I initially started this theory crafting under the impression that a Monk COULD move between the attacks granted by Flurry of Blows. I’m still in the camp that it is allowed considering most discussions fail to mention another Feature that grants multiple attacks which satisfies the rule about moving between attacks. Coincidentally, I would also rule RAW that Magic Spells that grant multiple attacks also allows movement between those attacks, but that’s a different discussion.
So now there’s at least two possible scenarios resulting in a WotOH Monk knocking a creature back 80’. One leaves the Monk with 60’ of separation at the end of his turn, and the other leaves him with 120’ of separation at the end of his turn.
Here are the Features involved:
L3 WotOH: Open Hand Technique •Push (with an attack granted by Flurry of Blows, push 15’ away from you)
L4 Feat: Weapon Master •Greatclub, 1d8, 2-Handed, Push (hit a creature, push it 10’ away from you)
L5 Monk: Extra Attack
L8 Feat: Charger •Improved Dash. +10 Speed for Dash •Charge Attack. Hit with melee attack roll, Push it 10’ once per turn
L10 Monk: Heightened Focus •Flurry of Blows. 3 unarmed attacks as a Bonus Action
L11 WotOH: Fleet Step •Add Step of Wind onto another Bonus Action
L12 Feat: Crusher •Push. Hit a creature with Bludgeon Damage Attack, move it 5’ to an unoccupied space once per turn
If movement between attacks taken as part of Flurry of Blows is not permitted, then RAW a Monk can still attack the same creature with all three attacks and apply Push 15’ on all three attacks anyways.
The thematic difference: •Either the Monk knocks the creature back 15’ three times moving 15’ to make each consecutive attack, or 45’ all at once.
The mechanical difference: •The first option leaves the creature 15’ away from the Monk and leaving 45’ of Movement that can either be used to close the distance for the next turn or increase separation to 60’. •The second option leaves the creature 45’ away from the Monk and leaving 75’ of Movement that can be used to close the distance for the next turn or increase the separation to 120’.
In summary:
Movement allowed between Flurry of Blows attacks: 60’ of separation after knocking creature back 80’.
Movement disallowed between Flurry of Blows attacks: 120’ of separation after knocking creature back 80’.
Also, applying 3 Pushes to the same creature with FoBs is RAW either way as far as I can tell. So the best outcome (more Movement left after the maneuver) is available either way.
P.S. To avoid the ancillary discussion about the timing for Flurry of Blows and Fleet Step to facilitate all these actions, we can use the example of a Wood Elf (35’ Base Speed) Monk 20 WotOH with Unarmored Movement (+30’), Speedy (+10’ Speed), Boon of Speed (+30’ Speed), and Wayfarer’s Boots (+10’ Speed) for a total of 115’ Speed to accommodate these scenarios with JUST Movement while leaving 125’ from Fleet Step available after all is said and done. This just increases separation to 190’ (FoB Movement allowed; 65’ Movement for the maneuver ending with 15’ of separation and 175’ of available Movement) and 250’ (FoB Movement disallowed; 35’ Movement for the maneuver ending with 45’ of separation and 205’ of available Movement).
Also, for the original scenario, FoB does NOT have to be taken AFTER your Attack Action, so you can still use Fleet Step (60’) to close the 45’ gap to execute the Attack Action and the gap after the first attack of your Attack Action. This leaves all 50’ from your Movement to close the 20’ gap after your second attack or increase separation to 70’.
Also, the 5’ of Movement to a creature from Crusher doesn’t have to be directly away, nor does it have to be with a Bludgeon Weapon, nor does it have to be from an attack from your Attack Action. This allows more flexibility by adjusting where you spend Movement to close gaps and how much final separation you have after the maneuver.
The 10’ from Charger HAS TO BE from a melee attack hit from your ATTACK action which disqualifies using it with FoB.
RAW you can't move between attacks during Flurry of Blows because they aren't part of Attack action but a Bonus Action instead. The same reasoning apply to spells letting you make more than one attack as part of the Magic action.
RAW you can't move between attacks during Flurry of Blows because they aren't part of Attack action but a Bonus Action instead. The same reasoning apply to spells letting you make more than one attack as part of the Magic action.
I addressed the clunky grammar due to excess commas. They are game designers, not linguists.
Please provide ANOTHER Feature that provides multiple attacks which “such as” refers to. If Extra Attack was the ONLY Feature that allows this, “such as” makes no sense.
Moving between Attacks. If you move on your turn and have a feature, such as Extra Attack, that gives you more than one attack as part of the Attack action, you can use some or all of that movement to move between those attacks.
