beginner's question

Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

Hi all,

I hope this is the correct group for questions about Dungeons and Dragons.
I've been playing D&D 3.5 for about 2 years now, with no experience of
table-top gaming (only PC games) prior to that.

I have a few questions...

I have a level 11 Fighter that is going Monk at next level-up. He has base
attacks of +11/+6/+1 and will get flurry of blows at -2/-2, does this mean
he can use flurry of blows at +9/+9/+4/-1? I think I have this right, but
I'd like to be sure.

He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?

When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack and -2
to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?

Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12 bonus
feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it calculate as
this... +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)

Your help would be much appreciated on this sunject

Thanks in advance

John Lawrie
38 answers Last reply
More about beginner question
  1. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    John Lawrie wrote:

    > I have a level 11 Fighter that is going Monk at next level-up. He has base
    > attacks of +11/+6/+1 and will get flurry of blows at -2/-2, does this mean
    > he can use flurry of blows at +9/+9/+4/-1? I think I have this right, but
    > I'd like to be sure.

    That would be correct. See below for more.

    > He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?

    I believe it should. Unarmed strikes count as light weapons, so it's
    not a bad decision. However, I'm not exactly sure how it interacts with
    Flurry of blows, if it interacts with it at all.

    > When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
    > Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
    > description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack and -2
    > to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?

    Okay, I believe that Katana = bastard sword, and Wakizashi = short
    sword, correct?

    That gives us "Off-hand weapon is light, and Two-Weapon Fighting feat."
    So your interpretation would be correct.

    > Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12 bonus
    > feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it calculate as
    > this... +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)

    The -2 penalty for two-weapon fighting also applies in addition to the
    -5 you mention. You should get

    +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana).

    The negative five penalty mentioned in the feat description is a way of
    saying that the off-hand attacks follow the same iterative pattern as
    the primary-hand attacks. In other words, each hand has a gradually
    descending pattern of attacks, with each successive attack at a bonus 5
    less than the previous.

    > Your help would be much appreciated on this sunject
    >
    > Thanks in advance

    Glad to be of service.

    Tialan
  2. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    John Lawrie wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I hope this is the correct group for questions about Dungeons and
    Dragons.
    > I've been playing D&D 3.5 for about 2 years now, with no experience
    of
    > table-top gaming (only PC games) prior to that.
    >
    > I have a few questions...
    >
    > I have a level 11 Fighter that is going Monk at next level-up. He has
    base
    > attacks of +11/+6/+1 and will get flurry of blows at -2/-2, does this
    mean
    > he can use flurry of blows at +9/+9/+4/-1? I think I have this right,
    but
    > I'd like to be sure.
    >

    I think so.

    > He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?
    >

    I don't think you can do two-weapon fighting with flurry.

    > When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
    > Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
    > description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack
    and -2
    > to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?
    >

    Yes.

    > Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12
    bonus
    > feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it
    calculate as
    > this... +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >

    The second wakizashi attach should be at +4 I beleive.

    - Justisaur
  3. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    John Lawrie wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I hope this is the correct group for questions about Dungeons and
    Dragons.
    > I've been playing D&D 3.5 for about 2 years now, with no experience
    of
    > table-top gaming (only PC games) prior to that.
    >
    > I have a few questions...
    >
    > I have a level 11 Fighter that is going Monk at next level-up. He has
    base
    > attacks of +11/+6/+1 and will get flurry of blows at -2/-2, does this
    mean
    > he can use flurry of blows at +9/+9/+4/-1? I think I have this right,
    but
    > I'd like to be sure.

    Correct. But realize that flurry of blows only work with special monk
    weapons.

    > He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?

    Yes. A recent FAQ at wizards.com clarified this. If using only monk
    weapons (unarmed strike included) you can flurry and make additional
    attacks via two weapon fighting, with a total penalty of at least -4.

    > When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
    > Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
    > description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack
    and -2
    > to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?

    +9/+9/+4/-1.

    > Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12
    bonus
    > feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it
    calculate as
    > this... +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)

    (assuming monk at level 12, otherwise this char's BAB would be +12
    instead +11)
    Katana +9/+4/-1, Wakizashi +9/+4

    If this char attacks with a flurry (of say, unarmed strikes) and two
    weapon fighting, the attacks would would be:

    Unarmed strike +7/+7/+7/+2/+2/-3.

