|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
OK,
I've really liked what Pathfinder has been doing but the new Monk just doesn't cut it. Admittedly there has been some attempt to correct previous failings but a Monk without a full BAB and only a D8 hit die will always fail to compete with other melee combatants.
The ki pool changes miss more often (aka flurry of blows) to misses even more often. Add this to Maneuver Training and it seems they are bending over backwards to do everything BUT increase the BAB. Why make such a complicated system for such a simple fix.
JoS
Director of Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
OK,
I've really liked what Pathfinder has been doing but the new Monk just doesn't cut it. Admittedly there has been some attempt to correct previous failings but a Monk without a full BAB and only a D8 hit die will always fail to compete with other melee combatants.
The ki pool changes miss more often (aka flurry of blows) to misses even more often. Add this to Maneuver Training and it seems they are bending over backwards to do everything BUT increase the BAB. Why make such a complicated system for such a simple fix.
JoS
Changing a monk's BAB is not in the cards, just like it is not for any other class. Changing BAB monkey's with a lot of statistics (especially for the monk with flurry). Truth be told, the monk is not a class that is designed specifically to stand up toe-to-toe with a fighter. They serve slightly different roles.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
|
Director of Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What do you see that role being, Jason, if I might ask?
Monks are support and mobility combatants, generally speaking, useful in moving around the battlefield to assist with problems. In this regard, they gain a number of abilities that allow them to work without the aid of others, which many of the other, straight fighter classes, lack to one degree or another.
Telling me that this is just a band aid, without any playtesting, because they do not get a full BAB, is not very helpful to my development. They might not be perfect for the role that I see them in (at least not yet), but I am looking to work within the system as opposed to just demanding a redesign of some of their core statistics.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Monks are blitzers: the caster killers of the melee classes.
|
Monks have always been one of my favorite classes and I love a lot of the changes in this. I think the problem with how you are seeing them is that they never have been intended to be a melee combatant. They aren't just a bruiser. They are a class that is all about being able to be the harrier when needed, getting in and out for blows(which become very powerful) and being remarkably mobile.
If there is a caster 70ft away, across the battle field, the monk is going to be the one who can take him out, whether that is tumbling around combat, balancing or leaping over obstacles and just having the distance to get there and either ready to stop that mage from casting or deliver a stunning blow to keep him from trying later.
Monks are also designed to be really self sufficient, building up resistances to just about everything, having evasion, a high AC, and the ability to heal themselves. It means that they can traverse the field this way without having to run back to the cleric constantly, and they can hit whatever spots in the battle they are needed quickly and efficiently, and abilities like slow fall and dimension door mean that they can get just about anywhere without the wizards help.
I think that the new release of the monk played on all those strengths greatly, allowing monks to use ki-points to make use of whichever abilities serve them best at the moment, be it the need to clear a great chasm or just to be harder to hit.
The monks flurry seems to be where people get tangled up in the thought that they should be great fighters, they get extra attacks and hit really hard with it when they full round. But I think thats part of the
point of it all, they have more shots -to- hit, because they don't hit so well with each of them. If they did hit that hard, they would out class the fighter at what he does.
-Tarlane
|
|
Jason, the new monk is an excelent class, I like a lot of the abilities. I'm not sure about the whole ki pool thing (because I reflavor monks to play them differently, my monk minotaur being one of my coolest characters, but with whom ki pool would totally break the flavor, but I'm allready thinking of ways to reflavor it so don't worry about it) but I'll play it before I say it's a failure (which I wholeheartedly disagree and think it is a sucess).
They're decent. But still feels like a junkyard of a class. I do like how a lot of the abilities are finally useable more than once a day... but...
|
I would argue that the monk's core role in combat is this:
Mage killer.
Between the speed (to get to the mage hiding in the back), the resistances/Saving Throws (to resist spells cast going in), and the ability to hit a relatively low AC opponent many times quickly, the monk is built for that combat role.
Outside of combat, the monk's role is to provide a profoundly ascetic quality to adventure; to call the party to higher objectives without the preachiness of a paladin or cleric. Importing the pursuit of secret knowledge and spiritual/physical perfection into any of the cultural milieus in which we adventure is a great addition to a party.
