| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just want to make sure I have this right. The monk only uses their Monk level for their attack bonus when using Flurry of Blow which is a full round action. So if the monk uses a standard action to make an unarmed attack they use the Monk BAB of 3/4s. Is this right?
I was thinking of taking scorpion style but it looks like I'd be better off going with Combat Expertise and Dodge then getting Improved Trip as trip can be used with the flurry of blows at the high attack rate.
|
Just want to make sure I have this right. The monk only uses their Monk level for their attack bonus when using Flurry of Blow which is a full round action. So if the monk uses a standard action to make an unarmed attack they use the Monk BAB of 3/4s. Is this right?
I was thinking of taking scorpion style but it looks like I'd be better off going with Combat Expertise and Dodge then getting Improved Trip as trip can be used with the flurry of blows at the high attack rate.
you are correct
check out treantmonks guide to monks, its around here some where
Furthermore you use your level as BAB for Comat Maneuvers, even if you don't use Flurry.
All true.
Oddly enough, when monks are super-fast, they hit more accurately. However, if they choose not to be super-fast, they also forget how to be accurate.
It's an artifact of the gimped 3.5 monk class, with an awkward attempt to make them more viable in Pathfinder, but I think the devs were just a bit too timid on this one - they probably should have just gone all the way.
My table has already kicked around just giving them full-BAB all the time as a houserule. I mean, they can have full-BAB with their best, most deadly combat stuff (flurry and CMB), so why should they be penalized with a lesser BAB when they are also penalized by making a weaker attack (weaker because they are not flurrying or using CMBs, so they only get one ordinary attack which is ALSO penalized on the BAB).
Nobody is playing a monk, though, so we haven't really worried about houseruling this, and since we only have 3 houserules so far (because we're trying not to houserule anything if we don't have to), we left this bit of wonkiness alone.
|
|
All true.
Oddly enough, when monks are super-fast, they hit more accurately. However, if they choose not to be super-fast, they also forget how to be accurate.
It's an artifact of the gimped 3.5 monk class, with an awkward attempt to make them more viable in Pathfinder, but I think the devs were just a bit too timid on this one - they probably should have just gone all the way.
A Level 1 Monk with a +2 Str.
Flurry of Blows +1/+1
Unarmed attack +2
Slower seems more accurate to me.
The point with Monk level allows for multiclassing better. If they start being a class with a higher BAB then their non-Flurry of Blows attacks still rise without buffing the Flurry of Blows, which would be broken.
A Level 1 Monk with a +2 Str.
Flurry of Blows +1/+1
Unarmed attack +2
Slower seems more accurate to me.
The problem does not come at level 1. Most problems don't.
The point with Monk level allows for multiclassing better. If they start being a class with a higher BAB then their non-Flurry of Blows attacks still rise without buffing the Flurry of Blows, which would be broke
In what universe?
Or are you suggesting full BAB would discourage using FoB? Which is simply not the case. I have a monk player and she always chooses to use FoB and a point of ki for yet another attack even though we made the monk Full BAB.
I guess their normal BAB is 3/4 to discourage them from using non-monk weapons. As for normal unarmed attacks, I guess it's because of... ki?
Or maybe the Flurry of Blows gets full BAB because of the rapid-fire effect or because the enemy gets confused...
|
|
A Level 1 Monk with a +2 Str.
Flurry of Blows +1/+1
Unarmed attack +2
Slower seems more accurate to me.
The problem does not come at level 1. Most problems don't.
A level 10 Monk with +2 Str.
Flurry of Blows +10/+10/+5/+5Unarmed attack +9/+4
Oh wait...looks like it fixed itself...
And I mean't, maybe you want to use 3 Levels of Monk for the mobility and high saving throws, toss in some wisedom based spell caster as a main class and you have an interesting character.
Allowing that caster-monk, say level 8, to use full BAB for FoB is retarded. Quicken Shocking Grasp + FoB as an example.
A level 10 Monk with +2 Str.
Flurry of Blows +10/+10/+5/+5Unarmed attack +9/+4
Oh wait...looks like it fixed itself...
What in the world are you talking about? The problem you originally posted about was the fact that a monk using a slower standard attack was less accurate than when using a FLURRY.
And I mean't, maybe you want to use 3 Levels of Monk for the mobility and high saving throws, toss in some wisedom based spell caster as a main class and you have an interesting character.
Yes an interesting character. But not a broken one.
Allowing that caster-monk, say level 8, to use full BAB for FoB is retarded. Quicken Shocking Grasp + FoB as an example.
All right I think I finally understand what the hell you were talking about and you completely misunderstood.
No one is saying Flurry of Blows should progress at Full BAB as a class feature of the monk. FoB remains tied to class level. We're just talking about standard attacks.
I guess their normal BAB is 3/4 to discourage them from using non-monk weapons.
The non-proficiency penalty isn't enough? ;-)
I think the easiest way to fix this is to simply introduce a feat:
(General)
Prerequisite: Flurry of Blows class ability
Benefit: The monk uses her class level as BAB for all attacks
Special: This feat is added to the list of monk bonus feats at level 1
This way the choice to have full BAB is just one feat away.
I think the easiest way to fix this is to simply introduce a feat:
(General)
Prerequisite: Flurry of Blows class ability
Benefit: The monk uses her class level as BAB for all attacks
Special: This feat is added to the list of monk bonus feats at level 1This way the choice to have full BAB is just one feat away.
Technically the "easiest" is to just give them full BAB. Making up a new monk bonus feat is fractionally more work.
I think the easiest way to fix this is to simply introduce a feat....
It's well past the time for an end to the trend of introducing feats to "fix" character classes. Here's my suggestion, glommed from Bad Axe Games's excellent Trailblazer:
Centered Bonus: A monk is not centered when wearing armor, using a shield, carrying a medium or heavy load, or not using one of these weapons: club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shuriken, siangham, sling, and spear (including shortspear and long spear).
A monk who is not centered loses many of her class abilities, including her centered bonus, her reaction bonus*, her fast movement, and her flurry of blows abilities. While she is centered, the monk applies the listed centered bonus to attack rolls (including combat maneuvers).
Centered Bonuses by Monk Level
Levels 1-4: +1
Levels 5-8: +2
Levels 9-12: +3
Levels 13-16: +4
Levels 17-20: +5
Add Centered Bonus to the monk's class features. Remove maneuver training. Problem solved.
* This is Trailblazer-speak for the monk's Wisdom bonus to AC and monk AC bonus.
I don't think I'd want to see the Monk with Full BAB. But using their monk level for BAB on all unarmed attacks or with monk weapons seems reasonable to me.
I guess what kind of got me was the bonus feats. Some work with flurry of blows and those are great but other are standard actions and don't work with flurry of blows so you take heavy hit in your chance to hit as you go up in level.
I've seen this in action. For example I saw monk with spring attack at 17th level. It was useless. It was good earlier on, around 10th level when the monsters ACs weren't as bad and the difference between BAB on the foB wasn't as great. By 17th level the spring attack feat became a really bad idea. You have +15 with the first blows FOB but you +12 if you do single unarmed strike in spring attack. In our game the monk was having a hard enough time trying to hit with the +15 so going with +12. That +3 actually made a big difference, that and fact that with Ki they can make 3 attacks at +15. Going down to 1 attack at +12 was hard to do.
Side by side with the fighter the Monk was no where near as effective and would be even less effective if they went with say Gorgon Strike and Medusa's Wrath which seems really cool but totally ineffective at higher level.
I don't think I'd want to see the Monk with Full BAB. But using their monk level for BAB on all unarmed attacks or with monk weapons seems reasonable to me.
Me too. It doesn't bump the monk's iterative attacks, but it does bump up their damage. This won't make the monk as combat-heavy as a fighter, but the monk isn't supposed to be that way.
In my PF campaign, I also let rogue's use their rogue level as attack bonus in place of BAB when making sneak attacks. This gives rogues a nice little boost in combat without increasing their iteratives.
Also, keep in mind that PF design principles link BAB to HD. Bump monks up to full BAB, and they should get bumped up to d10 HD as well. That just seems like too much to me.
Sinse they effectively get Full BAB with everything else. Whats the point in them having 3/4 BAB bonus. Its just silly.
They don't get full base attack bonus to CMD, and that's important. They are already quite high on that.
Also, Medusa's Wrath is quite effective once the monk is able to use it following a successful stunning fist (stagger) effect.
|
My table has already kicked around just giving them full-BAB all the time as a houserule. I mean, they can have full-BAB with their best, most deadly combat stuff (flurry and CMB), so why should they be penalized with a lesser BAB when they are also penalized by making a weaker attack (weaker because they are not flurrying or using CMBs, so they only get one ordinary attack which is ALSO penalized on the BAB).
