Full BAB Monk?

[Tibbaerrohwen]

I'm currently working on a Psionic Monk character. I'm trying to get Beast Strike and levels in War Mind as soon as I can. Power points are covered as the character is a Feral Elan.
As far as I can tell, the rest requires full BAB progression and Monk abilities (Unarmed Damage & AC Bonus as the focus). Is there a class that provides both of these?

EDIT: I'm also trying to stay away from ToB classes for the build.

Thanks.

[Cog]

Slayer with Tashalatora?

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Slayer with Tashalatora?

I'm not familiar with Slayer. Where is it from/What does it do? I've been trying my best to stay away from Tashalatora, but I don't think there's a way around it anymore.

[Cog]

Slayer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/prestigeClasses/slayer.htm) is the SRD version of the XPH's Illithid Slayer. I think you'll be stuck with Tash; classes that advance Monk abilities are generally 3/4 anyway, and ones that advance psionics as well would almost certainly be so.

If you don't want psionic progression, you could look at the CAdv/CSco multiclassing feats. I think there's ones for Ranger and Paladin that work with Monk abilities.

[Lateral]

I believe the Battle Dancer (DComp) gets full BAB and unarmed strikes.

[grimbold]

you could also ask your DM to cut you a break and say that giving monks full BAB is a pretty common fix anyway *shrugs*

[Lyndworm]

I believe the Battle Dancer (DComp) gets full BAB and unarmed strikes.
It does, but it gains Cha to AC instead of Wis. I'm not sure if that's better or worse for the OP.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Slayer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/psionic/prestigeClasses/slayer.htm) is the SRD version of the XPH's Illithid Slayer. I think you'll be stuck with Tash; classes that advance Monk abilities are generally 3/4 anyway, and ones that advance psionics as well would almost certainly be so.

If you don't want psionic progression, you could look at the CAdv/CSco multiclassing feats. I think there's ones for Ranger and Paladin that work with Monk abilities.

I might look into some fo the CAdv/CSco feats. I think you're right about Tash. There really isn't a way around it at this point.


I believe the Battle Dancer (DComp) gets full BAB and unarmed strikes.

True, but Battle Dancer requires a Chaotic alignment and War Mind requires any non-chaotic alignment. I was thinking Chaos Monk before too. It's too bad.


you could also ask your DM to cut you a break and say that giving monks full BAB is a pretty common fix anyway *shrugs*

I could talk ot my DM about it; he's usually very accomodating, but I'd rather stick with stuff by the book, for the most part. If something seems just plain silly then I'll bring it up, but otherwise I'd rather work with it as is.


EDIT:
It does, but it gains Cha to AC instead of Wis. I'm not sure if that's better or worse for the OP.

With the Feral Template, Wis is better for me than Cha as, I believe, Cha takes a hit with Feral.

[Taelas]

It doesn't, but Wis gets a bonus.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Is there a feat that lets you get Wis as a bonus to AC by any chance? I don't think there is, but if there was, the Pugilist from Dragon 310 is perfect.

Or, rather, are there any other ways to get Wis as a Bonus to AC than character levels?

[Lyndworm]

Not as far as I know, no. I think there are a few ways to get Cha to AC, but that's obviously not what you're after.

[Lateral]

A two-level dip into Unarmed Swordsage would get it, but you'd lose a BAB. Do you need to lose no BAB at all for this to work, or just mostly full?

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Not as far as I know, no. I think there are a few ways to get Cha to AC, but that's obviously not what you're after.

Unfortunately not, because War Mind and Haztaratain (another PrC I was looking at) both use Wisdom for their Psionics.

Edit:
A two-level dip into Unarmed Swordsage would get it, but you'd lose a BAB. Do you need to lose no BAB at all for this to work, or just mostly full?

I'm trying to do it without loosing any. If I have to loose some, I'll do a level or two dip into Monk. I'm just trying to find a way without loosing BAB first.

