Monks: A Treantmonk Guide (Optimization)


Advice

201 to 250 of 380 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>

Thanks for a great guide Treantmonk :)

Let's say the monk is in a party with a friendly wizard who would not mind doing a bit of buffing. Which one wizard spell per level would be best here? If it makes a difference lets assume the monk in question is optimized according to this guide.

For level 1 I would at least assume it would be Mage Armor just because that is blue in the guide :)


Im playing a level 2 monk in my Pathfinder d20 grp and I went to use my stunning blow as part of my flurry attack, and the DM said I can´t do that, its either one or the other. So I ask, where are you getting the info to where we can use Stunning fist as part of my flurry as stated in the guide so I can show my DM.


JPMK wrote:
Im playing a level 2 monk in my Pathfinder d20 grp and I went to use my stunning blow as part of my flurry attack, and the DM said I can´t do that, its either one or the other. So I ask, where are you getting the info to where we can use Stunning fist as part of my flurry as stated in the guide so I can show my DM.

The stunning fist feat does not declare it is its own action. Therefore it is part of a separate action. Also in Complete Warrior there is a feat that allowed for stunning fist to apply for more than one attack per round. If your DM were correct the feat in CW would never have been created. I do realize the Pathfinder and 3.5 are not the exact same game, but the wording of the feat is the same so therefore it plays out the same way.

Cleave is an example of an attack that takes up a specific action if your DM needs an example, while power attack, like stunning fist is just an add-on option to another attack.


I was going to criticize the idea of a monk maxing out strength (from a concept point of view, not a mechanics point of view), then I saw this

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=po7cpiPWRzo


Can you make this guide available for download like the others are?


I don't know if anyone pointed this out yet, so if someone did, please tell me.

The quarterstaff is not only flurry-able but also two-handed meaning that if you use it as a two handed weapon rather than a double weapon (which you should because from all accounts flurry and twf doesn't stack) you get 1.5 of your strength bonus to damage and a 3 for 1 on power attack. I have not had a chance to do the math at all the major levels but I'm pretty sure that out-does the extra damage that the monk's unarmed strike does. Also a +5 quarterstaff is much cheaper than a +5 amulet.


MinstrelintheGallery wrote:

I don't know if anyone pointed this out yet, so if someone did, please tell me.

The quarterstaff is not only flurry-able but also two-handed meaning that if you use it as a two handed weapon rather than a double weapon (which you should because from all accounts flurry and twf doesn't stack) you get 1.5 of your strength bonus to damage and a 3 for 1 on power attack.

You're wrong on the Str bonus:

"A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands."

The superior Power Attack benefit is supported by the rules, though.


Good catch- I've done the math- without the str x 1.5 unarmed does win out. (all other things being equal of course)

With it they are tied.

Still, at low levels the choice is clear.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
A Man In Black wrote:

You're still rating non-options. :| That's noise that distracts from ratings of choices, which actually matter.

Improved Bull Rush is stone cold terrible. Trading your standard action for moving a dude 15' at best? No, no, no, no, and also no.

When that 15 foot or less is over the side, or off a cliff, think again. Or even if it means placing your foe in a more advantageous situation, such as in line of sight for blasting from your wizard think again. Remember the monk is one of those characters who's going to be yelling at the mage to "OKAY LIGHTNING BOLT US... NOW!" and have a decent chance to get away with it.


LazarX wrote:
When that 15 foot or less is over the side, or off a cliff, think again. Or even if it means placing your foe in a more advantageous situation, such as in line of sight for blasting from your wizard think again. Remember the monk is one of those characters who's going to be yelling at the mage to "OKAY LIGHTNING BOLT US... NOW!" and have a decent chance to get away with it.

Lets not ignore that fact that moving the enemy is better than nothing, which is what an attack would do (because it will miss).

Liberty's Edge

For awhile after reading your guide, I was convinced there had to be something amiss. I tried to justify complaining about the AC's for awhile, because it seemed like you were neglecting them, but as I'm sure you're well aware, the monk makes his own AC well enough.

I finally figured out that what was bugging me was attack bonus. Looking at CR 8 ac's, they tend to hover around 20+. With that +10-ish, he'll be hitting an average of once or twice a round, dealing something like 15 damage a hit-perfectly reasonable.

