When a monk uses his flurry of blows does his cmb get a -2?
The reason for this is cause flurry of blows includes two weapon fighting+full base attak bonus. Two weapon fighting gives your attacks a -2 modifer for the round which transfer over to your trip and disarm attempts.
One of my players said thats how he uses his monk when playing in my game and I wanted to make sure that was correct
|
100% correct >CMB takes all penalties that effect all his attacks, also bonuses from amulet of mighty fist apply. (+1-5)
the monk uses his monk level in place of base attack so he can flurry and use his last attack that would normally be low base attack at full monk level because it is used in place.
If a monk is using FoB, his base attack is considered equal to the FoB bonus. Its in the FoB description. CMB uses your BAB. Two Weapon Fighting penalties normally apply to CMB.
So improved unarmed strike would increase his trip and disarms attemps aswell as he uses his unarmed strikes?
So improved unarmed strike would increase his trip and disarms attemps aswell as he uses his unarmed strikes?
Improved Unarmed Strike doesn't affect your attack bonus at all.
On the other hand, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) might affect your ability to trip or disarm with an unarmed strike.
So improved unarmed strike would increase his trip and disarms attemps aswell as he uses his unarmed strikes?Improved Unarmed Strike doesn't affect your attack bonus at all.
On the other hand, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) might affect your ability to trip or disarm with an unarmed strike.
Yes, it would. Any feat that gives you a bonus to hit with the weapon would affect the CMB, as would any enchantment to your weapon. Read the paragraph under the CMB description.
|
|
If a monk is using FoB, his base attack is considered equal to the FoB bonus. Its in the FoB description. CMB uses your BAB. Two Weapon Fighting penalties normally apply to CMB.
just a note on this post the exact wording is;
At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally.so the monk taking a -5 to the last attack to his base attack does not apply because his level is used in place of the current BAB
wording in place is different then equal to.
So improved unarmed strike would increase his trip and disarms attemps aswell as he uses his unarmed strikes?Improved Unarmed Strike doesn't affect your attack bonus at all.
On the other hand, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) might affect your ability to trip or disarm with an unarmed strike.
Sorry; I meant weapon focus (unarmed strike).
Thanks everyone for clearing this up and for the quick responses.
So improved unarmed strike would increase his trip and disarms attemps aswell as he uses his unarmed strikes?On the other hand, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) might affect your ability to trip or disarm with an unarmed strike.
TECHNICALLY, I believe there is some confusion on whether according to the current RAW Unarmed Strike is a 'vector' for Trip or not (like it was in 3.5). Technically, it uses the same 'in place of an attack' wording that other maneuvers use to indicate that (which allows ANY weapon bonuses, e.g. quarterstaff), but some (including James Jacob) believe the Trip Weapon section takes precedence because it specifically allows using Trip Weapons (and thus their bonuses), in addition to being able to drop them, and thus non-Trip Weapons' bonuses cannot apply (and Unarmed Strike is not a Trip Weapon).
The problem with that being that the normal Trip rules are written in the exact "in place of an attack" manner that DOES indicate weapon-vector-ability in other maneuvers, and nothing like the "as an X action..." wording that 'vector-less' maneuvers like Bullrush include, so if you're going to assume that Trip Weapons' specific allowance of use of their weapon (incl. bonuses) to perform a Trip indicates a UNIQUE ability, you are left with the only way to Trip somebody is with a Trip Weapon, since the basic Trip rules DO say normal Trips are in place of a melee attack (yet Unarmed Strike ISN'T a Trip Weapon) - Or else come up with some way to rationalize using a weapon (like unarmed strike) but not applying bonuses 'applicable to the weapon or attack used to perform the maneuver' (Trip Weapons never speak directly to weapon bonuses, just 'using the weapon').
Obviously, the simpler conclusion would be that the "Unarmed Strike" wording present in 3.5 was simply over-looked and should be re-inserted in the next Errata Update... But that would put you at odds with James' ruling on the situation. Either way, the rules need clearing up, so look for this in the next Errata/Update (SOON, very soon)
Whether Amulet of Mighty Fists applies to Trip or not also is dependent on this.
(I would recommend using unarmed strike as the default vector like 3.5 until it's clarified, unlike James Jacobs)
On the other hand, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) might affect your ability to trip or disarm with an unarmed strike.TECHNICALLY, I believe there is some confusion on whether according to the current RAW Unarmed Strike is a 'vector' for Trip or not (like it was in 3.5).
That's why I used the weasel word 'may' in my comment. :-)
That's why I used the weasel word 'may' in my comment. :-)
:-) (Saves alot of typing, huh?) ;-)
If a monk is using FoB, his base attack is considered equal to the FoB bonus. Its in the FoB description. CMB uses your BAB. Two Weapon Fighting penalties normally apply to CMB.just a note on this post the exact wording is;
At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally.so the monk taking a -5 to the last attack to his base attack does not apply because his level is used in place of the current BAB
wording in place is different then equal to.
No, I was talking about in the FoB description, where it says
"For the purposes of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus is equal to his monk level"
This triggers at level 1, not lvl 3.
|
|
If a monk is using FoB, his base attack is considered equal to the FoB bonus. Its in the FoB description. CMB uses your BAB. Two Weapon Fighting penalties normally apply to CMB.just a note on this post the exact wording is;
At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally.so the monk taking a -5 to the last attack to his base attack does not apply because his level is used in place of the current BAB
wording in place is different then equal to.
No, I was talking about in the FoB description, where it says
"For the purposes of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus is equal to his monk level"This triggers at level 1, not lvl 3.
Ok point made just your statement "CMB uses your BAB" i wanted to clearifiy on it as it was over looked in many monk CMD post that the normal base attack does not apply after 3rd lvl. so were the monks last attack would be normally weaker, a CM can be subed in order to utilize the better bonuses.
On the other hand, Weapon Focus (unarmed strike) might affect your ability to trip or disarm with an unarmed strike.Yes, it would. Any feat that gives you a bonus to hit with the weapon would affect the CMB, as would any enchantment to your weapon. Read the paragraph under the CMB description.
Any reason for a Weapon Focus (Grapple) if WF (Unarmed Strike) gives its bonus to all maneuvers made unarmed (which a Grapple is)?
i wanted to clearifiy on it as it was over looked in many monk CMD post that the normal base attack does not apply after 3rd lvl. so were the monks last attack would be normally weaker, a CM can be subed in order to utilize the better bonuses.
just a note on this post the exact wording is;
At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally.so the monk taking a -5 to the last attack to his base attack does not apply because his level is used in place of the current BAB
In some cases, especially when speaking about CMB, using the word BAB only means the higher value of your base attack bonuses from iterative attacks.
You use the monk's level instead of his BAB to determine his CMB, yes. What it means is that your monk is now as effective in combat maneuver as a fighter of the same level, nothing more.When using a combat maneuver, you have to apply any bonuses and penalties that you would incur if you attacked with the weapon used for the maneuver.
Since iterative attacks get a -5 cumulative penalty, so do iterative maneuvers.
You DON'T get to replace your weakest attack(s) by a combat maneuvers using your monk's level.
You DON'T get your level 11 monk to make 5 Trip attacks at +11, for instance.
I don't think you'd find a GM who'd allow you to do that.
|
When using a combat maneuver, you have to apply any bonuses and penalties that you would incur if you attacked with the weapon used for the maneuver. Since iterative attacks get a -5 cumulative penalty, so do iterative maneuvers.
You DON'T get to replace your weakest attack(s) by a combat maneuvers using your monk's level.
You DON'T get your level 11 monk to make 5 Trip attacks at +11, for instance.
I don't think you'd find a GM who'd allow you to do that.
(I added some spacing to make it a bit more readable. My apologies.)
This is interesting and I hadn't considered it before. Are you basing this on the monk using normal iterative attacks or on the flurry of blows ability, which is akin to 2WF?
I have a PC who has both Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple (multiple grapple checks per round). So if I may recap, they would make the first grapple check (call it the standard action) at their full CMB, but if they made a second grapple check using the Greater Grapple feat, that one would be at CMB-5?
