|
So, for arguments sake, I have a druid 12/monk 6 who is wildshaped into an earth elemental. Normally I get 2 slam attacks, but what if I want to use flurry of blows, would I then get the extra attack?
Does the (bas) attack bonus look right to you?
Druid BAB(+9/+4) + Monk FoB (+4/+4/-1)= +13/+13/+8
How about if wildshaped into a large cat, using 3 primary natural attacks, rake and flurry? Your take on this?
So, for arguments sake, I have a druid 12/monk 6 who is wildshaped into an earth elemental. Normally I get 2 slam attacks, but what if I want to use flurry of blows, would I then get the extra attack?
Does the (bas) attack bonus look right to you?
Druid BAB(+9/+4) + Monk FoB (+4/+4/-1)= +13/+13/+8How about if wildshaped into a large cat, using 3 primary natural attacks, rake and flurry? Your take on this?
I believe you either use the natural attacks OR the flurry. A flurry is "as if two weapon fighting" , which is a full round action that you can't combine with other two weapon fighting analouges, like using a weapon and natural attacks.
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.
12th level druid BAB= +9
6th level monk= +4 (+6 when making a flurry)
Total bab= 13 (+15 when flurrying)
Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus 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.
-So you don't get the 8th and 15th level benefits.
+13/+13/+8/+3
So, for arguments sake, I have a druid 12/monk 6 who is wildshaped into an earth elemental. Normally I get 2 slam attacks, but what if I want to use flurry of blows, would I then get the extra attack?
Does the (bas) attack bonus look right to you?
Druid BAB(+9/+4) + Monk FoB (+4/+4/-1)= +13/+13/+8How about if wildshaped into a large cat, using 3 primary natural attacks, rake and flurry? Your take on this?
I believe you either use the natural attacks OR the flurry. A flurry is "as if two weapon fighting" , which is a full round action that you can't combine with other two weapon fighting analouges, like using a weapon and natural attacks.
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.
12th level druid BAB= +9
6th level monk= +4 (+6 when making a flurry)
Total bab= 13 (+15 when flurrying)Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus 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.
-So you don't get the 8th and 15th level benefits.
+13/+13/+8/+3
Yip, flurry and natural attacks dont go together.
But, wild shape into a monkey of some sort for the extra str, then you might argue that he can punch :P
Now, for a large earth elemental you CAN get the size bonus to damage, but that would be it. As well as the strength bonus.
Now, for a large earth elemental you CAN get the size bonus to damage, but that would be it. As well as the strength bonus.
base 1d8 for a monk, large > 2d6, huge > 3d6 if I am not mistaken, I actually think the chart increases are in the bestiary the core book only deals with increases to large size.
Feral Combat training would allow you to choose one natural attack and use it in your Flurry routine.
Bear in mind this thread was created prior to the existence of the Feral Combat Training feat, which was in Ultimate Combat which was published in August of 2011.
Feral Combat Training allows you to use one very specific natural attack with Flurry of blows. For it to work when wildshaped in an earth elemental form you need to take IUS, Weapon Focus Slam and Feral Combat Training.
It is probably not worth it with an elemental's slam attack. You really want to flurry with a single high damage str X1.5 attack like a hippo's bite.
Note you really don't need it to make flurry attacks in wildshape. You can still make unarmed attacks with any part of your body, you just use your monk unarmed strike damage adjusted for your size, and since normally unarmed strikes do bludgeoning and so do slams, there's really not any loss besides technically being incorrect in saying "I'm doing it with my slams."
Honestly, the Feral Combat Training feat is only useful for monsters or if you have a single bite attack and really need the slashing or piercing damage and can get a GM to give you the RAI that it would keep the natural attack's improved strength mod.
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 natural attacks as secondary attacks during that attack, regardless of the attack's original type.
So you can fully flurry and then get your 2 slams as secondary attacks, which would be at -5 to hit.
So you can fully flurry and then get your 2 slams as secondary attacks, which would be at -5 to hit.
No, you can't, FoB explicitly forbids this.
CMonk: "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."
unMonk: "He takes no penalty for using multiple weapons when making a flurry of blows, but he does not gain any additional attacks beyond what’s already granted by the flurry for doing so."
