I don't mind them taking their time with sorting this stuff out. The clarification busted a number of things outright, introduced (or I guess technically brought to light, since it was a clarification) a significant number of stupid interactions, and raised a bunch of rules questions, and I'd rather that they sit down and carefully work those out once and for all, rather than going for some quick fix. (I'd also like it if any decisions made based on balance were made based on wholistic play experience and on number-crunching, and not on shallow comparisons to other class's TWF costs, but I'll settle for simply "most things that we broke are not broken any more.")
I actually see the simplest, KISSiest solution at this: just make it work how everyone (except I guess a cluster of people who had known what they meant all along but never bothered to bring up the big pile of rules issues that come with it) thought it worked before. Zen Archer: Unbroken! Longspear Sohei: Gets to reconcile its feud with the ground! Guy who wants to fight with one kama: Supported again! Questions about how many unarmed stikes are enhanced by various spells: No longer pressing! Table of flurry hit bonuses in the CRB: No longer wrong! You don't even need to worry about communicating errata to your playerbase because everyone's already doing it that way! (Or, for people who were using the clarification before it was issued, doing it in a compatible way!)
Netherek, that would solve a lot of issues. I did much the same thing with my medium BAB monk redesign, but it was enhancement bonuses, ala the Magus's arcane strike. Fighter weapons training would indeed fix the problem, and keeping the 3.5 15/15/15/10/5 BAB would be simple.
Well done; well done, I say.
Master Arminas
This is very similar to a suggestion I made in another thread, addressing the issue of amulet of mighty fists, overcoming DR etc. Give the monk a +1 enhancement bonus every time the Ki pool gets an enhancement to the strike - +1 when it's magic, +2 when it's lawful, +3 when it's adamantine. I think that's a separate issue to the FoB, though. FoB works fine the way everyone assumed it worked.
Plea to the Developers: When you see a common mistake like this with Flurry of Blows and there are no threads screaming "Broken!" please don't try and fix it.
I have finished a complete monk rewrite that I think (I think) addresses all of our problems with the Pathfinder class in an elegant manner. A Monk for All Editions Your criticisms and comments would be appreciated.
Master Arminas
It was OK. I think your FoB needs downgrading from you level if you up-gun the monk to full BAB and d10 hit dice. I think a change this radical is sidetracking from the issue here. Great for Pathfinder 2.0, but right now it's tweaks and errata only on the existing monk.
It is medium BAB. The monastic weapon training doesn't change the BAB, it merely provides a bonus on attacks and damage, just like the fighter's weapon training. If both the fighter and the monk have equal strength, both have all of their respective focus feats, and both have equal enhancement bonuses on their weapons, the fighter will still be +5 higher on the final adjusted attack bonus. Of course, the monk will have a lower Strength than the fighter, so the difference will increase. Same with the Barbarian, Ranger, and Paladin, all of which have their own 'enhancer' on attack rolls.
What it does though, is to allow the Monk to hold his own in battle against CR appropriate critters; he definately ain't bottom tier no more.
Master Arminas
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This change...no, nerf, is apalling, and I am angry. Why does paizo feel the need to constantly nerf and destroy the weakest class in the game? Do they take sick pleasure in it?
Unarmed strike is a single weapon, whether you use fist, foot, elbow, whatever. That's how it's always been, how it should always be, and the most sensible way to treat it. Paizo are the ones that confused the freaking issue with the flurry rules using TWF to describe how it works.
They would rather nerf the monk than admit the pricing for AoMF is way out of whack for a monk. Instead of saying that, they feel the need to justify its multi-weapon buffing properties by insisting unarmed are different weapons...nerfing the monk... just to say, "See! AoMF is useful!"
This nerf disgusts me and I demand that it be undone!
I don't know what all the fuss is about. In my mind the monk is still clearly more powerful than the warrior, the aristocrat AND the expert! 8P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How about this instead?
Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 3rd level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of the following weapons: club, dagger, handaxe, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, spear, or unarmed strike. New weapons designated with the monk special property may be added to this list at a later date. This additional attack is made at the monk's highest attack bonus.