[Cog]

Or, rather, are there any other ways to get Wis as a Bonus to AC than character levels?
Monk's Belt.

[Lyndworm]

I feel so dumb that I forgot about that... :smallredface: It goes for about 13,000gp off the top of my head.

Edit:
Yep (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#beltMonks).

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Monk's Belt.


I feel so dumb that I forgot about that... :smallredface: It goes for about 13,000gp off the top of my head.

Edit:
Yep (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/magicItems/wondrousItems.htm#beltMonks).


I know what you mean. I feel like a moron for forgetting it too. I was thinking in earlier levels which is probably why magical items didn't come to mind, but it's still a perfectly viable option. Thanks.

[JaronK]

I'm currently working on a Psionic Monk character. I'm trying to get Beast Strike and levels in War Mind as soon as I can. Power points are covered as the character is a Feral Elan.
As far as I can tell, the rest requires full BAB progression and Monk abilities (Unarmed Damage & AC Bonus as the focus). Is there a class that provides both of these?

Thanks.

Shou Disciple, from Unapproachable East. Full BAB, +3 AC in five levels, progresses Flurry and Unarmed Strike damage.

JaronK

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Shou Disciple, from Unapproachable East. Full BAB, +3 AC in five levels, progresses Flurry and Unarmed Strike damage.

JaronK

Shou Disciple would work well, but I'm looking for a base class.

I think I'll go with Pugilist, take Superior Unarmed Strike and get a Monk's Belt, unless there is a better option for low level.

[FMArthur]

An alternate Ranger combat style from Dragon 327 can get you IUS as well, which is compatible with Mystic Ranger (more Wis-based casting) and other good Ranger variants. It's not like the Pugilist gets you much better than plain IUS would anyway.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

An alternate Ranger combat style from Dragon 327 can get you IUS as well, which is compatible with Mystic Ranger (more Wis-based casting) and other good Ranger variants. It's not like the Pugilist gets you much better than plain IUS would anyway.

That would work very well. I do not have issue 327. Do you knpw where I can find info on this alternative combat style?

EDIT: Oh, I think you're refering to Bear Wrestling, from 326? The Pugilist gives Hard Hitter (+2 non-lethal damage to unarmed attacks) and Combo (average the BAB for first two unarmed attacks), both of which can be very useful.

[FMArthur]

Ah, yes 326. Sorry 'bout that.

Crystalkeep used to have it, but I think their stuff was of questionable legality (or more likely, wholly illegal). Anyway this is one thing where the simplest explanation is really all you need to know about it: it is a Combat Style called Bear Wrestling and grants IUS, Improved Grapple and Stunning Fist at Ranger levels that improve Combat Style.

[Talya]

There's an urban brawler barbarian variant in dragon magazine that gets IUS, too. You trade proficiency with shields, medium armor, and martial weapons for IUS and TWF (but it only works on unarmed strikes) at 1st level, ITWF (same restriction) at 6th level, and GTWF at 11th level, as well as the ability to only take a -2 penalty on improvised weapons instead of the normal -4.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

There's an urban brawler barbarian variant in dragon magazine that gets IUS, too. You trade proficiency with shields, medium armor, and martial weapons for IUS and TWF (but it only works on unarmed strikes) at 1st level, ITWF (same restriction) at 6th level, and GTWF at 11th level, as well as the ability to only take a -2 penalty on improvised weapons instead of the normal -4.

That's an interesting idea. What issue is it from?

[Cog]

Three Hundred Forty-Nine.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Three Hundred Forty-Nine.

Cog, you are a viable bag of holding of great knowledge. I would like a pocket-sized version you to carry around and tell me things.

[Cog]

To be fair, I'm aware of that one because I've got a dwarven Drunken Master build lying around that makes use of it...

[Tibbaerrohwen]

The one downside here is that I need a level in Monk for Flurry of Blows to get into Haztaratain and can't try Chaos Monk, because War Mind requires a non-chaotic alignment.

