|
#### Core Monk Cameron Stats: Lvl 11: Unarmed ####
Core Monk Cameron: Human Monk 11
Init +4; Sense Perception +22
## DEFENSE ##
AC 30 (+4 mage armor, +4 monk, +2 Dex, +3 Wis, +1 dodge, +4 nat, +1 defl, +1 insight); Special Mobility
HP 91 (11d8+11+11+11)
Fort [7] +12, Ref [7] +12, Will [7] +13; Special +2 v. ench., Dragon Style (+2 v. sleep, paralysis, stun), improved evasion; cloak +3
Immune disease, poison
## OFFENSE ##
Speed 60 ft.; Special Ignore difficult terrain when charge, run, withdraw; can charge through allies
Flurry No Style unarmed strike +16/+16/+11/+11/+6 (2d8+15/19-20x2)
Atk = +9 (bab), +7 Str, +2 enh, +1 foc, -3 pwr atk
Dmg = +7 Str, +2 enh, +6 pwr atk
Flurry Dragon Style unarmed strike +16/+16/+11/+11/+6 (2d8+21, 2d8+18/19-20x2 plus shaken 1d4+7)
Dmg = +13/+10 Str …
Special dragon style (dragon ferocity), flurry of blows, stunning fist (12/d, DC 18)
## KI POWERS (8 ki points) ##
barkskin [+4, 110 min] (1)
## STATISTICS ##
Str 24* Dex 14 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 16* Cha 8
BAB +8/+3; Flurry +9/+9/+4/+4/-1
Feats Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Dragon Ferocity, Dragon Style, Improved Critical (unarmed), Power Attack [-3/+6], Skill Focus (UMD), Spring Attack, Toughness, Weapon Focus (unarmed)
Ki Powers barkskin (1)
Skills Acrobatics [11] +16, Climb [1] +11, Diplomacy [8] +7, Escape Artist [1] +6, Knowledge (history) [1] +4, Knowledge (religion) [1] +4, Perception [11] +22*, Profession (stunt double) [1] +7, Ride [1] +6, Sense Motive [6] +12, Stealth [1] +6, Swim [1] +11, UMD [11] +20
Traits Dangerously Curious, Reactionary
Race Traits Bonus feat, skilled
Class Abilities bonus feats [x4], diamond body, flurry of blows, improved evasion, ki pool (8 points), maneuver training, purity of body, slow fall (50 ft.), still mind, stunning fist (12/d*, DC 18), wholeness of body; AC bonus (+4*), fast movement (+30), unarmed strike (lawful, 2d8*)
## EQUIPMENT ##
Offense Amulet of Mighty Fists +2, Belt of Giant Strength +4, Monk’s Robe; Defense Cloak of Resistance +3, Headband of Inspired Wisdom +2, Ring of Protection +1, Ioun Stone (Dusty Rose Prism); Other Eyes of the Eagle, Handy Haversack, Ring of Feather Falling; Cash 10,300 gp
|
|
#### Core Monk Cameron Stats: Lvl 11: Temple Sword ####
Core Monk Cameron: Human Monk 11
Init +4; Sense Perception +22
## DEFENSE ##
AC 30 (+4 mage armor, +4 monk, +2 Dex, +3 Wis, +1 dodge, +4 nat, +1 defl, +1 insight); Special Mobility
HP 91 (11d8+11+11+11)
Fort [7] +12, Ref [7] +12, Will [7] +13; Special +2 v. ench., Dragon Style (+2 v. sleep, paralysis, stun), improved evasion; cloak +3
Immune disease, poison
## OFFENSE ##
Speed 60 ft.; Special Ignore difficult terrain when charge, run, withdraw; can charge through allies
Flurry temple sword +17/+17/+12/+12/+7 (1d8+19/17-20x2)
Atk = +9 (bab), +7 Str, +3 enh, +1 foc, -3 pwr atk
Dmg = +7 Str, +3 enh, +9 pwr atk
Special dragon style, flurry of blows, stunning fist (12/d, DC 18)
## KI POWERS (8 ki points) ##
barkskin [+4, 110 min] (1)
## STATISTICS ##
Str 24* Dex 14 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 16* Cha 8
BAB +8/+3; Flurry +9/+9/+4/+4/-1
Feats Combat Reflexes, Dodge, Dragon Style, Exotic Weapon Proficiency (temple sword), Improved Critical (temple sword), Power Attack [-3/+6], Skill Focus (UMD), Spring Attack, Toughness, Weapon Focus (temple sword)
Ki Powers barkskin (1)
Skills Acrobatics [11] +16, Climb [1] +11, Diplomacy [8] +7, Escape Artist [1] +6, Knowledge (history) [1] +4, Knowledge (religion) [1] +4, Perception [11] +22*, Profession (stunt double) [1] +7, Ride [1] +6, Sense Motive [6] +12, Stealth [1] +6, Swim [1] +11, UMD [11] +20
Traits Dangerously Curious, Reactionary
Race Traits Bonus feat, skilled
Class Abilities bonus feats [x4], diamond body, flurry of blows, improved evasion, ki pool (8 points), maneuver training, purity of body, slow fall (50 ft.), still mind, stunning fist (12/d*, DC 18), wholeness of body; AC bonus (+4*), fast movement (+30), unarmed strike (lawful, 2d8*)
## EQUIPMENT ##
Offense Belt of Giant Strength +4, Monk’s Robe, Temple Sword +3; Defense Cloak of Resistance +3, Headband of Inspired Wisdom +2, Ring of Protection +1, Ioun Stone (Dusty Rose Prism); Other Eyes of the Eagle, Handy Haversack, Ring of Feather Falling; Cash 07,970 gp
|
|
#### Core Monk Cameron Results: Lvl 11 ####
# CR 13 MONSTER #
AC 28; HP 180
Attack +22 (60 dmg)
Primary Ability DC 21
# Core Monk Cameron 11 #
AC 30/26; HP 91
Fort/Ref/Will +12/+12/+13; Special +2 v. ench., improved evasion
Unarmed Flurry (No Style) unarmed strike +16/+16/+11/+11/+6 (2d8+15/19-20x2)
Unarmed Flurry (Dragon Style) unarmed strike +16/+16/+11/+11/+6 (2d8+21, 2d8+18/19-20x2 plus shaken 1d4+7)
Temple Sword Flurry temple sword +17/+17/+12/+12/+7 (1d8+19/17-20x2)
# Core Monk Cameron Lvl 11 v. CR 13 #
Fort, Ref, Will = 60%, 60%, 65% success; +10% v. ench, improved evasion
AC = 30/26
DPR No Style = 34 (18.9%)
DPR Dragon Style = 39.7 (22.1%)
DPR Temple Sword = 43.5 (24.2%)
Compare:
# Benchmark Fighter Lvl 11 v. CR 13 #
AC = 32/27
Fort, Ref, Will = 60%, 40%, 50% success
DPR = 47–65.3 (26.1%–36.3%)
# Unarmed Oona Lvl 11 v. CR 13 #
AC = 26/30
Fort, Ref, Will = 55%, 60%, 60% success; +10% v. ench, improved evasion; (+10% v. paralysis, sleep, stun)
DPR = 54.9–63.6 (30.5–35.3%)
# Temple Sword Tina Lvl 11 v. CR 13 #
AC = 26/30
Fort, Ref, Will = 55%, 60%, 60% success; improved evasion
DPR = 65.4–76.1 (36.3–42.3%)
To put the numbers side by side:
Unarmed No Style
Core = 34 dpr (18.9%)
Unchained = 54.9 dpr (30.5%)
Unarmed Dragon Style
Core = 39.7 (22.1%)
Unchained = 63.6 dpr (35.3%)
Temple Sword
Core = 43.5 (24.2%)
Unchained = 76.1 (42.3%)
|
|
In comparison, Core Monk Cameron gains:
* One freed up trait (for Indomitable Faith)
* Purity of Body
* Slow Fall
* Wholeness of Body
* +5% Will save success (at this level)
But Core Monk Cameron loses:
* Style Strikes — this is a huge loss
* Ki Powers (in my selection: high jump, insightful wisdom, wind jump—I guess you could grab the lost class features, but the Unchained version of Slow Fall isn't great [no limit but costs 1 ki] and Unchained Diamond body is not nearly as good the Core version)
* Full-bab feat build-out
* Significant DPR (even apart from the DPR loss of losing Flying Kick):
Unarmed: -20.9 dpr (-11.6% of enemy's hp)
Dragon: -23.9 dpr (-13.3% of enemy's hp)
Sword: -32.6 dpr (-18.1% of enemy's hp)
The best of the straightforward Core Monk Cameron builds, the Temple Sword build, underperforms every other benchmark build I've put up here, even the unoptimized Core-only Fighter Longsword Lou, and significantly underperforms all of the Unchained Monk builds ... and that's not even counting the "invisible" but very significant DPR boost that the Unchained Monk will enjoy from Flying Kick making full attacks much more frequent.
