5e: Finesse Wpn vs Monk Dedicated Weapon- What Is is?

[BerzerkerUnit]

Aloha,

This feels a little like a ship of theseus problem. Let's say I have a hammer. Then I take a branch and lump of metal. I arrange them like a hammer, work them together and use them to bang in nails. The second object is a hammer. It's shaped like a hammer, it serves a hammers purpose. It doesn't pull the nails in from the other side by attaching to their points, it doesn't do anything with magnets. It is a hammer shaped thing doing what a hammer does, the way a hammer does it.

So now we look at dedicated weapon and we compare the resulting object which can be used with Str or Dex like Finesse weapons and folks will say "that's still not a finesse weapon." I'm not so sure. At its most basic I do not think anything in the rules is intended to break logic chains unless it's specifically designed to do so (like magic and HP abstraction, etc).

So when I look at weapon properties, I can't find anything in the rules indicating the weapon properties are intended as a form of classification or anything referencing specific elements of the weapons charts. I know the community has collectively made very reasonable inferences.
From the PHB: "Many weapons have special properties related to their use, as shown in the Weapons table." They are properties of the listed weapon noting a mechanical deviation from the general rule.

I know there are some that feel (often rightly) that reading the rules as exhaustive and operating as if anything that isn't specified as "can't be done" therefore "can be done" are doing it wrong. However, there exists certain ambiguities by design that open the door to particular interpretations.

For example: Many feel that the term "ranged weapons" in rogue sneak attack excludes non finesse thrown weapons like hand axes. I vehemently disagree. The charts don't specify "Ranged Weapons" weapons are broken out as Martial/Simple and further divided into Ranged of each. The charts, from my reading, are there to indicate "this group of weapons requires this proficiency tier and isn't intended for melee attacks." Meaning they deal a d4 on a melee hit as if improvised (though I'll note, you can still use your dex to cudgel someone with a bow and I believe can use Sharpshooter to truly hammer people with the buttstock of a Heavy Crossbow. Whether you think that's reasonable or not, it definitely works with GWM.)

My take is that a ranged weapon is any weapon with the range property, which rolls in all the thrown weapons. There are athletic events and sports bars dedicated to hitting small targets with hand axes. Hunting in all my experience has been taught with a "least suffering" approach which focuses on targeting vitals, I can't imagine why you wouldn't do that with a spear. Further, adding the atalatl would probably create a ranged weapon (presumably with the ammunition and loading property) that would likely qualify for sneak attack as is. I digress.

My point, if a Monk Dedicated Weapon gains a mechanical property definitionally identical to the Finesse property, I believe it is an acceptable ruling on the DM's part to allow such weapons to be used with Sneak Attack even if they aren't normally on the default list.

Why did I spend a million words getting up to that position. I want it to become a more broadly accepted community stance.

Thanks for your time.

[Tanarii]

Sage Advice Compendium pg4:
Does the Archery fighting style work with a melee weapon that you throw? No, the Archery feature benefits ranged weapons. A melee weapon, such as a dagger or handaxe, is still a melee weapon when you make a ranged attack with it.

[kingcheesepants]

Aloha,

My point, if a Monk Dedicated Weapon gains a mechanical property definitionally identical to the Finesse property, I believe it is an acceptable ruling on the DM's part to allow such weapons to be used with Sneak Attack even if they aren't normally on the default list.



Yeah I agree with that it's logical to allow monk/rouges to use their dedicated weapon in their sneak attacks even if it isn't strictly within the rules. This also seems more fun and flavorful as well, it might be a tad strong but nothing too crazy. The weapon isn't gaining any mechanical property though. The monk simply has a special ability to treat their weapons in a way that's identical to finesse. Though that is a quibble that doesn't really address the main point.

I also allow monks to use polearms as their dedicated weapons because lots of martial arts utilize polearms and it seems silly to limit it. That's a little strong too but it's never been a problem for me.

[DarknessEternal]

Sure, but there are no hammers with Finesse.

So an improvised weapon that is very similar to a hammer also wouldn't.

[Witty Username]

"I can use this to hammer nails into a board" and "this is a hammer" are two different things.

From the side of verisimilitude. Take for example a sword too heavy for a human to wield effectively, and a humanoid with superhuman strength. The superhuman will not necessarily be able to wield the heavy sword without issue, because of biomechanics and physics. Balance, speed, effective stances will not match.

A monk that can treat a longsword as a Monk weapon is similar. Because they can do something with a longsword that a rogue can't do, doesn't mean a monk with a longsword is the same as a rogue with a rapier in functional terms.

In game design, then there is the issue of keywords. Finesse, and can use strength and dex interchangeably aren't the same in game terms because effects specifically reference the keyword finesse. The hypothetical end point is the "unloaded keyword" which D&D does not really use but some card games do, where a keywords effect text is Null but other effects in the game can reference it for whatever reason. The closest thing D&D has to this is damage types,
Take slashing, crushing, and piercing damage. These terms mean nothing inherently in game terms, but they are often referenced by resistances, Immunities and vulnerabilities or other effects like feats and features.

