Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hypersmurf" data-source="post: 1903031" data-attributes="member: 1656">Yeah, probably <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />In a flurry, a monk can only attack with unarmed strikes or special monk weapons.  A grapple check is neither.What he can do if he's already grappling is use the 'attack with light weapon at -4' option to Flurry with unarmed strikes or light special monk weapons, but he can't initiate a grapple, or use any of the grapple check options like damage opponent, pin, escape grapple, etc.I'm inclined to say no, but there's room to rule either way on the damage issue.When using the 'damage opponent' option, you're not using an unarmed strike... but you deal damage equivalent to your unarmed strike.Now, if you have a magic item that adds +2 to your damage when you make an unarmed strike, does 'damage equivalent to your unarmed strike' take that into account?  I'm inclined to say no... just as Bracers of Striking giving your unarmed strike the 'Holy' property wouldn't automatically apply +2d6 damage to evil creatures with a grapple.But someone else might rule differently, and still be supported by the wording <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />-Hyp.</blockquote>

Verification