At 8th level, a monk gains a second bonus attack at his highest attack bonus when he uses flurry of blows.
At 15th level, a monk gains a third bonus attack at his highest attack bonus when he uses flurry of blows.
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with a flurry of blows, whether the monk is fighting with unarmed strikes, a light weapon weapon, a one-handed weapon, two weapons, a weapon and an unarmed strike, a double weapon, a thrown weapon, or a two-handed weapon.
A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows.
A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows.
A monk cannot use two-weapon fighting (see Combat) to gain additional attacks when using flurry of blows.
A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.
A monk does not suffer any penalties when using flurry of blows (such as those normally associated with two-weapon fighting), regardless of whether he wields a light weapon, a one-hand weapon, a double-weapon, or a two-hand weapon.
A monk may wield two weapons, a double-weapon, or a two-handed weapon when using flurry of blows (provided that the weapon is a special monk weapon) and may use unarmed strikes and weapons wielded in any combination during his flurry of blows attacks.
Master Arminas
That's because it isn't based on Two-Weapon Fighting; it is it's own thing. And I have discovered that if you don't specify how it is meant to be used, there is the all-too-real possibility that it will be misread and misconstrued.
Master Arminas
Okay, but you are still using the mechanic of two-weapon fighting for extra attacks, right? With the entire split attack routine (primary vs. off-hand) that we have been grousing about for nearly 800 posts in two threads.
Master Arminas
Well, since everyone else is chiming in on this I guess I should throw in my 2 cents.
How about we modify flurry of blows to read as following:
Flurry of Blows (Ex)
When a monk uses the full attack action, she uses her monk level in place of her normal base attack bonus. Each attack made as part of this full attack action may be made with either a held monk weapon or as an unarmed strike at the monk's discretion.
Then, we add the two weapon fighting feats as optional bonus feats at the appropriate levels, say 1st, 6th and 14th respectively.
When a monk takes these feats, they must abide by the rules of both her Flurry of Blows ability and the Two Weapon Fighting feats which now work together without any issues.
The Sohei's ability would read that they can use any weapon for which they have taken weapon training as a monk weapon for purposes of flurry of blows. All other abilities remain the same.
The zen archer would say that they can use a bow to perform a flurry of blows and add rapid shot and manyshot as monk bonus feats at 1st and 4th. All other abilities remain the same.
The elegance of this solution lies in the fact that no special rules need be made for the monk (outside of course of monk level as BAB for full attack) while allowing a monk to use a two handed weapon effectively like a fighter, to two weapon fight if they want and with specific archetypes, to use alternate weapons to perform their abilities. It also allows the monk to substitute unarmed strikes for any of her attacks as the dev's intended while also avoiding the sohei kicking the ground when she just wants to full attack with her halberd.
Thoughts?
edited again for typos...
I like it: simple, unambiguous. Good job.
I don't see why the existing understanding of the Flurry rules couldn't simply be left be. Even if that understanding didn't fit the intent of the designers, it did nothing to make the monk class nor the FoB ability itself overpowered. In fact, this "clarification" seems to roll back a lot of the progress that the monk has made over the past several books.
This was a bad decision on the part of the Paizo staff.
Question: Can a Sohei monk Flurry with the weapons that they become proficient with? Using the older reading of the monk FoB of course. It doesn't say anywhere that he can flurry with the non-monk martial weapons and I feel the intent is that it is.
"It's not fair to other TWF's!"
TWF is not homosexuality, it's a choice. One that Monk's don't have. Politico-religious fervor aside, EVERY other class has the option of TWF, archery, or THW (spellcasters are a whole different hornet's nest), however, Monks ARE TWF. As such, why shouldn't their UNIQUE CLASS FEATURE allow them to do something....UNIQUE!?
"They are better fighters than fighters!"
