Is it just me, or does the monk get equal to or more feats than the fighter at level 8?
Sajan (a human) has 10 feats (11 or 12 if you count the virtual feats of 2WF & I2WF when flurrying)
Level 8 human fighter gets 10.
|
Hmmm... so people thought that Rage Points were too complex a mechanic, but Ki Points are okay? Uhm. Okay. I'm not against Ki Points (in fact, I was very much in favor of Point Pools for every class during the playtest), I just wonder why they didn't get ditched as well in favor of Ki Rounds (which would have made the mechanics more internally consistent).
Otherwise the Monk looks good, although I've never played one (but as a DM I just love to use Rogue/Monk/Assassins).
Sajan's feat
1;Character Level Bonus, Improved unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Class Bonus, Human Bonus
2;Class Bonus
3;Character Level Bonus
4;
5;Character Level Bonus
6;Class bonus
7;Character Level Bonus
total 10
All in all? Everything I see in this preview makes me want to play a monk for the first time in a VERY long time. May even play around and update an old 1e character I have lying around, hmmmmmmmmmmm.
|
I recently played a human monk for the first time a la 3.5 in an Iron Kingdoms campaign. Not being too fussy about class power, I enjoyed playing the class -- I guess I was inspired to try the monk because I was, as a grognard, also enjoying a kickboxing course at a Karate school in my 'hood! lol (Kickboxing fights belly fat!! lol)
Having played a monk to 7th level in that game (hey, my monk even gained a perm Spider Climb effect as the spoils of adventuring!), I really like what I see for the PF monk! The improved AC is very, very welcome, and the pumped up flurry is a definite boon that brings out the unarmed specialist concept of the class. I've always interpreted Flurry of Blows wasn't just fists, but some well placed kicks too to complete the martial arts flavour. So if Sajan is now able to deliver +9/+9/+4/+4 then he's probably striking with his feet as well as his hands. And throw in his Stunning fist effect!! Nasty cool! heh-heh
My own monk at the time avoided developing grappling style, and favoured manuveuring (Mobility, Spring Attack) and tripping, among other things. (I developed and played him very much as a "striker" as they say in 4E.) Now it will be interesting to me how my old character will look if written up according to the final PF rules coming in August. If Sajan is any indication of what's possible, I think the monk will be *my* class to play! :-)
|
Linked Sajan, the kung-fu fighter!.
Stunning fist is now cool. It's free, and it has upgrades. Very nice.
More AC!
More feats!
I like that the monk will attack more often and with greater accuracy. Nice gamist crunch. Now I'm looking for someone to help me wrap some simulationist fluff around the notion that somehow monks are more accurate when they flurry than they are when they don't. Everyone else, with a certain BAB, gets a certain number of attacks. It's the same for everyone. But monks, they have a special class feature to attack so fast that they get extra attacks. Great! Seems to me that attacking that fast might mean more hits, but it also might mean more misses. But the new monk ability only uses the better BAB when they flurry, not when they make normal attacks.
Help me with the fluff please!
I'd write it off that the monk becomes so centered that his attacks come faster and with greater precision. Kind of like a Super Self if you would.
|
|
Some flurry fluff:
"Sajan learned to center his sense of self at point within his body where the three axes of direction meet his center of gravity. From there he learned to spin and strike with his body with perfect timing and execution unhindered by handling the conventional tools of war that could throw off his dynamic balance. Certain weapons, by virtue of their weight and balance, where incorporated into his training, mostly as an exercise to hone his skill in fighting, but also to allow for those occassional situations where such tools were actually useful -- a monk's training is tightly focused and disciplined, but still open to adaptation. Because of such intense training, and it's dependence upon the beauty of the movement of the body, Sajan would not taint himself with training in cumbersome and unweildy weapons -- except to the minimum degree needed to avoid shame in an emergency..."
:-)
Wow, Monks are really powerful now, I hope monk fans are happy, they have to be with that buff.
Perhaps monks are even too good, but we'll have to see. Seems like all classes got nice buffs except for cleric and perhaps wizard.
