Paizo Top Nav Branding
  • Hello, Guest! |
  • Sign In |
  • My Account |
  • Shopping Cart |
  • Help/FAQ
About Paizo Messageboards News Paizo Blog Help/FAQ
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game
Pathfinder Society

Pathfinder Beginner Box

Pathfinder Adventure Card Game

Pathfinder Comics

Pathfinder Legends

Why is everyone complaining about the Zen Archer being "broken"?


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

51 to 95 of 95 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.

A bow requieres you to aim, you can only sight using one bow at a time, unless you had say 2 heads and 4 arms then I could see you being able to use 2 bows at once.


stringburka wrote:


There's a thread on this. Basically:
1. APG p. 72 says archetype entries replace entries with the same name in the core class.
2. Sohei's got a Weapons & Armor Proficiency entry that state their proficiencies.
3. The limitation on monks using FoB with armor is in their Weapons & Armor Proficiency entry. The FoB entry does not mention it.
4. Due to 1 and 2, Sohei's do not use the monk's Weapon & Armor Proficiency entry.
5. Due to 3 and 4, Sohei's do not have any limitation on when to use FoB in armor or encumbrance.

The other armor-restricted abilities (evasion, AC bonus and speed bonus (which the Sohei do not get IIRC) all state the limitation in their own entry.

They can even take the feats (or multiclass) to get heavy armor, though that will cause them to lose evasion and other abilities.

By that logic, the Monk of the Empty Hand would be affected the same way.

And creates a fuzzy area for the Zen Archer, as does 'in addition to their normal weapon proficiencies' bring the armour and FoB stuff with it?

Either this is RAW being twisted beyond the logical, or a lot of archetypes are in need of re-editing. You'll not convince me for a moment that this is RAI.


Mighty Squash wrote:
stringburka wrote:


There's a thread on this. Basically:
1. APG p. 72 says archetype entries replace entries with the same name in the core class.
2. Sohei's got a Weapons & Armor Proficiency entry that state their proficiencies.
3. The limitation on monks using FoB with armor is in their Weapons & Armor Proficiency entry. The FoB entry does not mention it.
4. Due to 1 and 2, Sohei's do not use the monk's Weapon & Armor Proficiency entry.
5. Due to 3 and 4, Sohei's do not have any limitation on when to use FoB in armor or encumbrance.

The other armor-restricted abilities (evasion, AC bonus and speed bonus (which the Sohei do not get IIRC) all state the limitation in their own entry.

They can even take the feats (or multiclass) to get heavy armor, though that will cause them to lose evasion and other abilities.

By that logic, the Monk of the Empty Hand would be affected the same way.

And creates a fuzzy area for the Zen Archer, as does 'in addition to their normal weapon proficiencies' bring the armour and FoB stuff with it?

Either this is RAW being twisted beyond the logical, or a lot of archetypes are in need of re-editing. You'll not convince me for a moment that this is RAI.

In that same thread it was clarified by the author of the class that it was never his intention to allow flurrying in armour. He merely wanted soheis to have the option of wearing armour if they so chose. Why anyone would want to do that is anyone's guess…

Furthermore, if the Sohei's "Weapon and Armour proficiencies" entry really replaced the corresponding Monk entries wholesale, then Soheis would lose proficiency with Monk weapons. Yet Monk weapons are explicitly mentioned in their weapon training class feature.

Similarly, using your logic the Sohei's Unarmed Strike feature would replace the Monk's Unarmed Strike feature in its entirety. As a result, Sohei's would not gain improved unarmed strike as a bonus feat.

Likewise, their Bonus Feats feature would replace the corresponding Monk feature wholesale, resulting in Soheis being restricted to ONLY selecting Mounted Combat Feats.

I agree with Minty Squash. This is RAW twisting at its worst.

Still, all in all a regrettably vaguely worded archetype…


Banecrow wrote:
A bow requieres you to aim, you can only sight using one bow at a time, unless you had say 2 heads and 4 arms then I could see you being able to use 2 bows at once.

I'm not sure trying to interject real world logic is going to help your case. If we relied on real world logic we wouldn't have two weapon fighting line as no one is really able to use two weapons effectively in as they do in the game. Anyone from history that used it used the off hand mainly for defense and the occasional "Jab" to set up for the real strike.

