Ye olde classic unarmed strike/natural weapon question.

[Hypersmurf]

No, actually not. There is an order for your BAB-driven mulitiple attacks- you cannot choose.

That's what he said.

The other attacks are not "multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough"; they are "multiple attacks for some reason other than because your base attack bonus is high enough". They're not subject to the highest-bonus-to-lowest clause.

-Hyp.

 

[Artoomis]

That's what he said.

The other attacks are not "multiple attacks because your base attack bonus is high enough"; they are "multiple attacks for some reason other than because your base attack bonus is high enough". They're not subject to the highest-bonus-to-lowest clause.

-Hyp.

Right- but:

"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. "

Your primary attacks come before or after secondary attacks, not interspersed, I think, per the rules on using an off-hand wepoan under "full attack.

Not that it matters, really. Who cares?

 

[Hypersmurf]

Your primary attacks come before or after secondary attacks, not interspersed, I think, per the rules on using an off-hand wepoan under "full attack.

The rules for using an off-hand weapon say that you can choose to attack with the off-hand weapon first!

-Hyp.

 

[glass]

Although I tend to agree that any attacks in addition to the flurry seems a bit off to me, I will point out that:

... 2. Flurry has no such statement.

No, it just says: "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)."

To me, IMHO, etc., that's exactly the same thing.

Well not exactly the same thing: You can still cleave (for example) in a flurry, as long as you do it with an unarmed strike or special monk weapon. You just can't cleave (or do anything else) with your claws.


glass.

 

[glass]

Uh, no. It means that the secondary natural attacks must be part of the full attack action. Not part of the flurry.

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

A full attack action. Not half a full attack action, that the monk can then fill up with other attacks, all of it.


glass.

 

[glass]

It would probably, in that case, be better to say, "but the FAQ has been demonstrated on several occasions to be wrong by comparison to what is actually written in the rule books. Sometimes they apologize for the error and correct it. Sometimes they don't."

That massively understates the case, IMO.

EDIT:

Yes, that's MUCH better.

Um, since we are pretty much at opposite ends of the spectrum re the FAQ, and accurate stating of your position on it would hardly be 'better' from my POV, would it?


glass.

 

[glass]

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

No, it quite obviously gets a full attack action, with which it attacks twice with its axe and once with its gore.

Why is this confusing at all?

Why indeed?


glass.

 

[Artoomis]

The rules for using an off-hand weapon say that you can choose to attack with the off-hand weapon first!

-Hyp.

Sure. First or last. Nothing about in the middle.

 

[Artoomis]

No, it quite obviously gets a full attack action, with which it attacks twice with its axe and once with its gore...

glass.

OKay, now lets say the beastie was a monk and only using unarmed strikes.

Quite obviously, he could attck twice with unarmed strikes and once with gore (if the BAB was +6). No argument with that, right?

Are you seriously suggesting that using Flurry of Blows he should then strike 3 times with unarmed strikes but must give up the gore attack?

On what basis?

The full attack is used for the Flurry if he Flurries AND uses the Gore attack, right? Isn't that what the monk class requires - USING a full attack? Isn't he USING a full attack to Flurry?

To support your position, I think the monk class would need to say one of:

1. The Flurry of Blows replaces a full attack action.

or

2. When using a Flurry if Blows, a monk forfeits any bonus or extra attacks granted by other feats, spells, or abilities.

It seems to me you are reading number (1) above into the class descrition when it simply is not there.

You are reading something extra into the rules that does not exist.

 

[Lonely Tylenol]

That massively understates the case, IMO.

FWIW, I don't think the FAQ (or, by extension, Sage Advice) is worth the paper it's written on either. However, I try to put it delicately to newcomers, so as to provide them with the impression that the FAQ is often in error, but without scaring them away from it completely, since there is a lot of good stuff in there that someone without my familiarity with the rules could benefit from.

Also, I'd like to see someone respond to Iku Rex's questions regarding iterative attacks due to BAB and disarm checks due to using a spiked chain. I think those are relevant to this debate, but I notice that nobody's been willing to pick up the ball.

Personally, I'm undecided, but I'd like to see where that line of argument goes.