    > Your help would be much appreciated on this sunject

    --
    @ @ Nockermensch, the helpful talking .sig
  4. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan wrote:
    > John Lawrie wrote:

    > > When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
    > > Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
    > > description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack
    and -2
    > > to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
    > > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?
    >
    > Okay, I believe that Katana = bastard sword, and Wakizashi = short
    > sword, correct?
    >

    According to the Samurai description in Complete Warrior, you are
    correct.
  5. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    John Lawrie wrote:

    > Hi all,
    >
    > I hope this is the correct group for questions about Dungeons and Dragons.
    > I've been playing D&D 3.5 for about 2 years now, with no experience of
    > table-top gaming (only PC games) prior to that.
    >
    > I have a few questions...
    >
    > I have a level 11 Fighter that is going Monk at next level-up. He has base
    > attacks of +11/+6/+1 and will get flurry of blows at -2/-2, does this mean
    > he can use flurry of blows at +9/+9/+4/-1? I think I have this right, but
    > I'd like to be sure.
    >
    > He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?
    >
    > When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
    > Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
    > description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack and -2
    > to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?
    >
    > Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12 bonus
    > feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it calculate as
    > this... +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >
    > Your help would be much appreciated on this sunject
    >
    > Thanks in advance
    >
    > John Lawrie
    >
    >

    Alright, my reply, limited by my knowledge check, and a few referals to
    the SRD to check my facts.

    - A Fighter 10/Monk 1 is +10/+5. Monks get +0 BAB at first level. In no
    combination does a fighter/monk have a BAB equal to a pure fighter.

    - Flurry should be +8/+8 on attack actions, and +8/+8/+3 on a full
    attack actions (with caveats; see monk description).

    - Unarmed damage and TWF. "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack
    for a monk striking unarmed." By the description, your entire body is
    one weapon. You can't TWF with unarmed. Use Flurry of Blows instead.
    That's what it is for. Note, some folks think you can fight with a
    weapon and use unarmed strike as a weapon.

    - ITWF: This should be +8/+3 primary and +8/+3 off-hand. Check your
    numbers. Your numbers have varying spreads. Iterative attacks always
    have five point spreads.

    Advice: calculate your primary attack, then just iterate -5's off those.

    CH
  6. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    John Lawrie wrote:
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I hope this is the correct group for questions about Dungeons and Dragons.
    > I've been playing D&D 3.5 for about 2 years now, with no experience of
    > table-top gaming (only PC games) prior to that.

    This is the right place, and welcome.

    I've been here on and off for years, mostly lurking, with sudden spurts
    of actual activity now and then, and the amount of knowledge here is
    astounding.

    Just be thick-skinned a little bit, as we have a small core of very
    opinionated people who may decide to 'flame' you for whatever reason.

    Don't be afraid to participate, though. It is quite possible to have a
    reasonable, interesting discussion around and through the middle of, a
    flame war.

    Welcome.

    > I have a few questions...

    I see that these have already been answered, so I'll just smile and nod.

    DWS
  7. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Clawhound wrote:

    > - Flurry should be +8/+8 on attack actions, and +8/+8/+3 on a full
    > attack actions (with caveats; see monk description).
    >

    You can flurry on a standard action? If so that makes it terriby more
    potent than I thought. (Me checks srd) - nope, flurry is a full attack
    action.

    > - Unarmed damage and TWF. "There is no such thing as an off-hand
    attack
    > for a monk striking unarmed." By the description, your entire body is

    > one weapon. You can't TWF with unarmed. Use Flurry of Blows instead.
    > That's what it is for. Note, some folks think you can fight with a
    > weapon and use unarmed strike as a weapon.
    >

    TWF does mention unarmed strike is a light weapon, which seems strange
    to me, it would seem to follow you can use it as an off-hand weapon...

    - Justisaur
  8. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Hi Guys

    Thankyou all for your help, I shall be returning regulalry to read and
    hopefully post something other than more questions.

    John Lawrie

    "John Lawrie" <cawrie@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
    news:4tz5e.16501$kr.2356@newsfe1-gui.ntli.net...
    > Hi all,
    >
    > I hope this is the correct group for questions about Dungeons and Dragons.
    > I've been playing D&D 3.5 for about 2 years now, with no experience of
    > table-top gaming (only PC games) prior to that.
    >
    > I have a few questions...
    >
    > I have a level 11 Fighter that is going Monk at next level-up. He has base
    > attacks of +11/+6/+1 and will get flurry of blows at -2/-2, does this mean
    > he can use flurry of blows at +9/+9/+4/-1? I think I have this right, but
    > I'd like to be sure.
    >
    > He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?
    >
    > When fighting with a Katana in right and a Wakizashi in left, with
    > Two-Weapon Fighting, how do his attacks calculate? I think from the
    > description in the PHB that he gets -2 to his extra off-hand attack and -2
    > to all his regular primary-hand attacks, therefore
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)?
    >
    > Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12 bonus
    > feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it calculate as
    > this... +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >
    > Your help would be much appreciated on this sunject
    >
    > Thanks in advance
    >
    > John Lawrie
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    John Lawrie wrote:
    > Hi Guys
    >
    > Thankyou all for your help, I shall be returning regulalry to read and
    > hopefully post something other than more questions.

