2wf & flurry of blows question [Archive] - Wizards Community

2wf & flurry of blows question [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
FatherNature
10-17-04, 08:39 PM I'm DM, and I cant find anything on this subject

will a human monk with Two weapon fighting and twin weapon fighting using two large Kama(s) [making them one-handed] get 3 attacks
(2 weapons then flurry)

or 4 attacks (2 weapons each with a flurry)??
tiluvias99
10-17-04, 08:52 PM flurry only applies to your regular attacks. Off-hand attacks are not a second set of BAB, they are simply extra attacks. However, If you manage to get perfect two weapon fighting (an epic feat in CW) you can flurry with your off-hand weapon as well.
tarkin
10-17-04, 09:04 PM 1) TWF grants a single additional attack, with the neccesary penalties. With the feat, using two large weapons that would be -4 to all your attacks

2) Flurry can be used with TWF. A first level monk, with the TWF feat, using TWF and FLurry would get a total of 3 attacks, all at -6 (-4 for TWF, -2 more for Flurry)

3) When using a weapon of the wrong size, you take a -2 additional penalty. That brings it to -8 to all your attacks

4) I am not sure I would even let a monk use Flurry with "monk" weapons larger than allowed. While I can find no explicited rule that says no, It certainly goes against concept of monk weapons. Please note that the only monk weapon that is not a light weapon is a quarterstaff, which is a double weapon. My first instinct is to simply House Rule, and say no you can't Flurry when using extra big monk weapons, they are too big. Definitely ask your DM before you try to do this.

So if your DM allows you to flurry with the larger weapons, and you were a first level monk with the TWF feat, you could get 3 attacks the 1d8 damage, but all your attacks would have a -8 penalty. In my opinion, taking the net -4 (-2 for using the Large Kamas, and an additional -2 for using them while TWF), it is not worth the extra 1 point average damage.

If you did it with normal sized Kamas, that would be -4 to hit, 3 attacks, damage at 1d6.
FatherNature
10-17-04, 09:24 PM thanks

oh,more Q's

can a monk two weapon fight with his two fists, and could he do the above stated with two fists?

I've never played a monk...so I feel kinda like a noob DM :(
guess I gotta tell the monk player he cant flurry, cause it makes sense.
Egres
10-18-04, 08:53 AM thanks

oh,more Q's

can a monk two weapon fight with his two fists, and could he do the above stated with two fists?

I've never played a monk...so I feel kinda like a noob DM :(
guess I gotta tell the monk player he cant flurry, cause it makes sense.
Yes.
Thorak
10-18-04, 09:54 AM flurry only applies to your regular attacks.
Just to kibitz, because I enjoy it, prove this please. And do not quote the FAQ, unless you can quote the core book rule it's based on.

I say this because, as written in the PHB, there's nothing implying Flurry only affects your primary hand attacks. Indeed, you can use multiple different weapons, if you like. And, the way it requires you to use a Full Attack action and the penalties last until the start of your next turn (as all full-round actions do, incidentally) strongly implies that Flurry is a full-round thing, which affects all attacks you make before your next turn. Both the penalties, the weapons restrictions, and anything else.

I kibitz because I find the FAQ ruling that you can use a non-monk weapon in your off hand with TWFing while Flurrying to be grossly contrary to the prohibition against non-monk weapons "when using flurry of blows". Especially since the mechanics are supposed to reflect continuous combat, however segmented they treat it. While it goes "my turn, your turn", it is supposed to reflect that we're both attacking simultaneously, and with both weapons if we have two. And it seems patently ridiculous that a monk, unlike most other characters flavor-wise, is whacking someone with the kama in one hand, and then switching to the longsword in the other halfway through the round. Because otherwise, they're implying that Flurry is flicked on and off during the round, which seems even more ridiculous.

Of course, monks are just one of the things that have caused more issues between 3.0 and 3.5. It's no big surprise they're still screwy.
Naeron
10-18-04, 11:11 AM Flurry gives you "one extra attack in a round at her highest base attack bonus, but this attack takes a –2 penalty, as does each other attack made that round". It also has the restriction "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). She may attack with unarmed strikes and special monk weapons interchangeably as desired".

TWF gives "You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make one extra attack each round with the second weapon."

So by combining flurry of blows and TWF during a full-attack action a monk may make 1 extra attack with an offhand weapon (which can be an unarmed strike or an armed attack) and 1 extra attack with either an unarmed strike or a monk's special weapon. Assuming all weapons are light then the penalty would be -4 on all attacks.

