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

Talking About the Bodywraps of Mighty Strikes


Pathfinder RPG General Discussion

1 to 50 of 213 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.

For this Edition of Good Morning Monks! (all your monk needs and concerns addressed by people who care!), I want to talk about the bodywrap of mighty strikes.

Ravennus said wrote:

I just started on the magic item section, however, and found this piece.

It seems they tried to solve the Monk/Unarmed enhancement dilemma, but I can't see this really helping anyone.

Bodywrap of Mighty Strikes

Slot: Body
Price: 3,000 gp (+1), 12,000 gp (+2), 27,000 gp (+3), 48,000 gp (+4), 75,000 gp (+5), 108,000 gp (+6), 147,000 gp (+7)

This long cloth is wrapped around the chest multiple times like a bandage. Once per round, the wearer may add an enhancement bonus of +1 to +5 on one attack and damage roll for an unarmed strike or natural attack (for one specific attack, not all attacks made with an unarmed strike that round). The wearer may use this item an dditional time per round when his BAB reaches +6, +11, and +16.
Choosing to enhance an unarmed strike is not an action and may occur when it is not the wearer's turn (such as when making an attack of opportunity). The wearer must decide to use the item before the attack roll is made, but does not have to expend all uses at the same time. For example, if the wearer can use the item twice per round, he can use it once on his turn when making an attack and save the second for the possibility of making an attack of opportunity.
Additionally, the bodywrap can grant melee weapon special abilities to a creature's unarmed attacks, so long as those special abilities to be added apply to unarmed attacks. See Table 3-8: Melee Weapon Special Abilities (page 137) for a list of abilities. Special abilities count as additional bonuses for determining the market value of the the item, but do not modify attack or damage bonuses. Any special abilities are set at teh time of creation. A bodywrap of mighty strikes cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +7. Unlike an amulet of mighty fists, a bodywrap needs to have a +1 enhancement bonus to grant a melee weapon special ability.

From the Ultimate Equipment thread.

Now, we did have a discussion going about this item, but it got locked down prior to GenCon (Lack of Monk Gear in Ultimate Equipment) but I wanted to bring this subject back up.

My own thoughts? Sigh.

While it could be useful (especially for a monk who uses a mix of unarmed strikes and a weapon), I find the mechanics of this item very clunky. Is there a single other magic item anywhere in Pathfinder whose function literally depends upon the Base Attack Bonus of the character wielding it? I don't know of a single one. Low BAB? You get one use. Medium? Two. High? Three. Very high? Four. It works like nothing else in Pathfinder, and that I find . . . disturbing.

Second, you are literally paying more for this item and getting less than you would be for a magic weapon. A +2 longsword (for example) gives you a +2 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls for every single attack you make with that weapon, and it does so for the price of 8,315 gp. If you are fourth level, you make 1 attack on your turn with it, and you get the bonus. AND, if an opponent provokes an attack of opportunity, you get the bonus on that attack as well. AND if you have the feat Combat Reflexes and an 18 Dexterity, you might get up to four more attacks of opportunity in that single round.

At fourth level. Up to six attacks which the 8,315 gp price longsword +2 gives its full bonus on attack and damage rolls. Each round. Sure, it is not likely, but it can be done. At 20th level? You can get four attacks, plus up to another nine attacks of opportunity (depending on your Dex, if you have Combat Reflexes), plus one from haste, plus two from the feat Medusa's Wrath (if you can get your opponent in the proper condition) . . . for that same price of 8,315 gp.

The magic in the sword doesn't change according to game mechanics based upon your level or Base Attack Bonus or class. It remains the same, which is what it should do as a permanent magical item. Once enchanted, it should give its bonus and not worry about who or what wields it.

Not so the bodywraps. To get that +2 bonus, you are spending 12,000 gp (~50% more than longsword, mind) AND you only get that bonus on handful of attacks based upon your Base Attack Bonus: a pure game mechanic that cannot be explained (at least easily) in in-game fluff. You get to add that bonus on the attack rolls and damage rolls of either 1, 2, 3, or 4 attacks, depending on your BAB. Not on how much you paid for the item.

Does anyone else find this odd? Or am I the only out there who considers this item to use one of worst in-game mechanics I have ever seen in my 26 years of gaming?

You pay more to get less. It just boggles the imagination.

EDIT: Another glitch is that you can vary between the number of attacks you receive a bonus on as a monk, even without changing level. Your BAB is medium, except when you flurry . . . then it is equal to your class level. So, when you flurry, you (sometimes) gain 1 more attack you can add the enhancement bonus on. But when you move and make a standard attack (and let's say an attack of opportunity), you lose that extra attack because your BAB has dropped. It is a wonky mechanic.

Third, this item does the same thing that amulet of mighty fists does: it enhances unarmed strikes AND unarmed attacks. When are we players who like monks going to get an item that doesn't also enhance natural attacks? We keep asking and begging, but we don't ever get any results. Every other class does (see brawling armor property in Ultimate Equipment for details, I think there is a thread on that subject right now, LOL), but monks have to share their stuff with druids, animal companions, critters, and edilons (however they are spelled).

And as usual, it is more efficient for them. Why? Because few animal companions exceed three attacks, many have two, and some have just one. A mid-level animal companion will have a high enough BAB to get the bonus on all their attacks (un-hasted, of course). So for those classes and critters, it may well be cost-effective, especially compared to the very expensive AoMF. When will monks finally have something of their own, something that enhances their unarmed strikes, but not natural attacks, something that doesn't cost an arm and a leg? When?

Finally, the location it takes up: the body. Really? You had to put this in the same slot as the Monk's Robes, didn't you? What about the Chest Slot, that never gets any love. That way, at least, it could be worn with the robes at the same time. You get the Monk's Robes, or you get . . . well, you get the shaft if you take this item, that's for certain (in my opinion).

And the name! Come on, you folks couldn't come up with a better name? Bodywraps of mighty strikes? It reminds me of baseball, where a strike is a swing and a miss, so I do admit it is thematically appropriate. From a certain point of view.

All that being said, it might be useful to certain builds that rely on a mix of weapons and unarmed strikes. But frankly, I can't see it. Would your character buy one of these? And if so why?

Tell us your thoughts. Share your own experience and impressions. And let's discuss the bodywraps of mighty strikes.

Master Arminas


Monk equipment is awful all over. Brass knuckles were good and then... well, you know what happened to them...


OK, here's my thoughts...

Monks aren't the only ones capable of using unarmed strikes/natural attacks. So quit acting like every single item that enhances those should be made just to make monks happy. That would be a good start.

As far as the item itself? For its cost it's overpriced IMO. 147k maxed out for limited use is a bit much. The way they calculated the usage is odd, but I don't really have an issue with it, unique mechanics keep things from being stale. It would be moderately better if it was for every attack you received based off your BAB, thus allowing TWFers and monks to gain a benefit on all their static granted attacks, or forgo the bonus on some for potential AoO's. As it is currently, I think dropping the price down about 1/3rd would make the cost less an issue.

I really don't see an issue with it taking the body slot, there isn't much competition for that slot for a lot of classes, and it does make you have to choose between Monk's Robes or this. Options and choices are nice, and I for one am not a fan of best in slot type items, I cheer every time viable options for slots come up.


Krigare wrote:

OK, here's my thoughts...

Monks aren't the only ones capable of using unarmed strikes/natural attacks. So quit acting like every single item that enhances those should be made just to make monks happy. That would be a good start.

As far as the item itself? For its cost it's overpriced IMO. 147k maxed out for limited use is a bit much. The way they calculated the usage is odd, but I don't really have an issue with it, unique mechanics keep things from being stale. It would be moderately better if it was for every attack you received based off your BAB, thus allowing TWFers and monks to gain a benefit on all their static granted attacks, or forgo the bonus on some for potential AoO's. As it is currently, I think dropping the price down about 1/3rd would make the cost less an issue.

I really don't see an issue with it taking the body slot, there isn't much competition for that slot for a lot of classes, and it does make you have to choose between Monk's Robes or this. Options and choices are nice, and I for one am not a fan of best in slot type items, I cheer every time viable options for slots come up.

Read SKR's posts on the Ultimate Equipment: What's Missing? thread. This item was intended for monks, Krigare, as a less expensive alternative to the AoMF. But, they kept that frustrating phrase ('can be used with natural attacks') in there, didn't drop the price nearly enough to matter (for what it does), and cut out more than half of a monks attacks . . . heck, closer to two-thirds!

That is where I am coming from. It was made specifically for monks and it . . . well, I won't say the word I am thinking here.

MA

RPG Superstar 2008 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not sure we needed this thread again. I am going to ask folks to, before they reply, think about if they're saying anything that hasn't already been said a dozen times.


Ross Byers wrote:
I'm not sure we needed this thread again. I am going to ask folks to, before they reply, think about if they're saying anything that hasn't already been said a dozen times.