You sir, are a wise tarrasque. I'm avoiding getting into this argument again. Nothing good will come of it.
Just an advice about giving Monks full BAB when using the standard action attack.
With an unarmed weapon that deals as much as 2d8 at high levels (2d10 at level 20, or using the Monk Vestment, or whatever that magic object is named), giving them full BAB would make them to use the Vital Strike feats better than anyone else. Not that it is going to make the core rulebook explode, but that's what would happen. If you also allow the use of Vital Strike and Spring attack at the same time the outcome can be dangerous (a friend has been experimenting with Monks as PCs and NPCs in our campaign, plus weird interpretations of the rules, so I have that unpleasant experience with modified Monks)
IMO a feat that gives them that advantage they currently haven't is a good and fair idea, specially if that's a Monk's bonus feat.
Sinse they effectively get Full BAB with everything else. Whats the point in them having 3/4 BAB bonus. Its just silly.They don't get full base attack bonus to CMD, and that's important. They are already quite high on that.
Also, Medusa's Wrath is quite effective once the monk is able to use it following a successful stunning fist (stagger) effect.
Actually they get better than full BAB to their CMD, they get it from another source, their monk bonus to armor applies to CMD. So with defensive training your monk is looking at full HD + str + dex + wisdom + 0-5 from class levels + deflection as a CMD which is pretty nice.
As to medusa's wrath I believe the blade binder feat and a temple sword to make opponents flat footed may be a better option for reliably getting to use medusa's wrath, but the stunning fist is definately nice when it works.
Just an advice about giving Monks full BAB when using the standard action attack.
With an unarmed weapon that deals as much as 2d8 at high levels (2d10 at level 20, or using the Monk Vestment, or whatever that magic object is named), giving them full BAB would make them to use the Vital Strike feats better than anyone else. Not that it is going to make the core rulebook explode, but that's what would happen. If you also allow the use of Vital Strike and Spring attack at the same time the outcome can be dangerous (a friend has been experimenting with Monks as PCs and NPCs in our campaign, plus weird interpretations of the rules, so I have that unpleasant experience with modified Monks)IMO a feat that gives them that advantage they currently haven't is a good and fair idea, specially if that's a Monk's bonus feat.
First off I have no idea why doing 2d8 at high levels matter. After all the suffering at lower ones where fighters probably had a 2d6 greatsword the entire time.
I don't like that there are feats that HAVE to be taken to be effective. Every monk will take this feat. Before you ask yes things like power attack/deadly aim bother me too. I think those should just be options automatically gained at the appropriate BAB but that's a different discussion.
That sounds great to me. I think monks should be the best at using spring attack and vital strike. The monk the best at something? Finally! ;-) J/K I know they're the best grapplers but that's so situational. Also how could vital strike and spring attack not be used together? Vital strike is a standard action and spring attack affects move actions. How is this outcome "dangerous"? Because FoB and Full Attack actions are still going to dramatically outdamage this method. Because the monk will be able to run circles around some opponents?
Monks are given fantastic land speed and then punished for trying to make use of it. Does any other class suffer in this way? All I can think of is bard at low levels having to use a standard action to use Inspire Courage but that's fixed at mid level where it only gets worse for the monk. In my mind Monks should be better skirmishers than they are currently where they are forced to stand in place and flurry repeatedly to be effective.
First off I have no idea why doing 2d8 at high levels matter. After all the suffering at lower ones where fighters probably had a 2d6 greatsword the entire time.
Characters should be balanced every level, "lower level suffering" isn't doesn't imply high level overpowering in this game. It just implies that the class is poorly designed and needs some love. Furthermore, a wise character will wait till high level to get feats that are good at those levels, as usual.
Also how could vital strike and spring attack not be used together? Vital strike is a standard action and spring attack affects move actions.
Spring attacks allows you to make an attack, not an standard attack action. Many times discussed and clarified by designers. However as said a generous DM would allow to use both feats together (also designers words).
How is this outcome "dangerous"? Because FoB and Full Attack actions are still going to dramatically outdamage this method. Because the monk will be able to run circles around some opponents?
