used to make something weaker, though. I also wouldn't allow it, if only because it just slows down the game to think about it too much. If you want to deal less damage, I let you deal less damage. Problem solved.

Let people do whatever they want, unless:

It normally requires a feature, level or spell.
It makes the game more complicated for little gain.


^ I'm in this camp.

If you think it's reasonable to let your players pull their punches and decide to only deal 1 damage or something, then just rule that they can do that. Conversely, if you think it makes sense for players to make an attack that they actually want to miss with, then just let them miss. Invoking weird readings of minor textual differences just adds complication for no value.


The specific situation being discussed involves the drunken master's ability to turn a miss against himself into a hit against someone else.
I know this is a cute consequence of the rules, but honestly it's such a blatantly gamey and unimmersive tactic that I find it not really worth discussing.

Of course, that doesn't mean other people can't find it interesting, but we shouldn't really be talking about it in terms of "here's a general rule I discovered that applies here", so much as "let's try to read the rules in weird ways to let monks generate auto-hits".

[Vogie]

This would also be thematic as a meta-nod of the monk builds that have like an 8 strength and 18 dexterity. DEX to hit (+4), STR to damage (-1) - sounds like something one's Sensei would pull while training students.

Something similar could be used with the Hexblade patron, as it simply states it Charisma could be used in lieu of STR & DEX, for attack and damage rolls.

[Damon_Tor]

This would also be thematic as a meta-nod of the monk builds that have like an 8 strength and 18 dexterity. DEX to hit (+4), STR to damage (-1) - sounds like something one's Sensei would pull while training students.

The old master does this crazy agile move to get past his arrogant student's defenses, swings a fist toward his face with what looks like a devastating blow then *poink* flicks his nose with a finger.

[Hytheter]

I think that's probably what the book refers to as "spending an action" to awaken somebody. It's unfortunate that the rules are set up in such a way that gently shaking someone awake is technically more time-consuming than stabbing them repeatedly, but as you say it would be reasonable for a DM to overrule the rules as written.

Well, when I say I would allow a slap, I mean as a weak 1 damage attack rather than specifically a means of awakening someone. It just makes sense that you should be able to slap someone in a relatively harmless but still painful way.

[BloodSnake'sCha]

Well, when I say I would allow a slap, I mean as a weak 1 damage attack rather than specifically a means of awakening someone. It just makes sense that you should be able to slap someone in a relatively harmless but still painful way.

Well, a 8 str characters can do 0 damage with an unarmed strike.