[holywhippet]

On the subject of AC, it's worth trying to get an item that can cast mage armor either on demand or several times per day. It provides an armor bonus which monks will never (or should never) have normally but doesn't count as armor when it comes to things that stop monk abilities from being available.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

On the subject of AC, it's worth trying to get an item that can cast mage armor either on demand or several times per day. It provides an armor bonus which monks will never (or should never) have normally but doesn't count as armor when it comes to things that stop monk abilities from being available.

This is true, but my primary concern at the moment is Flurry of Blows, which I think I can only get from the Monk class, or other lawful classes. Is there a neutral aligned class that offers Flurry of Blows (not including Shou Disciple PrC, because it adds too many complications), or a lawful Barbarian variant?

Edit: Actually, would TWF with unarmed strikes stack with Flurry of Blows or the Pugilist's Combo ability? I don't think it would, in which case, I gain very little from the Barbarian levels.

Edit: Side question, does Tashalatora work with PrC or only base classes?

[Cog]

The one downside here is that I need a level in Monk for Flurry of Blows to get into Haztaratain and can't try Chaos Monk, because War Mind requires a non-chaotic alignment.
Disciple of the Eye will get you Flurry of Blows without Monk levels, if you've got the dragonblood subtype. It doesn't progress unarmed damage, making it a good match for Superior Unarmed Strike builds over Monk builds. It requires Lawful to get in, but it doesn't have an Ex-Disciple clause, and Races of the Dragon doesn't have the troublesome clause about maintaining prereqs that CWar and CArc do, so if you can arrange an alignment shift after you get the ability, you're golden.

For Rage, Singh Rager is a mostly-barbarian-themed PrC from Oriental Adventures that is lawfully aligned. The ability isn't titled rage, but it's called a rage within the text. The Lists of Stuff (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871954/Lists_of_Stuff) has sources for Rage as well, and at least a couple have no alignment restrictions.

For Tash, it depends on the source. The PrCs in XPH are all described as psionic; for others, you'll just have to look at the features. If a class progresses manifesting or provides psilike abilities, it'd be hard to argue that it's not psionic.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Disciple of the Eye will get you Flurry of Blows without Monk levels, if you've got the dragonblood subtype. It doesn't progress unarmed damage, making it a good match for Superior Unarmed Strike builds over Monk builds. It requires Lawful to get in, but it doesn't have an Ex-Disciple clause, and Races of the Dragon doesn't have the troublesome clause about maintaining prereqs that CWar and CArc do, so if you can arrange an alignment shift after you get the ability, you're golden.

For Rage, Singh Rager is a mostly-barbarian-themed PrC from Oriental Adventures that is lawfully aligned. The ability isn't titled rage, but it's called a rage within the text. The Lists of Stuff (http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/19871954/Lists_of_Stuff) has sources for Rage as well, and at least a couple have no alignment restrictions.

For Tash, it depends on the source. The PrCs in XPH are all described as psionic; for others, you'll just have to look at the features. If a class progresses manifesting or provides psilike abilities, it'd be hard to argue that it's not psionic.

I think I said it already, but just to be sure: you're awesome.
The downside is that additional PrC's attop what I'm already taking is crippling to do to levels and feats. I think I'll just have to stick with my original build.

I will now take Tash though, cause stacking with my War Mind levels will make Monk a worth-while dip.

On the side, my question still stands: would Flurry of Blows, or TWF, or the Pugilist's Combo ability (average the attack bonus for first two unarmed strikes) stack with each other?

[ericgrau]

you could also ask your DM to cut you a break and say that giving monks full BAB is a pretty common fix anyway *shrugs*
Admiral ackbar says it's a trap. You might as well give fighters free skill focus feats. Sure it helps but if you try to use it to focus on punch damage dealing you'll still be behind, say, someone with full BAB AND weapons and armor. And if you're not focusing on punches, it's no big deal: For the OP it's 1 more BAB, which isn't a huge difference one way or another and isn't really a "fix" as he's not sticking with the class anyway.