    Hi, John - nice to see a familiar face, or at least name, here. Looks like
    Crusher's career change is going well. Assuming he survives what the DM has
    in store for us tomorrow. :)

    --
    Mark.
  10. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Clawhound wrote:
    >
    >> - Flurry should be +8/+8 on attack actions, and +8/+8/+3 on a full
    >> attack actions (with caveats; see monk description).
    >>
    >
    > You can flurry on a standard action? If so that makes it terriby more
    > potent than I thought. (Me checks srd) - nope, flurry is a full attack
    > action.
    >
    >> - Unarmed damage and TWF. "There is no such thing as an off-hand
    >> attack for a monk striking unarmed." By the description, your entire
    >> body is one weapon. You can't TWF with unarmed. Use Flurry of Blows
    >> instead. That's what it is for. Note, some folks think you can fight
    >> with a weapon and use unarmed strike as a weapon.
    >
    > TWF does mention unarmed strike is a light weapon, which seems strange
    > to me, it would seem to follow you can use it as an off-hand weapon...

    You use flurry with 'monk unarmed combat', not regular unarmed combat.

    If doing 'normal' unarmed combat you can in fact use your other hand as
    an offhand weapon... but then it doesn't get the benefit of flurry.


    Keith
    --
    Keith Davies "English is not a language. English is a
    keith.davies@kjdavies.org bad habit shared between Norman invaders
    keith.davies@gmail.com and Saxon barmaids!"
    http://www.kjdavies.org/ -- Frog, IRC, 2005/01/13
  11. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    justisaur@gmail.com wrote:

    > > - Flurry should be +8/+8 on attack actions, and +8/+8/+3 on a full
    > > attack actions (with caveats; see monk description).
    >
    > You can flurry on a standard action? If so that makes it terriby more
    > potent than I thought. (Me checks srd) - nope, flurry is a full attack
    > action.

    Right. But as an aside, might not allowing standard action flurry be a
    nice way to reinforce the monk's schtick as the highly mobile
    skirmisher? As it is, the monk has a certain negative synergy between
    his crazy mobility (encouraging hit-and-run Spring Attack tactics) and
    his bucket-o-attacks combat routing (encouraging full attacks).


    --
    Jasin Zujovic
    jzujovic@inet.hr
  12. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote in
    news:aRz5e.41$sn4.493689@news.sisna.com:

    >> Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12
    >> bonus feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it
    >> calculate as this...
    >> +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >
    > The -2 penalty for two-weapon fighting also applies in addition to the
    > -5 you mention. You should get
    >
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana).


    Errr that is just a little off.

    +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/-1(katana).
  13. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Nockermensch" <nockermensch@hotmail.com> wrote in
    news:1112985174.859161.264380@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:


    >> He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed fighting?
    >
    > Yes. A recent FAQ at wizards.com clarified this. If using only monk
    > weapons (unarmed strike included) you can flurry and make additional
    > attacks via two weapon fighting, with a total penalty of at least -4.


    Which FAQ was that in?
  14. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    > justisaur@gmail.com wrote:
    >
    > > > - Flurry should be +8/+8 on attack actions, and +8/+8/+3 on a
    full
    > > > attack actions (with caveats; see monk description).
    > >
    > > You can flurry on a standard action? If so that makes it terriby
    more
    > > potent than I thought. (Me checks srd) - nope, flurry is a full
    attack
    > > action.
    >
    > Right. But as an aside, might not allowing standard action flurry be
    a
    > nice way to reinforce the monk's schtick as the highly mobile
    > skirmisher? As it is, the monk has a certain negative synergy between

    > his crazy mobility (encouraging hit-and-run Spring Attack tactics)
    and
    > his bucket-o-attacks combat routing (encouraging full attacks).
    >
    >

    It makes sense cinematically, and it doesn't make much sense the way
    it's set up currently. Mobility, but a bunch of attacks if you sit in
    one spot. Doesn't synergize well. Probably contributes to thier
    weakness in actual play. However I can't see a 1 level dip granting
    standard action flurry ability to other classes, it's just way too
    powerful.

