Flurry of Blows

[kirerellim]

I'm curious about the RAW of Flurry of Blows. From what I read it gives you one extra attack a round(before level 11). But here it says:

In the case of the quarterstaff, each end counts as a separate weapon for the purpose of using the flurry of blows ability.

Does that mean each side gets an extra attack?

[holywhippet]

Not as such, a quarterstaff if a double weapon so you can fight with it as though fighting with two weapons but it works the same as regular two weapon combat. You can include two weapon fighting alongside flurry though. I think the other point though is that you can enchant each end separately.

[kirerellim]

Ooh, so for example a level 10 monk using the quarterstaff would get 3 attacks, then one more strike with flurry if minus 2 on top of the negatives for duel wielding?

[Talya]

Ooh, so for example a level 10 monk using the quarterstaff would get 3 attacks, then one more strike with flurry if minus 2 on top of the negatives for duel wielding?

A level ten monk with two weapon fighting and improved two weapon fighting attacks at +5/+5/+5/+0/+0.

This is also known as a "Flurry of Misses."

[holywhippet]

Yeah, it's supposed to be a trade off. You get more attacks, but less odds of them hitting. Statistically you have a 1 in 4 chance of getting a natural 20 that way though. Confirming the critical hit might be tricky though.

[kirerellim]

Hmm... monks make my head hurt. :smallconfused:

Ok, well while I'm on confusing monks, stunning fist. Is it a standard attack all on its own, or can you mix it in with a full attack action?

[Talya]

You can mix it in with a full attack.

[kirerellim]

Well... thats a much stronger ability than I realized then lol Thank you for the assistance!

[ArqArturo]

A level ten monk with two weapon fighting and improved two weapon fighting attacks at +5/+5/+5/+0/+0.

This is also known as a "Flurry of Misses."

This is why one tries to optimize the chances of hitting.

[Talya]

This is why one tries to optimize the chances of hitting.

Yes...although typically there are too many poor elements of the monk chassis that need additional "optimizing" just to be as effective as an unoptimized fighter.


Well... thats a much stronger ability than I realized then lol Thank you for the assistance!

Not nearly as much as you'd think, but it's still one of the nicest things the monk can get.

If you're going to focus on Stunning Fist, you'll want your wisdom high. Since that also boosts your AC, you probably want it at 18. If you're doing that, take the feat Intuitive Attack from BoED. while you're there, there's an improvement for stunning fist in the same book as well.

[kirerellim]

I have a high wisdom and did take that feat :D Thats why I like stunning fist now, though in a few levels I'm going to try and get my dm to let me take freezing the lifeblood. I don't think he's going to go for that though.

[holywhippet]

To be honest though, the best advice you can generally give someone for playing a monk is to never play a monk. Or if you do you need to multiclass a fair bit and go for a casting hybrid like sacred fist or psychic warrior. The special abilities seem nice, but without some fancy tricks your AC will suck and you'll get pounded in battle.

[ArqArturo]

Yes...although typically there are too many poor elements of the monk chassis that need additional "optimizing" just to be as effective as an unoptimized fighter.

To be honest, I've never really liked the monk. When I've played one, I only used it as a base. For example, I once did an Ex-Monk (notice the EX) 2/Druid 18 with VoP. It was a monk, disenchanted with his order's tyrannical rule over the people, and decided to strike on his on and learn the true way to enlightenment and found it in nature (Haha! Backstory!).

Another example was a monk/duskblade/enlightened soul. He was a monk, but more of an esoteric kind. I've never relied heavily on flurry or blows for obvious reasons, save when it was convenient to use certain style maneuver from the Sun School.

[Talya]

To be honest though, the best advice you can generally give someone for playing a monk is to never play a monk. Or if you do you need to multiclass a fair bit and go for a casting hybrid like sacred fist or psychic warrior. The special abilities seem nice, but without some fancy tricks your AC will suck and you'll get pounded in battle.

You're not wrong.

Monk/Cleric/Sacred Fist isn't bad, though.

[holywhippet]

You're not wrong.

Monk/Cleric/Sacred Fist isn't bad, though.

Yeah, because you can use spells to cover the monks weakness. Hmm, actually let me rephrase that. The cleric has the potential match and eventually exceed the fighter by itself. You are just adding monk goodness to the mix.

First time I played D&D at a table I tried a monk. The thing that really highlighted the problem of the monk was the dwarf fighter in plate armor using a tower shield. The goblins were were fighting usually needed a natural 20 just to hit him. I was getting smacked just about every combat round because I just had my DEX and WIS bonuses to AC.

[Person_Man]

Helpful house rule: Whenever a Feat or class ability adds an extra attack that is not a natural weapon, ignore the to-hit penalties. Thus, Flurry, Two Weapon Fighting, Snap Kick, etc, all become a lot more useful and easy to manage.

[ArqArturo]

Helpful house rule: Whenever a Feat or class ability adds an extra attack that is not a natural weapon, ignore the to-hit penalties. Thus, Flurry, Two Weapon Fighting, Snap Kick, etc, all become a lot more useful and easy to manage.

In 3.5, in the case of monks, our DM used the houserule that, if a PrC progressed unarmed strike and monk AC, it also progressed flurry of blows. This made the sorcerer/monk/enlightened fist of the party (not to mention that it was an Illumian) more useful in battle, and he had the chance of going VoP, because with the sorcerer spells he could fly and buff himself silly, and had all the monk goodness, but he chose not to.