Flurry of Blows?

[Reaver25]

Okay, so I read somewhere that Flurry of Blows has to hit the same target. Then, reading the PHB, pg. 78:

"Immediately after you take the Attack action on your turn, you can spend 1 Ki point to make two unarmed strikes as a bonus action."

It doesn't say it has to be against the same target. Also, there is no limit to how many times I can do this, right? For instance, Lv 5 Monk wielding a Quarterstaff attacks, 1d6 + flurry of blows (additional 2d6) then Extra Attack 1d6 + flurry of blows (additional 2d6). Am I right here or far from it?

[Elminster298]

Okay, so I read somewhere that Flurry of Blows has to hit the same target. Then, reading the PHB, pg. 78:

"Immediately after you take the Attack action on your turn, you can spend 1 Ki point to make two unarmed strikes as a bonus action."

It doesn't say it has to be against the same target. Also, there is no limit to how many times I can do this, right? For instance, Lv 5 Monk wielding a Quarterstaff attacks, 1d6 + flurry of blows (additional 2d6) then Extra Attack 1d6 + flurry of blows (additional 2d6). Am I right here or far from it?

Immediately after taking the attack ACTION. With bonus attack that means two attacks plus you two unarmed strikes from flurry of blows.

[Rysto]

You only get one bonus action in a turn, so you can only use your flurry of blows feature once on your turn, even if both of your attacks hit. Also note that if you spend your bonus action on flurry of blows after your first attack hits, you can't take the bonus unarmed strike granted by your martial arts feature if your second attack hits, as that also takes a bonus action.

I agree that nothing in the rules requires you to target the same creature with your flurry of blows.

[Reaver25]

Immediately after taking the attack ACTION. With bonus attack that means two attacks plus you two unarmed strikes from flurry of blows.

Okay, thanks for answering that question. What about the first one?

[Elminster298]

I do believe that with fighter action surge you would be able to: two attacks plus two unarmed strikes <action surge> two attacks plus two unarmed strikes. Unless there is a nuance I've missed between these interactions since I've never personally encounter this setup.

[Reaver25]

....
I agree that nothing in the rules requires you to target the same creature with your flurry of blows.

Okay, that's what I was looking for. I didn't see it in Errata so I wanted to make sure.

[Elminster298]

Right, right, right... I keep forgetting action surge doesn't give an additional bonus action. I have only ever played a fighter once in 5th ed.

[ad_hoc]

You only get one bonus action in a turn, so you can only use your flurry of blows feature once on your turn, even if both of your attacks hit. Also note that if you spend your bonus action on flurry of blows after your first attack hits, you can't take the bonus unarmed strike granted by your martial arts feature if your second attack hits, as that also takes a bonus action.

I agree that nothing in the rules requires you to target the same creature with your flurry of blows.

You don't need to hit with any attack to use Flurry of Blows (or the regular martial arts bonus action attack).

[Reaver25]

You don't need to hit with any attack to use Flurry of Blows (or the regular martial arts bonus action attack).

Refer to my original post, or PHB pg. 78. It specifically says you have to take the Attack action. Yes, you don't need to HIT, but once you take the Attack action. I'm not necessarily saying this for you, I'm fleshing it out for myself.

[Tanarii]

Bonus questions:

1) since it specifies 'after', do you require the actual attacks to occur after the attack(s) from the Attack action? If so, how do you reconcile this with JC's Shield Master ruling?

2) since it specifies 'immediately', do you allow movement between taking the Attack action and the bonus action attacks? Do you allow movement between the attacks?

(I could swear at least one of these was already in SA. Excuse me while I go review it.)

[smcmike]

I do believe that with fighter action surge you would be able to: two attacks plus two unarmed strikes <action surge> two attacks plus two unarmed strikes. Unless there is a nuance I've missed between these interactions since I've never personally encounter this setup.

No. Fighter action surge gives you another Action, but not another Bonus Action. Using Flurry of Blows requires a Bonus Action, and you only get one per turn.

