Let's flip it. Other than game-rules-mechanic, what's the difference between a kama and a sickle? My understanding is that there is none; the kama isn't specially-designed, nor more aerodynamic, nor distinguishable in any physical way; rather, "Kama" is simply Japanese for "sickle." If I find a dagger but call it a "tanto," can I suddenly use it to make a flurry of blows?
Second question: pretend I'm a karate master. Hand me a dagger. Am I suddenly redered inept, until I drop it? Or can I use the dagger, if not to increase my damage output, at least to match it? I'd argue the latter.
|
Let's flip it. Other than game-rules-mechanic, what's the difference between a kama and a sickle?
To make it scientific, we organised a playtest:
Kama vs. sickle
Weapon stats: identical (including weight)
Special FX: identical (trip)
Cost: 2 GP vs 6 GP
Winner: hmmm let me see...
Conclusion: Monks are way too poor to buy sickles.
I would have no problem giving Monks Simple Weapon Proficiency and allow them to take Martial or Exotic Weapons with their Bonus Feats.
|
|
Let's flip it. Other than game-rules-mechanic, what's the difference between a kama and a sickle? My understanding is that there is none; the kama isn't specially-designed, nor more aerodynamic, nor distinguishable in any physical way; rather, "Kama" is simply Japanese for "sickle." If I find a dagger but call it a "tanto," can I suddenly use it to make a flurry of blows?
Second question: pretend I'm a karate master. Hand me a dagger. Am I suddenly redered inept, until I drop it? Or can I use the dagger, if not to increase my damage output, at least to match it? I'd argue the latter.
I have some (not a huge amount, but some) experience with highly-trained hand-to hand combatants (I've taken some defensive tactics classes from a couple of police officers who both have multiple black belts). It's not unusual for people who are highly trained in unarmed combat to actually discard certain weapons (knives, koshes, and even short clubs) in favor of their hands, particularly if they know a lot of throws and holds. Human hands are surprisingly effective weapons in the possession of a skilled user. One of the drills we did on knife disarming, the officer demonstrating the technique actually kicked the knife away rather than collecting it, even though at that point he had pretty solid control of the former knife wielder.
|
|
Monk weapon proficiencies from the quite unasiatic Iron Kingdoms (OGL!):
IKCG, p. 83
"Good" monks
Proficient with:
light crossbow
heavy crossbow
dagger
halberd
Katrena's hook: handaxe (slashing 1d6) and pointy end (1d4 piercing) + hook (Trip bonus)
light mace
longsword
quarterstaff
short sword
Flurry of blows with:
Katrena's hook
light mace
short sword
"Not as good" monks
Proficient with:
club
dagger
handaxe
light chain
Menoth's sting (improvised shuriken)
quarterstaff
sickle
sling
Flurry of blows with:
club
light chain
sickle
I've always understood that there was some confusion about why they were given the weapons at all.
Because
1) Many real world martial arts teach both armed and unarmed weapon techniques,
2) There are times when attacking with a weapon is a better option than attacking with kicks/punches/etc. (bypassing good/silver/etc. DRs, protection from a monster's special qualities, reach, etc.),
3) The weapon may have special qualities that are useful (flaming vs. trolls, etc.).
As far as the specific weapons that monks can use, I think that this should be (as it is in the real world) dependent on the monk's fighting style (and not limited to the karate/kobujutsu/"ninja" stereotype). IMO, they should also receive a damage bonus (of one-half class level, round down?) when using their "style weapons," like the 1st Ed AD&D monk got with all weapons. Otherwise, there is currently no real mechanical benefit (outside of the specific situations above or to gain a bonus on disarm or trip) for a monk to use melee weapons past 4th level.
|
|
I personally think monk weapons should go the way of the dodo. As has been pointed out, most of them are mechanically identical to existing weapons, just cheaper or exotic instead of simple. The best way to go, I think, would just to let monks use their special abilities with any weapon in which they are proficient, then just make them proficient in simple weapons and unarmed strikes. Yes, they can take feats to expand their monk capabilities - or splash levels in fighter - but that's a cost. They're not getting something for nothing; they're still expending a permanent resource to improve their existing abilities.
