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?
Ooo, a clarification from James Jacobs! He endorses my logic as to how the polymorph section rules text is supposed to be interpreted, but he also gives a very narrow definition of "dependent on form", in keeping with StreamOfTheSky.
So if I'm reading him correctly, according to James Jacobs (and frankly, that's good enough for me) the monk/druid build is a go. Hope that helps, prototype!
James Jacobs wrote:
Ah, read what the bolded part says again:
"Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form"
"If they are possessed", NOT "if they can be used" as you erroneously stated. So if the new form has a claw attack and the old form had a claw attack, then you still have a claw attack. That doesn't mean however that if the new form can make unarmed strikes and the old form had some sort of special improved unarmed strike dependent on form that you get to keep the special improved unarmed strike; it merely means you get to keep the ability to make unarmed strikes at all.
Hi James! Got some questions on the polymorph rules:
[When affected by a polymorph effect you] lose any class features that depend upon form, but those that allow you to add features (such as sorcerers that can grow claws) still function. While most of these should be obvious, the GM is the final arbiter of what abilities depend on form and are lost when a new form is assumed. Your new form might restore a number of these abilities if they are possessed by the new form.
Question 1: In your opinion, which of the following class features "depend upon form"?
–Dragon Disciple's Ability Score increases
Question 2: If none of the above features depend on form, can you give an example of a class feature that does?
Question 3: What does the last sentence in the quoted text mean? Can you give an example of the kind of scenario in which this rule might be invoked?
Question 4: If the monk's improved unarmed damage (gained through the improve unarmed strike class feature) is dependent on form, does he lose the improved damage if the form he is polymorphing into is capable of making unarmed strikes? Let's say a dwarf monk/druid uses thousand faces to become a gnome? Let's say that same monk/druid wild shapes into an ape? A human shaped fire elemental?
Also, one more related question: Can creatures that normally attack with natural attacks make unarmed strikes? i.e. can a T-Rex make an unarmed strike with its feet (for the appropriate damage die) instead of a bite attack?
This logic is not sound, for obvious reasons. Observe:
Assumption: The dragon disciple's improved natural armour is a class feature dependent on form (just roll with this for now, whether or not you agree)
Scenario: A dragon disciple uses beast shape ii to assume the form of a large animal (+2 natural armour).
What the rules actually say:
Now, we can have an argument about whether the DD natural armour is actually dependent on form, but that doesn't change the internal logic of the rules,
The rules on polymorph state that if a class feature is one "dependent on form" then it is lost when you polymorph. The question of importance is therefore "is the monk's improved unarmed strike feature dependent on form?".
The flaw in your logic however, is that you're looking at the properties of the polymorphed form of the monk to answer this question. Instead, you should be looking at the properties of the class feature itself in isolation to determine whether it is based on form or not. What form the monk might assume has nothing to do with the inherent properties of his basic class features.
Alright, so I shouldn't have used the term "improved unarmed damage".
Regardless, the ability to make an unarmed strike is not something granted by a monk class feature. Everybody can make an unarmed strike, regardless of class. In the opinion of some posters, animals/creatures without fists/legs cannot make unarmed strikes. Introducing that argument to this thread is merely muddying the waters though.
The ability to do extra damage with your fists, elbows etc. however, IS a monk class feature. Therefore, it would be affected by the polymorph rules that disallow class features dependent on form (if it is such a class feature).
The question you really want answered is whether the monk's unarmed strike feature is dependent on form, not whether animals can make unarmed stirkes.
Sidenote: in my opinion, animals can make unarmed strikes. That's really neither here nor there though.
K, the thread has gotten seriously derailed. Please make another thread about whether animals can use Unarmed Strikes, or whether Natural Attacks can be used to deliver Ki abilities. That's not what this thread is about.
This thread is about whether the improved unarmed damage feature of the monk is a class feature dependent on form, and what ramifications the answer to question that might have for a polymorphing monk. This thread has nothing to do with Natural Attacks or Feral Combat Training at all. More broadly, this is also a thread about how to define the term "class feature dependent on form".
Yeah, but the issue the OP pointed out was that two separate abilities both replace "the ranger's second, third, fourth and fifth favoured enemies." The EXACT iterations of the SAME feature are being replaced TWICE by a single archetype. That's very anomalous, and looks a lot like an error.
Also, it's weird that the Wild Stalker gains 2 rage powers in a row (at 5th and 6th) and then no more for levels 7-9, before gaining another 2 in a row (10 and 11th).
Finally, Wild Talents says you gain a new one at 6th and every 5 levels thereafter to a max of 4 at level 20. However, the 4th Wild Talent would actually be gained at level 21. It should actually say a max of 3 at level 16.
There are many poorly written/edited archetypes out there. This seems to be one of them.
K, we really need to bring this discussion back to the issue that the original poster wanted clarified. The question stems from the fact that the rules on polymorph effects specifically call out class features dependent on form to be lost when you polymorph, regardless of the form of the creature whose shape you are assuming. Conceptually, this is an attempt to represent that certain class features work by augmenting the natural form of the character that possesses them. If the character alters his form via a polymorph effect, he loses those class features.
In the case of the monk, if improved unarmed damage is a class feature dependent on form, it doesn't matter if the form you're polymorphing into also has humanoid like limbs with which you could make unarmed strikes: you would still lose the improved unarmed damage upon changing shape (again, that's operating on the assumption that improved unarmed damage is a class feature based on form, something about which there is legitimate disagreement).
Question: What is a form dependent class feature? There is no hard and fast RAW on this, though the polymorph rules do distinguish between a class feature that premanently grants claws (dependant on form) and one that can temporarily grant claws X times a day (not dependent on form). Can anybody think of a single class feature that is unambiguously dependent on form? I cannot, although IMO there are a few strong candidates:
–Dragon Disciple's Natural Armour bonus
What do you guys think of the above list of class features? Do they function by permanently augmenting the form/body of the character that possesses them, thus becoming inexorably linked to the natural form of that character? Or do they function through some other means? If they aren't dependent on form, can you think of any class features that are?
There are many other ways to keep up on AC: Ring of deflection. Amulet of Natural armour.+X mithral buckler, etc…
If you use some combination of these things, then mage armour can start to make sense. If you don't make any effort to keep your AC up though, the +4 from mage armour won't help much. Whether AC remains a viable choice is in your hands as a player, if you have some control over your magic items. If you're mostly at the mercy of your DM for equipment, then your mileage may vary. Wizards have a harder time keeping up than certain other classes, obviously, and many players prefer to dump AC and find other means of protection.