1)
NOBODY seriously believes this, right?2)
Even IF they were, it would only be for ONE highly specialized aspect of a myriad subsets. Casters cast better than a fighter (even rangers and paladins!), rogues always sneak attack better, druids are more versatile, etc. Shouldn't EVERY class have SOMETHING that they are the best at?3)
No one (maybe some people) is taking the flip side: The Zen Archer is a better archer than the ranger. Oh, a scaling rapid shot, AND I get to use my wisdom mod? Oh, what's that, free point blank mastery? Any other goodies hiding in there?3a)
"oh, the Zen archer can't use unarmed as part of a flurry, that's so harsh!"Wait, If I have the option of using my SINGLE WEAPON to flurry, and can make MELEE ATTACKS with it, why am I worried about using unarmed strikes? Ever?
All that being said, what's up with the sudden love for the Zen Archer? Don't get me wrong, I think it's cool, and I glad that he's guaranteed to work (kind of), but why aren't the other types guaranteed to work?
Also, I am kind of disappointed that the other thread was locked. I thought that it was getting very civil for the second half. I even got over my dislike for Mabven and found that they had really good, salient points, and were a decent human being (or half-elf, whatever), and as such feel better as a person, and as a poster.
Exactly. I want my monk class to be special, to have something that no other class can claim as their own. Fighters have fighting (they really are the best at that), barbarians have rage, rangers have favored enemies, paladins have smite evil, bards have their music, rogues their sneak attack, sorcerers have blood lines, druids wildshape and animal companions, clerics have . . . well, ah . . . clerics have miracle! (whew!). And Wizards are absolute top dog with their books of infinite spells and their ability to change who and what they are on a daily basis.
Monks?
MONK: I run real fast.
FIGHTER: Run, Forrest, run!
MONK: I can jump too!
WIZARD: Pardon me, but have you seen the first level arcane spell jump? And by the time you become better than that spell, I am flying all day long.
MONK: I . . . I . . . I hit things with lots of weak attacks!
ROGUE, RANGER, BARD, TW-FIGHTER, MAGUS: So do we! Except for the weak part.
MONK: I hate you guys.
Question: Can a Sohei monk Flurry with the weapons that they become proficient with? Using the older reading of the monk FoB of course. It doesn't say anywhere that he can flurry with the non-monk martial weapons and I feel the intent is that it is.
They can't flurry with the weapons they become proficient with and they've never been able to do so, except for ones that have the "monk" special property. They can flurry with weapons in the weapon groups they select for their Weapon Training feature, available at level six, as described in that feature. Again, the clarification does not affect this in any way.
The way that Sohei are affected by the clarification is that they can no longer use a single weapon that they are proficient in to take all of the attacks in a flurry. For Sohei wielding a single weapon, that means that they have to take half of the attacks with their feet. For Sohei using a reach weapon and standing ten feet from an enemy, that means that those attacks are likely to be wasted. Before the clarification, when monks could make all of their attacks through one weapon, reach weapon sohei worked fine; now they work much less well. There is currenly some haziness surrounding things like whether you can make your attacks with the reach weapon, then take a five-foot step and make the rest of your attacks with your feet - which would still represent a singificant weakening and sillification of the reach-weapon sohei, but not nearly as severe as the clarification makes it if that's not allowed.
@master arminas: Have you considered simply giving Unarmed Monks the ability to pick up Penetrating Strike and Greater Penetrating Strike for unarmed strikes? I do not like how you suggest Monks cannot get Flurry of Blows until 3rd level.
I'd hate to see some off kilter rewrite of the monk.
I'm in a very small minority that believed the monk was fine as written. I seriously felt that the Paizo Rules team did a phenomenal job on the class and that it was playable in it's Plain Jane, vanilla CRB form. The support features from the CRB left some things to be desired; feats, weapons etc... The CLASS was fine, FoB was fine even elegant. It was "like TWF" but easier, more streamlined. It lacked the alternating requirement of weapons and the tedious accounting of differential bonuses. It was the easiest way to be a tornado of strikes, providing you abided by it's restrictions.
The ONLY thing missing in the FoB text that should have been there was a rider that said "this class feature mimics TWF, it does not stack with TWF nor does it allow access to the feats in the TWF feat tree".