So a Monk who is unarmed or armed only with monk weapons would get 1 primary hand attack, 1 offhand attack and 1 flurry attack which could be taken with either the primary or offhand weapon. If they have 2 monk weapons the flurry attack could still be an unarmed strike as monks can make this with a kick even if both hands are full.

By the rules a monk armed with a longsword could make 1 primary attack with the longsword, 1 offhand attack with their unarmed strike but cannot use flurry of blows because while using it they can only attack with monk weapons or unarmed strike.
FatherNature
10-18-04, 12:27 PM just to be sure I get this right

An unarmed monk can attack On hand, Off hand & flurry with only a -4.

also, my monk player wants to know if the flurry is 'on hand' or any unarmed or monk weapon, and If it is only 'on hand' can he take a feet to also flurry with his off hand?
Thorak
10-18-04, 03:06 PM just to be sure I get this right

An unarmed monk can attack On hand, Off hand & flurry with only a -4.

also, my monk player wants to know if the flurry is 'on hand' or any unarmed or monk weapon, and If it is only 'on hand' can he take a feet to also flurry with his off hand?

See? This is why WotC is screwing up by providing misleading, houseruling FAQs.

Flurry isn't handed. If you Flurry, you get an extra attack. It has absolutely nothing to do with your primary or your off hand. You could make every single attack with your off hand, if you like.
FatherNature
10-18-04, 03:28 PM ...got it.

flurry is just an extra attack at your highest BAB with all attacks afterword getting -2 until next turn.

TY
DragonsArt
10-18-04, 03:42 PM 2) Flurry can be used with TWF. A first level monk, with the TWF feat, using TWF and FLurry would get a total of 3 attacks, all at -6 (-4 for TWF, -2 more for Flurry)

He didn't do his homework... WITH TWF, the penalties for weilding two light weapons (fists are considered light) is -2. Add that to the -2 of the flurry and you get 2 attacks (flurry) at -4 with full strength bonus, and an off-hand attack at -4 with 1/2 strength bonus.

Check the FAQ for more details.
tiluvias99
10-18-04, 04:08 PM Just to kibitz, because I enjoy it, prove this please. And do not quote the FAQ, unless you can quote the core book rule it's based on.

As I have mentioned, you do not get a second flurry with your off-hand weapon because they are simply extra attacks. TWF is simply extra attacks as well, just made with a different weapon.

from page 160 of the PHB:
If you wield a second weapon in your off-hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon

flurry applies to your BAB chain, and TWF applies to your BAB chain. TWF does not give you a second BAB chain.

At least this is what I've interpreted from it. If it does actually give you a second BAB chain, then I assume you could apply flurry to it, as well as things like rapid shot and the like. As far as I know, TWF only gives you a second BAB chain after you get perfect TWF.

And hell, Thorak, I do not want to get in an arguement with you over rules, because every argument I've seen you in on these boards you have been correct (at least in my opinion), and I don't like being on the losing side :D
FitzNighteyes
10-18-04, 04:10 PM He didn't do his homework... WITH TWF, the penalties for weilding two light weapons (fists are considered light) is -2.He did his homework. The example tarkin was talking about it two one-handed weapons, not two light weapons.
FatherNature
10-18-04, 05:28 PM He did his homework. The example tarkin was talking about it two one-handed weapons, not two light weapons.

in the first example, i said
Human Monk
with two weapon fighting, twin weapon fighting as feats.
2 large (one-handed for medium) kama's (think one-handed scythes on a straight stick)
FitzNighteyes
10-18-04, 06:00 PM Apparently I didn't do my homework either. What is the Twin Weapon Fighting Feat?

