|
I'm in a homegame and there's a bit of confusion with a player who wants to run a kasatha monk.
Kasatha are four-armed creatures, so he's looking to have at least four attacks in a round.
However, no one is quite sure what the attack modifier would be for each strike. The multiweapon fighting feat says the penalty is normally -6 in the main hand, and -10 in all other hands. The monk unarmed strike says a monk doesn't have off-hand attacks when unarmed, so all attacks be -6.
It would be further reduced to -4 each because he's unarmed, per the rules with two-weapon fighting.
So with the feat, he should have -2 on a full attack with all four arms, plus one from his iterative attack from a high BAB, right?
There's also been some argument over how flurry of blows would work, since it states that it give ONE additional attack, taking -2 on all attacks as if using two weapon fighting.
I interpret this to mean he only gets 2 attacks with flurry of blows, albeit at a higher BAB than a regular full-attack.
So, to settle the argument, I wanted someone impartial to weigh in on the matter.
If a four-armed monk with a 15 strength and a +8/+3 BAB made an attack, what would his penalties be, and would be be better off using Flurry of blows or a full-attack?
One thing to keep in mind is that while multiweapon fighting states that it replaces two-weapon fighting, there is no improved multiweapon fighting to replace two-weapon fighting.
|
A four-armed monk gains no advantage over a regular monk when using a flurry of blows. Nor does a no-arm monk have a disadvantage over a regular monk using flurry of blows. The amount of attacks you get is immutable save for haste, ki points, and other effects that grant you one non-stacking bonus attack. Torso-Boy the monk would have the same number as well, assuming he was ruled to be allowed to attack at all.
The "as two-weapon fighting" rule in flurry exists as one of its immutability clauses: it prevents you from trying to stack the two together. This does not get replaced by Multi-Weapon Fighting because you do not actually have that feat to be replaced, and since multi-weapon fighting acts as two-weapon fighting you also cannot use it in conjuction with flurry even if you did take it.
Your monk can invest in multi-weapon feats, but gets no benefit with flurry of blows.
According to James Jacob a four armed player character would indeed get four attacks, because Unarmed Strike is a Light weapon however all his attacks suffer a -2. So it would look like -2/-2/-2/-2.
But yes Flurry of Blows is useless to the Kasatha, I recommend taking Master of Many Styles to trade it for flurry of style which can be used.
Or make a brawler. They actually get two weapon fighting to it should activate the replacement clause.
Ultimate Punch
9 seconds in he uses a move called "ultimate punch".
If you think its ridiculous that's because it is.
For a similar reason, a character doesn't get more attacks just for having more arms.
You gain more attacks as you level up because you know how to manipulate your body or weapons to attack faster or with less wasted movement so your attacks are closer together. You can have all the arms you want but if you don't know how to use them then the point is moot.
Lilith, James Jacob who is the creative design director says yes they get a total of 4 attacks even at level 1. He also admits they are way OP because of this and are not suppose to be common player characters.
A kasatha monk would not gain extra attacks when using flurry of blows. Flurry tells you exactly the number of attacks you get.
Now, if the monk wants to spend the feats to get two weapon fighting (which would be converted to multiweapon fighting) he could enjoy four attacks with reduced penalties. He could also just make 4 attacks with the -4 penalty to main hand attack and -8 to off hand(s), without the TWF feat.
It's also important to note that per some discussion that were had Improved Two Weapon Fighting and Greater TWF would each grant only one additional attack. Such that at level BAB 6 with ITWF would have 2 normal main hand attacks from iteratives, 3 more from the additional arms, and 1 more "iterative" attack from ITWF for a total of 6 attacks. Not 8.
Explain the -4 penalty when it should be -2 I mean unarmed strike is Light Weapon
Explain the -4 penalty when it should be -2 I mean unarmed strike is Light Weapon
You are right to question me, because I was not completely correct. But you are actually also wrong.
I was talking about making the attacks without the Two Weapon Fighting feat. If you do not have the TWF feat, the penalty is -4 to main hand, -8 to off hand(s).
It is only a -2 if you have both the TWF feat and you have a light weapon in your off hand.
See TWF rules here
I edited my previous post for clarity and accuracy.
So, your earlier example where you said they were all at a -2 is wrong, unless he has the two weapon fighting feat.
The ultimate result is that kasatha monks are a bad decision mechanically.
I made a lot of arguments why a class feature like Flurry of Blows or Spell Combat should allow multiple arms. The Multiweapon Fighting feat replaces Two-Weapon Fighting for a multiple character -- full stop. But it's ultimately up to the GM.
Without multiweapon fighting it is -6/-10/-10/-10
With it you are looking at -2/-6/-6/-6
Pretty large deficits to overcome.
Without multiweapon fighting it is -6/-10/-10/-10
With it you are looking at -2/-6/-6/-6
Pretty large deficits to overcome.
Except does that mean if I am fighting with a long sword in one hand and a short in the other I take a -2/-6?
Your Off-Hand is a Light Weapon, you have the multi-weapon fighting feat so shouldnt it act as Two-Weapon Fighting?
is that -2/-2/-2/-2 taking into account the clause under monk's unarmed strike ability that says "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed." Does this affect the attack roll, or just the damage roll?
That means every unarmed attack deals full strength damage instead of the usual 1/2 strength for an offhand attack. A multiweapon Kasatha's unarmed attacks are -2/-2/-2/-2 because that's what the table in the Two-Weapon Fighting section says. "Off-hand weapon is light and Two-Weapon Fighting feat –2, –2"
Without multiweapon fighting it is -6/-10/-10/-10
With it you are looking at -2/-6/-6/-6
Pretty large deficits to overcome.
Except does that mean if I am fighting with a long sword in one hand and a short in the other I take a -2/-6?
Your Off-Hand is a Light Weapon, you have the multi-weapon fighting feat so shouldnt it act as Two-Weapon Fighting?
Here is the feat:
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)
This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks with multiple weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
Without multiweapon fighting it is -6/-10/-10/-10
With it you are looking at -2/-6/-6/-6
Pretty large deficits to overcome.
Except does that mean if I am fighting with a long sword in one hand and a short in the other I take a -2/-6?
Your Off-Hand is a Light Weapon, you have the multi-weapon fighting feat so shouldnt it act as Two-Weapon Fighting?Here is the feat:
Multiweapon Fighting (Combat)
This multi-armed creature is skilled at making attacks with multiple weapons.
Prerequisites: Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit: Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by –2 with the primary hand and by –6 with off hands.
Normal: A creature without this feat takes a –6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a –10 penalty on attacks made with all of its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special: This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms.
That reads to me as -4/-4/-4/-4 with the feat, not -2/-6/-6/-6. Have you perhaps confused the word 'by' in the benefit section with 'to'?
Wielding a light weapon in the offhand reduces this penalty by a further -2, to a final -2/-2/-2/-2.