I'm worried about the boss fight. An armored humanoid or dragon or similarly scary end-fight, say a cr 11, is going to have about 30 AC. The monk needs to turn off power attack to hit over .05%. And Power Attack constitutes a third of his damage potential.

Contrast with other full BAB classes, who are never straight-jacketed into that -2 to attack from TWF, have various ways of jacking up their attack bonus (Weapon Training, Rage, Smite, Favored Enemy), and tend to deal more damage per hit, and focus less on attacks per round (to varying degrees; this applies more to, say, the barbarian than the ranger, obviously).

Now we're in a BOSS FIGHT, and the main tank has medium ac, medium hp, and can't land a hit.

Am I missing something?


kroarty wrote:

Now we're in a BOSS FIGHT, and the main tank has medium ac, medium hp, and can't land a hit.

Am I missing something?

Well, the monk does have a harder time hitting an enemy. But there are a few ways around it. But first of all, some general advise:

- open a bossfight with an dispel magic/dispel evil on the boss, this should help the whole party (well, obvious this is no tip for your monk, but if you have trouble hitting a partylvl+3 CR monster, you really should debuff it. Talk to your casters about this)
- use your advantages (mop up his minions, then flank, trip and debuff the Boss). A monk and an rogue make an awesome flankingteam (maybe get a scroll or wand of DimDoor for your flankingbuddy). Also, if you have improved bullrush or trip it can really help to hit the high-ac enemies if you use this maneuver first and try to damage him after he lies on the ground.
- deception can be your friend, lure the minions away from the boss and let them duke it out with the rest of the party while you DimDoor to the (hopefully caster-)boss and kill/irritate him. With your high saves he should have a hard time getting rid of you and now he has to defensively cast (which is not as easy in PF as it was in 3.5)


kroarty wrote:

For awhile after reading your guide, I was convinced there had to be something amiss. I tried to justify complaining about the AC's for awhile, because it seemed like you were neglecting them, but as I'm sure you're well aware, the monk makes his own AC well enough.

I finally figured out that what was bugging me was attack bonus. Looking at CR 8 ac's, they tend to hover around 20+. With that +10-ish, he'll be hitting an average of once or twice a round, dealing something like 15 damage a hit-perfectly reasonable.

I'm worried about the boss fight. An armored humanoid or dragon or similarly scary end-fight, say a cr 11, is going to have about 30 AC. The monk needs to turn off power attack to hit over .05%. And Power Attack constitutes a third of his damage potential.

Contrast with other full BAB classes, who are never straight-jacketed into that -2 to attack from TWF, have various ways of jacking up their attack bonus (Weapon Training, Rage, Smite, Favored Enemy), and tend to deal more damage per hit, and focus less on attacks per round (to varying degrees; this applies more to, say, the barbarian than the ranger, obviously).

Now we're in a BOSS FIGHT, and the main tank has medium ac, medium hp, and can't land a hit.

Am I missing something?

Nope - I think you are spot on. The Monk would NEED to drop the power attack in this hypothetical. This is going to sorely mess with damage output.

Of course, a simple flank or a buff can improve these chances. Gameplay is funny that way - always introducing complication to the simple predetermined math.

It is important to remember that the Monk is not a one man party. In the campaign I am currently playing, I am playing a Bard - and I begin combat with Inspire Courage - and not uncommonly a Good Hope spell. This gives +4 to hit and damage for all party members subsequent attacks.

There is a Monk in the campaign as well, and although our characters do not get along well in roleplay - tactically we are a nasty combo. Flurry of blows + Inspire courage + Good Hope FTW.

Specifically I chose Good Hope over Haste because there was a Monk in the party. If the party had been comprised of 2 Handed weapon fighters - Haste would have been a preferable choice.

Needless to say, the party Monk will delay action if necessary to benefit from these buffs when employing flurry of blows - which then becomes quite nasty indeed...

Dark Archive

Half-orcs get weapon proficiency with greataxe (and falchion). That provides flexibility as your primary in any round when you can't flurry - potentially 1d12+9 with power attack at first level and a standard build. In follow on rounds you can flurry with your hands full (using unarmed strike) or use the axe depending on circumstance.

You have plenty of encumbrance to spare to maintain a light load and it doesn't affect your monk benefits except for feats requiring a free hand like deflect arrows. You can always drop the axe as a free action if it becomes a liability.

Am I missing something?


