• The VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX is LIVE! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!

RotG vs FAQ: Flurry + TWF

Hypersmurf

Moderatarrrrh...
The PHB states:
There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed.
and
When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham).

The FAQ states:
Can a monk fight with two weapons? Can she combine
a two-weapon attack with a flurry of blows? What are her
penalties on attack rolls?


A monk can fight with two weapons just like any other
character, but she must accept the normal penalties on her
attack rolls to do so. She can use an unarmed strike as an offhand
weapon. She can even combine two-weapon fighting with
a flurry of blows to gain an extra attack with her off hand (but
remember that she can use only unarmed strikes or special
monk weapons as part of the flurry). The penalties for two weapon
fighting stack with the penalties for flurry of blows.


and

The monk can’t use his natural weapon attacks as part of a
flurry of blows, but he can make natural weapon attacks in
addition to his flurry.


RotG states:
Monks and Natural Weapons

As we saw in Part Two, a creature with natural weapons can use them for secondary attacks when using the full attack action. A monk character with natural weaponry has the same option.

For example, an 8th-level lizardfolk monk with a Strength score of 17 has a base attack bonus of +7 (+1 for its 2 humanoid Hit Dice and +6 for its monk levels). The character has three natural weapons: two claws (1d4) and one bite (1d4). For this example, we'll assume the character also has the Multiattack feat.

With the full attack action, our example monk can make two unarmed attacks thanks to its +7 base attack bonus. After adding in the +3 bonus from the monk's Strength score of 17, our example character's unarmed attacks have the following attack bonuses: +10/+5. Thanks to the monk's class level and Strength score, damage for the unarmed strikes is 1d10+3.

The example monk also can attack with its claws and bite as secondary natural attacks at a -2 penalty (thanks to the character's Multiattack feat). Each natural weapon uses the character's +7 base attack bonus and +3 Strength modifier, except that the Strength bonus on damage is halved because these are secondary attacks: 2 claws +8 (1d4+1) and bite +8 (1d4+1).

As noted last week, there are no two-weapon or off-hand penalties for these attacks.

The example monk cannot use a flurry of blows because a flurry doesn't work with natural weaponry.


and

If a monk is not using her flurry of blows ability, she can claim an extra attack from a second weapon.

-----

So, PHB says:
No off-hand while striking unarmed.
FAQ says:
You can use an unarmed strike as an off-hand weapon.
RotG says:
You can gain an extra attack with an off-hand weapon if you aren't using Flurry of Blows.

PHB says:
Unarmed strikes and monk weapons only in a flurry.
FAQ says:
You can use secondary natural attacks in addition to a flurry.
RotG says:
If you're using natural weapons, you can't flurry.

-Hyp.
 

log in or register to remove this ad


Felix

Explorer
Ah, Rules Cacophony.

Makes me all atwitter for the online e-zine WotC will start publishing after stabbing Paizo in the back.
 


IcyCool

First Post
*sigh* This just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. :(

I wasn't a big proponent of the FAQ to begin with (and I pretty much always ignored RotG), but there are people that are trying to use these resources, and things like this just make it harder to do.
 

mvincent

Explorer
Hypersmurf said:
So, PHB says:
No off-hand while striking unarmed.
FAQ says:
You can use an unarmed strike as an off-hand weapon.
RotG says:
You can gain an extra attack with an off-hand weapon if you aren't using Flurry of Blows.

PHB says:
Unarmed strikes and monk weapons only in a flurry.
FAQ says:
You can use secondary natural attacks in addition to a flurry.
RotG says:
If you're using natural weapons, you can't flurry.
The FAQ (i.e Andy Collin's) appeared to view flurry as being akin to say, rapid-shot, TWF'ing, etc. (i.e. granting an extra attack under certain circumstances). Using that paradigm, the ability to combine several of these techniques had precedent (it was just a bit complicated). Indeed, greater flurry was already expected to be combined with flurry, so (perhaps his view was) why not also combine it with things like rapid shot, TWF'ing, greater TWF'ing, natural attacks, etc. Based on the wording for greater flurry, I can see where he was going with that

Also, Andy was viewing those extra attacks as not being part of the flurry, but rather being performed in addition to the flurry.

Conversely, the RotG (i.e. Skip Williams) chose a stricter (but much easier) interpretation. I can see how anyone could come to either conclusion (and I credit most other readers here with similar insight). The contradictory rulings may seem vexing, but it also gives DM's options to choose the one that suits them best.

Because of the RotG article, I personally have recently removed the TWF'ing feats from several monk builds (including my wife's current, long term character)... it was just easier to make them legit using either interpretation. If I were to recommend a single method, I would choose the RotG, not only because it is more recent, but mainly because it is easier (and thus more suitable for anyone needing such advice).
 
Last edited:

Sejs

First Post
See, this sort of thing is the reason for my house rule that states "Anytime someone proposes playing a monk that is also a member of a race that has natural weapons, I get to kick them in the groin".


It's tough, but fair.
 

I'm pretty much at the point where I file Flurry of Blows under the category of Simply Not Worth It. Get rid of the whole "monks get extra attacks" idea entirely (where did that idea come from, anyway?), and give them a full fighter BAB with regular itterative attacks. Makes more sense for a warrior class, and gets rid of all this extra attack headache/BS/munchkining.
 

hong

WotC's bitch
mvincent said:
The FAQ (i.e Andy Collin's) appeared to view flurry as being akin to say, rapid-shot, TWF'ing, etc. (i.e. granting an extra attack under certain circumstances). Using that paradigm, the ability to combine several of these techniques had precedent (it was just a bit complicated). Indeed, greater flurry was already expected to be combined with flurry, so (perhaps his view was) why not also combine it with things like rapid shot, TWF'ing, greater TWF'ing, natural attacks, etc. Based on the wording for greater flurry, I can see where he was going with that

Also, Andy was viewing those extra attacks as not being part of the flurry, but rather being performed in addition to the flurry.

Conversely, the RotG (i.e. Skip Williams) chose a stricter (but much easier) interpretation. I can see how anyone could come to either conclusion (and I credit most other readers here with similar insight). The contradictory rulings may seem vexing, but it also gives DM's options to choose the one that suits them best.

Because of the RotG article, I personally have recently removed the TWF'ing feats from several monk builds (including my wife's current, long term character)... it was just easier to make them legit using either interpretation. If I were to recommend a single method, I would choose the RotG, not only because it is more recent, but mainly because it is easier (and thus more suitable for anyone needing such advice).
I wouldn't mind either interpretation, but really, shouldn't Skip and Andy be at least talking about this to each other?
 


Voidrunner's Codex

Remove ads

Top