|
A healing kit that allows mundane healing using the heal skillYou mean like what you can already do with a healer's kit and the heal skill...
I'm not expecting anything too big
Expert Healing kit
This kit of various medial tools can be used to treat deadly wounds and only uses one kit at a DC of 25 instead of 20. Failure can result in 1d6 con damage. Success restores 2 hit points per level of the creature. If you exceed the DC by 5 or more, add your Wisdom modifier. A creature can only benefit from its deadly wounds being treated within 24 hours of being injured and never more than once per day
Express Healing kit
This kit of various medial tools can be used to treat deadly wounds and only uses one kit at a DC of 30 instead of 20. Failure can result in 1d6 con damage. Success restores 1 hit point per level of the creature. If you exceed the DC by 5 or more, add your Wisdom modifier. This can be performed as a full round action instead of an hour. A creature can only benefit from its deadly wounds being treated within 24 hours of being injured and never more than once per day
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
It also kills a lot of the monks flavor. Before this, he can say he's kicking and punching and headbutting... but then as soon as he gets this item he's reduced to just punching people in the head over and over.
So the monk's flavor is a single wrapped hand while he attacks with his whole body?
Get a wrap for each hand and for each foot. Hey, I think I've seen that somewhere before! ;)
I suspect people are talking about a mundane item, too, so it'd stay cheaper than an AoMF even with a set of 4.
DQ's not wrong, and I think it overlaps with what I'm saying too. A weapon that uses unarmed strike damage of the wielder.
Heck, it could even be a weapon property. Would be very cool on staffs and monk weapons and the like. Would need some limitation or we'd be seeing on falcatas right away and whatnot.
Personally, I don't think it's a good idea to split up unarmed strikes unless everything about them is updated. It will cause issues otherwise. The least of which is how it'd work if a monk had both one of these things and an Amulet of Mighty Fists.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What the desire for handwraps boiled down to is "I want to be able to use something that can be enchanted like a weapon but uses my unarmed strike damage." I don't remember anyone asking about NOT being limited to punches.
Ah, so you want your cake and to be able to eat it, too. Why ever use a cheap-to-enhance weapon (with weaker damage) when you can use a handwrap that lets you deal unarmed strike damage and add enhancement bonuses and flaming to it? Why put a +5 enhancement bonus on your kama when you could add an ability that lets you deal 2d10 damage instead of 1d6?
Heck, you could wear a magic handwrap on one hand, and nothing on the other, and when you would flurry, the attack with your handwrap would be with your weapon and all its enhancements, and the attack with your empty fist would be an unarmed strike, with all its enhancements (or lack thereof).
Yes, which is why I said you'd need some language clarifying iterative attacks with that limb, because the monk writeup doesn't require you to specify what part of your body you're using. A level 20 monk in full flurry at +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3 could be doing seven headbutts, seven punches, or seven kicks as far as the rules are concerned because the rules assume his attacks are either all unaugmented or his whole body is augmented. If he has magic handwraps that only affect one hand, that changes the parameters of how monk attacks and flurries work and we have to specify certain things for the first time, like "you're actually making X primary attacks any Y iterative attacks, so you're only applying the handwrap's bonus to X' and Y' instead of all instances of X or Y."
So if you're using this "I enhance only one of my attacks" item, you need to specify which one as part of your attack routine. If you don't want to deal with that, then you go with "no enhancement" or "amulet of mighty fists," because you can't have it both ways.
Were monks with the pre-errata brass knuckles stealing the spotlight with all the damage they were putting out? What was overpowering about it?
I would wager that not many people knew of the implications.
I think this was a case of "It ain't right!".
But I can't speak for JB or SKR (although that'd be cool)
|
What the desire for handwraps boiled down to is "I want to be able to use something that can be enchanted like a weapon but uses my unarmed strike damage." I don't remember anyone asking about NOT being limited to punches.Ah, so you want your cake and to be able to eat it, too.
:/
Personally, what I'd like out of it is not something that just enhances punches. What I was visualizing were wraps that go about the wrists and ankles, possibly part of the torso, that infuses the entire body and thus unarmed strike. None of that splitting-up-unarmed-strike stuff. If it has to eat up wrist, feet, and body slots, so be it.
