Extra attacks with Monk FoB as standard attack?

[Zirconia]

Our DM has house ruled some improvements to the Monk class, including full BAB and their Flurry of Blows is a Standard action, not a Full Attack, so they can move and still use it.

The Monk wants to use a secondary attack, Fist of Stone (which he has a way to get), after his Flurry of Blows. If he is standing still, so could make a full attack, and FoB was a standard action, can a secondary attack be added after FoB? If so, I presume it would be at -2 from FoB use and -5 from secondary attack, totaling -7 to hit? I realize house rules are involved here, but I was wondering if anyone had similar examples from the actual rules to use as guidelines.

Also, just to check, we have been running Fist of Stone so it only gives a tohit bonus from the +6 STR, not a damage bonus, is this correct?

[Novawurmson]

Our DM has house ruled some improvements to the Monk class, including full BAB and their Flurry of Blows is a Standard action, not a Full Attack, so they can move and still use it.

Excellent.


The Monk wants to use a secondary attack, Fist of Stone (which he has a way to get), after his Flurry of Blows. If he is standing still, so could make a full attack, and FoB was a standard action, can a secondary attack be added after FoB? If so, I presume it would be at -2 from FoB use and -5 from secondary attack, totaling -7 to hit? I realize house rules are involved here, but I was wondering if anyone had similar examples from the actual rules to use as guidelines.

In general, I thought slams used limbs, and thus were unavailable to use in a full attack with manufactured weapons/unarmed strikes. However, if your DM rules that he could use it as part of a full attack, he should be able to apply it as part of his flurry, with a -7 penalty on the to hit roll, as you said.


Also, just to check, we have been running Fist of Stone so it only gives a tohit bonus from the +6 STR, not a damage bonus, is this correct?

Nope, an increase to Strength increases everything modified by Strength, which includes damage!

[Urpriest]

In general, I thought slams used limbs, and thus were unavailable to use in a full attack with manufactured weapons/unarmed strikes. However, if your DM rules that he could use it as part of a full attack, he should be able to apply it as part of his flurry, with a -7 penalty on the to hit roll, as you said.

One slam good, two slams bad, is the general (heuristic) rule. Most creatures with one slam use it like a body slam and can still attack with their limbs, most that have two or more are slamming with their hands. That said, Flurry of Blows shouldn't be using hands at all, so that shouldn't matter.

Anyway, it all depends on how your DM views the line that non-monk weapons can't be used in a flurry. Either that means you can't use them in the same full attack (so a monk who can make a full attack as a standard action using FoB couldn't also use a slam) or it means you can't get extra attacks with them using FoB (in which case it would be fine to add on).

Note that in general, the houseruled monk ability has to be worded as the monk being able to make a full attack as a standard action when using flurry of blows, not simply as being able to make a flurry of blows as a standard action. Flurry of blows modifies a full attack, it isn't an action in its own right.

[tyckspoon]

In general, I thought slams used limbs, and thus were unavailable to use in a full attack with manufactured weapons/unarmed strikes. However, if your DM rules that he could use it as part of a full attack, he should be able to apply it as part of his flurry, with a -7 penalty on the to hit roll, as you said.


Unarmed Strikes are functionally a non-handed weapon within the rules as they relate to whether your hands are in use. They don't have to be punches, so there shouldn't be a problem combining them with a secondary Slam. That said - I would rule that if you want to get the Strength bonus on Fist of Stone to apply to your Unarmed Strike, then you need to use the hand that was turned to said Stone Fist. That would indeed render that hand 'occupied' for that turn and make the Slam unavailable.

[Zirconia]

Anyway, it all depends on how your DM views the line that non-monk weapons can't be used in a flurry. Either that means you can't use them in the same full attack (so a monk who can make a full attack as a standard action using FoB couldn't also use a slam) or it means you can't get extra attacks with them using FoB (in which case it would be fine to add on).

Note that in general, the houseruled monk ability has to be worded as the monk being able to make a full attack as a standard action when using flurry of blows, not simply as being able to make a flurry of blows as a standard action. Flurry of blows modifies a full attack, it isn't an action in its own right.

Ah, interesting, we hadn't picked up on that nuance; our rule was in fact worded as "(Battle Monk class) can make a FoB as a standard action", hence the difficulty figuring out what you could add on. I was thinking Snap Kick at 6th level (we are 5th now), since it can specifically combine with a standard action.

The DM would probably have been fine with the latter interpretation you suggest, adding on the slam, except that I helped the guy redesign his monk after reading things here, and he went from about 1d8+3 to 2d6+12 damage or thereabouts per hit, which is fairly good at 5th level, more when he finishes buffing, so the DM may be less sympathetic to letting the monk have even more attacks. That said, we need a general rule, and locking the monk at 2 hits/round forever isn't fair either, and making him not use FoB later takes away from his monk schtick.

Urpriest, would the wording you suggest allow adding any number of secondary attacks in along with Flurry of Blows and still have the whole thing be a standard action? I figured what seemed fair was to allow the 2 FoB attacks as a standard action, but if he wanted to add still more attacks with various secondaries, he would have to use a full attack, and lose his move. How should that be worded?