    - Justisaur
  15. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    freakybaby wrote:
    > Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote in
    > news:aRz5e.41$sn4.493689@news.sisna.com:
    >
    >
    >>>Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12
    >>>bonus feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it
    >>>calculate as this...
    >>>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >>
    >>The -2 penalty for two-weapon fighting also applies in addition to the
    >>-5 you mention. You should get
    >>
    >>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana).
    >
    >
    >
    > Errr that is just a little off.
    >
    > +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/-1(katana).
    >

    Yeah. I missed that. +1 vs. -1. Just one little vertical line, and
    you miss out on a world of difference. :-/

    -Tialan
  16. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur wrote:

    > Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    >
    >>justisaur@gmail.com wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>- Flurry should be +8/+8 on attack actions, and +8/+8/+3 on a
    >
    > full
    >
    >>>>attack actions (with caveats; see monk description).
    >>>
    >>>You can flurry on a standard action? If so that makes it terriby
    >
    > more
    >
    >>>potent than I thought. (Me checks srd) - nope, flurry is a full
    >
    > attack
    >
    >>>action.
    >>
    >>Right. But as an aside, might not allowing standard action flurry be
    >
    > a
    >
    >>nice way to reinforce the monk's schtick as the highly mobile
    >>skirmisher? As it is, the monk has a certain negative synergy between
    >
    >
    >>his crazy mobility (encouraging hit-and-run Spring Attack tactics)
    >
    > and
    >
    >>his bucket-o-attacks combat routing (encouraging full attacks).
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    > It makes sense cinematically, and it doesn't make much sense the way
    > it's set up currently. Mobility, but a bunch of attacks if you sit in
    > one spot. Doesn't synergize well. Probably contributes to thier
    > weakness in actual play. However I can't see a 1 level dip granting
    > standard action flurry ability to other classes, it's just way too
    > powerful.
    >
    > - Justisaur
    >

    It should really be a full round action. I just made a mistake up there.

    CH
  17. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Justisaur <justisaur@gmail.com> wrote:
    >
    > Jasin Zujovic wrote:
    >>
    >> Right. But as an aside, might not allowing standard action flurry be
    >> a nice way to reinforce the monk's schtick as the highly mobile
    >> skirmisher? As it is, the monk has a certain negative synergy between
    >> his crazy mobility (encouraging hit-and-run Spring Attack tactics)
    >> and his bucket-o-attacks combat routing (encouraging full attacks).
    >
    > It makes sense cinematically, and it doesn't make much sense the way
    > it's set up currently. Mobility, but a bunch of attacks if you sit in
    > one spot. Doesn't synergize well. Probably contributes to thier
    > weakness in actual play. However I can't see a 1 level dip granting
    > standard action flurry ability to other classes, it's just way too
    > powerful.

    It'd be a damn tasty dip, yeah.

    I could perhaps see it as an advanced option, later, probably after
    iterative attacks are gained (to make it a little stiffer, don't require
    'BAB +6', require 'Monk 8' -- or BAB +11/Monk 15, if that's too low).
    IIRC, in RSRD those are approximately when the flurry penalties
    decrease.

    I don't know that I'd do it that way, though; it seems like an odd
    exception. However, given how much of a difference there is in the
    attacks at high level between 'move and attack' and 'full attack', it
    may be appropriate. A fighter with the right feats in full attack can
    currently out-attack a monk of the same level, even unarmed. The higher
    BAB, weapon focus, GWF, weapon specialization, GWS and Improved unarmed
    strike mean that *even with* the better damage die used by monks, the
    fighter can still lay more smack down per round than a monk of the same
    level.

    Add in that the fighter can also use weapons and increase his damage
    (especially since by the point he's got all this goodness he can
    probably afford some nifty magic on them), while wearing heavy armor...
    it probably isn't terribly unbalancing to let the monk do this. You'll
    want to limit it to monks, though, or you'll see every mobility fighter
    taking it.


    Keith
    --
    Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
    keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
    keith.davies@gmail.com a vaccuum in a room by pushing the air
    http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
  18. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote in
    news:%zy6e.57$M15.536600@news.sisna.com:

    > freakybaby wrote:
    >> Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote in
    >> news:aRz5e.41$sn4.493689@news.sisna.com:
    >>
    >>
    >>>>Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12
    >>>>bonus feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it
    >>>>calculate as this...
    >>>>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >>>
    >>>The -2 penalty for two-weapon fighting also applies in addition to the
    >>>-5 you mention. You should get
    >>>
    >>>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana).
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> Errr that is just a little off.
    >>
    >> +9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/-1(katana).
    >>
    >
    > Yeah. I missed that. +1 vs. -1. Just one little vertical line, and
    > you miss out on a world of difference. :-/


