Brawler's Flurry and TWF

[Elfkin_King]

I know that, for monks, Flurry of Blows and TWF stack, creating a stupidly large number of attacks per round. I was wondering if Brawlers Flurry did the same.

I'm trying to make my first ever PFS legal character (and thus using Point-buy for the first time), and I'm trying to decide if I even want to play a Brawler at all, or if I should chose a Ranger or Slayer instead.

I AM trying to avoid playing a monk all-together.

[grarrrg]

I know that, for monks, Flurry of Blows and TWF stack, creating a stupidly large number of attacks per round. I was wondering if Brawlers Flurry did the same.

This might have worked in 3.5, but PF has ruled against it.

"When doing so, he may make one additional attack, taking a –2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat."
"as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)."

Flurry basically _IS_ TWF already.

[arkangel111]

The wording is different. The only reason it would be different is if they actually wanted them to work differently.

Monks flurry:

When doing so, he may make one additional attack, taking a –2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. These attacks can be any combination of unarmed strikes and attacks with a monk special weapon (he does not need to use two weapons to utilize this ability).

Brawlers flurry:

Starting at 2nd level, a brawler can make a brawler's flurry as a full-attack action. When doing so, a brawler has the Two-Weapon Fighting feat when attacking with any combination of unarmed strikes, weapons from the close fighter weapon group, or weapons with the "monk" special feature. She does not need to use two different weapons to use this ability.

Emphasis mine.

By my reading, Brawler gives you TWF where monk treats it like TWF. Since TWF cannot stack with itself the brawler does not get extra attacks from TWF. The brawlers advantage is that it works with more weapons and it also can let you qualify for other feats in the TWF chain.

[Elfkin_King]

This might have worked in 3.5, but PF has ruled against it.

"When doing so, he may make one additional attack, taking a –2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat."
"as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)."

Flurry basically _IS_ TWF already.
The thing is, that RAW seems to point to the outcome for MONKS being different from yours. It says "as if" not "is", and I know I've read somewhere that it was completely kosher to stack the Monks FoB with TWF because, although SIMILAR (well, the effect is essentially identical), they are not actually the same thing. Especially because you can't get most of them at the same time. The ability to get extra attacks from FoB relies on your monk level (in place of BAB) whereas the ability to actually get TWF chain tends to rely on your actual BAB.

The wording is different. The only reason it would be different is if they actually wanted them to work differently.

Monks flurry:


Brawlers flurry:


Emphasis mine.

By my reading, Brawler gives you TWF where monk treats it like TWF. Since TWF cannot stack with itself the brawler does not get extra attacks from TWF. The brawlers advantage is that it works with more weapons and it also can let you qualify for other feats in the TWF chain.

I was afraid of that. :P Basically, if I want ridiculously stupid number of attacks, go strait monk. If Otherwise, I might as well just choose the Ranger or Slayer classes. :P

[Drelua]

The wording is different. The only reason it would be different is if they actually wanted them to work differently.

You, sir, have a very high opinion of Paizo. The Core book was printed 7 years ago, right? Honestly, I'd be surprised to see any game be perfectly consistent over that amount of time, and that's leaving aside certain editing concerns I might have about the ACG.


By my reading, Brawler gives you TWF where monk treats it like TWF. Since TWF cannot stack with itself the brawler does not get extra attacks from TWF. The brawlers advantage is that it works with more weapons and it also can let you qualify for other feats in the TWF chain.

I would agree with this, but I don't think it really matters. If you're given a bonus feat you already have, it doesn't stack any more or less than if you're given a class feature that allows you to pretend to have a feat you already have. Either way, you already have the feat and getting it a second time doesn't do anything.

[Elfkin_King]

You, sir, have a very high opinion of Paizo. The Core book was printed 7 years ago, right? Honestly, I'd be surprised to see any game be perfectly consistent over that amount of time, and that's leaving aside certain editing concerns I might have about the ACG.



I would agree with this, but I don't think it really matters. If you're given a bonus feat you already have, it doesn't stack any more or less than if you're given a class feature that allows you to pretend to have a feat you already have. Either way, you already have the feat and getting it a second time doesn't do anything.

The reason why we think that it stacks is because it says that it functions "like" TWF, not that it "IS". It may be one of those RAW and RAI issues. And no where does it say that you can use your FoB progression to qualify for TWF chain (as far as I am aware, if I'm wrong, please tell me :) ), such as if you took one level in monk for the FoB, and then switched to fighter and tried to take ITWF (at 7th), without having TWF would be impossible. Because of that, I would say that they do stack and don't make the other invalid.

That being said, for the same scenario with the Brawler, it actually states that it IS TWF, so it would not stack.

If there is an official ruling on this, I would love to see it, though. :)

[The Random NPC]

In Pathfinder, Monks cannot stack Flurry of Blows with Two-weapon Fighting because Flurry of Blows is Two-weapon Fighting. Additionally, Brawlers were intended to be able to use Brawler's Flurry to qualify for other feats, but that may not be the case anymore.

Here's a thread (paizo.com/threads/rzs2nrv4&page=last?Flurry-of-Changes-to-Flurry-of-Blows) with quotes from SKR and JB.

[Psyren]

Neither flurry stacks with TWF.

Monk: This does not stack because the monk's flurry is its own separate full-attack action with a specified number of attacks. Thus you cannot full-attack to activate flurry and then full-attack with TWF. Monk's flurry does give you a number of attacks more or less commensurate with what you get from TWF, so there's no real reason to go for TWF.

Brawler: Unlike monks, brawlers actually get the TWF line temporarily while using their own flurry; this was clarified as intentional during the playtest, because temporarily gaining feats is the Brawler's thing. Because you're actually gaining TWF here, having TWF a second time would do nothing. Unlike the regular TWF line, you do get your full strength bonus to damage with all hits during a brawler's flurry, keeping this on par with the monk's flurry. Because you actually get the feats, there's no reason to pick up TWF here either.

The main difference between the two is that the brawler has a few more options as to which weapons it can use - e.g. brass knuckles, shields and armor spikes. In addition, because the Brawler actually gets the feats, the Brawler can grab subsidiary feats like Two-Weapon Feint using those temporary feats as a jumping off point, particularly while using Martial Flexibility as a swift or free action.

[The Random NPC]

In addition, because the Brawler actually gets the feats, the Brawler can grab subsidiary feats like Two-Weapon Feint using those temporary feats as a jumping off point, particularly while using Martial Flexibility as a swift or free action.

Unfortunately, some people using the fact that Brawlers only have the feats while Flurrying to argue that they can't grab subsidiary feats. They're also saying that if Brawlers were meant to be able to, they would have made that clear, especially since it was clarified during the playtest.

[Psyren]

Unfortunately, some people using the fact that Brawlers only have the feats while Flurrying to argue that they can't grab subsidiary feats. They're also saying that if Brawlers were meant to be able to, they would have made that clear, especially since it was clarified during the playtest.

It's debatable whether you can do that using your regular feats, yes - but you absolutely can using Martial Flexibility, because while you have those feats you qualify for the downstream ones, and you can explicitly use swift- and free-actions mid-flurry.

[Elfkin_King]

In Pathfinder, Monks cannot stack Flurry of Blows with Two-weapon Fighting because Flurry of Blows is Two-weapon Fighting. Additionally, Brawlers were intended to be able to use Brawler's Flurry to qualify for other feats, but that may not be the case anymore.

Here's a thread (paizo.com/threads/rzs2nrv4&page=last?Flurry-of-Changes-to-Flurry-of-Blows) with quotes from SKR and JB.

I stand corrected. :)
Well, then, that just sorta kills all reason (for me, other than fluff) to play a monk over a Brawler. O.o

[Drelua]

I stand corrected. :)
Well, then, that just sorta kills all reason (for me, other than fluff) to play a monk over a Brawler. O.o

Well, I have a monk in PFS that can flurry with a nodachi. How's that for a reason? :smallamused:

Also, mid-to-high-level Hungry Ghost Qinggong Monks can do a lot of cool things, my favourite of which is spitting venom in people's eyes and blinding them. Try doing that with a Brawler.

[ArqArturo]

This actually bring up a question.

Since the Monk/Brawler's Flurry is comparable to TWF, could the flurry ability make the character qualify for the Two-Weapon Fighting feat tree (Defence, Improved TWF, etc) as long as it meets the criteria?.

[Psyren]

This actually bring up a question.

Since the Monk/Brawler's Flurry is comparable to TWF, could the flurry ability make the character qualify for the Two-Weapon Fighting feat tree (Defence, Improved TWF, etc) as long as it meets the criteria?.

Monk no, Brawler yes (though arguably, only while flurrying, and using Martial Flexibility to grab them mid-flurry.)

Again, the main distinction is that Brawler actually gets the feats. Monk just gets the attacks and refers to the feats to say how the attacks work.

The other main distinction is that Brawler can flurry with more weapon types than monk can.

[arkangel111]

Might be beating a dead horse but yea psyren had it right monk flurry is a full round action, as is the brawlers, so neither of them can stack with TWF. I knew there was a reason why they couldn't and apparently my mind jumped right over the action type.

In PFS you should be able to use the TWF brawler trick to get extra feats but in all actuality it shouldn't matter. Brawler has TWF, if only for a few moments at a time. In 3.5 you would be considered to have TWF and could take feats, they just won't function unless you are flurrying. I can't see why PF would be different.

[The Random NPC]

Well, I have a monk in PFS that can flurry with a nodachi. How's that for a reason? :smallamused:

Also, mid-to-high-level Hungry Ghost Qinggong Monks can do a lot of cool things, my favourite of which is spitting venom in people's eyes and blinding them. Try doing that with a Brawler.

I made a neat shield thrower that does an expected average of 43 damage per round vs AC 45; with about a 53% chance to turn it all into crits, which would raise the damage to 107.5.


Might be beating a dead horse but yea psyren had it right monk flurry is a full round action, as is the brawlers, so neither of them can stack with TWF. I knew there was a reason why they couldn't and apparently my mind jumped right over the action type.

In PFS you should be able to use the TWF brawler trick to get extra feats but in all actuality it shouldn't matter. Brawler has TWF, if only for a few moments at a time. In 3.5 you would be considered to have TWF and could take feats, they just won't function unless you are flurrying. I can't see why PF would be different.

Because Pathfinder hates mundanes!

[Frakeer]

I have been reading for hours and I can't seem to find a place (in any forum) where my point of view is explored. To me there is no doubt that these two stack, but not the way everyone is hoping for.
1) Two Weapon Fighting does not give any extra attacks. holding a second weapon in your off hand does.
2) Two weapon fighting reduces penalties by -2 primary, -6 offhand. Without TWF the negatives would be -6 & -10 (or -4 & -8 if offhand is light). This only functions during any full attack action.
...Here is my big problem
3) Flurry of Blows sets the initial penalty at -2/-2. The text says "as if using Two Weapon Fighting". -I was going to use the quarterstaff as an example but it is both a 2 handed and double weapon so I will use Sansetsukon (eastern weapons) which is not a double, is a two handed but is also a monk weapon and therefore "kind of" qualifies for FoB. one handed/light combos also qualify... all at -2/-2. all because they are monk weapons. Saying this mechanic functions "as if using Two Weapon Fighting" is a fluffy way of saying you can have your two attacks @ -2/-2 without that pesky dual-wield light weapon restriction. It doesn't in any way function as TWF. That text does not belong in this class feature. It just confuses people.
4) Flurry of Blows is a full round action. Two Weapon Fighting affects a full round actions. TWF affects a full round action already affected by class features, other feats, magic, conditional modifiers etc. If this was worded like the Brawler's Flurry then there would be no issue. As long as you can take TWF then it will affect FoB.
.
What everyone seems to be overlooking is that the only thing TWF does is reduce penalties by -2/-6. Taking TWF should reduce the penalty to 0/0.
.
Of course this opens another can of worms when the monk hits level 8 and the Improved version actually does grant an extra attack. it would be better if they eratta'd those comparisons right out of the class feature's description. Using rules to explain rules just complicates things most of the time.

[Deadkitten]

Hands of effort faq would kill this the same way killed slashing grace and spell combat.