What if they were using the FoB to make the grapple checks? First, they'd need to declare it in advance at the beginning of the attack sequence so that the correct modifiers could be determined. But can they even use FoB? The first grapple check is a standard action and the second is a move action -- not the full-attack sequence required by FoB. So I'd say "no".
If you are going to make Combat Maneuvers instead of attacks on a full attack, you should take the penalties for iterative attacks. However, if you are going use your move action to make a grapple check (allowed by Greater Grapple) you do not. You can then use your standard action to make either another grapple check (at no penalty since it is not an iterative attack) or any other standard action...um, action.
This is interesting and I hadn't considered it before. Are you basing this on the monk using normal iterative attacks or on the flurry of blows ability, which is akin to 2WF?
Any. Both. When one use a combat maneuver in place of an attack, one gets the same bonuses and penalties one would get for that attack, including the cumulative -5 for iterative full-attacks (which include FoB, which equate to a set of iterative attacks using 2WF). I only wanted to react when it was said that you could replace your weakest attack by your strongest maneuver, which is wrong.
I have a PC who has both Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple (multiple grapple checks per round). So if I may recap, they would make the first grapple check (call it the standard action) at their full CMB, but if they made a second grapple check using the Greater Grapple feat, that one would be at CMB-5?What if they were using the FoB to make the grapple checks? First, they'd need to declare it in advance at the beginning of the attack sequence so that the correct modifiers could be determined. But can they even use FoB? The first grapple check is a standard action and the second is a move action -- not the full-attack sequence required by FoB. So I'd say "no".
If you are going to make Combat Maneuvers instead of attacks on a full attack, you should take the penalties for iterative attacks. However, if you are going use your move action to make a grapple check (allowed by Greater Grapple) you do not. You can then use your standard action to make either another grapple check (at no penalty since it is not an iterative attack) or any other standard action...um, action.
+1 to what Mauril said.
Incidentally, there are several threads (especially this one) about grapple checks during full-attacks, but I don't remember any of them reaching a conclusive consensus. My own interpretation: anyone engaged in a grapple can't do full-attacks (otherwise, Greater Grapple is useless since you could pummel your enemy to death with iterative attacks... and Grappling would be extremely dangerous since the Grapplee would unleash his own full-attack just afterwards). They can only attack through a Standard action (creatures with Rake can do that as well).
I also think that, in order to start the grapple, you can use a full-attack to try several times. Once one succeed, you'd lose the remaining attacks. If you succeeded in your first check, however, you could decide it was a Standard action (this switch is normal procedure, see Combat rules) and use the remaining Move action and Greater Grapple to do something.
|
|
When using a combat maneuver, you have to apply any bonuses and penalties that you would incur if you attacked with the weapon used for the maneuver. Since iterative attacks get a -5 cumulative penalty, so do iterative maneuvers.
You DON'T get to replace your weakest attack(s) by a combat maneuvers using your monk's level.
You DON'T get your level 11 monk to make 5 Trip attacks at +11, for instance.
I don't think you'd find a GM who'd allow you to do that.
(I added some spacing to make it a bit more readable. My apologies.)
This is interesting and I hadn't considered it before. Are you basing this on the monk using normal iterative attacks or on the flurry of blows ability, which is akin to 2WF?
I have a PC who has both Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple (multiple grapple checks per round). So if I may recap, they would make the first grapple check (call it the standard action) at their full CMB, but if they made a second grapple check using the Greater Grapple feat, that one would be at CMB-5?
What if they were using the FoB to make the grapple checks? First, they'd need to declare it in advance at the beginning of the attack sequence so that the correct modifiers could be determined. But can they even use FoB? The first grapple check is a standard action and the second is a move action -- not the full-attack sequence required by FoB. So I'd say "no".
grapple cannot be used in FoB it is not in the list
When using a combat maneuver, you have to apply any bonuses and penalties that you would incur if you attacked with the weapon used for the maneuver. Since iterative attacks get a -5 cumulative penalty, so do iterative maneuvers.
You DON'T get to replace your weakest attack(s) by a combat maneuvers using your monk's level.
You DON'T get your level 11 monk to make 5 Trip attacks at +11, for instance.
I don't think you'd find a GM who'd allow you to do that.
(I added some spacing to make it a bit more readable. My apologies.)
