Monks & Staffs

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
Can monks use a magic staff, intended for wizards, like Staff of the War Mage, as his implement?
Under 'Staffs' in the PHB it says, 'A staff also functions as a melee weapon (treat it as a quarterstaff).'

So for the monk is it a quarterstaff or not. If so they can use the enh bonus of the staff for both the weapon attack and the implement attack.

In this case the monk just can't use the implement properties and powers with the weapon attack
All staffs are quarterstaffs, even the wizardly ones.

Quarterstaffs are weapons with which the Monk has proficiency.

Being a weapon with which the Monk has proficiency, the Monk can use it as an implement.  The Monk can also use it for weapon attacks, if any, but those aren't particularly common.

Superior Implement versions of the staff function normally for the Monk (e.g. Accurate Staff).  Magic enchantments function normally for the Monk (though be careful which properties and powers specifically call out "weapon attack" versus "attack with this weapon" - the former don't function for implement attacks, the latter do).
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
I agree with Mand.  The only thing I would add is that monks need to weild the staff two handed to be proficient, as they use quarterstaves as implements and not staves per se.   
And if you multiclass invoker, wizard, etc. you can use it one handed.
And if you multiclass invoker, wizard, etc. you can use it one handed.



Do you mean to make Weapon Attacks ? Because this seems incorrect to me GO as the Quatterstaff is a Two-handed weapon requiring two hands to wield. And for Implement Attacks, anyone can use a Staff one handed if they can use the Staff as an Implement, there shouldn't be no need to MC.

I am not sure i understand what you meant here. Can you elaborate ? 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Monks can use weapons with which they are proficient as implements.  When a normal class gets a staff as an implement, they can use it one-handed, but must use it two-handed to use it as a weapon.  Since a monk must use it as a weapon for it to count as an implement, it has to be used two-handed.  It's kind of a new twist on the same headache the staff has caused since launch.


Since implements proficiency now works essentially the same as weapon proficiency (a cleric/wizard could cast wizard spells with a holy symbol, for example), becoming proficient in the staff as an implement (via all those non-monk classes I just mentioned) means the monk can then use the one-handed staff implement for all of their powers.


As a flip-twist, a monk/caster can use any weapon they are proficient in as an implement for their caster class.  For example, monk/psion warforged proficient in the hand crossbow can use a shoulderbow as an implement.

You seem to imply that Proficiency is needed in order to use an Implement one handed. Do you have a Rule Quote to support this notion ?

All i know is:
 
RC 274 Implement: An adventurer must have Proficiency to use it at all. In the hands of a nonproficient user, an Implement -magical or nonmagical - is effectively a bauble.... A creature must be using an Implement to use it, unless otherwise noted. 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Sorry, I got all editty there.  Rule... rule... rule...


You have a point there, now that I think about it.


Here's what the rule compendium says:  "A creature must be holding an implement to use it."


We're running on the idea that a quarterstaff is only a quarterstaff if it's held in two-hands.  Now that I think about it, that is rather ludicrous.  Continue on to the entry for "staff implement" from the online compendium glossary:


"A staff implement can also function as a magic quarterstaff."


Yes, a quarterstaff is a two-handed weapon, but it doesn't have to be held two-handed to exist as a weapon.  Just to be wielded as one.


Thus, a monk should be able to use a magic staff implement one-handed, by my new inspired logic.


 

I agree with Mand.  The only thing I would add is that monks need to weild the staff two handed to be proficient, as they use quarterstaves as implements and not staves per se.   



I disagree with this interpretation as RAW (although it certainly makes sense in terms of flavor).  You need to be proficient with a weapon to wield it as an implement, but you do not need to be currently wielding it as a weapon to wield it as an implement.  You are proficient with quarterstaffs as weapons.  A quarterstaff (including an implement staff) does not stop being a quarterstaff simply because you are not currently using it as a weapon.  Therefore you can use it even 1 handed as an implement.
I agree with Mand.  The only thing I would add is that monks need to weild the staff two handed to be proficient, as they use quarterstaves as implements and not staves per se.   