The benefits got in exchange don't seem that great, either. (Especially considering that once you start optimizing I'd bet you could do a lot more with the Unchained Monk, widening the already significantly-wide gap.)
All together, the Unchained Monk looks like a clear upgrade over the Core Monk, and I'm not sure I'd say the Core Monk would pass the basic test I put the Unchained Monk to in my first entry in this thread: "Will [this class] successfully fulfill the role of a martial arts melee combatant in a Pathfinder party?"
[ETA the "of enemy's hp" clarification]
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think Core Monk Cameron may even have his temple sword numbers high, since before Unchained, you didn't get 1.5x Str bonus when two-handing the temple sword. EDIT: Nope, I just didn't add the sword because derp.
Also, I was confused by the negative percentages until I realized they were additive percentages of a creature's max health. I've calculated the multiplicative percentage of total damage for the other monks over Cameron (that is, Oona and Tina do this percentage of Cameron's damage) as follows based on your numbers:
Unarmed: 161% of Cameron
Dragon Style: 160% of Cameron
Sword: 175% of Cameron
|
|
I think Core Monk Cameron may even have his temple sword numbers high, since before Unchained, you didn't get 1.5x Str bonus when two-handing the temple sword.
But you would get the +3 progression from Power Attack, right?
Flurry temple sword +17/+17/+12/+12/+7 (1d8+19/17-20x2)
Atk = +9 (bab), +7 Str, +3 enh, +1 foc, -3 pwr atk
Dmg = +7 Str, +3 enh, +9 pwr atk
Compare Temple Sword Tina 11:
temple sword +19/+19/+19/+14/+9 (1d8+22/17-20x2 with Critical Focus)
Atk = +11 bab, +7 Str, +3 enh, +1 foc, -3 pwr atk
Dmg = +10 Str, +3 enh, +9 pwr atk
Also, I was confused by the negative percentages until I realized they were additive percentages of a creature's max health. I've calculated the multiplicative percentage of total damage for the other monks over Cameron (that is, Oona and Tina do this percentage of Cameron's damage) as follows based on your numbers:
Unarmed: 161% of Cameron
Dragon Style: 160% of Cameron
Sword: 175% of Cameron
Thanks! That's helpful.
I think Core Monk Cameron may even have his temple sword numbers high, since before Unchained, you didn't get 1.5x Str bonus when two-handing the temple sword.But you would get the +3 progression from Power Attack, right?
Flurry temple sword +17/+17/+12/+12/+7 (1d8+19/17-20x2)
Atk = +9 (bab), +7 Str, +3 enh, +1 foc, -3 pwr atk
Dmg = +7 Str, +3 enh, +9 pwr atkCompare Temple Sword Tina 11:
temple sword +19/+19/+19/+14/+9 (1d8+22/17-20x2 with Critical Focus)
Atk = +11 bab, +7 Str, +3 enh, +1 foc, -3 pwr atk
Dmg = +10 Str, +3 enh, +9 pwr atk
I was missing the sword. D'oh!
Edited to put something of actual use in my last post, a percentage comparison that fit with the way I was looking at the numbers in my own head.
...One of the main benefits of the feat is allowing a Sense Motive roll to confirm an unarmed crit. When you're rolling with a 3/4 bab Core Monk, or a Core Monk with flurry penalty, being able to use a skill roll in place of a confirmation roll is a pretty cool benefit. But it's just not nearly as exciting for full bab, no-penalty flurry for the Unchained Monk.Having full BAB is not going to make a big difference to this feat.
I have a Snake Style Bloodrager 7 / MoMS 2 with a Sense Motive bonus of +22 and an attack bonus capping at I think +18 (raging with a furious AoMF), down to only +6 on a non-raging Power Attacking iterative attack. So using Sense Motive to confirm is anywhere from a +4 (the equivalent of Critical Focus) to +16.
All other things being equal, the difference in accuracy between a Core and Unchained monk is about -2, though it opens up a bit more for a non-flurrying monk at levels 9+. If we assume that the Unchained Monk has a similar accuracy to a raging barbarian that's not using Power Attack (a generous assumption) then you're looking the difference between an improvement of 4 for the Unchained Monk and 6 for the Core Monk for a main attack, and something like 9 and 11 for an iterative.
It's a slightly better feat for the Core Monk, but not enough to make a real difference in the overall strength of the classes - especially since Snake Style is only considered a moderately good style compared to Dragon or Pummeling Style.
Determining whether Dragon Style or Snake Style is the better DPS boost depends largely upon the individual characters. For example, Snake Style itself doesn't really offer much of a DPS boost, where as Dragon Style does. However, if you also have Snake Fang, it does offer an indirect DPS boost, but it relies on the AC or defenses of the character.
Every time you are attacked in melee and the enemy misses, you have the chance to make an Attack of Opportunity in return. So if you can
Damnit! I was going to make an NPC that does that and hoped no one would stumble on it! Foot Stomp handidly solves the problem of "Well, you can't stop the enemy from just walking past you!"
"YES I CAN!!"
Wait, could you not get the 1.5x strength bonus for two-handing during a flurry before?
I thought since it said 'apply your full strength bonus to each hit' you could get the 1.5 bonus
|
|
Wait, could you not get the 1.5x strength bonus for two-handing during a flurry before?
I thought since it said 'apply your full strength bonus to each hit' you could get the 1.5 bonus
No, the CRB text disallows it—"A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands."
No, the CRB text disallows it—"A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands."Wait, could you not get the 1.5x strength bonus for two-handing during a flurry before?
I thought since it said 'apply your full strength bonus to each hit' you could get the 1.5 bonus
And 1.5 extra damage is the Monk's full strength.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have ... never heard that interpretation of the text before.
It may seem initially plausible, but I don't think it holds up once you think about it. Because "full Strength" bonus EITHER means, "x1 Str bonus," OR it means, "the full amount of your Str bonus that the rules let you apply" (I don't think you can have your cake and eat it with this line). In which case you'd apply only x1/2 of your Str bonus for an offhand attack and the line of text wouldn't do anything at all. So we should prefer the first interpretation.
But any way about it, even if that doesn't seem persuasive to you, I do at least suggest that yall are far in the minority here, at least going by the threads discussing the Unchained Monk, where I've seen everyone talking about the "new" ability to get the 1.5x Str when two-handing a weapon.
(Plus, Mark can be trusted to know all the ins and outs of the rules.)
I have ... never heard that interpretation of the text before.
It may seem initially plausible, but I don't think it holds up once you think about it. Because "full Strength" bonus EITHER means, "x1 Str bonus," OR it means, "the full amount of your Str bonus that the rules let you apply" (I don't think you can have your cake and eat it with this line). In which case you'd apply only x1/2 of your Str bonus for an offhand attack and the line of text wouldn't do anything at all. So we should prefer the first interpretation.
But any way about it, even if that doesn't seem persuasive to you, I do at least suggest that yall are far in the minority here, at least going by the threads discussing the Unchained Monk, where I've seen everyone talking about the "new" ability to get the 1.5x Str when two-handing a weapon.
(Plus, Mark can be trusted to know all the ins and outs of the rules.)
