| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And they need them as part of their class features. Why? Because it's ridiculous to expect monks to give up magic weapons in exchange for a little extra base damage. Here's what monks need to help them stay competitive (learn from the soulknife's mistakes).
1. Enhancement bonus on attacks: +1 at level 2 and every four levels thereafter.
2. Automatic keen property. Around level 4.
3. Automatic speed property. Around level 8.
Why is this? Because monks can't wear magical armor (so they need to do offense). And they could be getting a lot more benefits by using special monk weapons, but monks are supposed to use their fists.
A fighter spending 40-50% of his expected WBL on his main weapon can't buy a magic weapon before 4th-level and cannot afford a +1 keen weapon until 7th, let alone the +1 speed weapon until 11th-level. I'm all for monks having magical attacks, but let's not have them outclass the fighter.
Beyond that flury of blows is a speed enhancement thing anyways, it just takes time to work up to it.
A fighter spending 40-50% of his expected WBL on his main weapon can't buy a magic weapon before 4th-level and cannot afford a +1 keen weapon until 7th, let alone the +1 speed weapon until 11th-level. I'm all for monks having magical attacks, but let's not have them outclass the fighter.
Yes, but monks still need multiple high stats to do anything. The fighter can dump them.
No. Just no.
Monks can buy magic monk weapons or Amulets of Mighty Fists if they need those bonuses.
If they need them so badly that they can't afford to pay money for them, then the solution is to give them a fighter's BaB, not dupicate the effects of stronger and more attacks via weapon properties.
(Also, your argument that Monks can't use armor is silly: They can use Bracers of Armor, which cost the same per bonus as magic armor.)
To expand on my above post:
Monks are not supposed to be damage dealers or tanks. They are supposed to provide tactical support and help control the battlefield.
The soulknife was supposed to deal damage and didn't really have another schtick. The two are not comparable.
People are always saying that Monks are not supposed to be damage dealers or tanks, but tell me something people, what good is being a meleeist for battlefield control when thats primarily the caster's job? What good is not being able to pack a punch when the rogue is sneak attacking holes in the enemies armor and the barbarian is breaking skulls?
Face it, the monk isn't much good if he's not able to propperly fill a role. In the case of my monks, I've generally optimized them up the wazoo to max their unarmed strike size, and been lucky enough to have a DM houserule that their fists could be enchanted (which makes total sense, considering that they can be affected by magic weapon and its greater form)
The monk enables the other classes to do their jobs. Their mobility allows them to get exactly where they are needed. Also, stunning fist is great battlefield control. <plug>Check out Maximize Your Monk in KQ #5 to see what monks are supposed to be good at.</plug>
But the truth is, Monk's are supposed to be striving towards excellence, perfection of body and soul, but they end up being dependent on bracers of magic armor that cost 64,000 gold to grant the benefit of an unenchanted fullplate that only cost a fighter 1500 or so gold? Get real people. The purpose of the monk, as I see it, is a hybrid role. Its meant to be able to deal respectable damage, have a great tanking AC (but typically lower hit points, ceeding to the fighter as being the better tank) and be able to move around the battlefield fast enough to save the wizard's butt, or pull the rogue out of trouble.
Bracers of armor +8 don't fill the same role as full plate. That's like saying a +4 chain shirt is overpriced because full plate can do the same thing.
Bracers +8 would fill the roll of +8 armor (if such a thing were non-epic). The monk's wisdom bonus to AC fills the same role as light or medium armor. A character that does not wear armor is not going to have the same AC as a fullplate and shield using fighter unless they have 18s (or 20s) in both Dex and Wis.Thats my take on things at least. For the monk to get a measure of enchantments with their levels would not be disbalancing (though what the origonal poster suggested is lol.) My thought, let them have a built in enchantment progression, with the ability to purchase weapon enchantments from casters. (I would go into a specific format for that, with pricing methods and such, but I've already rambled long enough of this post lol)
Giving monks enchantments on their fists/feet/elbows as a class feature would be a more complex way of boosting their BaB, which Jason has already said is off limits. Making it so that their hands can be enchanted separately at a cost is the purpose of an Amulet of Mighty Fists.
Except that the amulet of might fists is FAR overpriced for what it does. (unless I've missed something and the item is in Pathfinder RPG at an appropropriate price.) Also, what good is an amulet of mighty fists going to be doing a monk, when they need their neckslot for their wisdom? (which is bad enough that they have to choose between wisdom and con until/if they can afford the crazy expensive ring of longstrider, which wouldn't even give its movement benefit to them.)