I disagree with this interpretation as RAW (although it certainly makes sense in terms of flavor).  You need to be proficient with a weapon to wield it as an implement, but you do not need to be currently wielding it as a weapon to wield it as an implement.  You are proficient with quarterstaffs as weapons.  A quarterstaff (including an implement staff) does not stop being a quarterstaff simply because you are not currently using it as a weapon.  Therefore you can use it even 1 handed as an implement.



So you don't have to wield weapons to use them as implements?  Where in the RAW is this found?

Wouldn't this mean I can wear a Disrupting Club around my neck and use it as a holy symbol, as it also is a weapon I'm prof with and I can use it as a holy symbol?   
Holy symbols and ki focuses have special rules on not having to "wield" them in hand though.
I wonder if this is the case for all two-handed Wepliments.  If I am a Monk Dwarf proficient in Mordenkrad, must I wield it two-handed to use it as an implement?  Or is simply holding it in hand sufficient?  I don't get a proficiency bonus.  Very seldom does the [W] damage apply. Hmmm?
So you don't have to wield weapons to use them as implements?  Where in the RAW is this found?



There is nothing in the rules that I'm aware of that restricts weapon-as-implement stuff to weapons currently being wielded.  Weapons you are proficient with are implements, so they follow the general rules for implements when you are using them as implements.  The text doesn't place any additional restrictions on them.

RC 275:  "If an adventurer is able to use a weapon as an implement, the weapon works like a normal implement..."

Normally implements do not require you to be currently wielding them as weapons in order to function (in fact, many of them expressly forbid doing so!) and nothing in the text regarding implements suggests that we are supposed to treat weapons-as-implements any differently.


Wouldn't this mean I can wear a Disrupting Club around my neck and use it as a holy symbol, as it also is a weapon I'm prof with and I can use it as a holy symbol?   



No.  RC 274:  "A creature must be holding an implement to use it, unless otherwise noted."

Edit:  Disrupting Weapon is a special case anyhow, since its ability to be used as an implement is a Property of the weapon.  As per RC 280, you need to be wielding (or wearing for wearable items, but that's not relevant here) a magical item to gain use of its properties.
So you don't have to wield weapons to use them as implements?  Where in the RAW is this found?



There is nothing in the rules that I'm aware of that restricts weapon-as-implement stuff to weapons currently being wielded.  Weapons you are proficient with are implements, so they follow the general rules for implements when you are using them as implements.  The text doesn't place any additional restrictions on them.



So this is a "the rules don't forbid it" sort of thing? Isn't that directly counter to how rules work in 4th ed? 

I say this because there are also no rules specifying that weapliments, like a bow, can be wielded differently if they are being used as implements.  There is also nothing in the rules that changes a weapon type item into an implement type item.  If there was, weapliment properties could be applied from the off-hand, which is established as against the RAW.


RC 275:  "If an adventurer is able to use a weapon as an implement, the weapon works like a normal implement..."




You cut off the part of the sentence and paragraph that explained what that meant. I.e., when used as implements you don't get profeciency bonus, [w] damage, and mundance properties.


RC 274:  "A creature must be holding an implement to use it, unless otherwise noted."



But holding an implement doesn't mean you can wield the implement, and you need to wield an implement to use it. The FAQ and the RC are clear on that. 

So how do you wield a bow as an implement?  There is nothing to indicate that you would do so differently than you would wield a bow as a weapon.  

Also, didn't you just say that you didn't need to wield the weapon to use it as an implement?

There is nothing in the rules that I'm aware of that restricts weapon-as-implement stuff to weapons currently being wielded.  



In short, there seems to be two issues here:
1) are quarterstaves and staves different when used as implements
2) how are weapliments wielded as implements
You seem to imply that Proficiency is needed in order to use an Implement one handed. Do you have a Rule Quote to support this notion ?

Actually, what's relevent is that for a Monk to use his Quarterstaff-as-implement, he must be proficient in it as a weapon.

When he holds it in one hand, he isn't proficient in it's use, and he therefore can't use it as an implement.

Note that a Monk is a special case, as he is using a weapon he's proficient with as the implement, not a Staff-implement.  Which is why I designated it Quarterstaff-as-implement.   That's not to imply he can't use a Staff-implement at all ... he can, as a Quarterstaff-as-implement, because a Staff can be used as a Quarterstaff. (And that distinction won't matter very often either.)