I did hold back the hyperbole, Ross. :) And we should be able to discuss the item in a reasonable manner. After all, most of us here are adults.

MA

Liberty's Edge

I only wish the apparent fear of giving monks to much power was applied to metamagic rods...

Someone show me the math that would make allowing monks to enhance their fists at the same cost as TWF without taking a slot a problem?

I agree MA has reached a point where his posts are driving the debate away rather than forward, but he's not wrong that there is a problem and that this item is frightening bad at what it was intended to do.

It's like someone was cooking a soup, tasted it, realized it was a bit bland and then added a large piece of plastic wrap.

It didn't change much about the taste issue, but it made the soup less desirable to eat, and make the work of correcting the issues that much more difficult all the same.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The forum post that begat the Bodywraps of Mighty Strikes. And a comment talking about the iteratives issue. Merge the two together, and we get the BoMS.

So really, this is all Evil Lincoln and Zark's fault. EL spawned the idea, Zark got the idea of iteratives in the devs' minds :P

My first impression upon reading it was that "hah! that's brilliant."


  • It's cheaper than the amulet.
  • It doesn't use the amulet slot, freeing that up for the AC boosting items you guys constantly complain that monks don't get. Sure, you have to choose between it and the monk's robes, but those are something like +1 or +2 AC and +1 damage in most cases.
  • It isn't by-definition overpowered for surpassing Core options.
  • It emulates using one weapon to attack for everything but, on average, 1 less attack IF something provokes an AoO from you.
  • The "Combat Reflexes" argument is silly. A spear doesn't take advantage of your Weapon Focus (greatsword) feat, but that doesn't say anything about the spear.
  • I can't think of any other body slot that actually makes sense for this sort of thing. it affects your whole body, not just your chest. A bracer enhancing your kicks doesn't make sense thematically. Same goes for a vest. Plus now monks can use that overpowered quickrunner's shirt to solve the issue brought up about FoB not meshing well with their movement specialty.


Yes, but monks are not the only unarmed attackers. And while it may suck, natural attacks area form of unarmed attacks, just with tooth,claw or horn etc. So because there is an overlap there, yes, it will say natural attacks as well. I'm sorry, but I understand there are monk issues, I know they need help, and while I'd like to see them get it, itemization is only a small part of the issue, and probably the least important (to my point of view, others will a different opinion, that's fine.)

Like I said, there is more than one thing I would do to fix it. It isn't just a one or the other. If it was every attack granted off BAB (so TWF and flurry would cap at 7) with the option to forgo the bonus on an attack and save it for an AoO if desired, and dropping the price by 1/3rdish, I could see it being viable.

And before you say it/ask it/whatever, no...I don't think any item should be created expressly for one class and one class alone. Benefit one class more than others is fine, but items that basically say "If you aren't class x you can't use it" are bad item design IMO. And yes, I know such things exist, and yes I have issues with them, regardless of who made them.

Liberty's Edge

Those +1 or +2 to AC stacks with pretty much everything. And that +1 to damage is on all attacks.

And you forgot the extra stunning fist per day. All for 13k

For just a 1,000 gold less I can add +2 to one attack each round that doesn't stack with most things.

I just wish the same amount of paranoia about overpowering monks was applied to the design of metamagic rods.

If monks who functionally get the same bonuses at two weapon fighters were also able to enhance unarmed strikes at a comparable cost, the game collapses.

But if I can carry rods that can force re-rolls of SoD spells...

MA is over the top, he's not helping, but this was a short bus item well below the high standard of excellence Paizo normally reaches.


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yea, but you can buy an amulet of natural armor +2 for 8k, and you'll always get that +2 AC. Not just at certain levels. And since it's an enhancement bonus to natural armor, it'll stack with most other things since IIRC enhancement bonuses to NA is fairly rare, while plain old NA isn't so much.

And if I recall, you were the one who was arguing that stunning fist was just about useless due to the low save, having to hit, and...a few other places where it could fail. I was considering bringing it up, but your argument on the Stunning Fist made me think "Nah, not worth mentioning it." Maybe that was Dabbler...

I heard faint rumblings about not wanting to keep Metamagic Rods the way they were, but they probably were kept for system compatibility. Maybe it was just SKR rumbling about it.


Cheapy wrote:

Yea, but you can buy an amulet of natural armor +2 for 8k, and you'll always get that +2 AC. Not just at certain levels. And since it's an enhancement bonus to natural armor, it'll stack with most other things since IIRC enhancement bonuses to NA is fairly rare, while plain old NA isn't so much.

And if I recall, you were the one who was arguing that stunning fist was just about useless due to the low save, having to hit, and...a few other places where it could fail. I was considering bringing it up, but your argument on the Stunning Fist made me think "Nah, not worth mentioning it." Maybe that was Dabbler...

I heard faint rumblings about not wanting to keep Metamagic Rods the way they were, but they probably were kept for system compatibility. Maybe it was just SKR rumbling about it.

That was Dabbler, Cheapy. And Ciretose, I thought I toned down my sense of outrage in my opening post on this thread. Tried to keep calm and fairly sedate, at least for me. Did I not succeed?

MA


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber

The important part is that one of you lot did convince me of something :p

Liberty's Edge

Cheapy wrote:

Yea, but you can buy an amulet of natural armor +2 for 8k, and you'll always get that +2 AC. Not just at certain levels. And since it's an enhancement bonus to natural armor, it'll stack with most other things since IIRC enhancement bonuses to NA is fairly rare, while plain old NA isn't so much.

And if I recall, you were the one who was arguing that stunning fist was just about useless due to the low save, having to hit, and...a few other places where it could fail. I was considering bringing it up, but your argument on the Stunning Fist made me think "Nah, not worth mentioning it." Maybe that was Dabbler...

I heard faint rumblings about not wanting to keep Metamagic Rods the way they were, but they probably were kept for system compatibility. Maybe it was just SKR rumbling about it.

Except now the monk can self cast barkskin...or just have it cast on them.

The monk bonus is awesome because it stacks with everything (and works against touch AC).

I think stunning fist can be very useful, if you can hit. Even if it is only a 25% success on a hit, that means 1 out of 4 times you hit you will get to flurry next round.

And considering the save is 10+ 1/2 Character level +wisdom, 25% is actually fairly low.

The issue is you can't hit. This item could help a stunning focused build except you lose access to the monk robe which gives more stuns AND AC and Damage.


meh... i DO wonder, why they just didn't do the OBVIOUS option? enchanting ONE UAS attack.
'UAS wrap', it covers ONE UAS weapon, occupying said slot (hands, feet, head, elbow/arm[bracer])
and is treated as one weapon to enhance as per normal... maybe have a flat cost adjustment if they think it needs to.
you can make as many AoOs and Iteratives with it as you can with one weapon.
getting two of them is probably not going to be cheaper than AoMF, except AoMF can add special enchants without +1 first.
it is donned/equipped like armor, so isn't quickly swappable.
that's what people wanted, right? simple, straight up, non-objectionable. WHY NOT?
how does making people track how many attacks/round they can make/have made (which changes if they flurry) improve gameplay?

question: WHY limit the total bonus equivalent to +7, rather than +10? that's just wierd IMHO.


i think what's being ignored here is that the item can apparently add enhancement bonus/special abilities ON TOP OF your enhancements from Amulet of Mighty Fist (actual enhancement bonus wouldn't stack, but special abilities from either side would combine with enhancement bonus). That's a pretty powerful usage, and certainly worth the extra cost vs. a weapon. On that account, I think it's not a bad item...

That said, that doesn't preclude that people were really requesting the single-UAS 'weapon enchantment' like I described, which this item is sub-par at emulating.

Liberty's Edge

They did with brass knuckles, they took it away for flavor reasons (correctly I feel) and never replaced it.

Which is where we are at.

To be clear, the outrage at this item is not because it can't have some use in some builds, but that it seems to clearly demonstrate someone in charge is scared to death about giving monks unarmed strike the same enhancement option other classes get.

Which many of us think is misplaced concern that seems to show a lack of agreement/understanding about what we say the problem is.

It is like saying to someone "My car broke down and I have a 30 mile commute to work" and they say "You can borrow my bicycle!"


perhaps somebody is. i seem to remember SKR being quite fine with doing a '1 UAS weapon' option.
is everybody also reading the potential stacking situation like how i am?
normally you couldn't use enhancements/effects from two sources even if they applied to the same weapon,
but this is specifically saying you 'ADD' it to one UAS/NW weapon, so it seems to work...?


I actually like this item for Dragon Disciples, as if they get up to a +16 BAB, they can use this item for up to four natural attacks such as their primary natural attacks in Dragon Form II. Also, since you can enchant an AoMF with stuff like Holy or Unholy, and elemental enchantments or even a Vorpal enchantment for extra fun. Sure it's expensive, but it stacks and it means the primary natural attacks can beat the +10 rule and can get up to a +12.

Yeah, I'm starting to think that this wasn't the best thing for Monks, but it isn't half bad for other Natural Weapon users. I think that Beastmorph Vivisectionists just got another boost to their power as well.


i don't think the +10 rule can be broken actually, but you would still save cash and have more flexibility by it.
(if it can't be broken by a class ability, i don't see why this item would break it)

Liberty's Edge

You can't go past the +10 and the once per round means once per round, not once per attack.

This is why AoMF is so expensive. It isn't that it is over priced, it's that it is priced for something that has 4 or more arms.

Liberty's Edge

It's a lame item for monks, but it rocks sauce for a Rogue/Duelist using Crane Style and Two-Weapon Fighting... Just saying.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Cheapy wrote:
And if I recall, you were the one who was arguing that stunning fist was just about useless due to the low save, having to hit, and...a few other places where it could fail. I was considering bringing it up, but your argument on the Stunning Fist made me think "Nah, not worth mentioning it." Maybe that was Dabbler...

It was me. The problem with stunning fist is you only get one attempt per round no matter how many attacks you make, it's blown if you miss, it's blown if they save, and it's blown if they have DR you cannot get through (another common monk problem).

Looking at the bodywraps, it's as if somebody thought: "Hey, we need an item for monks, because the AoMF is overpriced for them, what can we do that won't make the AoMF redundant?" and came up with this as a compromise. The big problem is that like many 'monk' items it works better for many non-monk options than it does for monks. In this case, because it works best for higher BAB and a limited number of attacks. Monks have lower BAB and many attacks. I mean seriously, did nobody THINK about that?

If they wanted an item that would help the monk but not put the AoMF out of a job, why not give it a bonus to hit only? That wouldn't put the AoMF out of the running but it would certainly address the monk's primary deficit. Instead this monstrosity rears it's head.

Honestly, the best item for monks I have seen in the UE is the Quick Runner's Shirt. Once per day you can move AND flurry! Now we are talking. I just wonder when it will be errata'd.


i believe the FAQ for flurry BAB would mean you WOULD use the effective full BAB from flurry for this item's number of attacks IF you did flurry on your turn.

'?


Pathfinder Adventure Path, Campaign Setting, Companion, Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Dabbler wrote:
Cheapy wrote:
And if I recall, you were the one who was arguing that stunning fist was just about useless due to the low save, having to hit, and...a few other places where it could fail. I was considering bringing it up, but your argument on the Stunning Fist made me think "Nah, not worth mentioning it." Maybe that was Dabbler...

It was me. The problem with stunning fist is you only get one attempt per round no matter how many attacks you make, it's blown if you miss, it's blown if they save, and it's blown if they have DR you cannot get through (another common monk problem).

Looking at the bodywraps, it's as if somebody thought: "Hey, we need an item for monks, because the AoMF is overpriced for them, what can we do that won't make the AoMF redundant?" and came up with this as a compromise. The big problem is that like many 'monk' items it works better for many non-monk options than it does for monks. In this case, because it works best for higher BAB and a limited number of attacks. Monks have lower BAB and many attacks. I mean seriously, did nobody THINK about that?

If they wanted an item that would help the monk but not put the AoMF out of a job, why not give it a bonus to hit only? That wouldn't put the AoMF out of the running but it would certainly address the monk's primary deficit. Instead this monstrosity rears it's head.

Honestly, the best item for monks I have seen in the UE is the Quick Runner's Shirt. Once per day you can move AND flurry! Now we are talking. I just wonder when it will be errata'd.

When flurrying, they have full BAB. That means that the BoMS will be based off the higher BAB.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

Yes it will, but it also means that it will only apply to half of their attacks. Whereas for a full-BAB class not TWFing it would apply to all the attacks, or to a relatively advanced animal companion it would be the same unless they had more than three natural attacks. You have an item that is in effect 50% effective for the weakest user and 100% effective for the stronger users. The net effect is that in proportion the monk is worse off, not better off.

As I stated in the previous thread, the best use I can think of for this item is to use in conjunction with the AoMF to provide special properties you won't necessarily need on all your attacks, with the AoMF providing the enhancement bonus.


Just going to throw this out there.

The Body-wraps of Mighty Strikes are good for a Monk who fights with a Monk Weapon and Unarmed Strike for Flurry.

That way you pay normal price for a weapon(kama, temple sword, etc.) and then pay about 1.5 cost for the BoMS. (Which can also stack with AoMF if done correctly.)

Liberty's Edge

Brain in a Jar wrote:

Just going to throw this out there.

The Body-wraps of Mighty Strikes are good for a Monk who fights with a Monk Weapon and Unarmed Strike for Flurry.