Honestly, the Feral Combat Training feat is only useful for monsters or if you have a single bite attack and really need the slashing or piercing damage
There're other ways to change damage type, or ignore DR (Pummeling Style). FCT is all about damage dice, like an Elasmotherium's 6d6 gore. And even then it's purely for flavor, as that's still worse than using a form with pounce (without FCT, as none of those have damage dice laerge enough to make FCT worth using).
Ultimately, FCT is for niche builds like 10th level Cave Druid turning into a Carnivorous Crystal with its a 7d8 slam, or 16d6 with Strong Jaw. Now that is something worth flurrying with!
and can get a GM to give you the RAI that it would keep the natural attack's improved strength mod.
That's not RAI for cMonk, but it is RAW for unMonk.
It would be an RAI ruling to say "you keep your 1.5 str in cMonk" because the RAW is wholly silent on the overlap of "you only get 1xStr for unarmed" and a 1.5 natural being substituted in; it's also a RAI ruling to rule the other way, because the operating factor is that RAW is just unclear as to what is specific and what is general.
For unMonk, there's a RAW argument that by not explicitly stating the Str for unarmed flurry attacks is 1xStr, but that's a very weak argument because that is essentially just reminder text for cMonk. Personally, I would just assume what is true for cMonk is the same for unMonk (at least for the Str multiplier question), but that then becomes a RAI argument again. So it's very much a "ask your gm for their RAI interpretation" situation.
That's... my point... There isn't a RAW, there's only barely a RAI, so a GM will inevitably have to fill in for a full RAI interpretation...
Derklord and now you are just being semantically incorrect with RAW vs RAI as a definition.
It would be an RAI ruling to say "you keep your 1.5 str in cMonk" because the RAW is wholly silent on the overlap of "you only get 1xStr for unarmed" and a 1.5 natural being substituted in
What? The reason you get 1xStr is not because of anything in the Uarmed Striek class feature, but rather because FoB very clearly says "A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows", no ifs or buts. I don't see any indication that natural attacks are intended to work differently, especially not with Monk deliberately weakening the boundaries between natural attacks and manufactured weapons/unarmed strikes.
For unMonk, there's a RAW argument that by not explicitly stating the Str for unarmed flurry attacks is 1xStr
Er, what? unFlurry's description doesn't even contain the word "strength", so it cannpt possibly change the strength multiplier, and thus the default ruels are used. Including the rules for natural weapons, if FCB is used.
It would be an RAI ruling to say "you keep your 1.5 str in cMonk" because the RAW is wholly silent on the overlap of "you only get 1xStr for unarmed" and a 1.5 natural being substituted inWhat? The reason you get 1xStr is not because of anything in the Uarmed Striek class feature, but rather because FoB very clearly says "A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows", no ifs or buts. I don't see any indication that natural attacks are intended to work differently, especially not with Monk deliberately weakening the boundaries between natural attacks and manufactured weapons/unarmed strikes.
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
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.
[Nothing for Flurry of Blows referencing Str]
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks can be with fists, elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk can make unarmed strikes with his hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk can apply his full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all his unarmed strikes.
Full strength just means not halved for "off-hand", not that you necessarily get more strength from other natural attacks that you are substituting in and even if you wield a weapon in both hands, you still lose strength for cMonk going from 1.5x to 1x. Note even in unMonk, both versions clearly state unarmed attacks are always 1x Str (short of someone having something more specific like dragon style).
For unMonk, there's a RAW argument that by not explicitly stating the Str for unarmed flurry attacks is 1xStrEr, what? unFlurry's description doesn't even contain the word "strength", so it cannpt possibly change the strength multiplier, and thus the default ruels are used. Including the rules for natural weapons, if FCB is used.
Had a brain fart typing there, there was supposed to be a continuation so it read "For unMonk, there's a RAW argument that by not explicitly stating the Str for unarmed flurry attacks is 1xStr, you do retain the natural attack 1.5x but that's a very weak argument because that is essentially just reminder text for cMonk." And see above quotes for the fact it is just reminder text in cMonk in regards for unarmed. If we pull from the natural attacks rules "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." the RAI again becomes murkier instead of clearer.