What are your guys thoughts on the serpent strike feat from the Eberron Campaign Setting (ability to use the long spear as a monk weapon)? Is it worthwhile? Being able to flurry at 10 foot reach seems pretty nice.


Silt wrote:
What are your guys thoughts on the serpent strike feat from the Eberron Campaign Setting (ability to use the long spear as a monk weapon)? Is it worthwhile? Being able to flurry at 10 foot reach seems pretty nice.

I have a monk that uses it and I quite like it. Of course, you can't use Stunning Fist through it unless you fork out for Ki Focus or take a feat like Cornugon Stun.

The one tricky part is that you can't qualify for the feat very quickly. It requires Weapon Focus which is not possible for a level 1 monk to take. So you might be stuck taking Serpent Strike at level 5.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
MinstrelintheGallery wrote:


Lets not ignore that fact that moving the enemy is better than nothing, which is what an attack would do (because it will miss).

Key part of one encounter I ran with some PCs was win when the barbarian charged the big Hezrou demon. Who was located in the central part of the room flanked by 2 stationary prismatic walls. The demon being a bit unconventional takes the charge from the barbarian, initiates a grapple and tosses the barbarian into the prismatic wall. Hilarity ensued.


wraithstrike wrote:
Can you make this guide available for download like the others are?

bump


wraithstrike wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
Can you make this guide available for download like the others are?
bump

Not sure why it's not downloadable - the doc shows up as available to everyone (just like the others) on my Google docs. Are you trying to download from PFSRD or Google Docs? The Google Doc address is: http://docs.google.com/Doc?docid=0AcNyxDTKvAmqZGRtZzhzdjZfNTB3YzJ0NzlkOA&am p;hl=en

Quote:

You have plenty of encumbrance to spare to maintain a light load and it doesn't affect your monk benefits except for feats requiring a free hand like deflect arrows. You can always drop the axe as a free action if it becomes a liability.

Am I missing something?

I don't think you're missing anything unless you are thinking the greataxe is going to be a very effective weapon for you. As a backup - I think it's OK.

Quote:
What are your guys thoughts on the serpent strike feat from the Eberron Campaign Setting (ability to use the long spear as a monk weapon)? Is it worthwhile? Being able to flurry at 10 foot reach seems pretty nice.

Sounds really, really good. I don't have the Eberron campaign setting - but I would pick that up if it was available. With kick attacks still available to threaten adjacent foes - that creates a very nice radius of threatening.


Hey, just curious, how optimal do you think a Suli would be as a monk?

They have low light vision, +2 Str and +2 Cha, bonuses to diplomacy and sense motive, an ability that gives them +1d6 energy damage to unarmed attacks once a day for 1 round/level (they choose the energy before activating it), resistance to fire, cold, acid and electric damage 5, medium creatures with a base speed of 30.

That said I know that Cha is a dump stat for monks so that nullifies a couple of their perks but that elemental damage sounds quite handy as does the resistance. If not for monks which of your guides do you think they might be optimal for?

The Exchange

After reading your guide here, I'd play a monk. Something which I have never done in 3E or 3.5E.

Thanks TM


Hey Treantmonk, what are your thoughts on the new monk weapons in the Adventurer's Armory - the cestus seems pointless but there's the temple sword - you need an exotic weapon prof but then it's a 1d8,19-20/x2 weapon with trip. That's a point better damage that all the rest and when you go for improved crit means you get two additional points of critability.

[Ed: never mind, see that you answered it back there]


Ernest Mueller wrote:

Hey Treantmonk, what are your thoughts on the new monk weapons in the Adventurer's Armory - the cestus seems pointless but there's the temple sword - you need an exotic weapon prof but then it's a 1d8,19-20/x2 weapon with trip. That's a point better damage that all the rest and when you go for improved crit means you get two additional points of critability.

[Ed: never mind, see that you answered it back there]

Cestus useless?

"The cestus is a glove of leather or thick cloth that covers the wielder from mid-finger to mid-forearm. It is reinforced with metal plates over the fingers and often lined with wicked spikes and fangs along the backs of the hands and wrists. While wearing a cestus, you are considered armed and your unarmed attacks deal normal damage rather than nonlethal damage. If you are proficient with a cestus, your unarmed strikes may deal bludgeoning or piercing damage. When using a cestus, your fingers are mostly exposed, allowing you to wield or carry items in that hand, but the constriction of the weapon at your knuckles gives you a –2 penalty on all precision-based tasks involving that hand (such as opening locks)."

And it's a monk's weapon. So you can enhance it, get your flurry of blows, doing unarmed strike damage, and have a 19~20 crit range. Now you do have to spend a feat to become proficient, but you can also change out between piercing and bludgeoning damage. Those are a lot of good things.


Abraham spalding wrote:


And it's a monk's weapon. So you can enhance it, get your flurry of blows, doing unarmed strike damage, and have a 19~20 crit range. Now you do have to spend a feat to become proficient, but you can also change out between piercing and bludgeoning damage. Those are a lot of good things.

Like enhancing it at normal prices and stacking special abilities with the the Amulet of Mighty Fists?

Humbly,
Yawar


YawarFiesta wrote:
Abraham spalding wrote:


And it's a monk's weapon. So you can enhance it, get your flurry of blows, doing unarmed strike damage, and have a 19~20 crit range. Now you do have to spend a feat to become proficient, but you can also change out between piercing and bludgeoning damage. Those are a lot of good things.

Like enhancing it at normal prices and stacking special abilities with the the Amulet of Mighty Fists?

Humbly,
Yawar

nice as it would be for the monk I doubt any competent GM would allow it.

Even if they were kind enough to allow the monk to Macflurry with the cestus in the first place the monk would still do the cestus's damage rather than his unarmed damage just like any other monk weapon, in wich case the monk would be much better off with a temple sword.

wc


The Cestus modifies your unarmed strike, more or less like a Gauntlet like a Gauntlet, and, since it is a monk weapon, it can be used in a Flurry of Blows.

Humbly,
Yawar


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

Two benefits of the Cestus over the Temple Sword, is that it cannot be disarmed or dropped and the hand is still free to hold things.


YawarFiesta wrote:

The Cestus modifies your unarmed strike, more or less like a Gauntlet like a Gauntlet, and, since it is a monk weapon, it can be used in a Flurry of Blows.

Humbly,
Yawar

I don't disagree, it can indeed be used in a flurry of blows, as it is indeed a monk weapon, and like any other monk weapon the cestus's damage will replace the monks unarmed damage.

the real problem is the Amulet of Mighty Fists, it needs to be erratad so as not to stack with enhancment bonuses on unarmed strikes. as it is all the monk has to do is have the cleric cast (greater)magic weapon on one fist while wearing an amulet of mighty fists enchanted with melee weapon special abilities to stack the bonus, no cestus or guantlet required.

and if your GM has a heart of gold he/she might actualy let you do it.

irt Lokie:

Quote:
Two benefits of the Cestus over the Temple Sword, is that it cannot be disarmed or dropped and the hand is still free to hold things.

True, three disadvantages of the cestus over the temple sword, it's not a trip weapon, it ties up your glove slot so you can't have, say, a glove of holding with a second temple sword in it, and it does less damage.

wc


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Wild Card wrote:


Lokie wrote:
Two benefits of the Cestus over the Temple Sword, is that it cannot be disarmed or dropped and the hand is still free to hold things.

True, three disadvantages of the cestus over the temple sword, it's not a trip weapon, it ties up your glove slot so you can't have, say, a glove of holding with a second temple sword in it, and it does less damage.

wc

Firstly... a Monk can trip barehanded.

Secondly... Why not just carry two temple swords in addition to the Cestus?

As you point out ... the Cestus takes up a glove slot. You could enhance it as both a weapon and a wonderous item. Simply enchant your masterwork Cestus as a Glove of Holding.

Thirdly... I forgot a benefit... the Cestus may do less damage but it is also more subtle than a big hooked blade hung with holy relics.


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

F.Y.I. - Thanks for the Guide Treantmonk. A very interesting read.


Lokie wrote:


Firstly... a Monk can trip barehanded.

Secondly... Why not just carry two temple swords in addition to the Cestus?