    It happens, take last night at for example, where my current character is a
    monk, I kept forgetting to use the flurry action when I was surrounded by
    foes for the first three rounds of a combat.
  19. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    freakybaby wrote:
    > Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote in
    > news:%zy6e.57$M15.536600@news.sisna.com:
    >
    >
    >>freakybaby wrote:
    >>
    >>>Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote in
    >>>news:aRz5e.41$sn4.493689@news.sisna.com:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>>Finally, If he takes Improved Two-Weapon Fighting for his level 12
    >>>>>bonus feat, giving him a second bonus off-hand attack at -5 does it
    >>>>>calculate as this...
    >>>>>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+6(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana)
    >>>>
    >>>>The -2 penalty for two-weapon fighting also applies in addition to the
    >>>>-5 you mention. You should get
    >>>>
    >>>>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/+1(katana).
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Errr that is just a little off.
    >>>
    >>>+9(katana)/+9(wakizashi)/+4(wakizashi)/+4(katana)/-1(katana).
    >>>
    >>
    >>Yeah. I missed that. +1 vs. -1. Just one little vertical line, and
    >>you miss out on a world of difference. :-/
    >
    >
    >
    > It happens, take last night at for example, where my current character is a
    > monk, I kept forgetting to use the flurry action when I was surrounded by
    > foes for the first three rounds of a combat.

    That reminds me of a monk from a campaign I once played in. The player
    never seemed to roll well on his attacks. This bad luck was all the
    more spectacular when he tried to flurry. We referred to it as his
    "Flurry of Whiffs."

    On the bright side, Karma decided that if he couldn't hurt others, he
    shouldn't get hurt himself. He always made amazing saving throws. :-)

    -Tialan
  20. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    freakybaby wrote:
    > "Nockermensch" <nockermensch@hotmail.com> wrote in
    > news:1112985174.859161.264380@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
    >
    >
    > >> He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed
    fighting?
    > >
    > > Yes. A recent FAQ at wizards.com clarified this. If using only monk
    > > weapons (unarmed strike included) you can flurry and make
    additional
    > > attacks via two weapon fighting, with a total penalty of at least
    -4.
    >
    >
    > Which FAQ was that in?

    The D&D main FAQ, IIRC.

    --
    @ @ Nockermensch, usually not RC.
  21. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Nockermensch wrote:
    > freakybaby wrote:
    >
    >>"Nockermensch" <nockermensch@hotmail.com> wrote in
    >>news:1112985174.859161.264380@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>>He also has Two-Weapon Fighting, does this apply to unarmed
    >
    > fighting?
    >
    >>>Yes. A recent FAQ at wizards.com clarified this. If using only monk
    >>>weapons (unarmed strike included) you can flurry and make
    >
    > additional
    >
    >>>attacks via two weapon fighting, with a total penalty of at least
    >
    > -4.
    >
    >>
    >>Which FAQ was that in?
    >
    >
    > The D&D main FAQ, IIRC.
    >

    Specifically:

    "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.
  22. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >> Yeah. I missed that. +1 vs. -1. Just one little vertical line, and
    >> you miss out on a world of difference. :-/

    freakybaby wrote:
    > It happens, take last night at for example, where my current character is a
    > monk, I kept forgetting to use the flurry action when I was surrounded by
    > foes for the first three rounds of a combat.

    I keep seeing replies to this "Tialan" person, but never the original
    post. It looks like Tialan's articles are getting filtered or canceled
    somewhere along the way to my ISP.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  23. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan wrote:
    >
    > That reminds me of a monk from a campaign I once played in. The player
    > never seemed to roll well on his attacks. This bad luck was all the
    > more spectacular when he tried to flurry. We referred to it as his
    > "Flurry of Whiffs."

    Ditto. "Master of the Open-Air Strike," our DM called him. It did seem
    like he couldn't hit the broad side of a tarrasque.

    Okay, okay, *the* Tarrasque. Bloody pedants.

    -Will
  24. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Will Green wrote:
    > Tialan wrote:
    >
    >>
    >> That reminds me of a monk from a campaign I once played in. The
    >> player never seemed to roll well on his attacks. This bad luck was
    >> all the more spectacular when he tried to flurry. We referred to it
    >> as his "Flurry of Whiffs."
    >
    >
    > Ditto. "Master of the Open-Air Strike," our DM called him. It did seem
    > like he couldn't hit the broad side of a tarrasque.
    >
    > Okay, okay, *the* Tarrasque. Bloody pedants.
    >
    > -Will

    Wow. Didn't know there were two of them. :-)

    Now the question is this: Can he make his saves?

    -Tialan
  25. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan wrote:
    > Will Green wrote:

    >> Ditto. "Master of the Open-Air Strike," our DM called him. It did
    >> seem like he couldn't hit the broad side of a tarrasque.
    >>
    >> Okay, okay, *the* Tarrasque. Bloody pedants.
    >>
    >> -Will
    >
    >
    > Wow. Didn't know there were two of them. :-)
    >
    > Now the question is this: Can he make his saves?