The monk has some issues, but the other classes do as well. None of the monks issues stem from it's base chassis. (Exception: it is the ONLY class that is denied a magic item slot at level 1). It's issues stem from the magic item system and the perception that it is somehow either too good or too substandard; depending on the observer.
Monks were fine prior to the recent Rules Clarification.
They can be fine again.
FoB just needs to be "fixed" so it works as played for the past 3 years. That solution will save the Devs a ton of workhours issuing errata on 10+ archetypes, various feat interactions and the very real question of whether the entire TWF feat tree is now fair game to the monk class, which will lead to a ton of weird issues.
I've long since resigned myself to the fact that the AoMF is not going to change and that I will pay more for the same bonuses as other players of different classes. I completely accept that the Monk is the only 4stat MAD class. I even accept that an entire subsection of players hate the class and all of it's Eastern influences. I will not accept the class being nerfed because of a "fairness" issue.
Fairness has no place in a game where multiple classes can use Wish or fly or completely circumvent the inevitability of death itself. That fairness is called out as the reason to nerf the monk predicated on the Monk having an advantage over the other classes in magic item costs is not only unfair it's absurd and makes me seriously wonder if I'm playing the same class as everyone else.
|
Nowhere does the feat identify the selected natural attack as an unarmed strike, it merely indicates that features that are used with an unarmed strike can be used with the selected natural attack as well. (Much like the acquisition of an adapter for my phone that allows it to use an iPod charging cable does not turn my phone into an iPod, but merely allows it to use the same charging cable as an iPod.)
Hmm...since there's a conflict in definitions, I'll concede that point.
Plea to the Developers: When you see a common mistake like this with Flurry of Blows and there are no threads screaming "Broken!" please don't try and fix it.
Wouldn't asking the developers to word abilities a bit more clearly be more helpful than that? Your proposition seems to appeal to a subconscious (or conscious) use of rule zero instead of attempting to solve the problem...
[Edit]
To Arminas
When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of the following weapons: club, dagger, handaxe, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, spear, or unarmed strike. New weapons designated with the monk special property may be added to this list at a later date. This additional attack is made at the monk's highest attack bonus.
I'd recommend changing this to...
"When attempting a Flurry of Blows, the monk may make an additional attack with either a currently held monk weapon or an unarmed strike."Then simply add "at level 8 and 15, the monk gains an additional attack (bringing the total to 2 and 3, respectively) that may consist of any combination of held monk weapons or unarmed strikes" somewhere.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't see why the existing understanding of the Flurry rules couldn't simply be left be. Even if that understanding didn't fit the intent of the designers, it did nothing to make the monk class nor the FoB ability itself overpowered. In fact, this "clarification" seems to roll back a lot of the progress that the monk has made over the past several books.
This was a bad decision on the part of the Paizo staff.
Agreed.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had just heard about this issue and decided I will throw my two cents at it.
I am against the idea that a monk must split his flurry attacks amongst different weapons.
Here is why:
1. You cannot compare a fighter with two weapon fighting to a monk with flurry. They are apples and oranges? (What you say?)
A monk does not have the same hit points of a fighter.
A monk's weapon selection is a lot smaller.
A monk’s armor and shield selection is zero.
Fighter’s do not have to take TWF.
A fighter can get weapon specialization, greater weapon focus, etc.
A fighter has a high BAB all the time. A monk cannot take improved critical until 11th level!
Monks won’t be using kukris.
Monks are not fighters they are monks.
Monks need a lot more ability scores. Fighter needs dex and str for a good TWF. Monk will need dex, str and wis(need AC from something).
2. Years of precedence.
This is the first time I have heard of requiring a monk to use at least two weapons when flurrying. Though unarmed can be two weapons but must be different body parts.
3. The way it reads to me
When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).
Well it says any combination.
