I understand the need for new product, but one of the downfalls of 3.5, in my opinion at least, was the constant press for new material, without fixing the old stuff.
As time goes on, more and more stuff comes to light with broken feats, items, spells, classes, and instead of fixing the stuff they'd already released, they're just leaving it as is. Every time a new book is released, there's a flurry of activity with new FAQs, Errata, etc, then it all just shuts down until the next book comes out.
Look at the Ultimate Equipment Errata thread. One guy has several pages of errors, many of which were already present in previous books and never got fixed then either.
They have a powerful resource available to them via these forums. Many people pick apart the books word-for-word, when they come out, just trying to help improve the game. A lot of the work is being done for them, and all they have to do is come in and copy paste and fix it. Hell, many of the people would probably volunteer their time to do the fixing for them. Once it's done, it's done, and they really don't have to worry about it after then, because once the next printing happens it'll all be int he Errata.
As it stands, I feel like I'm sitting around waiting for another shoe to drop, only for, seemingly, nothing happening.
I really don't mind if their taking their time working on it, mulling things over if you will, but a little word here, a little word there, can do wonders to keep irritation levels from building.
I mean, something like, "Work on the Monk issue is slow going, but we were tossing around some ideas earlier," would be fantastic. Granted, they probably haven't been tossing around ideas, but I find it unlikely that they hadn't put at least a couple minutes thoughts about it, even if only to themselves. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it was stated that the Monk issue was a priority, but, at this point, I can't help but wonder: priority compared to what?
Stealth fix?
Rogue fix?
Pathfinder 2?
Summoner nerf?I don't want to come off as bashing the Developers, I just don't like feeling like this issue is being ignored, hoping the players that care, will give up and go away.
I don't think you're coming across as negative or bashing. I think the issue is unfortunately that "what the fans want" doesn't always line up with what's possible.
For my part, I suspect paizo will find a way - that's impressive enough, in my books. I don't feel competent to form a view on what's a "reasonable" timeframe. I just don't know enough about the business.
They will, but it isn't their top priority. Added to that, it's a minefield because if they get a fix 'wrong' then they will get even more flak. Perhaps they are waiting for us all to get behind one set of 'fixes'?
I'm in two minds. Given the design team are presumedly about to get crazy-busy with the mythic playtest, I wonder if any deadline they'd suggest would therefore be framed conservatively. They copped some flak recently since "after gen con" was taken by some to mean "immediately after gen con" - if i were in their position and was asked to pin down a time I'd add a few hopefully unnecessary months, just to be sure.
It can't be easy to schedule design time for work which isn't directly tied to new product. "When we get a chance" is probably the reality.
I don't believe that Paizo will fix the monk.
(Yes, I am aware that they said they would fix the monk. I am too cynical now.)
That's another way to avoid disappointment, I guess. I can't remember them under delivering so choose to remain optimistic.
why we need a jason say something about the rules on our tables?
if someone wants monks do a same fist punches all of his possible strikes, then...
but remember the goal to achieve is the fun at all for all players!!
iin my games, the player who ussualy plays a monk drag a lot of flavor to his descriptions, he says "a fist, kick, head butt, waist, palm and so..."
that thing youre saying about the same fist hitting is so boring... figure how a monk (who actualy took a looooong years training in a monastery or alike with all of his body parts in a martial arts) quiting that idea to just come and say "im punching with MY weapon which deal more damage instead my wholy life training"
thats lame and munchkins to me!!
im not marry the monk fob with the twf tree (but monks can get the twft for his normal base attack)
c´mon people we are playing this game for a while, maybe pfrpg is not so good like a 2nd e but i prefeer against the 4e or 3.5
so, we need to make new rules... in every campaign we play to prevent the rusty system overwhelming us
Have any of you with a decent understanding of the monk and its issues thought of releasing an alternate version under the OGL? Whether you wanted to charge for it or not, one would think there'd be interest and value as a stop-gap measure at least and it seems to me that you've done a significant part of the work.
If anyone is interested and wants a backer I'd be happy to chip in some money for art/layout/etcetera (and by 'chip in some money' I mean 'pay for').
Have any of you with a decent understanding of the monk and its issues thought of releasing an alternate version under the OGL? Whether you wanted to charge for it or not, one would think there'd be interest and value as a stop-gap measure at least and it seems to me that you've done a significant part of the work.
If anyone is interested and wants a backer I'd be happy to chip in some money for art/layout/etcetera (and by 'chip in some money' I mean 'pay for').
im thinking the same, but... we dont need to do a lot of job, the real issue is:
the whole game has its issues!!so, to fix the monk make a rule for yourself, post it, we test it and feedback it.. actually ythats the way wihch pfrpg works: They sell our own ideas!!
the monk works fine, i dont know what are u talking about here guys!!
you ask for issues with a class?
take a look to the Samurai whic has less of the samuray than me (and he´s wearing a katana)
Have any of you with a decent understanding of the monk and its issues thought of releasing an alternate version under the OGL? Whether you wanted to charge for it or not, one would think there'd be interest and value as a stop-gap measure at least and it seems to me that you've done a significant part of the work.
If anyone is interested and wants a backer I'd be happy to chip in some money for art/layout/etcetera (and by 'chip in some money' I mean 'pay for').
Yes. If Paizo don't provide an adequate fix, I may consider doing this. However time is a constraint at the moment, but I have the Mystci Monk I was working on at a good standard now.
Yes. If Paizo don't provide an adequate fix, I may consider doing this. However time is a constraint at the moment, but I have the Mystci Monk I was working on at a good standard now.Have any of you with a decent understanding of the monk and its issues thought of releasing an alternate version under the OGL? Whether you wanted to charge for it or not, one would think there'd be interest and value as a stop-gap measure at least and it seems to me that you've done a significant part of the work.
If anyone is interested and wants a backer I'd be happy to chip in some money for art/layout/etcetera (and by 'chip in some money' I mean 'pay for').
Let me know if you want to go down the track of producing a PDF with professional art, a development pass or two, etcetera. I have no experience and not much knowledge of the rules really, but would be interested in getting something like that produced nicely.
Let me know if you want to go down the track of producing a PDF with professional art, a development pass or two, etcetera. I have no experience and not much knowledge of the rules really, but would be interested in getting something like that produced nicely.Yes. If Paizo don't provide an adequate fix, I may consider doing this. However time is a constraint at the moment, but I have the Mystci Monk I was working on at a good standard now.Have any of you with a decent understanding of the monk and its issues thought of releasing an alternate version under the OGL? Whether you wanted to charge for it or not, one would think there'd be interest and value as a stop-gap measure at least and it seems to me that you've done a significant part of the work.
If anyone is interested and wants a backer I'd be happy to chip in some money for art/layout/etcetera (and by 'chip in some money' I mean 'pay for').
I'm interested in helping out if this possibility ever occurs.
I appreciate the offers, guys, I really do. I don't know much about e-publishing, and while I can get the text formatting right, I'm less clear on images and the like. I do know an artist, though, that I might be able to persuade to do us some good artwork if it comes to it.
|
Do you guys prefer the 3.5 style flurry (real medium BAB with additional attacks at the highest attack bonus, i.e. +15/+15/+15/+15/+10/+5) or the Pathfinder style flurry (pseudo-full BAB with attacks in iterative order like TWF, i.e. +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3)?
I haven't really posted too much in the Monk threads (if at all), but I have been generally reading through them. That being said, I've never played a Monk in 3.5 nor Pathfinder. I wanted to, but the apparent suckiness of the class made it hard to do so. (No offense to anyone with that statement).
Now, to answer MA's question (and of which, generally speaking, I think his insights to the Monk class are dead-on), I also prefer the 3.5 style of Flurry of Blows. It was certainly a lot simpler than it turned out in Pathfinder.
Ideally, I'd have the Pathfinder Monk go back to the 3.5 style of Flurry of Blows, and add on the Weapon Training class feature of the Fighter (for the Monk and Natural Weapon groups). I'd also give the Monk a choice at 4th level to increase their Unarmed Damage (as it currently does), or give a scaling enhancement bonus to attack and damage rolls of +1 for every four levels, up to a maximum of +5 at 20th. With perhaps adding the ability to overcome Cold Iron and Silver at 12th, and overcome all alignment-based DR at 20th.
I would also consider adding Two-Weapon Fighting as a Monk bonus feat starting at 2nd, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting starting at 6th, and Greater Two-Weapon Fighting starting at 10th. So anyone who wants the current Flurry can still do that. (Don't know if allowing Two-Weapon Fighting at first is a wise idea, so placed that at 2nd). Whether that's a good idea or not, I'm not sure. Just throwing that one out there.
While I was at it, I'd (at the very least playtest) having the Monk gain an Armor bonus equal to his Wisdom score - 10 (to a maximum of +4) instead of Wisdom bonus to AC they currently get, but it also applies to Touch AC and CMD. Every 4 levels it increases by +1, to a maximum of +9 Armor at 20th level. (Reasoning: AC sucks at lower level, but generally gets too much at high level. That's just my opinion based off of 3.5, and I could be wrong).
I don't think AC needs adjusting for the monk, but I confess I like the idea of the FoB not being some full/partial hybrid but have it partial with a bonus for monk weapons and unarmed strike.
I'd prefer to make the DR/hardness bypass a ki-based power. My favourite is something like: "For 1 ki-point the monk may bypass 1 point of DR or hardness per level on one target for 1 round per level." So at 5th level, for 1 ki-point a monk could bypass 5 points of DR or hardness on one object for 5 rounds.
|
|
Master Arminas got me into thinking about what the Pathfinder Monk might look like if it kept 3.5 Flurry of Blows, but also added in some extra attack bonuses to help it with hitting things.
And since everyone else has thrown up their homebrew Pathfinder monks, I figured why not me? ;)
Arassuil's Updated Pathfinder Monk
I mainly kept it to the Pathfinder Monk, added in 3.5 Flurry of Blows, added a bonus to hit with Monastic Weapons (I'm not very creative, so that was the best name I could come up with). I also updated weapon proficiencies and the bonus feat lists, because that just made sense to me.
I just hope I don't end up hijacking this thread (if I do, I apologize MA); if it draws any kind of attention, I'll make my own thread on it.
Nice idea, but ultimately this monk is only +2 better off to hit by 20th level on the existing PF monk. The issues of MAD and enhancement haven't really been addressed at all, and I think personally that this is where the problem lies.
|
|
Nice idea, but ultimately this monk is only +2 better off to hit by 20th level on the existing PF monk. The issues of MAD and enhancement haven't really been addressed at all, and I think personally that this is where the problem lies.
I agree about the MAD; I just didn't try to address it at all. As far as enhancement bonus, I did try to provide an option to get +1 to hit with unarmed strikes every 4 levels, instead of increasing unarmed damage (which may not have been worded well). It doesn't invalidate AoMF (which has been argued by some), as it's useful for getting weapon enhancements like Agile, Flaming, etc. Also beefs up weapon-based combat maneuvers, because it'd be effectively full BAB + 5 by 17th level, which may help out the other supposedly area where a Monk should excel: combat maneuvers.
Still think it's more playable than the PF Monk or 3.5 Monk. *shrug*
Master Arminas got me into thinking about what the Pathfinder Monk might look like if it kept 3.5 Flurry of Blows, but also added in some extra attack bonuses to help it with hitting things.
And since everyone else has thrown up their homebrew Pathfinder monks, I figured why not me? ;)
Entilzha's Updated Pathfinder Monk
I mainly kept it to the Pathfinder Monk, added in 3.5 Flurry of Blows, added a bonus to hit with Monastic Weapons (I'm not very creative, so that was the best name I could come up with). I also updated weapon proficiencies and the bonus feat lists, because that just made sense to me.
I just hope I don't end up hijacking this thread (if I do, I apologize MA); if it draws any kind of attention, I'll make my own thread on it.
Looks good and don't worry about it none. LOL
MA
Power Attack is a trap for a monk, he doesn't have the attack bonus to begin with anyway. Using power attack reduces his hits to the point where the monk can hardly hit and average damage per round drops rather than increases.
Don't let it bother you, in other words.
You know, I wonder if the scariest thing for the other melee classes in the game, is being forced to rebuild as a Monk. Would make a good costume, I think.
(Still Halloween here in Alaska)
Two months later... Have monks been addressed properly yet...?
Not yet, Brother Kyle.
MA
|
how about the monk's standard BAB gains primary (-0) iterative attacks at 1st and 5th, and secondary (-5) iterative attacks at 9th, 13th, and 17th.
this would result in +15/+15/+15/+10/+10/+10.
this BAB functions for all weapons.
then, Monastic Weapons Training gives +1 at 1st, 5th, 9th, 13th, and 17th, to all monk weapons and unarmed strikes.
thus +20/+20/+20/+15/+15/+15 for monk weapons and unarmed strikes.
then, Ki Strike enhancement +1 at 3rd, +2 at 7th, +3 at 11th, +4 at 15th, and +5 at 19th (or alternatively 4th/8th/12th/16th/20th).
thus +25/+25/+25/+20/+20/+20 for unarmed strikes.
finally, a Flurry of Blows becomes burning a Ki point with any of these 'routines' to make it a standard action full-attack.
I don't think the devs want to re-write flurry of blows, just tweak the monk enough to make it work.
They could just apply a Monk's unarmed strike damage in place of Monk weapons. Easy fix.
They could just apply a Monk's unarmed strike damage in place of Monk weapons. Easy fix.
Well that would make weapon-using monks much stronger, yes. Leaves the unarmed monk just as much out in the cold as currently, though.
It would give Monks an incentive to utilize their weapons. I for one hate Monk weapons because it makes my unarmed damage useless.
It would also give them an incentive to not use unarmed strike. I share your opinion of monk weapons, I think they should be more effective than they are, but for some reason 'monk' in weapon properties seems to mean 'nerf' to the designers.
Take the kama, it's designed like a one-handed scythe. A scythe does 2d4/20/x4. Yet a kama does 1d6/20/x2. Wouldn't 1d4/20/x4 be more interesting? And give you a reason to use one? Kamas are nasty weapons, they are great for hooking and dissarming, but they only get the trip property and no bonus. Why is that?
Yarp. A kama is a lot like a pick, but with a slashing edge.
I agree, a vanilla unarmed monk has no love.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Yet a kama does 1d6/20/x2. Wouldn't 1d4/20/x4 be more interesting? And give you a reason to use one?
Why should this be more interesting?? Let's look at the average damage (ignoring that threats have to be confirmed, which would lower the average damage of the suggested kama stats even further):
Kama as written: (3.5x19 + 3.5x2) / 20 = 3,675Kama as suggested: (2.5x19 +2.5x4) / 20 = 2,875
Factoring in damage bonuses, say +b, results in:
Kama as written: (3.5+b)x21/20
Kama as suggested: (2.5+b)x23/20
Calculating the break even point for b:
(3.5+b)x21 = (2.5+b)x23
=> 2 x b = 3.5 x 21 - 2.5 x 23 = 16
=> b = 8
So, for a damage bonus (from strength or enchantments) of +8 or more the suggested kama is as good or better than the kama as written (again, not taking into account that threats have to be confirmed, raising the break even point for b even higher, depending on AC).
Critical hits might become relevant for weapons with wide threat ranges when doubling them, for anything else, they are just irrelevant.
So I'll gladly stick with the kama as written.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So now that the monk fix playtest is out, what do you guys think?
So now that the monk fix playtest is out, what do you guys think?
Link? Please?
MA
So now that the monk fix playtest is out, what do you guys think?
That's pretty low. ;)
Nice troll there, Neo2151.
I trolled?
Man, you can't DO that to people. :(
LOL nice one Cheapy
Has anyone before thought of a new mechanic for Unarmed Characters to take, kind of like a universal alternate class, for fighting styles?
Like, for instance, a character that sacrifices fighting ability using certain kinds of unarmed strikes (feet, head, knees) to gain bonuses in another style (hands, elbows).
I've got no knowledge of real-world martial arts, but I know many of them focus on different kinds of strikes or techniques that have various different strengths and weaknesses.
For instance, Boxing focuses entirely on strikes with the fist, so maybe they gain a bonus on unarmed strikes but only when using their fists.
The only problem I can think of is some fighting styles don't really emphasize any particular part of the body, like Muay Thai. As an alternative, maybe they could take penalties on different kinds of manuevers instead. I've never noticed Muay Thai users to 'grapple' much so maybe they take penalties on grapple CMB and CMD?
Anyway, just a thought that occurred to me as my brother sits in the living room watching recordings of UFC.
Alright, they've changed flurry of blows so you can flurry with one weapon.
Thread over, time to start complaining about paladins again. :)
Alright, they've changed flurry of blows so you can flurry with one weapon.
Thread over, time to start complaining about paladins again. :)
Posting the entire quote for my friends on this thread.
Hey there Folks,
First off, my thanks to everybody for calming down a bit in this thread. I understand how these sorts of topics can turn into a firestorm and I am glad to see it has abated a bit.
Second... when it comes to rulings on the game and internal consistency. I want to be clear on something. The buck stops with my department, and more specifically with me. I thought we had some of these issues under wraps, but it appears that there is still some confusion in the department. I am working to get them cleared up and fixed so that they do not happen again.
The NPC Codex issue was an error and it is one that we are going to fix in the next printing of the book. I am also going to put up an FAQ on it as soon as I am able.
As for the Monk issue. We have decided to reverse our previous ruling on using Flurry with one weapon. You can now do so. This change has been in the works for a little while now, but I have not had the chance to announce it. There are a few other changes coming to the monk as well and I am investigating a good venue for making those announcements.
I work very hard to try to make our rules system as tight and clean as possible, but with a rules set this complex, mistakes are bound to sneak through. That's not an excuse, its just a reality. Me and my team endeavor to solve these problems as they are found and as time permits. Its not easy, but I appreciate the patience that you have concerning these issues.
Expect more on this later today as I add some quick issues to the FAQ.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Cannot wait to see the rest of the changes, Mister Bulmahn. Thank you. And I am happy to see single-weapon flurry become offical at long last.
MA
Alright, they've changed flurry of blows so you can flurry with one weapon.
Thread over, time to start complaining about paladins again. :)
I'll wait until I see the "few other changes coming to the monk" before I start celebrating.
;-)
EDIT: Actually, the FAQ entry look pretty straightforward. Sweet!
And the new FAQ text is up.
When I use the monk class feature, flurry of blows, can I make all of the attacks with just one weapon, or do I have to use two, as implied by the ability functioning similarly to Two-Weapon Fighting?You can make all of your attacks with a single monk weapon. Alternatively, you can replace any number of these attacks with an unarmed strike. This FAQ specifically changes a previous ruling made in the blog concerning this issue.
—Jason Bulmahn, today
All attacks with a single monk weapon. Great.
MA