An amulet of mighty fists costs more because it is better than having a magic monk weapon. It also costs more because it buffs all natural weapons, which potentially makes it quite useful to creatures with multiple natural weapons (Like many animal companions.) Trust me, the price is fair.
Wisdom items are headbands in PFRPG. Con items are belts. (Not that Con is any more important to a Monk than to any other class.) The only thing Mighty Fists would compete with would be an amulet of natural armor. But you know what? The whole reason body slots exist is to make it a trade off what equipment you use.
Magic enhanced weapons do not take up a body slot, why should a monk need to use up a body slot (and one that is VERY crucial to them as well) to gain the same accuracy as a rogue enjoys? I'm not proposing effectively raising their BAB, what I propose, is a means of allowing them to have the same accuracy opportunities as a rogue, which is a class that was actually intended to be of equal "combat prowess" (aka BAB/accuracy) as the monk, who is then gimped by the exhorbitant price (3x as expensive to be specific) of a magical weapon enhancement bonus.
If a monk wants the same ability to hit as a Rogue, at the same cost, they should buy a magic Kama or quarterstaff. You know, a magic weapon.
The monk's unarmed strike does more damage than a normal weapon. It's almost like having several iterations of Monkey Grip for free. Enchanting it is better than enchanting a normal weapon for that reason, so it costs more.
I also LIKE that the Amulet works for more than just unarmed strikes, because it means it isn't automatically worthless with no monk in the party. Anyone with a mount/familiar/companion can make use of it, and it's a magic item that monsters might actually use when they fight.
If fists were directly enchantable, then there would be no reason to have monk weapons. Monks would just feel shafted when they fight something with DR/cold iron or DR/Slashing, because they'd need to get out their non-magic kama and suck. Under the current system, both magic monk weapons and amulets of mighty fists are viable. I'd like it to stay that way.
So your saying that there would be no reason for a monk to carry a Kama for when he wants to trip more effectively, or a sai when he needs a little extra punch to his disarm? Oh, or here's a thought. Shuriken for when he needs to hit opponents at range.
Sai actually suck at disarming. A disarming monk should use a quarterstaff.
Anyway, a monk gets extra damage on his unarmed strikes. The traditional trade off for more damage is a worse to-hit.
Sai actually suck at disarming. A disarming monk should use a quarterstaff.
Not in the Pathfinder RPG; there's no bonus or penalty for weapon size when disarming.
Seeing as monks aren't going to get full BAB, I agree with P_R that the monk needs to be able to affordably enhance their attacks so they don't keep damn missing.
They can, with a Amulet of Mighty Fists. The Amulet of Mighty Fists looks very expensive, but you don't need an initial +1 enhancement bonus, so it's misleading.
The comment that monks need the Speed special quality is just dumb. Number of attacks is not the monk's problem; they especially don't need an extra attack that doesn't stack with Haste.
So why should the monk have to sacrifice accuracy, or pay tripple the price that the rogue has to pay, in order to deal his extra damage? (Which, by the way, pales compared to the rogue unless the monk is heavily optimized for maximizing unarmed strike size, and only roughly equals it under that situation)
Because monks are not just all about damage. They're about exploiting the tactical situation and keeping foes off balance. If you want to be a rogue or a barbarian, play one. Don't turn the monk into one.
|
They can, with a Amulet of Mighty Fists. The Amulet of Mighty Fists looks very expensive, but you don't need an initial +1 enhancement bonus, so it's misleading.
It still seems pretty expensive.
Ross, how do the new CMB rules -- pretty much making manoeuvres harder, as well as the Improved Trip nerf (it now costs another feat to get the attack back if you succeed) -- affect your feelings about playing a monk? Your KQ article (by which I wasn't enormously convinced, but that's a different issue) uses quite a few combat manoeuvres.
...didn't Jason post that enchantable "fist wraps" were to be introduced? (that would cost like enchanted weapons?)
It still seems pretty expensive.
They can, with a Amulet of Mighty Fists. The Amulet of Mighty Fists looks very expensive, but you don't need an initial +1 enhancement bonus, so it's misleading.
I guess once you get more than +3 in enhancements, it's more expensive. But my games usually don't get that high.
+1 flaming sword = 8000 gp
+0 flaming amulet = 5000 gp
+1 holy sword = 18000 gp
+0 holy amulet = 20000 gp
+1 flaming holy sword = 32000 gp
+0 flaming holy amulet = 45000 gp
+1 holy wounding sword = 50000 gp
+0 holy wounding amulet = 80000 gp
+1 flaming holy wounding sword = 72000 gp
+0 flaming holy wounding sword = 125000 gp
What your missing Hrogarth, is we aren't talking about special abilities (and I'm not sure an amulet of mighty fists can have abilities put on it), we're talking about giving the monk equal accuracy without casting dependency. In a situation where there's nobody to cast greater magic weapon or Greater Magic Fang on the monk, he's screwed. Permanency Magic Fang is an option, but that costs gold, xp, and can be permanently dispelled, thus wasting the investment.
Oh no, I understand perfectly that the monk needs better attack bonuses. I was just pointing out that I don't think the price of an Amulet of Mighty Fists is the particular sticking point.
Kyrt - Bards and Druids are also sort of '5th player' classes. A 4-member party with a monk can work, but they have to go in knowing their limitations. They just can't assume the monk will fill in for the tank.
Bagpuss - CMB complicates the Monk's life somewhat, but they were already at a disadvantage due to the lower BaB. Maybe Monks should get a class bonus on combat manuevers (since they make up so much of a monk's schtick). Like the ranger Tracking bonus.
Kyrt, you are willfully ignoring the existance of monk weapons. A monk with a +2 kama and a rogue with a +2 short sword have the same chance of hitting and paid the same amount of gold. Yes, to monk has to pay more to get +2 with their fists, but they're better off for it, so it's fair that it costs more.
If you still don't think it's fair, the cost of an Amulet will cover many Oils of Magic Weapon or Potions of Magic Fang, which the Monk can use.
|
It might make for a neat feat chain or PrC class feature to create a Monk that can develop certain magical properties into their body.
As feats, they'd require one of the appropriate leveled Monk properties (Ki Strike lawful or whatever) and offer only a single option (flaming fists, for instance) equal to a +1 weapon enhancement, with the Monk being able to take the feat multiple times to add more enhancements (or swapping out a previous enhancement feat and adding it to the new one to add a +2 enhancement ability).
A PrC based off of this concept would get the uber-cool ability to spend 8 hours meditating and change their enhancement. Mr. Fire-Fists could find out that he's going up against the Red Dragon Pyre and his Fire Giant allies, and spend a day 'putting out the fire' and 'embracing the north wind' so that his fists now do +1d6 cold damage instead of fire damage.
gloves, arm wraps and gauntlets that have the same cost to enchant as any other magic weapon, nuff said.
The trouble with this plan is that it obsoletes the Amulet of Mighty Fists for monks. Why would a monk ever buy an Amulet +1 when he can get the exact same benefit from Boxing Gloves +1? Unless those fist and arm wrappings take up the bracer slot (which hoses bracers of armor), they're better off with the wrappings.
It'd be a bit silly if the only use for an item called 'Amulet of Mighty Fists' was for creatures with multiple natural weapons.
Maybe the Amulet should cost less than it does now (Say double, instead of triple a magic weapon), but I stand by the idea that it should cost more than a normal magic weapon and that its fine for Monks to need it.
|
|
Obsoleting the Amulet of Mighty Fists doesn't sound like a worst-case scenario, to me. Magic-item dependence for a monk does feel icky, as I said, but that's already there, except that the monk is dependent on an item they can't even afford, which is even worse than the standard magic-item dependence.
RPG Superstar 2009 Top 8
|
It might make for a neat feat chain or PrC class feature to create a Monk that can develop certain magical properties into their body.
As feats, they'd require one of the appropriate leveled Monk properties (Ki Strike lawful or whatever) and offer only a single option (flaming fists, for instance) equal to a +1 weapon enhancement, with the Monk being able to take the feat multiple times to add more enhancements (or swapping out a previous enhancement feat and adding it to the new one to add a +2 enhancement ability).
A PrC based off of this concept would get the uber-cool ability to spend 8 hours meditating and change their enhancement. Mr. Fire-Fists could find out that he's going up against the Red Dragon Pyre and his Fire Giant allies, and spend a day 'putting out the fire' and 'embracing the north wind' so that his fists now do +1d6 cold damage instead of fire damage.
Since 'ki' is supposed to be a matter of balancing the energies in the body, it is very appropriate fluff-wise for a monk to do elemental damage through channeling of the energies in the body. I suggested a few ki powers that involved resistance to energies and channeling of eneergies. I agree though, this could be developed as alternate monk levels.
|
|
gloves, arm wraps and gauntlets that have the same cost to enchant as any other magic weapon, nuff said.The trouble with this plan is that it obsoletes the Amulet of Mighty Fists for monks. Why would a monk ever buy an Amulet +1 when he can get the exact same benefit from Boxing Gloves +1? Unless those fist and arm wrappings take up the bracer slot (which hoses bracers of armor), they're better off with the wrappings.
It'd be a bit silly if the only use for an item called 'Amulet of Mighty Fists' was for creatures with multiple natural weapons.
Maybe the Amulet should cost less than it does now (Say double, instead of triple a magic weapon), but I stand by the idea that it should cost more than a normal magic weapon and that its fine for Monks to need it.
Now your complaint seems to be more geared toward improving the amulet of mighty fists rather than the monk. Which is it? If the amulet becomes unnecessary then so be it. This is the price of progress.
Exactly, as it stands presently the amulet of mighty fists is entirely innappropriate for a standard monk, who's only going to ever use one natural weapon.
I don't want to beat this into the ground, but it's just not as expensive as it's cracked up to be (providing you're willing to have one less "plus" of enhancement bonus in favour of having the same amount of special abilities). For instance, it's less expensive than two magic weapons of similar quality, so at least you're better off than a TWF fighter.
Just a note:
A monk doesn't use "one natural weapon" unless you mean his entire body is a natural weapon. Tie his hands? Ok he'll kick you to death. Tied his hands and feet? Ok he'll headbutt. Unless you completely hogtie (and possibly even then) him he can still attack without penalty with some part of his body.
It's not unarmed strike -- hands only -- it's unarmed strike with knee, foot, elbow, shoulder, hands, head, and body checking.
It's kind of like saying a staff only has two striking ends -- it's just not true. You can use any part of a staff to hit with, including the middle.
But you do keep beating it into the ground Hogarth, because your talking about putting special abilities on it and I'm not. I'm talking about actual attack and damage enhancement bonus.
The amulet's bonus would be roughly one point lower than the correspondingly priced magic weapon.
If you're claiming that being able to afford a +3 enhancement bonus amulet of mighty fists instead of a +2 amulet will make the monk work great as a class, I disagree.
@ Hogarth: My point isn't that a +2 is going to make the class so much better, its that to achieve a +5 (which all of my characters and most others I know go for, because our DM's love to separate the party for individual challenges multiple times in an adventure), and thus have equal accuracy potential to a rogue, a monk would have to pay 3 times as much. You haven't answered my question either Hogarth. Why should a monk get jipped 100,000 gold compared to other classes for equal benefits?
That's a reasonable question, although in my experience +5 weapons are a rarity (people like the flashy enhancements better); obviously YMMV. But if that's your goal, then the monk is getting slightly ripped off compared to a TWF melee fighter (2.5x the cost of a single weapon instead of 2x the cost). You could certainly argue that the TWF fighter is getting ripped off as well. But the monk's unarmed attack does a fairly large base damage; maybe that's the "equivalent" of +1 in enhancement bonus (in terms of worth).
The TWF doesn't have to have both weapons enchanted to the same degree, though...
And a monk can have a back-up weapon that's enchanted less than his amulet of mighty fists. Or he can just use a magic weapon and forget about having an amulet of mighty fists altogether. There's all kinds of suboptimal stuff you can do if you're strapped for cash and you're willing to settle for less than your "dream weapon".
Actually, there's a good point in the comparison to two-weapon fighting. In order to have the same to-hit bonus as a single-weapon fighter, a TWF actually needs a bonus of +2 more, due tot he two-weapon penalties.
A monk's flurry is a lot like TWF. Except that at a certain level, the penalties go away. That could be considered a +2 bonus right there.
|
|
Actually, there's a good point in the comparison to two-weapon fighting. In order to have the same to-hit bonus as a single-weapon fighter, a TWF actually needs a bonus of +2 more, due tot he two-weapon penalties.
A monk's flurry is a lot like TWF. Except that at a certain level, the penalties go away. That could be considered a +2 bonus right there.
A TWF fighter or ranger or pally, etc, gets full BAB, though...