Ye olde classic unarmed strike/natural weapon question.

[Iku Rex]

So, you're arguing that the flurry is not part of the full attack action?

No, I'm not. I did not say that, and I have a hard time seeing how anyone could honesty conclude that I did. :\

Yes, but only if those iterative attacks are with a manufactured weapon and the secondary attacks are with (unused) natural weapons.

And yet when I say you can make flurry attacks with manufactured weapons (unarmed strikes counts as manufactured weapons) and make secondary attacks are with (unused) natural weapons, it's all of a sudden a problem.

That does not mean that the secondary natural attacks must be part of the flurry.

Of course it does.

You believe that the use of the word "combine" makes the iterative attacks "part of" the natural attacks and visa versa. Right?

Not quite. They are both part of the full attack action, but not part of each other.

So you've changed your mind? It would help if you said so more clearly, rather than just suddenly arguing a different position.

Not "for some reason", for the reason I quoted. I'll do so again, so you don't forget again: "Some creatures combine attacks with natural and manufactured weapons when they make a full attack."

That reply makes no sense. A flurry is attacks with manufactured weapons. The very rule you're quoting allows you to combine it with (secondary) attacks with natural weapons!

 

[Artoomis]

For an example of how this works, let's look at the Minotaur, which I picked solely because I knew it's BAB was high enough for multiple attacks and it has a natural attack, too.

Attack: Greataxe +9 melee (3d6+6/×3) or gore +9 melee (1d8+4)
Full Attack: Greataxe +9/+4 melee (3d6+6/×3) and gore +4 melee (1d8+2)

It's pretty obvious that, when making a full attack with it's weapon, it also gets a natural attack.

It is using it's full attack action with its weapon, but ALSO gets a natural attack.

Same for a minotaur monk. She uses her full attack action to flurry (with or without a weapon) and gets the gore also (albeit at -5 to the attack roll).

Why is this confusing at all?

 

[Iku Rex]

You probably cannot cleave with Whirlwind (that would be a bonus or an extra attack), ...

(Don't just use the SRD. The original feat description in the PH adds "such as the Cleave feat or the haste spell" as examples of "extra attacks granted by other feats or abilities". So there's no "probably" about it.)

 

[Infiniti2000]

No, I'm not. I did not say that, and I have a hard time seeing how anyone could honesty conclude that I did. :\

I see no other way to infer it. You said: "It means that the secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action. Not part of the flurry." If the secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action, and a flurry by definition is the full attack action, then the secondary natural attacks must be part of the flurry. So, either I say that you are just plain wrong or that you mean there to be some other sequence of actions in addition to the full round action (either a standard action for one secondary weapon or a second full round action for more than one.

How else am I suppose to infer what you say?

And yet when I say you can make flurry attacks with manufactured weapons (unarmed strikes counts as manufactured weapons) and make secondary attacks are with (unused) natural weapons, it's all of a sudden a problem.

It became "all of a sudden a problem" when we read the limiting text under Flurry of Blows that does not allow anything other than unarmed strikes or special monk weapons.

So you've changed your mind? It would help if you said so more clearly, rather than just suddenly arguing a different position.

I've not changed my mind at all. You merely made an erroneous inference.

That reply makes no sense. A flurry is attacks with manufactured weapons. The very rule you're quoting allows you to combine it with (secondary) attacks with natural weapons!

Yes, sure, and yet the very rule I'm quoting does not have limiting text. So, you can combine natural weapons with manufactured weapons (even regular unarmed strikes), but not while flurrying because the rule on flurrying has a specific restriction.

 

[Infiniti2000]

Flurry restricts what weapons you may use to flurry - it says nothing about what else you might be able to do during the round.

You need to be more precise. Flurry restricts what weapons you may use "when using flurry of blows". Additionally, "The monk can’t use any weapon other than a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows."

So, your argument requires that a monk is using flurry of blows and then not using flurry blows, in the same round, in the same full round action. I say that's hogwash because

1. It's a single full round action, not multiple actions.
2. You can intersperse the natural weapon attacks with the other attacks, in any order (although iterative attacks must be taken in order, there's no other restriction). This means I could attack with an unarmed strike (now using flurry of blows), attack with my tail (not using flurry of blows), attack with another unarmed strike (using flurry of blows again), etc.
3. The rules that allow those secondary attacks combine them.

It does say, "A monk must use a full attack action to strike with a flurry of blows.," but that does not limit what ELSE you might be able to do either as part of your full attack or in addition to it. The only limits are those imposed by what you may do as part of, or in addition to, a full attack.

You need to be absolutely clear what you mean by this. Are you suggesting (a) there is a flurry full round action following some other type of action, or (b) just a flurry full round action coupled/interspersed with something else?

Whenever you say "in addition to the full attack" you are wrong because I've already shown that the secondary weapons are combined with the full attack (full round action) and therefore part of it.

 

[Infiniti2000]

It is using it's full attack action with its weapon, but ALSO gets a natural attack.

You are stating it incorrectly. Try this,

It is using its full attack action, which includes a natural attack combined with the weapon attacks.

I also would like to know why you are being confused on this at all. As would Patryn, I'm sure.