    Died in the second or third session. Don't remember how...but it was a
    vicious Ravenloft campaign. We all pretty much died every now and then.

    -Will
  26. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Oh yeah right and i suppose your going to bitch about conetxt next!1!1!1!1


    Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Bradd W. Szonye said

    > Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >>> Yeah. I missed that. +1 vs. -1. Just one little vertical line,
    >>> and you miss out on a world of difference. :-/
    >
    > freakybaby wrote:
    >> It happens, take last night at for example, where my current
    >> character is a monk, I kept forgetting to use the flurry action when
    >> I was surrounded by foes for the first three rounds of a combat.
    >
    > I keep seeing replies to this "Tialan" person, but never the original
    > post. It looks like Tialan's articles are getting filtered or canceled
    > somewhere along the way to my ISP.


    --
    Rob Singers
    "All your Ron are belong to us"
    Credo Elvem ipsum etiam vivere
  27. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Bradd W. Szonye said
    >
    >
    >>Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >>
    >>>>Yeah. I missed that. +1 vs. -1. Just one little vertical line,
    >>>>and you miss out on a world of difference. :-/
    >>
    >>freakybaby wrote:
    >>
    >>>It happens, take last night at for example, where my current
    >>>character is a monk, I kept forgetting to use the flurry action when
    >>>I was surrounded by foes for the first three rounds of a combat.
    >>
    >>I keep seeing replies to this "Tialan" person, but never the original
    >>post. It looks like Tialan's articles are getting filtered or canceled
    >>somewhere along the way to my ISP.

    You're not likely to see this, but I'm sending it anyway.

    I assure you, I am real. No need for quotation marks. Just plain
    Tialan will do. ;-)

    But anyway, I have no idea why my posts would get filtered out. But I'm
    a long-term lurker that just started posting this past week or so. That
    would be why you only recently started seeing these replies to my
    messages. :-)

    Hopefully someone can help us figure out why we're having this problem.

    -Tialan

    P.S. Someone out there might want to try replying to this so Bradd can
    see this.
  28. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> wrote:
    >
    > Between saving the world and having a spot of tea Bradd W. Szonye said
    >
    >>I keep seeing replies to this "Tialan" person, but never the original
    >>post. It looks like Tialan's articles are getting filtered or canceled
    >>somewhere along the way to my ISP.
    >
    > You're not likely to see this, but I'm sending it anyway.
    >
    > I assure you, I am real. No need for quotation marks. Just plain
    > Tialan will do. ;-)
    >
    > But anyway, I have no idea why my posts would get filtered out. But
    > I'm a long-term lurker that just started posting this past week or so.
    > That would be why you only recently started seeing these replies to my
    > messages. :-)
    >
    > Hopefully someone can help us figure out why we're having this
    > problem.
    >
    > -Tialan
    >
    > P.S. Someone out there might want to try replying to this so Bradd
    > can see this.

    Done.


    Keith
    --
    Keith Davies "Trying to sway him from his current kook-
    keith.davies@kjdavies.org rant with facts is like trying to create
    keith.davies@gmail.com a vacuum in a room by pushing the air
    http://www.kjdavies.org/ out with your hands." -- Matt Frisch
  29. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    "Nockermensch" <nockermensch@hotmail.com> wrote in
    news:1113347491.837722.90880@z14g2000cwz.googlegroups.com:


    >> Which FAQ was that in?
    >
    > The D&D main FAQ, IIRC.


    Thank you
  30. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:51:44 -0500, Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> carved
    upon a tablet of ether:

    > You're not likely to see this, but I'm sending it anyway.
    >
    > I assure you, I am real. No need for quotation marks. Just plain
    > Tialan will do. ;-)
    >
    > But anyway, I have no idea why my posts would get filtered out. But I'm
    > a long-term lurker that just started posting this past week or so. That
    > would be why you only recently started seeing these replies to my
    > messages. :-)
    >
    > Hopefully someone can help us figure out why we're having this problem.
    >
    > -Tialan
    >
    > P.S. Someone out there might want to try replying to this so Bradd can
    > see this.

    Maybe Bradd's system has a hate-on for Yahoo.


    --
    Rupert Boleyn <rboleyn@paradise.net.nz>
    "Just because the truth will set you free doesn't mean the truth itself
    should be free."
  31. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Tialan wrote:
    >> P.S. Someone out there might want to try replying to this so Bradd
    >> can see this.

    Thanks -- the original message didn't show up here.

    Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > Maybe Bradd's system has a hate-on for Yahoo.

