The point of dual wielding

[MundaneSoul]

hey guys is there a monk option is duel wielding fists an option are legs count as off hand weapon

I lol'd

 

[domein]

Unarmed monk wields 5 weapons, each of them has to recover separately

 

[Aotrs Commander]

hey guys is there a monk option is duel wielding fists an option are legs count as off hand weapon

Let's not get into that. I recently had to spend an hour or two sorting out the attack routines of a D&D 3.x 15th level monk with two weapon fighting who insisted on having weapons as well as fighting unarmed, and the subsequent table I had to make ran for 26 lines*...


I mean, the option for an "off-hand" unarmed attack would be nice to have (and a darn sight eaiser to do) in Tyranny, don't get me wrong (or would be if there was any kind of benefit for it...!)



*You CAN technically do TWF with unarmed - despite the poorly-worded gumph in the Monk description** (the logic was in one of those Rules of the Game or the FAQ articles or something, the essential limitation being you can make only one set of "off-hand" attacks, so you you could use a great sword and off-hand unarmed (abstracted to feet/elbows etc), you could wield a sword and off-hand unarmed (or unarmed and off-hand a sword) or unarmed and off-hand unarmed, but you couldn't use a short sword, off-hand a short sword and offhand an unarmed.

Now, if that sounds complicated, imagine that you have a character that may use either two kama or two unarmed attacks or one kama and one unarmed attack, either of which could be the primary and also be making flurry of blows; it's enough to give even a sad number crunching DM like muggins a hard time. We had to use coloured formatting in the end...!

**This is the same poorly worded gumph that does not, strictly, give the monk proficiency with unarmed attacks...