If you take the Oread monk archetype "Student of Stone", you can have Stunning Fist (imposes Stun effect) and Elemental Fist with Shaitan Style feats (imposes Staggered effect) by the time you get Medusa's Wrath at level 10. Two chances on every Flurry to impose a condition that will proc Medusa's Wrath, keying off two different saving throws (Reflex and Fortitude). A fairly good chance to proc Wrath on every flurry.
This wouldn't work too well with your multiclass Ninja, though. It really requires a single class monk.
Um, it kind of does.
It doesn't. Jiggy is right. It says that whether it is treated as one-handed or two-handed depends on how many hands you use to wield it.
This is a distinct question from whether it is a martial weapon or an exotic weapon.
A bastard sword is always an exotic weapon. It has a special exception that you can wield it without penalty in two-hands if you are proficient in all martial weapons.
One of the best things about double weapons is that Half-Orcs get Orc Double Axe proficiency for free. So you can do all the cool things the above posters have talked about without having to blow a feat. Slightly edges out going human and using your bonus feat to grab proficiecny in Sawtooth sabres, IMHO.
That's a pretty nifty trick blackblood, but a ninja's capstone ability is simply complete immunity to detection. Pretty tough to beat that.
At 20th level, a ninja becomes a true master of her art. She can, as a standard action, cast greater invisibility on herself. While invisible in this way, she cannot be detected by any means, and not even invisibility purge, see invisibility, and true seeing can reveal her. She uses her ninja level as her caster level for this ability. Using this ability consumes 3 ki points from her ki pool.
You guys are silly.
The "your version is a house rule" thing is really silly. Stop flinging mud at each other.
The truth is, there's no RAW on this. Why? Because RAW means "rules as WRITTEN."
As has been pointed out many times in this thread, there are no rules written to cover this case. There's nothing in the books about it. There's no rule about sundering unarmed strikes. There's no rule telling you the hardness or hp of an unarmed strike. There's no rule on how to use the "break an object" action against a human body. And there's certainly no rule about this particular corner case. So there's no RAW, by definition.
James has a good point: by his argument, an infinite amount of damage can accumulate to the "unarmed strike" weapon, but absent any rule that says "your unarmed strike and you share a single pool of hitpoints", none of that damage will ever get applied to the "wielder" of the unarmed strike. This is logically consistent, and not in contravention of any of the rules in the book. It's as good a ruling as any. A little silly by a strict verisimilitude standard, sure, but so are a lot of things in DnD.
Nefreet and co. also have a good argument. They are making the logical assumption that because an unarmed strike is made with the body, and a PC's hitpoints represent the ability of his body to absorb damage, therefore any damage that might be inflicted on the PC's unarmed strike should instead be redirected to the PC's pool of hitpoints. This argument is also logically consistent, and can be supported by making an inference based on the above reference FAQ entry.
Basically, BOTH of your arguments are sound. The difference is, that you're both making different ASSUMPTIONS. Nefreet and co. are making certain assumptions about the designer's intent and the degree to which the rules are supposed to model real world physics. James has made his own set of assumptions about the degree to which inferences should be made, absent an explicit rule.
So at the end of the day, you're all right, there is no RAW, and everyone keep playing the game and having fun. There's no winning this argument, so stop trying.
Well, it becomes a moot question at 3rd level when you start calculating all maneuvers at Monk level, but my ruling would be that even before 3rd level, any maneuver performed as part of a flurry would get the flurry BAB and not regular BAB.
It's not really a big deal though, because it's a only a difference of 1.
This is an interesting question, and depends on how you understand the Tetori and the grab ability. Unfortunately, the Tetori, while a really awesome and flavourful archetype, is one of those messy archetypes that lends itself easily to all sorts of rules questions and confusions.
The first part of the ability in question reads: "At 8th level, a tetori gains the grab special attack when using unarmed strikes" which suggests that he gains the grab ability with no restrictions.
The second part reads "and can use this ability against creatures his own size or smaller by spending 1 point from his ki pool" which creates a confusion, because those are the base size restrictions of the grab ability anyways. In other words, if the Tetori has the grab ability, then spending a single ki point does nothing. This leads to the inference that perhaps the Tetori doesn't gain grab after all. Perhaps the Tetori only gains grab when he spends a ki point.
So does the Tetori gain grab, as the first part suggest, or does the Tetori only gain grab when he spends a ki point, as the second part suggests?
Here's one possible answer I've come up with:
Originally, in Bestiary 1, grab only worked against targets SMALLER than the grabber. In Bestiary 2, they changed it to work on targets THE SAME SIZE OR SMALLER.
My theory is that Jason Nelson (I believe it was him who wrote the Tetori), was operating off the Bestiary 1 version. If you work off that assumption, then the wording on the ability makes sense. The Tetori has Grab all the time (as the wording of the ability suggests), and you only spend ki if you want to grab bigger targets than the base ability would allow. For me, that's the best way to reconcile the two parts of the ability.
You might want to ask Jason Nelson though. I'm sure he could clarify what he had in mind.
I'm not quite understanding your question. It seems to me that you might be confused about how actions and grappling work.
On a given turn, you get:
Making one attack or initiating a grapple is a standard action.
Making a full attack (several attacks per your BAB) or making a flurry of blows is a full-round action.
With the greater grapple feat, you can maintain a grapple as a move action. Otherwise it is a standard action.
Everytime you succeed on a grapple check to maintain a grapple you can:
If you begin your turn grappling and you have the greater grapple feat, if you want to maintain the grapple you must spend a move action or a standard action to maintain the grapple. If you succeed on this check, you can make another check as a move action if you like. If you have the rapid grappler feat, you can make a third check as a swift action.
Because flurry of blows is a full-round action, you can't maintain a grapple and flurry of blows on the same turn. Therefore, if you begin your turn as the controlling grappler, but want to make a flurry of blows, then you need to release the grapple.
Really, the grapple rules are extremely complicated once you start to delve into them. Figuring our exactly how all the different checks and conditions interact is surprisingly intricate and nuanced.
Might not be the easiest character to play if you don't have a very solid grasp on the rules.
Also, I'm playing a grappling monk in a campaign right now, and I'm having a blast. It's not particularly powerful in most circumstances though, so it's important to have other things you can do in combat too.
Also, monsters' CMDs scale up incredibly quickly, so you need to make sure you do everything you can to keep your grappling CMB as high as possible. At level 12, monsters with CMDs in the high 40 are not unheard of.
Initiating a grapple is a standard action.
However, with the feats you've chosen you can do the following in a single turn:
Standard action to initiate a grapple against an adjacent opponent.
I hope this helped clarify some things for you.
Just a note: She can already take extra performance, regardless of your houserule. The luck ability explicitly allows it to interact with feats that affect bardic performance. Also, because using luck is only a swift action, the preferred way of making it last is using lingering performance and refreshing it every 3 rounds.
Here's a step by step breakdown of how you calculate flurry of blows for a level 7 monk with 19 str:
1.The monk has an effective BAB of 7 (BAB equal to his monk level). Therefore, your starting point is two attacks, one at +7, one at +2 (+7/+2)
2.Flurry grants a further -2 on all attacks and adds one extra attack at full BAB, bringing it to +5/+5/+0
3.+4 for strength brings it to +9/+9/+4
I hope this clarifies things for you.
My understanding is that almost all of it is OGL, hence why it can be published on the d20pfsrd.com website. What is not OGL is all the Golarion specific fluff, hence why d20pfsrd had to remove it from their website once they opened their own online store (thus violating paizo's fair use policy).
If someone has better information than this, I would love to hear it though! I'm curious myself.
The Human Diversion wrote:
+1. That would be how I would rule it, if the eyestalk ray is a Sp ability. It's a coherent / harmonious reading of the rules, and makes for a memorable table experience! Lazer turtle FTW.
Well, if you look at the rules for transmutation spells / polymorph effects, it says you lose all your Su, and Ex abilities that depend on your original form.
You also get a whole bunch of restrictions on casting spells, but you aren't prohibited from casting spells entirely if you can overcome those restrictions (eschew material, silent/still spell, natural spell, etc.)
The will save component in baleful polymorph makes no mention of form, and grants a blanket prohibition on ALL spell casting, Su, Ex and Sp abilities.
The two sets of rules can therefore be read in harmony. Even if you don't fail the will save, your ability to make use of Su and Ex abilities that rely on your original form is hampered, and your spell casting is severely restricted. This may still allow you to do some limited spell casting and make use of some Su and Ex abilities, as well as use your Sp abilities. If you do fail the will save, then you lose the ability to use ANY special abilities.
In the case of the beholder, I think that your GM got it wrong. I can't think of a clearer example of an Ex ability that depends on form than the beholder's ability to float. Some Ex abilities don't depend on form, like a monk's slowfall for instance, or a rogue's evasion.
I hope this was helpful.
Ice Titan wrote:
It's not clear from Arizhel's post, but he/she is referring to the spell Strong Jaw, which increases the size increment of any natural attack by two.
The damage dice of the behemoth hippo is a total anomaly. It's a stupid, stupid, animal. Personally, I think it sucks that wildshape has distinct "best" choices like this. It would be cool if there was actually a reason to assume the shape of a dire bear as opposed to a dire tiger, for instance.
Brilliant find! /thread now? Pretty please?
Not this argument again...
For what it's worth:
"When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities."
Come to your own conclusions after that.
EDIT: this post is directed at those who think that a monk (or sohei) can flurry in armour. A straight monk definitely cannot. A Sohe is not intended to be able to, as clarified by the designer above, but on some readings of RAW you can argue that it does.
Vod Canockers wrote:
RING OF SUSTENANCE FTW!
Enervate and Energy Drain have a duration of instantaneous, so they can't be targeted by dispel magic. What other negative level effects were you thinking of Wraithstrike?
Another way to interpret it:
No, skill mastery specifically only allows you to ignore "stress and distractions" when taking 10. Nowhere does it actually grant the ability to take 10. Therefore, no taking 10 with UMD and Skill Mastery.
Which interpretation you want to go with depends on how broadly you want to interpret the words "she may take 10 even if" in skill mastery.
In my game, I'd probably allow them to work together, if only because Rogues need all the love they can get.
Sidenote: SKR confirmed long ago that a flurrying monk uses his adjusted BAB to determine power attack / flurrying, no his regular BAB.
That aside, I agree that there's nothing insanely overpowered about this build, although it is definitely quite strong. I should point out that the Druid/Monk also has crazy saves, spells and other goodies the fighter doesn't, while still maintaining a higher potential damage.
Yeah, I'm 99% sure that JJ is of that opinion that RAW allows it to work, which is good enough to convince me of the validity of this build. He doesn't seem pleased about it though!
In my game, I wouldn't let it fly though, purely for flavour reasons. I'm not a fan of crazy twinked out concepts ala 3.5 whose only purpose is to maximize the number of dice rolled per turn, and it's not because such builds are "overpowered". A kung-fu allosaur just seems lame to me. And no, I don't hate monks. I actually love monks. They're are one of my favourite classes and I wish the devs would fix them. But a kung-fu allosaur doesn't sit well with me, It's just too ridiculous.
At the end of the JJ response he said although you can make an unarmed strike as a creature polymorphed but you lose the increased damage and your unarmed strikes provoke. So it seems that you do lose the ability to kungfu fight polymorphed. Unless I am reading it wrong.
Oh, you're right. I think that is what he's saying… it's hard to tell.
James Jacobs wrote:
Groovy. Thanks James!
So Lead Blades would still affect the monk's unarmed strike damage though, right, because they are treated as manufactured weapon? Certainly the damage table on Lead Blades seems to suggest it's intended to affect monk unarmed strikes.
James Jacobs wrote:
Thanks James! Just to clarify, if I'm understanding you correctly a 20th level monk polymorphed into an Allosaurus and under the effect of the Strong Jaw spell would deal unarmed strike damage of 12d8 on each strike (i.e. as a Colossal sized kung fu machine of death)? Nothing in the polymorph rules prevents this from happening, correct?
EDIT: I'm assuming that Monk's unarmed strikes can be affected by Strong Jaw, because Monk's unarmed strikes can usually be affected by spells like Magic Fang that otherwise only target natural weapons. If Strong Jaw doesn't work though, Lead Blades would still do the trick and get the Monk's unarmed damage to 8d8, yes?