    I don't know what the issue is. I know my ISP's newsserver does filter
    stuff, but I have no idea why it's dropping Tialan's articles. Maybe
    there's a spammer in his IP neighborhood, or maybe he has an enemy
    sending out auto-cancels.
    --
    Bradd W. Szonye
    http://www.szonye.com/bradd
  32. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    > On Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:51:44 -0500, Tialan <shalahhr@yahoo.com> carved
    > upon a tablet of ether:
    >
    >
    >>You're not likely to see this, but I'm sending it anyway.
    >>
    >>I assure you, I am real. No need for quotation marks. Just plain
    >>Tialan will do. ;-)
    >>
    >>But anyway, I have no idea why my posts would get filtered out. But I'm
    >>a long-term lurker that just started posting this past week or so. That
    >>would be why you only recently started seeing these replies to my
    >>messages. :-)
    >>
    >>Hopefully someone can help us figure out why we're having this problem.
    >>
    >>-Tialan
    >>
    >>P.S. Someone out there might want to try replying to this so Bradd can
    >>see this.
    >
    >
    > Maybe Bradd's system has a hate-on for Yahoo.


    I suppose that might be an issue.

    I only use the Yahoo account when I'm afraid of someone else seeing it
    and sending me spam. Otherwise, I use my school account. I never
    thought about how I might be mistaken for a spammer. I'd like to think
    that whoever would set up such a filter would realize that some people
    use Yahoo accounts legitimately. Unfortunately, that's not always the case.

    -Tialan
  33. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Bradd W. Szonye wrote:
    > Tialan wrote:
    >
    >>>P.S. Someone out there might want to try replying to this so Bradd
    >>>can see this.
    >
    >
    > Thanks -- the original message didn't show up here.
    >
    > Rupert Boleyn wrote:
    >
    >>Maybe Bradd's system has a hate-on for Yahoo.
    >
    >
    > I don't know what the issue is. I know my ISP's newsserver does filter
    > stuff, but I have no idea why it's dropping Tialan's articles. Maybe
    > there's a spammer in his IP neighborhood, or maybe he has an enemy
    > sending out auto-cancels.

    The first possibility is more likely than the second. Up until this
    past week, my online presence has been limited to lurking. I don't have
    any real-life enemies of which I am aware, and there are only a handful
    of friends that would associate the name Tialan with me.

    And if there is a spammer elsewhere causing all MY mail to get
    canceled... Well, it seems everyone always wants to punish me for what
    someone else does. Why bother to dig out the bad apple when you can
    dump the whole barrel, right?

    -Tialan
  34. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Some Guy wrote:
    > Nockermensch wrote:
    >> freakybaby wrote:
    <TWFing + flurry stacking>
    >>> Which FAQ was that in?
    >>
    >> The D&D main FAQ, IIRC.
    >
    > Specifically:

    <big snip>

    Hmm. Human Ftr/Mnk 1/1, Flurry, PBS, Rapid Shot, TWFing; fires
    shurikens with both hands at -5/-5/-5/-5, with 1/2 Str bonus on the last
    for off-hand use.
    Within 30' and with 16 Dex that's four attacks at -1, which is too
    low really, three attacks at +1 gets as many hits against AC 14. Add in
    Weapon Focus at level 3 and it's up to four attacks at +1, which is
    better up to AC 15.

    OK, so not greatly effective at low level. Good to know.

    --
    tussock

    Aspie at work, sorry in advance.
  35. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    tussock wrote:

    > Some Guy wrote:
    >
    >> Nockermensch wrote:
    >>
    >>> freakybaby wrote:
    >
    > <TWFing + flurry stacking>
    >
    >>>> Which FAQ was that in?
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> The D&D main FAQ, IIRC.
    >>
    >>
    >> Specifically:
    >
    >
    > <big snip>
    >
    > Hmm. Human Ftr/Mnk 1/1, Flurry, PBS, Rapid Shot, TWFing; fires
    > shurikens with both hands at -5/-5/-5/-5, with 1/2 Str bonus on the last
    > for off-hand use.
    > Within 30' and with 16 Dex that's four attacks at -1, which is too
    > low really, three attacks at +1 gets as many hits against AC 14. Add in
    > Weapon Focus at level 3 and it's up to four attacks at +1, which is
    > better up to AC 15.
    >
    > OK, so not greatly effective at low level. Good to know.
    >

    I thought that flurry and TWF were melee only. PBS and Rapid Shot are
    ranged only. The two shouldn't mix.

    If this *is* true, you'd need quickdraw as well, or you'd be limited to
    two shuriken per round.

