| 5 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Ok, so here are the valid quotes (bolding in those quotes = mine):
Benefit: Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.
Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature.
Usually a monk's unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but he can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on his attack roll. He has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
A monk also deals more damage with his unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown above on Table: monk. The unarmed damage values listed on Table: monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with his unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large monk Unarmed Damage.
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.
Alternatively, this amulet can grant melee weapon special abilities, so long as they can be applied to unarmed attacks. See Table: Melee Weapon Special Abilities for a list of abilities. Special abilities count as additional bonuses for determining the market value of the item, but do not modify attack or damage bonuses. An amulet of mighty fists cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +5. An amulet of mighty fists does not need to have a +1 enhancement bonus to grant a melee weapon special ability.
So how do these work in conjunction with one another? I am considering many things, but I also have some specific questions. When answering please provide what you believe the RAW answer is and why and what you would rule after applying some logic and why.
1. What happens if you have a natural Claw attack and are a Monk with the feat Feral Combat Training and you put on a pair of Claw Blades? Can you flurry with them?
2. Same situation as above but you also have a Bite attack that is a primary attack. When you attack with the Claw Blades is your Bite attack primary still, or is it secondary? Can you include any of them in a flurry?
3. If you have a natural Claw attack and it is enchanted with Greater Magic Fang and then you put on a pair of Masterwork Claw Blades what does this do to your attack? What if the Claw Blades have an enhancement bonus and/or a Flaming enhancement?
4. If you have a natural Claw attack and are using an Amulet of Mighty Fists with only the Flaming enhancement and you use Claw Blades that have the Frost enhancement what does this do to your attack?
5. Combine 3 and 4. Claws + AoMF w/ Flaming + Greater Magic Fang + Claw Blades w/ Frost = ?
6. If your DM allows for you to take Improved Natural Attack what does this do to your Monk Unarmed Strike damage? Does it increase via the Monk table or the Natural Attack table?
7. If you take a feat that improves your natural unarmed damage like Catfolk Exemplar or similar ability what does this do to your Monk Unarmed Strike damage?
8. Consider 6 and 7 if you have Feral Combat Training.
9. What if you take Weapon Focus: Claw and then use Claw Blades? Does this apply now to Claw Blades or does it require a separate feat for Weapon Focus: Claw Blades?
10. Consider 9 if you have Feral Combat Training.
I know I had other questions I was considering but 10 seems like a good number so I think I will stop there. I'm sure I will come up with the others I had been thinking of later, but that is a good start.
I have my own opinions but I want to reserve those until after you all have answered and been made to feel silly because of your answers. Mostly so that when I give my answers I don't feel so silly myself. ....what? Hey, you don't like it then go start your own thread! ;)
1. The claw blades state that they change claws into light weapons. That means they no longer count as natural attacks. That takes them out of flurry contention. It also means they no longer qualify as natural weapons.
2. The blades don't affect bites, and when you flurry with natural weapons they count as iterative attacks so they are not treated as secondary or primary attacks.
3. See 1
4. See 1
6. INA does not work with the monk's unarmed attack. Before the FAQ was created official answers were given on the boards. These answers were marked as official answers.
7. Nothing. Your monk damage and your natural attack damage are not connected in any way.
9. I would say weapon focus(claws)should be enough. You are still using your claws, but the claw blade just changes its classification to a light weapon.
10. I think weapon focus(claws) should work.
Wraithstrike:
For 2. so what if you make a full attack without the flurry and add in the bite attack? ...but this changes with flurry? Why?
For 6. what if you use it with Feral Combat Training and take Improved Natural Attack on your natural weapon?
For 9. is this your judgement on how it works RAW, or how you would rule? Same for 10.
Also, you only answered half of the question for each question. See my bolded quote above:
When answering please provide what you believe the RAW answer is and why and what you would rule after applying some logic and why.
9&10 wraith's take is probably based on- The blades grant the wearer a +1 enhancement bonus on claw attack rolls
2. natural attacks at -5 and 1/2STR and your normal iterative attack routine. Can't add natural attacks as extra attack on the end of a Flurry.
6. then you can make claw attacks in place of unarmed strikes during the flurry, losing the benefit of your improved unarmed damage.
9. a more interesting question is what happens when you take weapon focus (claws) and then take weapon focus (claw blades) ;)
Phasics: for 6., why would you lose your Unarmed Strike damage? It specifically says, "A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons." I understand that you can not normally take Improved Natural Attack with Unarmed Strike but if you have a natural weapon and Feral Combat Training ... what is your reasoning for these not stacking?
For 9. it IS an interesting question. And one that I was hoping for an answer on. Blackbloodtroll came up with the same question in his thread. Opinion?
It seems as though the claw blades are not weapons in their own right, but an addition to claws that make the claws count as a light weapon(not natural attack) so I don't even know if they count as weapons. They seem to be an item, much like the amulet of mighty fist that only affects claws.
glutton is correct for 9 and 10.
Phasics has 2 and 6.
Wraithstrike: So does that mean you have changed your opinion about something? If they do not count as weapons are you able to use them in a flurry so long as you have Feral Combat Training?
What is the reasoning for Improved Natural Attack not working with Unarmed Strike when you have Feral Combat Training?
This is as I understand it:
Can you use Improved Natural Attack for a Monk's Unarmed Strike? No.
Can you use Improved Natural Attack to improved a natural attack? Yes.
If you have a natural attack and a Monk's Unarmed Strike can you take Improved Natural Attack to apply it to your natural attack? Yes.
If you have a natural attack, a Monk's Unarmed Strike, have taken Improved Natural Attack for your natural attack and possess Feral Combat Training does this feat improve your Unarmed Strike?
I propose that the answer is yes. I believe this due to the fact that Monk's Unarmed Strike specifically states that it benefits from effects that improve natural weapons. And while I understand that errata exists that states that you can not apply it to a Monk's Unarmed Strike, you CAN apply it to a Natural attack. And due to the wording of Feral Combat Training I believe it allows the feat to apply to a Monk's Unarmed Strike damage.
To clarify this is the valid text for Improved Natural Attack:
Benefit: Choose one of the creature's natural attack forms (not an unarmed strike). The damage for this natural attack increases by one step on the following list, as if the creature's size had increased by one category. Damage dice increase as follows: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
I understand that it says "(not an unarmed strike)". That is fine. This is being applied to the claw attack that is being used as a Monk Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training. So the damage for the claw attack increases by one step as if the creature's size had increased by one category. For a first level medium sized Monk that would change the Unarmed Strike damage from 1d6 to 1d8. Notice that the numbers it gives in the feat follow the Natural Attack by Size progression rather than the Monk Unarmed Strike progression. This means that the Monk would now be using his Unarmed Strikes along the Large Creature progression table for the Monk as his natural attack would be treated as if he were one size category larger.
The claw blades don't count as weapons. They make the claw into a weapon effectively, which means you can't flurry with eh claws since they no longer count as natural attack.
The reasoning is they said it was too good for the monk. I guess because of the way the monk's base damage die increases.
In my earlier post I was saying the devs(rules team) said it will not work. I don't like the idea, but they made the ruling. That statement(not an unarmed strike) was errata to make the point clar.
Applying the feat to a claw attack is not the same as applying it to an unarmed strike. Just to be clear I never said it did not apply to claws. I am also not saying a natural attack that is enhanced by Improved Natural Attack can not be used in a flurry. I am saying the unarmed attacks can not be improved by Improved Natural Attack.
The last part of my post was referring mostly to 6. (and 7 and 8 by extension) to which you had in your earlier post basically said that it didn't work. At least that is how I understood what you said. Then later you said that Phasics sorta had the right of it so I guess the latter part of my last post also is directed at him as well.
Actually, I'm confused. Do we disagree on anything right now? lol You'll have to forgive me, I've sorta felt out of it all night. Maybe a cold or something.
Lune if you wouldn't mind could you put together a build that has all these feats and list the attack routine and damage you believe you get as a result.
It's all well and good discussing feat interactions but unless we actually look at the end result even if we agree on an interpretation it doesn't mean we then follow that to its logical conclusion the same way.
I'm going to unfortunately agree with wraithstrike in all of his points. It's not unfortunate that I agree with wraithstrike (I do more than half the time anyway), it's unfortunate because my favorite D&D character ever was a Catfolk Monk in 3.5.
Improved natural attack improves only natural attacks. You choose it at the selection of the feat. You cannot choose Unarmed Strikes with it.
A Monk's unarmed strikes may be able to benefit from effects that affect natural attacks, but that doesn't mean that all natural attack effects will now affect unarmed strikes (that sounds confusing).
To be more direct:
What is the reasoning for Improved Natural Attack not working with Unarmed Strike when you have Feral Combat Training?
Claws are a natural attack, not an unarmed strike. Feral Combat Training allows them to be part of a flurry, but still does not make them an unarmed strike. This is why they do not increase in damage when the Monk's unarmed strength damage goes up.
Also, unarmed strike itself is not select-able as a natural attack for Improved Unarmed Strike by FAQ.
In the end, you may be able to increase your Claw natural attack, but it will never be an unarmed strike. You also increase your unarmed strength damage through monk (or spells and affects), but that does not necessarily mean that they increase your Claw natural attack. Only the Amulet of Mighty Fists increases both attack types at once. When you use your Claw in a flurry, it will do the Claw natural attack damage irregardless of your unarmed damage.
I also agree that the Claw Blades item does change your natural attack into a light slashing weapon and therefore may invalidate the Feral Combat Training feat which only applies to a selected natural attack.
Mostly I believe this because the devs have already stated that they plan on fixing Monk's ability to receive enhancements (or any other fix that would balance Monk, this simply seems to be the direction the conversation was going). This item is too specific and slipped too quickly under the radar for me to believe this was the intent of Claw Blades.
I would have to disagree that the claw blades are not weapons, if they were not weapons they would not be able to be enhanced further like a weapon, in the description it says they can.
The Claw Blades never say that they are a weapon themselves, but simply describe how they affect a weapon and how they can be enchanted. Amulet of Mighty Fists has already done this previously, so there is a precedent. Claw Blades not being on a weapon table and never calling themselves a weapon says to me that all feats that apply to weapons cannot apply to Claw Blades (but they can to Claws).
GrenMeera: Take a look at my second to last post. I respond to much of what you (and wraithstrike before you) say in your post.
Benefit: Choose one of the creature's natural attack forms (not an unarmed strike). The damage for this natural attack increases by one step on the following list, as if the creature's size had increased by one category. Damage dice increase as follows: 1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
I understand that it says "(not an unarmed strike)". That is fine. This is being applied to the claw attack that is being used as a Monk Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training. So the damage for the claw attack increases by one step as if the creature's size had increased by one category. For a first level medium sized Monk that would change the Unarmed Strike damage from 1d6 to 1d8. Notice that the numbers it gives in the feat follow the Natural Attack by Size progression rather than the Monk Unarmed Strike progression. This means that the Monk would now be using his Unarmed Strikes along the Large Creature progression table for the Monk as his natural attack would be treated as if he were one size category larger.
Ok, so that was my response above. If it were NOT this way then you get into some sillyness. Like if you had a natural attack that was 3d6 and you wanted to use it as an unarmed strike via Feral Combat Training but your Monk's Unarmed Strike was only at 1d6. So then your awesome natural attack of 1d6 goes down to a 3d6 damage? How does that make sense?
Feral Combat Training does not say that. It says that for the natural weapon that you selected it applies the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike. One of the effects that augments your Improved Unarmed Strike is Improved Unarmed Strike itself. It augments it by improving the die size of your Unarmed Strike and the natural attack you are using to make it thanks to Feral Combat Training.
Ok, if that doesn't make sense, think of it this way:
Lets say you start with a Stone Giant that has Monk levels. Stone Giants are Large sized and have a natural attack that does 1d8 damage. Thats cool because the Monk table says that your not losing out on anything as a Large sized Monk's Unarmed Strike does 1d8 as well.
Now, if you take Improved Natural Attack for your Slam attack and it bumps this up to 2d6, you still would not benefit from this boost to your slam attacks when you are using your Unarmed Strike. Until you took Feral Combat Training. The reason? Because when you are using your natural attack to make the Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training your Unarmed Strike takes into effect the size of the creature that is making the attack. Improved Unarmed Strike says that it increases the damage "as if the creature's size had increased by one category." Feral Combat Training says that it is affected by "effects that augment an unarmed strike". One of the things that augments your Unarmed Strike is the size of the creature that is making it per the "Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage" table.
So the real question is this: If you increase the your size or effective size (like via enlarge person or similar effects) past Large and are using your Monk's Unarmed Strike damage how do you calculate the damage of your attack? Large starts out at 1d8, but if you took Improved Natural Attack with Feral Combat Training changing your base effective size to Huge, then had Enlarge Person cast on you changing your effective size to Gargantuan what would the damage of your Unarmed Strike be? Do you follow the Natural Attack progression table or the Monk Unarmed Strike progression table? This is important as the tables progress at different rates.
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
This is being applied to the claw attack that is being used as a Monk Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training.
I think this is where most of what you were saying has a bit of a hole (not all of it, which I'll discuss later). The claw attack is not being used as a Monk Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training. The claw attack is replacing the unarmed strike via Feral Combat Training during a flurry. It also remains, as always, a separate attack option to use when not during a flurry. Also, it can be added to a full round attack as a secondary natural attack as per the normal rules. The claws never BECOME your unarmed strike, they simply can benefit from feats and affects as per an unarmed strike.
Your unarmed strike and natural attack remain separate weapons, similarly to a two weapon fighter wielding both a rapier and a dagger. The rapier does it's own damage progression as applied to that specific weapon (1d6 + whatever bonuses apply) and the dagger does it's own damage progression as applied to that specific weapon (1d4 + whatever bonuses apply).
For a first level medium sized Monk that would change the Unarmed Strike damage from 1d6 to 1d8.
No, Improved Natural Attack increases the Claw damage, not his unarmed strike damage. The claw would go up one size category larger in damage, but the monk unarmed strike is unaffected by Improved Natural Attack.
Ok, so that was my response above. If it were NOT this way then you get into some sillyness. Like if you had a natural attack that was 3d6 and you wanted to use it as an unarmed strike via Feral Combat Training but your Monk's Unarmed Strike was only at 1d6. So then your awesome natural attack of 1d6 goes down to a 3d6 damage? How does that make sense?
I assume you mean that the awesome damage of 3d6 Slam is higher than the 1d6 when using a punch? The answer is yes. Your Slam does 3d6, your punch does 1d6. You do the damage of the weapon you are using. I would suggest using your Slam attack during your flurry... it does more damage. With Feral Combat Training, you may use your Slam attack during a flurry. This feat still does not make your unarmed strike punch do more than 1d6, so Slam away.
Now, if you take Improved Natural Attack for your Slam attack and it bumps this up to 2d6, you still would not benefit from this boost to your slam attacks when you are using your Unarmed Strike. Until you took Feral Combat Training. The reason? Because when you are using your natural attack to make the Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training your Unarmed Strike takes into effect the size of the creature that is making the attack. Improved Unarmed Strike says that it increases the damage "as if the creature's size had increased by one category." Feral Combat Training says that it is affected by "effects that augment an unarmed strike". One of the things that augments your Unarmed Strike is the size of the creature that is making it per the "Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage" table.
Now THIS I can see where you're coming from. Earlier you kept saying you were using your natural attack as an unarmed strike, which was false. A Slam stays a slam. However, if you are now stating that the Monk class feature called "Unarmed Strike" should affect your Slam (not the same as turning your slam into an unarmed strike), then yes... this MIGHT be possible. The chart doesn't specifically have a method to allow it directly however, and one could argue that the class feature is directly targeting your unarmed strikes weapon specifically.
You could be correct about this though. It is a little vague and could use some clarification. I'll request a FAQ and begin preparing my Jason/James summoning circle... maybe we'll luck out.
Honestly, Monks have always been my favorite class and I'm still waiting on the long awaited promised fixes. Part of me hopes you're correct, though a natural attack damage increase isn't exactly what I had in mind.
Well, I believe that it does work for all the reasons I have given most notably the last quoted section of mine you posted:
when you are using your natural attack to make the Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training your Unarmed Strike takes into effect the size of the creature that is making the attack. Improved Unarmed Strike says that it increases the damage "as if the creature's size had increased by one category." Feral Combat Training says that it is affected by "effects that augment an unarmed strike". One of the things that augments your Unarmed Strike is the size of the creature that is making it per the "Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage" table.
Even with that though how exactly you calculate the damage is still a mystery to me. If your effective size for Unarmed Strike is Gargantuan then how does this affect the Monk Unarmed Strike damage chart?
As for whether you are using your natural attack as an unarmed strike or if you are using your unarmed strike as a natural attack I believe the point is moot from a sheer numbers standpoint. The only difference that it really makes is in damage type between bludgeoning, or slashing. Personally I believe that it works both ways due to the wording that I bolded above.
If you use the claw in a flurry, and the claw has INA applied then the claw will do 1d8 because of INA. It will not do IUS damage however. That is what I was saying.
I'm not suggesting using it in a flurry and never was.
I'm not suggesting using it in a flurry and never was.
After reading your post again I think I was misunderstanding your intent, and I think the others were also.
Just to be clear what did I say that you disagreed with?
I'm actually not sure if we disagree on anything.
Let me just ask it straight out: What do you believe the damage of a human character that takes Racial Heritage: Catfolk, Catfolk Exemplar, Aspect of the Beast, Improved Natural Attack and has a single level of Monk?
What if they are enlarged?
If the claw does 1d6 normally it goes up to 1d8. I think 1d8 enlarged goes up to 2d6. I am going off of memory though.
If you wouldn't mind, take a look into it. I'm actually pretty confused as to what it bumps up to. I think you will understand my confusion when you look into it.
Here is how it works. INA improves the damage "as if" you were a size category larger. I call this a virtual size increase, and they don't stack.
When you are enlarged you actually get bigger. In that case the increases stack.
When you take INA your claw base damage becomes 1d8. When you actually get a size increase that also increases your base damage so it is not 2d6.
1d2, 1d3, 1d4, 1d6, 1d8, 2d6, 3d6, 4d6, 6d6, 8d6, 12d6.
Yeah it would be 2d6.
2d6 on Catfolk Examplar claws with Improved Natural Attack and Enlarged, I fully agree.
It will not do IUS damage however.
I've seen this earlier in this thread too and it confuses me. Improved Unarmed Strike doesn't change your damage. Am I missing something?
For convenience:
You are skilled at fighting while unarmed.
Benefit: You are considered to be armed even when unarmed—you do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attack foes while unarmed. Your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your choice.
Normal: Without this feat, you are considered unarmed when attacking with an unarmed strike, and you can deal only nonlethal damage with such an attack.
2d6 on Catfolk Examplar claws with Improved Natural Attack and Enlarged, I fully agree.
It will not do IUS damage however.I've seen this earlier in this thread too and it confuses me. Improved Unarmed Strike doesn't change your damage. Am I missing something?
For convenience:
You are skilled at fighting while unarmed.
Benefit: You are considered to be armed even when unarmed—you do not provoke attacks of opportunity when you attack foes while unarmed. Your unarmed strikes can deal lethal or nonlethal damage, at your choice.
Normal: Without this feat, you are considered unarmed when attacking with an unarmed strike, and you can deal only nonlethal damage with such an attack.
I am too lazy to see check to see what the entire post was. IIRC I was saying that the claws won't do IUS damage.
If you flurry with FCT you are using your claws to flurry not your IUS. If you flurry with your natural attacks then you do natural attack damage, just like if you flurry with a monk weapon you do that weapon's base damage.
Oh, that much I understand and agree with wraithstrike, except... what's IUS damage? There's no such thing?
