[RPG] Does Monkey Grip allow wielding 2 handed weapons in 1 hand

combatdnd-3.5efeatsweapons

As typical in D&D a friend and I are having a debate, this time about whether or not Monkey Grip (3.5 complete warrior feat) allows a medium creature to wield a 2-handed medium weapon with one hand. He cites (PH p113):

"For instance, a Small greatsword (a two-handed weapon for a Small creature) is considered a one-handed weapon for a Medium creature, or a light weapon for a Large creature. Conversely, a Large dagger (a light weapon for a Large creature) is considered a one-handed weapon for a Medium creature, or a two-handed weapon for a Small creature."

As well as the feat itself (especially the bolded part):

You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll but the amount of effort it takes to use the weapon does not change. For instance a Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat. For a Medium creature that has this feat, it is still considered a one-handed weapon.

Basically saying that a two handed medium weapon and a large one handed weapon are the same and thus should be treated the same for purposes of this feat.

I counter that nowhere in the feat does it say specifically that there is any affect on weapons of your size, it just references weapons larger. Requote basis/first line of the feat:

"You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a -2 penalty on the attack roll but the amount of effort it takes to use the weapon does not change."

Note I don't disagree with any of his text as stated, I just don't believe it counters my side. I was pretty sure I had read about this before but did not see anything in the 3.5 FAQ or the CW FAQ. A general internet search seems to back me up as far as % agreement (as well as the belief this feat for normal characters is terrible; essentially trading -2 to hit for an average of 1 damage) but no specific quotes. This furthers my belief that either he or I are missing something quite obvious.

Does anyone have any (further) citations or quotes that can help steer or answer this question (even if I am wrong)?

Thanks, in advance and Merry Christmas.

Best Answer

In One Specific Case, Yes...

A creature possessing the feat Monkey Grip wielding a one-handed weapon designed for a creature one size category larger than the wielder can wield that one-handed, inappropriately bigger weapon one-handed.

For most other creatures--like those without the feat Monkey Grip--, that one-handed weapon designed for a creature one size larger than the wielder must be wielded as a two-handed weapon.

...But, Otherwise, No

The feat Monkey Grip (Complete Warrior 103) says

You can use melee weapons one size category larger than you are with a −2 penalty on the attack roll, but the amount of effort it takes you to use the weapon does not change.

Thus if the weapon is not designed for creatures one size category larger than the creature that is attempting to employ the weapon, the feat Monkey Grip has no effect.

Example

Without the feat Monkey Grip a Medium creature attempting to wield a Large weapon...

  • wields a Large light weapon as a one-handed weapon and suffers a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
  • wields a Large one-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon and suffers a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
  • can't wield a Large two-handed weapon at all.

With the feat Monkey Grip a Medium creature attempting to wield a Large weapon...

  • wields a Large light weapon as a light weapon and suffers a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
  • wields a Large one-handed weapon as a one-handed weapon and suffers a -2 penalty to attack rolls.
  • wields a Large two-handed weapon as a two-handed weapon and suffers a -2 penalty to attack rolls.

With or without the feat Monkey Grip, a creature wields a two-handed weapon that is designed for a creature of its own size category as a two-handed weapon. Just because a creature can use something designed for bigger creatures easier doesn't mean the creature can use something designed for creatures of its own size even more easier.


When the feat says in its example...

[A] Large longsword (a one-handed weapon for a Large creature) is considered a two-handed weapon for a Medium creature that does not have this feat.

...the feat's trying to make clear that it's not referring to the actual size of the longsword. That was the case in Dungeons and Dragons, 3rd Edition (where a greatsword for a Medium creature was actually a longsword for Large creature), but the weapon size rules changed significantly between 3rd Edition and 3.5. In the example in the feat Monkey Grip, the Large in Large longsword refers to the size of the creature for which the weapon is designed rather than the weapon itself. Thus, no, for the purposes of this feat a two-handed Medium weapon and a Large one-handed weapon are not the same and shouldn't be treated the same for purposes of this feat.

Mathematically, it's really not a very good feat. For role-playing, though, it enables a creature to use a ridiculously big weapon, and that's worth it to some folks.


The Sage's Succinctness

The Dragon #357 Sage Advice column "Official Answers to Your Questions" (83-4) contains this exchange between a reader and then-sage Andy Collins:

If Monkey Grip (Complete Warrior, 103) can be used to wield a weapon one size category larger without extra effort, can you instead wield a two-handed weapon of your size category with one hand?

Technically no--the feat specifically applies to weapons one size category larger than you.