Edit: When I read that I thought you meant: "Will a human monk with the Two-weapon Fighting Feat and using it to fight with twin weapons, using two large Kama(s) [making them one-handed] get 3 attacks?" My bad.
Egres
10-18-04, 06:45 PM twin weapon fighting :confused:
Thorak
10-18-04, 09:08 PM As I have mentioned, you do not get a second flurry with your off-hand weapon because they are simply extra attacks. TWF is simply extra attacks as well, just made with a different weapon.
That wasn't my point. I agree wholeheartedly with this. But the extra attack from Flurry is not an extra primary hand attack. And Flurry lets you use either hand interchangeably for your iterative BAB attacks. My question was; what's the source for declaring that Flurry is separate from TWFing? I know the attacks themselves are separate, but their penalties and such last throughout each other's duration. It seems to me the weapon restrictions and interchangeability of Flurry should as well. The FAQ disagrees, and I have yet to see a worthwhile argument why the FAQ is right, just by the RAW. Hence, my kibitz.
And hell, Thorak, I do not want to get in an arguement with you over rules, because every argument I've seen you in on these boards you have been correct (at least in my opinion), and I don't like being on the losing side :D
I don't care if I get proved wrong. And I do get proven wrong in these kinds of debates; I'm hardly an inhuman machine of accuracy. But I'd like to see the proof, and I haven't seen one yet. And, frankly, I'm tired of WotC offering up houserules as FAQ entries, without ensuring the rules actually say what they apparently think they say.

I know it's their game, but if they're going to change the rules, they need to issue an Errata. That's the channel they declared to be the one for rules changes and such. The FAQ is not. And, frankly, I can't see it being that hard to edit a PDF document and upload the new version, so it's not a "too much effort" issue.
FatherNature
10-18-04, 09:24 PM oh, no wonder...

Twin Weapon Fighting is in "The Netbook of Feats" #007
from The Fantasy Netbook Community Council...
I think they were disbanded or something, all their links are dead...
here it is:
TWIN WEAPON FIGHTING [General, Melee]

You can wield a matching pair of weapons, one in each
hand, with extraordinary ability.
Prerequisite: Ambidexterity, Two-Weapon Fighting, base
attack bonus +6 or higher.

Benefit: Choose a one-handed weapon.
When wielding one of the chosen weapons in each hand,
you wield the weapon in your off-hand as if it were a
light weapon.

Normal: With the Ambidexterity and Two-Weapon
Fighting feats, you can normally wield a pair of
one-handed weapons at a 4 attack penalty with
your primary and secondary weapons. This feat
reduces the attack penalty to 2 with your primary
and secondary weapons, the same penalties that
you would have if you had a light weapon in your
off-hand.
yea, its from 3.0, but my group ports over stuff all the time.
...and now that I have just re-read it...lets scratch that idea (bab +6 required)
tiluvias99
10-20-04, 06:57 PM My question was; what's the source for declaring that Flurry is separate from TWFing?

hmm... source that says flurry and TWF are seperate... I can think of no quotation that says that they are indeed seperate. Of course, there is also no source that says they are the same.

You know what? I have no idea. of course, then the same arguement could be said about whether or not things like Rapid Shot and TWF are seperate. hell, rapid shot, twf, and flurry could actually represent the same thing, except that rapid shot is made with the same weapon, twf is made with a different weapon, and flurry is made with either.

Can you think of anything?
Thorak
10-20-04, 07:04 PM hmm... source that says flurry and TWF are seperate... I can think of no quotation that says that they are indeed seperate. Of course, there is also no source that says they are the same.

You know what? I have no idea. of course, then the same arguement could be said about whether or not things like Rapid Shot and TWF are seperate. hell, rapid shot, twf, and flurry could actually represent the same thing, except that rapid shot is made with the same weapon, twf is made with a different weapon, and flurry is made with either.

Can you think of anything?

I can't, and haven't been able to over the course of the debate. Hence why I argue that it's not defind the way the FAQ implies, since the FAQ assumes they occur separately and their attacks aren't affected by either (save for the attack bonus penalties).
salamander
10-20-04, 07:11 PM I can't, and haven't been able to over the course of the debate.Ok, so the FAQ assumes they are separate and the rules don't explicitly say they are. So what? There's only a problem if the rules explicitly say they aren't - which they don't, afaik.
Thorak
10-20-04, 09:44 PM Ok, so the FAQ assumes they are separate and the rules don't explicitly say they are. So what? There's only a problem if the rules explicitly say they aren't - which they don't, afaik.
They don't explicitly say they aren't separated within the round, but they do say it implicitly. In that the penalties for each affect all attacks that round, even AoOs after your turn, and that full-round actions (including the full attack action both of these require) last from the beginning of your turn until just before the beginning of your next turn, though you resolve your actions ahead of time in a lump for simplicity.

The implication being that if you Flurry, you're Flurrying while you're TWFing. And, therefore, the extra attacks from TWF must follow the weapon restrictions for Flurry, but can also be made with any available weapon the monk has. Which is entirely contradictory to how the FAQ thinks things work. Hence my point; the FAQ is wrong, or at least has no support to claim it's right, and a clear implication that it's wrong.