I have enjoyed playing monks since the 1st edition and find they can go a long way beyond the Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon cliche from which they sprang. In most of my parties, the monk has ended up serving as the eyes, ears, and wisdom of a party. The clear combat role, once understood, insures a good tactical approach for most encounters. The clear story role provides tons of story hooks, a ton of PC interaction, and a really nice way to import higher concepts without the dogmatic arguments that religiosity in the game can sometimes provoke.
So, my feedback to anyone developing the monk as a class is to insure that the class has enough special abilities to fulfill the combat role and enough flavor to allow players to deliver on the promise of the story role.
(Which, btw, is one of my big gripes with 4E: by attempting to force all characters into one of four archetypes, they ruin the ability of a player to deliver other arechetypes into the storyline. LOTR didn't capture all that there is in imaginative game-play.)
|
|
The rogue's combat role is notably DPS machine when in the right place. The Monk *does not* replace this. I'll need to take a closer look at what the new monk does do, but it should theoretically be as attractive as dropping multiple +Nd6 attacks per round. It shouldn't necessarily (or even preferably) be damage, but it needs to do something awesome while its running around back there.
*Goes off to look at the monk more closely*
It seems... to be stripping actions off of opponents.
Which could be an extremely effective niche, if handled properly.
If you want bonus damage, though, consider the possiblities in a monk 15/fighter 5 with a monk's robe, Improved Natural Attack and Improved Vital Strike...
|
If you want bonus damage, though, consider the possiblities in a monk 15/fighter 5 with a monk's robe, Improved Natural Attack and Improved Vital Strike...
It somehow bugs me that monks and fighters have mutually exclusive class features. Fighters get their AC bonus only while wearing armor while monks lose theirs under such conditions. Maybe either monks should get an option of retaining their AC bonus while armored (like swordsages do) or fighters should get an unarmored option.
|
|
It somehow bugs me that monks and fighters have mutually exclusive class features. Fighters get their AC bonus only while wearing armor while monks lose theirs under such conditions. Maybe either monks should get an option of retaining their AC bonus while armored (like swordsages do) or fighters should get an unarmored option.
If you want bonus damage, though, consider the possiblities in a monk 15/fighter 5 with a monk's robe, Improved Natural Attack and Improved Vital Strike...
No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, please save me from armoured monks and naked fighters, their abilities are mutually exclusive because they are incompatable abilities. I want it kept that way please.
|
|
Alas, you have to multiclass to get the +16 BAB requirement of Improved Vital Strike. But yes, that was what I was getting at. Not too shabby, eh?
It's a nice idea, but you would have to go monk 16, fighter 4, otherwise you will have a BAB of +16 on level 20, but no feat to spend. By taking 16 levels of monk, you get a fighter feat to use on improved vital strike. Also, it seems a bit odd that there are no additions to the list of monk bonus feats past level 10. Maybe vital strike and improved vital strike should just be added for levels 14 and 18.
I think adding monk level instead of BAB to the CMB will help make up for the weak melee BAB in some cases (as well as the DC starting at 15+). One of the best ways for a monk to neutralize an enemy spell caster (particularly clerics) is to grapple them. Similarly, the best way for a monk to deal with level-appropriate heavily armored opponents is to special maneuver them too. Back when I was playing a 16th level monk back in 3.0, against a CR 16 fighter kitted out with appropriate armor, my best bet was grappling and tripping. It was really the only chance I had, save rolling very high, to affect the goon.
Overall, this fix may not be as far as I'd like to see it go, but it's got some potential.
Actually, I'd like to defend Jason's methodology, if not the Monk as he has it currently formulated. It's entirely possible and goo for back-compatibility of rhte Monk to retain clerical BAB if its class features are impressive enough. Rogues and Clerics are effective frontline combatants without needing full BAB.
The Monk currently doesn't have anything that makes up for the BAB hit, but they could be given something.
|
|
Changing a monk's BAB is not in the cards, just like it is not for any other class. Changing BAB monkey's with a lot of statistics (especially for the monk with flurry). Truth be told, the monk is not a class that is designed specifically to stand up toe-to-toe with a fighter. They serve slightly different roles.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I'm sorry Jason but you're just being obtuse. The changes from 3.0 to 3.5 increased the flurry of blows ability until the extra attacks were equal to the Monk's 3/4 BAB. Why? because it was realized that in a fight the Monk needed more. Unfortunately this just lead to a Monk that missed more often. You have bolted on all sorts of bells and whistles so that the Monk "almost" has a full BAB but with added complexity and bookkeeping. Why did you do this Jason if you didn't feel the Monk needed to be a better combatant?