On the side, my question still stands: would Flurry of Blows, or TWF, or the Pugilist's Combo ability (average the attack bonus for first two unarmed strikes) stack with each other?
Ya if you meet all the requirements you can combine those . TWF for example requires that your extra attack be with an off-hand weapon. Flurry requires that all your attacks be unarmed strikes or monk weapons, and monk unarmed strikes are never off-hand. You therefore need an off-hand monk weapon to TWF and flurry at the same time. The monk weapon gets the extra off-hand attack and the other attacks can be whatever unarmed strikes or monk weapons you want.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

TWF for example requires that your extra attack be with an off-hand weapon. Flurry requires that all your attacks be unarmed strikes or monk weapons, and monk unarmed strikes are never off-hand. You therefore need an off-hand monk weapon to TWF and flurry at the same time. The monk weapon gets the extra off-hand attack and the other attacks can be whatever unarmed strikes or monk weapons you want.

The TWF I was referring to is from the City Brawler ACF for Barb, which allows TWF with unarmed attacks only. Could that, would that, stack with Flurry of blows for additional attacks?

[Talya]

TWF for example requires that your extra attack be with an off-hand weapon. Flurry requires that all your attacks be unarmed strikes or monk weapons, and monk unarmed strikes are never off-hand. You therefore need an off-hand monk weapon to TWF and flurry at the same time. The monk weapon gets the extra off-hand attack and the other attacks can be whatever unarmed strikes or monk weapons you want.

That was either errattaed or corrected in the FAQ (which I know, isn't really RAW) in a way that makes a lot of sense. Monk unarmed strikes are never considered off-hand for the purpose of damage bonuses from strength or the like no matter which part of the body or hand they strike with, but they can still be used as off-hand weapons for the purposes of TWF. A completely unarmed, level 20 monk with Greater Two Weapon Fighting is going to be Flurrying - with the two weapon fighting penalty - at +13/+13/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3/+3.

(Which still sucks.)

[FMArthur]

It's possible that the original intent was that Flurry was unarmed TWF, so it's hard to be 100% certain that they didn't mean to disclude TWF as an option for Monks.

This is of course a curiousity at most: I would never advise anyone to rule that Monks can't use TWF just because of clumsy writing and unclear RAI. The FAQ did indeed address this and said you could TWF with Monk unarmed strike as well as use TWF+FoB in combination.

[Taelas]

That was either errattaed or corrected in the FAQ (which I know, isn't really RAW) in a way that makes a lot of sense. Monk unarmed strikes are never considered off-hand for the purpose of damage bonuses from strength or the like no matter which part of the body or hand they strike with, but they can still be used as off-hand weapons for the purposes of TWF. A completely unarmed, level 20 monk with Greater Two Weapon Fighting is going to be Flurrying - with the two weapon fighting penalty - at +13/+13/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3/+3.

(Which still sucks.)

You cannot dual-wield unarmed strikes. You have one unarmed strike, and that's it -- regardless of how many limbs you possess.

You would need a weapon to use TWF and a Monk weapon if you want to add Flurry of Blows.

[Killer Angel]

Is there a feat that lets you get Wis as a bonus to AC by any chance?

Feat? you're not lucky... there's Dungeoneers Intuition, but it's only AC Vs traps.

[Talya]

You cannot dual-wield unarmed strikes. You have one unarmed strike, and that's it -- regardless of how many limbs you possess.

You would need a weapon to use TWF and a Monk weapon if you want to add Flurry of Blows.

That's not accurate.

From the FAQ (which does not contradict the ambiguous PHB, so in this case, it would be official):


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 may 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.

[Cog]

That's not accurate.

