Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Alynn 08-12-05, 06:41 PM	Ok as a full round action a small monk TWF nunchuka, and flurry would do the following +2 STR +2 BAB +1 MWK, and +1 Size for +6 normal attack bonus. Level 3 monk No flurry +4/+2 for 1d4+2/1d4+2 While Flurrying +2/+2/+0 for 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d4+2 I never seem to know if I'm doing it quite right when I start mixing two things together...
Norhg 08-12-05, 06:55 PM	You hav flurry modifiers right. But... Two weapon fighting gives you another attack at the same bonus as your first attack. Those two attacks (and all subsequent) recive a -2 penalty to attack. Two weapon fighting your attacks would be +4/4. Two weapon fighting with flurry of blows +2/2/2
Alynn 08-12-05, 07:19 PM	Doh, yeah read it wrong... cool... thanks
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 08:51 PM	So a character is allowed to do multiple full round attack actions within one full round action? Just asking as I was under the impression that you can only do one full attack action with one full round attack. A full round action consumes all your effort during a round. I know what the FAQ states on this but I find a few things the FAQ says in error with the RAW.
Burgundy Lotus 08-12-05, 08:57 PM	So a character is allowed to do multiple full round attack actions within one full round action? Just asking as I was under the impression that you can only do one full attack action with one full round attack. I know what the FAQ states on this but I find a few things the FAQ says in error with the RAW. you only get one full round action, why?
TheNatealator 08-12-05, 09:02 PM	A full attack isn't really a full-round action in and of itself. It's a way of perfoming more than one standard action in a round. More than one attack action, to be precise. That's why you can make your first attack as normal, and then decide whether or not to turn it into a full attack. Calling them "full attack actions" isn't correct, because each action is still just an attack, albeit at progressively lower bonuses. This is, btw, from p. 143 of the PHB, under the "Full Round Actions" heading.
Fixxxer 08-12-05, 09:04 PM	you only get one full round action, why? I think Lord Ian Stark read the post title and thought the same thing I originally thought the question was going to be about...a monk with the TWF feat using both it and Flurr of Blows in the same round. Correct me if I'm wrong, Lord Ian Stark.
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 09:05 PM	you only get one full round action, why? A Monk's Flurry is a full attack action, and Two-Weapon fighting is a full attack action too. Am I missing something? (I just woke up so I could be. :P Midnight shift :D )
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 09:07 PM	I think Lord Ian Stark read the post title and thought the same thing I originally thought the question was going to be about...a monk with the TWF feat using both it and Flurr of Blows in the same round. Correct me if I'm wrong, Lord Ian Stark. Yes sir. After reading the second post I was sure that was the issue. :embarrass
Burgundy Lotus 08-12-05, 09:07 PM	Are not TWF and FoBs stackable with monk weapons?
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 09:10 PM	Are not TWF and FoBs stackable with monk weapons? I seem to be brain farting at the moment. Perhaps some clarity may be needed. I think TheNatealator is on the right course, however I'm not 100% sure that multiple full round actions can take place in one round. Let let me look at some other full round actions and see if they are stackable. According to table 8-2: Actions in Combat on page 141 of the PH, Two-weapon fighting is not on that list per say. Nor is Flurry of blows. However the Full Attack is and both actions require a full attack to happen. Hmm...
TheNatealator 08-12-05, 09:10 PM	Sorry, Lord Ian Stark, I misunderstood. However, on page 160 of the PHB, it describes two-weapon fighting in general (the feat only lessens the penalty) If you weild a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. It doesn't say anything one way or another about requiring a full-round action. Otherwise, I think it would also be listed under Full-Round Actions (a quick check on table 8-2 confirms this)
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 09:15 PM	Sorry, Lord Ian Stark, I misunderstood. However, on page 160 of the PHB, it describes two-weapon fighting in general (the feat only lessens the penalty) It doesn't say anything one way or another about requiring a full-round action. Otherwise, I think it would also be listed under Full-Round Actions (a quick check on table 8-2 confirms this) Check my edit on the post above. I see what you're saying but you are required a full attack in order to do that. Maybe it's just me. What other attacks require a full attack to commence? Can they be stacked in one round? EDIT: Hmm, maybe if table 8-2 said full attack(s) under full round action with a plural then I could see. Looks like it'll be a DM's call. ;)
Alynn 08-12-05, 10:07 PM	If you look, it says Full Attack is a full round action, Flurry is also a full round action, if you couldn't stack them, a level 20 monk would either get 3 attacks (for a full attack) at 15/10/5, or flurry for +15/+15/+15, since he couldn't use his other 2 attacks as that would be a full attack too But clearly the table 3-10 on page 40 of the PHB states otherwise. If this was true, then why would TWF be a fighter bonus feat, after all, why would a fighter take it if they can full attack with 2 attacks (2 weapon fighting full round action) or 5 for a normal full round attack. And yes, TWF does count as a full round action PHB page 143 Under full attack. They wouldn't. Now the interesting thing here is that the text reads "...because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason... you must use a full round action to get your additional attacks." Now the interesting thing there is it says OR, which would make it seam it's one or the other, but by the first two examples I gave it shows the opposite. So the way I read it is, if you can Flurry+Full Attack, and you can Full Attack + 2 Weapon Fight, then it only makes sense that you can Flurry+Full Attack+2 weapon fight. Making a Monk At 20'th level can Have 6 attacks, just like a figher can have 6 attacks. So I agree it's a jugdement call for the DM... and IMC, A full round Attack means you can jet off every attack you possibly have.