If they changed the wording in an Errata, I'd shut up about it. But they haven't, so the FAQ is wrong.
OrbitalB
10-21-04, 01:32 AM The implication being that if you Flurry, you're Flurrying while you're TWFing. And, therefore, the extra attacks from TWF must follow the weapon restrictions for Flurry, but can also be made with any available weapon the monk has. Which is entirely contradictory to how the FAQ thinks things work. Hence my point; the FAQ is wrong, or at least has no support to claim it's right, and a clear implication that it's wrong.

I don't think that it has any contradiction what-so-ever. TWF only cares that you are making your extra attacks with your off-hand... Flurry does not forbid that. Furry only cares that you make your extra attack with a monk weapon or unarmed... TWF does not forbid that. What the FAQ simply clarifies is that the two methods of attacking can only be used in conjuction with each other as long as you don't do the one thing they would dissagree on... making the flurry with a non-flurry-friendly off-hand weapon.

I understand your 'but the penalties from both apply to each other' dilema. But, like the I-Go You-Go mechanic for simplicity... they also like the 'until next turn' mechanic to apply to everything also for the sake of simplicity. Logical exceptions make no difference to that mechanic (thank Pelor).
salamander
10-21-04, 04:43 AM They don't explicitly say they aren't separated within the round, but they do say it implicitly. In that the penalties for each affect all attacks that round, even AoOs after your turn, and that full-round actions (including the full attack action both of these require) last from the beginning of your turn until just before the beginning of your next turn, though you resolve your actions ahead of time in a lump for simplicity.
Implication is not fact, so it's not a conclusive argument to say something is right or wrong either. As for AoOs, those are definitely affected by Flurrying (the book specifically says so) but not necessarily by dual-wielding (by the rules, they are made at their full normal attack bonus. Those same rules also don't specify that the TWF penalties last all round - they apply while dual-wielding, which you're not doing for AoO purposes). For dual-wielding, the implication (although again, the rules aren't conclusive) is clearly that the penalties don't apply to AoOs.
Ipsissimus
10-21-04, 04:52 AM breaking it down, TWF is a feat that gives you an extra attack but with an off hand wpn. All your attacks are at -2 that round.

We know what flurry of blows does and we know that you can combine it with TWF. There's just some hefty penalties involed.

But when a monk gets higher up and your Flurry of Blows negative goes away? Adding TWF isn't a bad deal since it's only -2 now and not -4 or -3 (At 5th lvl monk).

As for monks wielding larger weapons or strange cumbersome ones? Why would you houserule they can't use it? Monks train all their lives to do things normal ppl cannot, so if they mastered the fighting style of a wooden bench it might be unwieldy to even a veteran fighter it's a deadly wpn in the hands of a monk. So if a monk want's to monkey grip that's his poragative.
DragonsArt
10-21-04, 07:26 AM hmm... source that says flurry and TWF are seperate... I can think of no quotation that says that they are indeed seperate. Of course, there is also no source that says they are the same.

You know what? I have no idea. of course, then the same arguement could be said about whether or not things like Rapid Shot and TWF are seperate. hell, rapid shot, twf, and flurry could actually represent the same thing, except that rapid shot is made with the same weapon, twf is made with a different weapon, and flurry is made with either.

Can you think of anything?

They are NOT the same.

1) The abilities are not named the same.
2) The abilities do not reference each other or say anything about stacking
3) They are fundamentally different - class specific ability vs feat tree
4) The penalties for TWF (-2) cannot be reduced, whereas the penalties for Flurry CAN be reduced
5) TWF grants an OFF-HAND attack, Flurry grants an EXTRA attack
6) With a flurry, you get your STR bonus on ALL attacks and have no off-hand. With TWF, your offhand gets 1/2 your STR bonus.
7) Flurry specifically mentions it can only be used with certain weapons, TWF can be used together
8) The FAQ states that they can be used together in the same round - and therefore cannot be the same since like abilities don't stack (ie. You can't use evasion twice for the same attack even if you have it from 2 different sources, you can't use two haste effects, etc.)
pres_man
10-21-04, 11:07 AM TWF grants an OFF-HAND attack
Just to be rear-retentive for a second, TWF doesn't grant anything. What it does do is reduces the penalties for fighting with two weapons. Anyone can fight with two weapons they usually just have a -6/-10 or -4/-8 (if the offhand one is light). Now Improved TWF on the other hand ...