Even as a second line combatant (which is absurd for someone who has spent their lives learning to fight) the Monk fails. Clerics, Rogues, and Bards can all purchase armor and weapons which can improve their AC and attack bonuses; the Bard cannot. A rogue (someone who is generally self-trained and lives by their wits is a better combatant then a Monk. They will have a higher AC and a higher to-hit bonus. Plus given sneak attack they will, more often than not, do more damage than a Monk.
Changing the BAB to a full progression affects two things; Flurry of Blows and Damage Output. Flurry of Blows is an easy fix, put it back to an extra attack with all attacks at -2. Works just like the Rapid Shot feat chain. Damage output doesn't need to change at all because the Monk doesn't get access to all the elemental damage adds that every single other class has available (i.e. flaming, shocking, freezing etc.) thanks to magic items.
JoS
P.S. I may be coming off as a bit of a prick but that is not my intent. I really want to debate this and get a clear sense of what Mr. Bulmahn is thinking (and probably to lobby a bunch to change his thinking.) ;)
I like the new monk, however, there is one glaring error (to me at least). I've always slotted the monk as a mobile combatant, however, one of his main features goes completely against this philosophy and that is flurry of blows. Flurry is a full-round action, meaning a monk needs to choose if he will go mobile fighter or front-liner, and he just can't stand up to other front-liners and thus almost completely ignores flurry. Please, make flurry a standard attack action or have an option to use it at the end of a charge, or something to allow a mobile monk to use it more than once or twice a campaign when he gets cornered.
|
|
I'm sorry Jason but you're just being obtuse.~snip~
P.S. I may be coming off as a bit of a prick but that is not my intent. I really want to debate this and get a clear sense of what Mr. Bulmahn is thinking
Obtuse: not quick or alert in perception, feeling, or intellect; not sensitive or observant; dull.
Jack, I suggest that if your real intention is to debate and get a clearer indication of Jason’s thinking, you might do a lot better if you dropped the insults. Might make you come across as less of a prick too. Win/win.
|
|
Monks are support and mobility combatants, generally speaking, useful in moving around the battlefield to assist with problems. In this regard, they gain a number of abilities that allow them to work without the aid of others, which many of the other, straight fighter classes, lack to one degree or another.
Except that a Monk who moves away from the support and protection of the party gets gooned and taken down due to their poor AC. I can't argue the Monks mobility but it is often not a factor unless they are running away or trying to catch a single target. A monk away from the party is almost always overwhelmed and outmatched operating on their own.
Telling me that this is just a band aid, without any playtesting, because they do not get a full BAB, is not very helpful to my development. They might not be perfect for the role that I see them in (at least not yet), but I am looking to work within the system as opposed to just demanding a redesign of some of their core statistics.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
First, I didn't make any demands. You're just getting defensive because I didn't like what you did. That's not what this is about. I want to debate what you've done, not condemn it. I think the critical thing is that you have decided what a Monk should be and failed to ask yourself what do "players" want a Monk to be. I think this is the specific element that has been overlooked since the inception of the Monk in D20.
JoS
@Jack of Shadows
You may want to reread pages 2 and 3 of the PDF: History and Design Goals.
Keep in mind that if you tear down the Monk's BAB and Flurry, it alters the role of the Monk, negates the need for some other things the Monk would normally use, and would probably require taking from someplace else to accommodate this large power increase (we aren't talking about +1 hp/level here).
Changing the Monk's role would break the point of using THIS Monk for the roles it was used, and had PrCs and Feats from splatbooks created for. This is one of those "steps too far" that 'Improve the Game' doesn't cut it for changing.
Might I suggest making a PrC, or giving the Fighter a feat chain specifically for an unarmed/unarmored Martial Artist, as opposed to this mystical mage killer.
