Flurry of Blows and Special Attacks

[Artoomis]

I just sent off the following:

Question:

The scope of this first question is for a monk's unarmed attacks only.

May a monk's unarmed attacks (from a Flurry or otherwise) be used for:

Initiating a grapple?
Making Grapple Checks for pinning, etc., when the grapple check is noted to be in the place of an attack roll.
Disarm?
Trip?
Sunder?
Other Special Attacks that are done in the place of an attack?

Some folks are distinguishing the Flurry by stating it can only be used for an unarmed strike (as opposed to an "unarmed attack," as if an "unarmed strike" was a subset of "unarmed attacks") and that grapples, et.al. are not unarmed strikes so you can't do it.

--

Question: Is Sunder a Standard Action or just an Attack. The table of action shows it as a Standard Action, but the description say "melee attack," which may be the same thing,... or not.

--

Question: On a related note, with what can you make the "melee touch attack" to start a grapple? There is nothing stating you need to be unarmed, or that weapon bonuses would not apply. What about unarmed attack bonuses?

--

Question: Finally, to what does Weapon Focus (Grapple) apply? The initial melee touch attack? Grapple checks? Both?

--

Thanks for your help

To both the Sage and Customer Service.

 

[ZansForCans]

That's just silly.

Not really. You do not carry, ready, draw, drop, or put away an unarmed strike. It is not a real physical thing you are holding--think of it more as an effect. The definition is made this way deliberately, likely so it isn't by default subject to all the other rules (bonuses, etc.) that manufactured weapons are. It does not exist until it happens (i.e. your blow does damage). You can certainly try to deliver one though.

You cannot attempt to make an unarmed strike as defined in the glossary, because, in the glossary, an unarmed strike if defined already as being successful.

Now something's wrong, right?

Not really.

Your unarmed attack can fail to deliver the unarmed strike (the successful blow) by not beating the foe's AC. Attacking with it doesn't imply you succeed.

 

[heliopolix]

Your unarmed attack can fail to deliver the unarmed strike (the successful blow) by not beating the foe's AC. Attacking with it doesn't imply you succeed.

Ah ah ah.. but you're not allowed to make "unarmed attacks" in a FoB, only "unarmed strikes".

I think that you are reading way too much into the words "attack" and "strike". What WoTC needs to do is print a PHB where they only use one word to describe one thing. That would make for a pretty flavor-less read, but it would definitely be unambiguous.

 

[Liquidsabre]

An unarmed strike is one thing that can be delivered by an unarmed attack. You can think about it like a weapon if you need to (although it's not)--notice that unarmed strike is described under the Equipment chapter.

PHB p.121 "Unarmed Strike: ...an unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon."

 

[Artoomis]

...Your unarmed attack can fail to deliver the unarmed strike (the successful blow) by not beating the foe's AC. Attacking with it doesn't imply you succeed.

I am by nmo means advocating the potistion that an Unarmed STrike is always succesful. i am , howvere, trying to point out the silliness of looking at Unarmed Strike the way you are doing it.

Per the glossary (if you want to be technical about it) an Unarmed Strike is a SUCCESSFUL blow. It's what happens when you succeed with an unarmed attack.

That's the RAW.

More common sense-wise:

An Unarmed Strike is another word for an Unarmed Attack. If successful, it can deal real damage (Improved Unarmed Strike), subdual damage (normally, or by choice with Improved Unarmed Attack) or be used for one of many Special Attacks.

 

[MarauderX]

...
You can use flurry during a grapple, but only when using the "attack your opponent" grapple action. You make attack rolls (instead of grapple checks) then and are attempting to deliver an unarmed strike.

I guess you changed your mind from what you stated in this thread =>

You can't use flurry to initiate a Grapple. Once you are grappling, you can use the "Attack Your Opponent" grapple action with a flurry of blows (with the standard -4 penalty). However, you must use all the flurry attacks for really attacking (no pin snuck in at the end, for example).

I think Artoomis is also looking for what special attacks can be used with a FoB attack. As I read the rules, it is either all or none. By the rules, at least according to the recent thread mentioned by Hypersmurf on the subject, it is none. As I understand the rules a monk can use FoB OR a special attack, not FoB THEN a special attack.

 

[Artoomis]

...I think Artoomis is also looking for what special attacks can be used with a FoB attack...

Right.

By the rules, either way can be justified, depending uippn how much weight is given to certain words and definitions. (I wonder if we can even all agree on that?)

That means it's all about intent. Hopefully I'll get an answer from WoTC, though those tend to need to be taken with a grain of salt, too.

 

[ZansForCans]

Ah ah ah.. but you're not allowed to make "unarmed attacks" in a FoB, only "unarmed strikes".

You use an unarmed melee attack to deliver an unarmed strike. You use an unarmed melee attack to deliver a trip. You use an unarmed melee attack to deliver a touch spell. You use a melee attack to deliver a strike with a weapon.

You "may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons". It places no restrictions on the type of attacks. It does place restrictions on what you use for those attacks.

I think that you are reading way too much into the words "attack" and "strike". What WoTC needs to do is print a PHB where they only use one word to describe one thing. That would make for a pretty flavor-less read, but it would definitely be unambiguous.

No, they are completely separate game elements. That would be silly.

An attack is an attempt to do something to a foe. You usually roll a d20 for those.

An unarmed strike is the landed blow that does damage. You usually roll something other than a d20 for those.

 

[ZansForCans]

PHB p.121 "Unarmed Strike: ...an unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon."

You're pulling a quote about the weapon encumbrance classification of unarmed strike and are generalizing it. Are you saying this makes it a weapon?

No, it is "considered" a light weapon. You are still not armed (without IUS) when using an unarmed strike and you don't ready, wield, draw, or drop one. It works a lot like a weapon and for combat/skill/feat purposes, it's considered a light encumbrance one. But that's it.

 

[ZansForCans]

I guess you changed your mind from what you stated in this thread =>

No I didn't. They say the same thing.

I think Artoomis is also looking for what special attacks can be used with a FoB attack. As I read the rules, it is either all or none. By the rules, at least according to the recent thread mentioned by Hypersmurf on the subject, it is none. As I understand the rules a monk can use FoB OR a special attack, not FoB THEN a special attack.

Did you read the beginning of this thread? I copied over what I posted in the other thread. Hyp seemed to agree with that, if his opinion on the subject is important to you