If you have a combination lock and you have 5 numbers from 0 to 9 you can set those 5 to any combination. It can be 1 1 1 1 1 or 1 2 3 4 5 or 1 8 1 8 1 or any combination.A monk can be standing there holding a kama and a sai and flurry on you. He could just kick you with all or throw in a kama slash or a sai stab. Or he could just slice and dice is way through you with his kama.
4. It is what monks do. They flurry on you!
Give them their special ado. Don’t gimp them.
@master arminas: Have you considered simply giving Unarmed Monks the ability to pick up Penetrating Strike and Greater Penetrating Strike for unarmed strikes? I do not like how you suggest Monks cannot get Flurry of Blows until 3rd level.
Yes, I looked at those two feats. But I had a quandry: if we added those feats to the bonus feat list then we could ignore the prerequisites. Adding Penetrating Strike at 10th level and Greater Penetrating Strike at 14th level means that monk could pick up those feats from the fighter could--and those two feats are fighter only.
Give them the two as pure 'extra' bonus feats at the same level a fighter gets them might work, but that would bring the monk to 11 bonus feats--the same as a fighter gets. Sure, the monk's would be either pre-selected or limited to a specific list, but the monk shouldn't have the same number of feats as a fighter.
I push back flurry of blows to third level in order to keep the class from being completely front-loaded. And there is precendent. The original AD&D monk started out with 1 attack per round--the same as every other class at the time. Only the fighter, ranger, and monk ever got more than 1 attack, and the monk acrued them at a faster rate.
Of course, that was in the days before there was such a thing as fighting with two-weapons, but that did make into game before the end of 1st edition. But back to Pathfinder: at 1st or 2nd level, I think it is reasonable that the monk have a single attack: just like every one else. Not a lot of people actually USE two-weapon fighting as a 1st or 2nd level character, because of the penalties on attack rolls. A few do, but not many. So delaying flurry to 3rd level didn't strike me as a major inconvenience.
Master Arminas
I had just heard about this issue and decided I will throw my two cents at it.I am against the idea that a monk must split his flurry attacks amongst different weapons.
Here is why:
1. You cannot compare a fighter with two weapon fighting to a monk with flurry. They are apples and oranges? (What you say?)
A monk does not have the same hit points of a fighter.
A monk's weapon selection is a lot smaller.
A monk’s armor and shield selection is zero.
Fighter’s do not have to take TWF.
A fighter can get weapon specialization, greater weapon focus, etc.
A fighter has a high BAB all the time. A monk cannot take improved critical until 11th level!
Monks won’t be using kukris.
Monks are not fighters they are monks.
Monks need a lot more ability scores. Fighter needs dex and str for a good TWF. Monk will need dex, str and wis(need AC from something).2. Years of precedence.
This is the first time I have heard of requiring a monk to use at least two weapons when flurrying. Though unarmed can be two weapons but must be different body parts.3. The way it reads to me
When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).Well it says any combination.
If you have a combination lock and you have 5 numbers from 0 to 9 you can set those 5 to any combination. It can be 1 1 1 1 1 or 1 2 3 4 5 or 1 8 1 8 1 or any combination.
A monk can be standing there holding a kama and a sai and flurry on you. He could just kick you with all or throw in a kama slash or a sai stab. Or he could just slice and dice is way through you with his kama.4. It is what monks do. They flurry on you!
Give them their special ado. Don’t gimp them.
Well said, OgeXam. Well said.
Master Arminas
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
"Holy Can of Worms Batman!"
I was reading through this thread and the other locked thread and something hit me.
Some are saying if you cast magic fang on your unarmed strike you must say which unarmed strike: fist, foot, head.
This is a can of worms from hell!
That means I can have magic fang +1 on my: right hand, left hand, right elbow, left elbow, right shoulder, left shoulder, forehead, right foot, left foot, right knee, left knee, etc.
Someone can go body part crazy. In just the above list a human has 11+ unarmed strikes at his disposal.
If I get multi-weapon fighting can I make attacks with all 11+ unarmed strikes like a monster with 4 claws can make 4 claw attacks?
Uhmmmm. no! Though breaking it into specific unarmed strikes opens the door for such arguments.