That's not what the Implement section of the monk states, though.  It says nothing about how you use the weapon, just that you're proficient with weapons as implements.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
That's not what the Implement section of the monk states, though.  It says nothing about how you use the weapon, just that you're proficient with weapons as implements.

And you aren't proficient with a one-handed quarterstaff.  Therefore you can't use it as an implement.

And to be clear, it doesn't say you are proficient with weapons as implements.  It says you are proficient with weapons you are proficient with as implements.  Big difference there.
That's not what the Implement section of the monk states, though.  It says nothing about how you use the weapon, just that you're proficient with weapons as implements.



This. As Mand12 said.

So in short:

1) Monk are Proficient with the following Implements:

 Implement: Ki focuses, weapons with which you're proficient

2) You need to actually be Proficient with an Implement to use it at all. Once you are, you only need to Hold it or wear it in case of Holy Symbol, Ki Focus.

 Implement: A creature must be holding an implement to use it, unless otherwise noted

So, when a Monk hold a Quatterstaff in one hand, a weapon which is also his Implement, he can use it as any other Implement-Proficient caster would.  

Since Staff also count as Quatterstaff:

You need to wield a Staff two-handed to make Weapon Attacks.
You need to wield a Staff one-handed to make Implement Attacks.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

That's not what the Implement section of the monk states, though.  It says nothing about how you use the weapon, just that you're proficient with weapons as implements.



This. As Mand12 said.

So in short:

1) Monk are Proficient with the following Implements:

 Implement: Ki focuses, weapons with which you're proficient

2) You need to actually be Proficient with an Implement to use it at all. Once you are, you only need to Hold it or wear it in case of Holy Symbol, Ki Focus.

Implement: A creature must be holding an implement to use it, unless otherwise noted

So, when a Monk hold a Quatterstaff in one hand, a weapon which is also his Implement, he can use it as any other Implement-Proficient caster would.



Holding is not the same as wielding or able to attack with it.  Holding an implement is a necessary condition to use most implements.  Holding an implement is not a sufficient condition to use it.   To attack with an implement, you must wield it.  Weapons specify how many hands it takes to wield them.  Nothing in the implement rules overwrites these rules.  Just like nothing in the implement rules allows weapons properties to be used in the off hand, because if weapliment function just like normal implement, then weapon properties WOULD be applied from the off hand just like implement properties.
So in short:

1) Monk are Proficient with the following Implements:

 Implement: Ki focuses, weapons with which you're proficient

2) You need to actually be Proficient with an Implement to use it at all.

As such, they cannot use Quarterstaff-as-implement one handed.  They aren't proficient with it, because they aren't proficient with the Quarterstaff one handed.  When it's in one hand, it requires proficiency as an improvised weapon, which you cannot be proficient in.

You're reading in a restriction that doesn't exist.  You are proficient with the quarterstaff.  The quarterstaff being a 2h weapon does not impact whether or not you're proficient with it.  You're still proficient with a fullblade after SWP.  You can't swing it one-handed, no, but you don't stop being proficient with it.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
You're reading in a restriction that doesn't exist.  You are proficient with the quarterstaff.  The quarterstaff being a 2h weapon does not impact whether or not you're proficient with it.  You're still proficient with a fullblade after SWP.  You can't swing it one-handed, no, but you don't stop being proficient with it.


I'm not looking for a rule to forbid this sort of thing.  That's not how 4ed rules work.

I'm looking for a rule that allows it. 

In other words, where does it say you can wield a fullblade one-handed?  Where does it say you can attack with a fullblade one-handed?

If it doesn't say this somewhere, it's not allowed. 
You can't swing it one-handed, no, but you don't stop being proficient with it.

That's right, you don't stop being proficient with it.  But if you have it in one hand, it is not the thing you are proficient with.  This is self evident ... you don't get a proficiency bonus while it is used that way, therefore it is not the thing you are proficient with when used that way.  Therefore you are not proficient with it as an implement while it is being used that way.

Where does it say that if an Implement is also a Two-handed weapon, you need to wield it with two hands ? 

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

"if you have it in one hand, it is not the thing you are proficient with"

There is no rule that says this.  Nobody can make a weapon attack with fullblade one-handed, ever.  That doesn't mean you're not proficient with fullblades when holding it in one hand.  Hell, you're proficient with fullblades when not holding a fullblade on your person at all.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Where does it say that if an Implement is also a Two-handed weapon, you need to wield it with two hands ? 