Changing a monk's BAB is not in the cards, just like it is not for any other class. Changing BAB monkey's with a lot of statistics (especially for the monk with flurry). Truth be told, the monk is not a class that is designed specifically to stand up toe-to-toe with a fighter. They serve slightly different roles.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I'm sorry Jason but you're just being obtuse. The changes from 3.0 to 3.5 increased the flurry of blows ability until the extra attacks were equal to the Monk's 3/4 BAB. Why? because it was realized that in a fight the Monk needed more. Unfortunately this just lead to a Monk that missed more often. You have bolted on all sorts of bells and whistles so that the Monk "almost" has a full BAB but with added complexity and bookkeeping. Why did you do this Jason if you didn't feel the Monk needed to be a better combatant?
Even as a second line combatant (which is absurd for someone who has spent their lives learning to fight) the Monk fails. Clerics, Rogues, and Bards can all purchase armor and weapons which can improve their AC and attack bonuses; the Bard cannot. A rogue (someone who is generally self-trained and lives by their wits is a better combatant then a Monk. They will have a higher AC and a higher to-hit bonus. Plus given sneak attack they will, more often than not, do more damage than a Monk.
Changing the BAB to a full progression affects two things; Flurry of Blows and Damage Output. Flurry of Blows is an easy fix, put it back to an extra attack with all attacks at -2. Works just like the Rapid Shot feat chain. Damage output doesn't need to change at all because the Monk doesn't get access to all the elemental damage adds that every single other class has available (i.e. flaming, shocking, freezing etc.) thanks to magic items.
JoS
P.S. I may be coming off as a bit of a prick but that is not my intent. I really want to debate this and get a clear sense of what Mr. Bulmahn is thinking (and probably to...
First, how does a rogue or cleric end up with a higher to-hit bonus than the monk (since they all have access to enchanted weapons) and why wouldn't they get access to all of the elemental damage adds? Second, what difference would the elemental damage adds make? Compare a flame burst rapier (1D6 + 1d6 fire) to a 12th level unarmed monk. Same damage output. At 20th level the monk is doing 2D10 points of damage an attack which is probably more than the rogue is doing.
|
|
First, how does a rogue or cleric end up with a higher to-hit bonus than the monk (since they all have access to enchanted weapons) and why wouldn't they get access to all of the elemental damage adds? Second, what difference would the elemental damage adds make? Compare a flame burst rapier (1D6 + 1d6 fire) to a 12th level unarmed monk. Same damage output. At 20th level the monk is doing 2D10 points of damage an attack which is probably more than the rogue is doing.
A cleric or rogue is likely to have an enchanted weapon with a to-hit bonus and a Monk cannot add weapon enhancements to their unarmed attacks. Yes, they can enchant a monk weapon but that is a secondary weapon for them. How much of your characters resources do you spend on your back-up weapon? Also take into consideration the rogue's sneak attack and the cleric's buff spells.
As for damage you'll note that I was arguing to leave it as is. I don't think that it is overpowered when considered with the damage potential of the other second line classes.
JoS
|
|
Remember, a monk can use "monk weapons" with flurry of blows. Thus enchanted weapons, with flaming, bursting, wounding...etc.
I would like to see manriki guasari added to the monk weapons, give it a special ability of +4 to deflect arrows, as it can be spun in a figure eight. standard trip and 10' reach of course. Perhaps a feat to allow the manriki to deflect arrows in adjacent squares.
I would also like to see some other feats like Improved Vital Strike added to a level 16 category of Monk feats. If anyone should have that feat it's monks.
Change 5' step to half move rate, and you have a monk more mobile and allowed to full attack with a decent movement. While keeping those fighters in heavy armor to 10'. The 5' step always seemed a bit...restricted.
I would still like to see the Monk Bonus Feats replaced by Monk training. Similar to the rogue talents. Effectively the same, but more open to things like; Palm Strike, Dragon Tail sweep, Iron Broom Sweep, Crescent Kick, or any other martial arts maneuver.
Jack of Shadows, love the name btw, great book. Why would a monk's weapon be secondary? They unlike the cleric don't need to spend money on armor, although bracers of armor are very good addition to a monk's gear.
Monk feat Idea: Lunging Strike: A monk when using a spear may make use a spear or staff as a reach 10' weapon. This goes perfectly with real life martial arts use of a staff.