Now, I don't like either of these arguments personally because I feel that they talk around the real verisimilitude issue.

Can a rogue sneak attack with a hand axe? There are 2 possible answers in the rules:
-The rogue can't.
The plain reading, and the lesser evil for me
-The rogue can, only if they throw it.
This actively offends my sense of realism, the rogue has less control of the weapon, has less vision on the targets vital areas. This should be harder than hitting them in the back of the neck with an axe.

But that leads to my position. Why can't a rogue sneak attack with an axe, or a longsword, or a lance?
I think a rogue should be able to sneak attack with weapons they are proficient with. It makes much more sense, and isn't particularly concerning from a game balance point.

[Zalabim]

I think a rogue should be able to sneak attack with weapons they are proficient with. It makes much more sense, and isn't particularly concerning from a game balance point.

Lots of words spent by OP when this is the better explanation.

[Chronos]

As always, it depends on whether we're looking at what the rules are, or what the rules should be. By what the rules are, a rogue can sneak attack with a thrown handaxe, but can't with a longsword, even if they're also a kensai. By what the rules should be, well that's a matter of opinion, but probably neither would break the game.

[JackPhoenix]

That's a lot of text when your basic premise is wrong:

My point, if a Monk Dedicated Weapon gains a mechanical property definitionally identical to the Finesse property, I believe it is an acceptable ruling on the DM's part to allow such weapons to be used with Sneak Attack even if they aren't normally on the default list.

Monk's Dedicated Weapon does not gain any properties (unlike, say, Revenant Blade feat which explicitly grants Finesse property to the weapon). The monk gains an ability to use the weapon in few specific ways, but the weapon itself is exactly the same for everyone else, even other monks.


As always, it depends on whether we're looking at what the rules are, or what the rules should be. By what the rules are, a rogue can sneak attack with a thrown handaxe, but can't with a longsword, even if they're also a kensai. By what the rules should be, well that's a matter of opinion, but probably neither would break the game.

By "what rules are", rogue can't sneak attack with a hand axe, thrown or not, or a longsword (Sun blade and some Moonblades excluded).

[Greywander]

TBH, Sneak Attack should just be able to work with any weapon. Are we really worried about rogues screwing themselves over by using GWM to miss with their Sneak Attack? They can already do that with SS, and nobody cares. Greatsword rogues don't seem like they'd cause any issues, particularly since rogues don't get greatsword proficiency and would thus need to invest build resources elsewhere (e.g. a fighter dip) in order to get it. If they paid for it, let them have it.

But no, monk weapons don't gain the finesse property and aren't compatible with Sneak Attack. But yes, it would be a reasonable houserule. See also Defensive Duelist, which also requires a finesse weapon.

[diplomancer]

By "what rules are", rogue can't sneak attack with a hand axe, thrown or not, or a longsword (Sun blade and some Moonblades excluded).

Though there is some controversy whether they can sneak attack with a thrown long sword.

[Damon_Tor]

Aloha,

This feels a little like a ship of theseus problem. Let's say I have a hammer. Then I take a branch and lump of metal. I arrange them like a hammer, work them together and use them to bang in nails. The second object is a hammer. It's shaped like a hammer, it serves a hammers purpose. It doesn't pull the nails in from the other side by attaching to their points, it doesn't do anything with magnets. It is a hammer shaped thing doing what a hammer does, the way a hammer does it.

...

My point, if a Monk Dedicated Weapon gains a mechanical property definitionally identical to the Finesse property, I believe it is an acceptable ruling on the DM's part to allow such weapons to be used with Sneak Attack even if they aren't normally on the default list.

Why did I spend a million words getting up to that position. I want it to become a more broadly accepted community stance.

Thanks for your time.

In the context of a melee attack, str is used to punch through armor, while dex would be used to exploit gaps in the armor. So to me a weapon can be a "finesse" weapon if you can slide it through the eyeslits or shoulder joints of a guy in platemail. That means its almost always going to require a very narrow, thin blade or "stiletto" spike to qualify. A club or a staff can never fit in these gaps, and even if you could get them in there, you need to back a strike with that sort of weapon with velocity or it does nothing. But all a blade requires is pressure. There are places where you could make a case: spears should probably be finesse weapons.

And so what a rogue does is inherently intertwined with the action of that "finesse" property: sliding blades through gaps in armor. That's what a sneak attack is, and you can't do it with a club.

What a monk does is not that. They do a sort of fanstasy kung fu where strength is irrelevant. They hit a guy with that staff and it can punch right through their armor even though they have str 10 because kung fu magic.

Mechanically, they both have the same effect (or close enough: technically monks can choose to use dex for the attack roll and str for the damage if they felt like it, while finesse weapons require the same attribute used for both. Minor detail without purpose, moving on.) But in narrative terms the two game elements represent different sorts of methods.

As a DM I wouldn't have an issue making a houserule for a staff-wielding rogue or whatever, but it would be a houserule.

