Simple Flurry of blows question

[Tarangil]

Quick question here People.

A monk at lvl 1 has flurry of blows. If he/she were to use a weapon in the off hand, would that character get an additional attack on top of the 2 given by FOB??

Thanks for any input

 

[Henrix]

Well, either it is one of the monk weapons allowed to use with flurry of blows, in which case either or both attacks may be with the weapon, or it is not one of the weapons allowed with flurry, in which case it may not be used at the same time as flurry of blows.

 

[Gargoyle]

Quick question here People.

A monk at lvl 1 has flurry of blows. If he/she were to use a weapon in the off hand, would that character get an additional attack on top of the 2 given by FOB??

Thanks for any input

No. A flurry of blows is a full attack action by itself.

 

[starwed]

No. A flurry of blows is a full attack action by itself.

No. "A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows." TWF also requires you to take a full attack action. So it is perfectly permissible to combine the two, you just have to add the penalties on each attack. (So for a monk with the TWF feat, -4/-4.)

There's actually a question in the FAQ about this that you can check out.

 

[Artoomis]

No. "A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows." TWF also requires you to take a full attack action. So it is perfectly permissible to combine the two, you just have to add the penalties on each attack. (So for a monk with the TWF feat, -4/-4.)

There's actually a question in the FAQ about this that you can check out.

From the FAQ:

Can a monk fight with two weapons? Can she combine a two-weapon attack with a flurry of blows? What are her penalties on attack rolls?

A monk can fight with two weapons just like any other character, but she must accept the normal penalties on her attack rolls to do so. She can use an unarmed strike as an offhand weapon. She can even combine two-weapon fighting with a flurry of blows to gain an extra attack with her off hand (but remember that she can use only unarmed strikes or special monk weapons as part of the flurry). The penalties for twoweapon fighting stack with the penalties for flurry of blows. For example, at 6th level, the monk Ember can normally make one attack per round at a +4 bonus. When using flurry of blows, she can make two attacks (using unarmed strikes or any special monk weapons she holds), each at a +3 bonus. If she wants to make an extra attack with her off hand, she has to accept a –4 penalty on her primary hand attacks and a –8 penalty on her off-hand attacks (assuming she wields a light weapon in her off hand).

If Ember has Two-Weapon Fighting, she has to accept only a –2 penalty on all attacks to make an extra attack with her off hand. Thus, when wielding a light weapon in her off hand during a flurry of blows, she can make a total of three attacks, each at a total bonus of +1. At least one of these attacks has to be with her off-hand weapon. A 20th-level monk with Greater Two-Weapon Fighting can make eight attacks per round during a flurry of blows. Assuming she wields a light weapon in her off hand, her three off-hand weapon attacks are at +13/+8/+3, and she has five attacks (at +13/+13/+13/+8/+3) with unarmed strikes or any weapons she carries in her primary hand. If the same monk also has Rapid Shot and throws at least one shuriken as part of her flurry of blows (since Rapid Shot can be used only with ranged attacks), she can throw one additional shuriken with her primary hand, but all of her attacks (even melee attacks) suffer a –2 penalty. Thus, her full attack array looks like this: +11/+11/+11/+11/+6/+1 primary hand (two must be with shuriken) and +11/+6/+1 off hand.

 

[Gargoyle]

I stand corrected. Thx for the reference.

 

[Hypersmurf]

As long as the monk's off-hand weapons are special monk weapons, I agree completely. The disagreement crops up in two varieties:
1. Can the monk's off-hand attacks be with unarmed strikes?
2. Can the monk's off-hand attacks be with non-monk weapons?

The monk can only attack with unarmed strikes or special monk weapons "when using flurry of blows".

So let's say we have a Mnk1/Ftr11, with a dagger in each hand, the Rapid Shot feat, the Improved and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting feats, and a Haste spell.

If he's not Flurrying, he can make eight attacks on a full attack action; three iterative attacks (two of which are solely due to his BAB from his fighter levels), three off-hand attacks, one extra attack from Haste, and one extra ranged attack from Rapid Shot.

Now he uses Flurry of Blows. This grants him one extra attack, but "when using flurry of blows", he can only attack with unarmed striked or special monk weapons. So which of the attacks can he make with a dagger?

Are his off-hand attacks made "when using flurry of blows"? Are his Haste attack and Rapid Shot attack made "when using flurry of blows"? Are his iterative attacks which derive solely from Fighter BAB made "when using flurry of blows"?

The other question - can the monk make off-hand attacks with his unarmed strike - hinges on the line "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed" in the Monk class description.

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

...The other question - can the monk make off-hand attacks with his unarmed strike - hinges on the line "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed" in the Monk class description.

-Hyp.

That line seeems to have been ignored by WotC in the FAQ. I do not know why.

 

[Legildur]

That line seeems to have been ignored by WotC in the FAQ. I do not know why.

You don't want me to bring this quote up in the Monks and INA thread do you???

 

[Artoomis]

You don't want me to bring this quote up in the Monks and INA thread do you???

Very funny. I have admitted the FAQ may have some errors. I personally think they are off-base here, but I think there may be a legitimate (even if weak or overly complex) argument supporting the FAQ entry, and that's all it takes for the entry to be legitiimate as a rules interpretation.

In any case, the FAQ establishes the "official" rule, even if it should happen to change the core rule. It shoud not do that, of course, but it some cases it has (sigh). As I have said said, "official" is only worth whatever you say it's worth unless you are playing in some sort of "official" game.

I also would not be surprised if Hyp (aka Pirate, but not a feline)) pipes up and tells me how the FAQ entry perfectly lines up with the rule tha I think is being ignored. He is realy good at that sort of thing.