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FatherNature 10-17-04, 08:39 PM	I'm DM, and I cant find anything on this subject will a human monk with Two weapon fighting and twin weapon fighting using two large Kama(s) [making them one-handed] get 3 attacks (2 weapons then flurry) or 4 attacks (2 weapons each with a flurry)??
tiluvias99 10-17-04, 08:52 PM	flurry only applies to your regular attacks. Off-hand attacks are not a second set of BAB, they are simply extra attacks. However, If you manage to get perfect two weapon fighting (an epic feat in CW) you can flurry with your off-hand weapon as well.
tarkin 10-17-04, 09:04 PM	1) TWF grants a single additional attack, with the neccesary penalties. With the feat, using two large weapons that would be -4 to all your attacks 2) Flurry can be used with TWF. A first level monk, with the TWF feat, using TWF and FLurry would get a total of 3 attacks, all at -6 (-4 for TWF, -2 more for Flurry) 3) When using a weapon of the wrong size, you take a -2 additional penalty. That brings it to -8 to all your attacks 4) I am not sure I would even let a monk use Flurry with "monk" weapons larger than allowed. While I can find no explicited rule that says no, It certainly goes against concept of monk weapons. Please note that the only monk weapon that is not a light weapon is a quarterstaff, which is a double weapon. My first instinct is to simply House Rule, and say no you can't Flurry when using extra big monk weapons, they are too big. Definitely ask your DM before you try to do this. So if your DM allows you to flurry with the larger weapons, and you were a first level monk with the TWF feat, you could get 3 attacks the 1d8 damage, but all your attacks would have a -8 penalty. In my opinion, taking the net -4 (-2 for using the Large Kamas, and an additional -2 for using them while TWF), it is not worth the extra 1 point average damage. If you did it with normal sized Kamas, that would be -4 to hit, 3 attacks, damage at 1d6.
FatherNature 10-17-04, 09:24 PM	thanks oh,more Q's can a monk two weapon fight with his two fists, and could he do the above stated with two fists? I've never played a monk...so I feel kinda like a noob DM :( guess I gotta tell the monk player he cant flurry, cause it makes sense.
Egres 10-18-04, 08:53 AM	thanks oh,more Q's can a monk two weapon fight with his two fists, and could he do the above stated with two fists? I've never played a monk...so I feel kinda like a noob DM :( guess I gotta tell the monk player he cant flurry, cause it makes sense. Yes.
Thorak 10-18-04, 09:54 AM	flurry only applies to your regular attacks. Just to kibitz, because I enjoy it, prove this please. And do not quote the FAQ, unless you can quote the core book rule it's based on. I say this because, as written in the PHB, there's nothing implying Flurry only affects your primary hand attacks. Indeed, you can use multiple different weapons, if you like. And, the way it requires you to use a Full Attack action and the penalties last until the start of your next turn (as all full-round actions do, incidentally) strongly implies that Flurry is a full-round thing, which affects all attacks you make before your next turn. Both the penalties, the weapons restrictions, and anything else. I kibitz because I find the FAQ ruling that you can use a non-monk weapon in your off hand with TWFing while Flurrying to be grossly contrary to the prohibition against non-monk weapons "when using flurry of blows". Especially since the mechanics are supposed to reflect continuous combat, however segmented they treat it. While it goes "my turn, your turn", it is supposed to reflect that we're both attacking simultaneously, and with both weapons if we have two. And it seems patently ridiculous that a monk, unlike most other characters flavor-wise, is whacking someone with the kama in one hand, and then switching to the longsword in the other halfway through the round. Because otherwise, they're implying that Flurry is flicked on and off during the round, which seems even more ridiculous. Of course, monks are just one of the things that have caused more issues between 3.0 and 3.5. It's no big surprise they're still screwy.
Naeron 10-18-04, 11:11 AM	Flurry gives you "one extra attack in a round at her highest base attack bonus, but this attack takes a –2 penalty, as does each other attack made that round". It also has the restriction "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). She may attack with unarmed strikes and special monk weapons interchangeably as desired". TWF gives "You can fight with a weapon in each hand. You can make one extra attack each round with the second weapon." So by combining flurry of blows and TWF during a full-attack action a monk may make 1 extra attack with an offhand weapon (which can be an unarmed strike or an armed attack) and 1 extra attack with either an unarmed strike or a monk's special weapon. Assuming all weapons are light then the penalty would be -4 on all attacks. So a Monk who is unarmed or armed only with monk weapons would get 1 primary hand attack, 1 offhand attack and 1 flurry attack which could be taken with either the primary or offhand weapon. If they have 2 monk weapons the flurry attack could still be an unarmed strike as monks can make this with a kick even if both hands are full. By the rules a monk armed with a longsword could make 1 primary attack with the longsword, 1 offhand attack with their unarmed strike but cannot use flurry of blows because while using it they can only attack with monk weapons or unarmed strike.