As you point out ... the Cestus takes up a glove slot and is effectively a glove. You could enhance it as both a weapon and a wonderous item.

firstly: barehanded isn't a trip weapon, since you can't drop your bare hand to avoid being tripped as you can with a temple sword.

ohh, nice Idea, of course you'd have to spend a feat to be proficent with the cestus and a second for the temple sword, and I'm pretty sure the a –2 penalty on all precision-based tasks involving that hand would apply to wielding a weapon in the hand wearing the cestus and probably grapple checks as well.

the downsides would be the GP cost, the extra feat to use the cestus, the cestus's low damage, and the cestus is made of leather so you couldn't even make one of cold iron or mithril to bypass damage reduction, and your hand would be restricted, -2 on precision tasks, wich would probably include weapons wielded in the same hand as the cestus, and all combat manuvers using that hand.

the upside would be that you could do pirecing damage (about half as much as a singham) and couldn't be disarmed.

as for the final benifit you mentioned, well, the cestus is far less subtle than the bare hand the monk can fall back on, unless he has a cestus straped to it of course, and does much less damage.

any way you slice it the cestus is only going to be a great monk weapon if you GM adds house rules to make it so.

WC


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Wild Card wrote:
Lokie wrote:


Firstly... a Monk can trip barehanded.

Secondly... Why not just carry two temple swords in addition to the Cestus?

As you point out ... the Cestus takes up a glove slot and is effectively a glove. You could enhance it as both a weapon and a wonderous item.

firstly: barehanded isn't a trip weapon, since you can't drop your bare hand to avoid being tripped as you can with a temple sword.

ohh, nice Idea, of course you'd have to spend a feat to be proficent with the cestus and a second for the temple sword, and I'm pretty sure the a –2 penalty on all precision-based tasks involving that hand would apply to wielding a weapon in the hand wearing the cestus and probably grapple checks as well.

the downsides would be the GP cost, the extra feat to use the cestus, the cestus's low damage, and the cestus is made of leather so you couldn't even make one of cold iron or mithril to bypass damage reduction, and your hand would be restricted, -2 on precision tasks, wich would probably include weapons wielded in the same hand as the cestus, and all combat manuvers using that hand.

the upside would be that you could do pirecing damage (about half as much as a singham) and couldn't be disarmed.

as for the final benifit you mentioned, well, the cestus is far less subtle than the bare hand the monk can fall back on, unless he has a cestus straped to it of course, and does much less damage.

any way you slice it the cestus is only going to be a great monk weapon if you GM adds house rules to make it so.

WC

The example given for "precision based task" is opening a lock. Precision based ... would be scrimshaw, or lockpicking, or disabling a trap. Skills that require small fine finger control.

I think in no way is that going to apply to grappling or using a weapon in that hand. If they meant it to be that broad a penalty they would have just said -2 penalty on any task using that hand.


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

Another thought... the Cestus is made of leather with metal banding with metal hooks or barbs across its striking surfaces. You could indeed make a Cestus with Cold Iron, Mithral(Silver), or Adamantine.


Guys, not forcing the monk to pay exhorbent amounts of gold just to try and stay on par with other classes is TOTALLY wrong.


ProfessorCirno wrote:
Guys, not forcing the monk to pay exhorbent amounts of gold just to try and stay on par with other classes is TOTALLY wrong.

if your goal is to be on par with another class, than why aren't you playing the other class?

wc


Lokie wrote:
Another thought... the Cestus is made of leather with metal banding with metal hooks or barbs across its striking surfaces. You could indeed make a Cestus with Cold Iron, Mithral(Silver), or Adamantine.

sweet, 1-3 points of damage that bypasses DR, definately worth the cost.

wc


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber

Fine... why not just take away all wealth and equipment from all classes. Hmmph... on par. :p

Seriously though... its one thing to armchair and run probabilities and math... and another to site down at a table and play at a game with real people.

"On par" has allot to do with how the character is played. Luck is also a huge factor. I've seen players role nothing over a 3 all night no matter what or whose dice they use.


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Wild Card wrote:
Lokie wrote:
Another thought... the Cestus is made of leather with metal banding with metal hooks or barbs across its striking surfaces. You could indeed make a Cestus with Cold Iron, Mithral(Silver), or Adamantine.

sweet, 1-3 points of damage that bypasses DR, definately worth the cost.

wc

Right - 1d4 points of damage + STR + power attack + any weapon enhancements you put on the weapon times x number of attacks that hit. (Two of which are at full BAB if you pop a ki point)

Over all we are only talking about a 4 point difference in base weapon damage. If you are not playing in a "PC's vs. the DM" arms race type of game... It'll work quite well. :)


Lokie wrote:

The example given for "precision based task" is opening a lock. Precision based ... would be scrimshaw, or lockpicking, or disabling a trap. Skills that require small fine finger control.