From the FAQ (which does not contradict the ambiguous PHB, so in this case, it would be official):
You can use a dagger as a main-hand weapon or as an offhand weapon as well; that's not the part that I'd argue. The problem is that your dagger can't be both weapons simultaneously; you need two daggers to TWF. Likewise, you'd need two unarmed strikes to TWF with, if you aren't wielding another weapon, and unless you're a Dvati you've only got the one body and so only one unarmed strike.

[Taelas]

That's not accurate.

From the FAQ (which does not contradict the ambiguous PHB, so in this case, it would be official):

I didn't say you couldn't use unarmed strikes along with a weapon while dual-wielding. I said you can't dual-wield unarmed strikes. You only have one unarmed strike. As Cog said, you only have one body.

You can use a weapon as your primary weapon and an unarmed strike as an off-hand weapon, or an unarmed strike as your primary weapon and a weapon as an off-hand weapon, but you cannot use an unarmed strike as both the primary weapon and the off-hand weapon.

If you actually read through that quote, you'll note it stipulates that the calculation is with a light weapon as your off-hand weapon every time it mentions using TWF and Flurry of Blows at the same time -- if it were using unarmed strikes, this would be unnecessary, as unarmed strikes are always light.

[Talya]

I didn't say you couldn't use unarmed strikes along with a weapon while dual-wielding. I said you can't dual-wield unarmed strikes. You only have one unarmed strike. As Cog said, you only have one body.

You only have one quarterstaff, too. Doesn't mean you cannot dual weild it.


You can use a weapon as your primary weapon and an unarmed strike as an off-hand weapon, or an unarmed strike as your primary weapon and a weapon as an off-hand weapon, but you cannot use an unarmed strike as both the primary weapon and the off-hand weapon.

That is not directly stated anywhere, and is rather counterintuitive, considering it's far more than a "double weapon" with regard to the number of active weaponized extremities. (two feet, two hands, forehead, elbows, knees, shoulders...)


If you actually read through that quote, you'll note it stipulates that the calculation is with a light weapon as your off-hand weapon every time it mentions using TWF and Flurry of Blows at the same time -- if it were using unarmed strikes, this would be unnecessary, as unarmed strikes are always light.

That's not the reason it stipulates it. It is not required that you use a light weapon in your off hand, but if you are using unarmed strike, you are automatically using a light weapon in your off hand. There are several ways to add additional weapons into the list of things a monk can flurry with, such as a longspear.

[Cog]

You only have one quarterstaff, too. Doesn't mean you cannot dual weild it.
Actually, the bit that lets you dual-wield a quarterstaff is that it's specifically labeled as a double weapon, and is given stats that follow the pattern for double weapons. Unarmed Strike doesn't match either of those.


That is not directly stated anywhere, and is rather counterintuitive, considering it's far more than a "double weapon" with regard to the number of active weaponized extremities. (two feet, two hands, forehead, elbows, knees, shoulders...)
And because a sword has a back edge, a front edge, a point, and a pommel, I should be able to wield it as four weapons at once. Right?

The number of striking surfaces isn't what makes something a double weapon or not. It's whether the weapon has the double characteristic.

[Taelas]

You only have one quarterstaff, too. Doesn't mean you cannot dual weild it.
Yes. It specifically says you can do so because it is a double-weapon.


That is not directly stated anywhere, and is rather counterintuitive, considering it's far more than a "double weapon" with regard to the number of active weaponized extremities. (two feet, two hands, forehead, elbows, knees, shoulders...)
It doesn't need to be stated anywhere, since it is the same for every other weapon that isn't a double-weapon. Unarmed strikes can be made with any part of your body, meaning limbs are not a factor, and you only have one unarmed strike.


That's not the reason it stipulates it. It is not required that you use a light weapon in your off hand, but if you are using unarmed strike, you are automatically using a light weapon in your off hand. There are several ways to add additional weapons into the list of things a monk can flurry with, such as a longspear.
My point was, it is assuming a weapon, not an unarmed strike. That is, it does not indicate anywhere that you can dual-wield unarmed strikes (because that is impossible and more than just a little silly).