Well, there is Magic Fang (and it's Greater version), that can be made permanent. That does help some.
What do you see that role being, Jason, if I might ask?Telling me that this is just a band aid, without any playtesting, because they do not get a full BAB, is not very helpful to my development.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Its still the exact same class basically with the same problems. You don't need to playtest it to see that. It still has all the same problems the 3.5 version had.
|
|
@Jack of Shadows
You may want to reread pages 2 and 3 of the PDF: History and Design Goals.
Keep in mind that if you tear down the Monk's BAB and Flurry, it alters the role of the Monk, negates the need for some other things the Monk would normally use, and would probably require taking from someplace else to accommodate this large power increase (we aren't talking about +1 hp/level here).
Changing the Monk's role would break the point of using THIS Monk for the roles it was used, and had PrCs and Feats from splatbooks created for. This is one of those "steps too far" that 'Improve the Game' doesn't cut it for changing.
Might I suggest making a PrC, or giving the Fighter a feat chain specifically for an unarmed/unarmored Martial Artist, as opposed to this mystical mage killer.
Almost missed this post but I wanted to reply.
Thanks Kaisoku,
I hadn't actually considered all the previous PrC's and the cascade effect the change would engender. However, I think that of all the base classes the Monk is so inherently flawed something drastic IS called for. It doesn't have a "role" so you're not really changing something. I don't think the complexity of Mr. Bulmahn's revisions are warranted if the only issue is legacy problems. I think players (aka customers) would rather have a core class they can play than one that works well with old PrC's they wouldn't use anyway. If people aren't playing Monks, PrC's for Monks don't make much sense.
JoS
|
Director of Games
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey there all,
So, I am thinking a lot about the monk as of late. The monk, as I stated before, fills a different role than a fighter. They hit more like a rogue, with a different sort of damage potential. For some reason, and I am wondering why, there seems to be an opinion that the monk does not work, but the rogue, who is based off the same progression, does. The monk has access to some of the same bonuses as a rogue (to hit at any rate), but the monk has quite a bit more defenses (good saves, some immunities, and, in the right build, a better AC).
So, to help me understand the arguments being thrown about here. I am wondering. Where is the flaw with the monk? And, as a secondary question, why are these not the same problems with the rogue?
I have seen a large number of monks played over the past few years, and every one of them has been pretty solid at their role in the party. They are great at harrassing spellcasters (clerics, bards, wizards, and sorcerers) and other, equally classed, combatants (rogues and other monks). They do not stand up as well in a straight up fight with fighters, barbarians, and paladins. But this limitation is more about their niche than their shortcomings.
Once again, I am trying not to come off antagonistic here, but I am not sure I undersand the beef. Help me see the point.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
(As an aside, antagonistic thread titles like this one kinda set me off... which might account for some of my earlier defensiveness. My apologies if things were taken that way.)
|
|
There’s a lot of talk comparing monks unarmed attacks and flurry of blows with characters using (presumably magic) weapons, and the resulting disparity in attack bonus.
Monks can use weapons too. They can even use their flurry of blows when using monk weapons.
So then the problem might become damage – monks generally do more damage with their unarmed strike than with weapons. If this is seen as a problem (and I’m not sure it should be; playoff between doing a lot of damage unarmed or getting your magic weapon’s enhancement bonus and/or special properties) maybe their unarmed strike damage could become a bonus die (or fixed bonus) that adds to their damage roll when using an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon, much in the way a rogue’s sneak attack bonus dice are added to their damage rolls.
Balance issues may require that the damage dice are reduced in this case – maybe you start with +1d4 at first level and go from there.
Just some thoughts.
Help me see the point.
I've had no troubles with monks below 10th level or so, but at higher levels a monk really starts to run into trouble with having to choose which abilities to increase (str, dex, or wis being the big 3 for them) AND in the prohibitive cost of 'enchanted' fists.
For stats: If they choose to improve wisdom they can get AC and a better DC for stunning attack but lack a good attack bonus to hit things. If they choose dex they also get good AC and can compete with a rogue in attack bonus but their damage is poor. Finally, if they choose strength they can hit things and do ok damage, but their Armor Class suffers.
Then, when you stack the crazy cost of geting an Amulet of Mighty Fists they fall behind a few more notches (a +5 amulet of mighty fists is more costly than a standard weapon with a +8 equivalent enchantment).
Lower the cost of enchanting unarmed strikes will help, but giving monks some way to be more effective while moving and attacking and some sort of damage boost with monk weapons would really go a long ways.
For ideas on improving movement and attacking see this thread
Huh. You can see how many monks I've played. But I am 100% with the increased cost. The single amulet can boost two weapons on most PCs (two-weapon fighting while unarmed), and like ten on a giant squid or dragon.
I would like to see it rewritten to allow for other boosts - holy fists, anyone?
The amulet is ridiculously overpriced for monks. Its price really only make sense with non-humanoid characters with multiple natural weapons. With a monk, since the flurry could come from a single fist or foot (there's no specification it MUST be from multiple specific weapons or limbs), the extra expense is just a nasty penalty to bear.
That said, a monk could invest in a single monk weapon, enchant the heck out of it, and then use it for all his flurry attacks.
I wouldn't be against seeing a ki power added that allows the monk to make a touch attack roll. One of my favorite monk combos was the Empty hand strike from the dragon compendium combined with stunning fist to start off a flurry of blows volley. Touch attack usually hit, and if they failed the stunning save, the rest would have a much better chance of landing.
So, I am thinking a lot about the monk as of late. The monk, as I stated before, fills a different role than a fighter. They hit more like a rogue, with a different sort of damage potential. For some reason, and I am wondering why, there seems to be an opinion that the monk does not work, but the rogue, who is based off the same progression, does. The monk has access to some of the same bonuses as a rogue (to hit at any rate), but the monk has quite a bit more defenses (good saves, some immunities, and, in the right build, a better AC).
It's true that the monk typically plays a different role, but let's not focus too much on roles inherent to the classes. That's 4e's bag. The character may be called upon to play a different role in a party, at least temporarily, in the course of a game.
Comparing the rogue and the monk, the rogue's attack bonus might be the same but, assuming he's playing well, he's doing a fistful of dice damage every time he hits to anything that can be sneak attacked. And he's not getting all that many fewer attacks than the monk. Plus, he's concentrated on maxing Dex because he knows he makes up for the lower strength by doing more damage with the sneak attack dice. So, he might have a higher net bonus, assuming weapon finesse.
The monk's damage is lower, with stats spread out a bit more and less concentrated. The monk's traditional place to shine is in tripping and grappling, but the higher DC makes those a bit more challenging, other factors being equal. While I think using the monk level instead of the monk's BAB when calculating CMB is a step in the right direction, I'm not really sure it helps the monk keep up enough.
|
Director of Games
|
So,
I think we are starting to see what I felt has been the problem with the monk all along, the fact that they cannot really gain the same kind of bonuses to their unarmed strikes as others can with their weapons without paying a ridiculous cost.
I have been working on a way for them to do this, that is, apply weapon enhancements (such as +1 and flaming) to their fists at a reasonable price. The tripping point was not the idea, but the in game implementation. I thought of some sort of hand wrapping, rings, or maybe bracers, but these are really going off the beaten path, as they are not, in and of themselves, weapons.
I am hoping to get something like this into the Beta. Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
So,
I think we are starting to see what I felt has been the problem with the monk all along, the fact that they cannot really gain the same kind of bonuses to their unarmed strikes as others can with their weapons without paying a ridiculous cost.
I have been working on a way for them to do this, that is, apply weapon enhancements (such as +1 and flaming) to their fists at a reasonable price. The tripping point was not the idea, but the in game implementation. I thought of some sort of hand wrapping, rings, or maybe bracers, but these are really going off the beaten path, as they are not, in and of themselves, weapons.
I am hoping to get something like this into the Beta. Thoughts?
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Something i have long wondered/considered, but not actually playtested:
What about allowing the monk to use his 'unarmed strike' damage when using 'special monk weapons'?
It would eliminate the amulet of mighty fists supercost requirement by allowing the monk access to the same priced melee combat boosters as all other classes, plus also get rid of the 'need' to do things like..multiclass to kensai so i can enchant my fist...etc. I think it would allow the monks to get more into the damage dealing level that rogues have because it would allow the stacking of holy, flaming, etc.
Just a thought