Talk:Infinite Flurry (3.5e Feat)

"If you have a bonus attack, such as from haste, the multiplier for damage increases by one. "
You could say "If you have a bonus attack, such as from haste, the damage doubles." and it would mean the same thing :D --Foxwarrior (talk) 18:59, 2 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Indeed. I worded it this way so you wouldn't have to worry about funky D&D multipliers stacking. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 00:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Not Monk-Based
Monks don't get BAB high enough to entirely get the bonus from this, which seems to have been made for them. Instead, I would tie this into the monk's Flurry of Blows ability.

So x2 at basic FoB, x3 at level 5 when they lose 1 from their penalty to FoB, x4 at level 9 when the penalty disappears, and x5 when they hit level 11 and gain an additional attack from FoB. Or something like that. No need to tie it into extra attacks, as all that does is incentivize people to dip monk for a level, take this feat, and gain more benefits without taking any further levels in the class. --Ghostwheel (talk) 16:13, 3 November 2014 (UTC)


 * This is fair, implemented. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 00:53, 4 November 2014 (UTC)


 * I would keep the "on hit damage" not doubled, since that way it gives a reason to still normal flurry. Otherwise, this is far better in every way. --Ghostwheel (talk) 06:18, 4 November 2014 (UTC)


 * Not sure what you mean "on hit damage", but that's not particularly the case. Though it's not hard to out do flurry of blows due to flurry of misses, any extra damage (namely from things like Power Attack and Sneak Attack) won't really be as effective with this one auto-hit.  If you got sneak attack, it may be better to choose the flurry of misses.  For the vanilla unoptimized monk though, the infinite flurry may be better, and that should be ok. -- Eiji-kun (talk) 06:22, 4 November 2014 (UTC)


 * What I meant is not to double things that wouldn't be doubled by a crit. So no triple SA damage by taking this feat, dipping into monk, and getting Haste from somewhere. --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:58, 6 November 2014 (UTC)