[gfishfunk]

The nice thing is that you can activate it with a Grapple or a Shove, since the attack ACTION lets you replace one of your attacks with a grapple or a shove. This is different from the normal bonus action off-hand attack, which requires an attack (not action) to activate.

[Elminster298]

No. Fighter action surge gives you another Action, but not another Bonus Action. Using Flurry of Blows requires a Bonus Action, and you only get one per turn.

Yeah, I remembered that after I posted and corrected myself in a different post. As I said, I've only played one fighter in 5th ed so I forget some of the nuances.

[smcmike]

Yeah, I remembered that after I posted and corrected myself in a different post. As I said, I've only played one fighter in 5th ed so I forget some of the nuances.

My bad. I hate it when I make a mistake up thread, then people keep correcting me after I've acknowledged my error. Sorry.

[Rysto]

You don't need to hit with any attack to use Flurry of Blows (or the regular martial arts bonus action attack).

Yeah, I'm not sure where I got that idea from.

[Dizlag]

The text from the SRD on Action Surge says ...

Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action.

So, it would seem a Monk 1/Fighter 5 with Action Surge would be able to make two attacks plus a flurry of blows <action surge> two more attacks plus a flurry of blows.

Dizlag

[smcmike]

The text from the SRD on Action Surge says ...

Starting at 2nd level, you can push yourself beyond your normal limits for a moment. On your turn, you can take one additional action on top of your regular action and a possible bonus action.

So, it would seem a Monk 1/Fighter 5 with Action Surge would be able to make two attacks plus a flurry of blows <action surge> two more attacks plus a flurry of blows.

Dizlag

The possible bonus action is not additional.

[Yuki Akuma]

:smallsigh:

It's "You can take an additional action, on top of your regular allotment of actions".

Not "You can take an additional action and an additional bonus action".

[Elminster298]

My bad. I hate it when I make a mistake up thread, then people keep correcting me after I've acknowledged my error. Sorry.

No worries. It happens to all of us at some point.

[R.Shackleford]

Okay, so I read somewhere that Flurry of Blows has to hit the same target. Then, reading the PHB, pg. 78:

"Immediately after you take the Attack action on your turn, you can spend 1 Ki point to make two unarmed strikes as a bonus action."

It doesn't say it has to be against the same target. Also, there is no limit to how many times I can do this, right? For instance, Lv 5 Monk wielding a Quarterstaff attacks, 1d6 + flurry of blows (additional 2d6) then Extra Attack 1d6 + flurry of blows (additional 2d6). Am I right here or far from it?

I believe you can be armored while you use Flurry of Blows.

Some of the monks features work while armored, I'll need to check if this is one.

[Reaver25]

Bonus questions:

1) since it specifies 'after', do you require the actual attacks to occur after the attack(s) from the Attack action? If so, how do you reconcile this with JC's Shield Master ruling?

2) since it specifies 'immediately', do you allow movement between taking the Attack action and the bonus action attacks? Do you allow movement between the attacks?

(I could swear at least one of these was already in SA. Excuse me while I go review it.)

1) Yes, I would make my players do their Attack action first, consisting of rolling to hit/damage, then the Flurry of Blows. Not sure on the Shield Master.

2) As cool as it would be, it does say immediately after. So I would say no, that the attack from Flurry of Blows has to be against a nearby target.

Did yout find anything when you went to review it?

[gfishfunk]

I believe you can be armored while you use Flurry of Blows.

Some of the monks features work while armored, I'll need to check if this is one.

You CAN be armored for the flurry of blows bonus action costing 1 ki, but you do not get the benefit of martial arts at that point. Martial arts allows you to use Dex for your attack, damage modifier, and the unarmed strike damage. So, you would generally be doing 1 damage each hit.

So its possible, but not at all a good choice.

[R.Shackleford]

You CAN be armored for the flurry of blows bonus action costing 1 ki, but you do not get the benefit of martial arts at that point. Martial arts allows you to use Dex for your attack, damage modifier, and the unarmed strike damage. So, you would generally be doing 1 damage each hit.