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 10:16 PM	It doesn't say anything one way or another about requiring a full-round action. If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. Well I guess if you have a weapon of speed, you can two weapon fight with it to get another attack on top of the free speed attack. So lets see, a monk of 8th level with two weapon fighting, improved two weapon fighting, using flurry of blows, and has a kama of speed would get six attacks a round. Flurry +3 attacks Two weapon fighting +1 attack Improved to weapon fighting +1 attacks Speed +1 attack Total 6 attacks in one round I think I'm back on track. His attack bonus may suck for some of those attacks but they're attacks nonetheless. :D
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 10:21 PM	and IMC, A full round Attack means you can jet off every attack you possibly have. Yes sir. I am now awake enough to get back into reality. (Or D&D reality) :P Now to throw mud on the nice clean car, I personaly don't like allowing a Monk to use Two-Weapon Fighting in a round he is flurrying in. Why you say? Well a lot of Like-bonuses don't stack and to me, using a double weapon or a second weapon to get a free atack (with a -2 to all) is in essence a "flurry of blows" as you are swinging the weapons all around to get the extra attack. Same thing for a Monk's flurry is they are swinging wildely (with -2 to all) to get an extra attack in. But this is MO only as the FAQ seems to say otherwise. However this aspect has been beaten to death and leaves it up to the DM as most shady areas are.
clarkvalentine 08-12-05, 10:25 PM	Right. A monk can decide to attack with two weapons (two fists, perhaps) or use flurry of blows in the same round. Not both, for as Stark points out both require a full round action.
Lord Ian Stark 08-12-05, 10:31 PM	Right. A monk can decide to attack with two weapons (two fists, perhaps) or use flurry of blows in the same round. Not both, for as Stark points out both require a full round action. That is how I thought at first, but Alynn countered smartly by saying extra attacks from a base attack bonus and two weapon fighting attacks would not be able to be combined in one round under that ideal. I believe we all allow our characters to get there extra attacks from there BaB and use TWF in the same round. Both of those are also full attack actions. So yes it's left to each DM.
imperialjunkie 08-12-05, 11:45 PM	That is how I thought at first, but Alynn countered smartly by saying extra attacks from a base attack bonus and two weapon fighting attacks would not be able to be combined in one round under that ideal. Except that the extra attacks from the BAB really isn't the same thing as Two-Weapon Fighting or Flurry of Blows. Full Melee Attack- the multiple BAB is an expression of a combatant's exceptional ability to get off more blows. Again, this is the Base Attack Bonus. Any special attacks would add to this. Two-Weapon Fighting- a special full round attack that adds to the BAB. Therefore if a PC has 3 attacks from their BAB, Two-Weapon Fighting would add a fourth and lower the chances of all to land. Improved Two-Weapon Fighting would add a fifth. In other words, the special attack is adding something to the BAB. Flurry of Blows- a special full round attack useable only by monks that adds to the BAB. It adds an extra attack at the highest BAB. At low levels it has a -2 penalty which slowly disappears. Then later it adds a second extra attack. In other words, the Flurry of Blows is adding something to the BAB. I would think that adding two different 'special' attacks (both of which are very similar in nature), which are already full round actions in themselves, to one full round action is overdoing it, and against the nature of special attacks. I would most assuredly rule that a PC could use multiple standard actions in a full round action, such as the 20th level monk attempting to trip, disarm, and then grapple all in one full attack. But using two full attack special attacks would be out of bounds. That is how I would rule it.
The Wasp 08-12-05, 11:56 PM	Two-Weapon Fighting- a special full round attack that adds to the BAB. Flurry of Blows- a special full round attack useable only by monks that adds to the BAB. Imperialjunkie, you are incorrect. Neither two weapon fighting nor flutty of blows are full round attacks. They are abilities that allow you do make additional attacks when using the full attack option. The difference is subtle, but important. This is what everyone above is trying to say. So, yes, technically they can both be used. It is permissible, however, for a DM to rule that these are both attacks from the same source and disallow stacking.
imperialjunkie 08-13-05, 12:00 AM	Imperialjunkie, you are incorrect. Neither two weapon fighting nor flutty of blows are full round attacks. They are abilities that allow you do make additional attacks when using the full attack option. That is precisely my point. Alynn was equating Two-Weapon fighting with the extra attacks from the BAB. They are not the same. Both Two-Weapon Fighting and Flurry of Blows add to the BAB. Thus the argument that you should be able to use both Two-Weapon Fighting and Flurry of Blows in the same round because you can use Two-Weapon Fighting with the extra attacks of the BAB is not a sound argument. Both TWF and FoB are special attacks that are used with a full round attack. Because of that I wouldn't allow them both to be used. So I fully agree with you Wasp, but disagree on the conclusion.