This is interesting and I hadn't considered it before. Are you basing this on the monk using normal iterative attacks or on the flurry of blows ability, which is akin to 2WF?
I have a PC who has both Improved Grapple and Greater Grapple (multiple grapple checks per round). So if I may recap, they would make the first grapple check (call it the standard action) at their full CMB, but if they made a second grapple check using the Greater Grapple feat, that one would be at CMB-5?
What if they were using the FoB to make the grapple checks? First, they'd need to declare it in advance at the beginning of the attack sequence so that the correct modifiers could be determined. But can they even use FoB? The first grapple check is a standard action and the second is a move action -- not the full-attack sequence required by FoB. So I'd say "no".
grapple cannot be used in FoB it is not in the list
I just reread that particular bit of rule, and you're correct, if short (what list are you talking about?): one can start a grapple as a standard action, not as an attack action.
BTW, I confirm that nothing is said about not being able to make a full-attack while grappled, which makes this a very dangerous tactic and makes Greater Grapple much less useful.You didn't answer anything about what I said on the assumption that a monk would get his full level as CMB for his last iterative attack (this is for maneuvers that can be done as an iterative attack - in hindsight, it's obvious that this doesn't concern Grapple).
|
|
well in a short Louis IX the list i refer to is. "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." in flurry of blows from d20fpsrd.com
Let me explain this a easier for you.
At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally.
Normal CMB= base attack +stren +(feats) +size
MONK CMB= Monk LvL +stren +(feats) +size
explained very clearly the monk does not use base attack bonus at all and under 'understanding combat' the base attack bonus suffers for multiple attacks. the forumla above is used for the monk. Seeing as the monk does not use base attack bonus for calculating CMB so only penalties that apply to CMB for a monk is that effect all attacks this round or that specify CMB.
And just to clearify prev post, GRAPPLE is a standard action and can not be used during a flurry as a flurry is a full attack action. To flurry during a grapple you would have to end the grapple. You would be unable to maintain the grapple as you can not full attack and grapple in one round.
|
|
added note: Louis IX wrote:
When using a combat maneuver, you have to apply any bonuses and penalties that you would incur if you attacked with the weapon used for the maneuver. Since iterative attacks get a -5 cumulative penalty, so do iterative maneuvers.
to correct this. "using your base attack bonus minus 5"
I have clearly shown proof that base attack is not used during the calc for monk cmb. this -5 is not a pen to the attack action its that attack.
you're correct, if short (what list are you talking about?): one can start a grapple as a standard action, not as an attack action.
The standard action is very true and crucial, but I suggest you look up the discussion of 'attack action' and 'vital strike' on www.d20pfsrd.com to better under stand what 'attack action' is: it's just another type of standard action. The only types of maneuvers you can make during a full-attack action (normally, barring a special feat/ability), i.e. using one of the iteratives to do a maneuver, are maneuvers which use the phrase "in place of an attack" without any other action qualifiers, namely Trip and Disarm. Bull-Rush uses this phrase but connected to a Charge Action (or it can use a Standard Action NOT 'in place of an attack'), Sunder uses this phrase but connected to the Attack action (type of Standard Action). All of the 'in place of an attack' maneuvers can use weapon-specific bonuses (wpn focus, enhancement bonus, wpn training, etc) for weapons *used to 'deliver' the maneuver* (except Trip is 1imited to Trip Weapons and possibly Unarmed Strike). Grapple is not 'in place of an attack' but Weapon Focus: Grappling uniquely applies to it (no other weapon-specific bonuses do, because it isn't using a specific weapon to achieve, and it doesn't qualify as a Natural Attack for Mighty Fist/Magic Fang). Bull-Rush and Over-Run do not use specific weapons to do their thing (possibly excepting a CHARGING Bull-Rush, and Feats/Abilities like Shield Slam or Knockback), thus cannot benefit from weapon-specific bonuses normally (it seems reasonable to allow Weapon Focus: Bullrush/Over-Run though), and are normally "their own type of" Standard Action (i.e. can't swap in for Iterative Attacks or Attacks of Opportunity).