And it would be priced at a friendly midrange between the current AoMF and standard enhanced equipment.
But the most important thing: It fits the monk's flavor. It feels right. It's not a piece of bling that's making him a better monk. He's still fighting with his entire body. Bonus points if the monk himself has a hand in making those wraps through cost-appropriate rituals.
It's all about helping the monk feel more like a monk.
The earlier remarks on Improved Natural Attack already making a distinction between unarmed strike and natural attacks and all the other metagamey decisions that have been made to nerf the monk already in the game are spot on.
Splitting up unarmed strike would be overcomplicating an already complicated class.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What the desire for handwraps boiled down to is "I want to be able to use something that can be enchanted like a weapon but uses my unarmed strike damage." I don't remember anyone asking about NOT being limited to punches.Ah, so you want your cake and to be able to eat it, too.
If that's how you choose to see it... but I really, honestly don't think what I and other people are asking for is unreasonable.
Let me put it this way -- I am a GM. I have no problem giving my players the option I have been describing (it's actually one of my very few house rules). If I personally felt it was allowing players to have their cake and eat it, I wouldn't allow it in my games.
Why ever use a cheap-to-enhance weapon (with weaker damage) when you can use a handwrap that lets you deal unarmed strike damage and add enhancement bonuses and flaming to it? Why put a +5 enhancement bonus on your kama when you could add an ability that lets you deal 2d10 damage instead of 1d6?
Because you want an enchanted monk weapon that does slashing damage and has the trip feature?
And otherwise, why might a fighter choose to wield a +5 short sword instead of a +5 warhammer? Or greatsword? Or bastard sword? All of the latter do more damage. Sure the short sword has a better crit range, but then... if you're going for crit range, you "should" wield a rapier or falchion or something.
There's tons of weapons and attacks that are considered better/more optimal on the list than others, some weapons and attacks you hardly ever see in a build (how many light pick builds are there compared to kukri builds?). No one's saying we shouldn't have the option--especially when the less "popular" weapons do have something to offer. What most monk weapons have to offer is usually a special feature like disarm or trip or blocking, etc. Making a weapon that deals unarmed strike damage won't take those abilities, that utility away from those other weapons.
Heck, you could wear a magic handwrap on one hand, and nothing on the other, and when you would flurry, the attack with your handwrap would be with your weapon and all its enhancements, and the attack with your empty fist would be an unarmed strike, with all its enhancements (or lack thereof).Yes, which is why I said you'd need some language clarifying iterative attacks with that limb, because the monk writeup doesn't require you to specify what part of your body you're using. A level 20 monk in full flurry at +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3 could be doing seven headbutts, seven punches, or seven kicks as far as the rules are concerned because the rules assume his attacks are either all unaugmented or his whole body is augmented. If he has magic handwraps that only affect one hand, that changes the parameters of how monk attacks and flurries work and we have to specify certain things for the first time, like "you're actually making X primary attacks any Y iterative attacks, so you're only applying the handwrap's bonus to X' and Y' instead of all instances of X or Y."
Ah, I see I confounded things by mentioning wielding a handwrap in one hand and nothing in the other.
Let's start over. Forget about when we are using our fists. Forget hands, erase the word hands from your mind for a minute.
I am a monk. I am making a flurry of blows. I am holding a +5 kama in one of my appendages. I would like to split my flurry of blows between attacks with the kama and my unarmed strikes.
Per the rules
When doing so he may make one additional attack using any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon
So I can flurry with my unarmed strikes and my attacks with a special monk weapon in the same flurry of blows. If I've got 7 attacks, I can make 1 with the kama and 6 with unarmed strike, or 3 with the kama and 4 with the unarmed strike, or however I like. Correct?
But since I AM mixing attack types, I have to figure out which of my attacks are with the +5 kama and which are with the unarmed strikes, because the +5 kama attacks get an enhancement bonus to attack and damage and the unarmed strikes do not (the +18/+18 etc. etc. could become a +23/+18... or whatever). That's something I already have to do, as a monk, right now, with the rules as written. Does it matter that I am holding the +5 kama in one hand? No.
Because we assume that the monk is attacking with other parts of his body.
If I change the +5 kama to into +5 handwraps, the above scenario should be EXACTLY THE SAME. I just have to determine which of my attacks are done with the WEAPON (the handwraps) and which of my attacks are done with the unarmed strikes, and apply attack bonuses accordingly.
Again, this is a weapon that happens to do damage equal to your unarmed strike damage. It does not modify or enhance your actual unarmed strikes in any way. (For example, if I am wielding a +5 kama and I am wearing a +4 amulet of mighty fists, then I get +5 to my kama attack and +4 to my unarmed strikes. If I am wielding a +5 handwrap and I am wearing a +4 amulet of mighty fists, then I get a +5 to my handwrap attack and +4 to my unarmed strikes.)
The only time you should worry about what's in your hand is when anyone should worry about what's in their hands (for casting spells, how many weapons you can wield, etc.).
So if you're using this "I enhance only one of my attacks" item,
NO UNARMED STRIKES ARE BEING ENHANCED. In my scenario, you are attacking with a weapon. A weapon that deals damage equal to unarmed strike damage, but it is still a weapon and not an unarmed strike, and follows weapon rules.
Again, I screwed up about mentioning wielding one in one hand and nothing in the other. Rules wise for things like flurry of blows, it should actually be irrelevant.
More magical items for animal companions and mounts.
Magical items for vehicles.
I would also like to see extremely mundane magical items. Magical items that the common peasant may be able to afford after saving enough money. This is, of course for very high magical campaigns or areas where magic is very common. An example would be such as blowing bubbles, where the bubbles change shape and animate into animals.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is a mundane subject, but I'd like to see more information about containers. Bags, pouches, backpacks, quivers, scabbards, holsters, chests, coffers, etcetera. How much can they hold? How are they carried? What action is required to draw an item from them? How many bags you can a person carry? How many belt-pouches can you you clip onto a single belt? Can you wear a backpack, quiver and a sheathed weapon on your back at the same time? With a cloak?
I'd also like to see a revision of how space is conceptualized within these containers. Rather than in terms of cubic feet or pounds, I'd like to see it expressed in terms of item sizes. For example, A belt-pouch can hold 4 tiny items or 1 small.
a little suggestion for the "handwrap" discussion:
please call it "wrap" or "bodywrap" (okay, they sound like food somehow) but it would be nice for flavour if you could wrap your foot with it and make a flaming roundhousekick.
Perhaps if it works but for one attack, that might make vital strike a little bit better.
Just say you can only use it for one attack per round, or attack action, or whatever the rule lawyers call it these days. But leave it so that if a single attack (like whirlwind atk) that targets multiple opponents, still gets the full use, most of these attacks I can think of are underpowered (in comparison to flurry) anyhow.
I'm not sure if that last request would break it for some monsters though, that's why you're Paizo, and I'm the (always happy) costumer :)
|
|
Vehicles!
I want ships, wagons, aetherflyers, etc. Magic and mundane.
I REALLY liked Distant Worlds but the lack of crunch for all the gooey fluff was disappointing.
I'd really like a system to build your own vehicles but I'm not expecting that here. I see this book as being a really big "Whole Realms Catalog."
SM
Were monks with the pre-errata brass knuckles stealing the spotlight with all the damage they were putting out? What was overpowering about it?I would wager that not many people knew of the implications.
The implications being what? That monks could bypass DR silver or Cold Iron without having to get an amulet of mighty fist +3? Is that bad?
They are knuckles meaning they can't be used on knees and feet, only on hands. No seven headbutts or seven kicks bypassing DR Silver or Cold Iron.
Heck, any archer can bypass any DR (Even slashing). All it takes is a +1 bow and some sliver arrows and cold iron arrow. If alignment is a problem, get a +1 Holy and use your silver or cold iron arrows.
If you are a melee dude? A +3 sword for DR Silver/Cold Iron costs +18 000 gp.
Monk: an amulet of Mighty Fists +3 costs 45,000 gp.
The melee dude wants bypass DR Silver/cold iron and evil, so that is a +5 weapon: 50,000 gp.
Heck, the melee dude could just get a +1 Holy, cold iron sword and use some silversheen when he has to. It would only cost 18 000 gp + some Silversheen at 250 gp.
The monk wants to do the same: 125,000 gp
The melee dude and his archer buddy can get weapons with modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents) up to +10
An amulet of mighty fists cannot have a modified bonus (enhancement bonus plus special ability bonus equivalents) higher than +5.
I agree with Caedwyr. "I haven't seen any supporting evidence to the claim that the pre-errata brass knuckles were overpowered." Sure I could be wrong. I'm not a Dev, so there could have been implication I haven't considered, but if so, why are we even discussing handwraps ?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
On the Monk handwrap issue: Personally, I think a more flavorful solution would be some sort of ritual that permanently enhances unarmed strikes and 'enchants' them as if they were weapons. You could make the ritual be in book form like a manual of bodily health is that it can qualify as 'loot'.
If you want to worry about this ritual interacting with natural attacks, there are two solutions. You could use fluff that says the ritual works with the monk's Ki(and thus only works with his enhanced unarmed strikes), or you could allow the ritual to enhance a single type of natural weapon.
Just suggesting this because I like the idea of unarmed monks better than brass knuckle or handwrap wielding monks.
What the desire for handwraps boiled down to is "I want to be able to use something that can be enchanted like a weapon but uses my unarmed strike damage." I don't remember anyone asking about NOT being limited to punches.Ah, so you want your cake and to be able to eat it, too. Why ever use a cheap-to-enhance weapon (with weaker damage) when you can use a handwrap that lets you deal unarmed strike damage and add enhancement bonuses and flaming to it? Why put a +5 enhancement bonus on your kama when you could add an ability that lets you deal 2d10 damage instead of 1d6?
Heck, you could wear a magic handwrap on one hand, and nothing on the other, and when you would flurry, the attack with your handwrap would be with your weapon and all its enhancements, and the attack with your empty fist would be an unarmed strike, with all its enhancements (or lack thereof).Yes, which is why I said you'd need some language clarifying iterative attacks with that limb, because the monk writeup doesn't require you to specify what part of your body you're using. A level 20 monk in full flurry at +18/+18/+13/+13/+8/+8/+3 could be doing seven headbutts, seven punches, or seven kicks as far as the rules are concerned because the rules assume his attacks are either all unaugmented or his whole body is augmented. If he has magic handwraps that only affect one hand, that changes the parameters of how monk attacks and flurries work and we have to specify certain things for the first time, like "you're actually making X primary attacks any Y iterative attacks, so you're only applying the handwrap's bonus to X' and Y' instead of all instances of X or Y."
So if you're using this "I enhance only one of my attacks" item, you need to specify which one as part of your attack routine. If you don't want to deal with that, then you go with "no enhancement" or "amulet of mighty fists," because you can't have it both ways.
I don't agree DeathQuaker an all accounts, but I think you make to big thing out of this. Even when only the Core book was out a monk could flurry with a slashing weapon in one hand, a piercing weapon in the other and add a kick or two.
I just don't like the idea that all monk players are now using the temple sword or playing a Zen Archer. The alternative would be a +3 amulet of mighty fits with some special ability bonus and a lot of oils of align weapon.
Temple sword wielded in two hands gives you more damage when using flurry if you power attack and are more useful and cheaper and can have an enhancement bonus of +10. The monk with the +5, Holy, Shocking Temple sword can still have a amulet of mighty fits so he can trip with a kick or use a stunning fist at the start of the round.
I would actually let the monk stack the special ability of the amulet of mighty fits with the handwraps. A silver handwraps +2 and a +1, flaming amulet of mighty fits would be +2, flaming and silver. I have no problem with it.
edit:
The melee dude and the archer dude could still get more powerful weapons for the same cash and get a better to hit and probably just as good damage as the unarmed monk, or better.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey Sean,
Thanks for posting this topic. I appreciate the news available on Ultimate Equipment and I know that there is a lot of time and effort going into the compilation, organization and finishing of this product.
