Can a monk's single staff be considered dual wielded, as per the Dual Wielder feat? The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InCan Monks gain the benefit of the Dual Wielder Feat with their Unarmed Strikes?How does the Dual Wielder feat interact with versatile weapons?Barbarian with Dual Wielder feat and shieldCan Dual Wielder be used with Tavern Brawler?Can you still hold 2 non-light weapons even without the Dual Wielder feat?Can I get the bonus AC from Dual Wielder when I have a shield and Tavern Brawler?Is the Polearm Master Feat compatible with the Two-Weapon Fighting style?What effect would the feat Dual Wielder have on a Monk primarily using unarmed strikes?Can I use main hand shield and longsword in off hand and benefit from dual wielder?Can I draw 2 weapons with the same hand (throwing one and then drawing another) using the Dual Wielder feat?
One word riddle: Vowel in the middle
FPGA - DIY Programming
What is the most effective way of iterating a std::vector and why?
What could be the right powersource for 15 seconds lifespan disposable giant chainsaw?
What is the accessibility of a package's `Private` context variables?
slides for 30min~1hr skype tenure track application interview
Did Scotland spend $250,000 for the slogan "Welcome to Scotland"?
How to type this arrow in math mode?
Is this app Icon Browser Safe/Legit?
Can you compress metal and what would be the consequences?
What does ひと匙 mean in this manga and has it been used colloquially?
Is there a symbol for a right arrow with a square in the middle?
Button changing it's text & action. Good or terrible?
Did 3000BC Egyptians use meteoric iron weapons?
Which Sci-Fi work first showed weapon of galactic-scale mass destruction?
How technical should a Scrum Master be to effectively remove impediments?
Does a dangling wire really electrocute me if I'm standing in water?
Protecting Dualbooting Windows from dangerous code (like rm -rf)
How are circuits which use complex ICs normally simulated?
What is the motivation for a law requiring 2 parties to consent for recording a conversation
Why isn't airport relocation done gradually?
What do the Banks children have against barley water?
What do hard-Brexiteers want with respect to the Irish border?
Falsification in Math vs Science
Can a monk's single staff be considered dual wielded, as per the Dual Wielder feat?
The 2019 Stack Overflow Developer Survey Results Are InCan Monks gain the benefit of the Dual Wielder Feat with their Unarmed Strikes?How does the Dual Wielder feat interact with versatile weapons?Barbarian with Dual Wielder feat and shieldCan Dual Wielder be used with Tavern Brawler?Can you still hold 2 non-light weapons even without the Dual Wielder feat?Can I get the bonus AC from Dual Wielder when I have a shield and Tavern Brawler?Is the Polearm Master Feat compatible with the Two-Weapon Fighting style?What effect would the feat Dual Wielder have on a Monk primarily using unarmed strikes?Can I use main hand shield and longsword in off hand and benefit from dual wielder?Can I draw 2 weapons with the same hand (throwing one and then drawing another) using the Dual Wielder feat?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
$begingroup$
If a monk uses a staff and has the Dual Wielder feat, can they use a 1d6 attack for one hand then 1d6 attack bonus for the other, plus gaining +1 to AC for holding a melee weapon in each hand?
Seems a bit much to otherwise require 2 staves.
dnd-5e feats monk two-weapon-fighting
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If a monk uses a staff and has the Dual Wielder feat, can they use a 1d6 attack for one hand then 1d6 attack bonus for the other, plus gaining +1 to AC for holding a melee weapon in each hand?
Seems a bit much to otherwise require 2 staves.
dnd-5e feats monk two-weapon-fighting
New contributor
$endgroup$
add a comment |
$begingroup$
If a monk uses a staff and has the Dual Wielder feat, can they use a 1d6 attack for one hand then 1d6 attack bonus for the other, plus gaining +1 to AC for holding a melee weapon in each hand?
Seems a bit much to otherwise require 2 staves.
dnd-5e feats monk two-weapon-fighting
New contributor
$endgroup$
If a monk uses a staff and has the Dual Wielder feat, can they use a 1d6 attack for one hand then 1d6 attack bonus for the other, plus gaining +1 to AC for holding a melee weapon in each hand?