FatherNature 10-18-04, 12:27 PM	just to be sure I get this right An unarmed monk can attack On hand, Off hand & flurry with only a -4. also, my monk player wants to know if the flurry is 'on hand' or any unarmed or monk weapon, and If it is only 'on hand' can he take a feet to also flurry with his off hand?
Thorak 10-18-04, 03:06 PM	just to be sure I get this right An unarmed monk can attack On hand, Off hand & flurry with only a -4. also, my monk player wants to know if the flurry is 'on hand' or any unarmed or monk weapon, and If it is only 'on hand' can he take a feet to also flurry with his off hand? See? This is why WotC is screwing up by providing misleading, houseruling FAQs. Flurry isn't handed. If you Flurry, you get an extra attack. It has absolutely nothing to do with your primary or your off hand. You could make every single attack with your off hand, if you like.
FatherNature 10-18-04, 03:28 PM	...got it. flurry is just an extra attack at your highest BAB with all attacks afterword getting -2 until next turn. TY
DragonsArt 10-18-04, 03:42 PM	2) Flurry can be used with TWF. A first level monk, with the TWF feat, using TWF and FLurry would get a total of 3 attacks, all at -6 (-4 for TWF, -2 more for Flurry) He didn't do his homework... WITH TWF, the penalties for weilding two light weapons (fists are considered light) is -2. Add that to the -2 of the flurry and you get 2 attacks (flurry) at -4 with full strength bonus, and an off-hand attack at -4 with 1/2 strength bonus. Check the FAQ for more details.
tiluvias99 10-18-04, 04:08 PM	Just to kibitz, because I enjoy it, prove this please. And do not quote the FAQ, unless you can quote the core book rule it's based on. As I have mentioned, you do not get a second flurry with your off-hand weapon because they are simply extra attacks. TWF is simply extra attacks as well, just made with a different weapon. from page 160 of the PHB: If you wield a second weapon in your off-hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon flurry applies to your BAB chain, and TWF applies to your BAB chain. TWF does not give you a second BAB chain. At least this is what I've interpreted from it. If it does actually give you a second BAB chain, then I assume you could apply flurry to it, as well as things like rapid shot and the like. As far as I know, TWF only gives you a second BAB chain after you get perfect TWF. And hell, Thorak, I do not want to get in an arguement with you over rules, because every argument I've seen you in on these boards you have been correct (at least in my opinion), and I don't like being on the losing side :D
FitzNighteyes 10-18-04, 04:10 PM	He didn't do his homework... WITH TWF, the penalties for weilding two light weapons (fists are considered light) is -2.He did his homework. The example tarkin was talking about it two one-handed weapons, not two light weapons.
FatherNature 10-18-04, 05:28 PM	He did his homework. The example tarkin was talking about it two one-handed weapons, not two light weapons. in the first example, i said Human Monk with two weapon fighting, twin weapon fighting as feats. 2 large (one-handed for medium) kama's (think one-handed scythes on a straight stick)
FitzNighteyes 10-18-04, 06:00 PM	Apparently I didn't do my homework either. What is the Twin Weapon Fighting Feat? Edit: When I read that I thought you meant: "Will a human monk with the Two-weapon Fighting Feat and using it to fight with twin weapons, using two large Kama(s) [making them one-handed] get 3 attacks?" My bad.
Egres 10-18-04, 06:45 PM	twin weapon fighting :confused:
Thorak 10-18-04, 09:08 PM	As I have mentioned, you do not get a second flurry with your off-hand weapon because they are simply extra attacks. TWF is simply extra attacks as well, just made with a different weapon. That wasn't my point. I agree wholeheartedly with this. But the extra attack from Flurry is not an extra primary hand attack. And Flurry lets you use either hand interchangeably for your iterative BAB attacks. My question was; what's the source for declaring that Flurry is separate from TWFing? I know the attacks themselves are separate, but their penalties and such last throughout each other's duration. It seems to me the weapon restrictions and interchangeability of Flurry should as well. The FAQ disagrees, and I have yet to see a worthwhile argument why the FAQ is right, just by the RAW. Hence, my kibitz. And hell, Thorak, I do not want to get in an arguement with you over rules, because every argument I've seen you in on these boards you have been correct (at least in my opinion), and I don't like being on the losing side :D I don't care if I get proved wrong. And I do get proven wrong in these kinds of debates; I'm hardly an inhuman machine of accuracy. But I'd like to see the proof, and I haven't seen one yet. And, frankly, I'm tired of WotC offering up houserules as FAQ entries, without ensuring the rules actually say what they apparently think they say. I know it's their game, but if they're going to change the rules, they need to issue an Errata. That's the channel they declared to be the one for rules changes and such. The FAQ is not. And, frankly, I can't see it being that hard to edit a PDF document and upload the new version, so it's not a "too much effort" issue.
FatherNature 10-18-04, 09:24 PM	oh, no wonder... Twin Weapon Fighting is in "The Netbook of Feats" #007 from The Fantasy Netbook Community Council... I think they were disbanded or something, all their links are dead... here it is: TWIN WEAPON FIGHTING [General, Melee] You can wield a matching pair of weapons, one in each hand, with extraordinary ability. Prerequisite: Ambidexterity, Two-Weapon Fighting, base attack bonus +6 or higher. Benefit: Choose a one-handed weapon. When wielding one of the chosen weapons in each hand, you wield the weapon in your off-hand as if it were a light weapon. Normal: With the Ambidexterity and Two-Weapon Fighting feats, you can normally wield a pair of one-handed weapons at a 4 attack penalty with your primary and secondary weapons. This feat reduces the attack penalty to 2 with your primary and secondary weapons, the same penalties that you would have if you had a light weapon in your off-hand. yea, its from 3.0, but my group ports over stuff all the time. ...and now that I have just re-read it...lets scratch that idea (bab +6 required)
tiluvias99 10-20-04, 06:57 PM	My question was; what's the source for declaring that Flurry is separate from TWFing? hmm... source that says flurry and TWF are seperate... I can think of no quotation that says that they are indeed seperate. Of course, there is also no source that says they are the same. You know what? I have no idea. of course, then the same arguement could be said about whether or not things like Rapid Shot and TWF are seperate. hell, rapid shot, twf, and flurry could actually represent the same thing, except that rapid shot is made with the same weapon, twf is made with a different weapon, and flurry is made with either. Can you think of anything?
Thorak 10-20-04, 07:04 PM	hmm... source that says flurry and TWF are seperate... I can think of no quotation that says that they are indeed seperate. Of course, there is also no source that says they are the same. You know what? I have no idea. of course, then the same arguement could be said about whether or not things like Rapid Shot and TWF are seperate. hell, rapid shot, twf, and flurry could actually represent the same thing, except that rapid shot is made with the same weapon, twf is made with a different weapon, and flurry is made with either. Can you think of anything? I can't, and haven't been able to over the course of the debate. Hence why I argue that it's not defind the way the FAQ implies, since the FAQ assumes they occur separately and their attacks aren't affected by either (save for the attack bonus penalties).
salamander 10-20-04, 07:11 PM	I can't, and haven't been able to over the course of the debate.Ok, so the FAQ assumes they are separate and the rules don't explicitly say they are. So what? There's only a problem if the rules explicitly say they aren't - which they don't, afaik.
Thorak 10-20-04, 09:44 PM	Ok, so the FAQ assumes they are separate and the rules don't explicitly say they are. So what? There's only a problem if the rules explicitly say they aren't - which they don't, afaik. They don't explicitly say they aren't separated within the round, but they do say it implicitly. In that the penalties for each affect all attacks that round, even AoOs after your turn, and that full-round actions (including the full attack action both of these require) last from the beginning of your turn until just before the beginning of your next turn, though you resolve your actions ahead of time in a lump for simplicity. The implication being that if you Flurry, you're Flurrying while you're TWFing. And, therefore, the extra attacks from TWF must follow the weapon restrictions for Flurry, but can also be made with any available weapon the monk has. Which is entirely contradictory to how the FAQ thinks things work. Hence my point; the FAQ is wrong, or at least has no support to claim it's right, and a clear implication that it's wrong. If they changed the wording in an Errata, I'd shut up about it. But they haven't, so the FAQ is wrong.