It says two-handed weapons need to be wielded in two hands.  There is no added rule that says that the general rule for two-handed weapons is disregarded if you use a two handed weapon as a implement. 
You can't swing it one-handed, no, but you don't stop being proficient with it.

That's right, you don't stop being proficient with it.  But if you have it in one hand, it is not the thing you are proficient with.  Therefore you are not proficient with it as an implement.




Monk are Proficient with Quatterstaff wether they hold one tight in their grasp, or if they sleep and never ever possessed such stick. Because they are Proficnet with the Quatterstaff weapon, Monk are Proficient with the Staff Implement.  Even when they sleep....

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Where does it say that if an Implement is also a Two-handed weapon, you need to wield it with two hands ? 



It says two-handed weapons need to be wielded in two hands.  There is no added rule that says that the general rule for two-handed weapons is disregarded if you use a two handed weapon as a implement. 



Its alright, you dont use the Quatterstaff weapon. You use the Staff Implement. You need two hands when you phisically attack with it to make Weapon Attacks not when channelling energy through it to make Implement Attacks.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

Hell, you're proficient with fullblades when not holding a fullblade on your person at all.

Irrelevant.  They are proficient as an implement with weapons they are proficient with.

When you hold it in one hand, it is NOT the thing you are proficient with as a weapon, therefore it is also not the thing you are proficient with as an implement.  Therefore you can't use it.

You are still proficient with Quarterstaffs and quarterstaff-as-implement ... but that's not what you are using.  You are using an improvised weapon-as-implement.

Its alright, you dont use the Quatterstaff weapon. You use the Staff Implement.

No you don't.  You use Quarterstaff weapon as an implement.  That's not the same thing as a Staff as an implement, which is an implement in its own right.
You are still proficient with Quarterstaffs and quarterstaff-as-implement ... but that's not what you are using.
  You are using an improvised weapon-as-implement.



Using ? Where do you read that you need to use it to be Proficient with it ?

Every weapons a Monk is Proficent with, you can inscribe them in the line Implement:  of his Class write-up. If he take a Fullblade Feat, he also become Proficient with it as an Implement. Nothing about using it.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

If he take a Fullblade Feat, he also become Proficient with it as an Implement. Nothing about using it.

It's not a fullblade-as-an-implement if he uses it in one hand.  It is an improvised-weapon-as-an-implement.  Note that this is because the implement type is directly derived from the Monk being proficient with the weapon, which means the implement type is derived from whichever proficiency would apply to the weapon as it is used.

How does it cease to be a fullblade if you hold it one handed?  I mean I definitely agree you can't attack with it, but it doesn't stop being a fullblade.

Again, point to me the rule that says a weapon used as an implement must be wielded as a weapon.  You won't be able to find that rule - it is specifically the opposite in the case of the quarterstaff, which is that all staffs are quarterstaffs and they can all be used as implements when held in one hand.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
How does it cease to be a fullblade if you hold it one handed?  I mean I definitely agree you can't attack with it, but it doesn't stop being a fullblade.


It doesn't cease to be a full blade.  It ceases to have the Fullblade proficiency applied to it.  And since it isn't the thing a Monk is proficient with any more (it's still a fullblade, it just isn't a fullblade for proficiency), the Monk can't use it as an implement that way.

Don't get pulled into the 'it always is x' stuff that used to be used (incorrectly as it turns out) to the weapliment arguments.  That doesn't apply here, because the Monk's implements are derived from proficiency, and those *do* change depending on how you actually use the weapon.
Do you agree that a character that has taken SWP: Fullblade has proficiency with a fullblade, whether or not they actually have a fullblade on their person?  It seems like your answer to this question is "no."  "No" is unsupported by rules, is not consistent with how proficiency is described, anywhere, and causes failures.


Weapon Proficiency
Benefit: You gain proficiency in a single weapon of your choice.
Special: You can take this feat more than once. Each time you select this feat, choose another weapon.