Cyra 08-13-05, 12:26 AM	oh god...my brain is leaking out of my ears!!!!!! you people have melted my brain and I demand a refund!
Eightbitmage 08-13-05, 12:27 AM	As much as this pains me: <a monk> can even combine two-weapon fighting with flurry of blows to gain an extra attack with her off hand...
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-13-05, 12:41 AM	If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones. If I may... This makes it a DM call. You must use a full attack to get any extra attacks. However, it does not specifically say you cannot get those extra attacks from multiple sources. Nor does it say you may. Rule 0 this one, guys.
clarkvalentine 08-13-05, 12:58 AM	As much as this pains me: Hm. Well, I stand corrected. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, though, as it seems that a flurry of blows pretty much is the same thing as two-weapon fighting, but not everything in d20 makes complete sense.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-13-05, 01:04 AM	Hm. Well, I stand corrected. It doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me, though, as it seems that a flurry of blows pretty much is the same thing as two-weapon fighting, but not everything in d20 makes complete sense. The way I see flurry -- especially flurrying with a weapon, is a series of rapid, unconcentrated attacks on the target. This can be a flurry of punches with your fists, or jabbing rapidly with the end of a quarterstaff.
Alynn 08-13-05, 01:04 AM	Just remember you don't have to have TWF to actually TWF, that is something you can just DO, of course at a high penalty rate... all TWF does is lower the penalty. And I agree that at first a monk at first is flailing wildly (hence the -2) but in higher levels they are direct shots (as the penalty lowers to -1, then gone) for his flurry. I'm not totally disagreeing with you, I can see your point of view, and I am considering it, however I am not equating the extra attack from having an extra weapon to the extra attacks from a high BaB. It is an extra attack from an extra weapon, nothing more, flurry is extra attacks from an ability, and nothing more. Any class could full round attack with a single weapon and their fist, but of course they would be affected by the penalties without the proper feats (including AoO without Improved unarmed strike), so most don't bother doing it. Although just working some things out on paper, a flurry, TWF monk, ends up with one more attack than a fighter with TWF, although with ITWF they equal out... 1 feat selection compared with 2, however with all the feats a fighter gets, I don't believe it to be unbalanced between the two, since a fighter gets 17 (18 if human) feats, and a monk gets 10 (11 if human) this does count the monks bonus feats at 1,2, and 6. I dunno... looking at both my view and the other presented, it's just too close. So I say DM call... you have yours, and I have mine :)
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-13-05, 01:10 AM	Was that directed at me? I'm just wondering, because I'm cool with letting them stack since extra attacks from BaB stack with TWF anyway, setting a prescident.
nlumsden 08-13-05, 01:15 AM	Ponder this: To say that FoB and TWF cannot be used in tandem because they are like bonuses is to say that a Breastplate and a Large Shield cannot both provide AC because they are like bonuses. This rule does not always apply. I allow FoB and TWF because they are not "bonuses" in the strictest sense. They are abilities - ones that characters have either paid for or earned. The trade off is penalizing them by reducing their BaB for every attack.
Alynn 08-13-05, 01:23 AM	Actually it was toward Junkie, that was the last post that was there when I started typing (but then I got sidetracked by cleaning up for the game tomorrow, and putting the kids to bed), and all those other posts showed up in between.
Lord Ian Stark 08-13-05, 01:44 AM	As much as this pains me: I assume you havn't read my posts as I said numerous times the FAQ was against my train of thought on the subject. To me the FAQ is an educated opinnion on the matter and not set in "stone" (If any rules are) as the books or the errata for said books. Ponder this: To say that FoB and TWF cannot be used in tandem because they are like bonuses is to say that a Breastplate and a Large Shield cannot both provide AC because they are like bonuses. This rule does not always apply. The thing is, the RAW states that an armor and shield stack while the RAW doesn't state multiple full round actions can be used at the same time. My logic of what a full round action is, is an action that requires a full round to complete. That is IMO only however. That also may not apply to all cases. So that's why this grey area falls into the hands of the DM to determine.
Vaalingrade Ashland 08-13-05, 02:00 AM	The thing is, the RAW states that an armor and shield stack while the RAW doesn't state multiple full round actions can be used at the same time. My logic of what a full round action is, is an action that requires a full round to complete. That is IMO only however. That also may not apply to all cases. So that's why this grey area falls into the hands of the DM to determine. Like I said, the RAW does allow extra attacks from TWF and extra attacks from High BaB, effectively using 'multiple full round actions'.
Lord Ian Stark 08-13-05, 03:02 AM	Like I said, the RAW does allow extra attacks from TWF and extra attacks from High BaB, effectively using 'multiple full round actions'. Yes sir, the RAW does support those two full round attack actions to stack. As the silence from the RAW on all others, we may never know. Best for the individual DM to decide.