I think in no way is that going to apply to grappling or using a weapon in that hand. If they meant it to be that broad a penalty they would have just said -2 penalty on any task using that hand.

precision based task isn't covered in the rulebook as far as I can see, but it is certainly reasonable to asume it applies to any skill check or attack roll that requires manual dexderity, and if you're silly enough to think wielding a weapon or grappling aren't precision based tasks, well, I guess there's no point in trying to reason with you any more.

wc


Lokie wrote:

Fine... why not just take away all wealth and equipment from all classes. Hmmph... on par. :p

Seriously though... its one thing to armchair and run probabilities and math... and another to site down at a table and play at a game with real people.

"On par" has allot to do with how the character is played. Luck is also a huge factor. I've seen players role nothing over a 3 all night no matter what or whose dice they use.

I have however found that in games when having a mix of some classes that are quite good and some that are not so good if the gap is big enough often the people playing the less able classes are disappointed unless they knew what they were getting into. Sometimes people get a bit down when they have died more then everyone else and contribute less then everyone else.


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
WWWW wrote:
Lokie wrote:

Fine... why not just take away all wealth and equipment from all classes. Hmmph... on par. :p

Seriously though... its one thing to armchair and run probabilities and math... and another to site down at a table and play at a game with real people.

"On par" has allot to do with how the character is played. Luck is also a huge factor. I've seen players role nothing over a 3 all night no matter what or whose dice they use.

I have however found that in games when having a mix of some classes that are quite good and some that are not so good if the gap is big enough often the people playing the less able classes are disappointed unless they knew what they were getting into. Sometimes people get a bit down when they have died more then everyone else and contribute less then everyone else.

The same can be said of a group of experienced players with one new player. An experienced player can make do with half of what a newer player may have, just because they know how to make the most of it.

My point is... that there can be no black<>white way of looking at it. Each groups play style is going to be different based on a number of factors that have nothing to do with which character is more "powerful".


havnt read this yet as i am not interested in a monk at the moment but the other guides are great. realy helps alot. the druid / ranger ones are particulary great. and i love how you aim them at 'core' users like me because most guides just sugest multiclassing into infinate presteige classes and using feats spread across 5 books and it realy pisses me off as it dosnjt help most people. just thought id say thanks for a great job.


I have however found that in games when having a mix of some classes that are quite good and some that are not so good if the gap is big enough often the people playing the less able classes are disappointed unless they knew what they were getting into. Sometimes people get a bit down when they have died more then everyone else and contribute less then everyone else.

Sorry for being an %#&!!, but:

THAN everyone else, not "THEN everyone else"

Contribute less THAN everyone else, not "contribute less THEN everyone else"

"then" and "than" are different words with very different meanings.

Apart from that I see your point.

GRU


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Wild Card wrote:
Lokie wrote:


The example given for "precision based task" is opening a lock. Precision based ... would be scrimshaw, or lockpicking, or disabling a trap. Skills that require small fine finger control.

I think in no way is that going to apply to grappling or using a weapon in that hand. If they meant it to be that broad a penalty they would have just said -2 penalty on any task using that hand.

precision based task isn't covered in the rulebook as far as I can see, but it is certainly reasonable to asume it applies to any skill check or attack roll that requires manual dexderity, and if you're silly enough to think wielding a weapon or grappling aren't precision based tasks, well, I guess there's no point in trying to reason with you any more.

wc

I've just been stating facts as I see them in response to your posts. I myself DM for my group and have a "fair" grasp of the rules in most cases. Swinging a sword is in no way as "precise" as task as picking a lock. Its on two different levels. If you can wear a full metal gauntlet like the ones that come with a set of full plate and not have a penalty on attacks, then I do not see why you should when wearing a Cestus which should be less cumbersome. I think the only reason they felt they should include a rule for precision work with a Cestus is so that there was a rule for you to actually be able to do it.

Most DM/GMs I know of would more than likely not let you pick locks wearing gauntlets.

Liberty's Edge

Pathfinder Pathfinder Accessories Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Lokie wrote:
Wild Card wrote:
Lokie wrote:


The example given for "precision based task" is opening a lock. Precision based ... would be scrimshaw, or lockpicking, or disabling a trap. Skills that require small fine finger control.

I think in no way is that going to apply to grappling or using a weapon in that hand. If they meant it to be that broad a penalty they would have just said -2 penalty on any task using that hand.

precision based task isn't covered in the rulebook as far as I can see, but it is certainly reasonable to asume it applies to any skill check or attack roll that requires manual dexderity, and if you're silly enough to think wielding a weapon or grappling aren't precision based tasks, well, I guess there's no point in trying to reason with you any more.

wc

I've just been stating facts as I see them in response to your posts. I myself DM for my group and have a "fair" grasp of the rules in most cases. Swinging a sword is in no way as "precise" as task as picking a lock. Its on two different levels. If you can wear a full metal gauntlet like the ones that come with a set of full plate and not have a penalty on attacks, then I do not see why you should when wearing a Cestus which should be less cumbersome. I think the only reason they felt they should include a rule for precision work with a Cestus is so that there was a rule for you to actually be able to do it.

Most DM/GMs I know of would more than likely not let you pick locks wearing gauntlets.

Actually, by RAW, you can but the ACP applies. As most armours with gauntlets are medium or heavy armours, that's quite a lot of ACP to eat up. The cestus is on a par with a chain shirt, so less than all the really heavy gauntlets.


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Paul Watson wrote:


Actually, by RAW, you can but the ACP applies. As most armours with gauntlets are medium or heavy armours, that's quite a lot of ACP to eat up. The cestus is on a par with a chain shirt, so less than all the really heavy gauntlets.

True true... I guess I should have said that most of the DMs I know would laugh at you for trying because of those penalties. :)

Good catch! :)


Paul Watson wrote:

[

Actually, by RAW, you can but the ACP applies. As most armours with gauntlets are medium or heavy armours, that's quite a lot of ACP to eat up. The cestus is on a par with a chain shirt, so less than all the really heavy gauntlets.

your comparing apples and oranges, guantlets are designed to weild weapons with, cestus are designed to BE weapons wich is why you are considered armed while wearing a cestus, and unarmed while wearing a guantlet.


Pathfinder PF Special Edition Subscriber
Wild Card wrote:
Paul Watson wrote:

[

Actually, by RAW, you can but the ACP applies. As most armours with gauntlets are medium or heavy armours, that's quite a lot of ACP to eat up. The cestus is on a par with a chain shirt, so less than all the really heavy gauntlets.

your comparing apples and oranges, guantlets are designed to weild weapons with, cestus are designed to BE weapons wich is why you are considered armed while wearing a cestus, and unarmed while wearing a guantlet.

Sorry... Spiked Gauntlet then. The example is still the same. You have no penalty for having a big spikey metal gauntlet wrapped around your hand for when you wield weapons in the same hand as a spiked gauntlet.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
josh hill 935 wrote:
havnt read this yet as i am not interested in a monk at the moment but the other guides are great. realy helps alot. the druid / ranger ones are particulary great. and i love how you aim them at 'core' users like me because most guides just sugest multiclassing into infinate presteige classes and using feats spread across 5 books and it realy pisses me off as it dosnjt help most people. just thought id say thanks for a great job.

Those guides were written for D+D 3.5 where single-classing sucked for the most part. Pathfinder is a very different beast in that regard.


The problem with the cestus is that damage stays at 1d4 and doesn't go up. So it's like any other 1d4 monk weapon. It can't be disarmed but is subject to most other antiweapon measures (heat metal, rust, etc.). Your fists are coated with spikes to the point you'll have trouble drinking shots in a bar, so "subtle" isn't really on the table (at least no more subtle than the hanbo or nunchaku or other small weapons). Because of the damage thing it's cooler at low level, but low level is when you don't have money to adamantite and enchant anything.

And I certainly wouldn't let it stack with Mighty Fists - though they really didn't do a good job in the weapon description as to whether it really is an enhancement to unarmed strikes or just a weapon. But one of the core concepts, right or wrong, behind monk attacks is that you can't magically enhance them easily (mighty fists and loads of $$ being the only exception). I understand not liking that, but then you might as well just make the (eminently reasonable IMO) house rule that monk weapons always do the monk's unarmed damage as their base damage, whatever they are, and then let them enhance up whatever they want as their cool ninja concept. (Besides the general "no stacking" concept otherwise - MAYBE you could have a special effect from an Amulet go onto the weapon, but plusses absolutely not, you can't stack enhancement bonuses.)

It has arguable benefits over "your normal unarmed strike", but when you factor in that it costs a feat... NEIN!

201 to 250 of 380 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Monks: A Treantmonk Guide (Optimization) All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.