Natural Attack + Monk

[JoeStock]

That interpretation is pretty stupid, it means you can hit with a greatsword, then 'start' your flurry and get a bunch of unarmed attacks, then 'end' your flurry and attack a few more times with your greatsword.... what was the point of not being able to use non-monk weapons in a flurry again ?

I think more sensibly, that phrase should be interpreted to mean that you can't use any non-monk weapons in the same round that you flurry in (I'd extend that to AoOs, too).

Well I did edit my post above, since I worded it incorrectly. I do think it's a stupid ruling, but it is the official ruling. I mainly am trying to see what Sage's POV is. The only thing I c an add is the extra limbs. A centuar does have 6, while a humandoid only has 4. The extra attack for the centuar is his hoof, so I think Sage is going for the centuar striking with his with human limbs and maybe the blunt sides of his front legs and than rearing back and kicking the guy square with a hoof.

Of course that brings in the "hands full" rule, which makes the point moot. Anyway I'm done. I was just trying to say there is an official ruling on this and while retarded, it is there. Back to lurking.

 

[meleeguy]

Monk attack with natural attack: Unarmed strike +11 / +6 melee (1d8+6) and 2 Claws +6 melee (1d6+3) and Bite +6 melee (1d8+3)[/list][/list]

Thanks for the detailed workup. Shouldn't my unarmed strikes do 2d6 base since I'm a large, 5th level monk for purposes of damage ?

Thanks again.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

He's not saying you are flurrying with the natural weapons. I get the impression you are flurrying with your unarmed strikes, the flurry than ends and you can do your natural attacks with high penatlies.

Nor am I. However, the monk rule cleary states that, when you flurry, you may only attack with unarmed strikes or monk weapons. If you attack with a natural weapon - whenever you choose to do it during the round -, you are attacking with something that is neither. Accordingly, it is not allowed with the Flurry.

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). She may attack with unarmed strikes and special monk weapons interchangeably as desired. When using weapons as part of a flurry of blows, a monk applies her Strength bonus (not Str bonus x1-1/2 or x1/2) to her damage rolls for all successful attacks, whether she wields a weapon in one or both hands. The monk can’t use any weapon other than a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows.

Did you use Flurry of Blows? Yes.
Therefore, you may not atatck with anything other than unarmed strikes or special monk weapons.

Of course this IS overpowered and certainly worthy of a house rule.

Or, you know, it is overpowered and prevented by the RAW, and therefore not in need of house ruling at all.

You might not have a high opinion of the sage or the FAQ, but Wizards is the maker of the game and thus the rule readings are considered by most players/gms as official.

And wrongly so.

Errata Rule: Primary Sources

When you find a disagreement between two D&D rules sources, unless an official errata file says otherwise, the primary source is correct. One example of a primary/secondary source is text taking precedence over a table entry. An individual spell description takes precedence
when the short description in the beginning of the spells chapter disagrees.

Another example of primary vs. secondary sources involves book and topic precedence. The Player’s Handbook, for example, gives all the rules for playing the game, for PC races, and the base class descriptions. If you find something on one of those topics from the Dungeon Master’s Guide or the Monster Manual that disagrees with the Player’s Handbook, you should assume the Player’s Handbook is the primary source. The Dungeon Master’s Guide is the primary source for topics such as magic item descriptions, special material construction rules, and so on. The Monster Manual is the primary source for monster descriptions, templates, and supernatural, extraordinary, and spell-like abilities.

The Sage is not a book. He is not an errata file. Therefore, he is not a primary source. When what he says contradicts the primary source for a particular rule, the primary source (the RAW) take precedence.

The Sage has some good house rules - but they are house rules, and should be labeled as such.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Shouldn't my unarmed strikes do 2d6 base since I'm a large, 5th level monk for purposes of damage ?

Yep! I forgot that a Dire Ape is large. I've edited my earlier post.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Patryn- I agree with most everything you have said, but am unsure about the last two bullets; specifically, I thought that a Monk could add only *one* natural attack (primary only?) at -5 AB in addition to his normal attacks.

I see no limitation on a single natural weapon being used as a secondary natural attack.

rowport may just have been confused by your earlier statement:

If you are using manufactured weapons (and unarmed strike counts as one), you may only use a single natural weapon as a secondary natural attack.

Aside from this inconsistency, I agree with the quite detailed and excellent responses.

 

[radferth]

This isn't spelled out, but I would certainly house rule that using monk unarmed strikes occupies one hand for the round. I. e. If a monk with claws was using unarmed monk attacks in a round w/o flurry, I would cut one claw attack from the natural attacks he could take after his "regular" monk attacks.

As the the Sage, I bear him (or whatever hapless intern get stuck answering his mail for the day) no ill will, but I never occured to me to take sage rulings as Official Rules. Not that this matters to anyone's individual game what the Sage says, but on these boards I propose that his rulings carry no more weight than any other learned poster.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

rowport may just have been confused by your earlier statement

Aside from this inconsistency, I agree with the quite detailed and excellent responses.

Thanks for pointing that out!

I started posting that, and then went back and checked the SRD to make sure I had it right (I didn't, originally). For some reason, I then typed it in wrong anyway!

It's fixed now.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

This isn't spelled out, but I would certainly house rule that using monk unarmed strikes occupies one hand for the round.

I wouldn't, because:

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.

So, your clawed monk could easily perform all his monk attacks with his knees and feet, keeping his hands clear.

If, on the other hand (heh!), he had a kama or a quarterstaff in hand, I would certainly reduce the number of claw attacks he could make.

As the the Sage, I bear him (or whatever hapless intern get stuck answering his mail for the day) no ill will

Me neither. Like I said, he occasionally comes up with some great House Rules - which I've used, in the past. I just don't like it when he House Rules something and then passes it off as a the one true interpretation of the RAW.

 

[rowport]

rowport may just have been confused by your earlier statement: Aside from this inconsistency, I agree with the quite detailed and excellent responses.

Infiniti2000 is right- I could not reconcile the two statements. With your follow-ups, it makes sense to me now. Thanks, Patryn!

PS - As a player of a Monk with Natural Attacks (specifically, a Wererat) this topic has come up many, many times at our game table. I think we finally have a clear, workable answer- even if it does vary some from the FAQ.

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Infiniti2000 is right- I could not reconcile the two statements. With your follow-ups, it makes sense to me now. Thanks, Patryn!

PS - As a player of a Monk with Natural Attacks (specifically, a Wererat) this topic has come up many, many times at our game table. I think we finally have a clear, workable answer- even if it does vary some from the FAQ.

I'm very, very sorry to have confused you!

Like I said, I started typing that response, and then thought to myself, "Waitaminute ... Am I really, really sure you can only use one natural weapon as a secondary attack?"

So, I researched it, found out you could use them all, and *then* posted the old version anyway! What was I thinking? I can only plead a case of workitis.

Good luck with your wererat monk - sounds like an interesting character!