BTW, I confirm that nothing is said about not being able to make a full-attack while grappled, which makes this a very dangerous tactic and makes Greater Grapple much less useful.
You mean your grappled opponent Full-Attacking you back? Besides the fact that they couldn't use any two-handed weapon they were using, Greater Grapple seems especially GREAT just for this reason: it gives you a way to Grapple AND Pin an opponent in one round, immobilizing them so they can't so much as make ONE attack against you. You just have to wait for them to come to you (or don't escape from you after you close with them a previous round), because you can't more than 5' Step if you want to pull that tactic.
You didn't answer anything about what I said on the assumption that a monk would get his full level as CMB for his last iterative...
Right. Monk's aren't supposed to use Full BAB on lower Iteratives when Flurrying(2WFing), they use the normal Iterative sequence. Maybe that isn't actually spelled out as clearly as it should be, but it's no worse than the wording of many other areas, and that's how everybody understands it to work. The Full BAB for Maneuvers ability is MORE OR LESS worded just like the Flurry ability, for example. NOTE: Unless your Monk is using non-Monk weapons to Full-Attack (not Flurry) with attack-subsitutable Maneuvers (Trip, Disarm), then the ONLY use you're going to get out of the Full-BAB-for-Maneuvers if for SINGLE/non-Iterative Maneuver attacks, for which case you can just add +2 to the first Flurry attack attack bonus (to cancel 2WF penalty) and use that as your BAB for Maneuvers.
1) I didn't want to start a debate on what an "attack action" means, I just meant an attack made during a full-attack action.
2) As Quandary said, Greater Grapple can still be used efficiently (to pin your opponent in one round). One still has to take into account the when and what beforehand, though. When: doing this requires you to start your turn close to the enemy; What: is you opponent equipped with a two-handed weapon, is he a monk or a monster with natural attacks?
3) Saying "monks get their level instead of their BAB for any and all maneuvers made during a full-attack (especially their otherwise weakest attack)" is clearly a rule exploit and reeks of overpowerness. Considering the position of Paizo regarding monks (INA, for instance), I don't think that's what they intended.
well in a short Louis IX the list i refer to is. "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." in flurry of blows from d20fpsrd.com
Let me explain this a easier for you.
At 3rd level, a monk uses his monk level in place of his base attack bonus when calculating his Combat Maneuver Bonus. Base attack bonuses granted from other classes are unaffected and are added normally.
Normal CMB= base attack +stren +(feats) +size
MONK CMB= Monk LvL +stren +(feats) +size
explained very clearly the monk does not use base attack bonus at all and under 'understanding combat' the base attack bonus suffers for multiple attacks. the forumla above is used for the monk. Seeing as the monk does not use base attack bonus for calculating CMB so only penalties that apply to CMB for a monk is that effect all attacks this round or that specify CMB.
You seem to think I don't understand your point.
I seem to think you don't understand my point.CMB is like BAB for iterative attacks. Even if you use another variable to compute your CMB, it still gets the cumulative -5 for iterative attacks and FoBs.
When you say "Normal CMB= base attack +stren +(feats) +size" and you have a 2WF/I2WF/G2WF level 15 fighter, he can do the following iterative CM attacks: +13/+13/+8/+8/+3/+3
When you say "MONK CMB= Monk LvL +stren +(feats) +size" and you have a level 15 monk, you get the same thing, NOT +13/+13/+13/+13/+13/+13...
I'm surprised the usual suspects haven't come down this thread and twacked this exploit upside the head. Repeatedly.
Louis,
After reading the section, I am not so sure you are correct in that. I think the intent is for the -5 to apply, but itterative attacks are not a cumulative -5. They are an attack using a lower BAB. It is a slight, but significant difference. So, while I think it should be the same as the fighter, I'm not positive that is what the rules actually say.
After reading the section, I am not so sure you are correct in that. I think the intent is for the -5 to apply, but itterative attacks are not a cumulative -5. They are an attack using a lower BAB. It is a slight, but significant difference. So, while I think it should be the same as the fighter, I'm not positive that is what the rules actually say.
As expressed before, it's a poorly worded section opening the way for rule-lawyers to use that exploit. Seriously, no GM I know would allow that. Even fellow players would frown at this.