That way you pay normal price for a weapon(kama, temple sword, etc.) and then pay about 1.5 cost for the BoMS. (Which can also stack with AoMF if done correctly.)

But that only works in a Christmas tree game where you can afford to invest in both monk weapons (both hands now, remember) AND this wrap.


he said 'fights with a monk weapon and unarmed strike'.
the other hand is UAS, affected by this item.
NOT investing in 2 weapons AND this item.
so it's probably not much different in price compared to an AoMF,
except you are using the enchanted monk weapon that you want to,
without ALSO having to spend on the AoMF that doesn't apply to said monk weapon.
that would the christmas tree version, i.e. Vanilla Core Monk.

Liberty's Edge

If you have a monk weapon, presumably you bought it.

And you need two monk weapons to flurry.

Plus the wrap.


PRD wrote:
When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

you can flurry with a monk weapon and uas, one as main-hand, one as off-hand.

or using TWO DISTINCT UAS 'weapons' (i.e. hands/feet) for main and off hand. or TWO monk weapons as main and off hand.
a rogue or ranger with 2WF can do the exact same thing. get yourself a coffee, man! ;-)

EDIT: clarification in blue

Liberty's Edge

You are out of the loop. SKR and Jason clarified that it works like TWF and requires two weapons.

That is what lead to all the monk outrage threads. MA or Dabbler have the link I am sure.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
ciretose wrote:

You are out of the loop. SKR and Jason clarified that it works like TWF and requires two weapons.

That is what lead to all the monk outrage threads. MA or Dabbler have the link I am sure.

How exactly is a Unarmed Strike and a Temple Sword not two weapons?


Please tell me he is not for real.

ciretose, go read the monk classes unarmed strike. Pay particular attention to the part about what it counts as.


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
ciretose wrote:

You are out of the loop. SKR and Jason clarified that it works like TWF and requires two weapons.

That is what lead to all the monk outrage threads. MA or Dabbler have the link I am sure.

The Flurry text reads:

Flurry of Blows wrote:


When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon (kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, and siangham) as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).

Any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a monk weapon. If it was just US or just weapons, there would be no combination.

As I understand, the uproar was caused by the clarification that you must have 2 distinct "weapons" for the flurry attacks. Meaning you could not take all the flurry attacks with a single weapon (i.e. a monk using a single temple sword for all attacks). You needed to either alternate weapon/US or have two distinct weapons. This also has caused some unresolved questions regarding the sohei using a 2-hander and the zen archer when using flurry.

There was another layer, because I believe it was also ruled that different unarmed strikes (for example, each fist) needed to be enhanced separately by castings of Greater Magic Fang, and the monk would have to alternate different unarmed strikes while flurrying, rather than using a single, GMF-enhanced fist for all attacks.

Thus, an enchanted kama as one weapon and a bodywrap-enhanced fist as the other is completely fine.


of course you can 2WF/Flurry just fine with a 2-handed weapon, using head-butt/kick UAS as the off-hands...
people were certainly disappointed that they couldn't make ALL the attacks with one weapon though.
i'm pretty sure the zen archer will be errata'd...
it is rather frustrating that paizo has published so much stuff that is in conflict with/not understanding the core rule functionality.
(see pole-arm fighter archetype specially allowing trip with polearms when that was always allowed, no different than weapon disarms)


Pathfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

@Quandary - With the sohei, I believe the issue was a bit more complex when wielding a reach weapon, as they may not have anything to hit with US (unless the DM allows them to attack the ground), but you are correct.

Icyshadow wrote:

Bashing people who see that Flurry of Blows got weaker after the errata is not cool. Consider your post flagged, Benchak.

And yeah, when I told of the errata to a friend of mine (who now is the Necromancer in my Kingmaker game), he shrugged and said he'll ignore it.

I admitted that it was a wise choice to make, since I am doing the very same thing. Nobody's going to tell me to shut down my game for doing so.

I don't see Benchak's comment as bashing, merely an understandable observation regarding the state of the monk debates. You just need to look at the recent thread discussing whether the enhancement bonuses from AoMF granted monks the ability to bypass DR. Some of the monk advocates were the ones bending over backwards to interpret that they do not, even though in many people's minds there was enough reason to assume that it did. It at times felt like some of them just wanted another reason to complain. Granted, I am of the opinion that there is plenty of evidence that AoMF can allow bypassing DR, so my perspective on the thread is colored by that.