Here's another example that breaks your theory:  You are proficient with chain armor whether or not you're actually wearing chain armor.  If you disagree with this statement, how, then, could you ever possibly wear Scale armor after taking armor proficiency (scale)?  After you stop wearing your chain armor, you are no longer proficient in chain armor, and so fail to meet the prereq for AP (scale).

Your response must be consistent for all proficiencies.  Either proficiency is dependent on using the thing correctly and goes away if you do not have said object on your person, or proficiency is a character trait that is irrelevant of current equipment loadouts.  You can't have it both ways.
D&D Next = D&D: Quantum Edition
Do you agree that a character that has taken SWP: Fullblade has proficiency with a fullblade, whether or not they actually have a fullblade on their person?  It seems like your answer to this question is "no."  "No" is unsupported by rules, is not consistent with how proficiency is described, anywhere, and causes failures.


Weapon Proficiency
Benefit: You gain proficiency in a single weapon of your choice.
Special: You can take this feat more than once. Each time you select this feat, choose another weapon.

Here's another example that breaks your theory:  You are proficient with chain armor whether or not you're actually wearing chain armor.  If you disagree with this statement, how, then, could you ever possibly wear Scale armor after taking armor proficiency (scale)?  After you stop wearing your chain armor, you are no longer proficient in chain armor, and so fail to meet the prereq for AP (scale).

Your response must be consistent for all proficiencies.  Either proficiency is dependent on using the thing correctly and goes away if you do not have said object on your person, or proficiency is a character trait that is irrelevant of current equipment loadouts.  You can't have it both ways.



Sure, you gain profeciency with a fullblade.  How you wield it is specified in the weapon table.  If you're not wielding it in the specified manner, but are holding it, it is treated as an improvised weapon.  You are not proficient with improvised weapons. 
Wether you throw your Fullblade in a reckless way to make Improvised Range Attack with it and ain't benefiting from its Proficient bonuses doesn't change the fact that you remain Proficient with the Fullblade.

Proficiency to Weapon or Implement is static. You are either Proficient with X Item or you aren't. Being Proficient with an Implement means you can use it to make Implement Attacks and being Proficient with a Weapon means you can use its Proficiency Bonus on Weapon Attacks, unless otherwise noted. Using it as an Improvised Weapon specifically gets no bonus as noted otherwise. But under Improvised Weapon tab's name any, the name Fullblade would still stand as the object in which you are Proficient with, both as a weapon and as an Implement that you'd use as an Improvised weaponwith a given Range and Proficiency Bonus value of  -.

Yan
Montréal, Canada
@Plaguescarred on twitter

So this is a "the rules don't forbid it" sort of thing? Isn't that directly counter to how rules work in 4th ed? 

I say this because there are also no rules specifying that weapliments, like a bow, can be wielded differently if they are being used as implements.  There is also nothing in the rules that changes a weapon type item into an implement type item.  If there was, weapliment properties could be applied from the off-hand, which is established as against the RAW.



No.  We're not making up rules out of whole cloth here.  There are rules that cover the wielding of all implements.  Weapons-as-implements are included under that umbrella, and we are following those rules.

There is no more reason to think that we need to invent rules about restrictions on weapons-as-implements than there is to think that we need to invent separate rules for walking on grass vs. walking on dirt.  Both normal implements and weapons-as-implements are covered by the implement rules.  Both grass and dirt are covered by the movement rules. 

In other words, where does it say you can wield a fullblade one-handed?  Where does it say you can attack with a fullblade one-handed?

If it doesn't say this somewhere, it's not allowed.



The only restriction that the RC has on implement usage is that you must be holding the implement to wield it.  We get to treat the Fullblade as an implement if we are proficient with it as per the Monk's class rule text.  Therefore, when we make implement attacks with it we use the implement rules that are quite clearly written out for the purposes of delineating what sort of restrictions there are on implement usage.  We don't worry about the rules for making weapon attacks, because we are not making a weapon attack.

Similarly, there are no specific rules in the RC allowing Rods to be used one-handed as implements, yet it's allowed because all we have to do is be holding it.

When you hold it in one hand, it is NOT the thing you are proficient with as a weapon, therefore it is also not the thing you are proficient with as an implement.