KISS guys. Let's keep it simple. Just call it one unarmed strike and not open said can of worms.
Similarly, greater magic fang would allow you to make n number of unarmed strikes as a full round action, where n equals the number of body parts you can think of to hit your enemy with.
But you would still be limited to how many attacks Flurry gives you, from two at 1st level, to seven at 20th level.
"Holy Can of Worms Batman!"
And then some. Does the ruling allow monks to take such feats as Two Weapon Defence without actually buying Two Weapon Fighting as a separate feat? Do they have to calculate damage with off-hand penalties now or are they assumed to also have Double Slice?
It strikes me that this ruling basically imposes on the monk all the disadvantages of having TWF without any of the advantages, in the name of "fairness" which is clearly to me a case of "fair to everyone but the monk". Yet FoB remains it's own thing, as the Zen Archer testifies.
Confused? I am. It strikes me that the changes are unnecessary and unwanted. If the monk needs changes it is in the opposite direction to those that the development team are taking. First they strip away Improved Natural Attack, then they nerf FoB. What does that leave the monk? Situational manoeuvres that may be effective only against certain foes. They certainly have no hope of dealing effective damage in combat, or of scoring many hits. That's a huge disadvantage in a combat class.
Similarly, greater magic fang would allow you to make n number of unarmed strikes as a full round action, where n equals the number of body parts you can think of to hit your enemy with.But you would still be limited to how many attacks Flurry gives you, from two at 1st level, to seven at 20th level.
Well, no.
Multiattack (Combat)
This creature is particularly skilled at making attacks
with its natural weapons.
Prerequisite: Three or more natural attacks.
Benefit: The creature’s secondary attacks with natural
weapons take only a –2 penalty.
Normal: Without this feat, the creature’s secondary
attacks with natural weapons take a –5 penalty.
Its a feat from the Bestiary.
I doubt it applies to unarmed strikes, as they are not natural weapons.But this way of thinking that unarmed strike is a mass of weapons rather than just one, might lead people to get confused about this again.
Honestly, I never even thought that Flurry is a TWF gimmick. I read the "works like TWF" as "Uses the same mechanics for determining the number of additional attacks and the attack penalty for performing them. I even remember this question coming up a few years ago where a bunch of people including myself stated that "in any combination" means just that :P
"Holy Can of Worms Batman!"And then some. Does the ruling allow monks to take such feats as Two Weapon Defence without actually buying Two Weapon Fighting as a separate feat? Do they have to calculate damage with off-hand penalties now or are they assumed to also have Double Slice?
It strikes me that this ruling basically imposes on the monk all the disadvantages of having TWF without any of the advantages, in the name of "fairness" which is clearly to me a case of "fair to everyone but the monk". Yet FoB remains it's own thing, as the Zen Archer testifies.
Confused? I am. It strikes me that the changes are unnecessary and unwanted. If the monk needs changes it is in the opposite direction to those that the development team are taking. First they strip away Improved Natural Attack, then they nerf FoB. What does that leave the monk? Situational manoeuvres that may be effective only against certain foes. They certainly have no hope of dealing effective damage in combat, or of scoring many hits. That's a huge disadvantage in a combat class.
Hehehe, I was also asking about TW defence in the locked thread. Now I want it. Never wanted it before, but if I am forced to TWF, I want the extra feats that help it along.
TBH I am still wondering why the monk doesn't have diplomacy as a class skill :P
hahahaha
This is a can of worms from hell!
That means I can have magic fang +1 on my: right hand, left hand, right elbow, left elbow, right shoulder, left shoulder, forehead, right foot, left foot, right knee, left knee, etc.
Someone can go body part crazy. In just the above list a human has 11+ unarmed strikes at his disposal.
You forgot the fighting style of Duckman.