Also, if I recall correctly, the Flurry issue was more of a clarification, not an erratum. The devs always meant it to be interpreted that way, and a sizable (is less vocal) portion of players had understood it as functioning that way (I believe even Treantmonk understood that you could not use just weapon for all flurry attacks). Nothing really was changed, if was just emphasized that when it says "like Two-Weapon Fighting", it actually means that you need two+ weapons. Where is gets complicated is the fact that some of the Paizo adventure material does use the incorrect interpretation and has monks flurrying using only one weapon. And I agree, if you would rather have flurry work with one weapon, go for it. Nothing says you always have to follow RAW, and it is not gamebreaking to allow.


I fail to see the logic in a Monk being forced to use two weapons while Flurrying. Was it that way in 3.5e as well?


all the monk weapons are 1/handed or double weapons... 2WF material... makes sense to me.
that, and the 'as if using 2wf' (2wf = TWO WEAPON fighting) wording kind of seals the deal.
they SHOULD qualify for 2WF feats as if they gained the base 2WF feats per their BAB though, IMHO
(2wpn defense, rend, etc)


Flurry was different critter in 3.5 all together. It wasn't TWF under a different guise, mechanically or in principle. It started out similar, but vanishing penalties, extra attacks at higher bonuses etc. Pretty sure someone around here can give the exact specifics if it matters.


dual-wielding nunchuks. what more can you say?


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Brain in a Jar wrote:

Just going to throw this out there.

The Body-wraps of Mighty Strikes are good for a Monk who fights with a Monk Weapon and Unarmed Strike for Flurry.

That way you pay normal price for a weapon(kama, temple sword, etc.) and then pay about 1.5 cost for the BoMS. (Which can also stack with AoMF if done correctly.)

So it's perfectly OK if you can cough up to...let me see:

1 x normal weapon cost (weapon)
+ 1.5 x normal weapon cost (body wraps) (body slot)
+ 2.5 x normal weapon cost (Amulet of Mighty Fists) (amulet slot)
= 5 x normal weapon cost and two body slots, giving up the monk's robe and the amulet of natural armour just to get the equivalence of two normal magic weapons. Gosh. Hang on, am I the only person who thinks that doing this for two mediocre/inferior weapons TOTALLY SUCKS?

Note:
As for the AoMF and DR, I am of the opinion it bypass DR just like a weapon. Only a few monk advocates (notably Master Arminas) were of the opinion that it didn't. Mind you I think the general feeling from him wasn't that it wouldn't bypass DR, but that a DM may well rule such based on the wording.


Quandary wrote:
Dual-wielding nunchuks. What more can you say?

If a DM told me I have to dual-wield nunchuks or else I don't get to Flurry, I'd show him a picture of Bruce Lee (who I've always seen using just one nunchuk), and ask him to compare to a picture of Michelangelo from TMNT (who is an idiot wielding two somehow) before getting up and leaving the table, presumably followed by the other players either calling the DM out or following me out of the door like they did in the last campaign where the DM made me wanna bang my head to a wall.


the only point of getting AoMF AND the Bodywrap is that they stack, which given the exponential cost escalation of Enhancement Bonus/Equivalents is a way to SAVE money, even with the higher cost of AoMF. That AoMF lets you start adding special abilities without an initial +1 just makes that even more easy. If you think it's too expensive, then don't do it, simple as that.

i'm not really sure why people are surprised about Flurry working like 2WF: it directly states that upfront. The entire pricing structure for AoMF as used for UAS/Flurry only makes a shred of sense if Flurry is working like Two Weapon Fighting, with, surprise, TWO WEAPONS.

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

1 person marked this as a favorite.

@Icyshadow

I don't have any problem with people who say flurry of blows got weaker post clarification. I don't agree (I think it was never as strong as they thought it was), but I understand where they're coming from. It's a reasonable opinion, based on how flurry of blows worked historically and how it's been portrayed in some of Paizo's products.

It's going from "Flurry works like TWF" to "you can't use unarmed strikes as one of your two weapons because you need to be holding two physical monk weapons to flurry" that makes no sense to me. That's something that no one is saying, anywhere, ever, at all, and yet ciretose seems to be claiming Sean and Jason said just that.

It's such a bizarre interpretation of what Sean and Jason have said that I can't help but wonder if there's some motivation behind it. Maybe that's bashing, I don't know. It's certainly off-topic, so maybe I'll just keep my ponderings to myself. :D


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Quandary wrote:
the only point of getting AoMF AND the Bodywrap is that they stack, which given the exponential cost escalation of Enhancement Bonus/Equivalents is a way to SAVE money, even with the higher cost of AoMF. That AoMF lets you start adding special abilities without an initial +1 just makes that even more easy. If you think it's too expensive, then don't do it, simple as that.