Shadow Lodge

Wasn't there a clarification, not an errata though, that outright called vestigial arms useless with weapons and not giving any extra combat ability? I think it was a response to a thread about using vestigial arms for dual-wielding two-handed weapons with some added musings about putting the ferocious mutagen claws on the vestigial digits and adding those attack to your armed attack routine.

Sometimes I kind of wish there was no organized play or rules lawyers so the extra spicy controversy over this and that every other month would not reach such staggering heights. :P


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Bows require no more sighting than a crossbow, do they? Cause by the rules you can absolutely shoot 2 crossbows.

The body mechanics argument is much more valid. But, until paizo fixes the mess they made, it seems to be the only way RAW a zen archer can actually flurry with bow shots.


Muser wrote:

Wasn't there a clarification, not an errata though, that outright called vestigial arms useless with weapons and not giving any extra combat ability? I think it was a response to a thread about using vestigial arms for dual-wielding two-handed weapons with some added musings about putting the ferocious mutagen claws on the vestigial digits and adding those attack to your armed attack routine.

Sometimes I kind of wish there was no organized play or rules lawyers so the extra spicy controversy over this and that every other month would not reach such staggering heights. :P

Hmm… I'd love to see that clarification. IMO, Paizo has a terrible habit of "clarifying" things in a very counterintuitive way. Generally, it's because they introduced a mechanic without fully considering it's potential. Saying that vestigial arms don't grant extra attacks is not the same as saying that vestigial arms can't be used to gain an additional, unexpected benefit when using other sources that grant extra attack.

Really, the vestigial arm ability shouldn't exist. The core rules are (more or less) very clearly written in a manner that contemplates PCs with only 2 arms. Separate rules (see multi-weapon fighting) exist for monsters with 3+ arms. Why should there be an alternate set of very, very, VERY muddy "rules" for PCs with 3+ arms? It defies logic, and is overly "gamy" of Paizo. Why should a 4 armed giant NPC get a separate set of iterative attacks for each arm, but a PC alchemist with 4 arms not?

If PCs with 3+ arms would be so game breaking using the normal multi weapon fighting rules, then PCs simply should not be able to have 3 arms at all. Leave that for Homebrew.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bardic Dave wrote:
Just take 3 levels of vivisectionist with the extra discovery feat, grow two extra limbs, and dual-wield longbows. That's OBVIOUSLY what the dev team intended!

Hang on, isn't TWFing precluded from stacking with Flurry-of-Blows?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Dabbler wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
Just take 3 levels of vivisectionist with the extra discovery feat, grow two extra limbs, and dual-wield longbows. That's OBVIOUSLY what the dev team intended!
Hang on, isn't TWFing precluded from stacking with Flurry-of-Blows?

The joke is that Flurry of Blows is meant to work EXACTLY like TWF, according to the recent rules clarification. Therefore, for the Zen Archer to work as written, he needs to wield TWO bows. Most PCs can't manage this, and so the Zen Archer is effectively broken. This was acknowledged by Jason Bulmahn to be the case, and he's currently looking into possible fixes for the Zen Archer, and the Monk in general.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Bardic Dave wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
Just take 3 levels of vivisectionist with the extra discovery feat, grow two extra limbs, and dual-wield longbows. That's OBVIOUSLY what the dev team intended!
Hang on, isn't TWFing precluded from stacking with Flurry-of-Blows?
The joke is that Flurry of Blows is meant to work EXACTLY like TWF, according to the recent rules clarification. Therefore, for the Zen Archer to work as written, he needs to wield TWO bows. Most PCs can't manage this, and so the Zen Archer is effectively broken. This was acknowledged by Jason Bulmahn to be the case, and he's currently looking into possible fixes for the Zen Archer, and the Monk in general.

The clarification was partially retracted and is under review. We cannot assume anything one way or the other.


Dabbler wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
Dabbler wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
Just take 3 levels of vivisectionist with the extra discovery feat, grow two extra limbs, and dual-wield longbows. That's OBVIOUSLY what the dev team intended!
Hang on, isn't TWFing precluded from stacking with Flurry-of-Blows?
The joke is that Flurry of Blows is meant to work EXACTLY like TWF, according to the recent rules clarification. Therefore, for the Zen Archer to work as written, he needs to wield TWO bows. Most PCs can't manage this, and so the Zen Archer is effectively broken. This was acknowledged by Jason Bulmahn to be the case, and he's currently looking into possible fixes for the Zen Archer, and the Monk in general.
The clarification was partially retracted and is under review. We cannot assume anything one way or the other.

