D&D 3E/3.5 Shuriken have changed in 3.5E

[Caliban]

This is just my opinion, although it is backed by the SRD and neatly solves the feat stacking problem and the possibility of getting a million attacks at third level ;-).

Flurry of blows - As a FULL ROUND ACTION (rule), a monk can unleash a flurry of blows/shuriken
TWF/ITWF/etc - As a FULL ROUND ACTION (not specified), a character can make one or more extra attacks with an off-hand weapon.
Rapid shot - As a FULL ROUND ACTION (rule), a character can make an additional ranged attack.

Take your pick, but they don't stack!

Bigwilly

Edited for spelling!

Except that none of those are full round actions. The feats and flurry can be used while taking the FULL ATTACK ACTION. While you are making a full attack, you can choose to use one or more of those feats or abilities to modify the attack.

 

[sledged]

Except that none of those are full round actions. The feats and flurry can be used while taking the FULL ATTACK ACTION. While you are making a full attack, you can choose to use one or more of those feats or abilities to modify the attack.

He's right.

PHB pg 40, second column, last sentence:

"A monk must use a full attack action (see page 143) to strike with a flurry of blows"

PHB pg 99, first column:

"You must use the full attack action (see page 143) to use this feat."

 

[Bigwilly]

Semantics

The feats and flurry can be used while taking the FULL ATTACK ACTION. While you are making a full attack, you can choose to use one or more of those feats or abilities to modify the attack.

Hmmm, methinks you are playing with the words. For a start the full attack action is listed under full round actions. Also, I lifted this directly from the 3.5 SRD and it seems to read the other way around:

"A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows."

To me, this reads that if you want to use a flurry you have to announce a full attack action, not that you announce a full attack action and then add a bunch of feats to gain extra attacks - admittedly at an increasing penalty to each attack.

However, in the end it depends on whether or not your DM is prepared to rule that all these feats can stack. In my campaign, they don't!

Bigwilly

 

[Darklone]

Bigwilly: You're always free to rule however you wish in your campaign (Just don't expect the players not to complain if you don't play by the rules). And Caliban is not playing with the words, he's right.

The PHB states nowhere explicitely that you can't use TWF, Rapid Shot or Flurry at once, the FAQ declared that you can use them together (IIRC there was an older answer about Rapid Shot and TWF for thrown weapons)...

You can always say: In my games...

That's fine. But a houserule. Don't try to tell us it's not

 

[green slime]

The rules concerning TWF and Rapid shot stack. Of that there is no doubt. Ditto for Flurry of blows and Rapid shot.

Where I have a problem with the contents of this thread, is the stacking of flurry of blows and TWF. I base this off the description of the flurry of blows ability:

from the SRD
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.

With no off-hand attack, how are you going to make an off-hand attack?

If you apply you full Strength bonus due flurry of blows (due to no off-hand attack), how are you going to apply half your Strength bonus to your off-hand attack?

These obvious contradictions expose the fact that, IMO, the game designers did not intend for flurry of blows and TWF to be "stackable".

 

[Bigwilly]

Not in my game

The PHB states nowhere explicitely that you can't use TWF, Rapid Shot or Flurry at once, the FAQ declared that you can use them together (IIRC there was an older answer about Rapid Shot and TWF for thrown weapons)...

You can always say: In my games...

That's fine. But a houserule. Don't try to tell us it's not

I just checked the latest FAQ and indeed there is an example of a monk using flurry and TWF, so I guess it's official - just not in my game!

Bigwilly

 

[sledged]

from the SRD
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.

With no off-hand attack, how are you going to make an off-hand attack?

If you apply you full Strength bonus due flurry of blows (due to no off-hand attack), how are you going to apply half your Strength bonus to your off-hand attack?

The no off-hand rule only applies when the monk is attacking unarmed. With manufactured weapons, the off-hand rule stands.

Continuing with the SRD, under flurry of blows:

"When using weapons as part of a flurry of blows, a monk applies her Strength bonus (not Str bonus x 1-1/2 or x1/2) to her damage rolls for all successful attacks, whether she wields a weapon in one or both hands."

The FoB allows the monk to do full damage despite weapons being used in the off-hand. They're still off-hand attacks, they just have the benefit of full str damage in stead of half.

 

[RigaMortus]

Again, I disagree. My interpretation of the nature of melee vs ranged weapon precludes me from seeing your point of view as being valid. I don't see them as viable tactical options, as far as them stacking.

The thing is, Otter's "point of view" (as well as most other people's) is backed up by the feat and rules as written in 3.5. It isn't so much a point of view as actual fact. Your point of view is not backed up by the rules. It is just the way you "wish/hope/assume the rules worked".

I understand fully that Hyper, you can interpret the extra attacks as an unnamed bonus thus allowing them to stack.

Where are you getting this from? That an extra attack is an "unnamed bonus"? Hyper isn't suggesting it is an "unnamed bonus" or ANY bonus for that matter. You are. As he pointed out earlier, a bonus (named or unnamed) is numerical. You are making this up somehow. I don't know how or why really.

Let me ask this. If a character had a Spiked Chain and the Cleave feat, would you allow them to use their Cleave attempt to Trip someone? By the rules, this is allowed, even though it doesn't say (under Cleave or Trip) that you can "combine" these feats/tactics.

If someone has Cleave and Greater Cleave, do you allow them to take advantage of both? If I kill someone, can I Cleave AND Great Cleave the same opponent? By the rules I beleive this is allowed (someone correct me if I am wrong).

 

[green slime]

The no off-hand rule only applies when the monk is attacking unarmed. With manufactured weapons, the off-hand rule stands.

Continuing with the SRD, under flurry of blows:

"When using weapons as part of a flurry of blows, a monk applies her Strength bonus (not Str bonus x 1-1/2 or x1/2) to her damage rolls for all successful attacks, whether she wields a weapon in one or both hands."

The FoB allows the monk to do full damage despite weapons being used in the off-hand. They're still off-hand attacks, they just have the benefit of full str damage in stead of half.

Except, as I read it... the flurry of blows with weapon(s) is not dependant on having 2 weapons. You can wield one kama, and still do a flurry of blows, and each attack could be kama damage + Strength mod, or unarmed damage + Strength mod, or a combination of the two...

The example you mention above states that it makes no difference if the weapon is wielded in one or two hands.

This is because, (as far as I could see) as soon as you are fighting with flurry of blows, you have no "off-hand". Anyway, the discussion is irrelevant, as Bigwilly states there is a specific example in the FAQ of TWF and FoB stacking. So... Fine!

 

[Ottergame]

With no off-hand attack, how are you going to make an off-hand attack?

Actually, you CAN make an off hand attack when unarmed as a monk. The passage in question is worded in such a way that it makes it seem not possible, but this is addressed clearly in the FAQ. You -can- make an unarmed off hand attack, while the passage in the PHB meant to say is that you can strike with any part of your body without is being counted as being offhand for your primary attacks. IE, a swordsman who uses a sword in his left hand (If he is right handed) will only get 50% of his strength bonus to damage, even if its the only attack he makes in a round. With a monk, a monk using primary attacks or a flurry doesn't suffer that. He CAN still make an offhand attacks (at the normal penalties) and will only deal 50% damage on the off hand attacks. Check the FAQ.