It doesn't matter if FoB outdamaged this method, it outdamages most oponents. Spring attack + Vital Strike allows you to make a powerfull blow against someone, and the foe can then move and make a single attack that will be worse of that of the Monk even if that foe has Vital Strike (furthermore, the Monk has the advantage of striking first), if the foe didn't take Vital Strike feats or something useful for that situation then he is as good as dead. Now take in account the speed of the monk and other abilites as dimension door, which allow him to run circles around most opponents at high levels.
As I said I have seen how it works, and even with low and mid level Monks it is dangerous, to say the least.It also gives the Monks an ability they never had. When a Monk has to do a single attack he usually tries a Combat Maneuver, that's ok, but is almost useless against some enemies that have insane CMDs. Dealing damage isn't a good option either, as they doesn't have a high attack. Now you want to get rid of that disadvantage, that's power creep afaik. It may be ok if you think that monks are underpowered, but if the problem is just that the current rules for Monk BAB are far too weird you would need a solution a bit more elaborated than just giving the full BAB to monks for free, that's why a feat/trait/many feats/whatever looks nice to me.
Monks are given fantastic land speed and then punished for trying to make use of it. Does any other class suffer in this way? All I can think of is bard at low levels having...
What I said about power creep vs improving the class design.
Btw, barbarians get an ability that impoves their hitpoints... but they can't make good use of it at mid and high levels because if they drop to -1 hp they die instantly. And I guess we can find other class features that come with serious drawbacks and limitations.Btw Monks are prolly the best in defenses against magic: one of the higher SRs of the game plus the best Saving Throws of the game, and Evasion.
Characters should be balanced every level, "lower level suffering" isn't doesn't imply high level overpowering in this game. It just implies that the class is poorly designed and needs some love. Furthermore, a wise character will wait till high level to get feats that are good at those levels, as usual.
I agree they should be but I think we all know they aren't. How many campaigns make it to those high levels anyways? Most play is going to low to mid. I don't think the monk is overpowered because eventually his
attacks are slightly stronger than everyone else. He still has a myriad of weaknesses but at least he does get better at striking.
Spring attacks allows you to make an attack, not an standard attack action. Many times discussed and clarified by designers. However as said a generous DM would allow to use both feats together (also designers words).
I had no idea there was a difference between an attack and using a standard action to make an attack. I thought attacks required standard actions or full round actions. So people believed Spring Attack gave you some sort of magical attack that wasn't a standard action? That'd be pretty awesome. So I can still take a standard action like drinking a potion???? That's non-sensical. A single attack is an attack which is a standard action.
It doesn't matter if FoB outdamaged this method, it outdamages most oponents.
It does matter because the monks job is still going to be that of a striker and FoB will remain the superior option. This would only give monks another viable option if the circumstances were right. Options are good.
Spring attack + Vital Strike allows you to make a powerfull blow against someone, and the foe can then move and make a single attack that will be worse of that of the Monk even if that foe has Vital Strike
I guess if all your opponents are fodder that don't try to lock down the battlefield just like PCs do or that don't use magic and ranged attacks in conjunction with melee. I don't consider a class overpowered because it can own in specialized situations.
You seem really hung up on the vital strike spring attack combo. I hear there is apparently some confusion on whether or not you can combine the two. Maybe just don't be a generous DM and say they can't be used together. Solve the problem?
(furthermore, the Monk has the advantage of striking first), if the foe didn't take Vital Strike feats or something useful for that situation then he is as good as dead.
How is this different from ANYTHING that leads to a dead enemy? Oh man that guy was totally not prepared for that spell and now he's dead. So broken!
Also why is the monk going first a given?
Now take in account the speed of the monk and other abilites as dimension door, which allow him to run circles around most opponents at high levels.
MOST opponents? What are you fighting at high levels that isn't doing the same or better?
Again the monk running circles around people is not OP. That's what he should be doing with level based bonuses to land speed and jump and dimension door. The monk is OP because he's got one truly great class ability (Dimension Door)?
As I said I have seen how it works, and even with low and mid level Monks it is dangerous, to say the least.
And some of us believe monks should be dangerous because as it stands they pale in comparison to every other melee class. You keep saying "dangerous" but that is incredibly vague and subjective. You saw the monk completely overpower monsters beyond appropriate CR with regularity? You saw him outperform every other character in damage output? What does dangerous mean?
