Thrikreen Flurry of Blows?

[Iku Rex]

Because a flurry of blows is a full attack,

You "must use a full attack action" to use a flurry of blows. Likewise you "must use the full attack action" to get multiple attacks from a high BAB. (Almost exact same wording in the rules.)

Do you agree that multiple attacks from a high BAB can be combined with natural attacks. Even though you "must use the full attack action" to get them?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

Do you agree that multiple attacks from a high BAB can be combined with natural attacks. Even though you "must use the full attack action" to get them?

Yes, of course you can. You are, however, bound by all the limitations of the options you enable.

It just so happens that TWF, extra attacks from BAB, and extra natural attacks have no limitations on the others.

Whirlwind Attack and FoB do have limitations - specifically, "give up all other attacks from all other sources" and "use only unarmed strikes or special monk weapons."

Thus, you could use TWF, your BAB, your secondary natural attacks, WWA, and FoB all at the same time - and you'd be limited to a single attack at your highest BAB against each opponent you threaten, and you'd be limited to using only unarmed strikes or monk weapons. WWA overwrites the extra attacks from TWF, your BAB, FoB, and your secondary natural attacks, and FoB overwrites which weapons you're allowed to use.

It's silly, but doable.

 

[Iku Rex]

It just so happens that TWF, extra attacks from BAB, and extra natural attacks have no limitations on the others.

Whirlwind Attack and FoB do have limitations - specifically, "give up all other attacks from all other sources" and "use only unarmed strikes or special monk weapons."

You seem to have accidentally forgotten to include a vital part of the quote from flurry of blows: When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons.

This is a specific limitation on flurry of blows. Not secondary natural attacks or TWF. The penalty on attacks still apply because (as opposed to the TWF penalties) the writer made sure to state that "each other attack made that round" takes a -2 penalty. (NOT "each other attack made as part of the flurry of blows".)

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

You seem to have accidentally forgotten to include a vital part of the quote from flurry of blows: When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons.

Yes, I didn't include it, but I don't see the need to.

Is a monk who takes the full attack action, and elects to use flurry of blows, using flurry of blows?

Of course.

You seem to think that FoB ends before his full attack action does - in other words, there's a gap between the end of a monk's Flurry and the end of his full attack action.

Given that there is no required order for a mix of main-hand, off-hand, and secondary natural attacks*, how can you say that FoB ends before the full attack action does?

* =

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.

Succinctly, a Lizardman Monk 1 has an unarmed strike at +1, 2 claws at +1, and one bite at -1.

Since none of these are "multiple attacks because [his] base attack bonus is high enough," they may be made in any order.

By your ruling, a lizardman monk may mix FoB so long as his first two attacks in a round are unarmed strikes at -1 / -1; his claws (-3 / -3) and bite (-3) can be in any order after that.

However, there is no reason within the rules that the lizardman couldn't change the order around: claw -3, unarmed strike -1, claw -3, bite -3 -- but here, you'd not allow him to make a second unarmed strike, since his flurry must have ended as soon as he took an attack with a non-unarmed strike or monk weapon.

That's nonsensical.

Flurry of Blows lasts for your entire full attack action, and the penalty applies to any AoOs you may get before your next turn comes up in initiative order, as well as to any disarm checks you might be forced to make.

 

[Iku Rex]

Yes, I didn't include it, but I don't see the need to.

Is a monk who takes the full attack action, and elects to use flurry of blows, using flurry of blows?

Of course.

Of course.

You seem to think that FoB ends before his full attack action does - in other words, there's a gap between the end of a monk's Flurry and the end of his full attack action.

Sure, I suppose.

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "gap" though. Is there a "gap" between a creature's two-weapon fighting and the end of his full attack action?

Given that there is no required order for a mix of main-hand, off-hand, and secondary natural attacks*, how can you say that FoB ends before the full attack action does?

* =

If you get multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough, you must make the attacks in order from highest bonus to lowest. If you are using two weapons, you can strike with either weapon first. If you are using a double weapon, you can strike with either part of the weapon first.

.

Congratulations. You've discovered that the basic combat chapter in the PH doesn't contain explicit rules for every conceivable obscure situation.

Succinctly, a Lizardman Monk 1 has an unarmed strike at +1, 2 claws at +1, and one bite at -1.

Since none of these are "multiple attacks because [his] base attack bonus is high enough," they may be made in any order.

By your ruling, a lizardman monk may mix FoB so long as his first two attacks in a round are unarmed strikes at -1 / -1; his claws (-3 / -3) and bite (-3) can be in any order after that.

However, there is no reason within the rules that the lizardman couldn't change the order around: claw -3, unarmed strike -1, claw -3, bite -3 -- but here, you'd not allow him to make a second unarmed strike, since his flurry must have ended as soon as he took an attack with a non-unarmed strike or monk weapon.

That's nonsensical.

Let me see if I can get your interpretatons straight.

Since no explicit rule says that secondary natural attacks can't occur anytime during the full attack action, that proves that you can mix in secondary natural attacks anywhere you like in your attack routine.

For instance, a troll could go bite (-5),claw,claw or a lizardman fighter could go sword (-2 TWF), bite(-4 secondary multiattack), sword (-2 TWF).

And since no explicit rule says that an attack made as part of a flurry of blows can occur anytime during the full attack action, that proves that you can't (couldn't?) mix in flurry of blows attacks anywhere you like in your attack routine. (For some reason the flurry will end as soon as you use a non-flurry attack after a flurry attack.)

However, you can combine secondary natural attacks with two-weapon fighting because no explicit rule says that interjecting a natural attack between two-weapon fighting attacks in a full attack action will end the two-weapon fighting.

That's nice. It's not very consistent though. :\

Given that there is no explicit required order for a mix of flurry attacks and secondary natural attacks, how can you say that FoB must end if you perform a secondary natural attack in between flurry attacks?

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

So, for simplicity, Patryn's objection seems to hinge on whether a flurry of blows is performed as merely part of a full-attack action, or whether the full-attack action becomes a flurry of blows in its entireity.

It seems to me that there are plenty of examples of actions, as was pointed out by another poster, that may be performed only during a full-attack action, implying that they may be used synergistically. These include secondary natural attacks, two-weapon fighting, and (I claim) flurry of blows. And then there are examples of actions, like Whirlwind Attack, which specifically state that you must give up all your other attacks to do them (and would otherwise be combinable with things like two-weapon fighting).

Since nowhere does it state that flurry of blows cannot be used in the same full-attack action with other attacks, I don't see any problem. Flurry of blows seems to be a discrete action that provides extra attacks on top of the attacks you receive from your BAB, exactly as two-weapon fighting is. I find nothing that would make it impossible to combine them with secondary natural attacks (except as limbs become used to hold weapons), or with each other.

As far as this text is concerned:

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 x 1-1/2 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.

It seems clear to me that this restriction is quite like the restriction on using light weapons during off-hand attacks to avoid large penalties, but with a stronger restriction. When making flurry of blows attacks, a monk weapon or unarmed strike must be used. When using an off-hand attack, it doesn't matter what weapon you use in your primary hand, so long as the off-hand is light. Likewise, it doesn't matter what weapon you use in your off-hand so long as your flurry attacks are made with the appropriate weapons. And likewise, it doesn't matter whether you claw-claw-bite so long as you apply the flurry restriction to the flurry attacks properly, and apply the flurry penalty to every other attack made that round, including the claw attacks.

Keep in mind, however, that the penalties from each source stack, and if you're hitting anything at all with your secondary attacks after stacking two-weapon fighting and flurry of blows penalties stacked on it, it's a miracle. I do suppose, however, that a strict reading might indicate that you apply the two-weapon fighting penalty only to attacks made by the primary hand, which would mean that the flurry attacks (since they're not necessarily made with a hand) and natural attacks (ditto), may not be affected.

 

[Infiniti2000]

When making flurry of blows attacks, a monk weapon or unarmed strike must be used.

