Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Wolvercote Sep 03, 2014 5:03:42	If  a monk uses a quarterstaff 2-handed (since it's a versatile weapon), can he still peform his unarmed strikes?     I can see a monk being able to take one hand off his staff and hitting his opponent after just clubbing him but then why would a character ever use a staff one-handed and only do 1d6 damage?   Currently I've been allowing the monk to do so, but I'm questioning myself.
#2 Plaguescarred1 Sep 03, 2014 5:22:16	Yeah he should be able to let go of one hand to make an unarmed strike without problem.   But an unarmed strike doesn't have to be a hand punch necessarily, IMO it could also be a kick, headbutt, elbow, knee etc...
#3 Wolvercote Sep 03, 2014 5:24:55	I agree with that but believe it or not, I have a second Monk player that doesn't feel it makes sense.  His argument is about using a quarterstaff one handed. Why would you ever do so and only get a D6 for damage.
#4 Bloodscythe Sep 03, 2014 5:26:54	Yes.  Why would a monk need to take a hand off of the quarterstaff (or spear) to use unarmed strike?  They can kick, knee, headbutt, elbow, etc.    With regard to one handed over two handed, a fighter might wield a spear with shield instead of spear two handed.  A caster would need a hand free to cast spells with a somatic component.  A monk might want to be able to interact with an object, like drink a potion, which would require a free hand.  Or maybe you're hanging from a rope and trying to attack.  Or maybe you keep a hand free to throw a dagger.  Or maybe you're carrying someone or something.   For just flat damage output, a monk will likely always wield the staff two handed at least until the martial arts damage dice is 1d8, but until then, there might be instances where you'd use just one hand, and since the weapon is versatile, you can still attack, just for less damage.
#5 Wolvercote Sep 03, 2014 5:28:10	I like it. Thanks for helping out with settling it in my mind.
#6 Fremastr Sep 03, 2014 7:11:41	Sorry bring the bad news but it says you only get the martial arts benefits while using "unarmed strikes or monk weapons, which are shortswords and any simply melee weapons that don't have the two-handed or heavy property." Once you decide to use the quarterstaff as a two handed weapon you are no longer using a monk weapon. The two handed quarterstaff would still fall under your proficiency bounus for the attack roll though, as proficiencies are not limited to the subcategory of monk weapons only the martial arts benefits are.
(Reply to #6) Fenstrider	Fremastr wrote:
#8 Amerikajin Sep 03, 2014 7:50:06	Fremastr wrote:
(Reply to #8) Fremastr	Fenstrider wrote:
(Reply to #9) Vowtz	I agree with Amerikajin.
(Reply to #9) Bloodscythe	Fremastr wrote:
(Reply to #9) Amerikajin	Fremastr wrote:
#13 Fremastr Sep 03, 2014 8:28:07	That makes more sense, time to copy pasta my DM for more damages.
(Reply to #9) Ard3	Fremastr wrote:
#15 shivafang Sep 03, 2014 11:46:59	I'm going to step in here and confirm that the versatile property is not the two-handed property.   The versatile property allows you to use it two-handed, the two-handed property requires it.   Only weapons with the two-handed property or heavy property are excluded from monk weapons.  Quarterstaff and spear have the versatile property, and even when used two-handed they do not have the two-handed property.   Martial arts specifically uses the word property in the restriction - so the distinction is important (and why I bolded all instances of the word property in this post to make it super clear.)
#16 Wolvercote Sep 03, 2014 12:57:55	Good job people.  Thanks for the help!
#17 mddsangster Sep 05, 2014 15:46:12	btw, a reason you would use it as one handed is to go by two weapon fighting rules, thereby enabling you two make two 1d6 rolls for damage.
#18 Captain_Kobold Sep 06, 2014 3:53:42	mddsangster wrote:
#19 Thoughts_My_Aim Sep 06, 2014 8:23:24	Captain_Kobold wrote: