|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hey there, I've been noticing the whole Monk storm about how useful they are and about how expensive the Amulet of Mighty Fist is and all that other jazz, and I know there have been some arguments over whether gauntlets count for monks as an enchantable weapon, so rather than fight a battle against the rules itself, why not just give them the ability to buy a set of wraps for their hands and feat. Something like:
Wraps: This weapon increases the unarmed strike (but not natural attacks) of the wielder by one step as if their size had increased. Monks are proficient with Wraps, and it can be used as a part of a flurry of blows. Wraps are sold as a set, counting as one weapon, unlike similar weapons (such as gauntlets).
This is just a rough idea of what it would be, but a weapon like this would go a long way towards making Monks closer to the ideal of what people want them to be. The increase in damage could even be taken off, but it would give people a chance to play a monk more easily, especially considering the price of Amulets of Mighty Fist as well as all the stat boosting items this class needs.
i really like this idea. And yeah it can do without the damage increase i think, just the enchantment slot, and at low levels the masterwork slot make it worthwile.
There was a set of Ki Straps in the Magic Item Compendium for 3.5 if I am remembering correctly.
Found it.
Ki Straps - Hand slot - +2 enhancement bonus to the Stunning Fist DC or anything done by expending a use of Stunning Fist. (MiC, p113)
|
There was a set of Ki Straps in the Magic Item Compendium for 3.5 if I am remembering correctly.
Found it.
Ki Straps - Hand slot - +2 enhancement bonus to the Stunning Fist DC or anything done by expending a use of Stunning Fist. (MiC, p113)
There were also Ki Straps in Sword and Fist. And I may be wrong, but I think that the Githyanki Dragon or Dungeon issue had wraps, too.
The reason why the amulet is expensive is because a monk doesn't just use his hands to make unarmed strikes, he can use fists, elbows, knees, and feet, so the item potentially has to "charge up" eight weaponized parts of the body. Limiting something to the hands like this is possible, but the monk would only get the bonus on the part of the body wrapped with the magic item.
The reason why the amulet is expensive is because a monk doesn't just use his hands to make unarmed strikes, he can use fists, elbows, knees, and feet, so the item potentially has to "charge up" eight weaponized parts of the body. Limiting something to the hands like this is possible, but the monk would only get the bonus on the part of the body wrapped with the magic item.
That DOES seem to make it less convenient to fight while rock climbing, but I don't think most people would mind that loss of functionality.
Also, you'd probably, technically, need two of them to flurry with. I think that puts the cost above the amulet.
|
That DOES seem to make it less convenient to fight while rock climbing, but I don't think most people would mind that loss of functionality.
Also, you'd probably, technically, need two of them to flurry with. I think that puts the cost above the amulet.
But the OP stated that they were bought in a set and only needed one to cover both hands and both feet, maybe even have them extend the length of the whole arm and the whole legs, they are just cloth wraps after all. Think of them as medical wraps in real life, but instead of covering wounds they cover arms and legs (or what ever your monk uses as a weapon, could be forehead and look like a headband, LOL) but give no mechanical benefit except that they can be made masterwork and then enchanted.
I really like this idea and overall it makes more sense to me than an amulet would.
But the OP stated that they were bought in a set and only needed one to cover both hands and both feet, maybe even have them extend the length of the whole arm and the whole legs, they are just cloth wraps after all.
So the proposal is to replace an existing one-piece magic item with a multiple-piece magic item that is cheaper than the one-piece item?
...I know there have been some arguments over whether gauntlets count for monks as an enchantable weapon, so rather than fight a battle against the rules itself...
Err... but adding a new item is a house rule too. So why not just make a DM ruling that gauntlets count?
The points about needing two for flurry and not being able to use anything but your hands to attack have been made. The only other balance question I see is fixed by ruling that the amulet doesn't stack with worn gauntlets, which is perfectly reasonable: you're not striking with your own body.
I wouldnt mind wraps as a magic item for unarmed combatants, though I would definately require a monk to purchase 2 (having them be the normal magic weapon cost) and for him to have to specify the body part the wraps are on.
I once created magical leather wrappings for one of my players using the magic item rules. They didn't do a thing for him for purposes of unarmed damage, but with a +1 and Flaming on them, his right fist was a lot more useful. He ended up having on made for each limb in each energy type.
It makes sense to be able to do something like this. The fighter can have his weapon upgraded, but a monk can't exactly reforge his fists with firey magic...
|
|
The reason why the amulet is expensive is because a monk doesn't just use his hands to make unarmed strikes, he can use fists, elbows, knees, and feet, so the item potentially has to "charge up" eight weaponized parts of the body. Limiting something to the hands like this is possible, but the monk would only get the bonus on the part of the body wrapped with the magic item.
Okay, let's dwell on this statement a bit:
The best value you could get for something like this is a Dragon or something else just loaded down with natural weapons, which is what it seems like this is really used for. With that, you're getting bite, claws, tail, wings, and anything else. For a human, an unarmed strike is just one attack (even as a flurry). You mention the weaponized 8 body parts, and if a monk got an attack with all of them, then "super mega holy wow!" is that broken, but no matter what, a flurry will always be dictated by level and abilities. So what if my elbow does more damage, it's my elbow (awesome visual of a fighter who just fights with his elbows and head), it's not game breaking.
The increase in unarmed damage was a bit much (which is why I stated that it couldn't be taken on a natural weapon, as such an item would be a quick go to for any creature), but the core idea is that you buy them as a set so you can get MWK on your fist, enchant them without spending an arm and a leg (which you already do for getting up your MAD ability boosters), and give them more of a fighting (Ha!) chance in combat.
I actually posted this in the APG because I wanted to see something like this included in the new book. Take out the damage increase if you want (even with that, it doesn't bring them up to a fighter's melee damage, let alone his ranged!) but something like this would go a long way to making a monk a more viable class.
And just to be clear, I don't want this to stack with an amulet at all (I hate losing that slot when a weapon fighter has it for natural armor which a monk could really use), more as a replacement so a monk doesn't really have to burn an item slot and gold on something that more efficient classes don't need.
Think of doing something like this when you put out the APG!
You mention the weaponized 8 body parts, and if a monk got an attack with all of them, then "super mega holy wow!" is that broken, but no matter what, a flurry will always be dictated by level and abilities.
You're ignoring a major aspect, though. A monk with both hands full can still make unarmed attacks. If both hands are full of a climbing rope, that's a pretty useful ability. If both hands are full of a guisarme, it's amazing.
|
|
You mention the weaponized 8 body parts, and if a monk got an attack with all of them, then "super mega holy wow!" is that broken, but no matter what, a flurry will always be dictated by level and abilities.You're ignoring a major aspect, though. A monk with both hands full can still make unarmed attacks. If both hands are full of a climbing rope, that's a pretty useful ability. If both hands are full of a guisarme, it's amazing.
But you don't get additional attack because of wielding the guisarme, you still get the same number of attacks whether you are wielding the weapon or not.
|
|
You mention the weaponized 8 body parts, and if a monk got an attack with all of them, then "super mega holy wow!" is that broken, but no matter what, a flurry will always be dictated by level and abilities.You're ignoring a major aspect, though. A monk with both hands full can still make unarmed attacks. If both hands are full of a climbing rope, that's a pretty useful ability. If both hands are full of a guisarme, it's amazing.
I don't really see the point in wielding the guisarme, as you're non proficient with it, and if you're going to say "I'll use it for AOOs", it goes off of your 3/4 BAB and your -4 non proficiency penalty (unless you took a feat for it or multi'd into proficiency for it) Sure, it's better than nothing, but by so little that it hurts. Yeah, you could trip with it using a full BAB, but you're not getting a better version of trip after improved, which kind of ratchets down the use of it. There's a lot of things you have to do to specialize in that style of fighting, and by the time you've done them, you deserve to be good at them. If it was out of the box awesome like that, I'd agree, but there's not enough benefit in just taking a non proficient reach weapon with combat reflexes and hoping to hit with -4 staring you in the face.
