Monkeying Around

So is the remaining "issue" simply that monks are too versatile?

Hardly, Jiggy. This is a small, incremental change to a weak class. Monks are 'versatile' in that they don't really do anything well except mobility (until the first fly spell gets cast, anyway), but they are not the complete pits at anything either.

I understand that folks still have some frustrations with a few aspects of the monk. At this time, we are not considering any further changes. We want to see how these shake out over time and let things normalize a bit before any further considerations are made.

This is how we work on these issues. Small adjustments let us better gauge progress and understand impact. Big changes just lead to more big changes down the road and that is no way to manage a rules set.

Thanks for the comments folks.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

And we cannot ask more than that. I still think this leaves the monk weak and lacking even at the things they are meant to be good at, and I am not really sure that the change to the AoMF was a good idea or a good fix (great boost for druids, though) - but as you say, we can run with it and see how it plays.

And we cannot ask more than that. I still think this leaves the monk weak and lacking even at the things they are meant to be good at, and I am not really sure that the change to the AoMF was a good idea or a good fix (great boost for druids, though) - but as you say, we can run with it and see how it plays.

Yep, and hopefully we can get the feedback...back...in good faith without anyone going into histrionics over Paizo not doing enough or turning into hecklers over "monk fans complaining again" and drowning out how things actually pan out.

Paizo community, you can do this.

Dabbler wrote:

And we cannot ask more than that. I still think this leaves the monk weak and lacking even at the things they are meant to be good at, and I am not really sure that the change to the AoMF was a good idea or a good fix (great boost for druids, though) - but as you say, we can run with it and see how it plays.

Yep, and hopefully we can get the feedback...back...in good faith without anyone going into histrionics over Paizo not doing enough or turning into hecklers over "monk fans complaining again" and drowning out how things actually pan out.

Paizo community, you can do this.

But that would assume that certain someones cannot assume the worst about us and our intentions and obviously that cannot be countenanced.

Better. Thank you Paizo.

Let us not make the perfect the enemy of the good.

I understand that folks still have some frustrations with a few aspects of the monk. At this time, we are not considering any further changes. We want to see how these shake out over time and let things normalize a bit before any further considerations are made.

This is how we work on these issues. Small adjustments let us better gauge progress and understand impact. Big changes just lead to more big changes down the road and that is no way to manage a rules set.

Thanks for the comments folks.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

Yes. This. Please. Well said.

I understand that folks still have some frustrations with a few aspects of the monk. At this time, we are not considering any further changes. We want to see how these shake out over time and let things normalize a bit before any further considerations are made.

This is how we work on these issues. Small adjustments let us better gauge progress and understand impact. Big changes just lead to more big changes down the road and that is no way to manage a rules set.

Thanks for the comments folks.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer

But Paizo does make big changes. Just look at the Witch's Scar hex. As written originally, it was completely worthless. Then SKR came in and let it extend hex range on scarred creatures out to a mile (from the typical 30 or 60 ft range) and use it for scrying, too. I would call those pretty major buffs.

So yes, while I'm happy monk is getting any help at all, it is still frustrating just how tiny the changes are.

(And as others have joked about, lowering the price of AoMF is an even bigger help to summoners, druids, and other PCs with lots of natural attacks than it is to the monk -- the AoMF was well worth it for them as it was -- Paizo's just continuing to duck the real issue that monks need their own item that enhances ONLY unarmed and is priced equally to manufactured weapon enhancements)

I still think they should allow the Monk to apply his Unarmed Damage with certain weapons if he is proficient with them and they are monk weapons.

It gives them a reason to use certain flavorful weapons without losing one of their unique abilities.

I can just imagine a Monk fluffed out as a Street Brawler who specializes in Brass Knuckles.

But Paizo does make big changes. Just look at the Witch's Scar hex. As written originally, it was completely worthless. Then SKR came in and let it extend hex range on scarred creatures out to a mile (from the typical 30 or 60 ft range) and use it for scrying, too. I would call those pretty major buffs.

So yes, while I'm happy monk is getting any help at all, it is still frustrating just how tiny the changes are.

(And as others have joked about, lowering the price of AoMF is an even bigger help to summoners, druids, and other PCs with lots of natural attacks than it is to the monk -- the AoMF was well worth it for them as it was -- Paizo's just continuing to duck the real issue that monks need their own item that enhances ONLY unarmed and is priced equally to manufactured weapon enhancements)

I think its' really just some cognitive dissonance, or inertia in how things are thought of... EVEN WHEN they totally change the way Flurry is thought of (even if that original model wasn't applied very consistently), there is the persistence of the idea that AoMF MUST be the primary enhancement technique for UAS...

The main exception, Body Wraps, are gimped compared to real weapon enhancements since they are limited to usages based on BAB, not addressing extra attacks like Flurry (although full BAB when flurrying may give you an extra usage) and AoOs conflict with using a full attack.

On the other hand, AoMF /is/ the only means in the Core Rules, so for the Core Rules to work well by itself, AoMF does need to work as a primary means to enhance UAS, unless a new item is to be Errata'd into the CRB out of the blue... Which makes me wish that they DID persist with 2WF Flurry, improving Flurry to actually grant conditional Feats (usable to qualify for 2 Wpn Rend, etc). ... That wouldn't conflict with Body Wraps being upgraded to be on par with a single weapon enhancement. (Body Wraps using the same slot as Monk's Robes does kind of suck though) and Archetypes like Zen Archer could be Errata'd to uniquely NOT work like 2WF at all, but just be extra attacks ala Rapid Fire. I'd guess that FAQing/Errata'ing ONE rules item (Core Flurry) was preferred to dealing with all the exceptions individually.

Changing flurry of blows affects all monks (a core class), who by default all have the flurry of blows ability.

Changing scar hex affects only the subset of witches (not a core class) who choose that hex from the supplemental book Ultimate Magic.

Making a big change to flurry of blows (or AOMF) has a much greater impact on the player base, the game, and the Golarion setting than making a big change to scar hex. I'd argue that making an average or even a small change to flurry still has more impact on the player base, the game, and the setting than making a change to scar hex does.

It's like a big change to the Windows OS vs. a big change to the Mac OS; the big change to Windows is going to affect more users, more computers, and more programs, than an equivalent change to the Mac software.

Some just won't be happy untill the monk can do everything with perfection and beat every other class in all things. Let it go, the paizo folks will change what they feel they need to

I started a thread asking them what would make them happy. Many of the responses are well thought out.

Personally, other than the horrible MAD (so hard to do a decent monk on 15 pts even if he has the charisma of a flatutent warthog, and why are all monks ugly and disliked?) I think the monk is Ok, now, what with the new FAQ.

But I think that the devs should at least check out the responses to my thread, maybe there's something there that might help them. Or not.

Changing flurry of blows affects all monks (a core class), who by default all have the flurry of blows ability.

I agree. I think the course of action embarked upon is the most sensible. I also agree that changing the AoMF is a bit of a cop-out and insufficient to bring the monk up to speed. As I've said before, the cost is one problem with the AoMF, the +5 cap is another. However, it's best to tweak it and see if it works than not before making bigger changes.

Some just won't be happy untill the monk can do everything with perfection and beat every other class in all things. Let it go, the paizo folks will change what they feel they need to

Some of us, on the other hand, will be happy when the monk is a viable class that can just do one thing perfectly (or at least be the best at it). As it is, you can still list pretty much any major feature the monk has and find another class that does it better - unless said feature has a serious drawback...

Stunning Fist.

Stunning Fist.

Other classes do it better. Sure, Monk has more of it, but that doesn't mean it's better.

Stunning Fist encompasses 3 aspects of criteria to determine success.
1) You must hit the target.
2) You must damage the target.
3) Target must fail a Fortitude Save of DC 10 + 1/2 character level + Wisdom mod

So, the first criteria is one that has plagued Monks for a long time. Just hitting can be difficult enough for the Monk.

Monks have often had issues with overcoming DR. Granted, with the recent changes, this will be less of an issue, but it still exists. Other classes can get damage bonuses high enough to just power through any DR a creature has, Monks... not so much.