20goingon1232 08-13-05, 06:43 AM	Well I guess if you have a weapon of speed, you can two weapon fight with it to get another attack on top of the free speed attack. So lets see, a monk of 8th level with two weapon fighting, improved two weapon fighting, using flurry of blows, and has a kama of speed would get six attacks a round. Flurry +3 attacks Two weapon fighting +1 attack Improved to weapon fighting +1 attacks Speed +1 attack Total 6 attacks in one round I think I'm back on track. His attack bonus may suck for some of those attacks but they're attacks nonetheless. :D That is nothing really. A 16th level Centaur Monk (+4HD) with TWF feat tree has the following: 6 attacks with the Primary hand at 14/14/14/9/4/-1 (damage: 4d8) 3 attacks with the Off hand at 14/9/4 (damage: 4d8) 2 attacks with Natural weapons at 9/9 (11/11 with Multiattack feat, if your DM allows it as the Centaur does not mean feat requirements) (damage: 1d6) All attack bonuses are from BAB only. Extra attacks can be had with Haste and epic feats.
imperialjunkie 08-13-05, 09:00 AM	I wouldn't go with the FAQ, but I agree with everyone else that it is the DMs call. My thinking on it is thus: if you can stack multiple special attacks (that can only be used in a full attack) in a full round action, such as Flurry of Blows and TWF, then why can't you use each respective attack twice? For instance, a PC could say, "I'm going to use TWF twice this round, giving me 2 extra attacks." I would not allow that. And in my mind allowing FoB and TWF together is tantamount to the same thing. Those who allow FoB and TWF to stack should also allow a PC to use each individual ability multiple times in a round. But then what's to stop increasing this? There is nothing that says how many times these abilities can be stacked in round. Based on the same reasoning a PC could declare, "I'm going to use TWF and FoB... and then again... and again... and again." All in the same round. That is obviously absurd, but based on the reasoning that the two stack, there is no limit to the stacking. And what about charge? That must be used as a full round action. What is to stop a PC from charging and then using FoB? Or what is to stop a PC from charging twice? I think that there must be a limit to this, and to me the limitation is clear: if a special ability must be used as a full attack, then that is the only thing the PC can do that turn. Nothing more can be added. TWF must be used with a full round action. Thus it is the full round action. FoB must be used with a full round action. Thus it is the full round action. Combining both violates the nature of a full round action. And yes I know that both are not defined as a full round action. But the fact that they must be used in a full round action obviates this. But it does seem like the rules will allow for this based on the argument of silence (or the FAQ). I just wouldn't allow it as a DM.
TheNatealator 08-13-05, 10:56 AM	Hey everybody, it's me again, wading back into this rather messy thread (at 2 AM, no less). First, to Lord Ian, I missed your post before my last one because I took far too long in writing it, sorry. Now, I am going to reverse my former position (which was in favor of using both at the same time). When doing so, she may make one extra attack in a round at her highest base attack bonus...When using weapons as part of a flurry of blows, a monk applies her Strength bonus (not Str bonus x1-1/2 or x1/2) to her damage rolls for all successful attacks. If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. They both add one extra attack. The difference is, FoB adds the attack at the attack at highest BAB (after penalties of -2, -1, or 0), while TWF has different penalties depending on which weapon is being used. So then, which weapon is in the monk's off hand during flurry of blows? She adds her full strength bonus to each damage roll, when off-hand weapons only receive half strength bonus. How can you attack with a weapon in your off hand if you don't have one in your off-hand? I don't think it goes back to your off-hand 'after' the FoB, because the penalties for FoB last until your next round. Also, the examples they give with a quarterstaff all have only one use of each type of attack (one attack from each end and one unarmed strike) with a level 8 monk (BAB 6/1, FoB 5/5/0). They do not mention two-weapon fighting, or using one of her attacks more than once. I’m assuming their example was exhaustive, because they covered all combinations of attack orders (staff/staff/unarmed, staff/unarmed/staff, unarmed/staff/staff). Does this also mean you can’t repeat the same attack? If so, how can FoB possibly be effective with more than 3 attacks?
TheNatealator 08-14-05, 09:06 PM	Well, I found a post in a thread that should put an end to this. It was made by a WotC staff member, who consulted The Sage and Customer Service: here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=2568167&postcount=7)
Tyler Do'Urden 08-14-05, 09:24 PM	That is nothing really. A 16th level Centaur Monk (+4HD) with TWF feat tree has the following: 6 attacks with the Primary hand at 14/14/14/9/4/-1 (damage: 4d8) 3 attacks with the Off hand at 14/9/4 (damage: 4d8) 2 attacks with Natural weapons at 9/9 (11/11 with Multiattack feat, if your DM allows it as the Centaur does not mean feat requirements) (damage: 1d6) All attack bonuses are from BAB only. Extra attacks can be had with Haste and epic feats. You forgot about the +1 speed amulet of mighty fists.
20goingon1232 08-14-05, 09:46 PM	You forgot about the +1 speed amulet of mighty fists. Oh yes. And items :)
imperialjunkie 08-14-05, 10:21 PM	Well, I found a post in a thread that should put an end to this. It was made by a WotC staff member, who consulted The Sage and Customer Service: here (http://boards1.wizards.com/showpost.php?p=2568167&postcount=7) Well, looks like I have a new house rule then. No Flurry of Blows and Two-Weapon Fighting together.