Seems a bit much to otherwise require 2 staves.
dnd-5e feats monk two-weapon-fighting
dnd-5e feats monk two-weapon-fighting
New contributor
New contributor
edited Apr 5 at 21:07
V2Blast
26.3k591161
26.3k591161
New contributor
asked Apr 5 at 12:50
RikerRiker
322
322
New contributor
New contributor
add a comment |
add a comment |
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Monk has to wield two staves to get the benefits you list
The Dual Wielder feat specifies (PHB, p. 165; emphasis mine):
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
So while the monk is using one staff, they don't gain this benefit, nor can one use Two-Weapon Fighting with a single weapon wielded in two hands (emphasis mine).
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand.
With two staves, however, you can certainly benefit as you describe as Dual Wielder removes the requirement for light weapons:
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
Is this too strong?
Using two staves in this way is no stronger (by itself) than any other dual-wielding combination with monk weapons, so there should be no issue.
$endgroup$
6
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems like your question is coming from a slight misquote; you left out an important word. The Dual Wielder feat (PHB, p. 165) doesn't say "a melee weapon in each hand", and it's very clear about what it requires:
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
It specifically requires a separate weapon, not one weapon that you have both hands on. A single quarterstaff, no matter how you use it, is only a single weapon, and doesn't qualify.
I'm not sure where you're getting two 1d6 attacks with a staff. Are you suggesting that a staff held in two hands would also count as two weapons for Two Weapon Fighting (it doesn't), or are you talking about the monk's Martial Arts ability to "make one unarmed strike as a bonus action" after an attack action (which would be an unarmed strike, not an attack with the staff)?
Just to be clear, unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so they don't apply towards the "separate melee weapon" requirement. A weapon plus an empty hand doesn't work; two empty hands plus Martial Arts doesn't work; a staff held in two hands doesn't work; a weapon in hand plus a dancing sword doesn't work. You need two actual weapons in your actual hands.
I'm not sure why you said 'two staves is a bit much' -- if you were going to do this with a monk, you'd probably want to use two smaller weapons, like nunchaku (clubs), short swords, or similar. Dual quarterstaves might be a bit silly, yes, but that's not the only option, or even the most obvious one.
For more details on why unarmed strikes aren't weapons, see the Sage Advice Compendium question regarding Stunning Strike and the PHB errata document section marked Weapons (p. 149), as well as the errata for Melee Attacks (p. 195), which says in part:
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike [...]
(Since an unarmed strike is "instead of" a weapon, it clearly isn't one.)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ifUsing("editor", function ()
return StackExchange.using("mathjaxEditing", function ()
StackExchange.MarkdownEditor.creationCallbacks.add(function (editor, postfix)
StackExchange.mathjaxEditing.prepareWmdForMathJax(editor, postfix, [["\$", "\$"]]);
);
);
, "mathjax-editing");
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "122"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Riker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144618%2fcan-a-monks-single-staff-be-considered-dual-wielded-as-per-the-dual-wielder-fe%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
2 Answers
2
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
$begingroup$
The Monk has to wield two staves to get the benefits you list
The Dual Wielder feat specifies (PHB, p. 165; emphasis mine):
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
So while the monk is using one staff, they don't gain this benefit, nor can one use Two-Weapon Fighting with a single weapon wielded in two hands (emphasis mine).
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand.
With two staves, however, you can certainly benefit as you describe as Dual Wielder removes the requirement for light weapons:
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
Is this too strong?
Using two staves in this way is no stronger (by itself) than any other dual-wielding combination with monk weapons, so there should be no issue.
$endgroup$
6
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Monk has to wield two staves to get the benefits you list
The Dual Wielder feat specifies (PHB, p. 165; emphasis mine):
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
So while the monk is using one staff, they don't gain this benefit, nor can one use Two-Weapon Fighting with a single weapon wielded in two hands (emphasis mine).
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand.
With two staves, however, you can certainly benefit as you describe as Dual Wielder removes the requirement for light weapons:
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
Is this too strong?
Using two staves in this way is no stronger (by itself) than any other dual-wielding combination with monk weapons, so there should be no issue.
$endgroup$
6
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
The Monk has to wield two staves to get the benefits you list
The Dual Wielder feat specifies (PHB, p. 165; emphasis mine):
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
So while the monk is using one staff, they don't gain this benefit, nor can one use Two-Weapon Fighting with a single weapon wielded in two hands (emphasis mine).
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand.
With two staves, however, you can certainly benefit as you describe as Dual Wielder removes the requirement for light weapons:
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
Is this too strong?