The third and final criteria is a problem all users of Stunning Fist have. The people you are most apt to use it on, often have very high Fortitude saves.

In my opinion, the best user of Stunning Fist, is a Druid with Clerics as a strong candidate as well. Good Wisdom, and good combat potential, with good damage. They will be able to hit, deal damage, and probably have a fairly decent DC.

DR and maybe even To-Hit has been solved.

How will a Cleric be better with Stunning Fist? A Druid maybe if their Natural Attacks count as an Unarmed Strike to activate the feat.

They also suffer the To-Hit problem as well as they are also a 3/4th BAB class.

Heck, If a Monk can use this ability with Flurry Of Blows (which if memory serves they can if they state before the Attack Rolls and are willing to expend the uses) they basically get it at Full BAB with a slight penalty.

I would like to make this suggestion, perhaps this is the place for it.

Debilitating and pressure point strikes.

So don't give the monk great to hit, not great damage, but instead make it so that it is very easy for a monk to cause status effects (Enter The Reverse Paladin) and drain ability score points with unarmed strikes, e.g. hit reduces dex, hit reduces strength, the wizard gets punched in the head and their int goes down. Which in a way, is like making monks's strikes be like a variable poison.

So the monk doesn't get shut down by fort saves, the save could be made very high, or, non-existent for the small drains (2 ability points, a weak status effect), but only in place for the truly strong drains (3 ability points, stronger status effects).

And by Lamashtu, let monks be able to blind their foes. The eye gouge/snake strike/lunge to the eyes is in numerous unarmed martial arts.

Push something like this, and still emphasise their defences, with the option of monks not taking the pressure point path and instead increasing their damage to make them more in line with fighters, barbs and two weapon fighting rangers.

There are a lot better options that can merge more closely with the martial art background? Anyone ever got concussed, winded, leg-kicked, wrist-locked or nerve striked in the arm? That sort of thing.

100% in line with the monk fluff. Make them cool and fight totally different to other melee or skirmish classes, with the option to go the high and pure damage option for those that want it.

Quandary wrote:

Stunning Fist.

Other classes do it better. Sure, Monk has more of it, but that doesn't mean it's better.

Stunning Fist encompasses 3 aspects of criteria to determine success.
1) You must hit the target.
2) You must damage the target.
3) Target must fail a Fortitude Save of DC 10 + 1/2 character level + Wisdom mod

So, the first criteria is one that has plagued Monks for a long time. Just hitting can be difficult enough for the Monk.

Monks have often had issues with overcoming DR. Granted, with the recent changes, this will be less of an issue, but it still exists. Other classes can get damage bonuses high enough to just power through any DR a creature has, Monks... not so much.

The third and final criteria is a problem all users of Stunning Fist have. The people you are most apt to use it on, often have very high Fortitude saves.

In my opinion, the best user of Stunning Fist, is a Druid with Clerics as a strong candidate as well. Good Wisdom, and good combat potential, with good damage. They will be able to hit, deal damage, and probably have a fairly decent DC.

There is also the later death attack.

Stunning fist is an "also" ability to me. Unlike spells, this is part of a larger attack sequence. I am hitting you lots and "also" one of the attacks may stun or kill you. And monk can do this fairly often, relative to other classes.

Look, I would have gone another way that free attack bonus to monk unarmed strike without changing AoMF (as I've posted ad nauseum) but who cares, this is better than it was.

If it turns out this is "Not better enough" we can deal with that later, probably in the next version of the game

If it turns out this is "Not better enough" we can deal with that later, probably in the next version of the game

Or in this edition, since second edition PF is still far, far off, according to James.

ciretose wrote:

If it turns out this is "Not better enough" we can deal with that later, probably in the next version of the game

Or in this edition, since second edition PF is still far, far off, according to James.

I would say, define "Far, far off."

And to be clear, I am saying version, not edition change.

3.0 to 3.5 rather than 3.5 to 4.0.

magnuskn wrote:

ciretose wrote:

If it turns out this is "Not better enough" we can deal with that later, probably in the next version of the game

Or in this edition, since second edition PF is still far, far off, according to James.