Tyler Do'Urden 08-14-05, 10:23 PM	Well, looks like I have a new house rule then. No Flurry of Blows and Two-Weapon Fighting together. Aw, c'mon. PLEEEEEASE?
GemX 08-14-05, 10:42 PM	Keep in mind the Sage's monk example weilded a Sai+Unarmed (not 2 unarmed.) 1) Flurry of Blows does not require a full round attack, it just adds another attack for that round. 2) TWF is not a full round action. It allows you to make you to make another attack for that round (via offhand) I'm pretty sure ImpTWF and Greater TWF require full round attacks though...
imperialjunkie 08-14-05, 10:49 PM	Aw, c'mon. PLEEEEEASE? *rolls up battlemat and swats Tyler Do'Urden*
TheNatealator 08-14-05, 11:05 PM	Actually, he had 2 examples, if you read closely. One with only unarmed attacks, and one with a special monk weapon (sai in this case)
Lord Ian Stark 08-15-05, 01:07 AM	1) Flurry of Blows does not require a full round attack, it just adds another attack for that round. Flurry of Blows (Ex): <snip>A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows.<snip> 2) TWF is not a full round action. It allows you to make you to make another attack for that round (via offhand) If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough, because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. Saying something that requires a full round action to happen but doesn't take up the entire full round action is where the issue lies here. And again, wll be placed in the hands of the DM to decide.
Sapp 08-15-05, 01:56 AM	Wow, you could potentially get 13 attacks per round at epic level... even with just 2 arms. It doesn't explicitly state that speed on a weapon doesn't stack with haste does it? Also, from an earlier thread that debated the issue, the consensus seemed to be that two speed weapons do stack, because their rules state that you get an extra attack for the specific weapon with speed. So two speed weapons, you'd get an extra attack for each. Also, you'd just need level 16 monk, and level 4 paladin (or fighter, but that's a waste) and have BAB +16, enough for 4 base attacks. So we start with 4 attacks for a full-round action... TWF (+1), ITWF (+1), GTWF (+1), PTWF (+1) (Epic) Greater Flurry (+2) Two speed light weapons (+2) Hasted (+1) ... and end up with 13 attacks. Nice. But here's a question: Suppose we have a speed quarterstaff. It's a double weapon. It states in the rulebooks that a double weapon needs to be enchanted on each end separately. If you give one end the "wounding" property, the other end doesn't necessarily have it. So both ends are considered "separate". Would you say that a quarterstaff with one end blessed by speed is different than a quarterstaff with both ends sped?
Lord Ian Stark 08-15-05, 02:07 AM	It doesn't explicitly state that speed on a weapon doesn't stack with haste does it? Yes it does. Check the DMG's "speed" weapon ability. Also you can't take an epic feat unti 21st level. Would you say that a quarterstaff with one end blessed by speed is different than a quarterstaff with both ends sped? Blessed by speed? You mean when it was created?
Sapp 08-15-05, 02:32 AM	Yes, I meant when the quarterstaff was created, both ends of the staff were enchanted with "speed". Compare that to a staff with only one end enchanted. Should there be a difference? Oh, and thanks for the correction on the part about haste not stacking with speed. I missed that, or missread it.
Lord Ian Stark 08-15-05, 02:39 AM	Yes, I meant when the quarterstaff was created, both ends of the staff were enchanted with "speed". Compare that to a staff with only one end enchanted. Should there be a difference? I'm not sure if it's possible to create only one side with an enchantment but not the other. I'm at work. :P
Sapp 08-15-05, 02:55 AM	Masterwork double weapons incur double the masterwork cost to account for each head (+300 gp masterwork cost per head for a total of +600 gp). Double weapons have separate bonuses for their different heads. If randomly determined, the second head of a double weapon has the same enhancement bonus as the main head (01-50 on d%), doubling the cost of the bonus, or its enhancement bonus is one less (51-100 on d%) and it has no special abilities. It's quite ambiguous. First off, it states that double weapons don't even necessarily have the same enhancement bonuses (one side is +12 and the other side is +11), not to mention special abilities. I can't find where I've seen it, but I'm almost sure that double weapons could have different abilities for each end. For example, one end could have the "fiery blast" ability while the other end has "lightning blast".
TheNatealator 08-15-05, 01:58 PM	I'm sure you can have fiery blast and lightning blast on the same weapon, such as shortsword. It's in the FAQ. having a sword deal fire and lightning damage at the same time is no more illogical than having a sword deal fire damage in the first place.
Sapp 08-15-05, 02:33 PM	That's not what I meant. I mean that one side deals only fiery blast, while the other side deals only lightning blast. I'm saying that the abilities on double weapons are often, if not almost always separate. So potentially, you could have a double weapon with "speed" on one side, and none on the other. Or alternatively, you could have a double weapon with "speed" on both sides. Would that make a difference? I find this problem similar to the Flurry and TWF problem. Can you stack extra attacks? Or should they be treated as bonuses. Item abilities aren't really enhancement bonuses. Do they stack?
arykard 08-15-05, 03:56 PM	Saying something that requires a full round action to happen but doesn't take up the entire full round action is where the issue lies here. And again, wll be placed in the hands of the DM to decide. (chuckles) and how can people possibly say that with a straight face? That's my question. "A full-round action consumes all your effort during a round." I get "A" Full Round Action. Singular. Not "2" Full Round Actions. Even 3.0 Haste only gave only gave you 1 extra partial action.