I can see your point in this, a +1 body wrap and a +1 AoMF together cost 8Kgp. This is the same as a +2 weapon, only it's not as functional as a +2 weapon because in the monk's hands it only works as a +1 weapon in one hand and a +2 weapon in the other. Now this may seem reasonably at this level, but look at the next step up, cost wise, which is a +1 AoMF and +2 BW, they add to 17Kgp. That's the equivelant of a +3 weapon in one hand and a +1 weapon in the other. That might be cheaper than a +3 and a +1 weapon, but it's more expensive than two +2 weapons which is where the monk would rather be I am sure. Remember, you can't stack enhancement bonuses so one of these is only adding properties. That means the monk is still at +0 with half his attacks or only +1 with all of them.

Next step again and it costs 47Kgp to get a +2 AoMF and +2 BW. That's the equivelant of a +4 and a +2 weapon, but only slightly less than a +3 and a +4 weapon. Now the monk is falling behind in total enhancement, and is falling further behind in enhancement to hit as he's locked down at +2 maximum, while the weapon user is laughing at +4 and +3 if he wants it. Of course the monk could just focus on the AoMF and get +3 at the price, and keep the +1 BWs, then he's only behind on to hit on half his attacks, excluding MAD.

Here's a question, is a +1 Body Wrap worth more than a monk's robe?

Yes, I though so. Unless the monk has serious cash to throw around, the item is almost redundant on publication. The same is true of the various amulets that were clearly designed to bypass DR - in overall functionality they are out of the running before we start, because the monk needs the bonus to hit from the AoMF more than he needs functionality getting past ONE form of DR. Unless he has the spare cash to carry around loads of the things and change amulet every fight - in which case he's better off with the higher bonus of the AoMF which will bypass DR anyway.

Now the body wrap would be good if rather than giving a bonus to hit and damage on only a some attacks instead gave you a bonus to hit only on all attacks. At the price, that would be very useful. It's getting the attacks to hit that the monk it struggling with after all, so the body wrap can actually keep him up with the TWFing fighter in terms of hits and bypassing DR, but he loses out on damage. I can live with that, as the monk is actually getting in the hits. This actually is useful to the monk, and the AoMF can then just add in properties on a when-it's-affordable basis. The same would be true if the monk's ki-strike gave him an enhancement bonus to hit (only to hit) as well. The AoMF becomes nice gravy, the body wrap becomes handy too, as they provide properties or bonuses to damage.


Icyshadow wrote:
Quandary wrote:
Dual-wielding nunchuks. What more can you say?
If a DM told me I have to dual-wield nunchuks or else I don't get to Flurry, I'd show him a picture of Bruce Lee (who I've always seen using just one nunchuk), and ask him to compare to a picture of Michelangelo from TMNT (who is an idiot wielding two somehow) before getting up and leaving the table, presumably followed by the other players either calling the DM out or following me out of the door like they did in the last campaign where the DM made me wanna bang my head to a wall.

First off you don't have to wield two Nunchaku, you could use one and use unarmed strike with it to Flurry. (Plenty of the "iconic" monk figures used a weapon plus unarmed strikes.)

I gove you Bruce Lee wielding two nunchaku.
http://www.weapons-universe.com/Martial_Arts/Nunchaku.shtml

Also no one is bashing people for "thinking" Flurry is weaker.

Cirtose said:

Ciretose wrote:
But that only works in a Christmas tree game where you can afford to invest in both monk weapons (both hands now, remember) AND this wrap.
Ciretose wrote:

If you have a monk weapon, presumably you bought it.

And you need two monk weapons to flurry.

Plus the wrap.

Ciretose wrote:

You are out of the loop. SKR and Jason clarified that it works like TWF and requires two weapons.

That is what lead to all the monk outrage threads. MA or Dabbler have the link I am sure.

Which is just plain wrong. The Flurry "change" was that it functioned as two-weapon fighting with perks(effective free feats, increased BAB).

People got mad since they liked using Flurry with a single weapon.

Cirtose was saying a Monk would need two monk weapons and the body wraps.

Oh an Dabbler i understand, but the Bodywraps are only good if you are using a monk weapon with them. In my opinion at least.

1 to 50 of 213 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | next > last >>
Paizo / Messageboards / Paizo Publishing / Pathfinder® / Pathfinder RPG / General Discussion / Talking About the Bodywraps of Mighty Strikes 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.