I would say, define "Far, far off."

And to be clear, I am saying version, not edition change.

3.0 to 3.5 rather than 3.5 to 4.0.

Nope. We're not working on a 2nd edition of the game. Launching a 2nd edition of a game when the 1st edition is still increasing in popularity is not a good idea. Maybe once we get the idea that Pathfinder's reached a sales plateau we'll start working on a 2nd edition, but until we get the feeling that we're reaching or have reached such a sales plateau... we're not going to devote much resources in house to fixing something that our sales numbers are telling us isn't, overall, broken.

That's the best answer I can give you. James definitely sounds as if the next edition will be quite a few years down the line, not only one or two. So I think the Monk warrants another look at in one or two years, when the changes have settled and effects observed.

DR and maybe even To-Hit has been solved.

How will a Cleric be better with Stunning Fist? A Druid maybe if their Natural Attacks count as an Unarmed Strike to activate the feat.

They also suffer the To-Hit problem as well as they are also a 3/4th BAB class.

Heck, If a Monk can use this ability with Flurry Of Blows (which if memory serves they can if they state before the Attack Rolls and are willing to expend the uses) they basically get it at Full BAB with a slight penalty.

DR hasn't been solved, it's just been made easier to overcome. Monks now have less issues with DR, but DR is still an issue if it isn't one of the ones they auto-overcome with their unarmed strikes. Monks can overcome Cold Iron and Silver at about the same time you could potentially afford a +3 Amulet. Doesn't mean they can overcome DR/Cold Iron and Good, or Silver and piercing, or Good and Piercing etc. While other classes can get their damage bonuses high enough to power through the DR, Monks don't really have this ability.

Now I'm not complaining about this though, I like the changes to the Monk. In fact, I think it makes Monks one of the go-to guys for a low-magic kind of campaign.

The biggest detractor from the Monk's to-hit is his MADness and lack of ability to improve their attacks. Nearly every other class in the game has some method of enhancing their attack bonus. Inquisitors, Druids, Bards, Clerics, the Magus, Fighters, Paladins, Rangers, Barbarians, Cavaliers all get class abilities or spells, sometimes both, to improve their attack routine. Of the above, the Inquisitor, Cleric, and Druid are 3/4 BAB classes like the Monk, they can boost their to-hit and damage to be nearly on par with(or even exceeds) that of the full BAB classes.

With the ability to hit reliably, power through DR, and decent DCs due to being Wisdom classes, the Inquisitor, Druid and Cleric are at least equal to, or better than, the Monk at Stunning Fist.

There is always the option of talking to the dm and swapping out certain class abilities for others. If you want to play a monk with good bab progression, ask the dm if its possible by dropping one save to poor progression and giving up something like wholeness and still mind. Its always worked for players to play a character based on a slightly modified class.

There is always the option of talking to the dm and swapping out certain class abilities for others. If you want to play a monk with good bab progression, ask the dm if its possible by dropping one save to poor progression and giving up something like wholeness and still mind. Its always worked for players to play a character based on a slightly modified class.

Why drop anything? The monk (on a flurry of blows full attack) already HAS functional full BAB. At best he would be getting another +2 over flurry when he makes a single attack or an AoO were he given full actual BAB. And it would correct the . . . logical conundrum whereby the monk is more accurate (i.e., has a better chance of hitting) when he uses multiple fast attacks than with a single blow; every other class is the exact opposite.

MA

I would hope to go one step further and also have d10 hit dice. The monk's role should be a mobile front-liner, and I think the idea that a skirmisher class works in Pathfinder is a beartrap that needs to be removed.

If they are fast, evasive and with good saves, they probably shouldn't get tank hit die.

If you want to get better hit die, talk to the dm about taking your unarmed damage back to reflect your iron body style, heresy I know.

If they are fast, evasive and with good saves, they probably shouldn't get tank hit die.

If you want to get better hit die, talk to the dm about taking your unarmed damage back to reflect your iron body style, heresy I know.

First of all "tank" is not a thing that exists in this game.

