Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 Tal-eth Sep 28, 2014 19:08:09	If a monk is holding, but not using, a non-monk weapon while attacking unarmed, does he/she still benefit from the Martial Arts class feature?   For example: an elven monk holding a longbow in one hand while fighting unarmed in melee   Thanks for any help!
#2 Plaguescarred1 Sep 28, 2014 19:16:24	Yes i believe it should, since even though you are holding a non-monk weapon, you still meet Martial Arts requirement to make a bonus attack as you made an unarmed strike.     PHB78 Martial Arts: When you use the Attack action with an unarmed strike or a monk weapon on your turn, you can make one unarmed strike as a bonus action.
#3 FluffyBunbunKittens Sep 29, 2014 0:45:03	Holding something is not an issue, as long as it's not a shield.
#4 FrogReaver Sep 29, 2014 4:11:50	A monk "wielding" something other than a monk weapon will not let him use dex for the attack or the monk weapon dmg table for the damage or make an extra unarmed attack as a bonus action.   I guess it depends on what your DM defines wielding as since the rules as written never define what it means to "wield" something.     So to answer your question, if the DM thnks wielding means actively using the weapon then yes you get the bonus action attack.  If he thinks wielding the weapon means holding the weapon then no.   Personally I would definetely allow him to hold a bow and attack unarmed with the bonus action.  I wouldn't consider that a houserule since the rules are ambiguous so it is up to DM discretion whichever way he wants to take it.   Some thoughts for those who think "wield" means actively use.  In combat if a character makes some attacks with a longbow and then when enemies get close he kicks and headbuts them and then when they run he starts shooting them with the bow again.... I would rule consider the guy as having been described to be wielding a longbow during that combat.  I don't think there's a definitive moment that you can say he stopped wielding the longbow.     For example: Our soldiers wield M16's.  They aren't just wielding them for the few seconds a day when they are pulling the trigger.   So my personal opinion is that a longbow is wielded as long as you have it in your hands.  Just as our soldiers wield M16's even when they sometimes get into hand to hand combat while they are holding it (unless someone manages to disarm them).   But while that's my personal opinion the rules themselves are ambiguous enough to allow another interpretation as written (wield being undefined by the authors and all)...
#5 FluffyBunbunKittens Sep 29, 2014 4:09:45	It could admittedly been written clearer.   I think most would view wielding as 'holding with intent to use', as opposed to, say, cradling a baby in your other arm (wielding a potential improvised weapon).
(Reply to #5) FrogReaver	FluffyBunbunKittens wrote: