Flurry of Touch Attacks

[pbd]

Can a Monk/Caster (cleric for example) use flurry of blows to deliver touch attacks with say produce flame? The spell normally allows you to do as many touch attacks as you have attacks per round, so could you use flurry of blows to add extra attacks, albeit at the normal minus to hit from your flurry?

 

[Mirage_Patrick]

definitely

 

[moritheil]

Looks good to me. You use up your charges faster, but that's a good thing in this case.

 

[pbd]

Looks good to me. You use up your charges faster, but that's a good thing in this case.

Yes, but at druid 9/monk 1 (which is where I think my current character is headed) you have 3 rounds of 3 Touch attacks at (with 16 dex) +9/+9/+4 for 1d6+5 each. Against most opponents that should't be too shabby...

Pbd

 

[Lasher Dragon]

I remember arguing with someone about just this. I say you can, if only because I love old kung-fu movies and the master suddenly striking like 4 or 5 pressure points in rapid succesion seems as close to a flurry of touch attacks as anything I've ever imagined.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As touch attacks? No. If he's delivering the attacks with an unarmed strike (dealing unarmed strike damage in addition to Produce Flame damage, but needing to hit the opponent's normal AC) then yes.

You can only Flurry with unarmed strikes or special monk weapons.

-Hyp.

 

[pbd]

As touch attacks? No. If he's delivering the attacks with an unarmed strike (dealing unarmed strike damage in addition to Produce Flame damage, but needing to hit the opponent's normal AC) then yes.

You can only Flurry with unarmed strikes or special monk weapons.

-Hyp.

Would it be feasible to flurry with unarmed strike, while using produce flame, and get the flame damage if you hit the opponents touch AC, but get the unarmed strike damage only if you hit their normal AC?

Basically, if you touch them, but do not get through their armor, you do the flame damage only, if you just outright hit them you do both.

 

[Crothian]

Would it be feasible to flurry with unarmed strike, while using produce flame, and get the flame damage if you hit the opponents touch AC, but get the unarmed strike damage only if you hit their normal AC?

Basically, if you touch them, but do not get through their armor, you do the flame damage only, if you just outright hit them you do both.

not by the rules, but you might get a DM to allow it anyway

 

[moritheil]

Would it be feasible to flurry with unarmed strike, while using produce flame, and get the flame damage if you hit the opponents touch AC, but get the unarmed strike damage only if you hit their normal AC?

Basically, if you touch them, but do not get through their armor, you do the flame damage only, if you just outright hit them you do both.

I would rule it that way, but I do not think that is supported in the hard and fast rules.

 

[pbd]

Not being snide here; where does it say that won't work?