Second of all, talking to the GM should not be the first thing done. The first thing to do is try to improve the game for everybody.

ciretose wrote:

magnuskn wrote:

ciretose wrote:

If it turns out this is "Not better enough" we can deal with that later, probably in the next version of the game

Or in this edition, since second edition PF is still far, far off, according to James.

I would say, define "Far, far off."

And to be clear, I am saying version, not edition change.

3.0 to 3.5 rather than 3.5 to 4.0.

James Jacobs wrote:

Nope. We're not working on a 2nd edition of the game. Launching a 2nd edition of a game when the 1st edition is still increasing in popularity is not a good idea. Maybe once we get the idea that Pathfinder's reached a sales plateau we'll start working on a 2nd edition, but until we get the feeling that we're reaching or have reached such a sales plateau... we're not going to devote much resources in house to fixing something that our sales numbers are telling us isn't, overall, broken.

That's the best answer I can give you. James definitely sounds as if the next edition will be quite a few years down the line, not only one or two. So I think the Monk warrants another look at in one or two years, when the changes have settled and effects observed.

Depends on when this was posted and what happens with 5e.

3.5 Loyalist wrote:

If they are fast, evasive and with good saves, they probably shouldn't get tank hit die.

If you want to get better hit die, talk to the dm about taking your unarmed damage back to reflect your iron body style, heresy I know.

First of all "tank" is not a thing that exists in this game.

Second of all, talking to the GM should not be the first thing done. The first thing to do is try to improve the game for everybody.

You know what tank refers to. A melee char that soaks those hits really well (hit die is of course just the beginning).

Giving a class more isn't necessarily going to improve the game. The archetypes are already there to variant the monk up. What equalizer suggested above, is that if you want to play a monk that is different to the normal or archetypal monk, if you want to get something they don't have, so you can play a monk today or tomorrow, then talk to the gm. That is how you get it solved in the short term, in the long term the monk will steadily change. To play a different monk now, the first thing you do is talk to your gm, because class adjustment and development takes a long time to become official.

I just saw this. I'm pretty happy about it. It fixes a LOT of problems. I hope that more fixes happen, but this is a pretty awesome way to start things off.

Can't wait to see what happens next. :D

Me too fleet.

I'm very happy with the ki pool addition. I'm currently running an 8th level monk and it was getting to the point where he had to carry a couple different weapons around to try and deal with DR. It's a bit difficult to portray a well reasoned, soft spoken monk when he has a bunch of pointy metal objects dangling from his belt.

I believe this is a smart and balanced improvement. Thanks again, Paizo!

Temple Swords & Shortspears. Though I still find it strange that the Naginata isn't a Monk weapon when it is one of their most Iconic Weapons for Monastery Defense.

Very exciting. Nifty, even.

Did anyone else hear Snagglepuss while reading this post?

Cult of Vorg wrote:

Very exciting. Nifty, even.

Did anyone else hear Snagglepuss while reading this post?

Yep.

This change represents all that I could have wanted for the monk. My major frustration was the difficulty in overcoming DR - now that is no longer an issue. Woo-hoo!

The knuckleduster rule always made sense to me - the knuckleduster forces the punch to be thrown in a specific way, which (in my opinion, at least) would interfere with the monk's Unarmed Strike, thus reducing damage. At most, I might allow a monk to inflict half damage if he used them.

Temple Swords & Shortspears. Though I still find it strange that the Naginata isn't a Monk weapon when it is one of their most Iconic Weapons for Monastery Defense.

Exactly.

Naginatas exist in the game world...

Depends on when this was posted and what happens with 5e.

Only a few days ago ( James has an unholy posting volume lately and it took me almost an hour to wade through the 200-250 posts he did since then ) and, well, yeah. 5e of course could mean a lot of changes, if it proves to be popular.

DR and maybe even To-Hit has been solved.

Hardly. They can overcome one additional type of DR, and they do it 4-5 levels AFTER every other class gets to do it. The AoMF is a tad cheaper, but still expensive and still capped at +5. In other words, the first has been given a nudge and the second a wink, and that's all.