Even if RAW yes it is implied though not explicitly said for unMonk (as it had been before) that you keep special strength modifiers from minor subrules of natural attacks, I can easily foresee a gm saying "the ability to gain such natural attacks requires you to either be a semi-monstrous race like Tengu, multiclass with wizard or druid etc. for shapeshifting, or just be a monster with class levels, therefore the oversight shouldn't be viewed as inclusive to the same degree as it is with 2h monk weapons like a natural attack that normally loses its Str advantage when made multiple times a round" which is a RAI argument not without merit. Even when RAI and RAW clearly align, RAI still exists; it also exists in the absence of explicit RAW.
Back on topic to the OP, unless you find a creature with massively more damage dice than you will have as a monk, your small d10 of "slamming with unarmed strikes" will win out over the actual slam attacks anyway, regardless of the FCT feat or GM interpretation of gaining 1.5 Str. Instead of taking the feat, you can use it on anything else, grab a Monk's Robe and then when shapes as a small water/earth, you need +6 Str mod for the 1.5 str to break even (+8 Str mod for the air/fire elemental). Obviously he's not here anymore to answer but even with a pretty meta multiclass like Druid/Monk (although the elemental wildshape isn't) it's kinda hard to pull off that strength mod by even level 18 without heavily sacrificing spellcasting capability or defensive abilities. So yeah, FCT is just useful for ultra niche natural attack options, and by the time those are valid, if you do get a GM who okay's the 1.5 Str, it's just a bonus anyway.
Full strength just means not halved for "off-hand", not that you necessarily get more strength from other natural attacks that you are substituting in
What? "Full strength" means 1xStr, there is no ambiguity here. I don't even know why you quote tuen Unarmed Strike claass feature description, it has no bearing on what happens when you flurry with a manufactured weapon or natural weapon. It is utterly irrelevant for thios discussion.
"For unMonk, there's a RAW argument that by not explicitly stating the Str for unarmed flurry attacks is 1xStr, you do retain the natural attack 1.5x but that's a very weak argument because that is essentially just reminder text for cMonk."
Again, what? I have no idea what part of the text is supposed to be "reminder text for cMonk". Tha part about the strength modifier? That changes how e.g. a Monk flurrying with a Quarterstaff held in both hands works, and thus cannot possibly be reminder text.
cFlurry sets the strength modifier to 1x. With no such text, unMonk doesn't alter the strength modifier at all. If you get 1.5xStr for whatever reason, you get to apply that while flurrying, because nothing says otherwise. That's not a "very weak argument", that's an iron clad argument.
the RAI again becomes murkier instead of clearer
Only if you insist on finding an alleged RAI that differs from the RAW. The less clear RAI is, the less you should use it.
For example, RAW, armor proficiency feats (light for example) don't do anything. The benefits section states what happens when you are proficient, but the feat doesn't actually grant proficiency, nor does it say it removes the ACP from attack rolls that non-proficiency imposes.
Having the feats grant proficiency is RAI - from the name alone, it's 100% clear what the feat is supposed to do, even if the text doesn't match. Plus, rules are supposed to do something, and since the RAW doesn't do anything, it's obviously unintended.
In contrast, the interaction between FCT and the cMonk's class features has everything work fine and within expectations. cFlurry says you get 1xStr to attacks, and even though the explanatory text only talks about two-handed and off-hand weapons, there is no reason to believe the principle set isn't supposed to apply to natural weapons, too.
Even if RAW yes it is implied though not explicitly said for unMonk (as it had been before) that you keep special strength modifiers from minor subrules of natural attacks
It's not even implied. It is not addressed at all, neither directly nor implicitly. Of course, it doesn't need to, because it is already covered by general rules.
which is a RAI argument not without merit
No, that's entirely without the slightest bit of merit. What you describe is the GM pulling nonsense out of their ass, displaying a staggering lack of understanding of the game in the process.
like a natural attack that normally loses its Str advantage when made multiple times a round
This is not how natural weapons work. If you have a single bite, and are affected by Haste, you can make two bit attacks as a full-attack action, both at 1.5xStr. The rules don't care how often you attack with a natural weapon, it cares how many (and which onces) you have. What you're talking about is something like "2 claws", but that's not two attacks with one claw, that's one attack each with two claws. Very important distinction.