So its possible, but not at all a good choice.

I was thinking armored shillelagh flurry of blows stunning attack.

Take ff the Armor? Still awesome.

Works kinda like a 2 stage BBEG

[gfishfunk]

I was thinking armored shillelagh flurry of blows stunning attack.

Take odd the Armor? Still awesome.

Ah, but that would not work. Flurry of Blows is specific to unarmed attacks. You cannot use a weapon with the unarmed attacks because they are unarmed.

[R.Shackleford]

Ah, but that would not work. Flurry of Blows is specific to unarmed attacks. You cannot use a weapon with the unarmed attacks because they are unarmed.

Oh yeah...

Ok, need Tavern Brawler then.

[Christian]

I believe you can be armored while you use Flurry of Blows.

Some of the monks features work while armored, I'll need to check if this is one.

Yes, this is correct. The single unarmed strike as a bonus action is under the Martial Arts header in the class feature list, and so is only available when unarmored and shieldless, and fighting unarmed or with only monk weapons. But Flurry of Blows does not have any of these restrictions listed--you just have to pay a ki point after taking the Attack action, and you can use a bonus action to make two unarmed strikes. But ...


You CAN be armored for the flurry of blows bonus action costing 1 ki, but you do not get the benefit of martial arts at that point. Martial arts allows you to use Dex for your attack, damage modifier, and the unarmed strike damage. So, you would generally be doing 1 damage each hit.

So its possible, but not at all a good choice.

Never mind. Shadow monked. :)

[R.Shackleford]

Shilelagh twice (+stun) and then two unarmed Attacks (+stun) works fine with the rules.

The unarmed strikes aren't for damage but to allow you to stun more enemies.

Yes, you run out of ki fast, but this is for when you want to stun 4 enemies.

[RickAllison]

Shilelagh twice (+stun) and then two unarmed Attacks (+stun) works fine with the rules.

The unarmed strikes aren't for damage but to allow you to stun more enemies.

Yes, you run out of ki fast, but this is for when you want to stun 4 enemies.

Or when you REALLY need to stun one!

Really, a Long Death monk/Fighter 1 who just plays super tank doesn't seem like that bad of an option. Enough Strength to wear heavy armor is fine for point-buy, obtain Shillelagh somehow (either through Magic Initiate or another dip), grab Polearm Master, and basically be the opposite of a normal monk. Clank around in heavy armor and a shield, bludgeon people with your quarterstaff while pumping Wisdom, and put the fear of death into groups.

Alternatively, dump Strength, keep Dexterity at 14, and instead go medium armor. Kind of a roundabout way, but it does work.

[gfishfunk]

Shilelagh twice (+stun) and then two unarmed Attacks (+stun) works fine with the rules.

The unarmed strikes aren't for damage but to allow you to stun more enemies.

Yes, you run out of ki fast, but this is for when you want to stun 4 enemies.

One more slight frustration (subject to interpretation and house ruling) is that stunning strike requires a melee weapon attack, and unarmed strikes are not considered weapon attacks.

Some people interpret unarmed strikes as monk weapons (which is not a literal reading of martial arts), others house rule it.

[RickAllison]

One more slight frustration (subject to interpretation and house ruling) is that stunning strike requires a melee weapon attack, and unarmed strikes are not considered weapon attacks.

Some people interpret unarmed strikes as monk weapons (which is not a literal reading of martial arts), others house rule it.

This is a common error. Unarmed strikes are melee weapon attacks, but they are not attacks with a melee weapon. Fists are not weapons, but they can make melee weapon attacks.

[Tanarii]

1) Yes, I would make my players do their Attack action first, consisting of rolling to hit/damage, then the Flurry of Blows. Not sure on the Shield Master.

2) As cool as it would be, it does say immediately after. So I would say no, that the attack from Flurry of Blows has to be against a nearby target.