[Talya]

My point was, it is assuming a weapon, not an unarmed strike. That is, it does not indicate anywhere that you can dual-wield unarmed strikes (because that is impossible and more than just a little silly).

Improved unarmed strike is a weapon.

As for the silliness (realism?), actually, pretty much everyone dual weilds unarmed strikes. What's really silly is the assumption that somehow, putting a dagger in one hand suddenly allows you to punch with the other hand, while you couldn't before. Try telling a boxer he's not getting extra attacks if allowed to use both hands compared to if he only used one.

[Cog]

There's a reason humans started to use manufactured weapons, millions of years ago: the human body itself is a pretty lousy weapon. We're just not adapted for it, and creatures that do have that adaptation have such represented by slam attacks. It is entirely accurate for wielding daggers to be more effective than not wielding daggers.

As for the boxer: sure, that's a valid point. Now put him up against a trained knife-fighter and see who wins... unfortunately, there's only so much granularity we can have in the system; too much and you'd need a computer to run your reality simulation instead of a few people's brains and a few sets of dice. Futher, there are ways to represent that trained boxer, such as the Barbarian variant that specifically does get TWF for unarmed combat only.

[Taelas]

Yes, unarmed strike is a weapon (it doesn't have to be Improved). What is your point? The text is assuming a weapon (which could be unarmed strike, if you somehow manage to get two of them), but it is not assuming specifically unarmed strike, meaning it is not creating an exception you could argue with.

I repeat, it is silly. You only have one body, thus you only have one unarmed strike. Unarmed strike is intentionally abstract; you can make strikes with any part of your body. Thus, even if you say "I only attack with my right fist", you are attacking with your entire body when you use unarmed strike.

Look at it like this: If you are a boxer, you are already using both hands. You feint a jab with your right, so you can follow through with a left straight. That is one attack.

[MeeposFire]

Yes, unarmed strike is a weapon (it doesn't have to be Improved). What is your point? The text is assuming a weapon (which could be unarmed strike, if you somehow manage to get two of them), but it is not assuming specifically unarmed strike, meaning it is not creating an exception you could argue with.

I repeat, it is silly. You only have one body, thus you only have one unarmed strike. Unarmed strike is intentionally abstract; you can make strikes with any part of your body. Thus, even if you say "I only attack with my right fist", you are attacking with your entire body when you use unarmed strike.

Look at it like this: If you are a boxer, you are already using both hands. You feint a jab with your right, so you can follow through with a left straight. That is one attack.

And yet you do that with spiked gauntlets in the same exact way and you are two weapon fighting...

[Cog]

Of course, you had to choose a spiked gauntlet for that example rather than a regular gauntlet because it's listed as a light melee weapon rather than an unarmed attack - because wielding sharp bits of metal is generally more effective than wielding your fists.

[Curmudgeon]

The TWF I was referring to is from the City Brawler ACF for Barb, which allows TWF with unarmed attacks only. Could that, would that, stack with Flurry of blows for additional attacks?
Yes, that would work. You're still only using unarmed strikes (which satisfies flurry of blows requirements), and the City Brawler ACF provides an exception to the normal rule that you've got to have a second weapon to make off hand attacks for TWF.

[MeeposFire]

Of course, you had to choose a spiked gauntlet for that example rather than a regular gauntlet because it's listed as a light melee weapon rather than an unarmed attack - because wielding sharp bits of metal is generally more effective than wielding your fists.

So it is effectiveness that determines it and not actually what you did. And lets forget that anybody who wants to use unarmed strikes will be more effective than a spiked gauntlet.

[Cog]

So it is effectiveness that determines it and not actually what you did.
"What you actually did" has to be based in the game mechanics, not simply in how you describe your actions. You can say "I swing with both of my fists", just as you can say "I take a wild swing, and I might miss but I'll hit harder if I connect"; you need a special ability to justify the former just as you need Power Attack to justify the latter. I'd have no problem with you describing your actions in either way without the relevant abilities, but if you want to claim the mechanical benefits as well, you have to pay the mechanical price.