It's not a bad idea, and I do see how having those options are useful, but for the most part, you're generally just going to be swinging with your hands and maybe feet, so being able to do so slightly better (at least to the level of a fighter without giving up an item slot and more gold to do so) isn't a huge breaking point. The only thing I'm really willing to concede here is that it's a cheaper way to TWF, but it's built into the class, so it's not like you can just dip to do it, you dedicate to how the monk fights.
How about something simpler? What if the benefit of the wraps is that a monk wearing them is able to spend a Ki point to bypass all DR an enemy possesses - his Ki focuses the strike to tap the same weakness as whatever other type of attack would overcome the DR. The wraps serve as foci for the Ki of his strike.
The only slight advantage a monk gains from the wraps is the fair pricing that everybody else gets.
You mean, the fair pricing the monk also gets if he decides to use a monk weapon? There's no difference in "fairness" between a fighter with a +5 longsword and a monk with a +5 kama.
I don't understand why so many game designers get so hung up on the fact the monk attacks with his whole body, it's one weapon. This isn't like an amulet of mighty fists that augments all the natural attacks a creature has.
Your statement is unclear. We ARE talking about the amulet, and comparing it to the OP's suggested item, which still isn't defined well enough for me to know what he wants out of it. Does he want to have masterwork and magical versions of it? Then why not just use a weapon?
How about something simpler? What if the benefit of the wraps is that a monk wearing them is able to spend a Ki point to bypass all DR an enemy possesses - his Ki focuses the strike to tap the same weakness as whatever other type of attack would overcome the DR. The wraps serve as foci for the Ki of his strike.
See, now that would be an interesting option for a low-level monk, but a higher-level one already gets almost all of that (ki strike at 4th = magic weapon, at 10th = lawful, 16th = adamantine). Still, the ability to bypass cold iron or silver has its benefits.
I'd like to see a masterwork, nonmagical wrap that allows a monk to deliver a contact poison without a chance of poisoning him/herself *and* "hold the charge".
This post was partially inspired by the chipotle-vodka infusion I made over the weekend, during which I made the classic mistake of not wearing gloves and wiping my forehead before washing up. You think I would have learned after I made the same mistake with a serrano pepper.
|
|
The only slight advantage a monk gains from the wraps is the fair pricing that everybody else gets.You mean, the fair pricing the monk also gets if he decides to use a monk weapon? There's no difference in "fairness" between a fighter with a +5 longsword and a monk with a +5 kama.
I don't understand why so many game designers get so hung up on the fact the monk attacks with his whole body, it's one weapon. This isn't like an amulet of mighty fists that augments all the natural attacks a creature has.Your statement is unclear. We ARE talking about the amulet, and comparing it to the OP's suggested item, which still isn't defined well enough for me to know what he wants out of it. Does he want to have masterwork and magical versions of it? Then why not just use a weapon?
The issue with the Kama v. unarmored attack is that the increase in damage is a class feature and generally expected to be used, as opposed to the static damage most melee is expected to use.
What am I looking for? A weapon you could use to allow your natural attacks (or maybe only fist, feet, or one set of "natural attacks") to be made masterwork, and then enchanted like a regular weapon. To try to put it into different terms, I'd like to enchant my hands and feet as a weapon like a fighter enchants his weapon, similar to the Kensai in WOTC's Complete Warrior suppliment.
Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.