Hmmm... so people thought that Rage Points were too complex a mechanic, but Ki Points are okay?
No. I despise them, but I'm trying not to fuss too much because I seem to be in the minority. I just deleted something I wrote on another thread for this very reason... >.>
Wow, Monks are really powerful now, I hope monk fans are happy, they have to be with that buff.
Perhaps monks are even too good, but we'll have to see. Seems like all classes got nice buffs except for cleric and perhaps wizard.
Admittedly, those classes were some of the stronger ones in 3.5.
Now on-topic, the monk looks great. As someone who's playing a monk right now, I'm very excited about this.
What I would have liked was a line saying "Monks weapons may change by order or region, Ask you GM about this"I notice that the whole "monk weapon" thing didn't get cleaned up -- or at least, short swords don't get to flurry, which implies to me that there is still a class of "special monk weapons."
There may or may not still be a "special class" of weapons - but the only thing we know right now is Sajan is not statted up with short sword as a flurry.
I was hoping and expecting that Monk's would get their unarmed damage on a successful CMB check against an opponent. I saw this as a great way to boost Monk damage slightly against fighter/barbs while maintaining their BAB/HD and promoting their niche as the trip/grapple/disarm/sunder guy. As well, it makes a lot of sense to me thematically for the monk.
I'm presuming that it didn't make it, so it's something I'm going to house rule in.
I notice that the whole "monk weapon" thing didn't get cleaned up -- or at least, short swords don't get to flurry
The shuriken didn't get a flurry entry, either.
So far the only argument I've seen against that is for backward compatibility. Screw that - make the game just work
It's not as easy as that. PFRPG is not a new edition. It's a 3e revision. You can't just ignore backwards compatibility.
I'm not saying that this is something that would break BC, I'm saying you can't just ignore it.
Seems like all classes got nice buffs except for cleric and perhaps wizard.
Clerics got channel energy, which is finally useful (turning was only useful in some circumstances).
Sure, their melee prowess was lessened, but I think that's good, since they were just a tad too good at that.
Wizards got their school powers, and bonded item.
I just wonder why they didn't get ditched as well in favor of Ki Rounds (which would have made the mechanics more internally consistent).
Same difference. It all more or less lasts for one round. With ki points, you can say some more powerful stuff costs 2 or more points, but it's weird if you do that with rounds.
Regarding monk weapons - most of the "original", i.e. far eastern monk weapons started out as simple farming tools, modified over time - the sickle, the flail and the staff are the first three examples that come to my mind. So, monks should have their "special" monk weapons defined by the culture they come from and the reasons why there is a monk discipline to start with. IIRC, one reason for using simple farming tools is that commoners were not allowed to carry proper weapons, so they needed a substitute. Most european pole arms started out as modified farming equipment as well, btw.
This sounds like the idea for an article on Golarion monks and the weapons they use, if any, and the reasons for it. That way, you would get cultural background and some minor new game rules all in one.
Stefan
I think the prize could very well be the first sample of Jason's new collectible thing game, "Thing In A Box" which he unveiled to all of us at Paizocon. Hmmmm, what thing could be in the box?
-Lisa
What's in the box? What's in the box? Gotta find out what's in the box, oooooooo oo.
I notice that the whole "monk weapon" thing didn't get cleaned up -- or at least, short swords don't get to flurryThe shuriken didn't get a flurry entry, either.
TWF but no Quick Draw (Shuriken is a thrown weapon).
3. Finally, Jason mentioned discouraging a 1-level dip into monk for all the class goodies. By making 1st level a +0 BAB level, that problem is mitigated. I can definitely see this... but really, most of the goodies you get (except the saves) are no good if you wear armor or use actual martial weapons -- so a paladin, fighter, or barbarian is probably not going to go that route. A caster would seem to stand to gain the most, except that they'd be giving up a caster level either way, which is already a pretty steep price for dipping.
most of the goodies you get (except the saves) are no good?
Good class skills, many skill points, two feats (unarmed strike + Bonus feat), Weapon Proficiency all good with ot without armor. And the monk version of unarmed strike is cool. I have no problem seeing rogue + monk + rogue or 1-level dip from other classes, or 2-level dip (evasion, etc).Druid + wisdom bonus to AC = powerful when wild shape.
KaeYoss wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I notice that the whole "monk weapon" thing didn't get cleaned up -- or at least, short swords don't get to flurryThe shuriken didn't get a flurry entry, either.
TWF but no Quick Draw (Shuriken is a thrown weapon).
Monk can use flurry of blows with shuriken, so shuriken is treated as ammunition for the purposes of drawing them(beta p.106).
Monk can use flurry of blows with shuriken, so shuriken is treated as ammunition for the purposes of drawing them(beta p.106).
KaeYoss wrote:
Kirth Gersen wrote:
I notice that the whole "monk weapon" thing didn't get cleaned up -- or at least, short swords don't get to flurryThe shuriken didn't get a flurry entry, either.
TWF but no Quick Draw (Shuriken is a thrown weapon).
ah, cool. But then there must be an error in the preview or rules have changed.
|
|
RE:Backwards compatability & BAB
Other classes have had changes to Hit Die, to Saving Throws, to feat progressions, to spell descriptions, etc. The list goes on and on. Somehow, for me, the "backwards compatability" excuse stopped being a valid reason not to change this sort of thing.
I'm much more convinced by the Prestige Class compatability argument. Not so much that I wouldn't consider houseruling full BAB (& D10 HD) for monks, however.
RE:Backwards compatability & BAB
Other classes have had changes to Hit Die, to Saving Throws, to feat progressions, to spell descriptions, etc. The list goes on and on. Somehow, for me, the "backwards compatability" excuse stopped being a valid reason not to change this sort of thing.
I'm much more convinced by the Prestige Class compatability argument. Not so much that I wouldn't consider houseruling full BAB (& D10 HD) for monks, however.
Not to be a naysayer but can someone explain why monks should recieve d10 hit die? I can only guess you and others want them to be as tough as a fighter/paladin/ranger. But in truth they already are without it. Their saves are vastly better then the fighter's, better clearly then the ranger and yes even better then the paladin's. That by itself makes them as tough as them, and they do it their way, not through brute force(read more hit points) but through strength of will and speed of moment. I actually like the difference, I think it gives them a bit of class. 3.5 melee edition is certainly coming up with nice ways to buff melee characters, though the rogue may be in some trouble unless they get some of this melee love fest going on.
TWF - Sorry, but I am not going to let all the cats out of their bags just yet. Just a little bit more than a month to go.Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
Arrgh just bring time forward allready .....
There is a difference between foreplay and teasing you know.......
I want the book now by thunder...!!!!!!!
<Stomps his big dwarven feet shakes his fist and goes into a corner to sulk>
|
RE:Backwards compatability & BAB
Other classes have had changes to Hit Die, to Saving Throws, to feat progressions, to spell descriptions, etc. The list goes on and on. Somehow, for me, the "backwards compatability" excuse stopped being a valid reason not to change this sort of thing.
I'm much more convinced by the Prestige Class compatability argument. Not so much that I wouldn't consider houseruling full BAB (& D10 HD) for monks, however.
Not to be a naysayer but can someone explain why monks should recieve d10 hit die? I can only guess you and others want them to be as tough as a fighter/paladin/ranger. But in truth they already are without it. Their saves are vastly better then the fighter's, better clearly then the ranger and yes even better then the paladin's. That by itself makes them as tough as them, and they do it their way, not through brute force(read more hit points) but through strength of will and speed of moment. I actually like the difference, I think it gives them a bit of class. 3.5 melee edition is certainly coming up with nice ways to buff melee characters, though the rogue may be in some trouble unless they get some of this melee love fest going on.
I don't think anyone gives a crap about the d10 hitdie, it's merely a side effect of attaching hit dice to BAB (something I was never in favor of for this very reason. If it hadn't been done, then you could change a monks BAB without changing his HD. Now if you change his BAB and not his HD he's an exception like the barbarian to a rule that never really needed to exist in the first place).
most of the goodies you get (except the saves) are no good?
Good class skills, many skill points, two feats (unarmed strike + Bonus feat), Weapon Proficiency all good with ot without armor. And the monk version of unarmed strike is cool.
Druid + wisdom bonus to AC = powerful when wild shape.
Just wanted to add, it's *three* feats, Unarmed Strike + Bonus + *Stunning Fist* (which normally isn't available until much much higher BAB).
Someone earlier mentioned they should open the "monk weapons" to more weapons. I agree. All melee weapons a monk is proficient with should count as monk weapons (especially since you start out-damaging melee weapons with unarmed pretty quick!)
No. You can gain proficiency with just a feat. I do not want to see Flavor of the Month Spiked Chain Flurry Monks. Not here and not ever.
I kept waiting to see a Pudao (Chinese Glaive and martial arts weapon) appear in 3.5. It never happened....or at very least, there should be an extra feat to convert a non-monk weapon into a monk weapon.
Eberron does have some feats that allow you to take very specific weapons as special Monk weapons. Longspear, longsword or double sword if I recall. These were carefully chosen so you can't do it with just anything. Also the requirement is somewhat steep. First you have to be proficient (1 feat or class dip) and you have to take Weapon Focus (2nd feat, requires BAB +1), and of course the third feat to add it to your monk list.
Eberron does have some feats that allow you to take very specific weapons as special Monk weapons. Longspear, longsword or double sword if I recall. These were carefully chosen so you can't do it with just anything. Also the requirement is somewhat steep. First you have to be proficient (1 feat or class dip) and you have to take Weapon Focus (2nd feat, requires BAB +1), and of course the third feat to add it to your monk list.
I love that "flurry with a longspear" feat. I'm getting tons of use out of it!
I love that "flurry with a longspear" feat. I'm getting tons of use out of it!
Oh man, with Stand Still and Lunge potentially being released, I think it might help this particular build really excel at battlefield control, which would -finally- be a concrete role for a Monk to play. I think it would be a lot of fun. Unfortunately I'm DMing. Ah well. :)
One thing really bugs me.
The way monks are set up now, BAB-wise, is in a way worse than they were before. How can that possibly be? Well, the monk has two main gimmicks: (1) great mobility and (2) lots of attacks. The best way to make the monk more viable, and to give him a unique niche, would be to integrate those two things -- not ensure that they can never be used together.
The new monk in essence gets a scaling penalty to attacks when he moves (3/4 vs. the full BAB he gets when standing still). So the new monk, rather than running up and attacking, has a very, very strong incentive to stand still and just hope someone comes within reach. Which begs the question, if it's so disadvantageous for him to move -- why give him a speed that scales up with level, when the level-based attack penalty makes him less and less likely to use that speed?
I just don't get it.
One simple change fixes all of this. One that I doubt is in the final version or may ever be....
Make a full attack action only cost a standard action. This simple changes does wonders for the gap between melee/caster.
One simple change fixes all of this. One that I doubt is in the final version or may ever be....Make a full attack action only cost a standard action. This simple changes does wonders for the gap between melee/caster.
Maybe that flattens out the difference between melee and casters, but I think that its debatable this is a difference that needs rebalancing. After all we just had a whole evoker thread about how casters don't keep up in raw damage output.
The big thing for me though is that you reduce the number of interesting choices that a player can make. If standing still and moving around is basically all the same then why bother moving at all? The enemy will just run up and get a full attack on you anyway. This rule would have a cascade effect on reducing the tactical richness of the game.
|
|
I notice that the whole "monk weapon" thing didn't get cleaned up -- or at least, short swords don't get to flurryThe shuriken didn't get a flurry entry, either.
So far the only argument I've seen against that is for backward compatibility. Screw that - make the game just workIt's not as easy as that. PFRPG is not a new edition. It's a 3e revision. You can't just ignore backwards compatibility.
I'm not saying that this is something that would break BC, I'm saying you can't just ignore it.
The thing is, what backwards compatibility does it break? It certainly doesn't break old adventures any more than the rest of the classes. The only thing we're really looking at here are prestige classes...which are not abundant for the monk anyways, and it would be much easier to modify the requirements for the prestige class (we have to do that anyways with the way skill ranks are now) than making the rules for a core class all wonky just to satisfy a supposed "backward compatibility."
That and we'll likely be seeing official PRPG versions of those prestige classes eventually anyway.
So like I said, screw backwards compatibility (we already have with enough other things, why is this so different?) and just give monks full BAB. It makes things so much simpler.
I could see spending 1 feat to get proficiency with 1 particular martial weapon (possibly a select list) -and- giving it the "monk weapon" quality as well. I think a feat tree is a bit much to ask, especially if it's a limited selection and you only get 1 weapon.
All you’re really getting out of it is
A -Fluff
and
B -any weapon qualities that weapon might have (reach, piercing etc).
As I stated before you start out-damaging melee weapons pretty quick and now that you can add weapon enhancements to AoMF that's no longer a factor.
Fair enough, I'd just say choose the weapons carefully. Do you want a highly mobile heavy pick flurrying monk with the Critical Feats dancing between your monsters and obliterating them with Standard Actions? If so, hey go for it, that sounds neat to me. Allowing a glaive (which lets you trip at reach) so your monk becomes a flytrap and bad guys have a hard time getting away? Well you'd make Scorpion Style and Stand Still a lot less useful, but the effect is the same so you'd probably not shatter the game.
You'd probably take Weapon Focus anyway if you were serious about the combat style, so in that regard you're just making the flurries available at level 1 instead of level 3.
Bottom line is most of the effects can be achieved through other means, you're just adjusting feat costs, so go for it if that's how your monks roll. :)
Maybe that flattens out the difference between melee and casters, but I think that its debatable this is a difference that needs rebalancing. After all we just had a whole evoker thread about how casters don't keep up in raw damage output.
Raw damage output is not a meaningful measure of anything, because it doesn't hinder combat ability. Rebalancing is needed because battlefield-control wizards and save-or-suck spells are infinitely more effective than damage of any kind -- whether it's from a fighter or an evoker. Reference any of the sixteen billion threads re: hp inflation from 2nd -> 3rd ed. vs. damage output for a clearer demonstration.
Paizo has started the ball rolling by slightly nerfing most of the save-or-instantly-be-taken-out-of-the-fight spells, but there's more to be done before a fighter or monk of any level can be a tenth as effective as a low-level wizard with a wand of black tentacles.
Paizo has started the ball rolling by slightly nerfing most of the save-or-instantly-be-taken-out-of-the-fight spells, but there's more to be done before a fighter or monk of any level can be a tenth as effective as a low-level wizard with a wand of black tentacles.
House rule Bolas as a special Monk weapon.
;)
Are any of the remaining previews going to be at high (15+) level, or are they all going to stay in the 8-12 range? Seelah and Valeros were nice, but still, I want more insight on the high end of the game! At least one high level iconic would be nice to see.Fear not, I've got a few high level iconics lined up in the coming weeks.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing
I know this is off topic but will we see some PrC Preview Characters?
Maybe that flattens out the difference between melee and casters, but I think that its debatable this is a difference that needs rebalancing. After all we just had a whole evoker thread about how casters don't keep up in raw damage output.Raw damage output is not a meaningful measure of anything, because it doesn't hinder combat ability. Rebalancing is needed because battlefield-control wizards and save-or-suck spells are infinitely more effective than damage of any kind -- whether it's from a fighter or an evoker. Reference any of the sixteen billion threads re: hp inflation from 2nd -> 3rd ed. vs. damage output for a clearer demonstration.
Paizo has started the ball rolling by slightly nerfing most of the save-or-instantly-be-taken-out-of-the-fight spells, but there's more to be done before a fighter or monk of any level can be a tenth as effective as a low-level wizard with a wand of black tentacles.
A) Some may not agree
B) lot of spells have been nerfed. black tentacles may have been nerfed too.C) let's see what the barbarian preveiw show us before we start screaming too loud: melee sucks! Or better still, let's wait for the final
D) it's our game - houserules are still there.
...In any case I think this discussion in more appropriate to the various threads alluded to above (and a bit out of place, on occasion, there too). Maybe someone should start a "Why Save-Or-Suck Spells Are Too Powerful" thread. Since that is really what this argument is about and not the monk or its preview.
The assertion was made that the new monk is a super-battlefield-controller extraordinaire. I countered that he's not so great at it, when compared to the example given. Because the monk does not exist in a vacuum, it seems fair to be able to compare the things he's supposedly "the best" at with other classes' ability to do those exact same things better.
The thing is, what backwards compatibility does it break?
As I said: I'm not saying it breaks BC. I'm not saying it doesn't. I'm saying you can't just ignore BC in a game that is supposed to be BC. That would be false advertising. Paizo's not the game company to lie to their customers.
That and we'll likely be seeing official PRPG versions of those prestige classes eventually anyway.
Not likely. Paizo doesn't seem like they'll flood the market with PrCs.
That and we'll likely be seeing official PRPG versions of those prestige classes eventually anyway.
There is unlikely to be an 'official' version of most of the WotC splat material... I would say 95% of it will never be converted. WotC owns copyright on all that material and they are most certainly not going to convert it. It's not entirely clear at this point what sort of supplemental materials Paizo is going to be putting out. They have committed to 3-4 hardback rules books a year but the first one they announced is a Game Mastery book. There is also likely to be another monster manual out next year.
Paizo tends to make prestige classes that fit into a specific campaign role in Golarian or a specific Adventure Path rather than the sort of product Wizards put out in their supplemental books which was pretty broadly defined. Maybe Paizo will change their stance on this but I'm not entirely sure about that. It's more likely IMO that they might come out with an Oriental Adventures type book that has a series of entirely NEW monk based prestige classes.
"Official" replacements aren't likely from either Wizards or Paizo.
So like I said, screw backwards compatibility (we already have with enough other things, why is this so different?) and just give monks full BAB. It makes things so much simpler.
I could care less about backwards compatability also. I want the game to play like classic D&D, but if some little bits don't fit into the old pattern it doesn't bother me a bit... that said there are some folks who scream bloody murder every time someone threatens to invalidate their 150 book collection of supplement books and I see their point also. From day 1 Pathfinder has been advertised as a reverse compatible upgrade and Paizo has an obligation to meet that.
|
Hmmm... so people thought that Rage Points were too complex a mechanic, but Ki Points are okay? Uhm. Okay. I'm not against Ki Points (in fact, I was very much in favor of Point Pools for every class during the playtest), I just wonder why they didn't get ditched as well in favor of Ki Rounds (which would have made the mechanics more internally consistent).
Rage points were more complex, you had to count points for on going rounds of activity, and points for specific actions, and then figure out how fatigued you were by the total number of points at the end.
Ki points are a lot less complex, because there is no form of "monk rage [super focus]." So it is just # of special skill uses per day.
I don't think anyone gives a crap about the d10 hitdie, it's merely a side effect of attaching hit dice to BAB (something I was never in favor of for this very reason. If it hadn't been done, then you could change a monks BAB without changing his HD. Now if you change his BAB and not his HD he's an exception like the barbarian to a rule that never really needed to exist in the first place).
Couldn't agree more. I had no desire for the HD change and still ignore it. Wizards should have crappy hp and eventually run out of spells. If that makes me an annoying old coot, oh well.
For that matter I say dump sorcerers, but that would get me lynched so nevermind.
I blame it on MMO's. People have gotten lazy and don't want to bother with resource management. They just want to spam thier 'light damage' key until thier 'moderate' and 'heavy' damage powers recharge IMO.
The wusses! They should spam their "throw darts" key until their "moderate" and "heavy" powers recharge, like we used to in AD&D!
;-)
So, to be clear, you can use flurry of blows with shuriken? Which means at a distance you can use a "flurry of throws" per se? Obviously not a great distance but one nonetheless. Is this correct?