Until now the flurry of blows could not consider such "minutiae" such as one of the weapons being enchanted or mixing natural weapons within the mix with such feats that allow them to be added to the flurry.
By making the flurry of blows effectively just a two weapon fighting feat that affects only some weapons and giving to all natural weapons the character sheet layout of normal weapons it should be possible to show what happens when you gain feats that allow multiple attacks and/or what happens when you are able to mix them among other attacks via the proper feats.
The above is a direct quote from the Paizo faq. The flurry of blows has always been (in the "normal" non-unchained monk) equivalent to the two-weapon fighting, for all intents and purposes.
However [the two weapon fighting feat series does not stack with furry of blows], mostly because the flurry only affects unarmed strikes and monk weapons while the feats affect everything.
Until now the "two weapon fighting" has been shown in the character sheets as a series of "used as main hand or off hand, with a light weapon or not" etc. etc.
But this is not shown for the unarmed strike and natural weapons.
I would like to propose that the unarmed strike be considered as a weapon much like everything else and that the "flurry of blows bonus" be considered just a normal "two weapon fighting" only affecting those weapons that gain an advantage from it.
Moreover i would propose for the other kinds of natural weapons to have a similar layout so normal weapons, so that the player knows what happens when he mixes them with other attacks, or what happens when he gains the proper feats that allow them to be part of a series of attacks. (most probably just a flag that would be showing a dash if a feat affecting natural weapons is not present, so that the player knows he does not have that option or the proper values if the player has the option)
This is not exactly part of just the character sheet bugs but is being put in the Data because i think most of the work needs to be done at the data level before the character sheet side of the implementation can work.
Microsoft Windows [Version 10.0.17763.195]
java version "11.0.1" 2018-10-16 LTS
Java(TM) SE Runtime Environment 18.9 (build 11.0.1+13-LTS)
Java HotSpot(TM) 64-Bit Server VM 18.9 (build 11.0.1+13-LTS, mixed mode)
Okay, this cannot be considered a bug when it uses such languages as “Proposal” and “Change how”.
This would need input from a few people, and an effective redesign of how things are displayed. Flurry of Blows is a special block hard-coded.
The code team is working on a formula system redesign, and for me to pursue this without wasting time, I’ll need their expertise and implementation to process this request. Otherwise, if you really want something to play with, you make a Weapon called Unarmed Strike Eq w/ PROF Unarmed and equip it.
either that or have a “two weapon fighting” block that works exactly as the flurry of blows, but accounts just for the stuff you get by the two weapon fighting rules.
Apples and Oranges. Unless you actually understand the behind the scenes engine, you’d understand the Flurry/Unarmed stuff is not a weapon per se, and is a special hardcoded block.
Weapons are programmed different, and even “natural weapons” are special constructs.
This is going to be shelved until the weapons portion of the formula system is ready.
Sorry. I could not find the monk’s flurry, i just looked at the brawler’s flurry…. which is a bit of a mess… but it’s coded as a weapon. 😅 I thought making a “Two weapon fighting” block would be something looking like that but checking which feats you have instead of the “monk/brawler” level.
We currently have several systems in place to show “fighting with two weapons”. The weapon box, the flurry box, and that “weird thing” which is the brawler’s flurry.
Each weapon has a “stat block” showing how it works when handled in a two weapon fighting situation.
Except for the natural weapons. Which can be used in conjunction with other weapons buuuuut. Yeah. Normally they are handled like 💩 by the pathfinder system. If you get the correct feats you can incorporate them into a flurry. But their weapon box never shows this, nor how they are handled in said flurry.
It is not clearly stated, but i just assume you use the normal flurry of blows attack sequence, you just use the natural weapon’s damage and possible weapon focuses, etc. instead of the unarmed strike damage. Just like any other “manufactured weapon” used in the middle of a flurry of blows.
[I can totally see a witch with monk levels using the “Prehensile Hair” Hex and then delivering a series of blows just like “Medusa” from the X-Men. but using her intelligence to attack and damage]
(Though i must say this seems like a badly written faq as it implies one monk with a 5 attack flurry and poisonous bite could make all five attacks bites with the bite’s strength modifier and all five delivering poison. I… don’t think this is how it was intended, but i could be wrong. No official faqs i found clarify this detail and the wording… as usual… is quite… open to interpretation. This is not, however, part of my question.)
Then we have the “monk’s flurry”, which mechanically is exactly like the “Two weapon fighting” but uses monk levels instead of checking feat acquisition to say how many attacks one makes and what is their base attack bonus before specific things (such as weapon focus or weight) are considered.
then the weird “brawler’s flurry”, which follows the same rules as the monk’s flurry…. but checks different things and is also a “weapon”.
We basically have multiple ways of telling players how stuff works. And that is confusing by itself already… also i am sorry for the poor wording. But basically i’m trying to understand what would be the “best way” to deliver this information to the player in the character sheet. And it seems to me this is not so much a character sheet question, but a data question, since the problem resides in how these information are stored, calculated and taken from PCGen rather than just a “character sheet layout” problem.