Monk flurry = TWF?

[risner]

Is this statement actually taking a position?

I ask because my copy of the PH says, explicitly, jack and squat about the question of whether or not both weapons in TWF can be unarmed strikes.

It was pointing out that what position the RAW takes depends on the interpretation of the rules. So I assure you that your PHB both explicitly says you can and explicitly says you can't TWF with Unarmed Strikes. In short, it becomes a "ask you DM" thing since RAW isn't specific enough to be sure what is meant.

Oh, and if we really want to be technical, monks aren't proficient in unarmed strike.

Re: Full attack actions and full round actions: By your logic, I could make a full move while also making a full attack action
means that weapons and unarmed strikes are two separate weapons, and thus TWF and flurry are mutually exclusive.

Monks don't have Simple weapons nor Unarmed Strikes explicitly listed in the weapon list, but they do use Unarmed Strikes and they have IUS. It is very clear they do not take the proficiency penalty despite not having the two words present in the Weapon list. You can't use the fact that Monks (a class built around Unarmed Strikes) doesn't have them to base the theory that everyone has proficiency in them nor that the non proficiency penalty wouldn't apply to other classes.

Sigh.... No. Let me try again, since you seem to be avoiding looking at the book? In Monk it says "A monk must use a full attack action (see page 143) to strike with a flurry of blows." In TWF it says "If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon" and finally in Full Attack on page 143 it calls out TWF as things you can do. The rules are pretty explicit that a Monk doing a Flurry can make use of other things a Full Attack grants him such as Haste attacks, TWF attacks, attacks from items, etc. Pretty much anything that normally can be done with a Full Attack is still explicitly on the take in the Full Attack rules.

As it has already been pointed out, Flurry and TWF together is the official rules interpretation by WotC.

Thank you for bringing this up. The quarterstaff isn't just a two-handed weapon. It's a double-weapon.

Taking that stance requires you ignore the Flurry "there is no such thing as an offhand attack" rule. If while finishing your Flurry in the Full Attack you have yet to attack offhand, then you may add offhand attacks as part of the Full Attack rules using TWF penalties (which needed to apply to your previously finished Flurry attacks.)

 

[Arkhandus]

Wow, too many replies. I'll just condense it.

Re: unarmed strikes and proficiency: Those of you who say it requires proficiency would appear to be correct (and yes, Vegepygmy, it IS a weapon - otherwise it wouldn't require proficiency). Huh. It's rather stupid, though... if they (my fists) are part of my body, I should know how to USE them, right? I mean, you're already suffering an AoO for attacking unarmed - why tack a -4 on top of it? And.. if they're not natural weapons, what are they? They're certainly not manufactured weapons. This is why we've had so many problems over the years with magic fang and the monk's unarmed strike. If WotC would just man up and say "Yes, it's a natural attack" it would clear so many things up. It really wouldn't break the game. Honest.

Oh, and if we really want to be technical, monks aren't proficient in unarmed strike. Check their weapon list.

Re: Club proficiency: Yes, it's a fairly common house rule.

Re: MWF. The prereqs are Dex 13, three or more arms. A human monk cannot take it. Period.

Re: Full attack actions and full round actions: By your logic, I could make a full move while also making a full attack action, since I

And now, back to the discussion at hand...

I remember a line in the flurry description that might prove pertinent:

It goes on to use a quarterstaff (a two-handed weapon) as an example. This, to me, means that weapons and unarmed strikes are two separate weapons, and thus TWF and flurry are mutually exclusive.

We humans, though, aren't as naturally inclined towards using our bodies as weapons compared to an animal, which has the instincts and upbringing to mold them into an effective user of their fangs, claws, or whatever. I'd be a lot more scared of an ape trying to beat on me or a gator trying to whip its tail at my face than I would be of another human being trying to punch me. We need formal training to regain the natural instincts for unarmed combat; animals don't. And Joe Shmoe isn't going to throw as good or accurate a punch as Bob the Boxer or Max the Martial Artist. So I don't have a problem with the need for proficiency (hardly any classes lack Simple Weapon Proficiency, just wizards and a few others, anyway).

But yeah, technically, monks aren't specifically called out as being proficient in unarmed strikes. But then, Wizards of the Coast never really bothered to clarify the monk's unarmed fighting ability like they should have, they always just left it vague and expected folks to understand it regardless. -_-

The full-attack action is a specific type of full-round action. Two-Weapon Fighting, Flurry of Blows, and other effects simply say that you must use a full-attack action in order to use these options. If you couldn't use more than one option with a full-attack, then you couldn't fight defensively at the same time (which would invalidate one of the benefits of the Two-Weapon Defense feat in the 3.5 core rules). Nor could you Power Attack and use Combat Expertise at the same time. Or Power Attack while TWFing. Or make a grapple attempt with one attack during a full-attack while making a trip attempt with one of the other attacks in that full-attack action. Yet you can; grapple, trip, and disarm are all valid replacements for an attack during the full-attack action, each replacing one normal attack in that action. Fighting with two weapons IS NOT a specific "special/exclusive" full-round action; it is simply one of many options that can be used during a full-attack action, like fighting defensively or Power Attacking or a Smite Evil attempt.

The reason you can't run, withdraw, charge, deliver a coup de grace, or whatever during a full-attack action is that those are listed as full-round actions of their own; they do not call themselves full-attack actions, nor do they say you must use the full-attack action with them. TWF and Flurry of Blows have been in 3e since the 3.0 PHB, yet neither that one nor the 3.5 PHB list them as specific Full-Round Actions in the table or other listings of the Combat chapter. That is because they are not distinct, special full-round actions of their own; they are merely options for use during a full-attack.

The quarterstaff is called out in the monk description because it needed some extra clarification given its unusual status compared to other monk weapons. They needed to explain how it worked in combination with the other rules of the Flurry of Blows, since it was normally a two-handed weapon and normally oculd be used as a double weapon.

 

[Wrathstorm]

hmmm i am not sure how it worked in 3ed but i believe in 3.5 you flurry with your main hand and make your normal off hand attacks with the off hand
that's how we have been playing at least
and actually if you take a look at the sample NPC of the exotic weapon master in Complete warrior you will notice that he has two full attack entries main hand + off hand and flurry at main hand normal off hand!
(i know that this is an example of the EWM prestige class but it still is a kind of flurry)

 

[StreamOfTheSky]

hmmm i am not sure how it worked in 3ed but i believe in 3.5 you flurry with your main hand and make your normal off hand attacks with the off hand
that's how we have been playing at least
and actually if you take a look at the sample NPC of the exotic weapon master in Complete warrior you will notice that he has two full attack entries main hand + off hand and flurry at main hand normal off hand!
(i know that this is an example of the EWM prestige class but it still is a kind of flurry)

In 3.5, the entire body is a single "weapon." It doesn't matter if you're making the unarmed strike with fists, feet, knees, headbutts, elbows, it's all your unarmed strike.

"A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes. "

As I mentioned way back half a year ago, considering all a monk's unarmed strikes are the same "weapon" and can even count as natural or manufactured weapons as it best suits the monk*, it makes no sense ot me why they can't just enhance their weapon the same as a Fighter enhances his sword, instead of paying ludicrous prices on things like the Amulet of Mighty Fists, which is really only worth it for monsters with lots of natural weapons.

*Same link, also under unarmed strike: "A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."