Using two staves in this way is no stronger (by itself) than any other dual-wielding combination with monk weapons, so there should be no issue.
$endgroup$
The Monk has to wield two staves to get the benefits you list
The Dual Wielder feat specifies (PHB, p. 165; emphasis mine):
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
So while the monk is using one staff, they don't gain this benefit, nor can one use Two-Weapon Fighting with a single weapon wielded in two hands (emphasis mine).
When you take the Attack action and attack with a light melee weapon that you're holding in one hand, you can use a bonus action to attack with a different light melee weapon that you're holding in the other hand.
With two staves, however, you can certainly benefit as you describe as Dual Wielder removes the requirement for light weapons:
You can use two-weapon fighting even when the one-handed melee weapons you are wielding aren't light.
Is this too strong?
Using two staves in this way is no stronger (by itself) than any other dual-wielding combination with monk weapons, so there should be no issue.
edited Apr 5 at 21:09
V2Blast
26.3k591161
26.3k591161
answered Apr 5 at 13:49
David CoffronDavid Coffron
39.9k3138285
39.9k3138285
6
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
add a comment |
6
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
6
6
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
Might be worth noting that since monks already get a bonus action attack that adds their ability modifier to damage, two weapon fighting will deal significantly less damage than normal.
$endgroup$
– Derek Stucki
Apr 5 at 14:36
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
$begingroup$
And that just adding 2 to Dexterity or Wisdom instead of taking the feat will give them the same AC bonus (plus other bonuses) they would get from Dual Wielder.
$endgroup$
– Marq
2 days ago
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems like your question is coming from a slight misquote; you left out an important word. The Dual Wielder feat (PHB, p. 165) doesn't say "a melee weapon in each hand", and it's very clear about what it requires:
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
It specifically requires a separate weapon, not one weapon that you have both hands on. A single quarterstaff, no matter how you use it, is only a single weapon, and doesn't qualify.
I'm not sure where you're getting two 1d6 attacks with a staff. Are you suggesting that a staff held in two hands would also count as two weapons for Two Weapon Fighting (it doesn't), or are you talking about the monk's Martial Arts ability to "make one unarmed strike as a bonus action" after an attack action (which would be an unarmed strike, not an attack with the staff)?
Just to be clear, unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so they don't apply towards the "separate melee weapon" requirement. A weapon plus an empty hand doesn't work; two empty hands plus Martial Arts doesn't work; a staff held in two hands doesn't work; a weapon in hand plus a dancing sword doesn't work. You need two actual weapons in your actual hands.
I'm not sure why you said 'two staves is a bit much' -- if you were going to do this with a monk, you'd probably want to use two smaller weapons, like nunchaku (clubs), short swords, or similar. Dual quarterstaves might be a bit silly, yes, but that's not the only option, or even the most obvious one.
For more details on why unarmed strikes aren't weapons, see the Sage Advice Compendium question regarding Stunning Strike and the PHB errata document section marked Weapons (p. 149), as well as the errata for Melee Attacks (p. 195), which says in part:
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike [...]
(Since an unarmed strike is "instead of" a weapon, it clearly isn't one.)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems like your question is coming from a slight misquote; you left out an important word. The Dual Wielder feat (PHB, p. 165) doesn't say "a melee weapon in each hand", and it's very clear about what it requires:
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
It specifically requires a separate weapon, not one weapon that you have both hands on. A single quarterstaff, no matter how you use it, is only a single weapon, and doesn't qualify.
I'm not sure where you're getting two 1d6 attacks with a staff. Are you suggesting that a staff held in two hands would also count as two weapons for Two Weapon Fighting (it doesn't), or are you talking about the monk's Martial Arts ability to "make one unarmed strike as a bonus action" after an attack action (which would be an unarmed strike, not an attack with the staff)?
Just to be clear, unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so they don't apply towards the "separate melee weapon" requirement. A weapon plus an empty hand doesn't work; two empty hands plus Martial Arts doesn't work; a staff held in two hands doesn't work; a weapon in hand plus a dancing sword doesn't work. You need two actual weapons in your actual hands.
I'm not sure why you said 'two staves is a bit much' -- if you were going to do this with a monk, you'd probably want to use two smaller weapons, like nunchaku (clubs), short swords, or similar. Dual quarterstaves might be a bit silly, yes, but that's not the only option, or even the most obvious one.