That being said, I implore you to add some rules text to the items that require it. I realize that this may increase the cost by adding more pages to the book, but I will gladly pay a little more for this :). This may be against the original slant of your topic - or not, I'll let you decide.
Things I'd like to see from Ultimate Equipment (equipment rules wise):
1. Adding the "cannot be disarmed" reminder text to item descriptions that require it - the Gauntlet weapons have this text and more weapons require it. For example, this would apply to shields (buckler, light, heavy, tower and quickdraw) based on the Disarm FAQ, Armor Spikes, Shield Spikes and the Cestus. There may be more, but this is an example.
2. Text update to Throwing Shields that sort of covers that you can't quickdraw and throw a billion throwing shields as a continuous string of free actions.
3. Extension of the Buckler Rules to all shields. Let me explain.. there is a problem where by stacking quickdraw and/or quickdraw shields folks argue they can use two hands to attack then draw the shield to gain the defensive benefit of the shield while attacking with the force of two-hands. This is currently nebulous in the rules because light/heavy shields do not carry the same text as a buckler: "In any case, if you use a weapon in your off hand, you lose the buckler's AC bonus until your next turn."
4. An update to the Brace weapon feature that makes it more usable in game. Right now, the text implies that you need to explicitly ready an attack vs a charge, this is a very limiting use of the ready action that would result in the readier not being able to strike an opponent that entered their reach by any means other than a charge.
5. An update to the Trip weapon feature that gives +2 on trip attempts. This would make the Trip weapon feature continue to have value after the Tripping FAQ & errata.
Things I'd like to see from Ultimate Equipment (new items):
1. A repeating hand crossbow. We have all other kinds of repeating crossbows.
2. An update to whip type weapons that using them two-handed doesn't increase their damage dealt. (Something like what is written on the Rapier).
Thanks for listening, I'd be interested in your comments on the subjects above.
|
|
Not to make things more complicated, but what is stopping unarmed martial artists from wrapping knees, feet, and elbows? In fact, don't some of them do that anyway?
Mostly Naruto references, I have jet to see another monk with green track suite though^^.
I think that people just want something else to improve their unarmed strikes, currently you can have an amulet of mighty fists with +5 weapon abilities like spell storing (works according to Kingmaker 5), frost, defending and bane (dragons). On top of that the Monk can let a friendly arcanist or druid IIRC improved his unarmed strikes with either greater magic weapon/fang either refreshed every day or cast with permanency.
Thats your +10 weapon right there. If you add a new item into the mix the max +10 bonus on weapons rule should keep your weapons tame.
EDIT: After reading the amulet of mighty fists again it seems to be priced for monsters with natural attacks like dragons and my groups druid, a weapon priced just for monk (slightly more expensive than a +10 weapon would be fun.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Are there going to be vehicles in this book?
If there are, I might need to revise a writing project I want to publish.
I'm fairly certain Erik Mona said elsewhere there would be no vehicles in this book because it's so close after the release of Ultimate Combat and the vehicle rules and vehicles in that book.
On the Monk handwrap issue: Personally, I think a more flavorful solution would be some sort of ritual that permanently enhances unarmed strikes and 'enchants' them as if they were weapons.
Yup. Like the feats Monte Cook put in Arcana Evolved and the Book of Experimental Might.
I am sure it was mentioned somewhere in this thread, but I would love to see mundane clothing separated out from outfits, and illustrations of said clothing. Would be cool to show different styles of dress from the major areas, as well.
I know it is mentioned that it will NOT be in the book, but I would love to see some prices for furniture and other items for kitting out your base of operations, too. If not in this book, perhaps part of a future offering?
I can understand the developers' concerns with boosting the usefulness of a class by improving things like wealth efficiency and damage output. It is the beginning of power creep. Does the monk need it? You bet! Is it a step to be taken lightly? No. Even if the answer seems obvious now, this could cause some issues later that we can't see yet.
Adding new items with new options are intended to be balanced against what exists and is known to be more or less 'fair.' Adding items such as these proposed handwraps circumvent the need for an expensive item AND a spell or two cast with permanency. That's a much bigger deal.
I am an advocate. Monks get the shaft when it comes to gear. They should have nice things like these hypotehtical handwraps (though it really doesn't help them much if you have to buy one for each limb -- I'd definitely take the amulet (5000g, four limbs) over four wraps (4000g, one limb)).
This fix is more or less necessary, as is evidenced by the amount of support it's getting. But, to what extent and how that goal is reached is something that has to be really fiddled with, because it's not just making a new option, it shifting the fulcrum of balance, even if slightly.
We should respect the developers reaction to such a task, even while we ask them to respect our desires for a new product. This could come back to bite us all if it's not done right.
Maybe if the monk had gotten enhancement bonuses on it's unarmed strike like it should have to begin with it wouldn't be a problem. I would say a +1 at lv4 and additional +1 every four levels after for a max of +5 at level 20. Also getting special weapon properties like flaming, shocking, Holy, Disruption, etc. my spending Ki would have nore then made up for the whole HD/BA depate.
a magic item that grants a bonus spell known permenantly to spontanous casters. Such an item item would be one use likt the tomes/manuals for stats.
A magic item that grants permenant skill points(like 5) and is one use.
A magic item that grants permenant bonus feats(max 5 per character) and lone use.
Magical works of art like paintings, sculptures, etc.
Magical hat for witches.
Magical armor properties that grant freedom of movement, deathward, absorb magic missles as healing, grant fast healing, etc.
Shields that grant protection from arrows, deflect ray effects, protect against gaze attacks, etc.
Cloak of Invisibility(regular and greater versions)
Sandels of waterwalking
Magical third eyes that attach to your forhead and grant darkvion, see invisible, perception bonuses, claraudiance/claravioyance, spell penetration, ray attacks, etc.
Circlets that improve spellcasting in various ways.
Cloaks that have mirror image effects, create illusions, plant based abilities, light based abilities, shadow magic, etc.
|
|
On the Monk handwrap issue: Personally, I think a more flavorful solution would be some sort of ritual that permanently enhances unarmed strikes and 'enchants' them as if they were weapons.Yup. Like the feats Monte Cook put in Arcana Evolved and the Book of Experimental Might.
Direct enhancement rituals, especially if the monk does it himself, are actually the approach I'd prefer.
I hoped we could get something like that in Ultimate Combat. And since they technically aren't items, didn't seem like they'd have a chance here...
But yeah, that's pretty much the monk holy grail, short of a workable VoP for them.
I hoped we could get something like that in Ultimate Combat. And since they technically aren't items, didn't seem like they'd have a chance here...
Yea, it is kind of unfortunate. The only way I can think of that we could get something like this in Ultimate Equipment is if the 'ritual' came in book form, kind of like the Manuals that give Inherent bonuses to stats.
How about a Cutlass?
An eyepatch that gives you lowlight vision for a few minutes if you wear it (with a penalty to perception checks) for X hours a day.
There's Infernal and Celestial Armor, so how bout the other Planes get some lovin' via thematic armor?
What I'd like to see:
More Channel Foci (which are Golarion-specific at this point, so might count as "new rules").
Some sort of inexpensive crude/booby traps that won't take a week to craft. Maybe a "trap pack" that allows pre-built traps to be set up quickly in the dungeon/wilds?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Personally, what I'd like out of it is not something that just enhances punches. What I was visualizing were wraps that go about the wrists and ankles, possibly part of the torso, that infuses the entire body and thus unarmed strike. None of that splitting-up-unarmed-strike stuff. If it has to eat up wrist, feet, and body slots, so be it.
And it would be priced at a friendly midrange between the current AoMF and standard enhanced equipment.
You folks are sending me mixed signals.
If you want an item that enhances multiple unarmed attacks, it's the amulet of mighty fists. We're not going to introduce a new item that enhances multiple attacks at a lower price than the amulet. If you want to make a new item that does the same thing as the amulet, but in the chest slot, that's fine, but something that does what the amulet does at a lower price is a better item than the amulet, and we're not going to introduce an item that's clearly better than a core item.