And lets forget that anybody who wants to use unarmed strikes will be more effective than a spiked gauntlet.
Except that they wouldn't be. Unarmed strikes require an additional feat investment that the spiked gauntlet does not. Without that investment, the unarmed strike wielder will certainly not be more effective, assuming all else is equal.

[MeeposFire]

"What you actually did" has to be based in the game mechanics, not simply in how you describe your actions. You can say "I swing with both of my fists", just as you can say "I take a wild swing, and I might miss but I'll hit harder if I connect"; you need a special ability to justify the former just as you need Power Attack to justify the latter. I'd have no problem with you describing your actions in either way without the relevant abilities, but if you want to claim the mechanical benefits as well, you have to pay the mechanical price.


Except that they wouldn't be. Unarmed strikes require an additional feat investment that the spiked gauntlet does not. Without that investment, the unarmed strike wielder will certainly not be more effective, assuming all else is equal.

Make whatever excuses for a bad mechanic you like it makes no sense and never has. The rules on unarmed strikes are dumb from the very start of the game.

[Cog]

Make whatever excuses for a bad mechanic you like it makes no sense and never has. The rules on unarmed strikes are dumb from the very start of the game.
I'm not making excuses; I'm pointing out why the rules are at least consistent. If you simply dislike the mechanic, that's another matter entirely, and you're certainly welcome to that opinion - but it has no bearing on how the rules actually work, which is what the argument was about.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

I suppose what I'm asking is what combination of Combo, Flurry of Blows, Snap Kick and, if possible (which I didn't think it was but won't complain if it is), TWF, would allow for the most unarmed attacks in one round, with the greatest attack bonus?

Thanks

[Cog]

Combo, Flurry, and TWF all simply modify how a full attack works; none of them have an action cost of their own, and so they stack. Snap Kick has even less of a requirement (merely making an attack at all), and so combines with everything else in that narrower set as well.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Combo, Flurry, and TWF all simply modify how a full attack works; none of them have an action cost of their own, and so they stack. Snap Kick has even less of a requirement (merely making an attack at all), and so combines with everything else in that narrower set as well.

Would combining them be an effective decision? Can they even be combined?
Combo does not seem to stack with Flurry, because it equalizes the bonus accross the first two unarmed attacks, which would make the -2, -2 anyway. Same issue arises with TWF.
Am I interpretting this wrong?

[Cog]

Would combining them be an effective decision? Can they even be combined?
Combo does not seem to stack with Flurry, because it equalizes the bonus accross the first two unarmed attacks, which would make the -2, -2 anyway. Same issue arises with TWF.
Am I interpretting this wrong?
Combo would technically combine, it just wouldn't do you much good (though it never struck me as a very useful ability anyway. It's entirely possible I'm missing something subtle about the math, but I doubt I'd trade a feat for it even as a level 20 core fighter). You should be able to make your mainhand iterative attacks and average those, and then claim your TWF attacks after that; Flurry would be trickier. As for combining the rest... I suspect it'd be a tradeoff based on how often you're hitting a given target. The basic Monk ability is often called "flurry of misses" for a reason, after all; you're making up for that with better BAB, but then you're feeding that extra attack bonus right back into even more attacks. If you've often got a target with low AC, of with miss chances you aren't otherwise punching through, making a ton of swings might come in handy.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Combo would technically combine, it just wouldn't do you much good (though it never struck me as a very useful ability anyway. It's entirely possible I'm missing something subtle about the math, but I doubt I'd trade a feat for it even as a level 20 core fighter). You should be able to make your mainhand iterative attacks and average those, and then claim your TWF attacks after that; Flurry would be trickier. As for combining the rest... I suspect it'd be a tradeoff based on how often you're hitting a given target. The basic Monk ability is often called "flurry of misses" for a reason, after all; you're making up for that with better BAB, but then you're feeding that extra attack bonus right back into even more attacks. If you've often got a target with low AC, of with miss chances you aren't otherwise punching through, making a ton of swings might come in handy.