Full strength means maximum strength, and it is the common interpretation as that's what full means.
It also is an associated mechanic (x1.5 damage), are Monks so weak they can't put all their strength behind a swing with a quarterstaff? But a Wizard can? Makes little sense when you think about it.
These forums are a snapshot of a minority group who play Pathfinder. The majority don't use forums or not extensively anyway.
Edit: The core Monk's flurry is treated as if you are using the Two Weapon Fighting feat, so you cannot use a two-handed weapon at all. Nothing to do with full strength. All that has changed now with the Unchained Monk. Joe M. checking the rules first would save a lot time and effort by everyone involved in these forums.
Monks only get 1x strenth with the Core Flurry, this is a well known aspect of Flurry of Blows. This isn't some 'vocal minority' of people who interpret it this way, it's how the rules work for Flurry. You ask any designer or developer and they will all of them tel you that Monks don't get 1.5x strength on the Core Flurry of Blows.
|
|
Edit: The core Monk's flurry is treated as if you are using the Two Weapon Fighting feat, so you cannot use a two-handed weapon at all. Nothing to do with full strength. All that has changed now with the Unchained Monk. Joe M. checking the rules first would save a lot time and effort by everyone involved in these forums.
Now now, there's no need to be rude.
A few points.
(1) If it's true that Core Monk Cameron cannot two-hand his temple sword while flurrying, he'd lose +3 damage per hit, widening the gap between Core and Unchained Monk.
(2) But since the Core Flurry rules explicitly discuss what happens when two-handing a weapon ("A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands"), it's safe to say it's in-bounds.
(3) "As if" TWF is not the same as TWF. Especially given the explicit call out of being able to flurry with a single weapon.
(4) All of this discussion of Core Flurry is rather beside the point of this thread, at least if we get into it at any length, so I'm going to ask that we leave it there and agree to disagree if that's where we're at. Make the adjustments to my numbers for your preferred interpretation of the rules. (Your latest interpretation, as pointed out #1, would only further support my general claim about Core v. Unchained, so hey.)
Edit: The core Monk's flurry is treated as if you are using the Two Weapon Fighting feat, so you cannot use a two-handed weapon at all. Nothing to do with full strength. All that has changed now with the Unchained Monk. Joe M. checking the rules first would save a lot time and effort by everyone involved in these forums.Now now, there's no need to be rude.
A few points.
(1) If it's true that Core Monk Cameron cannot two-hand his temple sword while flurrying, he'd lose +3 damage per hit, widening the gap between Core and Unchained Monk.
Actually, the Core Monk can use a weapon 2-handed, he just doesn't get 1.5x his strength bonus, but he does still gain the 3-1 return on Power Attack.
Actually, the Core Monk can use a weapon 2-handed, he just doesn't get 1.5x his strength bonus, but he does still gain the 3-1 return on Power Attack.Edit: The core Monk's flurry is treated as if you are using the Two Weapon Fighting feat, so you cannot use a two-handed weapon at all. Nothing to do with full strength. All that has changed now with the Unchained Monk. Joe M. checking the rules first would save a lot time and effort by everyone involved in these forums.Now now, there's no need to be rude.
A few points.
(1) If it's true that Core Monk Cameron cannot two-hand his temple sword while flurrying, he'd lose +3 damage per hit, widening the gap between Core and Unchained Monk.
I'm not trying to point score, Flurry of Blows (excerpt): when doing so he may make one additional attack using any kind of combination of unarmed strikes and special monk weapons as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.
Two-Weapon Fighting feat: You can fight with a weapon wielded in each of your hands.
Edit: The Unchained Monk deleted the Two-Weapon Fighting feat reference.
Actually, the Core Monk can use a weapon 2-handed, he just doesn't get 1.5x his strength bonus, but he does still gain the 3-1 return on Power Attack.Edit: The core Monk's flurry is treated as if you are using the Two Weapon Fighting feat, so you cannot use a two-handed weapon at all. Nothing to do with full strength. All that has changed now with the Unchained Monk. Joe M. checking the rules first would save a lot time and effort by everyone involved in these forums.Now now, there's no need to be rude.
A few points.
(1) If it's true that Core Monk Cameron cannot two-hand his temple sword while flurrying, he'd lose +3 damage per hit, widening the gap between Core and Unchained Monk.
I'm not trying to point score, Flurry of Blows (excerpt): when doing so he may make one additional attack using any kind of combination of unarmed strikes and special monk weapons as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat.
Two-Weapon Fighting feat: You can fight with a weapon wielded in each of your hands.
Edit: The Unchained Monk deleted the Two-Weapon Fighting feat reference.
Uh... using a weapon 2-handed (with both hands) is not the same as two-weapon fighting (weapon in each hand).
|
The best of the straightforward Core Monk Cameron builds, the Temple Sword build, underperforms every other benchmark build I've put up here, even the unoptimized Core-only Fighter Longsword Lou, and significantly underperforms all of the Unchained Monk builds ... and that's not even counting the "invisible" but very significant DPR boost that the Unchained Monk will enjoy from Flying Kick making full attacks much more frequent.
The benefits got in exchange don't seem that great, either. (Especially considering that once you start optimizing I'd bet you could do a lot more with the Unchained Monk, widening the already significantly-wide gap.)
All together, the Unchained Monk looks like a clear upgrade over the Core Monk, and I'm not sure I'd say the Core Monk would pass the basic test I put the Unchained Monk to in my first entry in this thread: "Will [this class] successfully fulfill the role of a martial arts melee combatant in a Pathfinder party?"
I don't doubt that the Unchained Monk has improved DPR. I'm just not sure that makes it a successful class. I think you're underestimating key losses.
In addition to the decreased will save, the monk has lost some passive defenses. If you take Diamond Body and Diamond Soul, they now cost ki to activate. Diamond Soul also takes a swift action, and Diamond Body has a failure chance (neutralize poison requires a CL check vs the poison's DC) and doesn't provide ongoing protection if you're still fighting the thing that poisoned you. The Drunken Master gets immunity to fear whenever he's had a drink - the Unchained Monk can remove fear as a swift action that costs ki. The Monk of the Sacred Mountain gets DR which he can double for a turn by spending ki and a swift action. The Unchained Monk gets comparable DR but needs to spend ki and a swift action to activate it in the first place. (The Drunken Master also gets DR - it's less potent but still passive, as long as the monk has had at least one drink.)
The barbarian, which is stereotyped as an offense over defense sort of class, still gets several passive defenses: uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and DR (better than the Unchained Monk); plus potentially more semi-passive abilities that piggyback on rage without using extra actions or resources (like natural armour from beast totem, or superstition). The more defensive paladin gets massive save bonuses plus immunity to disease, fear, charm, compulsion, and DR/evil, and can remove a variety of conditions with lay on hands (which has its own resource pool at least equal in size to ki).
Both of these classes can also deliver significant DPR. They are successful classes. I'm not sure why the monk has to lose so much defensively in order to obtain competitive DPR.
Flurry of Blows (Ex): Starting at 1st level, a monk can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action. When doing so, he may make on additional attack, taking a -2 penalty on all of his attack rolls, as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat. These attacks can be any combination of unarmed strikes and attacks with a monk special weapon (he does not need to use two weapons to use this ability). For the purpose of these attacks, the monk's base attack bonus from his monk class levels is equal to his monk level. For all other purposes, such as qualifying for a feat or a prestige class, the monk uses his normal base attack bonus.
At 8th level, the monk can make two additional attacks when he uses flurry of blows, as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).
At 15th level, the monk can make three additional attacks using flurry of blows, as if using Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat).
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks.
The first bolded part clearly states that while Flurry generally functions as TWF it does not require the use of two weapons.
The second bolded part states (as an assumption in the sentence) that a monk using Flurry can wield a weapon in both hands.
The italicized bit indicates that the same damage modifier - your full strength, ie 1x strength - applies to all damage rolls while flurrying.
