Can a monk with natural weapons use them in a flurry?

[Arkhandus]

Isn't Flurry of Blows a special full-attack action anyway, to where the entire full-attack action is considered a flurry?
*may be thinking in outdated 3.0 terms though*

 

[Saeviomagy]

Any FAQ rulings which contradict the above are house rules. And, given the number of complaints I've seen on this board from people who find natural-attack-armed monks overpowered, they aren't well-thought out, at that.

I must admit, I've totally missed these, and to be honest I can't see how it would prove to be a problem, especially given the ability of, say, similarly built classes that do not require the flurry maneuver to do the same thing only better...

 

[Alzrius]

The FAQ seperates the use of natural weapons in a flurry and together with a flurry. The first is what the PHB rule means ("when using flurry of blows ..."). There is no contradiction, as the natural weapons are not used when the flurry is used, but are instead secondary attacks. This is quite clearly along the lines of the MM rules about manufactured and natural weapons as well.

And while I also do not agree with everything written in the FAQ, it is official and that is the current, official answer to the question. Whether you or me or anyone else likes it or not.

I think Thanee is correct. Any form of melee attack as a full-round action always lets you use natural weapons as secondary attacks, presuming you have any. It makes sense that once you've finished with your flurry, you could then make those same secondary attacks (which will still have the flurry penalty).

 

[Diirk]

In the same way it makes sense for the monk to be able to make offhand attacks with his shortsword after he's finished with his flurry ? Thats all secondary natural attacks are, really, a special form of offhand attack.

Besides, I'm of the opinion you aren't 'finished' with the flurry until your next turn.

 

[Ketjak]

I know this probably belongs in the House Rule section, but after looking at some of the expansion books with feats allowing for using flurry with specific weapons, I was thinking wouldn't it just be easier to just have a generalized feat that allows flurrying with any specific weapon as a feat (in this case natural weapons).

To this end I was wondering what people thought of this new feat to accomplish that (based on the doublesteel strike, serpent strike, etc. feats):

Flurry fighting-style

Pre-req: Flurry of blows, Proficiency (specific weapon), Weapon focus (specific weapon)

Description: A character with this feat has training in a specific weapon school of fighting. The character can use one specific weapon that he has both proficiency with and weapon focus in and use it in a flurry of blows. This feat can be taken multiple times, each time adding an additional specific weapon, but the character must meet the proficiency and weapon focus pre-requirements for the additional weapon.

Is there a situation where this feat could be abused to the point of brokeness? TWF Monk with improved trip and 2 whips come to mind. Feedback would be appreciated.

Greatsword... spiked chain... ouch.

 

[Alzrius]

In the same way it makes sense for the monk to be able to make offhand attacks with his shortsword after he's finished with his flurry ? Thats all secondary natural attacks are, really, a special form of offhand attack.

I agree. A monk with a shortsword wouldn't be able to use it during his normal flurry attack sequence, but once that was over, he could make an off-hand attack with it (though only if he remembered to apply the two-weapon fighting penalty to his previous attacks).

 

[Elephant]

By the RAW, no. However, keep in mind that the RAW is stupider than the stupidest human ever born. In my campaign, monks can use natural weapons as part of a flurry.

Note that, most of the time, a monk's unarmed damage is better than his natural weapon damage

 

[Bront]

Greatsword... spiked chain... ouch.

Eberron has Longspear, Double Sword (Which also requires two weapon fighting), and longsword. The long spear is fun since you can flurry with reach or without reach alternately, and you still threaten the squares around you with unarmed. Thead on this topic here

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Isn't Flurry of Blows a special full-attack action anyway, to where the entire full-attack action is considered a flurry?
*may be thinking in outdated 3.0 terms though*

You may only use FoB when using the Full Attack action.

A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows.

When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham).

The "You can use natural weapons alongside a Flurry" crowd depend on a reading of the rules in which, inside a particular full attack action, there's a definitive line between "flurrying" and "not flurrying."

By a similar reading:

WHIRLWIND ATTACK [GENERAL]
Prerequisites: Dex 13, Int 13, Combat Expertise, Dodge, Mobility, Spring Attack, base attack bonus +4.

Benefit: When you use the full attack action, you can give up your regular attacks and instead make one melee attack at your full base attack bonus against each opponent within reach.

When you use the Whirlwind Attack feat, you also forfeit any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.

Special: A fighter may select Whirlwind Attack as one of his fighter bonus feats.

There's a definitive line during the full-attack action between "whirlwinding" and "not whirlwinding," so a character with two weapons, Cleave, and Great Cleave can make his whirlwind attack and then, off-hand, make use of TWF and then Cleave to his heart's content, because the limitations of WWA no longer apply.

 

[apesamongus]

A distinction which appears nowhere else in the rules. In other words, they made it up.

That's how I understood it before ever seeing the faq. Your insistance that there isn't a difference is just as made up.