Thematically, I think it would also make the monk fit in a lot better with the rest of the default-European-themed PCs. There are plenty of European martial arts (savate and pankration, just to name two) and the monk having a bunch of weird Asian-themed weapons (and Asian-named powers) has never made any sense to me. It sets them apart and creates a frission for people that just want to play their street brawler or peasant-warrior without making him a Street Fighter knockoff.
Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with Asian-themed monks either - in an Asian-themed setting. I've personally always held that the cultural trappings associated with a class should be as neutral as possible, so that when you have a different culture, you can introduce its powers as feats, feat trees, or even alternate class abilities instead of a whole different character class: A samurai is a Japanese-themed fighter; a shugenja is a Japanese-themed cleric; a wu jen is a Chinese-themed wizard; and so on. This is one of the reasons I haven't much cared for any Oriental Adventures-style RPG book yet released: they try too hard to make Asia different mechanically instead of different stylistically.
I think that since Pathfinder is supposed to be a fresh start for 3.5 while maintaining backward compatibility, this would be the perfect time to make a break from the monk's shoehorned Asian stereotypes. Don't call it a "ki pool"; call them "spirit points" or "willpower points". Take away their silly exotic weapons - which are almost all based off of existing simple or martial weapons (or farm implements) anyway - and get rid of the no-multiclassing restriction. If you think that people will dip a level into monk for the AC bonus, then just restrict it so that your maximum AC bonus from Wisdom can't exceed twice your monk level. (For single-classed monks, that would still mean that your AC bonus is roughly equivalent to a rogue's worn armor at low levels.)
In short, I think the time has come to let monk be all it can be, instead of making it the niche-iest core class in D&D.
Jeremy Puckett
|
The special weapons of a monk are not just rebranded common weapons even though they were based on them. They have acquired modfications in form, material and balance to specially mesh with a monk's moves.
Absolutely, and from a historical / martial arts viewpoint its a very interesting topic.
However, I don't think D&D / Pathfinder needs this kind of detail so I'd prefer if they got rid of monk weapons and allowed flurry etc. with the "normal" equivalents.
I personally think monk weapons should go the way of the dodo. As has been pointed out, most of them are mechanically identical to existing weapons, just cheaper or exotic instead of simple. The best way to go, I think, would just to let monks use their special abilities with any weapon in which they are proficient, then just make them proficient in simple weapons and unarmed strikes. Yes, they can take feats to expand their monk capabilities - or splash levels in fighter - but that's a cost. They're not getting something for nothing; they're still expending a permanent resource to improve their existing abilities.
Thematically, I think it would also make the monk fit in a lot better with the rest of the default-European-themed PCs. There are plenty of European martial arts (savate and pankration, just to name two) and the monk having a bunch of weird Asian-themed weapons (and Asian-named powers) has never made any sense to me. It sets them apart and creates a frission for people that just want to play their street brawler or peasant-warrior without making him a Street Fighter knockoff.
Don't get me wrong, there's nothing wrong with Asian-themed monks either - in an Asian-themed setting. I've personally always held that the cultural trappings associated with a class should be as neutral as possible, so that when you have a different culture, you can introduce its powers as feats, feat trees, or even alternate class abilities instead of a whole different character class: A samurai is a Japanese-themed fighter; a shugenja is a Japanese-themed cleric; a wu jen is a Chinese-themed wizard; and so on. This is one of the reasons I haven't much cared for any Oriental Adventures-style RPG book yet released: they try too hard to make Asia different mechanically instead of different stylistically.
I think that since Pathfinder is supposed to be a fresh start for 3.5 while maintaining backward compatibility, this would be the perfect time to make a break from the monk's shoehorned Asian...
Here here.
Monk should be able to represent a /Wide Variety/ of Archetypes just as Fighter, Rogue, Cleric, and Wizard can. The fact they've been shoehorned into a single cultural Asian fist-fighter and nothing but would imply that they're /not/ a core-class, and I think they should be.
A Sufi warrior who lives by the sword and silk and nothing but, a Greco-Roman Hero who wrestles and beats his foes, these should all be things a Monk should be capable of representing.
Also, I RP in Asian/Arabian and Meso-American settings fairly often, to try and mix it up out of the standard European fantasy. I never use the crazy classes in those other books, the core classes are almost always perfect. Samurai=Fighter, Ninja=Rogue, Wu-Jen=Wizard, etc, etc. A whirling Dervish can easily be a Barbarian with a little Unearthed Arcana tweaking their rage into a Whirling Frenzy, and giving them a big nasty curved sword.
Also, Monks should be able to use Simple Weapons. For the purpose of the game, a Short-Sword represents many things, including a Dao, and a Light-Flail Can represent a real weapon, or one bristling with spikes, or even a Nunchaku. Also...a sickle is a sickle, the same size, damage, and weight, used for threshing grain, it's a stick, with a blade...that's it. Changing it's name doesn't make it magical, it's a farm implement.
The special weapons of a monk are not just rebranded common weapons even though they were based on them. They have acquired modfications in form, material and balance to specially mesh with a monk's moves. So you may be a karate master but that dagger is just a crude long knife to you. In some cases like the quarterstaff, or the longsword for a Hurrianic monk, it is not the weapon that has been adapted to the monk, but the monk to the weapon.And the monk is inherently an Asian class, just as a knight with a charging lance is inherently middle ages European. The only offensive weapon European monks had were the boards they slapped thier heads with. :)
All the monk weapons are farming implements, like Shinobi and Okinawan peasants who learned to use common tools as deadly implements.
I'm not entirely certain you know what you are talking about.
Also, there is no Knight Class in core, there's a Fighter, who is cross-cultural, and there were European monastic orders...who trained in the martial arts (not kung-fu and all of that flash) some just for the purposes of exercise, and some later actually became military orders. However, grappling and wrestling was involved.
This whole 'Asia is Magic' thing bothers me.
One of the silliest things is that the ability for a monk to flurry with a weapon or not was considered one of the traits considered to determine if a weapon should be simple, martial, or exotic. That is why the kama is exotic and the sickel is simple, because a monk can flurry with it. But think about that. All the weapons in the core rules that a monk can flurry with, the only class that even benefits from the ability to flurry with it, are already weapons the monk is proficient with anyway, so why make it exotic? The ability to flurry or not with a specific weapon is the effect of the class and not the weapon. I made the following changes to monk weapons in my game:
dropped kama -> use sickel
nunchaku -> becomes a light flail, martial weapon
sai -> no change, this is the only monk weapon that is mostly balanced as exotic
shuriken -> no change (though I'd prefer to use darts if not for the drawing issue)
drop siangham (WTF?) -> use punching dagger
I'm considering letting monks flurry with a dire flail, describing it as a 3 section staff, they wouldn't get automatic proficiency with it though, so would have to take the EWP feat.
Some options to making monks of different backgrounds distinct in Golarion were discussed in this thread.
A monk of Iomedae could be trained in the Overwhelming Attack style and the longsword. A Shoanti monk could be trained in the Undying Way style, handaxe, kukri, and javelin. A Varisan Monk could be trained in the Hand and Foot style, bladed scarf, and dagger. A Vudran monk could be trained in the Passive Way style and the temple sword ("hook sword?"; described in Pathfinder #9 on pg. 83; 18 gp, 1d6(S)/1d8(M), 19-20/x2, 4 lbs, Slashing). A monk of Zon-Kuthon could be trained in the Sleeping Tiger style and the spiked chain.
Using the OGL Fighting Styles from UA as a basis and assigning different "special weapons" by style is a good way to make the monk more "universal," rather than being specific to a single real world background/martial art as they are currently written.
The thing is about styles is that each one of them neccessitates at the least a partial rebuild of the class for it.
No more so than the Pathfinder sorcerer from the 3.5 sorcerer.
A monk of Iomedae could be trained in the Overwhelming Attack style and the longsword. A Shoanti monk could be trained in the Undying Way style, handaxe, kukri, and javelin. A Varisan Monk could be trained in the Hand and Foot style, bladed scarf, and dagger. A Vudran monk could be trained in the Passive Way style and the temple sword. A monk of Zon-Kuthon could be trained in the Sleeping Tiger style and the spiked chain.
But they would all still suck compared to an unarmed monk. Monks can beat DR through ki; they don't need special material weapons to do it. And a flaming quality really isn't good enough to spend money on as they level, when base damage continues to plummet in comparison with unarmed strikes.
Why not give Monks proficiency with a limited selections of weapons, like those listed for the Sorcerer?
Additionally, at 1st level the Monk may choose any one simple weapon, any one light weapon, and any one martial weapon to be his designated Monk weapons. If the player takes EWP as a feat at first level, he may designate the exotic weapon as one of his Monk weapons and uses the exotic weapon instead of choosing a martial weapon.
|
|
My House Rule:
1. Monks are all trained in Simple Weapons and may use the melee weapons as monk weapons.
2. The standard monk weapons are but one group of weapons that a monk may be specially trained with.
3. A monk may substitute those non-simple weapons with 1 weapon group drawn from the Fighter's weapon group listing as the weapons he or she is particularly trained with, i.e., monk weapons.
4. As an additional bonus feat, a monk may take "Weapon Group Proficiency" with each "group" defined as one of the Fighter's weapon groups.
I made the following changes to monk weapons in my game:
dropped kama -> use sickel
nunchaku -> becomes a light flail, martial weapon
sai -> no change, this is the only monk weapon that is mostly balanced as exotic
shuriken -> no change (though I'd prefer to use darts if not for the drawing issue)
drop siangham (WTF?) -> use punching daggerI'm considering letting monks flurry with a dire flail, describing it as a 3 section staff, they wouldn't get automatic proficiency with it though, so would have to take the EWP feat.
You take the average 15th century european footman who used a flail and handed him nunchaku, he might not even recognize it as a weapon.
A siangkam is definetly not a punching dagger as it requires much more training to use properly. Skilled users parry and slash with it, not just punch with it.
And having practiced with a three-section staff in my youth, it is definetly not similiar to a footman's flail either.... though it might look a wee bit more like a weapon to those aforementioned 15th century europeans.
Why not give Monks proficiency with a limited selections of weapons, like those listed for the Sorcerer?
because the class isn't martial artist per say but rather a monastic who practices martial arts as a means to self enlightment... However, world specific monk orders could have different class features that would allow more latitude what weapons they could use.
and besides, the monk does have proficiency with a limited selection of weapons.... the monk weapons people are complaining about.
Of course, this is only my view on the monk... others have different stances on the matter.
You take the average 15th century european footman who used a flail and handed him nunchaku, he might not even recognize it as a weapon.
A siangkam is definetly not a punching dagger as it requires much more training to use properly. Skilled users parry and slash with it, not just punch with it.
And having practiced with a three-section staff in my youth, it is definetly not similiar to a footman's flail either.... though it might look a wee bit more like a weapon to those aforementioned 15th century europeans.
The stats of a nunchaku fit the progression of a light martial flail nicely. Both the nunchaku and the martial flails have the same farm implement as a thing they were derived from (one in asian, the other in europe).
What the hell is a siangham? Never seen it, if it does exist it is too obscure to matter. It does piercing damage in its stats, as does the punching dagger and the punching dagger is a more familiar weapon for players.
Dire flail has been made fun of for its apparent lack of realism. On the other hand, the three section staff is much like the nunchaku and the flail in its derivation from a farm tool. The dire flail therefore makes a lot more sense if you think of it as a three section staff.
As for what the weapons look like, that is pure flavor, I'm talking mechanics. If you want to describe a punching dagger as looking like a siagham, great. You want to describe a nunchaku as a light flail that also works. Stats and flavor are two different things, don't get hung up on one or the other.
A monk of Iomedae could be trained in the Overwhelming Attack style and the longsword. A Shoanti monk could be trained in the Undying Way style, handaxe, kukri, and javelin. A Varisan Monk could be trained in the Hand and Foot style, bladed scarf, and dagger. A Vudran monk could be trained in the Passive Way style and the temple sword. A monk of Zon-Kuthon could be trained in the Sleeping Tiger style and the spiked chain.But they would all still suck compared to an unarmed monk. Monks can beat DR through ki; they don't need special material weapons to do it. And a flaming quality really isn't good enough to spend money on as they level, when base damage continues to plummet in comparison with unarmed strikes.
Which is why I suggested a bonus to damage with their "style weapons." The 1st Ed AD&D monks got to add one-half their class level to damage with all weapons; that's actually pretty close to the unarmed damage progression of the Pathfinder monk (1d6+10 vs. 2d10 at 20th level, assuming kama/nunchaku/quarterstaff), with the weapon doing slightly more damage on average after 2nd level. Add in the better critical statistics of many weapons, and it's debatable if that's too powerful on top of allowing Flurry of Blows with some of them (flaming burst keen temple sword for example; although making the bonus precision damage would keep it within reason; likewise making it a ki power that costs 1 ki point and is declared on a successful attack).
Monks can beat some DR through ki (magic, lawful, adamantine). Ki, as written, has no benefit to unarmed attacks in beating DR based on cold iron, evil, good, holy, piercing, silver, slashing, unholy, etc.
Which is why I suggested a bonus to damage with their "style weapons." Add in the better critical statistics of many weapons, and it's debatable if that's too powerful on top of allowing Flurry of Blows with some of them (flaming burst keen temple sword for example; although making the bonus precision damage would keep it within reason; likewise making it a ki power that costs 1 ki point and is declared on a successful attack).
Sounds good; I could go with either of those options, although of the two the first would be my preference. Note that the special monk weapons all crit on 20/x2, though, just like an unarmed strike (IIRC).
Which is why I suggested a bonus to damage with their "style weapons." Add in the better critical statistics of many weapons, and it's debatable if that's too powerful on top of allowing Flurry of Blows with some of them (flaming burst keen temple sword for example; although making the bonus precision damage would keep it within reason; likewise making it a ki power that costs 1 ki point and is declared on a successful attack).Sounds good; I could go with either of those options, although of the two the first would be my preference. Note that the special monk weapons all crit on 20/x2, though, just like an unarmed strike (IIRC).
The karate/kobujutsu weapons the monk is currently pidgeonholed with do 1d6, 20/x2 damage (the same as the base monk unarmed strike). If monks are differentiated by style, then they should be granted different weapons based on that style. For example, a monk trained in the equivalent of arnis/escrima/kali could use club, dagger, and short sword as part of their style; a monk trained in the equivalent of pankration could use spiked gauntlets; a monk trained in the equivalent of savate could use a cane (club, can be used to trip).
As other posters have stated, it's past time the monk moved beyond the Japanese/Okinawan stereotype and became a generic, broadly applicable class.
As other posters have stated, it's past time the monk moved beyond the Japanese/Okinawan stereotype and became a generic, broadly applicable class.
YES!
I tend to disagree with the assessment that monk weapons are inherently inferior damage. The most crucial aspect to remember is that a weapon can have an enhancment bonus. That's not just a +damage deal. It's +hit, too.
Look at it this way: You have a 5th level human monk. Strenght score is 16. Unarmed damage is a D8. He also carries a +1 Shocking Quarterstaff.
When you make an unarmed attack your roll is this:
D20 + 3 (Base Attack Bonus) + 3 (Strength) - 1 (Flurry) = Total Attack
And your damage is:
D8+3 (Strength)~ 7 damage average
Now, instead, he busts out his quarterstaff:
D20 + 3 (Base)+ 3 (Strenght) + 1 (Enhancement) - 1 (Flurry) = Total Attack
He has a better chance of hitting. And for damage, he's doing:
D6 + 3 (Strength) + 1 (Enhancement) + 3 (Electricity) ~ 10 damage average
So, you are doing more average damage, but hitting more often.
Let's loot at it at level 20, figuring the same 16 strength score.
D20 + 15 (Base) + 3 (Str) = Total Attack
2D10 + 3 (Strength)~ 14 damage
Versus:
D20 + 15 (Base) + 3 (Str) + 4 (Enhancement)= Total Attack
D6 + 3 (STR) + 4 (Enhancement) + 3 (Electricity) ~ 13 damage.
And that's with a pretty crappy 20th level weapon. It's important to remeber that no matter how much damage potential you have, it's meaningless if you can't hit the broad side of a barn. Wrecking balls are used on stationary buildings, not on the battlefield.
Now, this is not meant to advocate a full attack progression for monks. That would make them silly over powered. With their saves and other nutty special abilities, they have an excellent role in the party: utterly destroy anything with a low to mid AC.
Weapons are also important, as stated above, for dealing with damage reduction, and things that hurt to touch directly. As far as the inferiority and redundancy of monk weapons some item folding would be nice. However, a couple do have added benefits. Better would be to expand the list to include weapons from other martial arts styles, or to simply add weapons that would make sense. The Khopesh and Spike Chain come to mind.
Or, the ultimate solution: Feat it. Martial Arts Training - Chose a weapon with which you are proficient. It's now a special monk weapon for you. This rewards people who are willing to multiclass monks (Woo! No more penalty!), along with certain races' built in proficiencies.
I tend to disagree with the assessment that monk weapons are inherently inferior damage. The most crucial aspect to remember is that a weapon can have an enhancment bonus. That's not just a +damage deal. It's +hit, too.
Amulet of mighty fists can give you that, and still lets you use Stunning Fist, which is often better than flaming, etc. weapons (even considering its limited uses/day).
Amulet of mighty fists can give you that, and still lets you use Stunning Fist, which is often better than flaming, etc. weapons (even considering its limited uses/day).
Carry both!
Stunning Fist is a fantastice ability. Especially if you want to be the magekiller monk.
However, I still maintain that armed monks are a good idea. There's always ways to make things better, but removing monk weapons I don't think is one of them. Part of it is also a style preference. I have a player right now who loves her quarterstaff. I'm not going to tell her she's wrong for using it when her unarmed in a couple levels will do more die damage, especially since gearing correctly can get her as much, if not more damage. One thing I did for each of my players was to give them augment crystals. For the monk, I ruled that if she bought brass knuckles and attatched the augment to that, she could benefit from elemental damage that way while unarmed, and since they augments can be moved around, it can be placed on whatever weapon she wants to use.
The big problem with comparing raw dice damage from weapons (be they manufatured or natural), it pales compared to bonus damage. Rogue sneak attack damage FAR outclasses the damage of whatever weapons they carry by just die roll. Even magic'd up, sneak attack damage is a ludicrous boost in comparison. Fighters do it with a wonderful array of feats and combat tricks. And, of course, Weapon Specialization and now Weapon Training and Weapon Mastery.
Monks make up for this by getting 5 iterative attacks, 3 of which are at max attack bonus. Let's be honest, anything after the second attack from any other melee class is generally worthless unless you get a natural 20 to hit. Monks get THREE shots like that. With or without weapons, that's fantastic.
Basically, I like monk weapons. They add flavor to a character, and really aren't any worse than unarmed attacks. If you want to rule that certain weapons, due to their table values are the same thing, go for it! My biggest love of RPGs are the options. Why take something away from a player? Give them a choice. Modify it to fit your game.