The best of the straightforward Core Monk Cameron builds, the Temple Sword build, underperforms every other benchmark build I've put up here, even the unoptimized Core-only Fighter Longsword Lou, and significantly underperforms all of the Unchained Monk builds ... and that's not even counting the "invisible" but very significant DPR boost that the Unchained Monk will enjoy from Flying Kick making full attacks much more frequent.
The benefits got in exchange don't seem that great, either. (Especially considering that once you start optimizing I'd bet you could do a lot more with the Unchained Monk, widening the already significantly-wide gap.)
All together, the Unchained Monk looks like a clear upgrade over the Core Monk, and I'm not sure I'd say the Core Monk would pass the basic test I put the Unchained Monk to in my first entry in this thread: "Will [this class] successfully fulfill the role of a martial arts melee combatant in a Pathfinder party?"
I don't doubt that the Unchained Monk has improved DPR. I'm just not sure that makes it a successful class. I think you're underestimating key losses.
In addition to the decreased will save, the monk has lost some passive defenses. If you take Diamond Body and Diamond Soul, they now cost ki to activate. Diamond Soul also takes a swift action, and Diamond Body has a failure chance (neutralize poison requires a CL check vs the poison's DC) and doesn't provide ongoing protection if you're still fighting the thing that poisoned you. The Drunken Master gets immunity to fear whenever he's had a drink - the Unchained Monk can remove fear as a swift action that costs ki. The Monk of the Sacred Mountain gets DR which he can double for a turn by spending ki and a swift action. The Unchained Monk gets comparable DR but needs to spend ki and a swift action to activate it in the first place. (The Drunken Master also gets DR - it's less potent but still passive, as long as the monk has had at least one drink.)
The barbarian, which is...
So the Core Monk's Flurry of Blows is like the Two Weapon Fighting feat except it's really not because you can use a weapon with two hands, not just a weapon with each hand.
Okay the second rule contradicts the first rule.
Full strength is seen in context with Two-Weapon Fighting feat as off hand attacks do half str damage and in this case they do full str damage, you only ever do 1x Str damage with single handed melee weapons (not two-handed weapons) maybe it has been interpreted this way, but there is no evidence this is the case.
There is full damage and half damage. Anything else is speculation.
I say this because the bolded part states there are no Strength penalties and functions like any other kind of melee attack be it with two weapons or a two-handed weapon (using maneuvres) just without the off-hand penalties
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So the Core Monk's Flurry of Blows is like the Two Weapon Fighting feat except it's really not because you can use a weapon with two hands, not just a weapon with each hand.
Okay the second rule contradicts the first rule.
Full strength is seen in context with Two-Weapon Fighting feat as off hand attacks do half str damage and in this case they do full str damage, you only ever do 1x Str damage with single handed melee weapons (not two-handed weapons) maybe it has been interpreted this way, but there is no evidence this is the case.
There is full damage and half damage. Anything else is speculation.
I say this because the bolded part states there are no Strength penalties and functions like any other kind of melee attack be it with two weapons or a two-handed weapon (using maneuvres) just without the off-hand penalties
No there is no contradiction. The first paragraph gives a reference to Two-Weapon Fighting so that people know what they are dealing with. The second paragraph further explains the intricacies of the ability.
Pathfinder is, mostly, a permissive system. It tells you what you can do, not what you can't. The general rule is that, if something doesn't say you can do something, then you can't.
At the same time, one of the basic rules of Pathfinder is that there are general rules everyone must follow, except unless you have an ability that explicitly says otherwise.
In Pathfinder, the general rule is that weapons wielded in an off-hand deal half-strength bonus on an attack. If you don't have an ability that says otherwise, then you deal half-strength bonus. Period.
Flurry of Blows states that you deal full strength bonus with all of your attacks, whether it be off-hand or 2-handed. Because it states you get your full-strength bonus, as opposed to half-strength or 1.5x strength, then that is what you get.
The Unchained Monk's flurry is different as you no longer attack as if with Two-Weapon Fighting. And since you only ever have an off-hand attack if you are using a weapon to gain an additional attack (using two-weapon combat), then if you aren't using a weapon in such a way, it's not considered an off-hand attack. The way the Unchained Flurry works is that it simply gives you bonus attacks into your normal attack routine.
In a normal attack routine, you can wield as many weapons as you want, as long as you don't use them to gain extra attacks.
For example, If I had three attacks (BAB 11), then, assuming I have Quickdraw, I could draw a sword, and attack, then drop it, draw an axe, attack, then drop it, and then draw a dagger and throw it at someone.
I get no penalty on any of those attacks, or damage rolls, because I'm not using weapons to gain an extra attack, I'm simply using different weapons to make my normal attacks with.
----------------------
So to sum it up, Core Flurry both buffs and nerfs weapon damage attacks by letting you attack with 1.0x strength bonus at all times.
Unchained Flurry doesn't have this issue because Unchained Flurry doesn't allow for off-hand attacks. However, since you don't have off-hand attacks, and there is no language limiting the strength bonus, if you 2-hand a weapon during an Unchained Flurry, you get 1.5x strength.
|
|
The barbarian, which is stereotyped as an offense over defense sort of class, still gets several passive defenses: uncanny dodge, improved uncanny dodge, and DR (better than the Unchained Monk); plus potentially more semi-passive abilities that piggyback on rage without using extra actions or resources (like natural armour from beast totem, or superstition). The more defensive paladin gets massive save bonuses plus immunity to disease, fear, charm, compulsion, and DR/evil, and can remove a variety of conditions with lay on hands (which has its own resource pool at least equal in size to ki).
Both of these classes can also deliver significant DPR. They are successful classes. I'm not sure why the monk has to lose so much defensively in order to obtain competitive DPR.
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Weirdo. Folks in the other thread are also insisting that Paladin and Barbarian are more-useful reference points, so those are the next up for comparison.
But especially re your me tion of Core Monk archetypes, I'm going to stick to my Core principles and not draw on archetypes or character options from hardcovers or (especially) supplements, so that we can be sure we're comparing apples to apples as far as possible.
So I don't think it's quite helpful to compare (Core Monk plus archetypes and other support) to (Unchained Monk without such options), at least at first. It may be helpful now as a second pass though. Because now that we've compared Core and Unchained at the basic level, if we discover that the gap narrows considerably when we add in archetypes and supplemental character options for the Core Monk, then what we've discovered isn't that the Unchained Monk *itself*, just the base class, is somehow fundamentally weak. What we've discovered in this example is that the Unchained Monk needs supporting material published for it! (Which it does, at least if you're interested in that comparison). So starting with the basic builds first before getting more elaborate helps us identify just where the problem (if there is one) lies for the class.
Same for Paladin and Barbarian. I'll start with Core. You and anyone else are more than welcome a encouraged even—to chip in a build (same principles and restrictions) to speed things along. I think we can do as I did for the Core Monk and just quick-check lvl 11 to see.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Just wanted to mention that I really appreciate the detailed analyses you're working out here, and (more generally) the concrete data-driven arguments for and against various claims being made in this thread. I find this incredibly helpful in getting a feel for how the new monk fares.
(P.s.: ....and, dotted.)
(P.s.s.: Despite some of the suggestions above and in the other thread, I'm a little doubtful as to the value of trying to stack up the unchained monk against spell-casting and niche-oriented classes like the ranger or paladin, since so much depends there on the kind of opponent, and whether they've decided to blow all their spells on short term buffs for this encounter or not. (Plus, in my experience, the paladin is the most powerful martial class, so I would expect *every* other martial class to fall short of that.)
So if other people chip in (and I hope they do!), I hope we'll see comparisons to other non-spell-casting martials, like the barbarian, brawler, swashbuckler, etc, which offer more informative contrasts.)
|
|
Joe,
I SUSPECT that one reason that the Unchained Monk holds up similar to Core only Falchion Fred has to do with testing at level 11 (a sweet spot for new monk).
While I still disagree with not allowing dueling gauntlets but allowing styles, I would appreciate if you should run the numbers with your build at 10 rather than 11. Also if you really wanted too... level 20 might be interesting too.
Thanks for the helpful comment!