Are you instead referring to the monk's Unarmed Strike class ability damage? That might be why I'm confused and would make sense with what you're saying.
Actually, the fact that there is a class ability called Unarmed Strike and a weapon called unarmed strikes is already confusing enough. ^.^ I hope IUS doesn't end up in the mix.
Also, if a dev does happen to come by, I'm pointing this out for them now too. It would be terrible if they say "unarmed strike" and were not clear if they meant the weapon or class ability, so please take care. We'd hate to have a dev come by to clear things up and we still aren't certain what they said.
Oh, that much I understand and agree with wraithstrike, except... what's IUS damage? There's no such thing?
Are you instead referring to the monk's Unarmed Strike class ability damage? That might be why I'm confused and would make sense with what you're saying.
Actually, the fact that there is a class ability called Unarmed Strike and a weapon called unarmed strikes is already confusing enough. ^.^ I hope IUS doesn't end up in the mix.
Also, if a dev does happen to come by, I'm pointing this out for them now too. It would be terrible if they say "unarmed strike" and were not clear if they meant the weapon or class ability, so please take care. We'd hate to have a dev come by to clear things up and we still aren't certain what they said.
IUS=Improved Unarmed Strike. :)
I probably should have just used US instead.
Oh, that much I understand and agree with wraithstrike, except... what's IUS damage? There's no such thing?
Are you instead referring to the monk's Unarmed Strike class ability damage? That might be why I'm confused and would make sense with what you're saying.
Actually, the fact that there is a class ability called Unarmed Strike and a weapon called unarmed strikes is already confusing enough. ^.^ I hope IUS doesn't end up in the mix.
Also, if a dev does happen to come by, I'm pointing this out for them now too. It would be terrible if they say "unarmed strike" and were not clear if they meant the weapon or class ability, so please take care. We'd hate to have a dev come by to clear things up and we still aren't certain what they said.
Technically they are the same thing, just the monk class ability increases the damage done and has some other fancy tricks they can work with it.
Well, I believe that it does work for all the reasons I have given most notably the last quoted section of mine you posted:
when you are using your natural attack to make the Unarmed Strike via Feral Combat Training your Unarmed Strike takes into effect the size of the creature that is making the attack. Improved Unarmed Strike says that it increases the damage "as if the creature's size had increased by one category." Feral Combat Training says that it is affected by "effects that augment an unarmed strike". One of the things that augments your Unarmed Strike is the size of the creature that is making it per the "Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage" table.Even with that though how exactly you calculate the damage is still a mystery to me. If your effective size for Unarmed Strike is Gargantuan then how does this affect the Monk Unarmed Strike damage chart?
As for whether you are using your natural attack as an unarmed strike or if you are using your unarmed strike as a natural attack I believe the point is moot from a sheer numbers standpoint. The only difference that it really makes is in damage type between bludgeoning, or slashing. Personally I believe that it works both ways due to the wording that I bolded above.
To copy and paste from your other thread in Advice:
That doesn't work. Unarmed strikes and natural attacks are two completely different entities. FCT allows you to use a chosen natural attack as a monk weapon, and to be used with feats that include IUS as a prereq. The monk US progression doesn't work for the same reasons you don't get to increase the damage die of a monk weapon, they aren't unarmed strikes, just like natural weapons aren't unarmed strikes. The last part of FCT is there to allow you to use things like magic weapon (which wouldn't normally work on a claw attack). The only way you're going to get your claw damage up to 1d8 is through improved natural attack (claw) or a size increase right off the bat.
Notice you chopped off the last part of FCT, which is what you want to see. The part before it where it says "While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects..."
That means feats with prereqs, if there is an effect like MAGIC WEAPON that normally wouldn't work on a NA, it does because it is an effect that isn't a feat without IUS prereq(so it wouldn't work) but is called out to work by the FCT even though the spell doesn't normally work on natural attacks (but does on manufactured weapons and/or unarmed strikes). For feats to work, there is a stipulation involved.
Also note the monk class ability isn't Improved Unarmed Strike or some feat or effect. It is actually called "Unarmed Strike" which for game purposes is a rather loosely but still defined weapon. Natural Weapon is a different classification, they don't interact. Improving your Unarmed Strike, improves your unarmed strike. It doesn't improve your natural weapons.
I get that you want it to work that way, but they are definitely two completely different things. RAW, you don't get to improve your (claws) as unarmed strikes via monk Unarmed Strike because they are effectively monk weapons per FCT's FAQ. The benefit you are getting is any extra effects delivered via the natural attack (poison, grab, trip) that normally only occurs once or twice per natural attack routine can come into play as many times as you can attack with FoB. It's a trade off in some cases, your natural attack damage with rider effect OR your Unarmed Strike damage. If you have a pidly natural attack damage die with no extra effects riding on it, FCT is actually a really sub par option. If you have an awesome rider effect (energy drain on a bite), FCT with levels of monk is amazing.
Technically they are the same thing, just the monk class ability increases the damage done and has some other fancy tricks they can work with it.
This is generally what I was thinking, but never specifically saw proof of this. You mentioned FCT's FAQ as a source, would you mind sharing a link?
Basically, if the Unarmed Strikes class feature is in fact the same as the unarmed strikes weapon of the Monk, then it is NOT an effect that could be transferred via FCT. The damage table specifically targets the weapon in this case.
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Ok, so here are the valid quotes (bolding in those quotes = mine):
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **
** spoiler omitted **...
Here are my interpretations, take them as you will:
1. What happens if you have a natural Claw attack and are a Monk with the feat Feral Combat Training and you put on a pair of Claw Blades? Can you flurry with them? Sadly, since it changes the attack type to a light slashing weapon, these can no longer be used with flurry of blows or any other feat that has the Improved Unarmed Strike prerequisite (which is what Feral Combat Training does for natural attacks). This also means that you will need to have Two-Weapon Fighting to be able to attack with both claw(blades), unless you have a BAB of +6 to get the iterative attack.
2. Same situation as above but you also have a Bite attack that is a primary attack. When you attack with the Claw Blades is your Bite attack primary still, or is it secondary? Can you include any of them in a flurry? Your bite would become a secondary natural attack, since you're now making weapon attacks.
3. If you have a natural Claw attack and it is enchanted with Greater Magic Fang and then you put on a pair of Masterwork Claw Blades what does this do to your attack? What if the Claw Blades have an enhancement bonus and/or a Flaming enhancement? The claw blades would not be affected by your Magic Fang spell, since they're no longer considered natural attacks.
4. If you have a natural Claw attack and are using an Amulet of Mighty Fists with only the Flaming enhancement and you use Claw Blades that have the Frost enhancement what does this do to your attack? You'd only get the Frost damage when you use the claw blades.
5. Combine 3 and 4. Claws + AoMF w/ Flaming + Greater Magic Fang + Claw Blades w/ Frost = ? They don't combine in any way, so it would still just be the Frost damage with the claw blades.
6. If your DM allows for you to take Improved Natural Attack what does this do to your Monk Unarmed Strike damage? Does it increase via the Monk table or the Natural Attack table? Here's where it actually gets tricky. Since the claw blades don't have a damage listing of their own, it must be assumed that they use the damage that your claw attacks normally would. Because of this, the increase in damage dice from taking Improved Natural Attack would also increase the damage you do with the claw blades.
7. If you take a feat that improves your natural unarmed damage like Catfolk Exemplar or similar ability what does this do to your Monk Unarmed Strike damage? This question is badly worded. Catfolk Exemplar doesn't improve your UNARMED damage. It improves your CLAW NATURAL ATTACK damage. This means it would function exactly as Improved Natural Attack does in the question above this, so with claw blades you would get increased damage. This has no effect on your monk unarmed strike damage, since an unarmed strike and a claw natural attack are still different things.
8. Consider 6 and 7 if you have Feral Combat Training. Feral Combat Training lets you use a natural attack with flurry of blows and any feat that requires Improved Unarmed Strike. If you put on claw blades, you can no longer apply the benefits of Feral Combat Training to your claw attacks, since they become light slashing weapons instead of natural attacks. So, 6 and 7 are irrelevant in this case.
9. What if you take Weapon Focus: Claw and then use Claw Blades? Does this apply now to Claw Blades or does it require a separate feat for Weapon Focus: Claw Blades? This is an interesting one. Since they are technically different weapon types, I think by RAW that Weapon Focus (claw) would not affect claw blades and vice-versa. This is one instance, however, where I would rule that Weapon Focus (claws) should work for both.
10. Consider 9 if you have Feral Combat Training. Again, Feral Combat Training wouldn't apply to claw blades, so it doesn't change.
[b]So, based on all of these things, I don't think claw blades were meant to be useful for monks. I think they were instead meant to be awesome for Catfolk Rogues (especially given that there's a Catfolk Rogue archetype in the ARG right next to the claw blades description.) [b]
It seems that with out the "these now become light slashing weapons" clause we could have a good argument for monk gauntlets or cat folk flurry flame claws.
Technically they are the same thing, just the monk class ability increases the damage done and has some other fancy tricks they can work with it.This is generally what I was thinking, but never specifically saw proof of this. You mentioned FCT's FAQ as a source, would you mind sharing a link?
Basically, if the Unarmed Strikes class feature is in fact the same as the unarmed strikes weapon of the Monk, then it is NOT an effect that could be transferred via FCT. The damage table specifically targets the weapon in this case.
http://www.d20pfsrd.com/feats/combat-feats/feral-combat-training-combat
The FAQ/Errata is shown below the feat as well as the link to the boards here, you could probably do a search to find it too.
The important line:
Feral Combat Training allows you to use the selected natural attack as if it were a monk weapon—you can use it as one of your flurry of blows attacks, use it to deploy special attacks that require you to use a monk weapon, apply the effects of the natural weapon (such as a poisonous bite) for each flurry of blows attack, and so on.
The FAQ/Errata is shown below the feat as well as the link to the boards here, you could probably do a search to find it too.
Oh. You meant that bit. Yes, I've already read that without actually noticing that it was a FAQ sidebar.
Unfortunately, that FAQ/Errata is in the context of use during Flurry of Blows to determine how flurry itself works. I wouldn't call this "proof", but I think it sets a precedent that the way we are viewing it is still most likely an accurate interpretation. I continually agree that you are correct in that the Unarmed Strikes class feature of Monk is not a valid effect due to specifically targeting the unarmed strike weapon.
The FAQ/Errata is shown below the feat as well as the link to the boards here, you could probably do a search to find it too.
Oh. You meant that bit. Yes, I've already read that without actually noticing that it was a FAQ sidebar.
Unfortunately, that FAQ/Errata is in the context of use during Flurry of Blows to determine how flurry itself works. I wouldn't call this "proof", but I think it sets a precedent that the way we are viewing it is still most likely an accurate interpretation. I continually agree that you are correct in that the Unarmed Strikes class feature of Monk is not a valid effect due to specifically targeting the unarmed strike weapon.
It isn't in the context of how flurry works itself, it is how a natural attack can be used in flurry when it is expressly prohibited any other time. If natural attacks were capable of being an "unarmed strike" this would never need to be clarified and there wouldn't need to be a feat to allow for their use in this way. Seeing as they aren't unarmed strikes they needed a special rule (read FEAT) to allow them to be used in a way or two that is similar to how unarmed strikes are able to be used. It doesn't actually make them unarmed strikes. There is no line "This feat makes the natural attack considered/into a unarmed strike."
In questions of RAW when people want to see it a certain way, even a post by the Paizo crew gets argued. All you can do is take what has been said about the rules in question and see what it adds up to. We have post by Paizo stating that NA cannot be used as part of or in conjunction with a FoB attack action. And while I don't take issue with it, it has been said to be "controversial." But as far as RAW goes that is neither here nor there, they've stated what the rules are as far as that goes (RAW/RAI with errata/faq). With that ruling and the FCT FAQ, we have the general rule of NA not being associated with an unarmed strike (FoB ruling), and a rule specifying how you can get a NA to interact with a FoB (as a monk weapon) which goes along with the various core book rules that state the same.
An unarmed strike is a defined weapon that pretty much every creature has access to (with an entry on the weapon table) which gets modified by the monks class ability:
"A monk also deals more damage with his unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown..."
Then we have the line in the weapon description that states:
Unarmed strikes do not count as natural weapons (see Combat).
And the Combat section details the natural attack as:
Natural Attacks:Attacks made with natural weapons, such as claws and bites, are melee attacks that can be made against any creature within your reach (usually 5 feet). These attacks are made using your full attack bonus and deal an amount of damage that depends on their type (plus your Strength modifier, as normal). You do not receive additional natural attacks for a high base attack bonus. Instead, you receive additional attack rolls for multiple limb and body parts capable of making the attack (as noted by the race or ability that grants the attacks). If you possess only one natural attack (such as a bite—two claw attacks do not qualify), you add 1–1/2 times your Strength bonus on damage rolls made with that attack.
So, now we see that natural attacks cannot be used as unarmed strikes can be (as you cannot use your BAB to gain more uses of them, as you would in a FoB or using your unarmed strike as part of a full attack action with a high BAB). You can either use them alone, or AFTER a full attack action, not as part of the full attack. Again a separation being made.