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 05:55 PM	Wow, you could potentially get 13 attacks per round at epic level... even with just 2 arms. It doesn't explicitly state that speed on a weapon doesn't stack with haste does it? Yes, it does. It is in the DMG. However, it is very possible to have an ungodly number of attacks with a Monk and with a very high damage ratings per strike. However, Monks only have a medium BAB and they have problems with MAD. They will never rival pure Fighter-types for sheer damage per hit, and so DR will be a masive issue for them. However, with Psionic feats, they should be able to play the spring-attacker with a massive one-hit psi-strike before moving so far away that the opponent cannot effectively strike back at them.
Alynn 08-15-05, 09:06 PM	I'm actually quite amused that I asked what I thought was a simple question with no strings, and all this comes out of it. Fun stuff.
Tedly224 08-15-05, 09:26 PM	It's not my intent to hijack the thread, but since we have some monk rules specialists or DM's with experience with them... I have to ask. If a monk uses no weapon at all and is just going for bare handed attacks, how does two weapon fighting work here? I see from the monk's class description that there "is no such thing as an off hand attack" which states that the monk always gets full strength bonus for attacking with the other hand. But aside from that, *can* the monk always get an extra attack in from the second hand? Do normal two weapon fighting penalties apply? And if it is possible, what feats seem to help improve off handed unarmed combat? Anything that doesn't specifically have text stating a weapon must be used in the off hand? Thanks.
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 09:29 PM	I'm actually quite amused that I asked what I thought was a simple question with no strings, and all this comes out of it. Fun stuff. The Monk Flurry + TWF question has been around for a very long time. Long and loud enough that the FAQ addressed it explicitly. Of course, we have a lot of disgruntled customers out there that think they know better than the people that created the game, but hey, that's their view and they are entitled to it. It doesn't mean we have to cater for them, though. The RAW is sort of ambiguous but the FAQ is not. So, therefore, according to RAW, you can use it.
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 09:34 PM	It's not my intent to hijack the thread, but since we have some monk rules specialists or DM's with experience with them... I have to ask. If a monk uses no weapon at all and is just going for bare handed attacks, how does two weapon fighting work here? I see from the monk's class description that there "is no such thing as an off hand attack" which states that the monk always gets full strength bonus for attacking with the other hand. But aside from that, *can* the monk always get an extra attack in from the second hand? Do normal two weapon fighting penalties apply? And if it is possible, what feats seem to help improve off handed unarmed combat? Anything that doesn't specifically have text stating a weapon must be used in the off hand? Thanks. Normal TWF penalties apply and you only get 0.5 Str for the off-hand attack. The "no such thing" statement only applies to your normal attacks to prevent people from having arguments about Str bonuses (1x or 0.5x or 1.5x??) for your primary attacks because the paragraph also states that it does not matter which hand or foot you do your primary attack with (you can even do it with a body in your arms..... that sounds so wrong....). It was obviously never intended to mean that you can NEVER have an off-hand attack with your fists, or the FAQ would have stated otherwise. So, yes, you can TWF with your other fist, but with the normal TWF penalties (it is considered a light weapon) and at 0.5x Str to damage. All standard feats that enhances TWF will enhance unarmed TWF, including TWDefense.
Alynn 08-15-05, 09:40 PM	so bottom line... my monk TWF kobolds with duel wielding nunchuka would be +2 STR +2 BAB +1 MWK, and +1 Size for +6 normal attack bonus. Level 3 monk +4/+4 TWF only for 1d4+2/1d4+1 +2/+2/+2 Flurry TWF for 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d4+1 ;)
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 09:43 PM	so bottom line... my monk TWF kobolds with duel wielding nunchuka would be +2 STR +2 BAB +1 MWK, and +1 Size for +6 normal attack bonus. Level 3 monk +4/+4 TWF only for 1d4+2/1d4+1 +2/+2/+2 Flurry TWF for 1d4+2/1d4+2/1d4+1 ;) Level 3 Monk = +2 BAB So, your AB would be: +6 With Flurry, it is: +4/+4 With TWF, it is: +4/+4 With TWF and Flurry, it is: +2/+2/+2 Damage is 1d4+2 for all but the off-hand attack, which is 1d4+1. You are right.