(1) Yeah, that's definitely a danger of doing a selective test. I just chose those levels because it's the PFS range and the range of much of PF play, but we'd really need to do a full 1-20 comparison (or a selection of levels covering the full range) to be more confident. When I have a chance I'll try to look at Level 10 and Level 12 and see how they stack up.
(2) I can see the thought that it might be unfair to bar gloves of dueling but allow Style feats. That's why I've given the unarmed numbers starting without Styles active, and I'm happy to accept that as what we *really* should be comparing.
|
|
Just wanted to mention that I really appreciate the detailed analyses you're working out here, and (more generally) the concrete data-driven arguments for and against various claims being made in this thread. I find this incredibly helpful in getting a feel for how the new monk fares.
Thanks! I've found it to be a really interesting and instructive exercise (I came in unsure of what I would think, influenced by some of the criticism I'd heard, but going through the process has really helped clear things up for me). :-)
(P.s.s.: Despite some of the suggestions above and in the other thread, I'm a little doubtful as to the value of trying to stack up the unchained monk against spell-casting and niche-oriented classes like the ranger or paladin, since so much depends there on the kind of opponent, and whether they've decided to blow all their spells on short term buffs for this encounter or not. (Plus, in my experience, the paladin is the most powerful martial class, so I would expect *every* other martial class to fall short of that.)
So if other people chip in (and I hope they do!), I hope we'll see comparisons to other non-spell-casting martials, like the barbarian, brawler, swashbuckler, etc, which offer more informative contrasts.)
Yeah, it gets a lot trickier with some classes. We'll have to be careful about just how we interpret the data if/when we get to those comparisons.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, I thought <this comment from brightshadow360> in the other thread was especially helpful in highlighting the sort of reason why I'm insisting on *basic* tests, so I'm going to reproduce it here (bold added):
While the new build may have problems, keep in mind that the biggest boon is not so much the current new features as it is the way the class itself is now FORMATTED. now that the class abilities pull from lists of options, deficiencies can be addressed with new abilities. lacking Ki? the designers releases a Ki ability that grants you double your WIS bonus or fuses your pool with a pool from another class for multi-classers. need more style strikes? release a feat that lets you use an extra one. loss of will save got you down? there's an app future ability for that.
That being said, the fact that you have to use up slots to make such fixes is unfortunate, but we have quite a few slots to work with. remember, we now have an UPGRADABLE monk. just so long as the unadorned unchained monk functions at least as well as a base fighter, the developing team has succeeded. The bells and whistles can come later.
So the new monk is kind of sucky right now, but since they pick from a pool of options they can be fixed later through the release of new material.
Like the fighter now kicks ass and takes names with splat support, given all the awesome fighter only feats printed.
Not to mention all those spectacular rogue talents that make the old-rogue the skilliest skill monkey that ever skilled while being a credible threat in combat.
And this is even more likely given that the unchained monk isn't in the most important and commonly owned book in the game, but rather in an optional rules supplement. It is going to get so much support.
Do I need to break out the sarcasm tags, or is the stupidity of this already apparent?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm sure you're capable of expressing your claims without being rude. Please make the effort. We've been having a polite and constructive conversation in this thread so far, let's not spoil it.
I just tend to get really annoyed when people say things that patently are not true.
Every class that has been weak at it's inception has stayed weak. Without fail. The core monk is the class that has gone against this the most, and it has managed the mindblowing leap from "Terribad without extreme application of system mastery" to "Basically a fighter with better saves". All the other fairly weak classes (such as the fighter, brawler, gunslinger, swashbuckler, ninja, rogue and cavalier) have barely moved in their capabilities as a class. Frankly, the only reason the monk has improved so much as a class is that it's abilities were so weak, narrow and counter-synergistic that replacing them with merely weak abilites is a massive buff for the class. This is not the case with the new monk - they have enough abilities that aren't counter-synergistic or narrow, but they are mostly pretty weak. Paizo has shown that they will generally avoid printing options that are greatly better than existing options. The new monk *may* get more abilities, but this won't fix the fact that they have a whole pile of weak,short term, minor abilities that are all competing for a handful of ki points, as well as a bunch of style strikes that are going to get ignored because of how critical the mobility flying kick gives is. Adding more variety in the form of equally weak abilities is never going to solve this.
There is another element to why the new monk won't improve significantly. The only reason the old monk has managed to improve as much as it did is because of the abnormally high amount of worthwhile support in non-CRB material that allowed it to break out of it's state of incapability. The new monk will not get this. It is part of an optional ruleset and as such will recieve little to no support from other books, especially since it is incapable of using archetypes the other monk can use (the other unchained classes at least have this going for them). Since the new monk is unlikely to receive significant support it will improve very little and sit in it's current state of "about as good as a fighter".
So, yes, I was blunt and sarcastic, but what I said was very accurate. The new monk is extremely unlikely to improve enough to take it out of the "Kind of sucky" state it is in, based on the past history of the game. I don't understand what possible reasons people could have for thinking otherwise.
|
|
But especially re your mention of Core Monk archetypes, I'm going to stick to my Core principles and not draw on archetypes or character options from hardcovers or (especially) supplements, so that we can be sure we're comparing apples to apples as far as possible.
So I don't think it's quite helpful to compare (Core Monk plus archetypes and other support) to (Unchained Monk without such options), at least at first.
I think the abilities available to the archetypes are relevant for two reasons.
Firstly, because if support for the Unchained Monk is expanded, Paizo is unlikely to introduce ki powers that are the same as the ones that exist, but better. If Diamond Mind lets you spend ki to remove the fear conditions, there won't be an ability that makes you flat immune to fear - unless it has Diamond Mind as a prerequisite, in which case you're spending two ki powers on something that used to be one (fairly minor) class feature.
Secondly, because I think that the writers were specifically referencing the archetypes as they made the Unchained Monk. The monastic mount ki power appears to have been borrowed from the Sohei and the Elemental Blast ability works just like the Drunken Master's Firewater Breath except with extra elemental options (and without the Drunken ki requirement). So it's entirely plausible to me that the writers saw for example fear immunity and DR in the archetypes and intentionally decided that they should be included but in diminished form - even though other powers did not need to be nerfed.
Why?
I'm thinking it's because the Core Monk has a reputation as a toothless turtle and so the writers decided to give it teeth, but take away the shell to balance it out. Hence the general complaint that this is a side-grade, not an upgrade.
|
|
While the new build may have problems, keep in mind that the biggest boon is not so much the current new features as it is the way the class itself is now FORMATTED. now that the class abilities pull from lists of options, deficiencies can be addressed with new abilities. lacking Ki? the designers releases a Ki ability that grants you double your WIS bonus or fuses your pool with a pool from another class for multi-classers. need more style strikes? release a feat that lets you use an extra one. loss of will save got you down? there's an app future ability for that.
Just wanted to point out an example of the highlighted option that already exists. There is a Magus Arcana that allows you to combine your Arcane Pool with you ki pool and use it for either. My Monk/Magus loves it.
Joe,
I SUSPECT that one reason that the Unchained Monk holds up similar to Core only Falchion Fred has to do with testing at level 11 (a sweet spot for new monk).
While I still disagree with not allowing dueling gauntlets but allowing styles, I would appreciate if you should run the numbers with your build at 10 rather than 11. Also if you really wanted too... level 20 might be interesting too.
The original Fred was built at level 10. Is there a level 11 version?
Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Weirdo. Folks in the other thread are also insisting that Paladin and Barbarian are more-useful reference points, so those are the next up for comparison.
But especially re your me tion of Core Monk archetypes, I'm going to stick to my Core principles and not draw on archetypes or character options from hardcovers or (especially) supplements, so that we can be sure we're comparing apples to apples as far as possible.
So I don't think it's quite helpful to compare (Core Monk plus archetypes and other support) to (Unchained Monk without such options), at least at first. It may be helpful now as a second pass though. Because now that we've compared Core and Unchained at the basic level, if we discover that the gap narrows considerably when we add in archetypes and supplemental character options for the Core Monk, then what we've discovered isn't that the Unchained Monk *itself*, just the base class, is somehow fundamentally weak. What we've discovered in this example is that the Unchained Monk needs supporting material published for it! (Which it does, at least if you're interested in that comparison). So starting with the basic builds first before getting more elaborate helps us...