If the monk20 has the choice of using his 2d10 unarmed strike or a +5 flaming frost shock quarterstaff for 1d6+5+1d6fire+1d6cold+1d6electricity, I think that's a fair choice.
|
|
Except it's not fair, because while the monk has that choice, his unarmed damage is what's supposed to keep him balanced compared to the Fighter and Barbarian who are power attacking with a (insert whatever enhancements bla bla) greatsword or Falchion and still hitting more often.Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.If the monk20 has the choice of using his 2d10 unarmed strike or a +5 flaming frost shock quarterstaff for 1d6+5+1d6fire+1d6cold+1d6electricity, I think that's a fair choice.
Yeah, looking at the monk's weapon selection, they get on average a 1d6 weapon while a fighter can start with a 2d6 with a 3/1 exchange with power attack. I guess if PF could make it's own version of the Scorpion Kama from the Magic Item Compendium, that'd be another good way to sum up the kind of weapon that'd be useful. Heck, I wouldn't mind it if it was some one handed weapon, it'd still be nice.
There's going to be a few new monk weapons in the upcoming Luven Lightfinger's Gear & Treasure Shop, including the Jian, Hook Sword, Meteor Hammer, Shanqquan Jian, et al. Some of these might be exactly what you're looking for.
Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.If the monk20 has the choice of using his 2d10 unarmed strike or a +5 flaming frost shock quarterstaff for 1d6+5+1d6fire+1d6cold+1d6electricity, I think that's a fair choice.
I guess I'm not seeing how 2d10 (average 11 points) from unarmed strike is worse than 4d6+5 (average 19 points). Or that the 19-points-per-attack is "falling off the map" compared to the unarmed strike, which is the point I was responding to.
|
|
I guess I'm not seeing how 2d10 (average 11 points) from unarmed strike is worse than 4d6+5 (average 19 points). Or that the 19-points-per-attack is "falling off the map" compared to the unarmed strike, which is the point I was responding to.Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.If the monk20 has the choice of using his 2d10 unarmed strike or a +5 flaming frost shock quarterstaff for 1d6+5+1d6fire+1d6cold+1d6electricity, I think that's a fair choice.
Let's not forget that the +5 also goes into attack. It's just that if monks were intended to use weapons (it's not a horrible option, especially with some of the 3.5 weapons such as the hook swords from one of the Eberron books) the monk itself seems to be based on going unarmed, so why make it worse than having it use a weapon and just be a somewhat more mystic fighter.
I guess I'm not seeing how 2d10 (average 11 points) from unarmed strike is worse than 4d6+5 (average 19 points). Or that the 19-points-per-attack is "falling off the map" compared to the unarmed strike, which is the point I was responding to.Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.If the monk20 has the choice of using his 2d10 unarmed strike or a +5 flaming frost shock quarterstaff for 1d6+5+1d6fire+1d6cold+1d6electricity, I think that's a fair choice.
Which is where the item I created for my monk player came in. It allowed him to place magic weapon properties ON HIS FISTS AND FEET. Referring to my previous post, here:
I once created magical leather wrappings for one of my players using the magic item rules. They didn't do a thing for him for purposes of unarmed damage, but with a +1 and Flaming on them, his right fist was a lot more useful. He ended up having on made for each limb in each energy type.
It makes sense to be able to do something like this. The fighter can have his weapon upgraded, but a monk can't exactly reforge his fists with firey magic...
The Bracers of Striking in Magic of Faerun allow you enhance your unarmed strikes as if they were a blunt weapon, although they count as a double weapon so you have to pay double the cost.
Argh, it was late and I typed the opposite word, confusing the issue.
kyrt-ryder wrote:
{Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.}
So Kyrt is saying that monk weapon damage falls off the map, i.e., gets worse than unarmed strike damage.
But unarmed does less damage than the +5 flaming/frost/shock quarterstaff, i.e., weapon damage is quite on the map.
I interpreted his comment as "weapon damage for monks really sucks, we need to improve it." But now we have people arguing both sides, that weapon damage is better and that unarmed damage is better.
So until I have a clear idea of which side the group is on, I can't weigh in. (I'm not going to argue both sides, thanks. :))
Argh, it was late and I typed the opposite word, confusing the issue.
kyrt-ryder wrote:
{Damage. A monk's damage completely falls off the map when he's using something other than his unarmed strike at medium to high levels.}So Kyrt is saying that monk weapon damage falls off the map, i.e., gets worse than unarmed strike damage.
But unarmed does less damage than the +5 flaming/frost/shock quarterstaff, i.e., weapon damage is quite on the map.
I interpreted his comment as "weapon damage for monks really sucks, we need to improve it." But now we have people arguing both sides, that weapon damage is better and that unarmed damage is better.
So until I have a clear idea of which side the group is on, I can't weigh in. (I'm not going to argue both sides, thanks. :))
The monk should not have to give up a class feature to try and keep up with other classes.
If the monk uses a weapon, he falls behind because he's stuck with a base weapon die of 1d6 compared to anyone else's 1d8 or better. If a monk fights unarmed, he falls behind because an Amulet of Mighty fists is both prohibitively expensive (more than double the cost of a weapon) and needlessly limited (+5 instead of the total +10 of weapons) and doesn't allow them to breach material-based DR. And both are restricted to the worst available critical hit ranges and multipliers.
In short, neither one is better than the other, they're BOTH bad when compared to what other melee-based classes have access to.
Monk unarmed strikes cannot currently be enhanced without having to pay an unfair price.2: Allow a monk to enhance his body at the same price a fighter enhances his greatsword.
I once created magical leather wrappings for one of my players using the magic item rules. They didn't do a thing for him for purposes of unarmed damage, but with a +1 and Flaming on them, his right fist was a lot more useful. He ended up having on made for each limb in each energy type.
It makes sense to be able to do something like this. The fighter can have his weapon upgraded, but a monk can't exactly reforge his fists with firey magic...
I could have sworn that you couldn't have flaming, frost, and shocking active at the same time on a weapon. I mean you could enchant a weapon to have all those but you couldn't benefit from all three at once.
Monk weapons are small, low dice weapons and flurry doesn't even allow a quarterstaff to dish out 1.5* strength.
Ftr20 has 4 attacks per round with a two-handed weapon. If he has Str 30 and uses a +5 greatsword, that's 2d6+20 x4, or an average of 108 damage per round.
Mnk 20 has 7 attacks per round with a special monk weapon (such as a siangham, 1d6/x2). If he has Str 30 and uses a +5 siangham, that's 1d6+15 x7, or an average of 129 damage per round.The monk's individual attacks are doing less than the fighter's, but he's getting more attacks per round. Even if you discount attacks with less than a starter BAB of +13 (fighter loses his +10 and +5, monk loses two +8's and a +3), the fighter is doing 2d6+20 x2 (54) and the monk is doing 1d6+15 x 4 (74).
{Monk unarmed strikes cannot currently be enhanced without having to pay an unfair price.}
"Unfair" is an opinion and a subjective statement. The pricing of the amulet is comparable to the cost of a TWF character putting magic on both his weapons.
Two +5 short swords = 100,000 gp
Amulet of mighty fists +5 = 125,000 gp
That's because the amulet is priced according to the monk using flurry, which operates much like TWF. Also note that the monk 20 Str 30 with amulet +5 is doing 2d10+15 x7 (average 182), even better than the monk-with-siangham (2d10 vs. 1d6).
Even if you compare the maxed-out TWF fighter20 Str 30 using two +5 short swords (TWF, ITWF, GTWF for +18/+13/+8/+3/+18/+13/+8), he's doing the same damage as the +5 siangham monk (1d6+15 x7) and less damage than the unarmed monk Str 30 with amulet (2d10+15 x7).
1: Allow a monk to replace monk weapon's base damage with his unarmed damage.
The monk's weapon damage is already better than the fighter's weapon damage.
2: Allow a monk to enhance his body at the same price a fighter enhances his greatsword.
The proper cost comparison is to the TWF fighter, not the 2H fighter, because the flurrying monk's attacks are parallel to the TWG fighter's attack style.
(Yes, all of my "averages" ignore the reduced chance to hit from the iteratives. I don't feel like building a spreadsheet right now, but the comparison with that factored in should still work.)
I could have sworn that you couldn't have flaming, frost, and shocking active at the same time on a weapon. I mean you could enchant a weapon to have all those but you couldn't benefit from all three at once.
There is nothing in the rules that says this is the case.
|
assuming Sean's numbers are correct (I hate maths so I assume they must be) is there an alternative option (which still costs the same) that monks could get so that the amulet does not take up that slot allowing monks to use the amulet of natural armour so for instance it could become a gauntlet of mighty fists - sounds better to me since it is located where it states ie. gauntlet = hands/fists
I would also like to see the amulet or whatever a new item may become or both lose the +5 maximum cap it seems like its handicapping a class which does not need it
Here's where I throw up my hands and say, "whatever, dude." I'm done talking to you about this because you're getting hostile.
I could have sworn that you couldn't have flaming, frost, and shocking active at the same time on a weapon. I mean you could enchant a weapon to have all those but you couldn't benefit from all three at once.The rule is that you simply cannot exceed a +10 total bonus or it becomes an epic weapon.
Here's where I throw up my hands and say, "whatever, dude." I'm done talking to you about this because you're getting hostile.There's no hostility here. The whole point of the thread, from post one, is "Why are monks forced to use inferior weapons or pay more than everyone, in order to get level-appropriate magic weapons?"
There's no justification for the inferior weapons, because other classes get +hit/+damage as class abilities and can take the TWF feats (often as bonus feats) to get just as many attacks as a monk, while using superior weapons.
There's no justification for the more-expensive unarmed attack enhancements, because a monk's fist isn't better than a light martial weapon until level 8, and is only 6.5 points ahead of a light martial weapon at 20, while other classes get +4hit/+4dam, +4hit/+4dam (plus WS/GWF/GWS), smite, favored enemy, etc. on top of shortswords or kukris.
This imbalance is fundamental and it begs a lot of other questions, but let's focus on the simple ones. Who made these decisions and why? What math was involved? Did they realize something I haven't?
Why can't monks flurry with light martial weapons?
Why do monks pay more for weapon enhancements on unarmed attacks if unarmed attacks do less damage per round than other classes TWFing?
Honestly Sean, I think the Man of Black has a point. However, Sean has a point too. I DM a monk that has somehow survived to 27th level over the past 15 years and to Sean's point the guy has lots of attacks and does lots of damage. But to Man of Black's point, as a DM, I allowed the monk to apply damage types (fire, acid, and enhancement bonuses) directly to his gloves (not a spiked guantlet/attacking tool) to the point where it did not take away his monk abilities...this is problematic I know, and we had long discussions on it...also - they can be dispelled or disjoined...but at the heart of this I do think there is an issue with the monk and magic enhancement.
(snip)This imbalance is fundamental and it begs a lot of other questions, but let's focus on the simple ones. Who made these decisions and why? What math was involved? Did they realize something I haven't?
Why can't monks flurry with light martial weapons?
Why do monks pay more for weapon enhancements on unarmed attacks if unarmed attacks do less damage per round than other classes TWFing?
I must presume the first point is pure thematics, not mechanics. Of course, why this comes about tends to have more to do with Monks being so thematically different to the other melee classes than anything else, but we'll see.
As for the second... I can see why at first glance an amulet should cost twice as much "So it scales with the price a TWF combatant pays for two weapons" - that a Monks damage falls behind because their damage mechanic is potentially a tad wonky is perhaps a quirk of having one person write the classes, and another the magic items?
(PS: Are you the Mibsy I might happen to know from a certain Mythical IRC channel? I'm just curious since I saw your name, and if these forums have a PM button I've missed it. :) )