Moving this discussion where it belongs:
Okay, first I wanted to ask if you had considered about changing the AL prereqs for the Paladin from "LG" to "Any Good" or even "Any non-Evil." Also, what about changing the Monk AL prereqs from "Any Lawful" to "Any Non-Chaotic." If you have considered it and have decided not to, I would like to know you reasoning, because I found the AL prereqs (especially when you are limited to 3 or less alignments) to be one of the major detriments to the 3.x system.
Next, why give the Monk any weapon proficiencies at all, when the damage of his/her unarmed strikes still way overpower any of weapons that he/she is proficient with. It would be nice to see a monk who can specialize in something other than unarmed strikes.
I have a thought on monk weapons. There are several possible uses. First, a monk may occaisonally want to use slashing or piercing damage instead of bludgeoning. Second, a monk's fists can't be enchanted the same way that a weapon can (unless I'm mistaken ...) - In those cases, maybe the monk really wants a +1 flaming keen kama or a +2 knockback quarterstaff. Also, you can freely interchange attacks with the 2 heads of a quarterstaff and a monk can interchange attacks between a monk weapon and unarmed strikes. So a monk holding a quarterstaff can freely interchange attacks among 3 different weapons!
Yes, but the max damage of any monk weapon other than unarmed strike is 1d6. In addition, while unorthodox, you can take the Simple Weapon Proficiency feat, and wear a gauntlet which you can have enchanted as any other magical item but uses your unarmed strike damage for its base damage. This reduces the number of attacks you can make (by 1-2 depending on your level), but by level 20 you can have a +5 Flaming Burst Gaunlet of Speed (giving one of those attacks back) that deals 2d10 +5 +Str +1d6 fire damage; x2 +1d10 fire damage on a critical; and with a BAB of +15/+15/+10/+5. If you use the Magic of Faerun book, you can even improve the critical threat with the Impact enhancement (works like Keen but for blunt weapons). So the only thing you would need would be a weapon that does piercing or slashing damage in case you ever got swallowed or something similar such.
Actually, rather than making Paladins any non-Evil, I would vote for using the distinctions found in Unearthed Arcana, where you have a version of the Paladin for each of the extreme alignments. The word "paladin" basically meant "knight" in the times of Charlemagne, and just like Arthur's knights, while most where of the "Good" variety, you had a few who were not. Anyways, outside of D&D (and the RPG video games which have stemmed from it [e.g. WoW, Diablo II, et cetera]), a Paladin can be used to describe one's personal warrior or similar such role (if you get a chance, read The Paladin, by Brian Garfield sometime).
Where are you getting the consideration that a gauntlet deals the monk unarmed damage instead of simply 1d3 (for Medium)?
Where are you getting the consideration that a gauntlet deals the monk unarmed damage instead of simply 1d3 (for Medium)?
Hm, maybe I was remembering something from 3.0 where it had and * next to gauntlet damage and below it stated that the * was equal to your unarmed damage. Hmm...my bad for mixing editions (or just remembering incorrectly). Anyways, you can still get and Amulet of Mighty fists to imbue you unarmed attacks with an enhancement to attack and damage (up to +5). Also, once again, Magic of Faerun has the Bracers of Striking, which you can enchant as a weapon to add weapon enhancements to your unarmed attacks. For that you don't even need to take the Simple Weapon Proficiency feat above. Once again, you can get all of the effects described above for Monks. It is more expensive gp wise (+1,320 gp), but that way you do not end up paying the feat.
Another thing that I do not like about the 3.5 Monk that was carried over into PFRPG, is the bonus to speed. I could see an up to +30 ft enhancement to speed, but a +60 ft enhancement triples the base speed of most creatures. IMO, that is just ridiculous.
I do however like the Ki Pool mechanic that was implemented, as well as the PFRPG as a whole. It is just that the monk is one of my favorite concepts, and I was hoping to see the class get a little more of an overhaul that it did.
Are gauntlets not considered armor and therefore unavailable to the monk?
In any event, per Pathfinder A3, page 29:
"A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a
manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the
purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve
either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."
Couldn't the monk just have his hands enchanted into a magical weapon?
Are gauntlets not considered armor and therefore unavailable to the monk?
In any event, per Pathfinder A3, page 29:
"A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a
manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the
purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve
either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."Couldn't the monk just have his hands enchanted into a magical weapon?
Gauntlets, though often included in a set of armor, are not considered armor in and of themself. The quoted section is actually word for word from the Monk class section in the d20 SRD (System Reference Document):
"A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons."
However, the official D&D 3.5 FAQ states that a Monk cannot have his/her hands enhanced as a magical weapon.
Can a monk get her unarmed strike enhanced as a
magic weapon?No. Even a magic gauntlet or spiked gauntlet isn’t the ideal
answer, since these aren’t listed as special monk weapons (and
therefore aren’t as versatile as unarmed strikes).
The amulet of mighty fists (Dungeon Master’s Guide, 246)
grants the wearer an enhancement bonus on unarmed and
natural weapon attacks, which would include the monk’s
unarmed strike.
Obviously this contradicts my first comment (which I apologized for) but as I pointed out, if you have the correct 3.x supplements, with which the PFRPG is supposed to be easily backwards compatible, it is very easy to break the monk still, even if you think that it is not a broken class to begin with.
Also, on my comment about using Bracers of Striking from Magic of Faerun, the D&D 3.5 FAQ has this to say about Monks and bracers (about Bracers of Armor specifically, but the rule applies to all bracers):
Do wearing bracers of armor prevent a monk from using
her AC bonus class feature?No. Bracers of armor grant an armor bonus to AC, but they
don’t count as armor worn and thus don’t interfere with a
monk’s special abilities. The phrase you cite simply explains
what an armor bonus is, pointing out that you don’t get the AC
bonus from the bracers and also from armor you wear.
Actually Sage Advice from Wizards provided an answer to the gauntlets one (although different people could rule differently-TETO)
Directly copied from sage advice 5/28/08
Q: Can a monk use a +5 gauntlet in an unarmed attack, gaining all of his class benefits as well as the +5 bonus to hit and damage from the gauntlet?
A: Gauntlets are indeed a weapon. If a monk uses any weapon not listed as a special monk weapon, he does not gain his better attack rate. He would, however, gain the increased damage for unarmed attacks.
I think by increased damage it means the +5 increase to the d4 he'd roll.
No... the answer indicates you use the monk's unarmed dmg (which is based on his level) but can then not flurry with it because its not a monk weapon.
If that is true, than why have monks always complained about not having ways to enchant their unarmed attacks? This ruling hands it to them no question.
I was only replying to the portion regarding how much damage a gauntlet does when worn by a monk...
as to why monks complain anyway...
they don't have simple weapon proficiency so not only do you lose the flurry with gauntlets because it is not a monk weapon... you have a -4 non-proficiency with it.
Of course you can always burn a feat for the proficiency.
However, I'll rather live with the fact that I can only afford a +3 Amulet of Mighty Fists when the fighter has a +5 Weapon and use the feat on improved natural attack....
Please keep Paladin alignments at Lawful Good only! You can't follow a code if you're not lawful and if you don't follow a strict code, you're not a Paladin. There's a stronger case for non-good Paladin's than there is for non-lawful Paladins.
I will now return you to your regular monk weapon programming!
Peace,
tfad
At the very least this proves Paizo needs to nail-down the rules concerning Monks, weapons, flurry and unarmed damage with gauntlets and whatnot =)
I have always thought monks could enchant wraps for their hands. I thing in the magic compendium there is one that goes with the scorpion kama. It would offer no damage on its own, but would allow the monk to enchant his hands. Make sense to me and doesn't seem to need any rule tweeking.
I'd go one step further -- I'd rewrite the Monk's Robe (née Belt) as an item you can enhance with weapon enhancements (applying to your unarmed strike) and armor enhancements (applying to the robe with a base +0 or +1 armor bonus). Heck, maybe every monk could get a robe for free as a class feature like a wizard's Arcane Bond.
I guess I just like the visual image of a robe better than hand wraps or gauntlets or whatever.
Please keep Paladin alignments at Lawful Good only! You can't follow a code if you're not lawful and if you don't follow a strict code, you're not a Paladin. There's a stronger case for non-good Paladin's than there is for non-lawful Paladins.
I will now return you to your regular monk weapon programming!
Peace,
tfad
Robin Hood had a code.
In my playtest COTCT, I've let the monk use special hand wraps (silver-threaded, magic fanged, etc.) and this works just fine. He loves the direction of the class as it is and I haven't noticed any real issues with the extra movement provided by the class.
Robin Hood had a code.
Yes, but he never had to ahere to it, and stretched/broke it more than once to suit his needs. Though I'm a fan of defining a code specifically for the individual paladin, it should probably be something they have to stick to after it is defined.
I've already stated that my games will never enforce LG-only paladins, regardless of the rulebook. I find it silly to dismiss other alignments simply because a chaotic or neutral person doesn't HAVE to do something. I would find a paladin of true neutrality to be an incredible role-playing opportunity.
Robin Hood was also, clearly *not* a Paladin.
20th level monk damage with fists, and amulet of mighty fists +5: 2d10+5+str
20th level monk damage with say; +1 Vicious Holy Shock kama (v evil -or stack on whatever enhancements you care to): 6d6+1+str
for an average of 16+str or 22+str respecively. And Monk #2 has saved himself a considerable bundle of gold. So... *how* is being a monk with weapons not a good thing?
Robin Hood was also, clearly *not* a Paladin.
Let's not confuse ourselves into thinking that I said this.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 4, RPG Superstar 2011 Top 16
|
Robin Hood had a code.
"Steal from the Rich and give to the Poor" isn't a code, it's a cause. Robin Hood was a Freedom Fighter, and that archetype is certainly more Chaotic than Lawful. Paladins have a code, which are strict rules to live by. Paladins are Lawful Good. Any other church can sponsor a knightly order and there are plenty of PrC's out there to cover those.
Robin Hood had a code."Steal from the Rich and give to the Poor" isn't a code, it's a cause.
Correct. I'm sorry you were confused by something that I never said.
20th level monk damage with fists, and amulet of mighty fists +5: 2d10+5+str
20th level monk damage with say; +1 Vicious Holy Shock kama (v evil -or stack on whatever enhancements you care to): 6d6+1+str
So... *how* is being a monk with weapons not a good thing?
Stunning Fist.
Stunning Fist.20th level monk damage with fists, and amulet of mighty fists +5: 2d10+5+str
20th level monk damage with say; +1 Vicious Holy Shock kama (v evil -or stack on whatever enhancements you care to): 6d6+1+str
So... *how* is being a monk with weapons not a good thing?
Make it a Ki Focus weapon instead of a Shock weapon, then.
Would a Ki Focus weapon work with Medua's/Gorgon's Fist?
|
Actually, rather than making Paladins any non-Evil, I would vote for using the distinctions found in Unearthed Arcana, where you have a version of the Paladin for each of the extreme alignments. The word "paladin" basically meant "knight" in the times of Charlemagne, and just like Arthur's knights, while most where of the "Good" variety, you had a few who were not. Anyways, outside of D&D (and the RPG video games which have stemmed from it [e.g. WoW, Diablo II, et cetera]), a Paladin can be used to describe one's personal warrior or similar such role (if you get a chance, read The Paladin, by Brian Garfield sometime).
Actually Paladin is derived from Arabic (to phoneticize) "B'iladeen"
or Be AlaDin
or "With Religion" or "With God"..
The Moslems of the time said the Crusaders shwon with the lights of those fighting for religion...which they respected....so Those knights who fought in the crusades or in The Churches name....became Paladins...
Your humble Arab linguist
*bows*
|
|
Jason mentioned on one of the other threads a while back that he was considering the idea of some sort of wrappings for a monk and I could see that as being a cool compromise I think.
Normally monks can attack with their hands full, perhaps you could just rule that if the monk has something in his hands he can't use the bonus of the wrappings when making unarmed strikes, but otherwise they could be enchanted more like normal.
-Tarlane