Agreed.

I'm even more curious now: is there a final ruling on whether unarmed strikes can be used with TWF?

[Cog]

I'm even more curious now: is there a final ruling on whether unarmed strikes can be used with TWF?
It comes up less frequently than some issues, but as far as I see it's one of those things that some reasonable people simply continue to disagree on. Personally, I am confident in my reading of the rules, but I see no difficulties with a houserule that you can TWF with only unarmed strikes if you feel the need for one; the writer(s) of the FAQ apparently agreed with that houserule as well, and even mistook it for the actual rules.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

It comes up less frequently than some issues, but as far as I see it's one of those things that some reasonable people simply continue to disagree on. Personally, I am confident in my reading of the rules, but I see no difficulties with a houserule that you can TWF with only unarmed strikes if you feel the need for one; the writer(s) of the FAQ apparently agreed with that houserule as well, and even mistook it for the actual rules.

Alrighty, thanks. I'll pass it by my DM before I consider it for use. With Snap Kick and Flurry of Blows, though, I can't see why I would need it; do my attack rolls really need another -2? Probably not.

[FMArthur]

Agreed there. It's like a Power Attack with a low chance to inflict its extra damage once instead of per-attack. I think there's a feat out there for using unarmed strike and counting as two-handed for Power Attack. You might see better returns on that when you've already got a fair number of unarmed attacks.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Agreed there. It's like a Power Attack with a low chance to inflict its extra damage once instead of per-attack. I think there's a feat out there for using unarmed strike and counting as two-handed for Power Attack. You might see better returns on that when you've already got a fair number of unarmed attacks.

I've heard of this before too. If you can give me the source, it would be very helpful. Considering the character is an animalistic drunkard, it would be fitting.

[FMArthur]

I think it was called Hammer Fist or something. I believe it was Dragon Magazine material, but there might also be more than one version around.

[Lyndworm]

Hammer Fist (http://www.realmshelps.net/cgi-bin/featbox.pl?feat=Hammer_Fist) indeed. Good call.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

Hammer Fist (http://www.realmshelps.net/cgi-bin/featbox.pl?feat=Hammer_Fist) indeed. Good call.

Excellent, thank you. So it could not be used with Flurry of Blows. It does not state explicitly anywhere in the text that it would treat PA as being with a two-handed weapon. Are we certain this is the correct interpretation?

[FMArthur]

Yeah, that doesn't work. It neither makes provision for Power Attack nor works with anything more than one attack. Sorry about that.

[Curmudgeon]

Excellent, thank you. So it could not be used with Flurry of Blows. It does not state explicitly anywhere in the text that it would treat PA as being with a two-handed weapon. Are we certain this is the correct interpretation?
You'll get the 1½ x STR bonus, but it's still 1:1 damage for Power Attack. Even with a lot of Strength bonus, adding Power Attack penalties on top of iterative attack penalties and the Snap Kick penalty is going to cause you to miss too much to be worthwhile.

In any event, there's a much better approach to increasing unarmed damage than Power Attack. Get your party Sorcerer/Wizard to cast Greater Mighty Wallop on you, once daily, and you're kicking and punching as if you were really big ─ up to Colossal size.

[Tibbaerrohwen]

You'll get the 1½ x STR bonus, but it's still 1:1 damage for Power Attack. Even with a lot of Strength bonus, adding Power Attack penalties on top of iterative attack penalties and the Snap Kick penalty is going to cause you to miss too much to be worthwhile.

In any event, there's a much better approach to increasing unarmed damage than Power Attack. Get your party Sorcerer/Wizard to cast Greater Mighty Wallop on you, once daily, and you're kicking and punching as if you were really big ─ up to Colossal size.

Good call. Thanks.