Next we have the universal monster rules for natural attacks:
Universal Monster Rules, Natural attacks:
Most creatures possess one or more natural attacks (attacks made without a weapon). These attacks fall into one of two categories, primary and secondary attacks. Primary attacks are made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and add the creature’s full Strength bonus on damage rolls. Secondary attacks are made using the creature’s base attack bonus –5 and add only 1/2 the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. If a creature has only one natural attack, it is always made using the creature’s full base attack bonus and adds 1-1/2 times the creature’s Strength bonus on damage rolls. This increase does not apply if the creature has multiple attacks but only takes one. If a creature has only one type of attack, but has multiple attacks per round, that attack is treated as a primary attack, regardless of its type.
<Table>
Some creatures treat one or more of their attacks differently, such as Dragons, which always receive 1-1/2 times their Strength bonus on damage rolls with their bite attack. These exceptions are noted in the creature’s description.Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type.
Some creatures do not have natural attacks. These creatures can make unarmed strikes just like humans do. See Table: Natural Attacks by Size for typical damage values for natural attacks by creature size.[/url]
Ok, the italic/bold are points of note.
First, natural attacks are attacks made without a weapon. An unarmed strike is a weapon with definition, description, table entry and all.
Next, if it were possible in some circumstance, it would be noted. Like it is with the FCT feat. Where it says it can be used in a way where it cannot normally be used.
The bolded part has been ruled to not work with the effects of FoB. Basically an exception to the general rule was made by Paizo.
Again there is a separation being made between natural weapons and unarmed strikes. If a creature has no natural attacks it can always make unarmed strikes. Basically if a creature has no weapon, natural or manufactured, the unarmed strike is another option.So, we end up having rules that say an unarmed strike is a weapon as well as it not being a natural weapon AND a rule that says natural attacks are attacks made without weapons (of which unarmed strike is considered and defined as). We're left with comparing two items that seem like they are similar but actually are stating they aren't the other item they are being compared to by their definitions.
EDIT: And the Improved Natural Attack feat has been to ruled to not work with unarmed strikes, yet another separation of the two.
Lots of rules...
I think you misunderstood me and the actual distinction problem at hand. I agree with every single thing you posted and as far as I'm aware I have never said anything to the contrary. You did do a very good job on explaining how the unarmed strike weapon itself works, so even though it was unneeded I'll give you credit for a well done report!
The distinction problem ONLY arises when Feral Combat Training is a chosen feat not because the natural attack becomes the same thing as unarmed strike, but because the natural attack becomes subject to effects that enhance an unarmed strike.
Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.
The debate then becomes, is the Monk Unarmed Strike class feature considered an effect that augments an unarmed strike?
A simple answer is yes.
A complex answer is that I believe that the class feature also is specifically targeting the unarmed strike weapon itself, and therefore is not generically augmenting the character in such a way that the natural attack would benefit. Also, a chart with no precedent baseline for all weapon damage suggests to me that it is not applicable.
This is where it gets a bit hazy if this can be interpreted this way because there is no RAW text that sways this distinction one way or the other. I at least believe the RAI also would mean the damage wouldn't somehow apply, but only a dev can clarify RAI for certain.
So... they should define "and effects..." better? I guess adding something like "and SP/SU effects..." that would keep the probable intent of allowing spells, racial abilities and such that add damage or abiltities to unarmed strikes to affect the natural weapons as well. It would also prevent double dipping feats or things that are much less likely to be "intended."
Skylancer: I disagree that their intention was limited to only "and SP/SU effects" so I do not think that line should be added. Nor would it simplify the issue if it were.
GrenMeera: Thank you for explaining out the reasoning behind my thoughts as well. ...well, right up until everything that came after, "A simple answer is yes." ;)
Also, as I posted in another thread on a similar topic:
Setting aside the issue of Feral Combat Training + Flurry of Blows for a moment, lets instead look at Feral Combat Training + Improved Unarmed Strike.
If you happen to have a natural attack, lets say a bite attack and you wish to attack with a manufactured weapon as well as your natural attack this is permissible within the rules. The natural attack simply becomes a secondary attack that you make in addition to your iterative attacks that you make with your manufactured weapon.
Now, if you have Improved Unarmed Strike - like for instance from the Monk's Unarmed Strike class ability - and you have a bite natural attack this also still works. You get to make all of your iterative attacks with your Unarmed Strikes, plus you can follow up with your bite as a secondary natural attack.
Now Monks gain an improved form of Improved Unarmed Strike and also get Flurry. Flurry, in most ways emulates Two Weapon Fighting. But for those characters that do not have a level of Monk but wish to fight unarmed they can take a combination of Improved Unarmed Strike and the Two Weapon Fighting feats and pretty much accomplish the same thing.
So in this example if you were an Unarmed Fighter archetype and you had a bite natural attack as well as the Improved Unarmed Strike and Two Weapon Fighting feats then you could make all of your iterative attacks plus your off hand attacks and follow it up with a bite secondary natural attack.
Why then with a Monk can you not make a Flurry of Blows and then follow up with a secondary bite natural attack? You even paid a feat tax like the Unarmed Fighter and took Feral Combat Training, a feat that pretty much outright says that you should be able to combine the two. Not only that but Monks are considered the BEST among all unarmed fighters and you took a feat that is the only real feat that is made to mix natural attacks and unarmed attacks. So everyone else can do this except you? Oh wait... you can do it. You just have to take the Two Weapon Fighting line of feats despite the fact that you have a class ability that mimics it.
What? What reason is there for this other than "because the developers said so"?
Look. I normally agree with the developer's rulings. However there are some recent rulings for the Monk that I can just not get behind. It really seems like they are getting hit by the nerf stick for no reason at all. It isn't a balance issue, it isn't a logic issue, what is it?
Why then with a Monk can you not make a Flurry of Blows and then follow up with a secondary bite natural attack?
I'm not 100% sure that this is what Sean Reynold's was talking about. The FAQ/Errata was addressing this:
What does “with” in the Special line for Feral Combat Training mean for monks making a flurry of blows?
This gave me the impression that the intent was to keep people from simply adding their natural attacks at no penalty. They were simply using their bite "in addition to" the flurry as primary attacks.
The rule that allows you to use a natural attack alongside of weapon attacks as a secondary natural attack almost seems like a completely separate rule and not what Sean was talking about.
I'm not sure, but I would think that maybe you CAN use a secondary natural attack alongside of flurry even without Feral Combat Training.
What worries me about this: dragons or other creatures with a very large numbers of natural attacks. Most of the "nerfs" done to Monk are usually a calculated way to ensure that natural attacks cannot make a flurry completely unbalanced and devastating. I worry what a Dragon Monk could do if he could continue to secondary attack beyond his flurry.