Jason Bulmahn acknowledging that the Zen Archer is currently broken with the new clarification

Jason Bulmahn wrote:

the Zen Archer… clearly does not work with these rules

Not retracted. It was merely acknowledged to be problematic, and a review is forthcoming. Until the results of that review are in, Zen Archer is hooped w/out house rules.

This post was meant to be sort of a joke though. I just had a funny revelation that the Zen Archer actually can work by RAW if you dip alchemist and wanted to cheekily point it out to people.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Modules Subscriber
TheSideKick wrote:
nicklas Læssøe wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:

I can't see anything in the Sohei archetype that lets them flurry while in armour. Is that an errata I've missed somehow?

yes they can, but thats a different thread, so lets not digress this one any more then it already is.

Care to give a quote or a faq reference? because if we go by what is written in the book then he cant.
do a search and lets not digress this thread anymore... thanks

I was all ready to shoot that down, but I went ahead and reread the entire description for Flurry of Blows.

The word "armor" doesn't appear anywhere.

I'll be damned. The Sohei isn't completely broken now.


Also, how come only the unarmed fighter gets all the good monk weapons? Temple sword, monk spades, nine sectioned chains, the monk is not proficient in them, but CAN flurry with them. An unarmed fighter gets all monk weapons, including exotics. Monks get thier small list, and the 1 or 2 additional monk weapons that are listed as monk profienct in the text entry, and not the table.

Does a knife master vivisectionst get d8 SA from vivisectionist, when using daggers, or does he use d6s?


blahpers wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
nicklas Læssøe wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:

I can't see anything in the Sohei archetype that lets them flurry while in armour. Is that an errata I've missed somehow?

yes they can, but thats a different thread, so lets not digress this one any more then it already is.

Care to give a quote or a faq reference? because if we go by what is written in the book then he cant.
do a search and lets not digress this thread anymore... thanks

I was all ready to shoot that down, but I went ahead and reread the entire description for Flurry of Blows.

The word "armor" doesn't appear anywhere.

I'll be damned. The Sohei isn't completely broken now.

Soheis CANNOT flurry in armour

"PRD wrote:
Armor and Shield Proficiency: … 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.

The argument goes that the sohei armour and weapon proficiencies entry completely replaces the monk's armour and weapon proficiency entries (above), including the part about flurring in armour. However, see this earlier post of mine refuting that:

LINK

If one wishes to twist RAW in such a way as to allow Sohei's to flurry in armour, then by the same logic the sohei also loses several other core monk features it is CLEARLY not intended to lose, such as the unarmed strike bonus feat, and access to any bonus feat other than the mounted combat feats.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Well, it's a good thing that Sohei's only bonus feats are Mounted Combat Feats, and their unarmed strike never goes higher than 1d6 and is not affected by armor. :D

Cheliax

The Drunken Dragon wrote:
I don't think the double-wielded bows works...anatomically...but...meh

I feel a disturbance in the force....as if a million thri-kreen players cried out in agony...


Here is a list of class features the sohei would lose if you follow the logic that would allow them to flurry in armour:

–EVERY CLASS SKILL, (they instead gain handle animal as their ONLY CLASS SKILL)
–Proficiency with monk weapons
–The improved unarmed strike feat
–The ability to do lethal damage with unarmed strikes
–The ability to apply their full strength modifier on "offhand" unarmed strikes
–The ability to select bonus feats other than mounted combat feats

If you can claim it was intended for the sohei to lose all of the above, and keep a straight face, then you have a logically consistent argument for saying sohei's can flurry in armour. Otherwise, no way.


Bardic Dave wrote:

Here is a list of class features the sohei would lose if you follow the logic that would allow them to flurry in armour:

–EVERY CLASS SKILL, (they instead gain handle animal as their ONLY CLASS SKILL)

Incorrect, they gain that skill. Nothing about replacing or editting.

Quote:


–Proficiency with monk weapons

Correct.

Quote:


–The improved unarmed strike feat

Inconclusive, neither mentions nor dismentions.

Quote:


–The ability to do lethal damage with unarmed strikes

I guess.

Quote:


–The ability to select bonus feats other than mounted combat feats

Inconclusive. Neithe mentions nor mismentions. You are reaching.

Cheliax

Bardic Dave wrote:
blahpers wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
nicklas Læssøe wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:

I can't see anything in the Sohei archetype that lets them flurry while in armour. Is that an errata I've missed somehow?

yes they can, but thats a different thread, so lets not digress this one any more then it already is.

Care to give a quote or a faq reference? because if we go by what is written in the book then he cant.
do a search and lets not digress this thread anymore... thanks

I was all ready to shoot that down, but I went ahead and reread the entire description for Flurry of Blows.

The word "armor" doesn't appear anywhere.

I'll be damned. The Sohei isn't completely broken now.

Soheis CANNOT flurry in armour

"PRD wrote:
Armor and Shield Proficiency: … 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.

The argument goes that the sohei armour and weapon proficiencies entry completely replaces the monk's armour and weapon proficiency entries (above), including the part about flurring in armour. However, see this earlier post of mine refuting that:

LINK

If one wishes to twist RAW in such a way as to allow Sohei's to flurry in armour, then by the same logic the sohei also loses several other core monk features it is CLEARLY not intended to lose, such as the unarmed strike bonus feat, and access to any bonus feat other than the mounted combat feats.

but RAW thats exactly what happens. its RAI that they dont, but RAW they flurry in armor, dont have UAS and can only pick mounted bonus feats


I looked at the Sohei and I come to this conclusion:


  • It gains proficiency with all simple and martial weapons but cannot flurry in them, but monk weapons (including unarmed strikes) still work in a flurry, it does not lose proficiency with them.
  • It gains proficiency with light armor but loses the monk AC/WIS bonus with it. Without armor it still gains the monk AC bonus/WIS bonus.

The reason for this is that looking at the wording it is clear to me that the corresponding entries to "skills", "weapon and armor proficiency" etc. are meant to be modifying. If you compare it to other class features it always says that it "replaces feature xxx". For the case of the weapons and amor proficiency you can look at the geisha bard archetype where this exact description ("Weapon and Armor Proficiency") is used but also has a line that it "replaces the normal bard armor and weapon proficiencies". Sohei does not have it, so it gains it in addition, but it also does not remove the limitations of the original features. Since "Weapon and Armor Proficiency" is no feature in the standard monk entry block that actually could be replaced since it does not exist, it is also clear that it is not to be read this way IMO.

The Sohei is still a nice archetype. It gives you a lot more features, e.g. it allows you entry into prestige classes in a completely different way. For example, Sohei 1/empyreal sorcerer 6/eldritch knight xx/class yy allows you to focus on wisdom for all your casting and even gives you a monk ac bonus on it. Slap on a monk robe and it gets even better.
Sohei also allows you to pick up and use a lot more of the treasure/loot found in adventures. So you won't be frustrated as the poor sole melee guy monk who finds this fantastic bastardsword to use against the dragon - but nonproficiency lowers your attack bonus just enough to not hit the annoying beast (don't bring flurry in here, it won't apply in lots of situations, this is just for illustration)...
Also, Sohei allows you to play a low wisdom monk since you can dump wisdom but still have fantastic saves, mix it with qi gong monk and profit from other nice features of the monk.

So Sohei is nice, but fills another niche than Zen Archer, and does not beat that one at its own thing (RAI). I think that's OK :-)


Name Violation wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
blahpers wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:
nicklas Læssøe wrote:
TheSideKick wrote:

I can't see anything in the Sohei archetype that lets them flurry while in armour. Is that an errata I've missed somehow?

yes they can, but thats a different thread, so lets not digress this one any more then it already is.

Care to give a quote or a faq reference? because if we go by what is written in the book then he cant.
do a search and lets not digress this thread anymore... thanks

I was all ready to shoot that down, but I went ahead and reread the entire description for Flurry of Blows.

The word "armor" doesn't appear anywhere.

I'll be damned. The Sohei isn't completely broken now.

Soheis CANNOT flurry in armour

"PRD wrote:
Armor and Shield Proficiency: … 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.

The argument goes that the sohei armour and weapon proficiencies entry completely replaces the monk's armour and weapon proficiency entries (above), including the part about flurring in armour. However, see this earlier post of mine refuting that:

LINK

If one wishes to twist RAW in such a way as to allow Sohei's to flurry in armour, then by the same logic the sohei also loses several other core monk features it is CLEARLY not intended to lose, such as the unarmed strike bonus feat, and access to any bonus feat other than the mounted combat feats.

but RAW thats exactly what happens. its RAI that they dont, but RAW they flurry in armor, dont have UAS and can only pick mounted bonus feats

Just seeing this and replying directly: By RAW they cannot and by RAI they probably should not either in my opinion :-)

Cheliax

Archetype features

...Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype replaces a specific class feature from its parent class.

no normal monk armor stuff applies, it is replaced

Sczarni

I find it a bit odd that nobody's mentioning the part about how "There is
no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking
unarmed." It's listed under his Unarmed Strike class ability, so really the simplest thing would be to copy-paste that sentence into the Zen Archer build.

It also sheds a little light on how this whole knot came to be in the first place. Monks have never cared about main hand or off hand before, so why would they start now?


Name Violation wrote:

Archetype features

...Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype replaces a specific class feature from its parent class.

no normal monk armor stuff applies, it is replaced

Read my post above.

#1 It does not say it replaces anything. That is necessary to actually replace something.
#2 There is no feature "Weapon and Armor Proficiency" that can be replaced. There is "Weapon Proficiency" and "Armor and Shield Proficiency".

So your point is valid as a general statement but does not apply here :-)


Hmm are class skills actually class features.

Cheliax

Sangalor wrote:
Name Violation wrote:

Archetype features

...Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype replaces a specific class feature from its parent class.

no normal monk armor stuff applies, it is replaced

Read my post above.

#1 It does not say it replaces anything. That is necessary to actually replace something.
#2 There is no feature "Weapon and Armor Proficiency" that can be replaced. There is "Weapon Proficiency" and "Armor and Shield Proficiency".

So your point is valid as a general statement but does not apply here :-)

it doesnt need to remind you it replaces anything. THE RULES FOR ARCHETYPES SAYS IT REPLACES IT


Name Violation wrote:
Sangalor wrote:
Name Violation wrote:

Archetype features

...Each alternate class feature presented in an archetype replaces a specific class feature from its parent class.

no normal monk armor stuff applies, it is replaced

Read my post above.

#1 It does not say it replaces anything. That is necessary to actually replace something.
#2 There is no feature "Weapon and Armor Proficiency" that can be replaced. There is "Weapon Proficiency" and "Armor and Shield Proficiency".

So your point is valid as a general statement but does not apply here :-)

it doesnt need to remind you it replaces anything. THE RULES FOR ARCHETYPES SAYS IT REPLACES IT

You are missing the point and you do not need to scream about it.

Look at #2 again and read it again. If there was a corresponding equally named feature your argument would have merit. But here it does not.


OK, now I see why I should not check d20pfsrd and go to the Paizo PRD in these discussions: It's labeled differently there, there is actually an entry about weapon and armor proficiency.

Therefore Soheis
- do not gain monk wis/ac bonus
- can flurry in armor and with non-monk weapons (with monk weapons they are not proficient)
- skills are gained in addition

So it's good here. Still I see no way how it can flurry with a bow according to the TWF clarification :-/

Shadow Lodge

as of right now it cant, sohei or zen archer, so they are broken archetypes. sohei is better then a zen archer until the fix both archetypes.


Starbuck_II wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:

Here is a list of class features the sohei would lose if you follow the logic that would allow them to flurry in armour:

–EVERY CLASS SKILL, (they instead gain handle animal as their ONLY CLASS SKILL)

Incorrect, they gain that skill. Nothing about replacing or editting.

Quote:


–Proficiency with monk weapons

Correct.

Quote:


–The improved unarmed strike feat

Inconclusive, neither mentions nor dismentions.

Quote:


–The ability to do lethal damage with unarmed strikes

I guess.

Quote:


–The ability to select bonus feats other than mounted combat feats

Inconclusive. Neithe mentions nor mismentions. You are reaching.

Starbuck, you're missing the point: nothing says that the Sohei CAN flurry in armour, just like how nothing says they lose unarmed strike. The only way to interpret it so that Sohei's can flurry in armour is to assume that the weapon and armour entry REPLACES the corresponding monk entry in its entirety. So if you're going to do that, you're going to have to replace EVERY OTHER similarly named entry of the monk's with the corresponding Sohei entry.

Hence how I got to the ridiculous conclusion that Sohei's have only one class skill, and how they lose bonus feats other than mounted combat feats.

Yes, I AM REACHING, but that's precisely the point. To suggest that the sohei can flurry in armour is to stretch the bounds of RAW to its ridiculous extremes. It's reaching, plain and simple, and if you aren't going to apply the rule consistently and have it lead to the ridiculous results I demonstrated, then it's cherry picking too.

NOTE: In case I haven't been clear enough, I am not personally of the opinion that Sohei's can flurry in armour, nor do I think they only have one class skill or lose improved unarmed strike.


Silent Saturn wrote:

I find it a bit odd that nobody's mentioning the part about how "There is

no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking
unarmed." It's listed under his Unarmed Strike class ability, so really the simplest thing would be to copy-paste that sentence into the Zen Archer build.

It also sheds a little light on how this whole knot came to be in the first place. Monks have never cared about main hand or off hand before, so why would they start now?

Good point! In fact by RAW, the Monk can't flurry with pure unarmed strikes, because there's no such thing as an offhand attack, but in order to use TWF at all you need to be using a weapon in your offhand! Nice catch!

Things are even more broken than we thought…

Cheliax

Bardic Dave wrote:
nothing says that the Sohei CAN flurry in armour

they SPECIFICALLY LOSE THE TEXT THAT SAYS NO FLURRY IN ARMOR. i dont know why thats hard to get

nothing in flurry says no-armor. the monks armor prof section say's no flurry in armor. now that entire armor prof section gets replaced by sohei's, which in turn has no mention of no flurry in armor


Name Violation wrote:
Bardic Dave wrote:
nothing says that the Sohei CAN flurry in armour

they SPECIFICALLY LOSE THE TEXT THAT SAYS NO FLURRY IN ARMOR. i dont know why thats hard to get

nothing in flurry says no-armor. the monks armor prof section say's no flurry in armor. now that entire armor prof section gets replaced by sohei's, which in turn has no mention of no flurry in armor

Read all my posts please. I understand what you're saying. I've always understood your point. You're saying that text from Advanced player's guide about archetypes directs that the sohei entry replaces the monk's entry in it's entirety. Got it. Thanks.

My point is that if you apply that logic consistently, it leads to stupid results, both with the Sohei class, and many other archetypes too. There are obvious contradictions in the rules, and so to say that one should slavishly follow the RAW makes no sense, because sometimes the RAW makes no sense, is unascertainable, or there might be more than one way to read the RAW.

In this case I'm attempting to demonstrate how the logic that gets you to the point where you can say "sohei's can flurry in armour" leads to ridiculous outcomes. So if a different interpretation is possible, one should go with that instead.


Why are mommy and daddy fighting?


Tiny Coffee Golem wrote:
Why are mommy and daddy fighting?

Lol, good point. I'll step back from this one now I think.

Cheliax

a lot of RAW doesnt work (titan mauler I'm looking at you)

I'm just arguing the official rules. Use what ever rules you like, but saying official rules dont say what official rules say sows chaos

Until things get properly sorted out, everythings a mess.

I'm just saying what the mess actually does, not how its intended to work


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Name Violation wrote:

a lot of RAW doesnt work (titan mauler I'm looking at you)

I'm just arguing the official rules. Use what ever rules you like, but saying official rules dont say what official rules say sows chaos

Until things get properly sorted out, everythings a mess.

I'm just saying what the mess actually does, not how its intended to work

Good. Then I guess we actually agreed all along!

EDIT: Although, I don't actually think you can genuinely say there is such a thing as an official rule with a convoluted mess like this…

Sczarni

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Bardic Dave wrote:
Silent Saturn wrote:

I find it a bit odd that nobody's mentioning the part about how "There is

no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking
unarmed." It's listed under his Unarmed Strike class ability, so really the simplest thing would be to copy-paste that sentence into the Zen Archer build.

It also sheds a little light on how this whole knot came to be in the first place. Monks have never cared about main hand or off hand before, so why would they start now?

Good point! In fact by RAW, the Monk can't flurry with pure unarmed strikes, because there's no such thing as an offhand attack, but in order to use TWF at all you need to be using a weapon in your offhand! Nice catch!

Things are even more broken than we thought…

I was actually trying to argue that things aren't really broken at all-- since all of a monk's attack are "main hand", the distinction between an offhand and a mainhand weapon is meaningless, and thus the monk's rules have consistently ignored the distinction. Which is why Zen Archers are expected to be able to flurry with one weapon-- being a monk absolves them from having to designate an offhand weapon.

The problem is that at some point along the way, the developers decided they don't want a monk to be able to execute an entire flurry with a single weapon-- I guess so that a monk wouldn't be able to get himself one cold iron siangham and bypass all the DR by executing his entire attack routine with it, or something. But, by ruling against that, they created this whole blunder.


Sorry for the rez - has there been a ruling regarding this in the last 8 months?


Theodoxus wrote:
Sorry for the rez - has there been a ruling regarding this in the last 8 months?

Yes, they just reversed their ruling a few days ago. Check the FAQ, you can flurry with a single weapon now :-)

Silver Crusade

You don't need two bows because you can flurry using the same hand. They went and reversed their own rules change.

I guess if you wanted to split your attacks and take penalties from hell you could but why would you?


So, it took them this long to change something back to the way it was in the first place? Yay progress.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Less it took them this long to change something back, more (as I understand it), they decided to make the popular misunderstanding official. From what I understand of the whole thing, the original intent of the devs was that you couldn't flurry with one weapon (hence the references to Two-Weapon Fighting). A lot of people didn't pick up on that (due to somewhat ambiguous wording in the ability description), including authors of quite a few published Paizo works. This ruling is more of a "well, I guess in the plans we have for monk in the future, we can make this play-style official". So yes, non-sarcastic progress.


You have to admit, a little sarcasm is justified at least. They made a ruling that caused some of their own printed work to stop functioning. So yeah, hitting the reset button "fixed" it. Progress.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Perhaps. I have not yet recovered from the amount of monk advocate whining that occurred about how much Paizo hated them, etc, despite the fact that I have blocked the most egregious monk threads.

I think that it is important to understand that the core issue was not a change least. It was a realization that while they thought it was clear that it worked one way, many players and even unfortunately some of the people who contributed to their printed work, thought it was clear that it worked in a different way. That they weren't able to catch it creeping into their own work is extremely unfortunate, but mistakes are made and errors slip through.

It wasn't a "we are making it so you can't do that now" so much as a "I guess we weren't clear enough, but this was the intent". Too often, people imply, or incorrectly state, that they made a conscious decision to change how the monk works, and that was not the case (again, in their minds). In particular I am referring to the numerous times it was called an errata. Clarification is the more accurate term, as they didn't change how they thought the monk worked. Quite honestly, looking at the Flurry of Blows description, I actually think it is quite clear what they intended originally. In fact I remember being a bit surprised when I found out (per-clarification) that the monk could use just one weapon to flurry. I had assumed being able to get all the attacks with a single bow was a bonus to the Flurry alteration in Zen Archer and moved right along.

The whole "hit the reset" button is really less them undoing something, and more a matter of them investigating the way others had interpreted it, factoring it into whatever other changes the may be considering, and deciding that yes, it can work that way without impeding any other changes they may make, and updating the rules according to what their customers were demanding.

51 to 95 of 95 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Why is everyone complaining about the Zen Archer being "broken"? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.

©2002–2014 Paizo Inc.®. Need help? Email customer.service@paizo.com or call 425-250-0800 during our business hours: Monday–Friday, 10 AM–5 PM Pacific Time. View our privacy policy. Paizo Inc., Paizo, the Paizo golem logo, Pathfinder, the Pathfinder logo, Pathfinder Society, GameMastery, and Planet Stories are registered trademarks of Paizo Inc., and Pathfinder Roleplaying Game, Pathfinder Campaign Setting, Pathfinder Adventure Path, Pathfinder Adventure Card Game, Pathfinder Player Companion, Pathfinder Modules, Pathfinder Tales, Pathfinder Battles, Pathfinder Online, PaizoCon, RPG Superstar, The Golem's Got It, Titanic Games, the Titanic logo, and the Planet Stories planet logo are trademarks of Paizo Inc. Dungeons & Dragons, Dragon, Dungeon, and Polyhedron are registered trademarks of Wizards of the Coast, Inc., a subsidiary of Hasbro, Inc., and have been used by Paizo Inc. under license. Most product names are trademarks owned or used under license by the companies that publish those products; use of such names without mention of trademark status should not be construed as a challenge to such status.