Did yout find anything when you went to review it?
Only the same old SA answers, which are internally contradictory, unless you add something that is never explained. For example, JC says that War Magic can be used in any order, but in that exact same answer he says "unless the the bonus action specifies it must take place". The only way that answer makes any sense is if all actions are declared first in a round, then all resolution takes place next, in any order desired. But he and the PHB never say that's how it works. If that's not the case, the the "when" is specifying when it must take place: after the cantrip.

For reference, from the SA Compendium found http://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/SA-Compendium.pdf (here)
Does the “when” in the Eldritch Knight’s War Magic feature mean the bonus attack comes after you cast the cantrip, or can it come before? The intent is that the bo- nus attack can come before or after the cantrip. You choose when to take a bonus action during your turn, unless the bonus action specifies when it must take place (PH, 189).

[R.Shackleford]

One more slight frustration (subject to interpretation and house ruling) is that stunning strike requires a melee weapon attack, and unarmed strikes are not considered weapon attacks.

Some people interpret unarmed strikes as monk weapons (which is not a literal reading of martial arts), others house rule it.


This is a common error. Unarmed strikes are melee weapon attacks, but they are not attacks with a melee weapon. Fists are not weapons, but they can make melee weapon attacks.

Rick is *berp* right on this one *takes swig from flask*.

Basically WotC went full fiddly when it comes to unarmed strikes. And everyone knows, you never go full fiddly.

[gfishfunk]

This is a common error. Unarmed strikes are melee weapon attacks, but they are not attacks with a melee weapon. Fists are not weapons, but they can make melee weapon attacks.


Rick is *berp* right on this one *takes swig from flask*.

Basically WotC went full fiddly when it comes to unarmed strikes. And everyone knows, you never go full fiddly.

Can you cite a page to back this up from the player's handbook or DMG?

[R.Shackleford]

Can you cite a page to back this up from the player's handbook or DMG?

Sage Advice/errata

[Tanarii]

Link-y goodness: https://media.wizards.com/2016/downloads/DND/PH-Errata-V1.pdf

Weapons (p. 149). Unarmed strike doesn’t belong on the Weapons table.
&
Melee Attacks (p. 195). The rule on unarmed strikes should read as follows: “Instead of using a weapon to make a melee weapon attack, you can use an unarmed strike: a punch, kick, head-butt, or similar forceful blow (none of which count as weapons). On a hit, an unarmed strike deals bludgeoning damage equal to 1 + your Strength modifier. You are proficient with your unarmed strikes.

Also Sage Advice refers back to this rules change several times.

[RickAllison]

This distinction does come into play with a few other abilities. A big one is Sharpshooter's -5/+10 not working with thrown melee weapons (those are ranged attacks made with a melee weapon, not an attack with a ranged weapon) but the first two abilities functioning with it. That is really the biggest one. Guess it is just so that you can only get the "BOOM, Headshot" with a dedicated ranged weapon.

[R.Shackleford]

This distinction does come into play with a few other abilities. A big one is Sharpshooter's -5/+10 not working with thrown melee weapons (those are ranged attacks made with a melee weapon, not an attack with a ranged weapon) but the first two abilities functioning with it. That is really the biggest one. Guess it is just so that you can only get the "BOOM, Headshot" with a dedicated ranged weapon.

In all honesty, they should have just made improvised and unarmed strikes a weapon on the weapon table (much like say... 3e for one example) and then made everything work off melee or ranged weapon attack, hit, or damage. Get the fiddly out of the game.

[RickAllison]

In all honesty, they should have just made improvised and unarmed strikes a weapon on the weapon table (much like say... 3e for one example) and then made everything work off melee or ranged weapon attack, hit, or damage. Get the fiddly out of the game.

I think the distinction does have its place, though. Hilarious as the image may be, it doesn't make sense for someone to be able to throw a greatsword and key off of the precision targeting with Sharpshooter (improvised thrown weapon, 1d4 damage, range 20/60). Yeah you can throw it, but you can't really get a solid hit...