If you want an item that enhances one unarmed attack, it has to cost a little more than the enhancement on a weapon, because it can't be disarmed, it doesn't look like a weapon (nobody's going to make you "leave your handwraps at the door" when you visit the king), and you never have to spend an action to draw it. And if you're just enhancing one of a monk's unarmed strikes (even if you can decide on the fly whether that's a punch, kick, knee, or headbutt), that still means you have to figure out which of the monk's attacks are from that unarmed strike (and are enhanced by the item) so you know which ones aren't (and aren't enhanced).
And because the amulet of mighty fists costs 2.5x what a single magic weapon costs, that means the item that enhances one attack has to be priced about 1.5x what a single magic weapon costs because
standard magic weapon = 1x
proposed one-attack item = ??
amulet of mighty fists = 2.5x
The easy-math options are 1.5x and 2x, and I'm sure you'd rather it be 1.5x rather than 2x.
Which means if you have two of these proposed items, your net cost is 3x what a magic weapon costs, which means in terms of costs you're better off with an amulet of mighty fists.
That's how the math works. It can't be cheaper than a weapon because it's better than a weapon. It can't affect multiple attacks because it invalidates the amulet of mighty fists. As far as I can tell, there's only a narrow strip of middle ground, and if you're not satisfied with that, our other option is to not include anything like this at all.
I'm trying to create something that is balanced and is still something you'd like, but if that doesn't satisfy you, our other option is to not publish anything like this at all, because I'd rather not waste my time creating something you're going to hate anyway. I really am trying to work with you on this, but you're not seeing the repercussions of what you're asking--or you're being unclear in what you're asking for.
|
RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16
|
Personally, what I'd like out of it is not something that just enhances punches. What I was visualizing were wraps that go about the wrists and ankles, possibly part of the torso, that infuses the entire body and thus unarmed strike. None of that splitting-up-unarmed-strike stuff. If it has to eat up wrist, feet, and body slots, so be it.
And it would be priced at a friendly midrange between the current AoMF and standard enhanced equipment.You folks are sending me mixed signals.
If you want an item that enhances multiple unarmed attacks, it's the amulet of mighty fists. We're not going to introduce a new item that enhances multiple attacks at a lower price than the amulet. If you want to make a new item that does the same thing as the amulet, but in the chest slot, that's fine, but something that does what the amulet does at a lower price is a better item than the amulet, and we're not going to introduce an item that's clearly better than a core item.
If you want an item that enhances one unarmed attack, it has to cost a little more than the enhancement on a weapon, because it can't be disarmed, it doesn't look like a weapon (nobody's going to make you "leave your handwraps at the door" when you visit the king), and you never have to spend an action to draw it. And if you're just enhancing one of a monk's unarmed strikes (even if you can decide on the fly whether that's a punch, kick, knee, or headbutt), that still means you have to figure out which of the monk's attacks are from that unarmed strike (and are enhanced by the item) so you know which ones aren't (and aren't enhanced).
And because the amulet of mighty fists costs 2.5x what a single magic weapon costs, that means the item that enhances one attack has to be priced about 1.5x what a single magic weapon costs because
standard magic weapon = 1x
proposed one-attack item = ??
amulet of mighty fists = 2.5xThe easy-math options are 1.5x and 2x, and I'm sure you'd rather it be...
DAMN! SKR BEATDOWN!
I agree with your assertion on this one, I hadn't thought about the un-diarmable thing and the fact that a monk would be the only one able to keep his magical weapons in a situation like a royal meeting. The 1.5x magic item on a single unarmed strike does seem reasonable to me.
|
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
What if it was a non-magical handwrap that did something slightly less powerful than a weapon? Something like "unarmed strikes made using a handwrap gain a +1 bonus to damage".
It's weaker than a +1 weapon because there's no bonus to hit and no overcoming of DR and no damage to incorporeal creatures; therefore it can be much cheaper
What about that?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If that's how you choose to see it... but I really, honestly don't think what I and other people are asking for is unreasonable.
