In Pathfinder Beta introduction Jason writes "I wanted to give every class a reason to be followed up through 20th level". It's a great design goal, and things are clearly for the better. Naturally there are some classes and levels where multiclassing is tempting. However, I think the monk has it worse.
There is a pair of new feats: Vital Strike and Improved Vital Strike. They are great for anyone with iterative attacks - maybe even to the point of being overpowered. The one class with iterative attacks to spare is the monk. Especially with all the two-weapon fighting feats they are drooling all over Improved Vital Strike.
The only way they get the feat is to multiclass. One might argue monk 9 is needed for Flurry of Blows penalties to disappear. Someone else could argue monk 15 is needed for maximum unarmed damage with Monk's Belt. After that all they need is full BAB.
It's not the biggest of problems, and could be easily fixed. But it shows how the latter monk levels aren't really delivering. None of the class abilities after monk 15 is that special.
And that, my fellow Pathfinders, is where the problem lies.
There should be alternate monk paths like there are bloodlines for sorcerers, domains for clerics, and specialist schools for wizards. The monk paths should be tied to a specific attribute in addition to Wis and represent a certain style of fighting. Also, I think that there should be at least one feat that grants +1 BAB, at least as a background feat that must be chosen at first level.
|
Actually, if the monk's weapon proficiency was changed to include (a) Simple Weapons and (b) Weapon Group Proficiency (and b is drawn from the list of Fighter Weapon Groups), you'd have a slew of versatility.
You could have a monk who fights with a double-bladed sword, another who pummels, another with two short swords or two maces, and so on. Talk about variety.
While agree that the last 5 levels or so of the monk could use a bit more oomph, I don't think Vital strike, or improved vital strike are "broken". But they certianly do encourage a bit of multiclassing.
To look more closely at the feats themselves, assume a monk 16 and fighter 4. Gives a base attack of +16 and a few extra feats. We'll also assume they have TWF, improved TWF, and greater TWF, so with flurry the attacks look like so: +14/+14/+14/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1 (attack modifier not factored in becuase it varies too much, but I did factor in the -2 penalty for TWF,) Now with a monks belt the unarmed damage is 2d10, so the extra damage on each attack would be 4d10 and the monk/fighter would loose two attacks, for a total of 132 (22 average per attack, 6 attacks) average points of damage at 20th level...assuming all attacks hit, not bad. In comparison a rogue with TWF, improved TWF, and Greater TWF will get a total of 210, (10d6 sneak attack over 6 attacks) average extra damage from sneak attack.
While agree that the last 5 levels or so of the monk could use a bit more oomph.
On this, I just wanted to say I feel Diamond Soul (when Monk's get SR 10 + class level) is a feature that encourages staying single class more than almost any other draw... Now, taking 4 levels of fighter first? That's something else.
To look more closely at the feats themselves, assume a monk 16 and fighter 4. Gives a base attack of +16 and a few extra feats. We'll also assume they have TWF, improved TWF, and greater TWF, so with flurry the attacks look like so: +14/+14/+14/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1. Now with a monks belt the unarmed damage is 2d10, so the extra damage on each attack would be 4d10 and the monk/fighter would loose two attacks, for a total of 132 (22 average per attack, 6 attacks) average points of damage at 20th level)
The flurry attacks would actually be: +14/+14/+14/+14/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1 (main, + 2 flurry, + two weapon), for 7 attacks total, 154 total bonus damage. + Haste potentially.
|
|
The Paizo staff have asked for our help in making the game better. They want to hear what you want to say about the monk. But they won't.
One man (Jason) is mostly responsible for listening to all of our feedback. If we type thousands of posts on topics that he isn't working on, they're going to disappear into the ether. If you have ideas that you want to see for Pathfinder, please wait to post them until the chapter they're relevant to is being discussed.
Monks are a class. Currently they're discussing ability scores and races. If you've noticed a problem with either of those subjects, it should be considered now. Classes will be covered as well - in depth - with Jason engaging the community when he is ready to think about changes for it.
I don't want anyone to say "Well, I gave you my great idea 2 days after the Beta came out" and Paizo to say "We weren't ready. Why didn't you repeat it? We would have made that change if we understood your reasoning when we were looking at changing this aspect of the game."
I know waiting is hard. But I have a lot of things that I want to have heard, and we're not talking about them yet. When we start talking about classes, I don't want my comments lost because someone else is talking about feats and Jason can't wade through all the off-topic posts. And when we're talking about feats and someone else is talking about magic systems, we may reduce the signal-to-noise ratio to a point where we're no longer helping to shape the new system. That would make me cry.
Overpowered, shmoverpowered. Anything that keeps a player from rolling for attack (and miss chance, and critical threats, and...) eight times a round is a godsend.
The Paizo staff have asked for our help in making the game better. They want to hear what you want to say about the monk. But they won't.
One man (Jason) is mostly responsible for listening to all of our feedback. If we type thousands of posts on topics that he isn't working on, they're going to disappear into the ether. If you have ideas that you want to see for Pathfinder, please wait to post them until the chapter they're relevant to is being discussed.
Monks are a class. Currently they're discussing ability scores and races. If you've noticed a problem with either of those subjects, it should be considered now. Classes will be covered as well - in depth - with Jason engaging the community when he is ready to think about changes for it.
I don't want anyone to say "Well, I gave you my great idea 2 days after the Beta came out" and Paizo to say "We weren't ready. Why didn't you repeat it? We would have made that change if we understood your reasoning when we were looking at changing this aspect of the game."
I know waiting is hard. But I have a lot of things that I want to have heard, and we're not talking about them yet. When we start talking about classes, I don't want my comments lost because someone else is talking about feats and Jason can't wade through all the off-topic posts. And when we're talking about feats and someone else is talking about magic systems, we may reduce the signal-to-noise ratio to a point where we're no longer helping to shape the new system. That would make me cry.
Good point. Right now I'd say the paizo staff are too bussy with gencon for anything else. For the most part i'm happy with races/abilities..excect Charisma, it really shouldn't measure physical beuaty, but thats a tail for another thread....good point, I'll be good now.
The flurry attacks would actually be: +14/+14/+14/+14/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1 (main, + 2 flurry, + two weapon), for 7 attacks total, 154 total bonus damage. + Haste potentially.
Plus a potential ki point to give 8th attack. It's a class ability so I'd factor it in. And with Improved Natural Attack the base damage is 4d6, multiplying to 12d6 for each hit. Suddenly we're talking about a whopping 336 average damage if all attacks hit (not yet counting Str or any other bonuses). Single class monks would have 9 Vital Strike attacks, for 216 average damage. So a single feat gives 56% more (potential average) damage per round. And the attack bonuses are better for IVS so the figure is a bit bigger in actual situations (and the damages smaller).
Monks are a class. Currently they're discussing ability scores and races. If you've noticed a problem with either of those subjects, it should be considered now. Classes will be covered as well - in depth - with Jason engaging the community when he is ready to think about changes for it.
I'm well aware of the process. And I'm going to repeat this argument in a refined form when we concentrate on classes. I prefer to have the argument thought out to save Jason's (and others) time.
This same problem was there already in Alpha stage. I waited for Beta to see if the problem was gone. Which it wasn't. Hence this thread. I thought for a while if this should've been posted under Alpha forums but this one felt more right.
That is, I'm not waiting for comments from Jason (yet). But all feedback from anyone is greatly appreciated.
Actually I think the whole process would be smoother if there was some kind of refining forum where ideas are discussed before they are presented in the actual discussion forum. That way Jason (and others) wouldn't need to read hundreds of threads with overlapping or no actual content. Of course, I might be solving a problem that doesn't exist.
Since when can you use two-weapon fighting feats with unarmed attacks? They work with offhand attacks, and there is supposedly "no such thing as an offhand attack" for a monk fighting unarmed. So you could use either greater flurry of blows OR ITWF, not both, right?
Since when can you use two-weapon fighting feats with unarmed attacks? They work with offhand attacks, and there is supposedly "no such thing as an offhand attack" for a monk fighting unarmed. So you could use either greater flurry of blows OR ITWF, not both, right?
If you want monks in your campaign to get Vital strike and Improved Vital Strike, add them to the bonus feat list for monks. Monks do not need to meet the prerequisites (+16 base attack bonus in this case) to take a bonus feat that they are allowed. Fighters would be getting IVS at level 16, you could make it a bonus feat for monks at level 16.
Good point. Right now I'd say the paizo staff are too bussy with gencon for anything else. For the most part i'm happy with races/abilities..excect Charisma, it really shouldn't measure physical beuaty, but thats a tail for another thread....good point, I'll be good now.
Like this one? :D
|
|
I'm well aware of the process. And I'm going to repeat this argument in a refined form when we concentrate on classes. I prefer to have the argument thought out to save Jason's (and others) time.
Of course I can't stop you. I'm not the forum police. But while you may not intend this thread for Jason's attention, by posting it you displace threads that are here for his attention.
And by posting it now you very well may not get the 'flurry' of evaluation you'll get when classes are on the docket. Everyone will want to participate at that point because they'll be heard.
But that's my take.
Of course I can't stop you. I'm not the forum police.
Even if you were Jason says here:
"Welcome to the General Discussion Forum of the Beta Playtest of the Pathfinder RPG. This forum is for posting general observations about the rules as well as discussing aspects of the rules that have not yet been brought up in the Design Forums."
I'm not trying to be an ass. I just sincerely followed what Jason wished us to do.
Since when can you use two-weapon fighting feats with unarmed attacks?
WotC cleared it up in the official D&D game rule FAQ. Check the v.3.5 Main D&D FAQ, pages 19-20. It says (among other relevant clarifications):
"The rules don’t come right out and say that a monk can’t use an unarmed strike for an off-hand strike (although the exact wording of the unarmed strike ability suggests otherwise), and no compelling reason why a monk could not do so exists. When using an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack, the monk suffers all the usual attack penalties from two-weapon fighting (see Table 8–10 in the PH) and the monk adds only half her Strength bonus (if any) to damage if the off-hand unarmed strike hits".