Once again, almost no one has said that the Unchained Monk is a weak class, only that it was a side grade over the Monk. It is not as good as the Paladin, Barbarian or Ranger, but those are also the 3 best martially inclined classes.
Once again, almost no one has said that the Unchained Monk is a weak class, only that it was a side grade over the Monk. It is not as good as the Paladin, Barbarian or Ranger, but those are also the 3 best martially inclined classes.Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Weirdo. Folks in the other thread are also insisting that Paladin and Barbarian are more-useful reference points, so those are the next up for comparison.
But especially re your me tion of Core Monk archetypes, I'm going to stick to my Core principles and not draw on archetypes or character options from hardcovers or (especially) supplements, so that we can be sure we're comparing apples to apples as far as possible.
So I don't think it's quite helpful to compare (Core Monk plus archetypes and other support) to (Unchained Monk without such options), at least at first. It may be helpful now as a second pass though. Because now that we've compared Core and Unchained at the basic level, if we discover that the gap narrows considerably when we add in archetypes and supplemental character options for the Core Monk, then what we've discovered isn't that the Unchained Monk *itself*, just the base class, is somehow fundamentally weak. What we've discovered in this example is that the Unchained Monk needs supporting material published for it! (Which it does, at least if you're interested in that comparison). So starting with the basic builds first before getting more elaborate helps us...
It seems to me, without putting in my opinion as to which is true but simply following logically, that one of the following must not be true:
A) The CRB monk is a weak class.
B) The Unchained monk did not increase the power of the CRB monk.
C) The Unchained monk is not a weak class.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Once again, almost no one has said that the Unchained Monk is a weak class, only that it was a side grade over the Monk. It is not as good as the Paladin, Barbarian or Ranger, but those are also the 3 best martially inclined classes.Thanks for the thoughtful comment, Weirdo. Folks in the other thread are also insisting that Paladin and Barbarian are more-useful reference points, so those are the next up for comparison.
But especially re your me tion of Core Monk archetypes, I'm going to stick to my Core principles and not draw on archetypes or character options from hardcovers or (especially) supplements, so that we can be sure we're comparing apples to apples as far as possible.
So I don't think it's quite helpful to compare (Core Monk plus archetypes and other support) to (Unchained Monk without such options), at least at first. It may be helpful now as a second pass though. Because now that we've compared Core and Unchained at the basic level, if we discover that the gap narrows considerably when we add in archetypes and supplemental character options for the Core Monk, then what we've discovered isn't that the Unchained Monk *itself*, just the base class, is somehow fundamentally weak. What we've discovered in this example is that the Unchained Monk needs supporting material published for it! (Which it does, at least if you're interested in that comparison). So starting with the basic builds first before getting more elaborate helps us...
It seems to me, without putting in my opinion as to which is true but simply following logically, that one of the following must not be true:
A) The CRB monk is a weak class.
B) The Unchained monk did not increase the power of the CRB monk.
C) The Unchained monk is not a weak class.
Not necessarily, it depends on how the weakness is determined.
It's absolutely true that the Unchained Monk is, in several ways, stronger than the Core Monk is. However, with that increase in strength came weaknesses elsewhere.
The Core Monk, especially with splat books is a defensive monster. Only the Paladin can rival the Monk for defenses, while the Barbarian, using a certain kind of build, is comes close in someways, but falls short in others.
The problem is, the Core Monk has little-to-no offense that is worth speaking of.
The Unchained Monk sacrificed many of his defensive abilities, to increase his over-all offense.
In terms of survivability, the Core Monk is stronger. In terms of lethality, the Unchained Monk is stronger.
To put it this way, the Core Monk is a C- class, whereas the Unchained Monk is a C+ class. An improvement, to be certain, but no matter how you look at it, the Monk is still got a C on the grading scale.
However, as we all know, the Core Monk with archetypes and some feat support goes from a C- class, to a B- or even B+ class (Zen Archer). This is not something that the Unchained Monk achieves.
This is why I consider the Unchained Monk a side-grade compared to the Core Monk. An Unchained Monk with archetype support would probably be a B+ class as well (A- and above is almost strictly the realm of 9th level casters).
|
|
@Snowblind, Weirdo — I'm more optimistic about the Unchained Monk receiving ongoing support than it seems either of you are, and I'm also pretty confident that it'll get the tricks it needs to play high-opt games for folks who are looking for that, if nothing else than just as a matter of time. More options means more flexibility means more opportunities for high-optimizing players to run their tricks. But that's just a guess about the future, and I suppose time will tell.
@Wraithstrike — Ughbash is referring to the Falchion Fred I put together in my <Reference: Basic Fighter Builds> thread that I used for comparison here, rather than the "original" Falchion Fred (I don't even know where he first came up, honestly—that was before my time on the boards). I checked the numbers at 2, 5, 8, 11 (evenly spaced across PFS play).
@Tels — It seems to me that a *lot* of people have been saying the Unchained Monk is a weak class. But any way about it, it just doesn't seem right to call it a "side grade" compared to the Core Monk. <Check my numbers upthread!>
The Unchained Monk *might* represent a "side grade" if we're comparing [relatively optimized Core Monk drawing on supplemental material and archetypes] to [basic, Core-only Unchained Monk], but that's not an apples-to-apples comparison and it doesn't license a judgment that *the class itself* is somehow a "side grade" (it's plain, I think, that the Unchained Monk is a clear upgrade in comparison to the Core Monk, just comparing the classes themselves). Now, you *might* be able to get to the "side grade" conclusion if you couple that sort of apples-to-oranges comparison with an expectation like Snowblind's that the Unchained Monk will not receive future support and that this is the best that it will ever get. But that seems unlikely to me, and even if it works out that way I'd still say the problem wouldn't be the with Unchained Monk itself (it would be kind of weird, I think, to want a base class that is just in itself is so awesome and powerful that you throw together a basic build and it competes with the highly optimized, all the bells and whistles, barbarians or paladins) but rather with a lack of support.
[EDIT: I see you posted while I was composing this. So this post doesn't respond to your most recent one.]
@Snowblind, Weirdo — I'm more optimistic about the Unchained Monk receiving ongoing support than it seems either of you are, and I'm also pretty confident that it'll get the tricks it needs to play high-opt games for folks who are looking for that, if nothing else than just as a matter of time. More options means more flexibility means more opportunities for high-optimizing players to run their tricks. But that's just a guess about the future, and I suppose time will tell
...
Again, what basis do you have for being optimistic about this when it has never happened before.
Heck, unchained was meant to be the big opportunity to have a new, better monk. If they were going to give it the "tricks" to make it a decent class, this would have been the perfect time to do so. They failed to deliver. Why would you think some minor support in future products is going to change the monk's state as a weak class when a full rewrite failed to do so.
|
|
To put it this way, the Core Monk is a C- class, whereas the Unchained Monk is a C+ class. An improvement, to be certain, but no matter how you look at it, the Monk is still got a C on the grading scale.
However, as we all know, the Core Monk with archetypes and some feat support goes from a C- class, to a B- or even B+ class (Zen Archer). This is not something that the Unchained Monk achieves.
This is why I consider the Unchained Monk a side-grade compared to the Core Monk. An Unchained Monk with archetype support would probably be a B+ class as well (A- and above is almost strictly the realm of 9th level casters).
Okay, I'm starting to see where you're coming from here. Thanks!
(1) Saying the Unchained Monk is a 'C' class sure sounds like saying the Unchained Monk is a weak class, to me! Feel I should point that out since just before you were saying "almost no one has said that the Unchained Monk is a weak class." Maybe you can see where I'm getting that impression now. :-)
(2) Glad to see that we agree that the Unchained Monk with support will probably work out to be an excellent martial class.