The reason we had only been allowing Fist of Stone to apply to tohit bonuses was the wording of the spell, "gaining a +6 enhancement bonus to Strength for purposes of attacks, grapple checks, or breaking and crushing items." The DM read that as "attack rolls", with no mention of damage rolls. Since it is a first level spell, it seemed odd to have it give an even higher boost to fighting than Bull's Strength, which is 2nd level.

Interesting argument, tyckspoon, but why would using the Fist of Stone fist for the flurry mean you couldn't make a secondary attack with the same limb? Is there some general rule that says a secondary attack must be made with a different limb than other "main" attacks you are making in the round, say your longsword in your right hand? Our group doesn't have a lot of experience with those kind of combined attacks, but I think we'll be seeing more in the next few levels, so I want to get a better handle on those rules, I'm the one who does most of our research.

[Urpriest]

Urpriest, would the wording you suggest allow adding any number of secondary attacks in along with Flurry of Blows and still have the whole thing be a standard action? I figured what seemed fair was to allow the 2 FoB attacks as a standard action, but if he wanted to add still more attacks with various secondaries, he would have to use a full attack, and lose his move. How should that be worded?

Well, first of all, your DM might want to rule on whether the old "flurry of blows must contain only monk weapons" thing was a restriction on secondary natural weapons, or only applied to the bonus attacks.

The other question is, do you want to let the Monk just get their standard action attack plus the bonus FoB attacks, or a full full attack, just without secondaries? Basically, at 8th level, should the Monk be getting three attacks as a standard action, or only two?




Interesting argument, tyckspoon, but why would using the Fist of Stone fist for the flurry mean you couldn't make a secondary attack with the same limb? Is there some general rule that says a secondary attack must be made with a different limb than other "main" attacks you are making in the round, say your longsword in your right hand? Our group doesn't have a lot of experience with those kind of combined attacks, but I think we'll be seeing more in the next few levels, so I want to get a better handle on those rules, I'm the one who does most of our research.

It's not a rule so much as precedent. In general, when a monster uses a weapon, its full attack is missing natural attacks that the limb holding the weapon could be making. It's applied pretty consistently, but it's never explicitly laid out.

[Zirconia]

Thanks Urpriest; in addition to looking at your advice, I read your Monster guide and the Natural Attacks guide referenced in it, and I think I can put together a recommendation now.

I think the way to word the house rule is "The extra Flurry of Blows attack(s) may be made without needing to take a Full Attack action to do so. Thus if only FoB attacks are made, only a standard action is needed. The tohit penalty from using FoB adds on to any other penalties from making other attacks in the round." That should allow for addition of other attacks in the round, at appropriate penalties, but then a full attack would have to be made. That way the monk gets some advantages over the fighter if they have to move, but still has an incentive to stay in one spot.

I'm a little hesitant to recommend that ANY full attack action the Monk makes become a standard action, as I think he will be able to get five attacks/round by 6th level, and six/round by 8th, with Haste, which we often have going in a fight. Maybe if I hadn't rebuilt him to be considerably scarier. :)

[Urpriest]

Thanks Urpriest; in addition to looking at your advice, I read your Monster guide and the Natural Attacks guide referenced in it, and I think I can put together a recommendation now.

I think the way to word the house rule is "The extra Flurry of Blows attack(s) may be made without needing to take a Full Attack action to do so. Thus if only FoB attacks are made, only a standard action is needed. The tohit penalty from using FoB adds on to any other penalties from making other attacks in the round." That should allow for addition of other attacks in the round, at appropriate penalties, but then a full attack would have to be made. That way the monk gets some advantages over the fighter if they have to move, but still has an incentive to stay in one spot.

I'm a little hesitant to recommend that ANY full attack action the Monk makes become a standard action, as I think he will be able to get five attacks/round by 6th level, and six/round by 8th, with Haste, which we often have going in a fight. Maybe if I hadn't rebuilt him to be considerably scarier. :)

If you're going to do it like that, you could actually just take the regular Flurry of Blows ability, and remove the "full attack only" restriction. The penalty already explicitly applies for a full round.

[Epsilon Rose]

The reason we had only been allowing Fist of Stone to apply to tohit bonuses was the wording of the spell, "gaining a +6 enhancement bonus to Strength for purposes of attacks, grapple checks, or breaking and crushing items." The DM read that as "attack rolls", with no mention of damage rolls. Since it is a first level spell, it seemed odd to have it give an even higher boost to fighting than Bull's Strength, which is 2nd level.

The reason it's worded that way is because you're only getting the bonus for things you're actually using your hand for. So, for instance, you wouldn't get +6 to strength for jump checks (which bulls strength would give). When it says for attacks, I would assume it means the whole attack, both to hit and to damage. Otherwise, I would have expected them to explicitly say "to attack rolls" or something similar, much like how they said "grapple checks", rather than "grapples".