    CH
  36. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Clawhound wrote:
    > tussock wrote:

    <TWFing + flurry stacking>

    > > Hmm. Human Ftr/Mnk 1/1, Flurry, PBS, Rapid Shot,
    > > TWFing; fires shurikens with both hands at -5/-5/-5/-5,
    > > with 1/2 Str bonus on the last for off-hand use.
    > > Within 30' and with 16 Dex that's four attacks at
    > > -1, which is too low really, three attacks at +1 gets
    > > as many hits against AC 14. Add in Weapon Focus at
    > > level 3 and it's up to four attacks at +1, which is
    > > better up to AC 15.
    >
    > I thought that flurry and TWF were melee only. PBS
    > and Rapid Shot are ranged only. The two shouldn't
    > mix.

    Shuriken are explicitly allowed for flurrying, and are not usable in
    melee, so flurry is obviously not limited to melee.

    As for TWF, read PH3.5 160 (or the SRD). "Thrown Weapons: The same
    rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or
    shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a
    bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon."

    PBS and Rapid Shot are ranged-only (including thrown), and no one has
    suggested otherwise.

    So this (PBS/Rapid/flurry/TWF shuriken) is completely legal, and not
    universally useful at low levels, as tussock showed quite nicely. :D
    I assume it'd be pretty nice if you were in range for sneak attacks,
    though.

    > If this *is* true, you'd need quickdraw as well, or
    > you'd be limited to two shuriken per round.

    Shuriken explicitly get drawn as free actions, as if they're
    ammunition (and have the 100%-if-hit, 50%-if-miss chance of breaking
    that ammunition does), so Quick Draw is unnecessary.

    --
    Nik
    - remove vermin from email address to reply.
  37. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    Nikolas Landauer wrote:

    > Clawhound wrote:
    >
    >>tussock wrote:
    >
    >
    > <TWFing + flurry stacking>
    >
    >>> Hmm. Human Ftr/Mnk 1/1, Flurry, PBS, Rapid Shot,
    >>>TWFing; fires shurikens with both hands at -5/-5/-5/-5,
    >>>with 1/2 Str bonus on the last for off-hand use.
    >>> Within 30' and with 16 Dex that's four attacks at
    >>>-1, which is too low really, three attacks at +1 gets
    >>>as many hits against AC 14. Add in Weapon Focus at
    >>>level 3 and it's up to four attacks at +1, which is
    >>>better up to AC 15.
    >>
    >>I thought that flurry and TWF were melee only. PBS
    >>and Rapid Shot are ranged only. The two shouldn't
    >>mix.
    >
    >
    > Shuriken are explicitly allowed for flurrying, and are not usable in
    > melee, so flurry is obviously not limited to melee.
    >
    > As for TWF, read PH3.5 160 (or the SRD). "Thrown Weapons: The same
    > rules apply when you throw a weapon from each hand. Treat a dart or
    > shuriken as a light weapon when used in this manner, and treat a
    > bolas, javelin, net, or sling as a one-handed weapon."
    >
    > PBS and Rapid Shot are ranged-only (including thrown), and no one has
    > suggested otherwise.
    >
    > So this (PBS/Rapid/flurry/TWF shuriken) is completely legal, and not
    > universally useful at low levels, as tussock showed quite nicely. :D
    > I assume it'd be pretty nice if you were in range for sneak attacks,
    > though.
    >
    >
    >>If this *is* true, you'd need quickdraw as well, or
    >>you'd be limited to two shuriken per round.
    >
    >
    > Shuriken explicitly get drawn as free actions, as if they're
    > ammunition (and have the 100%-if-hit, 50%-if-miss chance of breaking
    > that ammunition does), so Quick Draw is unnecessary.
    >

    Well, whatddya know!!! Thanks.

    CH
  38. Archived from groups: rec.games.frp.dnd (More info?)

    none@nowhere.com wrote:

    > > Hmm. Human Ftr/Mnk 1/1, Flurry, PBS, Rapid Shot, TWFing; fires
    > > shurikens with both hands at -5/-5/-5/-5, with 1/2 Str bonus on the last
    > > for off-hand use.
    > > Within 30' and with 16 Dex that's four attacks at -1, which is too
    > > low really, three attacks at +1 gets as many hits against AC 14. Add in
    > > Weapon Focus at level 3 and it's up to four attacks at +1, which is
    > > better up to AC 15.
    > >
    > > OK, so not greatly effective at low level. Good to know.
    >
    > I thought that flurry and TWF were melee only. PBS and Rapid Shot are
    > ranged only. The two shouldn't mix.
    >
    > If this *is* true, you'd need quickdraw as well, or you'd be limited to
    > two shuriken per round.

    Shuriken are counted as ammunition, so they can be drawn as a free
    action, just like arrows.


    --
    Jasin Zujovic
    jzujovic@inet.hr
Ask a new question

Read More

Games Video Games