You're asking for a magic item that lets you deal unarmed strike damage instead of weapon damage. We have to balance that for the optimized character so it can't be abused. That means we have to balance the choice of having a +5 weapon vs. an item that lets a 20th-level monk deal 2d10 damage with each attack, even a said that normally deals 1d4 damage.
And otherwise, why might a fighter choose to wield a +5 short sword instead of a +5 warhammer? Or greatsword? Or bastard sword? All of the latter do more damage. Sure the short sword has a better crit range, but then... if you're going for crit range, you "should" wield a rapier or falchion or something.
Apples and oranges. Short swords and warhammers are in the game because they're actual, historical weapons, and if the game doesn't have a reasonable assortment of historical weapons, it fails the basic premise of "sword and sorcery" gaming. So yes, some historical weapons are worse than others... just like how it was in history. The game models that, and allows characters to choose sub-optimal weapons for flavor. That's material in the core rulebook for the game.
You're talking about adding an option in a new book that is clearly better than an option in that core rulebook. It invalidates that part of the core rulebook, like a new version of the bard class that has d12 Hit Dice but only 4 skill points per level. "Some people would still play the old bard because it has more skill points" doesn't change that the new bard is better than the old bard. You're invalidating something in the baseline game. That's rules creep. That's bad.
I'm all about allowing players to make sup-optimal choices. I frequently quote Monte Cook's adage about the game letting you eat rocks if you want to. But there's a difference between "giving the option to make suboptimal choices" and "turning a standard choice in the core rules of the game into a suboptimal choice."
You folks are sending me mixed signals.
If you want an item that enhances multiple unarmed attacks, it's the amulet of mighty fists. We're not going to introduce a new item that enhances multiple attacks at a lower price than the amulet.
Hmm. I think part of core problem here is that people tend to think that the amount of money that a character has to spend on weapons should be proportionate to the benefit that he's getting from it. For example, many people say a two-weapon fighter shouldn't have to pay twice as much money for weapons as a two-handed fighter because the two-handed fighter is generally more combat effective. Monks seem to have to pay an awful lot just because they want to punch people rather than use a weapon, but their punches aren't necessarily better than just using a really big sword.
I guess you could think of this as a game balance vs realism problem? Of course, if you want to stick to the 'cost per weapon' design philosophy, and count each part of a monk's body as a weapon, then monks may have problems, lol. I guess the best we can settle for then is something like the handwraps that only enhance punches idea.
I do have to say though, your idea about having an 'amulet of mighty fists' item that uses the chest slot appeals to me. I guess it would be another kind of monk robe? The fact that it is a robe would probably also keep it from helping many types of monsters.
Sean, just curious, do you think adding additional requirements to the item like saying 'it only functions while the wearer has at least 1 point in his ki pool' might serve to lower the price and limit it to monks rather than monsters? Or do you think that's making things too complex?
You're talking about adding an option in a new book that is clearly better than an option in that core rulebook. It invalidates that part of the core rulebook, like a new version of the bard class that has d12 Hit Dice but only 4 skill points per level. "Some people would still play the old bard because it has more skill points" doesn't change that the new bard is better than the old bard. You're invalidating something in the baseline game. That's rules creep. That's bad.
Ahhh, I see what you're saying. I was thinking of these suggestions as fixing things that (I thought) were missing or off balance in the core rules, but I can see why you're be wary about it since it might be power creep.
Sean, just curious, do you think adding additional requirements to the item like saying 'it only functions while the wearer has at least 1 point in his ki pool' might serve to lower the price and limit it to monks rather than monsters? Or do you think that's making things too complex?
You'd still have to cost it assuming the optimal user, so that wouldn't change.
For example, if I'm a good-aligned, male, blue-eyed, left-handed, elf wizard, and I craft a pearl of power that only works for good-aligned, male, blue-eyed, left-handed, elf wizards, should I really get a discount on the cost to create the item? It works just like a normal pearl of power for me, so should I really be able to make it cheaper than a standard magic item? Especially if these limitations mean most of my enemies can't use it against me if it's stolen from me? Answer: no. Putting those limitations on it would reduce its price on the open market if I were to sell it because it's much less useful than a normal pearl of power, but the cost to create it should be the same.