[meandean]

Though there is some controversy whether they can sneak attack with a thrown long sword.Did I miss a joke here? A longsword is neither a finesse nor a ranged weapon (even if you throw it).

My guess is that the definition of Sneak Attack was intended towards the goals of balance and class archetypes. They thought they had succeeded in making each stat about equal in value, and they wanted to reinforce that Rogues are dexterous. What they didn't realize was that the stats wouldn't at all be equal in value, and actually, Dexterity would be a lot more powerful stat than Strength. So there didn't need to be a particular rule that basically forces Rogues to choose Dexterity over Strength. Most of them would anyway, even absent that rule.

Of course, there's a difference between a longsword and a halberd. You could argue that, even if you allow Sneak Attack with a smaller Strength-based weapon, some weapons are so unwieldy and swing so slowly that you can't "sneak attack" with them.

Still, D&D rules work best when they're evaluated in the context of the other D&D rules, rather than any real-life analogues. I say go ahead and allow it. I think you'll get more STRogues, but STRogues still won't be better than DEX rogues, so that's a good place to be. (STRonks are still real tough to do even if you allow it.)

[diplomancer]

Did I miss a joke here? A longsword is neither a finesse nor a ranged weapon (even if you throw it).



Not a joke, a comment on a long, recent, and frustrating debate. The gist of it is whether improvised weapons are also divided between melee/ranged, or whether they are their own category that does not fall on that dichotomy.

I'm not going to go into it again, but, basically, if you believe the first position (I.e, improvised weapons also can be either Melee or Ranged) then anything that is thrown (and is not properly a weapon with the thrown property) would be a Ranged weapon. This is because the PHB states:


The Weapons table shows the most common weapons used in the worlds of D&D, their price and weight, the damage they deal when they hit, and any special properties they possess. Every weapon is classified as either melee or ranged. A melee weapon is used to attack a target within 5 feet of you, whereas a ranged weapon is used to attack a target at a distance. (my emphasis)

That would be the general rule, which some weapon properties, like Reach or Thrown, could overrule. But a Long Sword, improvised or not, has none of these properties (which is why, whether you think it's a ranged weapon or not, it definitely uses Dex and not Str for the attack and damage roll, as it is the thrown property that makes thrown weapons work with the same stat for ranged attacks that they use for melee attacks; default for ranged attacks is Dex).

If you believe the second position, a thrown long sword is an improvised weapon, and, therefore, neither melee nor ranged, simply improvised.

[ZRN]

But that leads to my position. Why can't a rogue sneak attack with an axe, or a longsword, or a lance?
I think a rogue should be able to sneak attack with weapons they are proficient with. It makes much more sense, and isn't particularly concerning from a game balance point.

I mean this is actually very concerning balance-wise. You could play a barbarian 5/rogue X with GWF/PAM and just get a bunch of free damage every round on top of your already high greatweapon damage.

[rlc]

But that leads to my position. Why can't a rogue sneak attack with an axe, or a longsword, or a lance?
I think a rogue should be able to sneak attack with weapons they are proficient with. It makes much more sense, and isn't particularly concerning from a game balance point.

Even a great sword ends up just being basically one extra sneak attack die. I get why they’re limiting that, but I don’t think it really breaks too much at this point.



I mean this is actually very concerning balance-wise. You could play a barbarian 5/rogue X with GWF/PAM and just get a bunch of free damage every round on top of your already high greatweapon damage.
can’t you already do this with ranged weapons?

[diplomancer]

Even a great sword ends up just being basically one extra sneak attack die. I get why they’re limiting that, but I don’t think it really breaks too much at this point.



can’t you already do this with ranged weapons?

You can get Sharpshooter and Crossbow Expert, but you can't get the always on advantage of the Barbarian.

[CapnWildefyr]

I think it's about being a rogue vs being something else. Anybody with a halberd or a dagger or whatever can attack from behind or with advantage. A sneak attack isn't a normal attack like that, even if it's all someone's rogue does in every combat. It's a special ability that defines the class as much as anything else in the class abilities list. The first things I think of when I think "Rogue Class" are Sneak Attack and Stealthy. Rogues don't develop their special ability by being toe-to-toe, face-to-face combatants -- we know this because there are other classes that fill that role. The flavor of the class is built around being a sneak, stabbing creatures in the back when they're not paying sufficient attention, etc. If you open up sneak attack, you lose a little of the rogue's flavor.

I side with the RAW here. Finesse or ranged weapon (as in, what Tanarii said above) for sneak attacks, I don't see a reason to change this, regardless of whether the impact is OP or not.

A bit off track, but this thread reminds me of The Gamers video... backstab with a ballista... still laughing.

[JNAProductions]

A Monk Weapon that is not normally Finesse is not a Finesse weapon, even it behaves like one in the hands of a Monk.

That being said, I'd have no issues with a Monk/Rogue Sneak Attacking with any attack using Dexterity. Including fists or Dedicated Weapons. It's not RAW, but it's not something that'll break anything, and feels fun, so it makes sense to allow it.