Badger Kung Fu -- need rules help! Thx.

[Graf]

Every creature - regardless of physiology - can make an unarmed strike. It's just that most will never need or want to.

Badgers have claws and bites - which are better than a badger's unarmed strike (which does less damage and provokes an AoO when used).

He cannot mix flurry and non-monk weapons (and natural weapons are not monk weapons). Therefore, he cannot flurry and use his claw, claw, bite routine at the same time.

He could, however, make his normal unarmed attacks, and then use his claw, claw, bite routine as secondary natural weapons. They take a -5 penalty to his best attack roll, and only apply .5 of his Strength bonus to damage.

This interpretation seems erronious to me.

As blargney said if you flurry or use iterative attacks you do not get your normal attack routine.
There -are- exceptions (Long Tooth shifter feat, and some deformity feat I just saw in the Heroes of Horror book) but they all say specifically in the feat section.
Anyway even if that were possible it would be more like Unarmed Strike (Flurry) + one Bite Attack at -5 to hit.

Let him use Kung-fu badger if he wants to (and it fits in your game; it wouldn't in mine). penalties to hit (plus the loss of Bab from taking a single level of Monk) will limit the minor advantage of being able to use claws and get some natual armor.

 

[Shadowdweller]

He cannot mix flurry and non-monk weapons (and natural weapons are not monk weapons). Therefore, he cannot flurry and use his claw, claw, bite routine at the same time.

You really should preface your answers by stating "IGNORES THE FAQ," Patryn. (Which might very well be reasonable in certain circumstances of course)

FAQ, p. 8. Right-hand column, third question:

The monk can't use his natural weapon attacks as part of a flurry of blows, but he can make natural weapon attacks in addition to the flurry. Such attacks suffer the same -2 penalty as the monk's flurry attacks in addition to the normal -5 penalty for secondary natural attacks.

If you don't ignore the FAQ, yes you CAN use a flurry of blows and natural weapons simultaneously.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You really should preface your answers by stating "IGNORES THE FAQ," Patryn.

Alright.

IGNORES THE FAQ, WHICH IS WRONG.

Better?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

This interpretation seems erronious to me.

As blargney said if you flurry or use iterative attacks you do not get your normal attack routine.

I'm not certain what your objection is.

Anyway even if that were possible it would be more like Unarmed Strike (Flurry) + one Bite Attack at -5 to hit.

Er, what's stopping him from using his claws?

 

[blargney the second]

Alright.

IGNORES THE FAQ, WHICH IS WRONG.

Better?

*laugh*

So you mean to say that it's wrong to ignore the FAQ?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Yeah, that's what I meant ...

What puzzles me is Graf mentioned you when responding to my post, and we agree ...

 

[glass]

But....

Monks can take Improved Natural Attack (as recently answered, then discussed on a looong thread here).

What's that writhing sound coming from that can you're holding? Oh I see, it's worms...

That looong thread didn't really have any conclusion, so you can't use 'Monks can take Improved Natural Attack' as evidence in another argument, because it is by no means certain that they can (in fact, I am pretty certain that they can't ).

Interestingly, a druid monk with wildshape can take INA because he can have natural weapons. And he can apply it to both his real natural attacks and his unarmed strikes while wildshaped. But as soon as he leaves wildshape, he loses the prerequisite and can't use the feat.


glass.

 

[glass]

You really should preface your answers by stating "IGNORES THE FAQ," Patryn. (Which might very well be reasonable in certain circumstances of course)

I don't think that preface is necesary. Any discussion of the rules will by necessity ignore the FAQ, because the FAQ often bears no resemblance to the rules.

IOW, 'Ignores the FAQ' is implied by the forum title!


glass.

 

[Shadowdweller]

I don't think that preface is necesary. Any discussion of the rules will by necessity ignore the FAQ, because the FAQ often bears no resemblance to the rules.

IOW, 'Ignores the FAQ' is implied by the forum title!


glass.

Ahem. What was that about a can of worms?

What's that writhing sound coming from that can you're holding? Oh I see, it's worms...

 

[Vraille Darkfang]

At htis point....

My answer would drift into house rules.

I understand that the rules about Monk's not using natural attacks with flurry is to prevent the wierd Druid turing into a Ninja T-Rex, but it strains my game world pseudo-realism at the expense of a (very) minor rules issue.

For Example:

Let's say I have a race of Badger People (or the new spiky people in Magic of Incarnum) and these people have Natural Attacks. I if give them a eastern (by way of Hollywood westernism) ideology and system of Martial Arts.....

Why would their martial art-NOT be compatable with their natural weapons. Much like Kung-fu uses a person's natural abilites, so would a Martial Art developed by a race with natural weapons.

For my games, I let Natural Weapons count as unarmed. Since a race with a Martial Art & Natural Weapons would include the Natural Weapons within the art (or at least some schools of it).

If I smelled Cheese drifting off a player, I might make him take a Feat to combine Natural Attacks with Monk Abilities.

But, this drifts into house rules, away from the players request from offical info. I don't know of any. Others have doe a good deal showing how the rules work, officially.

As there is never any disagreement as to how the rules work 'Offically.'