It also gives the Monks an ability they never had. When a Monk has to do a single attack he usually tries a Combat Maneuver, that's ok, but is almost useless against some enemies that have insane CMDs. Dealing...
Yeah which has always been great fun for monk players. Get yourself into position for FoB or be useless except for that once in awhile you manage to grapple a squishier enemy. Usually a spellcaster. Maybe a rogue.
Dealing damage isn't a good option either, as they doesn't have a high attack. Now you want to get rid of that disadvantage, that's power creep afaik. It may be ok if you think that monks are underpowered, but if the problem is just that the current rules for Monk BAB are far too weird you would need a solution a bit more elaborated than just giving the full BAB to monks for free, that's why a feat/trait/many feats/whatever looks nice to me.
Monks are definitely underpowered. Yes the monk rules for BAB are weird. I would personally say ridiculous. It's solved quite easily by just giving them full BAB and something to replace combat maneuvers. A simple solution to replace something convoluted. Making the monk take a feat is not a solution to anything.
What I said about power creep vs improving the class design.
I don't see the power creep. Monks will still FoB whenever possible and IF they take Spring Attack and Vital Strike they may also skirmish effectively. The Horror?
Btw, barbarians get an ability that impoves their hitpoints... but they can't make good use of it at mid and high levels because if they drop to -1 hp they die instantly.
Yeah barbarians have some stupid issues too. We should try to fix them not throw out hands up in the air.
And I guess we can find other class features that come with serious drawbacks and limitations.
Lets find flaws instead. Drawbacks and limitations are fine. Limitations are things like uses per day or round, prepared spells vs. spontaneous etc. Drawbacks are abilities you only want to use in specific situations.
What we should find are flaws in classes and try to fix those flaws.Btw Monks are prolly the best in defenses against magic: one of the higher SRs of the game plus the best Saving Throws of the game, and Evasion.
Yeah they're generally better at taking on mages than other melee classes. Doesn't mean they aren't still wonky as hell. And they do not own against mages. Most dedicated spellcasters will still get through that SR. Evasion? A blaster wizard was never a real threat to begin with but it's nice. Helps him move around the battlefield...
Saving Throws are awesome. Not sure I see the point. The class being good at something doesn't mean it's perfectly balanced.
I "fluff" the better accuracy in flurry in this way: the number of attacks in a flurry are actually far more than the ones rolled, and so many that are very likely to land, but less effective.
To represent this, the monk has full BAB in flurry (as rules state). In game terms this rain of blows is represented by such full BAB flurry.
Easy :)
|
I only play in PFS games, so Athyc is limited to 12th level. We'll see what happens. This character has played in only one module, but he was reasonably effective in combat. His good saving throws helped him too.
I can sort of justify the odd fact that his FoB bonus is first lower and then higher than his BAB by agreeing that at enemies do not expect so many attacks, so he is more likely to hit. At lower levels the monk's relative inexperience counters the element of surprise.
(I just had a "Get Smart" flashback...)
|
I think the main reason the 3/4 BAB progression is a drawback is when it comes to prerequisites for feats. I would really love to be able to qualify for things like Greater Grapple a few levels earlier.
I have a monk and the group constantly comments on how high his damage output seems. I don't see that a problem. Yes monks are squishy, but a little support from a friendly wizard and it solves most problems.
|
|
Monks have always been a bit on the weak side in combat. I still have my "Advanced Dungeons and Dragons" books from the early 1980s. The monk was described as "the most difficult to qualify for, and perhaps the most deadly". But the monk had AC 10 (back then, lower AC was better, but 10 was the worst AC) and no DEX bonus to AC. The monk got no STR bonus to hit or damage either. He also had d4 hit dice (2 at first level, but still!). The monk also had to defeat other monks in single combat to progress beyond 7th level! If a monk could survive to high level, he could inflict serious damage, but his likelihood of reaching second level was pretty thin.
Compared to the old days, the modern monk is a regular powerhouse!
I "fluff" the better accuracy in flurry in this way: the number of attacks in a flurry are actually far more than the ones rolled, and so many that are very likely to land, but less effective.
To represent this, the monk has full BAB in flurry (as rules state). In game terms this rain of blows is represented by such full BAB flurry.
Easy :)
That's one of my theories, too. The other one can be summed up in one word:
Bullet Time! (Or Wuxia if you want)
(Okay, those were two...)