(3) I'm curious if you think *any* martial class, just in itself following the "Core" principles I follow here, is in that 'B' range of yours. I've seen requests to compare the Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger ... and I guess I'd better do those as I have time (or others are welcome to speed this whole thing up and contribute those builds!), but I'm curious whether you'd say that those classes just are better in themselves, or whether they're better thanks to the sort of archetype & character option support that they have that the Unchained Monk currently lacks.
|
Again, what basis do you have for being optimistic about this when it has never happened before.@Snowblind, Weirdo — I'm more optimistic about the Unchained Monk receiving ongoing support than it seems either of you are, and I'm also pretty confident that it'll get the tricks it needs to play high-opt games for folks who are looking for that, if nothing else than just as a matter of time. More options means more flexibility means more opportunities for high-optimizing players to run their tricks. But that's just a guess about the future, and I suppose time will tell
...
1) Unchained has never happened before, so there's no point of comparison to be made there.
2) The monk has gotten steady upgrades since the core book, via feats and archetypes both. The fighter has gotten upgrades via archetypes sporadically, especially during the last year or so. The barbarian received a substantial upgrade in the APG. It has happened before, and assuming it won't is just a function of confirmation bias.
The Unchained Monk *might* represent a "side grade" if we're comparing [relatively optimized Core Monk drawing on supplemental material and archetypes] to [basic, Core-only Unchained Monk], but that's not an apples-to-apples comparison and it doesn't license a judgment that *the class itself* is somehow a "side grade" (it's plain, I think, that the Unchained Monk is a clear upgrade in comparison to the Core Monk, just comparing the classes themselves). Now, you *might* be able to get to the "side grade" conclusion if you couple that sort of apples-to-oranges comparison with an expectation like Snowblind's that the Unchained Monk will not receive future support and that this is the best that it will ever get. But that seems unlikely to me, and even if it works out that way I'd still...
Claiming that the Unchained Monk is the "best it will ever get" is actually a pretty realistic expectation.
Keep in mind that a great many aspects of things that worked for the Core Monk no longer works for the Unchained Monk and vice-versa. If new Ki Powers come out, the Core Monk can't make use of them (unless they are Qinggong Powers).
Stuff that comes out to support the Core Monk, especially it's archetypes, likely won't function with the Unchained Monk. Going forward, from a design point, feats, items, powers etc, have to have had a choice made at the creation, "Is this for the Core Monk or the Unchained Monk?"
Sure, some things will be shared between the two, but many things won't. If an option comes out that triggers off the Unchained Monk's Elemental Fury, then it has zero useage for the Core Monk.
The only way it would work for the Unchained Monk to continue getting support is if nearly all feats or abilities related to the Monk has provisos attached to them to determine how they work between the two. At which point you're basically writing two feats or abilities for every aspect of the Monk that gets designed in the future.
For example, say there is a feat that comes out that augments the Elemental Fury ability.
Elemental Wrath
The elemental forces inside you explode with a furious rage.Prerequisites : Unchained Monk 6th or Monk (see special), elemental fury ki power, Elemental Fist
Benefit: You can consume uses of your Elemental Fist feat to augment the power of your elemental fury ki power. For every 2 uses of Elemental Fist that you expend, the damage dice of your elemental fury increases by 1 step for the remainder of it's duration.
Special: A none-Unchained Monk can select this feat to gain access to the elemental fury ki power. Selecting this feat second time allows them to make full use of the feat.
A feat that alters how an ability for an archetype works, might have to have a reverse 'Special' exception to allow the Unchained Monk to work in someway.
You're talking about nearly doubling the 'Monk' content going forward if Paizo wants to support the Core Monk and the Unchained Monk at the same time. The reverse is not (entirely) true for the other Unchained Classes. Most archetypes work for the other classes, so most archetypes going forward are likely to work as well. Rage Powers, Evolutions, Rogue Talents etc. are all going to work for the other three classes (except in PFS).
So the idea that the Unchained Monk won't get a lot of support going forward is not one that is entirely unrealistic. I would wager, that one should not expect any support going forward for the Unchained Monk as most support is going to be exclusive to the Unchained Monk.
Considering there is still a very strong incentive to play a Core Monk with archetypes, I suspect that, once the 'New Hype' dies down, you won't see as many Unchained Monks in play compared to the Core Monk + Archetypes. Though I suspect the Core Monk is likely a dead class if the Unchained Monk is available.
|
|
You're talking about nearly doubling the 'Monk' content going forward if Paizo wants to support the Core Monk and the Unchained Monk at the same time. The reverse is not (entirely) true for the other Unchained Classes. Most archetypes work for the other classes, so most archetypes going forward are likely to work as well. Rage Powers, Evolutions, Rogue Talents etc. are all going to work for the other three classes (except in PFS).
The Unchained summoner is at least as bad, but the Companion line developer is on record as saying he plans to fully support it going forward. Why would the monk be any different?
Again, what basis do you have for being optimistic about this when it has never happened before.@Snowblind, Weirdo — I'm more optimistic about the Unchained Monk receiving ongoing support than it seems either of you are, and I'm also pretty confident that it'll get the tricks it needs to play high-opt games for folks who are looking for that, if nothing else than just as a matter of time. More options means more flexibility means more opportunities for high-optimizing players to run their tricks. But that's just a guess about the future, and I suppose time will tell
...1) Unchained has never happened before, so there's no point of comparison to be made there.
2) The monk has gotten steady upgrades since the core book, via feats and archetypes both. The fighter has gotten upgrades via archetypes sporadically, especially during the last year or so. The barbarian received a substantial upgrade in the APG. It has happened before, and assuming it won't is just a function of confirmation bias.
And now unchained has happened. And it gave us a sidegrade. According to the one data point we have, "unshackled" or w/e has a good chance of changing nothing with respect to the monk.
As for previous books
Monk - Significantly upgraded, still weak. Unchained did not change it from weak.
Barbarian - Got a bit better at wreaking faces in combat. Still somewhat useless outside of combat. A bit of an improvement, but not a lot.
Fighter - Somewhat better, still sucks at everything but wailing on things.
Do you have any examples of something going from fighter level to bard level. That is the sort of thing that people want - a class that can hold it's own in combat while having decent utility value. This has yet to happen.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
To put it this way, the Core Monk is a C- class, whereas the Unchained Monk is a C+ class. An improvement, to be certain, but no matter how you look at it, the Monk is still got a C on the grading scale.
However, as we all know, the Core Monk with archetypes and some feat support goes from a C- class, to a B- or even B+ class (Zen Archer). This is not something that the Unchained Monk achieves.
This is why I consider the Unchained Monk a side-grade compared to the Core Monk. An Unchained Monk with archetype support would probably be a B+ class as well (A- and above is almost strictly the realm of 9th level casters).
Okay, I'm starting to see where you're coming from here. Thanks!
(1) Saying the Unchained Monk is a 'C' class sure sounds like saying the Unchained Monk is a weak class, to me! Feel I should point that out since just before you were saying "almost no one has said that the Unchained Monk is a weak class." Maybe you can see where I'm getting that impression now. :-)
(2) Glad to see that we agree that the Unchained Monk with support will probably work out to be an excellent martial class.
(3) I'm curious if you think *any* martial class, just in itself following the "Core" principles I follow here, is in that 'B' range of yours. I've seen requests to compare the Barbarian, Paladin, Ranger ... and I guess I'd better do those as I have time (or others are welcome to speed this whole thing up and contribute those builds!), but I'm curious whether you'd say that those classes just are better in themselves, or whether they're better thanks to the sort of archetype & character option support that they have that the Unchained Monk currently lacks.
The Paladin is a monster of a class. If it only has access to Power Attack, and no other feats in the game, the Paladin is still going to be a top-tier martial.
It's defenses are solidly covered between it's Charisma to saves (and AC during smite), good armor class choices, and Lay on Hands. It's offense is covered between uses of Divine Bond and Smite + Spells. It's got amazing out of game utility as the face of the party (Paladin's get all the ladies). With the auras the Paladin has, he can even buff the party just by being there.
The Core Rule Book only Barbarina is a little on the sad side, but he's still very powerful. Superstition alone makes him unlikely to ever fail saves vs magic and there are very few non-magical Will saves in the game, and his Fortitude save is top notch regardless. His AC is a lacking a little, but he's also got an abundance of HP to work with.