 

[Artoomis]

..." If the secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action, and a flurry by definition is the full attack action, then the secondary natural attacks must be part of the flurry. ...

There is an error there. The flurry is not by definition the full attack action, one USES a full attack action to flurry. Not teh same thing, though, to my mind, this argument is over-technical and the Minotaur (or other) examples wins the day easily.

It's really quite simple.

"Some creatures combine attacks with natural and manufactured weapons when they make a full attack. When they do so, the manufactured weapon attack is considered the primary attack unless the creature’s description indicates otherwise and any natural weapons the creature also uses are considered secondary natural attacks. These secondary attacks do not interfere with the primary attack as attacking with an off-hand weapon does, but they take the usual -5 penalty (or -2 with the Multiattack feat) for such attacks, even if the natural weapon used is normally the creature’s primary natural weapon. "

A monk attacks with a monk wepon when making a full attack (and ONLY the monk weapon if flurrying). Per the above, the monk ALSO gets a secondary attack.

Simple, eh?

I am positive that's the way it works per the rules.

It certainly is possible to read the rules another way, but I think it is a stretch and not correct.

 

[Artoomis]

You are stating it incorrectly. Try this,

It is using its full attack action, which includes a natural attack combined with the weapon attacks.

I also would like to know why you are being confused on this at all. As would Patryn, I'm sure.

Actually, it combines normal weapon attacks with the natural weapon to make a full attack. true.

A monk uses a full attack when flurrying, just as anyone uses a full attack to make all attacks from BAB.

No difference. And thus no difference when combining with a natural attack.

You guys are over-thinking this.

 

[Iku Rex]

I see no other way to infer it. You said: "It means that the secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action. Not part of the flurry." If the secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action, and a flurry by definition is the full attack action, then the secondary natural attacks must be part of the flurry.

Since when "is" the flurry "by definition" the full attack action? It is not.

This full attack action includes a flurry of blows and secondary natural attacks. I already said that.

And I have a hard time believing you when you claim to have "honestly" concluded that I think the flurry "is" the full attack action from the post where I said that "secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action" and "not part of the flurry". That would be absurd.

I've not changed my mind at all. You merely made an erroneous inference.

You said that "off course" the secondary natural attacks must be part of the flurry if "the full attack action includes a flurry of blows and secondary natural attacks".

If I make both iterative attacks from BAB and secondary natural attacks with a full attack action then the full attack action "includes iterative attacks from BAB and secondary natural attacks". There is no reason to think you wouldn't draw the same conclusion - the secondary natural attacks must be "part of" the iterative attacks from BAB.

Yes, sure, and yet the very rule I'm quoting does not have limiting text. So, you can combine natural weapons with manufactured weapons (even regular unarmed strikes), but not while flurrying because the rule on flurrying has a specific restriction.

The rules for iterative attacks from BAB and natural weapons also have a "specific restriction". I've quoted it quite a few times now. "Creatures do not receive additional attacks from a high base attack bonus when using natural weapons".

And yet when I ask you why that limitation doesn't apply when you combine iterative attacks from BAB and natural weapons, you quote a rule which applies just as well to combining a flurry and natural attacks. It makes no sense.

 

[Hypersmurf]

My question is about a hasted Ftr6/Mnk1 with Rapid Shot and Improved Two-Weapon Fighting.

He is wielding a longsword and dagger, and he attacks with a Flurry of Blows.

His BAB is +6.

The Flurry of Blows entry in the Monk class table reads "-2/-2" for a Mnk1.

He can, in theory, make a total of 7 attacks in a round, as long as none of them are disallowed, all with a -2 penalty for Flurry of Blows, a -2 penalty for TWF, and a -2 penalty for Rapid Shot:

2 iterative attacks for +6 BAB. (+6a / +1a)
2 off-hand attacks for ITWF. (+6b / +1b)
1 extra attack for Flurry of Blows. (+6c)
1 extra attack for Haste. (+6d)
1 extra ranged attack for Rapid Shot. (+6e)

Neither a longsword nor a dagger is a special monk weapon.

Which of the attacks are required to be made with unarmed strikes or special monk weapons?

+6c, certainly - it is undeniably part of the Flurry of Blows.

+6a, probably; either that or +1a maps to the 'other' -2 attack in the Monk table entry. I suspect it's the +6a.

+1a is an attack that is gained solely due to the BAB he possesses from his fighter levels. It has no connection to the Monk class; is this attack made 'when using Flurry of Blows', or can it be made with the longsword?

The extra attack from Haste bears no relation to Monk levels. Can it be made with the longsword?

The off-hand attacks have no connection to Monk levels. Can he use his dagger? Or are these attacks made 'when using Flurry of Blows', and thus required to be made with an unarmed strike or special monk weapon? If so, do we use the PHB rule (there is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed), or do we use the FAQ rule (a monk cannot make an off-hand attack with an unarmed strike, unless he treats the unarmed strike as an off-hand attack (!?))?

Can he use the extra ranged attack from Rapid Shot to throw his dagger? Or is this attack made 'when using Flurry of Blows', limiting him essentially to shuriken or sai?

-Hyp.