It doesn't stop being something you are proficient in.  You are simply not using it in a way that allows you to make proficient weapon attacks.  But you don't need to be presently able to attack with it as a proficient weapon.  That's inserting a rule that isn't there.  You simply need to have proficiency with it, and that is covered by either a feat or your class features.  Like Mand said, you don't stop having proficiency with Chain just because you are currently wearing Scale.

Sure, you gain profeciency with a fullblade.  How you wield it is specified in the weapon table.  If you're not wielding it in the specified manner, but are holding it, it is treated as an improvised weapon.



It's treated as an improvised weapon for the purposes of making weapon attacks with it.  An implement attack is not a weapon attack.
A quarterstaff and a staff implement are distinct.

Staff implements can function as a quarterstaff. (Where does it state quarterstaves can be used as staff implements?)

Monks are NOT proficient with staff implements. Since staff implements can function as a quarterstaff, monks can use a staff implement as a quarterstaff as an implement (almost circular, but it isn't).

Being able to use weapons as implements does not miraculously change how they are used/wielded. Implements do not have a "handedness" property associated with them. Does it state anywhere that all implements are one-handed?

A quarterstaff is a two-handed weapon. It is what it is. You want to use it, it takes both hands. The quote regarding holding implements does not imply you only need one hand to use it. You just need to be able to hold it (as opposed to being in your backpack/not held).

Magic Dual Color Test
I am White/Green
I am White/Green
Take The Magic Dual Colour Test - Beta today!
Created with Rum and Monkey's Personality Test Generator.
I am both orderly and instinctive. I value community and group identity, defining myself by the social group I am a part of. At best, I'm selfless and strong-willed; at worst, I'm unoriginal and sheepish.
Being able to use weapons as implements does not miraculously change how they are used/wielded. Implements do not have a "handedness" property associated with them. Does it state anywhere that all implements are one-handed?



No, in fact it doesn't state anywhere in the rules compendium that any sort of implement is one handed.  All it says is that you need to be holding an implement to wield it.  And you can certainly hold a two handed weapon in one hand (just as you can hold any random object of 10 lbs. or less in one hand), you just can't use it as a weapon while doing so.
You cut off the part of the sentence and paragraph that explained what that meant. I.e., when used as implements you don't get profeciency bonus, [w] damage, and mundance properties.



It doesn't explain the meaning any further.  It adds additional restrictions to what benefits you get while wielding a weapon as an implement, but it doesn't restrict the way you can wield it:

"If the adventurer is able to use a weapon as an implement, the weapon works like a normal implement, but the adventurer uses neither the weapon's proficiency bonus nor its non-magical weapon properties with his or her implement powers."

That honestly doesn't change the context of my quote at all.  The important thing here is that the weapon works like a normal implement, except with the specific caveats.  None of those caveats is related to how you must hold the weapon when using it as an implement, so that rule falls under the general "works like a normal implement" blanket.

But holding an implement doesn't mean you can wield the implement, and you need to wield an implement to use it. The FAQ and the RC are clear on that.  



You are right strictly speaking.  But that line also applies to normal implements.  If we aren't allowed to read that line as permissive rather than (or in addition to) restrictive, we aren't allowed to wield implements at all.  In other words, if we can't assume that "you must hold an implement to wield it" also implies "you can wield an implement if you are holding it", there is no rule that allows us to legally wield implements.  So a little bit of interpretation is necessary there.


So how do you wield a bow as an implement?  There is nothing to indicate that you would do so differently than you would wield a bow as a weapon.  



The line "the weapon works like a normal implement" is what indicates that you would do so differently.  Normal implements only need to be held to be wielded (again, assuming that you allow that the rules permit implement wielding at all, which strictly speaking they don't, maybe).


Also, didn't you just say that you didn't need to wield the weapon to use it as an implement? 



For the specific case of Disrupting Weapon, yes.  But that's because its ability to be used as an implement is a property of the weapon, and you need to be wielding something in order to gain use of its properties.  That can't be applied to stuff like Monk and Swordmage implements, because those are properties of the class.
Exactly Mithrus.  You've got it.

Do you agree that a character that has taken SWP: Fullblade has proficiency with a fullblade, whether or not they actually have a fullblade on their person?  It seems like your answer to this question is "no."  "No" is unsupported by rules, is not consistent with how proficiency is described, anywhere, and causes failures.

Yes.

And completely irrelevant, as I've already pointed out.