Honestly, I never even thought that Flurry is a TWF gimmick. I read the "works like TWF" as "Uses the same mechanics for determining the number of additional attacks and the attack penalty for performing them. I even remember this question coming up a few years ago where a bunch of people including myself stated that "in any combination" means just that :P
Yeah, maybe I am just too picky about how I would run it or I have seen too many martial arts movies. But I would break down Flurry further than the rules do and let a monk get all the attacks with a single weapon, but NOT with a single body part. I have seen plenty of times what I would call a Flurry done with a single one-handed or a single two-handed weapon, but I cannot remember a single time I have seen it done with one empty hand. Sure, I have seen plenty where several blows are done with one hand, but there is always at least one hit mixed in to that from the other hand or an elbow or a knee, etc.
Honestly, I never even thought that Flurry is a TWF gimmick. I read the "works like TWF" as "Uses the same mechanics for determining the number of additional attacks and the attack penalty for performing them. I even remember this question coming up a few years ago where a bunch of people including myself stated that "in any combination" means just that :PYeah, maybe I am just too picky about how I would run it or I have seen too many martial arts movies. But I would break down Flurry further than the rules do and let a monk get all the attacks with a single weapon, but NOT with a single body part. I have seen plenty of times what I would call a Flurry done with a single one-handed or a single two-handed weapon, but I cannot remember a single time I have seen it done with one empty hand. Sure, I have seen plenty where several blows are done with one hand, but there is always at least one hit mixed in to that from the other hand or an elbow or a knee, etc.
I agree. Attacking with all your unarmed strikes with one fist seems very unbalancing.
Unless it works in the situation. But my first thought would be Chun-Li. With her many kicks move :P
Believe it or not, the motivation of the developers on this ruling is not to be "fair" to other two-weapon fighters, but to simplify the system, by marrying the two abilities, so that they do not need to make individual changes to both if they change something. This attempt at simplifying the rules is an obvious failure, as it opens a whole lot of extra "special cases" that would not be special cases if they were two separate abilities.
It is obvious that the developers are finding this to be as sticky a situation as we find it to be, or else they would have followed up with their full ruling by now, as Jason said they were looking into it. I say, go ahead and find all the corner cases that this ruling makes more ambiguous, so the developers can have all the information while trying to resolve this, but keep in mind that this is still in the air, and simply stating that you are angry is not all that helpful.
I think most of us have come to the consensus that there are multiple problems with this ruling, even those such as myself who started out defending the ruling and thinking that it was clear enough. I, and others on that side of the issue have realised that the description of FoB is lacking full consideration of all possible special cases, no matter which way the ruling goes, so lets do our due-diligence in pointing out what all those special cases are, and help the developers arrive at a final wording of FoB that does not leave unresolvable issues.
... but I cannot remember a single time I have seen it done with one empty hand. Sure, I have seen plenty where several blows are done with one hand, but there is always at least one hit mixed in to that from the other hand or an elbow or a knee, etc.
Chun Li's flurry of kicks is all the same foot that would be a great example of 8 attacks with one body part.
My TKD instructor can easily kick me 3 to 5 times in a row with one foot in rapid secession. So I have witnessed a flurry with one foot first hand, or should I say first foot?
I read the "works like TWF" as "Uses the same mechanics for determining the number of additional attacks and the attack penalty for performing them. I even remember this question coming up a few years ago where a bunch of people including myself stated that "in any combination" means just that :PFunny how different people read it and got different things from it. I just assumed it was written that way so that people wouldn't ask if TWF and Flurry stacked, the way people used to ask in 3.0/3.5.
+1.
MA
... but I cannot remember a single time I have seen it done with one empty hand. Sure, I have seen plenty where several blows are done with one hand, but there is always at least one hit mixed in to that from the other hand or an elbow or a knee, etc.Chun Li's flurry of kicks is all the same foot that would be a great example of 8 attacks with one body part.
My TKD instructor can easily kick me 3 to 5 times in a row with one foot in rapid secession. So I have witnessed a flurry with one foot first hand, or should I say first foot?
Yeah, I thought about that, but did not want to use a video game example. And I thought about the real life foot kick too, after posting, but I did not go back and edit that in since I was not sure in real life how many kicks could be done at one time, like in your example.