Perhaps it's not too bad, I haven't sat down with any of the numbers. Perhaps it's completely unbalancing and not the developer's intent.
Oh. Hm. Well, I thought what Sean was saying is that you can not include it even with the secondary -5 penalty. If it is as you say then I can totally get behind that ruling.
Did anyone else get that impression?
Also, if that IS the case then what would having Feral Combat Training allow you to do above and beyond being able to Flurry and then get your natural attack as a secondary?
Skylancer: I disagree that their intention was limited to only "and SP/SU effects" so I do not think that line should be added. Nor would it simplify the issue if it were.
Unfortunately while it would disallow certain odd "things," it would simplify the issue a great deal. Intent-wise that line is in there for things like "Magical Weapon" spells, which normally cannot be used on natural attacks. That line is there for things like a Suli's Elemental Strike ability which can be used on unarmed strikes with their fist or arms, but nothing being mentioned of natural weapons. What do those "things" have in common? They are SP (spells) or SU abilities that normally affect unarmed strikes. Feats have the distinction of requiring IUS as a prereq to affect a natural attack via FCT. Feats are also about the only "EX" abilities that would come into play for the topic on hand. The number of possible things "broken" by stating "and SP/SU effects" can easily be "fixed" by stating Special: This works with FCT, while clearing up a mess of other issues.
The intent isn't the issue, the real issue is getting as much of the intent into the RAW as possible without breaking other things or having to restate it in such a way that requires a half of a page to explain it out in detail for every situation for every person. Fixing the "and SP/SU effects" keeps the majority of intent and keeps out things that weren't intended, like you saying natural attacks use the unarmed strike damage table. Basically it is a very small fix(word count) that clears up the issue to make the rule work as intended. Is that not the whole idea behind "simplify"? Four letters and a symbol fix the issue, how much more "simple" could you ask for?
GrenMeera: Thank you for explaining out the reasoning behind my thoughts as well. ...well, right up until everything that came after, "A simple answer is yes." ;)
Also, as I posted in another thread on a similar topic:
Setting aside the issue of Feral Combat Training + Flurry of Blows for a moment, lets instead look at Feral Combat Training + Improved Unarmed Strike.
If you happen to have a natural attack, lets say a bite attack and you wish to attack with a manufactured weapon as well as your natural attack this is permissible within the rules. The natural attack simply becomes a secondary attack that you make in addition to your iterative attacks that you make with your manufactured weapon.
................
Why then with a Monk can you not make a Flurry of Blows and then follow up with a secondary bite natural attack? You even paid a feat tax like the Unarmed Fighter and took Feral Combat Training, a feat that pretty much outright says that you should be able to combine the two. Not only that but Monks are considered the BEST among all unarmed fighters and you took a feat that is the only real feat that is made to mix natural attacks and unarmed attacks. So everyone else can do this except you? Oh wait... you can do it. You just have to take the Two Weapon Fighting line of feats despite the fact that you have a class ability that mimics it.What? What reason is there for this other than "because the developers said so"?
Look. I normally agree with the developer's rulings. However there are some recent rulings for the Monk that I can just not get behind. It really seems like they are getting hit by the nerf stick for no reason at all. It isn't a balance issue, it isn't a logic issue, what is it?
You seem to be missing one very large point, which is "Not stepping on another class' toes." By not allowing the natural weapons to be tagged onto the FoB you are insuring that the Monk is not a better fighter than the Fighter is.
It also keeps the book keeping down for things like a "provisional" BAB. Because which BAB does the natural weapon trigger off of? The monks "enhanced BAB" from a FoB or the normal BAB from the class levels? You know what... Never mind, if they don't allow it, it isn't an issue is it? Basically by not allowing the natural attacks and FoB they force the monk to invest in the TWF feats, like the Fighter has to to do the same thing. They are also enforcing the idea that the Fighter is the preeminent fighter class. Which was an intentional part of the class redesign that Paizo wanted for the PFRPG game, was it not?Monks don't pay a feat tax, they get a class ability based on a feat line with SIGNIFICANT perks (FoB which is roughly TWF with a better BAB). IF you want to do it like everyone else, why shouldn't you have to pay the feat tax like everyone else? Because you are a monk and you are good with unarmed attacks? Unarmed attacks and natural attacks are two completely and seperate entities. The game treats them as two seperate classes of weapons. Being good with your hands or elbows or knees, has nothing to do with claws or bites or tails mechanically. The only time the two intersect is with FCT and the FAQ says, treat the selected natural weapon as a monk weapon as far as its use in a FoB.
The only rules on the subjects state one is not the other. In numerous places. Is it a balance issue? Maybe, because how is it "balanced" that the Monk is a better fighter than the Fighter for less investment? It isn't a "nerf" because it wasn't ever intended to be allowed, AKA FAQ/Errata. Get in line with the numerous other people who haven't liked a change from 3.5 to PFRPG, this is absolutely no different. Just because you or other people were running it that way, doesn't mean they intended for it to happen when they redid the system. It just means it was one of the things that they didn't think to explicitly mention and just now became aware of the implications it involved and come out with an "official" answer about.
Is that not the whole idea behind "simplify"? Four letters and a symbol fix the issue, how much more "simple" could you ask for?
Except that I do not think that your proposed "fix" would fix the issue at all. In fact, I think it would break it. I think it would make it worse than it was intended to be.
You seem to be missing one very large point, which is "Not stepping on another class' toes." By not allowing the natural weapons to be tagged onto the FoB you are insuring that the Monk is not a better fighter than the Fighter is.
Except that I specifically did not miss that point at all. I said, "Not only that but Monks are considered the BEST among all unarmed fighters and you took a feat that is the only real feat that is made to mix natural attacks and unarmed attacks. So everyone else can do this except you? Oh wait... you can do it. You just have to take the Two Weapon Fighting line of feats despite the fact that you have a class ability that mimics it." IMO there are other classes outshining a Monk at what a Monk should be doing better. When a feat has prereqs that included Improved Unarmed Strike then it is a feat that was made with a Monk in mind that other characters can use as well. Not the other way around.
It also keeps the book keeping down for things like a "provisional" BAB. Because which BAB does the natural weapon trigger off of? The monks "enhanced BAB" from a FoB or the normal BAB from the class levels? You know what... Never mind, if they don't allow it, it isn't an issue is it?
What? "trigger off of"? I don't understand your meaning.
Basically by not allowing the natural attacks and FoB they force the monk to invest in the TWF feats, like the Fighter has to to do the same thing.