The monk is still shut down by DR/any alignment but lawful, which other classes get to bypass with their first (solitary) +5 weapon. Monk has to afford twice the cost for the weapon still, and has no option for weapon qualities on top if they want to bypass DR.

I will agree it is easier to get around with say oil of bless weapon but even so the matter is hardly resolved.

How will a Cleric be better with Stunning Fist? A Druid maybe if their Natural Attacks count as an Unarmed Strike to activate the feat.

Higher Wisdom score = higher save DC. Throw in Guided Attack and you get wisdom as your to-hit modifier as well.

They also suffer the To-Hit problem as well as they are also a 3/4th BAB class.

They self-buff, something they are famous for.

Heck, If a Monk can use this ability with Flurry Of Blows (which if memory serves they can if they state before the Attack Rolls and are willing to expend the uses) they basically get it at Full BAB with a slight penalty.

Except for the issues of MADness and reduced to-hit enhancement (less than it was, but still) which are not addressed at all. The monk's to-hit is the same as it was before the tweak in most cases - maybe +1 better at a few levels along the scale, but no significant difference. When you work it all out, Stunning fist is a 3rd-rate ability easily surpassed by many spells that require either a touch attack or no attack roll whatsoever and also use a primary rather than secondary ability score, so have a higher save DC.

I know I must come across as negative here, but I'm just pointing out the facts. These tweaks are an improvement, but I think they fall far short of being a fix. That said, I absolutely agree that this is probably the best way to go with making the changes. I look forward to more to come.

Guy, I did a thread : "Monk-o-phile what do you want?" maybe we can put all the "what I want for Yule for my Monk is...." posts there? That way the Devs have only one thread to wade thru.

Mind you I am not expecting any major changes until 2nd Ed, which appears to be several years out.

Now, if we could only address the problems with stand in place flurry vs. highly mobile tumbling, fast-moving character, that would be the icing on the cake. :)

MA

Agreed.

I had a thought to treat Flurry similarly to the PF Cleave, where you can make two attacks as a standard action (makes moving and flurrying at low levels better than standing still), and then when you get an additional flurry attack, that gets added to your standard action option (standing still and flurry full-attacking, and moving and flurrying become fairly competitive, as you will get more attacks while standing still). Could probably use some further cleaning up and maybe some tweaks to keep it balanced.

Then there's also the fact that monks would work VERY well with Spring Attack, but, again, no flurry-SA interaction, even with my idea.

Happy to see that flurry of blows ruling.

We've got a Monk/Paladin of Shelyn who fights with a glaive in the game where I play instead of GM. The idea that she couldn't use her crusader's flurry to flurry at reach just because she only had one reach weapon really hurt the style she was going for with that class combination. We've always ruled that she could use ever attack of her flurry with her glaive anyways, but it's nice to know that the way we're doing it is now actually rules-correct.

Several comments after reading whole thread...

Yay, changes for the better for monk!!

I also will raise my hand for inclusion of the Ki power addition in Herolab.

I must ask, since no one else mentioned it, but this would be a ruling for Society and home play, right?

As far as a new edition is concerned, I look for one of three things to happen in the future.

1- Pathfinder will have a 2nd edition that is more toward M&M with classes.

2- Pathfinder will be adapted to the new edition that is upcoming in the brand (D&D) (This is becoming more unlikely as it looks like even more backtracking instead of going forward)

3- Pathfinder will create it's own system independent of the brand (D&D) that might be more like some of the flavor of Dragon Age rather than the crusty Sword and Sorcery from outdated novels.

BTW.. It is D&D Next, not 5th edition.

I don't know what you mean by #2.

As for your last line... it is 5th Edition, they're just calling it D&D Next.

I think he meant that Pathfinder 2.0 would borrow ideas from D&D Next.

I don't know what he meant by #1.

Edit: Mutants & Masterminds, perhaps? I don't know enough about it to say whether borrowing any ideas from it would improve Pathfinder.

[tangent]I think by #1 he was referring to the introduction of chocolate dice, and using M&Ms to track hitpoints.[/tangent]

I do appriciate the changes/refinements/improvements to the monk.

Coins do make good tokens for tracking consumables and HP.