RAW you can't move between attacks during Flurry of Blows because they aren't part of Attack action but a Bonus Action instead. The same reasoning apply to spells letting you make more than one attack as part of the Magic action.
I addressed the clunky grammar due to excess commas. They are game designers, not linguists.
Please provide ANOTHER Feature that provides multiple attacks which “such as” refers to. If Extra Attack was the ONLY Feature that allows this, “such as” makes no sense.
Moving between Attacks. If you move on your turn and have a feature, such as Extra Attack, that gives you more than one attack as part of the Attack action, you can use some or all of that movement to move between those attacks.
Thirsting Blade.
Even if that didn't exist, though, consider the possibility that the person who wrote that sentence did not have perfect knowledge of all of the features that could ever possibly exist in the future, and did not intend to provide an exhaustive list of them, but only an example, which is what the phrase "such as" means.
There aren't any "excess commas"; all the commas in that sentence are grammatically valid.
RAW you can't move between attacks during Flurry of Blows because they aren't part of Attack action but a Bonus Action instead. The same reasoning apply to spells letting you make more than one attack as part of the Magic action.
I addressed the clunky grammar due to excess commas. They are game designers, not linguists.
Please provide ANOTHER Feature that provides multiple attacks which “such as” refers to. If Extra Attack was the ONLY Feature that allows this, “such as” makes no sense.
Moving between Attacks. If you move on your turn and have a feature, such as Extra Attack, that gives you more than one attack as part of the Attack action, you can use some or all of that movement to move between those attacks.
Thirsting Blade.
Even if that didn't exist, though, consider the possibility that the person who wrote that sentence did not have perfect knowledge of all of the features that could ever possibly exist in the future, and did not intend to provide an exhaustive list of them, but only an example, which is what the phrase "such as" means.
There aren't any "excess commas"; all the commas in that sentence are grammatically valid.
The arguments are split across two threads at the same time (this one and 2024 Moving between Attacks), but I wanted to add the next information to the thread:
The arguments are split across two threads at the same time (this one and 2024 Moving between Attacks), but I wanted to add the next information to the thread:
YES!! This document proves the PHB wording was confusing, otherwise the clarification would not have been necessary.
Thank you for this, truly!
No this is a flawed reasoning. That document isn't there to do clarifications, it is there to specify things that have been changed (which this rule was).
Please provide ANOTHER Feature that provides multiple attacks which “such as” refers to. If Extra Attack was the ONLY Feature that allows this, “such as” makes no sense.
The arguments are split across two threads at the same time (this one and 2024 Moving between Attacks), but I wanted to add the next information to the thread:
Attack Action [Revised Rule] The Attack action contains several revisions:
[...] The ability to move between attacks during combat is now a function of the Attack action rather than a general rule.
YES!! This document proves the PHB wording was confusing, otherwise the clarification would not have been necessary.
Thank you for this, truly!
That's not a clarification, it's explaining how to convert from the 2014 core rules to the 2024 core rules for third parties who wish to do so. It's so they don't have to go through both rulebooks page-by-page doing a comparison and instead lists out all the changes.
I initially started this theory crafting under the impression that a Monk COULD move between the attacks granted by Flurry of Blows. I’m still in the camp that it is allowed considering most discussions fail to mention another Feature that grants multiple attacks which satisfies the rule about moving between attacks. Coincidentally, I would also rule RAW that Magic Spells that grant multiple attacks also allows movement between those attacks, but that’s a different discussion.
So now there’s at least two possible scenarios resulting in a WotOH Monk knocking a creature back 80’. One leaves the Monk with 60’ of separation at the end of his turn, and the other leaves him with 120’ of separation at the end of his turn.
Here are the Features involved:
L3 WotOH: Open Hand Technique
•Push (with an attack granted by Flurry of Blows, push 15’ away from you)
L4 Feat: Weapon Master
•Greatclub, 1d8, 2-Handed, Push (hit a creature, push it 10’ away from you)
L5 Monk: Extra Attack
L8 Feat: Charger
•Improved Dash. +10 Speed for Dash
•Charge Attack. Hit with melee attack roll, Push it 10’ once per turn
L10 Monk: Heightened Focus
•Flurry of Blows. 3 unarmed attacks as a Bonus Action
L11 WotOH: Fleet Step
•Add Step of Wind onto another Bonus Action
L12 Feat: Crusher
•Push. Hit a creature with Bludgeon Damage Attack, move it 5’ to an unoccupied space once per turn
Monk, Level 12
Starting next to an enemy…
(15’ Push) Attack 1: Greatclub 10’ Push, Crusher 5’
(20’ Push) Attack 2: Move 15’, Greatclub 10’ Push, Charger 10’ Push
(15’ Push) FoB 1: Move 20’, Unarmed Push 15’
(15’ Push) FoB 2: Move 15’, Unarmed Push 15’
(15’ Push) FoB 3: Move 15’, Unarmed Push 15’
Total Move: 65’ out of 110’
Total Push: 80’
If movement between attacks taken as part of Flurry of Blows is not permitted, then RAW a Monk can still attack the same creature with all three attacks and apply Push 15’ on all three attacks anyways.