Wait... huh? That is exactly the problem. Monks do not need to take TWF because they already have Flurry of Blows which emulates TWF anyway. Getting TWF (via Flurry of Blows) but having to buy the feats again separately is a detriment to the Monk.
They are also enforcing the idea that the Fighter is the preeminent fighter class. Which was an intentional part of the class redesign that Paizo wanted for the PFRPG game, was it not?
No, it is not. That is why they increased the Hit Dice of all of the classes that involve themselves in melee. And, no, Paizo was not trying to make Fighters fight better than Monks. They just do it differently. A Monk typically goes about it with unarmored with Monk weapons or Unarmed Strikes whereas a Fighter typically goes about it with weapons and armor. That is kinda my point. This feat is the Monk's schtick.
Monks don't pay a feat tax, they get a class ability based on a feat line with SIGNIFICANT perks (FoB which is roughly TWF with a better BAB). IF you want to do it like everyone else, why shouldn't you have to pay the feat tax like everyone else? Because you are a monk and you are good with unarmed attacks? Unarmed attacks and natural attacks are two completely and seperate entities. The game treats them as two seperate classes of weapons. Being good with your hands or elbows or knees, has nothing to do with claws or bites or tails mechanically. The only time the two intersect is with FCT and the FAQ says, treat the selected natural weapon as a monk weapon as far as its use in a FoB.
*facepalm*
The exception that you mention at the end of that paragraph is the very case we are talking about here. So, yes, the Monk WOULD have to pay a feat tax to use it like everyone else. He already gets TWF via Flurry of Blows. The caveat is that he has to use Unarmed Strikes or Monk weapons. Being that the feat specifically calls out that you CAN use it with Flurry of Blows but then the FAQ turns around and says that you do not get to use your natural attacks in addition to your flurry is the issue that I am referring to. The reason this is an issue is because other classes do get to do this with their attacks but the Monks do not.Is it a balance issue? Maybe, because how is it "balanced" that the Monk is a better fighter than the Fighter for less investment?
Firstly, where is it stated that a Fighter should be the best fighter? You keep saying this but I can't get beyond it simply being based on personal opinion. What abilities does the Monk have that would lead you to believe that they are supposed to be worse at fighting than a Fighter?
Secondly, how is the Monk having to make LESS investment?
Lots of stuff
I generally agree with the premises that you present, though I'm uncertain about the methods you used to reach your conclusions. Either way, I agree with the viewpoint you are taking on balance. As a lover of Monk it pains me to say that applying the damage table to natural attacks is a dangerous road that may be skirting the intent of the feat and could cause severe damage to the balancing of monsters.
I am curious about the idea of Secondary natural attacks now and was hoping you would weigh in, or that anybody else on the boards would weigh in at least. We could use more voices in this debate I think because I feel like I'm not hearing enough interpretation.
So to directly put it out there:
Creatures with natural attacks and attacks made with weapons can use both as part of a full attack action (although often a creature must forgo one natural attack for each weapon clutched in that limb, be it a claw, tentacle, or slam). Such creatures attack with their weapons normally but treat all of their available natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack’s original type.
So any class can use a full attack action this way. A Fighter, a bard... but can the monk with a flurry? This is completely without the Feral Combat Training feat.
This makes me wonder if the FAQ/Errata of FCT is in the context of primary natural attacks being added only, as you don't even need the feat to use secondary natural attacks with a full attack action.
A Fighter, a bard... but can the monk with a flurry?
No.
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.
Bolding mine. It is pretty clear that they can not use natural attacks in addition to their flurry. They can use them as part of a normal attack (without Flurry). They could even TWF and use them. But not in a Flurry.
Now to ask the question that you did not ask; Can they use them in a Flurry if they have Feral Combat Training?
Prerequisite: Improved Unarmed Strike, Weapon Focus with selected natural weapon.
Benefit: Choose one of your natural weapons. While using the selected natural weapon, you can apply the effects of feats that have Improved Unarmed Strike as a prerequisite, as well as effects that augment an unarmed strike.
Special: If you are a monk, you can use the selected natural weapon with your flurry of blows class feature.
Yes. It says that you can use them with your Flurry.
The problem is that Sean K. Reynold's addition to the FAQ contradicts this. He basically redefines what "with" means in the context of that sentence. I just don't see his definition as being applicable.
It goes from: Can you use natural attacks in a Flurry? No.
To: Can you use natural attacks in a Flurry when using Feral Combat Training which specifically states that you can? Yes.
And finally to: Can you use natural attacks in a Flurry when using Feral Combat Training if you define "with" the way that Sean states in his FAQ statement? Well, no. But that is whacky because that is overriding what the feat does in the first place.
Feral combat training let's you use na with flurry. It over rides flurry rule against it. However you are basically doing it as part of one of the flurry attacks not in addition to.
But "in addition" is the standard. That is the wording of Flurry. You already can't do it "in addition". That is the quoted text above. IMO, that is what Feral Combat Training was designed to accomplish. That is what "with" means to me.
I understand that is not what "with" means to Sean K. Reynolds. But then again, he is also the one who thinks that Flurry should work oddly to begin with.
I wonder who it was that actually designed that feat and what their intention for it was.
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.
Ah, well there it is. Thanks Lune for catching that. I completely missed that part of Flurry of Blows.
Every single time I read the Core Rulebook I swear I find something I hadn't noticed last time.
But "in addition" is the standard. That is the wording of Flurry. You already can't do it "in addition". That is the quoted text above. IMO, that is what Feral Combat Training was designed to accomplish. That is what "with" means to me.
I understand that is not what "with" means to Sean K. Reynolds. But then again, he is also the one who thinks that Flurry should work oddly to begin with.
I wonder who it was that actually designed that feat and what their intention for it was.
Right so it means you can do flurry punch bite, or even bite bite. Because your is ng the name in place of an unarmed strike.
You still cannot punch punch, secondary attack bite. Because flurry prohibits that.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Sorry to dig up an old thread, but it contains parts of a problem I have right now that didn't get answered fully (or at least there wasn't a clear consensus):
What happens to the Claw damage of a Monk/Synthesist Summoner with Feral Combat Training and the Improved Damage Evolution?
Personally, since Feral Combat Training states pretty clearly that effects which in some way augment unarmed strikes apply to your chosen natural attack, I think the Claw damage would get bumped from 1d4 to 1d6 as per the Monk unarmed damage chart and then again bumped up to 1d8 by Improved Damage (or 1d4->1d8->2d6->2d8 if the Monk is hit by Enlarge Person).
I'm fairly certain this is how it works, but I'd like some extra consensus since I may well be missing an FAQ or Errata on this particular issue that I'm not aware of.
Edit: All of this is disregarding Flurry since the Monk will be a Master of Many Styles, so no need to take that into account.