The Offense of the Barbarian is second only to that of the Smiting Paladin when it comes to Martials, or a Ranger up against a Favored Enemy that got all of his Favored Enemy increases.
The Ranger is not nearly as offensively powerful as the Barbarian or Paladin unless he's super focused on a single type of enemy. This is unlikely, as he's more likely to diversify his Favored Enemy bonus. However, the Ranger has nearly unparalled utility for a full BAB martial. 6+Int Skill points means he's incredibly useful to the party for a host of reasons. Solid buffing spells at 4th level and higher means he's fairly independent. An animal companion for an ally and the Ranger is the best switch-hitter the game has to offer.
Now other classes can match or even exceede the offensive power of these three, but they often (read: always) fall short elsewhere. For example, a mounted and charging Cavalier against the target of his challenge is a bloody terrifying thing to behold. But the same cavalier struggles in other types of combat if he's not mounted and charging. For instance, he's likely to not have much feat support for on-foot combat (outside of Power Attack anyway). His ability to hurt targets at range is also likely lacking.
The Fighter is amongst the least powerful full-BAB classes because his defenses are rather crap. Now ability to heal, only a good Fortitude, and his sheer offensive ability is, while rather impressive, not so amazing as to offset the fact that he is one will save away from murdering the entire party, and very likely to fail that will save when it comes.
When it comes down to it, the Paladin, Barbarian and Ranger are the best you an hope for when it comes to full BAB martials.
You're talking about nearly doubling the 'Monk' content going forward if Paizo wants to support the Core Monk and the Unchained Monk at the same time. The reverse is not (entirely) true for the other Unchained Classes. Most archetypes work for the other classes, so most archetypes going forward are likely to work as well. Rage Powers, Evolutions, Rogue Talents etc. are all going to work for the other three classes (except in PFS).The Unchained summoner is at least as bad, but the Companion line developer is on record as saying he plans to fully support it going forward. Why would the monk be any different?
Because the Unchained Summoner has a rather easy access to Core Summoner stuff. Most stuff for the Unchained Summoner that already exists still functions, the same is not true for the Unchained Monk.
Many things the Core Monk had access to no longer function when you Unchain him, from archetypes to feats, things stop working. If you develop something for the Core Monk, chances are high it might not work for the Unchained Monk.
|
|
@Snowblind, Weirdo — I'm more optimistic about the Unchained Monk receiving ongoing support than it seems either of you are, and I'm also pretty confident that it'll get the tricks it needs to play high-opt games for folks who are looking for that, if nothing else than just as a matter of time. More options means more flexibility means more opportunities for high-optimizing players to run their tricks. But that's just a guess about the future, and I suppose time will tell
...Again, what basis do you have for being optimistic about this when it has never happened before.
Heck, unchained was meant to be the big opportunity to have a new, better monk. If they were going to give it the "tricks" to make it a decent class, this would have been the perfect time to do so. They failed to deliver. Why would you think some minor support in future products is going to change the monk's state as a weak class when a full rewrite failed to do so.
I think some of the problem here is just the unfortunate coincidence of (1) the general nature and architecture of the Unchained book and (2) the extent to which the designers overhauled the Monk class.
Because of (2), a lot of previous options were "wiped out" for the Unchained Monk in a way that they really weren't for the Unchained Barbarian or the Unchained Rogue. Those classes could include rewrites of key powers and then have sidebars with "use these others as is," and the archetypes all worked. That wasn't really an option with the Monk class given how thoroughly it was re-framed.
And I'm glad they didn't try for half-measures here, "chained" to backwards compatibility. I'd rather get the sort of clean-slate Monk that we got, which looks like a lot better of a platform to build on than the Core Monk or a backwards-compatible Unchained Monk ... but this does come with the downside that it's a clean slate.
And then because of (1), the space in Unchained was more properly devoted to the sort of modular optional rules that is the main point of the book, rather than providing a set of archetypes, feats, equipment, etc. for the "new" Monk class. In the past, new classes came in books that had the rest of their space to give more character options, and so they could receive immediate support. But Unchained is sort of a hybrid here, and it leaves the Unchained Monk, without the basic framework of the previous intact and without that backward-compatibility, also without later material in the book supporting it to give it more options.
And although that's a downside here, I can see the reasoning for the decision. It's an unfortunate tradeoff to have to make, but Paizo only has so many pages in a hardcover and I'd rather they use those pages in Unchained for more interesting rules systems rather than to support the new Monk. But I do hope to see support for the new Monk in the future.
As for what explains my hope that the Unchained Monk *will* get such support in the future, well, I guess I'm hoping that the powers that be at Paizo realize what a better version of the Monk they've got and that the game's better off with this one than with the Core Monk, and then commit to supporting it in the same way they support all the classes. (And with a little extra special love for it in the immediate future to help bring it up to speed with some extra archetypes and feats and equipment.)
Now maybe that's a foolish hope, born more of what I'd *like* to see than what I have any *reason* to expect. But that's where I'm coming from—it would just be such an obviously poor decision, I think, to *not* commit to the Unchained Monk, that I have a hard time imagining Paizo making that mistake.
Your dismal assessment of that possibility has offered two reasons: (1) it's from a book of optional rules, so maybe it'll be written off like Words of Power; (2) other 'weak' classes haven't got future options that make them better, so even if they do support it it won't be worth much.
Now the first one here (1) is a worry, but as somebody pointed out in another thread there's at least some precedence for "optional" rules becoming mainstream, in the general adoption of traits. I think that if we see widespread adoption of the Unchained Monk, which I expect we will, that Paizo will see what's happening and commit to supporting the class.
The second one (2) I'm just not sure whether I agree with that. As Tels has been pointing out, the Core Monk has seen quite a bit of support that has made it a better option. The Fighter class has some interesting archetypes and gets more and more options the more feats are added to the game. Etc. Especially given the complex, mix-and-match nature of the PF ruleset, I think that even if the design team and the developers don't *intentionally* add more powerful options for the Unchained Monk, the natural tendency of the game will, if they just keep adding options, give optimizers more and more to work with in making the Unchained Monk shine. And unlike the Core Monk, it seems to me, the Unchained Monk is at least a better platform to work with and has more potential once you start adding in those options.
Now, you and Weirdo have both offered not-unreasonable thoughts on why you don't share my expectations, and maybe yall are closer to the mark than I am here. We'll see in time.
As for me, I'm pretty sure it'll all work out for the best. I mean, we know the Paizo folk are pretty active on the boards, I think if the Unchained Monk just replaces Core Monk in play (with the exception of specialized archetype builds), which I expect it will, and if there's demand for Unchained Monk support (which I think there will be), then I'd really be shocked if we didn't see dedicated support published for the class.
The Unchained Monk is still MAD, costly to equip, and offers little utility outside of combat. It's in combat damage got a buff. It's overall combat abilities are about equal.
Comparing a PFS legal Unchained Monk to a PFS legal fighter or core monk or other classes are the comparisons you should be making, because these are the kinds of classes it will be competing against to be chosen to be played.
Or saying all material up through Unchained is usable. The U-Monk gets to exist and the Fighter/C-Monk/others gets all the stuff up to the condition the game was in when the U-Monk was made.
Both of these could be considered to be comparing apples to apples.
(If you're running a "core" Fighter/C-monk then no traits should be allowed for them since it's not the standard base the class was made with.)
The Unchained Monk is still MADI keep seeing this claim get made, and I really don't think it's gotten the examination it deserves.
I'm reasonably certain all the Unchained monk needs is Strength and Wisdom. Everything else it can more or less ignore.
Enjoy your god-awful AC without a decent Dex score.
You will need HP more than other martials too, since you don't have the AC to dodge hits even with a good dex.
At low levels monks have a shockingly bad AC, and unchained has not changed this (until they can get their hands on a wand of mage armor monk AC is pathetic).
Yeah, Uncahined did nothing to change the Monk's MAD issues, so why would they be fixed?