For more details on why unarmed strikes aren't weapons, see the Sage Advice Compendium question regarding Stunning Strike and the PHB errata document section marked Weapons (p. 149), as well as the errata for Melee Attacks (p. 195), which says in part:
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike [...]
(Since an unarmed strike is "instead of" a weapon, it clearly isn't one.)
$endgroup$
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
It seems like your question is coming from a slight misquote; you left out an important word. The Dual Wielder feat (PHB, p. 165) doesn't say "a melee weapon in each hand", and it's very clear about what it requires:
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
It specifically requires a separate weapon, not one weapon that you have both hands on. A single quarterstaff, no matter how you use it, is only a single weapon, and doesn't qualify.
I'm not sure where you're getting two 1d6 attacks with a staff. Are you suggesting that a staff held in two hands would also count as two weapons for Two Weapon Fighting (it doesn't), or are you talking about the monk's Martial Arts ability to "make one unarmed strike as a bonus action" after an attack action (which would be an unarmed strike, not an attack with the staff)?
Just to be clear, unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so they don't apply towards the "separate melee weapon" requirement. A weapon plus an empty hand doesn't work; two empty hands plus Martial Arts doesn't work; a staff held in two hands doesn't work; a weapon in hand plus a dancing sword doesn't work. You need two actual weapons in your actual hands.
I'm not sure why you said 'two staves is a bit much' -- if you were going to do this with a monk, you'd probably want to use two smaller weapons, like nunchaku (clubs), short swords, or similar. Dual quarterstaves might be a bit silly, yes, but that's not the only option, or even the most obvious one.
For more details on why unarmed strikes aren't weapons, see the Sage Advice Compendium question regarding Stunning Strike and the PHB errata document section marked Weapons (p. 149), as well as the errata for Melee Attacks (p. 195), which says in part:
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike [...]
(Since an unarmed strike is "instead of" a weapon, it clearly isn't one.)
$endgroup$
It seems like your question is coming from a slight misquote; you left out an important word. The Dual Wielder feat (PHB, p. 165) doesn't say "a melee weapon in each hand", and it's very clear about what it requires:
You gain a +1 bonus to AC while you are wielding a separate melee weapon in each hand.
It specifically requires a separate weapon, not one weapon that you have both hands on. A single quarterstaff, no matter how you use it, is only a single weapon, and doesn't qualify.
I'm not sure where you're getting two 1d6 attacks with a staff. Are you suggesting that a staff held in two hands would also count as two weapons for Two Weapon Fighting (it doesn't), or are you talking about the monk's Martial Arts ability to "make one unarmed strike as a bonus action" after an attack action (which would be an unarmed strike, not an attack with the staff)?
Just to be clear, unarmed strikes aren't weapons, so they don't apply towards the "separate melee weapon" requirement. A weapon plus an empty hand doesn't work; two empty hands plus Martial Arts doesn't work; a staff held in two hands doesn't work; a weapon in hand plus a dancing sword doesn't work. You need two actual weapons in your actual hands.
I'm not sure why you said 'two staves is a bit much' -- if you were going to do this with a monk, you'd probably want to use two smaller weapons, like nunchaku (clubs), short swords, or similar. Dual quarterstaves might be a bit silly, yes, but that's not the only option, or even the most obvious one.
For more details on why unarmed strikes aren't weapons, see the Sage Advice Compendium question regarding Stunning Strike and the PHB errata document section marked Weapons (p. 149), as well as the errata for Melee Attacks (p. 195), which says in part:
Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike [...]
(Since an unarmed strike is "instead of" a weapon, it clearly isn't one.)
edited Apr 5 at 21:11
V2Blast
26.3k591161
26.3k591161
answered Apr 5 at 13:44
Darth PseudonymDarth Pseudonym
16.1k34188
16.1k34188
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
add a comment |
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I can see where you may have gotten it, but I really don't think unarmed strikes are at all what OP is asking about. It is not a bad thing to cover necessarily, but I would recommend maybe delegating it to a side point?
$endgroup$
– Rubiksmoose
Apr 5 at 14:14
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
$begingroup$
I made some edits to make that part a little less central.
$endgroup$
– Darth Pseudonym
Apr 5 at 14:32
add a comment |
Riker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Riker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Riker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Riker is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
Thanks for contributing an answer to Role-playing Games Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2frpg.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f144618%2fcan-a-monks-single-staff-be-considered-dual-wielded-as-per-the-dual-wielder-fe%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown