Basically, I've got a very weird build going- Rogue1/Ranger2/Monk1 from the start 4th level character, and I've got a few questions, and no none of them were "what was I thinking?" The campaign has a large wilderness setting, the pc is a peasant and wilderness survivor, and after being a rogue (WHO CAN BE LAWFUL) and having honed his skills enough to be a ranger has taken up a more hand to hand fighting style- I took the two weapon fighting style (but yes , I have a bow) btw with a mixture of kama, sai, kukri and unarmed strikes, thus the question...what would the flurry of blows be? (18 dex 14 str) I guess that I mostly just need some help checking my numbers. My character generator has the flurry of blows adding base attack and strength for a combined flurry attack bonus of +2/+2- but, and this may be the problem I was looking for to answer my question- the generator doesn't automatically label unarmed strikes as light weapons (presuming they do count as Natural weapons, duh)
additional, how might, if at all, two weapon fighting affect unarmed attacks? (an extra attack with the off hand, right? but at what penalty would the attacks be?)
I know it might be a crazy build into almost uncharted territory, but it really feels like the right answer to a wilderness setting in a mercenary driven war/refugee campaign... (the rest of my stats are pretty much perfect, including a SECOND 18 for Wisdom, lowest being charisma and strength with INT being in the middle)
I start playing this character, if the dm signs off on my Unearthed arcana Sleeping Tiger monk and the multiclassing path (monk as the last level and the only further class to be levelled in for my human until such time as he decides to or is unable to continue training as a "monk"- which is all but inevitable, at which point he might return to rogue for a stint for evasion and skills, but may just go ranger.)
Really, I think I should argue that weapon finesse should affect flurry of blows, despite the inaccuracy of the technique- since there is already an inherent attackbonus penalty on it. I do NOT, however, presume that Two-weapon fighting would have any effect on strictly unarmed damage but weapon + unarmed damage does make me scratch my head (even with monk weapons that would be allowed in flurry of blows) what about unarmed strike in the regular or off hand with a weapon in the other, and would two-weapon fighting have any affect on flurry of blows?
...
Rogue1/Ranger2/Monk1
...
two weapon fighting style
...
mixture of kama, sai, kukri and unarmed strikes
...
flurry of blows
...
18 dex 14 str
I tried to draw out the most important stats above. You seemed to ramble a little, so I'm going to do my take of it:
BAB: +2
Str mod: +2
Dex mod: +4
Regular attack with one of unarmed/kukri/sai/kama: +6 (+2 base + 4 dex mod for light weapons) with +2 damage
Two Weapon Fighting with two different choices above: +4/+4 (+2 base +4 dex mod for light weapons -2 penalty) with +2 damage on attack 1 and +1 damage on attack 2
Flurry of Blows: uses unarmed/sai/kama, mixed in any order: +4/+4 (+2 base +4 dex mod for light weapons) damage is +2 on both attacks
Flurry of Blows + Two Weapon Fighting: +2/+2/+2 (+2 base, +4 dex mod for light weapons -2 flurry penalty -2 twf penalty)
For simplicities sake, make the Two Weapon Fighting extra attack last. The first two attacks can be any ocmbinatino of unarmed/sai/kama all with +2 str bonus to damage, the third attack, can be any weapon (to include kukri here) and only has +1 str bonus to damage.
Of course, all this is much nastier when you flank your favored enemy, getting sneak attack (up to three times) and your favored enemy damage on each strike. That is where your multiclass character will really really shine.
Since you've chosen so many classes, your bab has suffered, and your attacks won't be as high as most other 4th level characters. However you can throw down up to three attacks (which is good vs easy to hit opponents and those impossible oppenents as well, as you pray for that 20)
Hope that helps!
additional, how might, if at all, two weapon fighting affect unarmed attacks? (an extra attack with the off hand, right? but at what penalty would the attacks be?)
A player in my campaign has a dual-classed monk/psychic warrior, with the double-steel strike feat (Eberron feat - allows double-bladed sword to be used as a monk weapon) and two-weapon fighting, so I have personal experience with flurry/two-weapon fighting characters.
Basically, flurry and two-weapon fighting each add an extra attack at your highest base attack bonus and each confers a -2 penalty to hit with all attacks (ie. -4 penalty on all attacks). In your case you have a +2 BAB and +4 ability modifier from Weapon Finesse. So can make one attack at +6, two attacks using either two weapon fighting or flurry at +4/+4, or three attacks using both two-weapon fighting and flurry at +2/+2/+2.
Weapon Finesse does indeed apply to unarmed blows.
The flurry of blows takes the place of two-weapon fighting; they do not stack (read the description of flurry). Unarmed, or when using the specified weapons, you use the flurry of blows ability. When using other weapons, use the two-weapon fighting rules.
Generally speaking, the flurry of blows is better, since the penalty goes from -2 to 0 and the second extra attack (when gained) is at your maximum bonus. Also, when using one of the flurry weapons, you can specify if any or all the attacks come from the weapon or from unarmed strikes.
Weapon Finesse does indeed apply to unarmed blows.
The flurry of blows takes the place of two-weapon fighting; they do not stack (read the description of flurry). Unarmed, or when using the specified weapons, you use the flurry of blows ability. When using other weapons, use the two-weapon fighting rules.
Generally speaking, the flurry of blows is better, since the penalty goes from -2 to 0 and the second extra attack (when gained) is at your maximum bonus. Also, when using one of the flurry weapons, you can specify if any or all the attacks come from the weapon or from unarmed strikes.
With the presumption that my character is using light monk weapons, which can be used with flurry of blows as well as two weapon fighting, I make the assumption that this occurs- with two weapon fighting, in addition the the standard attack as normal he would get a second attack with two weapon fighting, BUT when doing flurry of blows (which according to the description given in the PHB, allows ONE EXTRA attack per round- this changes at 11th level, but we aren't concerned with that...so I AM making an assumption that my character can make two attacks- since he gets an extra attack from two weapon fighting- WHILE making flurry of blows, and get an extra attack- again presuming that only flurry of blows weapons are used. So I am inclined to agree with the other posters on this...
now, one might make an arguement that the Flurry of Blows attack bonus prevents a third attack until 8th level, but I do not believe this is the case under the combination of Two-Weapon fighting and Flurry of blows. For instance, flurry of blows- normally- could be all with the same weapon or interchanged with unarmed strikes (which don't have to be with hands), so basically, the mechanics don't particularlly fall against the tactic of two-weapon fighting with flurry of blows. there is no designation that two weapon fighting CAN'T be used in conjunction with Flurry of Blows...
The description of "one extra attack" and at reduced penalties for the weapons, make sense.
I have read the descriptions, and essentially it says "one extra attack" for flurry of blows and two weapon fighting, so 1+1+1=3.
Weapon Finesse does indeed apply to unarmed blows.
The flurry of blows takes the place of two-weapon fighting; they do not stack (read the description of flurry). Unarmed, or when using the specified weapons, you use the flurry of blows ability. When using other weapons, use the two-weapon fighting rules...
Sorry, but this isn't accurate -- the effect of 2WF is to grant an extra attack, even if the weapon is an unarmed strike.
More to the point, WotC's FAQ specifically states that 2WF stacks with flurry of blows.
Regards,
Jack
Weapon Finesse does indeed apply to unarmed blows.
The flurry of blows takes the place of two-weapon fighting; they do not stack (read the description of flurry). Unarmed, or when using the specified weapons, you use the flurry of blows ability. When using other weapons, use the two-weapon fighting rules...
Sorry, but this isn't accurate -- the effect of 2WF is to grant an extra attack, even if the weapon is an unarmed strike.
More to the point, WotC's FAQ specifically states that 2WF stacks with flurry of blows.
Regards,
Jack
Thank you for the clarification, now I'll know to go to the FAQ (not that it had never been mentioned before) to be sure about pressing rules issues, wherever there might be conflict.
Note that the FAQ has been wrong on occasion before. And I distinctly recall a Sage Advice question with the answer that flurry of blows and two-weapon fighting don't stack.
That said, I couldn't tell you the current status quo off the top of my head - my advice is to check the write-up of flurry of blows in the PHB before looking at anything else. From a balance point of view, I see absolutely no harm in allowing the two to stack, though.
Oh, and Weapon Finesse _does_ work with unarmed strikes - these are always considered to be light weapons.
Note that the FAQ has been wrong on occasion before. And I distinctly recall a Sage Advice question with the answer that flurry of blows and two-weapon fighting don't stack.
I'll be the first to say that some of the past rulings within the FAQ have been questionable (at best). That said, I've always taken the FAQ to be official rulings and clarifications -- like it or not, they are 'right' in the context of what the game rules are. That can be painful for me, because as a DM I almost always defer to WotC's rules (house rules are a can of worms I don't like opening).
That said, I couldn't tell you the current status quo off the top of my head - my advice is to check the write-up of flurry of blows in the PHB before looking at anything else. From a balance point of view, I see absolutely no harm in allowing the two to stack, though.
I agree all around. My reading of the PHB doesn't conflict with letting 2WF stack with flurry of blows, but the language of a 'second weapon' (on 2WF) might easily lead to a different interpretation.
IMHO :)
Jack
I'll be the first to say that some of the past rulings within the FAQ have been questionable (at best). That said, I've always taken the FAQ to be official rulings and clarifications -- like it or not, they are 'right' in the context of what the game rules are.
Actually, no. The FAQ is not errata, and as such is less significant than the PHB in the 'primacy of sources'. So, if the FAQ says one thing, and the PHB another, the FAQ is wrong. More to the point, though, a couple of the answers in the FAQ now include notes to the effect that they are revisions of previous answers, where the author got it wrong.
Hence, as I said, from time to time, the FAQ is wrong.
That can be painful for me, because as a DM I almost always defer to WotC's rules (house rules are a can of worms I don't like opening).
Fair enough. Since I don't DM Living Greyhawk, and since I don't have a problem with worms, I generally ignore the FAQ as anything other than suggestions. In fact, I also ignore the errata, firstly because I don't want to have to check two documents every time I need to look something up in the PHB, and secondly because by publishing the polymorph changes as 'errata' they've just gone too far IMO. (That's the sort of thing I think should have been in a new edition, and not before.)
Naturally, I would expect that many people will find their mileage varies.
Actually, no. The FAQ is not errata, and as such is less significant than the PHB in the 'primacy of sources'. So, if the FAQ says one thing, and the PHB another, the FAQ is wrong.
Thanks for the info -- I wasn't aware of that.
I'll actually game easier now. My problem with house rules is that often (at least for us) every player has a different take on how bothersome rules should be fixed, and which ones/how many should be fixed. It's enough of a debate for us that I refuse to get sucked into an endless series of modifications.
Deferring to the FAQ was simply sticking with the Rules As Written -- I'm happy to learn that's not what they are :)
Thanks,
Jack
while yes, flurry of blows does require a full attack action, the two-weapon fighting merely reduces the penalties for fighting with the 'off' hand. you are always free to take a -6 on your primary and -10 on your secondary (-4 and -8, respectively, if the offhand weapon is light). thus, two-weapon fighting (the feat) does not take an action in and of itself, but actually using more than one attack does. confusing issue, but one where shades of gray come into play. the question becomes this, though: is flurry of blows essentially a "monk weapons" two-weapon fighting virtual feat that gets better, and isnt actually called two weapon fighting?
tog
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Having checked the PHB, there's nothing in the "flurry of blows" description to prevent it from being used alongside two-weapon fighting. Therefore, I would allow it.
Having checked the PHB, there's nothing in the "flurry of blows" description to prevent it from being used alongside two-weapon fighting. Therefore, I would allow it.
After checking the PHB again, the key words are in the description of the monk's Unarmed Strike: "A monk attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet... There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk when striking unarmed." Taken with the restrictions on weapons when using a flurry and the way the examples read, the flurry is using the monk's unarmed technique (which has no "off-hand" for the Two-Weapon Fighting feat to affect) even if wielding one of the named weapons.
One or the other, not both.
Having checked the PHB, there's nothing in the "flurry of blows" description to prevent it from being used alongside two-weapon fighting. Therefore, I would allow it.After checking the PHB again, the key words are in the description of the monk's Unarmed Strike: "A monk attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet... There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk when striking unarmed." Taken with the restrictions on weapons when using a flurry and the way the examples read, the flurry is using the monk's unarmed technique (which has no "off-hand" for the Two-Weapon Fighting feat to affect) even if wielding one of the named weapons.
One or the other, not both.
Flurry of Blows (Ex)
Starting at 1st 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 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). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.
At 8th level, the monk can make two additional attacks when he uses flurry of blows, as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).
At 15th level, the monk can make three additional attacks using flurry of blows, as if using Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. 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 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.
While you are right that there are no "off hand" unarmed strikes, I see no where in there that says that unarmed strikes and monk special weapons are the same thing. Therefore monk weapons could be used "off hand" as any other weapon.