The monk already needs Dexterity and Constitution in combat. The monk needs Wisdom for his class features. With a 3/4 base attack bonus and an attack penalty when using flurry of blows, Strength also becomes important.
I believe that no class should require high stats in more than 3 scores to be effective in battle. This is the same argument that made Charisma the spellcasting stat for the paladin.
Here's my proposition: Allow the monk to substitute his Wisdom modifier for his Strength modifier for melee attack and damage rolls.
This would balance out the weakness of the attack penalty of flurry of blows and having +0 to BAB early on.
This is a tough one. I would agree on the damage but if Wisdom guides Attack, Damage, AC and Class features it might be too heavily focused on. Otherwise I agree that they shouldn't have to rely on more than 3 different stats. Just as it is for everyone else.
I would say give them their Wisdom bonus to unarmed/monk-weapon-armed damage but for attack rolls let them have weapon finesse.
Here's a kooky idea: How about letting a monk choose at level 1 to add either Str or Dex or Wis to unarmed attack and damage rolls? (And you can't change your mind later.)
Here's a kooky idea: How about letting a monk choose at level 1 to add either Str or Dex or Wis to unarmed attack and damage rolls? (And you can't change your mind later.)
Wouldn't it still end up with Wisdom? The player will always go for wisdom as the best stat and have that one stat govern pretty much everything around them.
I remember my abuse of the Shadow Blade feat with a Swordsage. Thanks to that feat i could spend pretty much all my equipment on increasing my dexterity, because i could apply it to Attack, AC and Damage. One stat should govern only two of these at a time for a melee character at least.
Here's a kooky idea: How about letting a monk choose at level 1 to add either Str or Dex or Wis to unarmed attack and damage rolls? (And you can't change your mind later.)Wouldn't it still end up with Wisdom? The player will always go for wisdom as the best stat and have that one stat govern pretty much everything around them.
Your monk might. Personally, I'm not that crazy about Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, so I don't really care about Wis too much; I'd rather have Str (for combat maneuvers, assuming they worked) or Dex (for AC, initiative, Acrobatics, etc.).
Your monk might. Personally, I'm not that crazy about Stunning Fist and/or Quivering Palm, so I don't really care about Wis too much; I'd rather have Str (for combat maneuvers, assuming they worked) or Dex (for AC, initiative, Acrobatics, etc.).Here's a kooky idea: How about letting a monk choose at level 1 to add either Str or Dex or Wis to unarmed attack and damage rolls? (And you can't change your mind later.)Wouldn't it still end up with Wisdom? The player will always go for wisdom as the best stat and have that one stat govern pretty much everything around them.
As it is it surely wouldnt care about stunning fist and such. But what if you got the option to add wisdom to attack and damage too? Wouldn't you focus most around your wisdom, since with that ability you suddenly can do anything? I figure most players would.
Wisdom is imho already a good a stat for a monk to let it apply to melee attacks, saves and AC. Same goes for dexterity.
That said I'd like to propose the following:
At first level a monk can decide if he want's to add his wisdom modifier to his armor class or his melee attacks and damage rolls.
that wouldnt really help anything. It either leaves their attacks weak, or makes their AC even worse than it is at the time being.
Wisdom is imho already a good a stat for a monk to let it apply to melee attacks, saves and AC. Same goes for dexterity.
I think you are grossly exaggerating how useful a high Wis is for a monk. For instance, Stunning Fist is useless if you can't hit anyone in the first place!
The monk already needs Dexterity and Constitution in combat. The monk needs Wisdom for his class features. With a 3/4 base attack bonus and an attack penalty when using flurry of blows, Strength also becomes important.
I believe that no class should require high stats in more than 3 scores to be effective in battle. This is the same argument that made Charisma the spellcasting stat for the paladin.
Here's my proposition: Allow the monk to substitute his Wisdom modifier for his Strength modifier for melee attack and damage rolls.
This would balance out the weakness of the attack penalty of flurry of blows and having +0 to BAB early on.
Good reasoning, good idea to change the stat, but wrong reasoning. Weapon finesse is what your looking for. IMHO no effects of one stat should be changed to a stat that is also a good save. With weapon finesse, maybe a better one to include all monk weapons, you could pull off what you need with out trunk loading wisdom too much.