You know, I just realized that the language of the game does result in one ridiculous combination. I don't think it is OP, just... weird. A Champion 20 takes his longbow into the thick of battle, wielding it as a blunt melee instrument. Remember that longbows (and heavy crossbows) are ranged weapons with the Heavy property. Now we can make improvised melee attacks with these ranged weapons per this section:


If a character uses a ranged
weapon to make a melee attack, or throws a melee
weapon that does not have the thrown property, it also
deals 1d4 damage.

So we have his longbow acting as a Heavy ranged weapon making 1d4 damage melee attacks. Say the Champion picked up Tavern Brawler so he is proficient in the use of his bow making melee attacks. The Champion also has Sharpshooter, with the following text:


Before you make an attack with a ranged weapon that
you are proficient with, you can choose to take a - 5
penalty to the attack roll. If the attack hits, you add +10
to the attack’s damage.

We are making an attack with a ranged weapon, and we are covered whether that proficient requirement applies to the base weapon or being used for an improvised melee attack. So we qualify for the -5/+10 here. But wait:


Before you make a melee attack with a heavy weapon
that you are proficient with, you can choose to take a
- 5 penalty to the attack roll. If the attack hits, you add
+10 to the attack’s damage.

So according to GWM, making a melee attack with a heavy weapon, which our longbow is making, provides for another -5/+10.

So for the cost of two feats (possibly three) and a -10 on your attack roll, the Champion can dole out his four attacks at 1d4+5+20 damage. Might be better for a Battlemaster...

EDIT: And yes I am aware that this is firmly in bleu cheese territory. I don't believe the intention is for Sharpshooter to apply to melee attacks with ranged weapons, that is just an odd quirk of the language they used.

[R.Shackleford]

I think the distinction does have its place, though. Hilarious as the image may be, it doesn't make sense for someone to be able to throw a greatsword and key off of the precision targeting with Sharpshooter (improvised thrown weapon, 1d4 damage, range 20/60). Yeah you can throw it, but you can't really get a solid hit...

You know, I just realized that the language of the game does result in one ridiculous combination. I don't think it is OP, just... weird. A Champion 20 takes his longbow into the thick of battle, wielding it as a blunt melee instrument. Remember that longbows (and heavy crossbows) are ranged weapons with the Heavy property. Now we can make improvised melee attacks with these ranged weapons per this section:



So we have his longbow acting as a Heavy ranged weapon making 1d4 damage melee attacks. Say the Champion picked up Tavern Brawler so he is proficient in the use of his bow making melee attacks. The Champion also has Sharpshooter, with the following text:



We are making an attack with a ranged weapon, and we are covered whether that proficient requirement applies to the base weapon or being used for an improvised melee attack. So we qualify for the -5/+10 here. But wait:



So according to GWM, making a melee attack with a heavy weapon, which our longbow is making, provides for another -5/+10.

So for the cost of two feats (possibly three) and a -10 on your attack roll, the Champion can dole out his four attacks at 1d4+5+20 damage. Might be better for a Battlemaster...

EDIT: And yes I am aware that this is firmly in bleu cheese territory. I don't believe the intention is for Sharpshooter to apply to melee attacks with ranged weapons, that is just an odd quirk of the language they used.

Why not? Bullseye or Hawkeye could shoot/throw a greatsword with precision, my D&D character should easily be able to do that.

Edit

Also your bow is a melee improvised weapon. Sharpshooter needs a ranged weapon.

[RickAllison]

Why not? Bullseye or Hawkeye could shoot/throw a greatsword with precision, my D&D character should easily be able to do that.

Edit

Also your bow is a melee improvised weapon. Sharpshooter needs a ranged weapon.

Page 148 has that covered. It doesn't talk about using a ranged weapon as an improvised melee weapon, but to make melee attacks, same as melee weapons that are thrown are ranged attacks with melee weapons rather than becoming a ranged weapon.