The thematic difference:
•Either the Monk knocks the creature back 15’ three times moving 15’ to make each consecutive attack, or 45’ all at once.
The mechanical difference:
•The first option leaves the creature 15’ away from the Monk and leaving 45’ of Movement that can either be used to close the distance for the next turn or increase separation to 60’.
•The second option leaves the creature 45’ away from the Monk and leaving 75’ of Movement that can be used to close the distance for the next turn or increase the separation to 120’.
In summary:
Movement allowed between Flurry of Blows attacks: 60’ of separation after knocking creature back 80’.
Movement disallowed between Flurry of Blows attacks: 120’ of separation after knocking creature back 80’.
Also, applying 3 Pushes to the same creature with FoBs is RAW either way as far as I can tell. So the best outcome (more Movement left after the maneuver) is available either way.
P.S. To avoid the ancillary discussion about the timing for Flurry of Blows and Fleet Step to facilitate all these actions, we can use the example of a Wood Elf (35’ Base Speed) Monk 20 WotOH with Unarmored Movement (+30’), Speedy (+10’ Speed), Boon of Speed (+30’ Speed), and Wayfarer’s Boots (+10’ Speed) for a total of 115’ Speed to accommodate these scenarios with JUST Movement while leaving 125’ from Fleet Step available after all is said and done. This just increases separation to 190’ (FoB Movement allowed; 65’ Movement for the maneuver ending with 15’ of separation and 175’ of available Movement) and 250’ (FoB Movement disallowed; 35’ Movement for the maneuver ending with 45’ of separation and 205’ of available Movement).
Also, for the original scenario, FoB does NOT have to be taken AFTER your Attack Action, so you can still use Fleet Step (60’) to close the 45’ gap to execute the Attack Action and the gap after the first attack of your Attack Action. This leaves all 50’ from your Movement to close the 20’ gap after your second attack or increase separation to 70’.
Also, the 5’ of Movement to a creature from Crusher doesn’t have to be directly away, nor does it have to be with a Bludgeon Weapon, nor does it have to be from an attack from your Attack Action. This allows more flexibility by adjusting where you spend Movement to close gaps and how much final separation you have after the maneuver.
The 10’ from Charger HAS TO BE from a melee attack hit from your ATTACK action which disqualifies using it with FoB.
RAW you can't move between attacks during Flurry of Blows because they aren't part of Attack action but a Bonus Action instead. The same reasoning apply to spells letting you make more than one attack as part of the Magic action.
I addressed the clunky grammar due to excess commas. They are game designers, not linguists.
Please provide ANOTHER Feature that provides multiple attacks which “such as” refers to. If Extra Attack was the ONLY Feature that allows this, “such as” makes no sense.
Moving between Attacks. If you move on your turn and have a feature, such as Extra Attack, that gives you more than one attack as part of the Attack action, you can use some or all of that movement to move between those attacks.
Thirsting Blade.
Even if that didn't exist, though, consider the possibility that the person who wrote that sentence did not have perfect knowledge of all of the features that could ever possibly exist in the future, and did not intend to provide an exhaustive list of them, but only an example, which is what the phrase "such as" means.
There aren't any "excess commas"; all the commas in that sentence are grammatically valid.
pronouns: he/she/they
“Excess commas” does not mean invalid. It means it is grammatically correct but creates excessive parsing.
The arguments are split across two threads at the same time (this one and 2024 Moving between Attacks), but I wanted to add the next information to the thread:
YES!! This document proves the PHB wording was confusing, otherwise the clarification would not have been necessary.
Thank you for this, truly!
No problem, mate, but IMO, the PHB is not confusing, as many people were trying to explain to you in two different threads.
No this is a flawed reasoning. That document isn't there to do clarifications, it is there to specify things that have been changed (which this rule was).
The Nick Mastery
That's not a clarification, it's explaining how to convert from the 2014 core rules to the 2024 core rules for third parties who wish to do so. It's so they don't have to go through both rulebooks page-by-page doing a comparison and instead lists out all the changes.
Find my D&D Beyond articles here