Good reasoning, good idea to change the stat, but wrong reasoning. Weapon finesse is what your looking for. IMHO no effects of one stat should be changed to a stat that is also a good save. With weapon finesse, maybe a better one to include all monk weapons, you could pull off what you need with out trunk loading wisdom too much.The monk already needs Dexterity and Constitution in combat. The monk needs Wisdom for his class features. With a 3/4 base attack bonus and an attack penalty when using flurry of blows, Strength also becomes important.
I believe that no class should require high stats in more than 3 scores to be effective in battle. This is the same argument that made Charisma the spellcasting stat for the paladin.
Here's my proposition: Allow the monk to substitute his Wisdom modifier for his Strength modifier for melee attack and damage rolls.
This would balance out the weakness of the attack penalty of flurry of blows and having +0 to BAB early on.
Agreed. This is pretty much what I was talking about. If could apply Finesse to all monk weapons that would help alot. Additionally you could opt a feat to add the WIS bonus to monk-weapon- and unarmed damage. There's been a good proposition on that in the "Monks need full BAB" thread.
Wisdom is imho already a good a stat for a monk to let it apply to melee attacks, saves and AC. Same goes for dexterity.
That said I'd like to propose the following:
At first level a monk can decide if he want's to add his wisdom modifier to his armor class or his melee attacks and damage rolls.
No-brainer there. I'm always going to choose AC over damage. I'd rather not take a hit and deal weaker damage consistently than take the hits and deal more damage.
That said, I'm all for using the monk's Wisdom modifier in place of strength for determining Melee attack. It (to me) implies that the monk is using precise focus and internal energy to motivate the damage behind his attack, rather than brute force. I like it.
I would push to get that wrapped into a feat similar to the old "Zen Archery", where the wisdom was used in the place of Dex to determine the attack roll modifiers, and just use it for both, if the player wants. Maybe taken at 1st level (bonus feat?), and open to any class? Why should monks get all the fun?
No-brainer there. I'm always going to choose AC over damage. I'd rather not take a hit and deal weaker damage consistently than take the hits and deal more damage.
The problem is that a high AC does nothing to end a fight sooner. It's generally in a party's best interests for a fight to end as soon as possible (IMO).
IMHO no effects of one stat should be changed to a stat that is also a good save.
Well, Monks already have the niche of having high saves all around. But by splitting their stat dependencies, those saves suffer.
A Monk who has to take Str, Dex, Con, and Wis will have lower saves than a Monk who takes Dex, Con, and Wis.
Allowing Monks to use Wisdom in place of Strength when attacking unarmed or with special monk weapons is actually a really good idea, and inherently balanced, because Power Attack, the feat that's needed for big damage, requires investment into Strength (just how much... we'll have to see how that argument pans out).
With this change, a Monk who wishes to deal lots of damage will still need to take Strength, but a monk who just wishes to get by won't have to. Also, the Monk's niche of having high saves is reinforced.
-Matt
No-brainer there. I'm always going to choose AC over damage. I'd rather not take a hit and deal weaker damage consistently than take the hits and deal more damage.The problem is that a high AC does nothing to end a fight sooner. It's generally in a party's best interests for a fight to end as soon as possible (IMO).
Be that as it is, the monk will end up getting killed even more often if he chose to add the bonus to attacks abecause that will leave him with an AC of about 13 (14 if he's small or an elf or has very good stat rolls, lots of points to buy from and 15 if he's both and elf and with lots of really good stats, and maybe 16 if a halfling with really good stats), but in most cases a monk without WIS bonus to ac oin first level wont have more than AC 13. They already before had major issues with getting a decen AC, but if they even left out the Wisdom bonus, they wouldn't need to care anymore how soon to end a fight, because it will end very soon for them anyway.
I say let them add their Wisdom bonus to unarmed/monk-weapon damage, and use weapon finesse to get a decent attack bonus. That way you can have wisdom on both attacks and AC without overloading the stat.
You know this is a fine idea... up until your monk takes wisdom damage from a poison or touch of idiocy spell, then he's up the creek even more than he is now.
AND as a DM if I realised that the only thing a monk needed was wisdom, well I can't say some of my NPC's and BBEG's might not realise that too and try to hit them where it hurts the most.
You know this is a fine idea... up until your monk takes wisdom damage from a poison or touch of idiocy spell, then he's up the creek even more than he is now.
Similarly, wizards shouldn't invest everything in Int because they might get poisoned or affected by Touch of Idiocy as well.
You know this is a fine idea... up until your monk takes wisdom damage from a poison or touch of idiocy spell, then he's up the creek even more than he is now.Similarly, wizards shouldn't invest everything in Int because they might get poisoned or affected by Touch of Idiocy as well.
And then I remember: at level 11 monk's become immune to poison, and with their great saves (and bonus verses enchantments) making a save is going to be easy for them, which could lead to this actually being a little overpowered... oh wait undead, ok undead can still do drain/damage.
I don't know I don't like tying the monk's up into just wisdom... I mean "Perfecting self" doesn't lead me to think of a guy that has focus solely on his wisdom stat...
How about, we give the monk an ability that uses "Ki" points to boost his stats (whichever physical one he wants) kind of like a bull's strength does?
Director of Games
|
Hey there all,
Although I understand that monks have it a little rough when it comes to MAD, I believe that tying their attacks to Wis makes them a bit too focused on one stat. Not to mention the fact that this would make the monk a prime choice for class dipping by clerics.
I am open to debate, but I am not sure that I am sold on this idea.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Hey there all,
Although I understand that monks have it a little rough when it comes to MAD, I believe that tying their attacks to Wis makes them a bit too focused on one stat. Not to mention the fact that this would make the monk a prime choice for class dipping by clerics.
I am open to debate, but I am not sure that I am sold on this idea.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Well, if a cleric is going to dip into a class, the monk would make sense fluff wise. They'd also be losing the benefit of armour proficiency if whatever was proposed required wearing no armour, so that's a trade off (one the cleric could probably live with) as she would gain the monk's 'Wis added to AC' trait.
If there was anything like this, it should IMO be a feat with a pre-requisite such as the 'Insightful Maneuvers' feat that Wicht drafted which gives a Wis bonus to Combat Maneuvers. That would make it obtainable but with a cost.
What about a ki power instead? Something that lets you add wis to hit/dmg for a limited time?
I had a player with a monk when I ran Age of Worms, towards the end he could barely hit anything. I could see that some sort of ki ability or feats could add a useful wis bonus without making it a permanent power increase.
Perhaps if the monk were offered Weapon Finesse as a bonus feat choice at 1st level and the Wisdom modifier applied only to melee damage, not attack rolls?Hey there all,
Although I understand that monks have it a little rough when it comes to MAD, I believe that tying their attacks to Wis makes them a bit too focused on one stat. Not to mention the fact that this would make the monk a prime choice for class dipping by clerics.
I am open to debate, but I am not sure that I am sold on this idea.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Thats what im trying to say all the time. I'm getting the feeling my posts are only visible to me.
If the wisdom bonus only applied to damage I think it could work...
It would keep the monk from having all his eggs in one basket but still help him worry a little bit less on being so MAD.
|
|
From my experience the martial arts are about dexterity for striking an oponent (speed, footwork, positioning, refelxes). However, the true power behind an attack truly comes from your focus and undrstanding of body motion and critical strike points. The entire style allows a slightly built person to completely devestate a much larger person with the correct training and moves. Strength really doesn't come into it, although at times it helps depending on the style you're using (grappling styles rather than kicking or punching style). If you're trained in one of the styles that focuses on kicking (Tae Kwon Do for eg), then upper body strength is less important as you're using the big muscles fo the legs to drive your attack, but you are truly relying on speed and timing to do the damage. Any one who's had to break timber for a grading will understand this I think, as I'm not sure i've been very articulate in my argument.
Because of this reasoning, I have to agree with the posters above who are advocating for the Dex to hit, Wisdom to damage. A higher wisdom represents your ability to focus your power through timing and understanding of biomechanics combined with pressure points. Dexterity allows you to actually hit those points.
From a balance point it gives you more than one characteristic to focus on and therefore provides a built in balance mechanic.
Cheers
From my experience the martial arts are about dexterity for striking an oponent (speed, footwork, positioning, refelxes). However, the true power behind an attack truly comes from your focus and undrstanding of body motion and critical strike points. The entire style allows a slightly built person to completely devestate a much larger person with the correct training and moves. Strength really doesn't come into it, although at times it helps depending on the style you're using (grappling styles rather than kicking or punching style). If you're trained in one of the styles that focuses on kicking (Tae Kwon Do for eg), then upper body strength is less important as you're using the big muscles fo the legs to drive your attack, but you are truly relying on speed and timing to do the damage. Any one who's had to break timber for a grading will understand this I think, as I'm not sure i've been very articulate in my argument.
If you don't feel that strength is important in martial arts then you clearly don't understand martial arts. The disparity between different strength and size is huge, this is why every significant martial arts competition is broken down into weight classes.
|
From my experience the martial arts are about dexterity for striking an oponent (speed, footwork, positioning, refelxes). However, the true power behind an attack truly comes from your focus and undrstanding of body motion and critical strike points. The entire style allows a slightly built person to completely devestate a much larger person with the correct training and moves. Strength really doesn't come into it, although at times it helps depending on the style you're using (grappling styles rather than kicking or punching style). If you're trained in one of the styles that focuses on kicking (Tae Kwon Do for eg), then upper body strength is less important as you're using the big muscles fo the legs to drive your attack, but you are truly relying on speed and timing to do the damage. Any one who's had to break timber for a grading will understand this I think, as I'm not sure i've been very articulate in my argument.If you don't feel that strength is important in martial arts then you clearly don't understand martial arts. The disparity between different strength and size is huge, this is why every significant martial arts competition is broken down into weight classes.
agree in the general point.
for game design, however, i don't see Wis to Damage as too over-bearing. perhaps as one of the monk-bonus feats, or possibly as a ki-power (1 point for rds/monk lvl of wis to damage, perhaps)
as far as striking style martial arts...if you're good enough, and fast enough, it doesn't matter if you hit someone in the throat with 5 oz of strike force, or 15, they're still going down. now, for grappling/submission styles, strength and size plays a MUCH larger role.
-t
From my experience the martial arts are about dexterity for striking an oponent (speed, footwork, positioning, refelxes). However, the true power behind an attack truly comes from your focus and undrstanding of body motion and critical strike points. The entire style allows a slightly built person to completely devestate a much larger person with the correct training and moves. Strength really doesn't come into it, although at times it helps depending on the style you're using (grappling styles rather than kicking or punching style). If you're trained in one of the styles that focuses on kicking (Tae Kwon Do for eg), then upper body strength is less important as you're using the big muscles fo the legs to drive your attack, but you are truly relying on speed and timing to do the damage. Any one who's had to break timber for a grading will understand this I think, as I'm not sure i've been very articulate in my argument.If you don't feel that strength is important in martial arts then you clearly don't understand martial arts. The disparity between different strength and size is huge, this is why every significant martial arts competition is broken down into weight classes.
of course strength is an important part. But also the knowing how to play out your advantages and speed is important.
For example kung fu has a few styles that basically use centrifugal force and leverage by making wide swings and thereby maxing damage out. Of course if you know how to do that and have the brawn of a grizzly bear you will have a nack over someone who uses the same techniques with less muscles, but that doesnt mean that martial artists dont apply such techniques to overcome a lack of physical strength.I think it makes a lot of sense to have your wisdom modifier to damage, even if only as a feat.
agree in the general point.
for game design, however, i don't see Wis to Damage as too over-bearing. perhaps as one of the monk-bonus feats, or possibly as a ki-power (1 point for rds/monk lvl of wis to damage, perhaps)
as far as striking style martial arts...if you're good enough, and fast enough, it doesn't matter if you hit someone in the throat with 5 oz of strike force, or 15, they're still going down. now, for grappling/submission styles, strength and size plays a MUCH larger role.
Meh.... I was replying to a 'real world example' which Wrath posted. If strength and size weren't important then the lightweight champion would be able to kick the majority of heavyweight contenders butts and this simply isn't true. A small expert martial artist will lay down some serious hurt against a non-martial artist but there is a huge advantage in martial arts to being strong. (Of course there is also a huge advantage to having a big ass knife in martial arts but that's a whole other conversation).
As for in-game mechanics... I haven't tested the new monk in my game so I really have a hard time saying whether it's good enough or not.
|
|
If you don't feel that strength is important in martial arts then you clearly don't understand martial arts. The disparity between different strength and size is huge, this is why every significant martial arts competition is broken down into weight classes.
Competition martial arts -yes weight plays a part due to the strict limitations placed in types of strikes allowed. Its also limited to particular styles.
Check out Ninjitsu and Aikido for styles where strength is less important than technique and knowledge of critical strike points and focusing on the manipulation of an opponents weaker joint areas. I don't see too many competitions for these styles of martial arts (would be interested in watching some if they exist though)
Styles such as Tae Kwon Do really focus on kicking techniques. These are big muscles admittedly, but I've seen ten year old girls break 2 inch timber with front kicks and roundhouse kicks. Its all about speed and timing maximising force (Newtons second law). You can easily compensate for a lack of mass - strength from muscle, by increasing the speed of an attack - Dex.
Of course if you combine them both you get a really powerful fighter but without the training and understanding of where to strike and when to strike (Wisdom) your power means nothing. Check out chinese kung fu flicks. They're not overly powerful guys. These are people who have knowledge and timing and speed.
I think I have a pretty good idea of how martial arts works, I'm just looking at a broader picture than competitions.
Now, all that aside, for a game where you've limited points to spend in stats and have to do a job, spreading the effective stats across four places (strength, dex, con and wis for monks) is a real limiter. USing the reasoing above, I see no reason why you couldn't drop the strength aspect from the needed stats and allow them to use Dex to hit and wisdom mod as an add for damage. Of course I'm only one opinion, it's really up to the designers to make that final call.
Cheers
Sneaksy said it. There is a feat that allows you to use your wis instead of anything with simple weapons and unnarmed strike. There could be a feat that did the same thing.
However, as jason said, clerics would dip into the monk. So why not allow this but only at, maybe, 3rd level, as some kind of "ki strike" or any other fluff name? Maybe even 2nd level. If the cleric or druid really wants this ability, make him pay two spellcaster levels to have it.
The rp of this could be that the monk take a little time to develop this intuitive ability. He was spending his training on learning to intuitively dodge blows first. In MOST martial arts you learn the basic defenses more than the basic moves.
Sneaksy said it. There is a feat that allows you to use your wis instead of anything with simple weapons and unnarmed strike. There could be a feat that did the same thing.
However, as jason said, clerics would dip into the monk. So why not allow this but only at, maybe, 3rd level, as some kind of "ki strike" or any other fluff name? Maybe even 2nd level. If the cleric or druid really wants this ability, make him pay two spellcaster levels to have it.
The rp of this could be that the monk take a little time to develop this intuitive ability. He was spending his training on learning to intuitively dodge blows first. In MOST martial arts you learn the basic defenses more than the basic moves.
We already got as far as adding wisdom bonus only to melee damage. Of course Weapon finesse solves the attack bonus issues, but the monk is still lacking in damage. That's why we're discussing adding a monk's Wis-modifier to unarmed/monk-weapon damage.
Those feats Sneaksy proposed don't do that.
|
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
Reposted from the monks need full BAB thread.
Some Ideas Thanks to Chris and Deadly
Wisdom is Strength
Your years of training and innate wisdom provide you with an insight into the weaknesses of your opponents style.
Prerequisites: Wis 13+. Improved Unarmed Strike,
Benefit: You can add your wisdom bonus to your strength bonus in calculating your damage.
Special: This feat can be taken as a monk bonus feat.Zen Strike
Your years of training and innate wisdom provide you with an insight into the weaknesses of your opponents style.
Prerequisites: Wis 13+. Improved Unarmed Strike,
Benefit: You can add your 1/2 wisdom bonus to your when calculating your attack bonus.
Special: This feat can be taken as a monk bonus feat.
Reposted from the monks need full BAB thread.
Some Ideas Thanks to Chris and Deadly
Wisdom is Strength
Your years of training and innate wisdom provide you with an insight into the weaknesses of your opponents style.
Prerequisites: Wis 13+. Improved Unarmed Strike,
Benefit: You can add your wisdom bonus to your strength bonus in calculating your damage.
Special: This feat can be taken as a monk bonus feat.
Yes just like that. Except that the bonus should be only applicable with monk weapons and unarmed strike.
And leave the Zen strike out completely, because that would lead to the overload of wisdom mod, weve got weapon finesse for the attack bonus.
|
|
umm...excuse me but wasnt the increase in unarmed damage supposed to make up for low strength? they dont need wisdom for damage (maybe they need the option of doing 1d8's at first level, then allow improved natural attack and ignore the preq's)
there weapon die increase makes up plenty for POSSIBLY having a low strength. what they need is to make sure that their unarmed strikes can be enchanted as cheap as anyone elses weapons. balance their magical items and you will have better damage.
I always thought it was the secondary BaB that killed them, not damage.
Sneaksy's right. It was never the damage that was the problem, just the inability to hit. Not that giving them wis to damage would be bad or game breaking by any means, in fact I like the idea.
I second the motion that it should come in at second or third level to discourage ridiculous class dipping by the Cleric.
All of this has been said before. What I'd like to make sure we don't do is make for cookie-cutter class generation. The very last thing we want to do is make one of the only things that can be modified about the Monk (bonus feats) such an obvious choice that no one does anything but.
See if to be competent every Monk with average stats needs weapon finese and wisdom is strength then EVERY monk will have those two feats. When that becomes the case they should be class features. Perhaps on an excalating scale, for instance
a Monk gains a bonus to hit equal to his dex bonus -3 min 0 at say second level, then increase it to -2 then -1 and +0 as the Monk gained levels. That would alow the monk to hit more often and almost solve the BAB problem.
(As Jason obviously doesn't intend the Monk to be an exeptional melee combatant this probably provides the happy medium needed.)
A similar (if higher level) system could be used for wis damage.
umm...excuse me but wasnt the increase in unarmed damage supposed to make up for low strength? they dont need wisdom for damage (maybe they need the option of doing 1d8's at first level, then allow improved natural attack and ignore the preq's)
Have you ever seen a monk who focuses on Dex at the expense of Str? The damage is pretty sad compared to a melee character who focuses on Str (especially a 2-handed weapon user).
I agree that if Improved Natural Attack is so popular among monks, it should be given as a bonus feat.
(As Jason obviously doesn't intend the Monk to be an exeptional melee combatant this probably provides the happy medium needed.)
It seems to me that the much of the monks abilities are focused on defenses and secondary abilities. Poison immunity, spell resistance, super speed, etc... With all the cool oddness that comes with being a monk they should not be as good at dealing out damage as a fighter or a barbarian.
I've never seen a high level monk in play (my game's died at level 8 at a sad trap, saving her comrades...), so I can't be sure, but Dennis mentioned it: The monk is supposed to have all this "imortability" (not to mess up with Imortality, that they don't have) of being the guy who don't use weapons, armor, is immune to many things and all.
But then, I've never seen a high level monk in play to say anything...
I keep saying: Give something, but only at level 2 or 3, as I mentioned and was ignored by my replier.
|
|
(As Jason obviously doesn't intend the Monk to be an exeptional melee combatant this probably provides the happy medium needed.)It seems to me that the much of the monks abilities are focused on defenses and secondary abilities. Poison immunity, spell resistance, super speed, etc... With all the cool oddness that comes with being a monk they should not be as good at dealing out damage as a fighter or a barbarian.
This I can agree with. There's another thread in here about monks getting much better at CMB. If that happens then I don't think they will need the Dex/Wis modification (Particularly since CMB is strength dependent). I think they need at least one of these fixes in order to be a "wanted" character class though.
Cheers
Here's a kooky idea: How about letting a monk choose at level 1 to add either Str or Dex or Wis to unarmed attack and damage rolls? (And you can't change your mind later.)Wouldn't it still end up with Wisdom? The player will always go for wisdom as the best stat and have that one stat govern pretty much everything around them.
I remember my abuse of the Shadow Blade feat with a Swordsage. Thanks to that feat i could spend pretty much all my equipment on increasing my dexterity, because i could apply it to Attack, AC and Damage. One stat should govern only two of these at a time for a melee character at least.
I do not see the problem here, wizards always go for high Intelligence.
I support the idea partly (Wisdom should only give attack, but not damage), but recommend to not allow Wisdom to also replace Str or Dex in calculating CMB. This will also create different Monks.
The standard melee monks will go for Wis and Str for damage. The CMB monk will go for Dex or Str depending if he wants more AC or more feats to play with (since Dex needs Weapon Finesse and Agile Maneuvers).
Hey there all,
Although I understand that monks have it a little rough when it comes to MAD, I believe that tying their attacks to Wis makes them a bit too focused on one stat. Not to mention the fact that this would make the monk a prime choice for class dipping by clerics.
I am open to debate, but I am not sure that I am sold on this idea.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Wait, shouldn´t that be *encouraged*? The only downside I see in a more desirable dip by cleric into monk, is that the Sacred Fist PrC suddenly becomes less desirable.
Clerics who dip into Monk still lose pure spellcasting levels and would be required to ditch their armor to make full use of that class dip, anyway. Not to mention alignment restrictions, if those still survive into the finalized product.
Again, I ask, what would be so bad, if a Cleric could benefit from dipping into Monk, in case "Wisdom instead of Strength on damage" would be implemented?