Sapp 08-15-05, 09:53 PM	Yes, it does. It is in the DMG. However, it is very possible to have an ungodly number of attacks with a Monk and with a very high damage ratings per strike. However, Monks only have a medium BAB and they have problems with MAD. They will never rival pure Fighter-types for sheer damage per hit, and so DR will be a masive issue for them. However, with Psionic feats, they should be able to play the spring-attacker with a massive one-hit psi-strike before moving so far away that the opponent cannot effectively strike back at them. Yes. Lord Ian Stark corrected me on that mistake. You're right about monks having medium BAB, but that shouldn't stop them from having base 4 attacks per round. By taking 4 levels of fighter or paladin (or ranger, if you will), and 16 levels of Monk, a character can have a BAB of +16, giving them 4 attacks per round. The saves don't suffer too much, I believe it is Fort +14, Reflex +11, and Will +11, which evens out to +12 average (which is what a monk normally has). Paladin is the best for those 4 levels, I believe. Some of the paladin's best class abilities come during those first four levels. Divine Grace, Divine Health (which is better than Purity of Body, since it applies to magic diseases too), etc... I think monks can deal as much damage as fighters. There is a gap, but it's probably not as bad as most people think (+4 BAB bonus difference between a Monk16/Paladin4 and a Fighter20). At higher levels, the Monk will have better AC than a fighter too. And if the DM does accept the FAQ, then Monks can have a godly number of attacks with TWF and Flurry, even compared to Fighter. Though I can see what you mean about Fighters having more bonus feats to spend on the TWF feats.
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 10:07 PM	Yes. Lord Ian Stark corrected me on that mistake. You're right about monks having medium BAB, but that shouldn't stop them from having base 4 attacks per round. By taking 4 levels of fighter or paladin (or ranger, if you will), and 16 levels of Monk, a character can have a BAB of +16, giving them 4 attacks per round. The saves don't suffer too much, I believe it is Fort +14, Reflex +11, and Will +11, which evens out to +12 average (which is what a monk normally has). Paladin is the best for those 4 levels, I believe. Some of the paladin's best class abilities come during those first four levels. Divine Grace, Divine Health (which is better than Purity of Body, since it applies to magic diseases too), etc... I think monks can deal as much damage as fighters. There is a gap, but it's probably not as bad as most people think (+4 BAB bonus difference between a Monk16/Paladin4 and a Fighter20). At higher levels, the Monk will have better AC than a fighter too. And if the DM does accept the FAQ, then Monks can have a godly number of attacks with TWF and Flurry, even compared to Fighter. Though I can see what you mean about Fighters having more bonus feats to spend on the TWF feats. You mis-read what I said. I said that Fighter-types, because of things like 2-hd weapons and Power Attack, can reliably hit someone for more damage per hit than the Monk. However, the Monk can smack someone with Spring Attack and then disappear before the guy can do anything back to him because of his rather obscene speed. But high AC monsters will still cause a Monk a lot of problems, as will DR. Monks depend on number of attacks rather than single powerful attacks and DR tend to hose those. Monks can't even try to get around DR as it is... difficult... to have a golf bag of hands/feet handy... At higher levels, I don't really see the Monk equalling a Ftr in terms of sheer AC without a bit of fiddling with class dips. However, they have anti-magic compensation. A lot of anti-magic compensation. I never liked Paladin as the 4 level dip. That is really opening him up to MAD. A Paladin's abilities really suck synergetically with a Monk. Chances are Cha is going to be a dump stat for a Monk, so your +to saves and Lay on Hands is useless. Aura of Courage when you have high saves and Still Mind is a bit redundant. You get one measly spell and you are never getting your mount. Monks already get Immune Disease, so why bother with the Paladin one? Ranger is a better dip for skill points, skills and the first TWF feat for free. Alternatively, Fighter with WF:unarmed strike and WS:unarmed strike is a better bet.
Ax'Orl 08-15-05, 10:08 PM	The FAQ does not change the rules, that is what Eratta does. In this case the FAQ is clarifying the GRAMMAR of the PHB, for those who do not/cannot understand it. If you read the text in the PHB regarding FoB, the line about "no off hand" for a monk striking unarmed is followed by the statement [paraphrased] "thus, a monk adds his full str. to all unarmed attacks". This would grammatically indicate that a monk can TWF, unarmed, with FoB and NONE of his unarmed flurry attacks suffer the .5 STR DMG mod. At least that is how we play it. Now, in 3.0 FoB specifically replaced TWF for a monk however in 3.5 it does not.
Sapp 08-15-05, 10:17 PM	You mis-read what I said. I said that Fighter-types, because of things like 2-hd weapons and Power Attack, can reliably hit someone for more damage per hit than the Monk. However, the Monk can smack someone with Spring Attack and then disappear before the guy can do anything back to him because of his rather obscene speed. But high AC monsters will still cause a Monk a lot of problems, as will DR. Monks depend on number of attacks rather than single powerful attacks and DR tend to hose those. Monks can't even try to get around DR as it is... difficult... to have a golf bag of hands/feet handy... At higher levels, I don't really see the Monk equalling a Ftr in terms of sheer AC without a bit of fiddling with class dips. However, they have anti-magic compensation. A lot of anti-magic compensation. I never liked Paladin as the 4 level dip. That is really opening him up to MAD. A Paladin's abilities really suck synergetically with a Monk. Chances are Cha is going to be a dump stat for a Monk, so your +to saves and Lay on Hands is useless. Aura of Courage when you have high saves and Still Mind is a bit redundant. You get one measly spell and you are never getting your mount. Monks already get Immune Disease, so why bother with the Paladin one? Ranger is a better dip for skill points, skills and the first TWF feat for free. Alternatively, Fighter with WF:unarmed strike and WS:unarmed strike is a better bet. What DR are you talking about? I assumed we were just talking about normal monster DR, which is usually bypassed by magic. I see now you probably mean versus epic NPCs who've taken the DR feat? That's probably true. Monks are lacking in terms of damage. Then again, they are heavily item dependent, unless you take the Vow of Poverty (most concocted versions of the Epic Vow of Poverty provide Good and a few other properties to the ascetic's natural attacks). There's also the "Sense Weakness" feat (Draconomicon, I believe) that allows you to bypass 5 points of any form of damage reduction.
