Are shuriken useful?

[James McMurray]

It's rules-lawyerism of the most obnoxious kind.

What he said. But then again, this is the Rules forum, so you have to expect that sort of thing every now and then.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

You're missing that Two-Weapon Fighting is specifically applicable to thrown weapons in 3.5.

You're right, I hadn't realized that.

The only reference in 3.5 that would suggest a prohibition on combining TWF and Flurry is "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed".

Since you're using weapons, you're not "striking unarmed", and thus there's nothing preventing you using off-hand attacks.

Since the weapons you're using are special monk weapons, you can Flurry.

"Flurry replaces TWF" is not a rule; it's an assumption people make that has no support in the 3.5 rules.

Interesting. This is one of those times where it's good to know the actual rule, so I can Rule 0 it. A Flurry is using both hands, feet, head, etc. to get extra attacks, IMO. It isn't just extra attacks with the primary hand, allowing TWF attacks with the off-hand.

Or so it shall be House Ruled IMC from this point onward.

 

[Henry]

Only a twink trying to tweak extra attacks out of the system would come up with an interpretation that allowed both flurry and two-weapon fighting simply because it's a flurry with a "monk weapon" and not their unarmed attack. It's rules-lawyerism of the most obnoxious kind.

It's also legal, and more helpful to know it can be done legally than to have a player try to surprise you with it.

Look at it this way: Better to know about it, than not.

 

[The Hanged Man]

Hyp: I hate E-sub (whatever). And no, I don't think you could do that.

And who tells you that you can't stack two Flame Arrow spells ? The spell description or what?

Effects from the same spell don't stack. So, only one Flame Arrow fire bonus per shuriken.

 

[Unseelie]

In the monk description, where it talks about unarmed attack, especially referring to flurry, it includes special monk weapons that can be used with flurry, too. Only a twink trying to tweak extra attacks out of the system would come up with an interpretation that allowed both flurry and two-weapon fighting simply because it's a flurry with a "monk weapon" and not their unarmed attack. It's rules-lawyerism of the most obnoxious kind.

Actually, if you do the math, it's not that bad. It's only really advantageous if you combine Flurry and TWF against unarmored opponents. I don't have a problem with that, mowing through unarmored mooks is what Monks do.

When was the last time you threw low AC opponents against a party of 10th level adventurers? They're gonna die no matter what you do.

The moment you start raising the AC of the target, the combined penalties start hurting you and you end up doing less average damage per turn.

I'm currently playing a Rng 4/Monk 6 and Flurry/TWF has hardly worked to my benefit. If I could rebuild her and take the archery path instead, I would. I'd still Rng/Monk though... member of the Monastery of the Yellow Rose and I wanted the Outdoors Skills.

 

[Elder-Basilisk]

I think it goes hand in hand with their designation as ammunition.

PH. 113. "Although they are thrown weapons, Shuriken are treated as ammunition for the purposes of drawing them..." This text is repeated on p. 121.

So apparently there is something special about drawing ammunition that is different from drawing a thrown weapon. That makes the rest of the case more plausible.

IMO The two leading candidates are "it's not a weapon so quickdraw can't ever apply" and "drawing ammunition is a free action." Balance considerations point towards the latter interpretation because shuriken don't need to be made any wimpier by prohibiting the use of full attack actions with them.

For a bow, drawing arrows is unambiguously free.

Crossbows require a move action to load. Note, however, that, although connected with drawing, loading is not the same thing. A character could have a bolt in one hand and a crossbow in the other. It still takes either the rapid reload feat or a move action to load the crossbow. Conversely, a character need not spend a move action to draw a bolt before he loads the crossbow. I think that much is clear.

Now, let's take another section of the rules. Rapid Reload (P. 99). This reduces the time required to reload a crossbow to a free action (light or hand crossbow) or a move action (heavy crossbow). With a light or hand crossbow, the character can make use of the full attack option as he could if he were using a normal bow.

Now, breaking down that description, nowhere does it mention making drawing the bolt a free action. Were it a move action to retrieve a crossbow bolt, the character would not be able to make full attacks even if he had the rapid reload feat.

One could also make a literal case that the "when using a bow...can draw ammunition as a free action" means that, as long as the monk is holding a bow he can draw as many shuriken as he wants. A better way of interpreting those words, however, is "When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action; [Even after drawing ammunition,] crossbows and slings [still] require an action for reloading."

Where are we getting the information that you can draw shuriken as a free action without Quickdraw? The SRD states that shuriken are ammunition, and When using a bow, a character can draw ammunition as a free action; crossbows and slings require an action for reloading. It doesn't say anything about shuriken, why would someone assume that drawing them is a free action.

Something in the Player's? (which I don't have with me, now)?

pvandyck

 

[Saeviomagy]

Shuriken are generaly only really useful fro sneak attacks and poison delivery.
Even then , you really need multiple attacks and quick draw to make them practical. Of course , it would be very cool to catch your enemies flat footed and hit them with a couple of shuriken sneak attacks and have them have to deal with abiltiy score damage from poison to boot.

In 3.0 maybe. None of this applies to 3.5. Go revise.

In the monk description, where it talks about unarmed attack, especially referring to flurry, it includes special monk weapons that can be used with flurry, too. Only a twink trying to tweak extra attacks out of the system would come up with an interpretation that allowed both flurry and two-weapon fighting simply because it's a flurry with a "monk weapon" and not their unarmed attack.

Yeah. It's is SO overpowered to allow the use of lame weapons for a class with a second-best BAB with feats that anybody can get in order to gain a whole 2 extra attacks which are the primary combat benefit of said class. Hell - I'd let a monk do this unarmed as well.

To whit - the tactic requires at a minimum, a 12th level monk/7th level primary fighter with no less than a dex of 19, 5 feats and a spell.

The result has two attacks more than a 19th level fighter, but has a BAB of only 16, and is taking -4 on every attack.

The base attack bonus is:
12/12/12/12/12/12/7/7/2/2/-3

The fighter has 3 points more attack bonus, and isn't limited to using shurikens.

Quite frankly this tactic is a bit of BFW.

It's rules-lawyerism of the most obnoxious kind.

Oh. How terrible! People are using the rules and drawing sensible conclusions! Save me!

 

[pawsplay]

Not only does the TWF + Flurry of blows combination appear to be correct, but I finally see a reason to purchase a nunchaku and learn TWF.

 

[Lord Pendragon]

Oh. How terrible! People are using the rules and drawing sensible conclusions! Save me!

Sensible. Yeah. I know that's what I was thinking when Hyp spelled it out for me. Uh, yeah.

 

[Camarath]

I just thought I would post some links to two old Threads about TWF and Flurry for anyone who might be interest.
Flurry of Blows and Two Weapon Fighting (has some comparative tables)
[3.5] Monks and two weapons (the first 3.5 thread on the issue)