OrbitalB 10-21-04, 01:32 AM	The implication being that if you Flurry, you're Flurrying while you're TWFing. And, therefore, the extra attacks from TWF must follow the weapon restrictions for Flurry, but can also be made with any available weapon the monk has. Which is entirely contradictory to how the FAQ thinks things work. Hence my point; the FAQ is wrong, or at least has no support to claim it's right, and a clear implication that it's wrong. I don't think that it has any contradiction what-so-ever. TWF only cares that you are making your extra attacks with your off-hand... Flurry does not forbid that. Furry only cares that you make your extra attack with a monk weapon or unarmed... TWF does not forbid that. What the FAQ simply clarifies is that the two methods of attacking can only be used in conjuction with each other as long as you don't do the one thing they would dissagree on... making the flurry with a non-flurry-friendly off-hand weapon. I understand your 'but the penalties from both apply to each other' dilema. But, like the I-Go You-Go mechanic for simplicity... they also like the 'until next turn' mechanic to apply to everything also for the sake of simplicity. Logical exceptions make no difference to that mechanic (thank Pelor).
salamander 10-21-04, 04:43 AM	They don't explicitly say they aren't separated within the round, but they do say it implicitly. In that the penalties for each affect all attacks that round, even AoOs after your turn, and that full-round actions (including the full attack action both of these require) last from the beginning of your turn until just before the beginning of your next turn, though you resolve your actions ahead of time in a lump for simplicity. Implication is not fact, so it's not a conclusive argument to say something is right or wrong either. As for AoOs, those are definitely affected by Flurrying (the book specifically says so) but not necessarily by dual-wielding (by the rules, they are made at their full normal attack bonus. Those same rules also don't specify that the TWF penalties last all round - they apply while dual-wielding, which you're not doing for AoO purposes). For dual-wielding, the implication (although again, the rules aren't conclusive) is clearly that the penalties don't apply to AoOs.
Ipsissimus 10-21-04, 04:52 AM	breaking it down, TWF is a feat that gives you an extra attack but with an off hand wpn. All your attacks are at -2 that round. We know what flurry of blows does and we know that you can combine it with TWF. There's just some hefty penalties involed. But when a monk gets higher up and your Flurry of Blows negative goes away? Adding TWF isn't a bad deal since it's only -2 now and not -4 or -3 (At 5th lvl monk). As for monks wielding larger weapons or strange cumbersome ones? Why would you houserule they can't use it? Monks train all their lives to do things normal ppl cannot, so if they mastered the fighting style of a wooden bench it might be unwieldy to even a veteran fighter it's a deadly wpn in the hands of a monk. So if a monk want's to monkey grip that's his poragative.
DragonsArt 10-21-04, 07:26 AM	hmm... source that says flurry and TWF are seperate... I can think of no quotation that says that they are indeed seperate. Of course, there is also no source that says they are the same. You know what? I have no idea. of course, then the same arguement could be said about whether or not things like Rapid Shot and TWF are seperate. hell, rapid shot, twf, and flurry could actually represent the same thing, except that rapid shot is made with the same weapon, twf is made with a different weapon, and flurry is made with either. Can you think of anything? They are NOT the same. 1) The abilities are not named the same. 2) The abilities do not reference each other or say anything about stacking 3) They are fundamentally different - class specific ability vs feat tree 4) The penalties for TWF (-2) cannot be reduced, whereas the penalties for Flurry CAN be reduced 5) TWF grants an OFF-HAND attack, Flurry grants an EXTRA attack 6) With a flurry, you get your STR bonus on ALL attacks and have no off-hand. With TWF, your offhand gets 1/2 your STR bonus. 7) Flurry specifically mentions it can only be used with certain weapons, TWF can be used together 8) The FAQ states that they can be used together in the same round - and therefore cannot be the same since like abilities don't stack (ie. You can't use evasion twice for the same attack even if you have it from 2 different sources, you can't use two haste effects, etc.)
pres_man 10-21-04, 11:07 AM	TWF grants an OFF-HAND attack Just to be rear-retentive for a second, TWF doesn't grant anything. What it does do is reduces the penalties for fighting with two weapons. Anyone can fight with two weapons they usually just have a -6/-10 or -4/-8 (if the offhand one is light). Now Improved TWF on the other hand ...