No, and this is where you have the disconnect I think. It's "When using flurry of blows..." Like Patryn said, you can 'add in' the natural weapon attacks, but the FoB restriction remains. If Iku Rex agreed to the question Patryn posted: "Is a monk who takes the full attack action, and elects to use flurry of blows, using flurry of blows?", do you? Unless you answer no to this question, your argument doesn't hold water.

Since no explicit rule says that secondary natural attacks can't occur anytime during the full attack action, that proves that you can mix in secondary natural attacks anywhere you like in your attack routine.

The one exception is for iterative attacks. All attacks at the lower BAB must follow all those at the higher BAB. Thus, a troll TWF would do the primary weapon, the bite, and the secondary weapon in any order he wished and then do the iterative attacks with the primary weapond (and/or secondary weapon). It is neither inconsistent nor odd.

 

[Iku Rex]

The one exception is for iterative attacks. All attacks at the lower BAB must follow all those at the higher BAB. Thus, a troll TWF would do the primary weapon, the bite, and the secondary weapon in any order he wished and then do the iterative attacks with the primary weapond (and/or secondary weapon). It is neither inconsistent nor odd.

Let me walk you through the interpretation I consider to be inconsistent:

No explicit rule says that secondary natural attacks have to be made second to primary attacks (like a flurry of blows would be).

Therefore, according to PoE, you can make natural attacks in any order you like in relation to other attacks in the round. (Barring special rules like the one for iterative attacks due to high BAB of course, as you pointed out.)

No explicit rule says that flurry of blows attacks have to be made before (or after) secondary natural attacks.

Therefore (??), according to PoE, you can't make flurry attacks in any order you like in relation to other attacks in the round.

Confused yet? I know I am. Now tell me how this is consistent...

The worst part is, there's no way he can win with this argument. He'll either have to admit that "no rule=no forced order=no problem" or claim that flurry attacks must be made in order, in which case they're no different from regular iterative attacks due to high BAB and there's no problem. (We all agree that regular iterative attacks due to high BAB can be combined with secondary natural attacks.)

 

[Infiniti2000]

No explicit rule says that secondary natural attacks have to be made second to primary attacks (like a flurry of blows would be).

Agreed.

Therefore, according to PoE, you can make natural attacks in any order you like in relation to other attacks in the round. (Barring special rules like the one for iterative attacks due to high BAB of course, as you pointed out.)

Agreed.

No explicit rule says that flurry of blows attacks have to be made before (or after) secondary natural attacks.

Agreed.

Therefore (??), according to PoE, you can't make flurry attacks in any order you like in relation to other attacks in the round.

No, that's not what he implies. You can make the flurry attacks and secondary natural weapon attacks in any order, but you don't get the natural weapon attacks because you are using flurry of blows and the restriction therein doesn't allow natural weapon attacks. This is the point -- natural weapon attacks are not allowed, period, as part of the flurry or as secondary attacks, or whatever, any time during your turn (i.e. when you are using FoB).

So, it's totally consistent. It's probably somewhat misleading to say "you can intersperse the attacks however you want" only to follow it up with "you don't get those attacks, though." I apologize for the confusion that causes, but that's the way it is.

 

[Hypersmurf]

No, that's not what he implies. You can make the flurry attacks and secondary natural weapon attacks in any order, but you don't get the natural weapon attacks because you are using flurry of blows and the restriction therein doesn't allow natural weapon attacks. This is the point -- natural weapon attacks are not allowed, period, as part of the flurry or as secondary attacks, or whatever, any time during your turn (i.e. when you are using FoB).

To clarify - if an Eberron sourcebook comes out with one of those nifty monk feats that says "X weapon is considered a monk weapon for you" - let's say "Tiger Style: claw attacks are considered monk weapons for you", for example - my understanding is that Patryn would have no problem with the Thri-Kreen Tiger Style Monk making a full unarmed Flurry, an offhand attack with his Kama, and secondary natural attacks with all his remaining claws, since for the Tiger Style monk, unarmed strikes, kama attacks, and claw attacks are all permitted when using Flurry of Blows.

-Hyp.