TheNatealator 08-15-05, 10:39 PM	Monks should have no problem with DR at higher levels. By level 5, she overcomes /magic DR, /lawful at lvl 10, /adamantine (and hardness) at lvl 15, and her own DR of 10/magic at level 20. I can't speak from experience, as I've never had a character at high level, but I don't think it's all about BAB when the monk has so many other abilities. Perfect Self is the reason why my monk started monk, and is going to finish monk, and I don't care how much more damage/hit "fighter-types" get. That's how I feel, at least. :)
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 10:41 PM	What DR are you talking about? I assumed we were just talking about normal monster DR, which is usually bypassed by magic. I see now you probably mean versus epic NPCs who've taken the DR feat? That's probably true. Monks are lacking in terms of damage. Then again, they are heavily item dependent, unless you take the Vow of Poverty (most concocted versions of the Epic Vow of Poverty provide Good and a few other properties to the ascetic's natural attacks). There's also the "Sense Weakness" feat (Draconomicon, I believe) that allows you to bypass 5 points of any form of damage reduction. Silver, Cold Iron, Good, to name but a few. Many things have them, especially Feys, Outsiders, Lycans and certain Undead. Even one with simple Slashing or Piercing DR is gonna wreck havoc with a Monk's ability to nail him. In one of my campaigns, we ran into 4 zombies. The Monk got absolutely HAMMERED by them because of their DR 5/Slashing.
TheNatealator 08-15-05, 10:50 PM	Monks can have their special monk weapons enchanted for DR overcoming purposes. Lots of them can be made of silver or cold iron (or have the proper potion applied). I'm sure they can all be good aligned, and a kama is a good weapon for /slashing. It's also a trip weapon, which is a plus.
20goingon1232 08-15-05, 11:12 PM	Monks can have their special monk weapons enchanted for DR overcoming purposes. Lots of them can be made of silver or cold iron (or have the proper potion applied). I'm sure they can all be good aligned, and a kama is a good weapon for /slashing. It's also a trip weapon, which is a plus. For a measly 1d6 damage... And they are light weapons... And Monks generally don't have as good a Str to make up for the lower base dice damage as a Fighter-type... And... You get the idea. Monks generally are incredibly bad as weapon users. WotC overdid it with the unarmed combat nonsense. Heck, the old Chinese movies and serials had martial artists using swords, even TWF-ing swords and going on a round the world jumping spree plus beam weapons coming out of their fists... And they were the original unarmed Monk tradition areas.
Sapp 08-16-05, 01:19 AM	Silver, Cold Iron, Good, to name but a few. Many things have them, especially Feys, Outsiders, Lycans and certain Undead. Even one with simple Slashing or Piercing DR is gonna wreck havoc with a Monk's ability to nail him. In one of my campaigns, we ran into 4 zombies. The Monk got absolutely HAMMERED by them because of their DR 5/Slashing. Early levels when you haven't invested too much into your unarmed strikes (with feats) you could just use magical kamas or other magical items for that purpose. And then onto epic, you could get Keen Strike, which allows slashing unarmed attacks. Anyway, I admit that you're right about monk not being as good at melee as a fighter. After all, that's all fighters are good for. Higher BAB, higher HP per HD, more combat oriented feats, etc. Kamas are alright. I think you underestimate them. They're a "measly" 1d6 damage, but hey, that's what a lot of two-weapon fighters get anyway. Kukris, rapiers, and scimitars, for example, only deal 1d4 or 1d6, but they are among the best weapons because of the fact they only give a -2 penalty for two weapon fighting, AND have a huge critical threat range of 18-20 (15-20 with improved critical... 14-20 if keen... 35% critical threat anyone? Who needs a high attack bonus when you're always hitting 35% of the time? And who cares about making the critical hit? Critical threat at least guarantees a hit). About the "overdoing" the unarmed attacks? I think it's fine. I doubt most of the monks in those old Chinese movies got past level 5 anyway (and yes, I've watched tons of those movies, haha). The monks in those movies or television series (the high fantasy ones) that DID become high level (and started using abilities similar to quivering palm and ignoring damage from swords via some form of "perfect self", etc) did do more damage with their unarmed attacks than with their weapon (at least 4-5 series that I've seen). Man, some of those series were funny. Two guys, standing there, not moving, palms against palms, staring. A trickle of blood flows gently down one man's face. The other man smiles, "I win." And the bleeding guy gets blasted back and dies. Nice simulation of quivering palm, hahah. I haven't seen similar effects done with weapons. I know they're just oriental fantasy, but hey, I'm sure that was what you were referring to when you mentioned the Chinese movies and series.