does anyone see any power problems with the 3.5 Monkey Grip feat? is it too powerful or too weak? do you have any suggestions to modify it for pathfinder?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
i just really like the idea of using a weapon that is bigger than i can usually use
i replied, but the boards are a piece of crap.
long short is monkey grip is either crap, or stupid imho. mainly because power attack is better attack/damage wise. its not horribly unbalanced tho
if you wanna use it in pf, reduce the -2 to -1. and remember that they dont get more reach than normal
{emphasis mine}
Now that right THERE may well be the key to making it worth a damn in PF. Keep the -2 to hit, but pick up the higher damage die AND add reach (with all it entails - ie: no good for YOU if someone is within that reach unless you've got feats in place to deal w/close combat reach weapons).
Hell, you *could* drop the -2 to a -1, but I like the idea of wrapping reach into this as a benefit. It makes sense, and gives a new benefit that fits w/PF design, I think, in general.
Just a thought ...
i just really like the idea of using a weapon that is bigger than i can usually usethat can screw you depending on the dm. Ever tried swinging a 5 ft or larger sword in a 5ft wide, 7 ft tall hall way? not very practical.
Finally someone who thinks as I do! :-D
So many folks are just like "the rules don't say you can't, so screw physics".
Ever played Silent Hill 2? Remember Pyramid Head dragging that huge blade behind him? That's what I imagine wielding a Large sized sword would be like.
i replied, but the boards are a piece of crap.
long short is monkey grip is either crap, or stupid imho. mainly because power attack is better attack/damage wise. its not horribly unbalanced tho
if you wanna use it in pf, reduce the -2 to -1. and remember that they dont get more reach than normal
{emphasis mine}
Now that right THERE may well be the key to making it worth a damn in PF. Keep the -2 to hit, but pick up the higher damage die AND add reach (with all it entails - ie: no good for YOU if someone is within that reach unless you've got feats in place to deal w/close combat reach weapons).
Hell, you *could* drop the -2 to a -1, but I like the idea of wrapping reach into this as a benefit. It makes sense, and gives a new benefit that fits w/PF design, I think, in general.
Just a thought ...
As a matter of fact, there is already Lunge to boost reach at the expense of 2 AC.
I always associated MonkeyGrip to a weird manga trend involving many troubles (Like maneuvering such a weapon in enclosed spaces, especially dungeons, or next to your party members without hindering anything. Quite hard to imagine.
i replied, but the boards are a piece of crap.
long short is monkey grip is either crap, or stupid imho. mainly because power attack is better attack/damage wise. its not horribly unbalanced tho
if you wanna use it in pf, reduce the -2 to -1. and remember that they dont get more reach than normal
{emphasis mine}
Now that right THERE may well be the key to making it worth a damn in PF. Keep the -2 to hit, but pick up the higher damage die AND add reach (with all it entails - ie: no good for YOU if someone is within that reach unless you've got feats in place to deal w/close combat reach weapons).
Hell, you *could* drop the -2 to a -1, but I like the idea of wrapping reach into this as a benefit. It makes sense, and gives a new benefit that fits w/PF design, I think, in general.
Just a thought ...
As a matter of fact, there is already Lunge to boost reach at the expense of 2 AC.
I always associated MonkeyGrip to a weird manga trend involving many troubles (Like maneuvering such a weapon in enclosed spaces, especially dungeons, or next to your party members without hindering anything. Quite hard to imagine.
And yet D&D has fullblades and doubleblades and doubleaxes and great flails ;p
|
While I can't recommend it for general builds, I have a Barbarian that focuses on taking a Move then Standard Attacking, instead of the Full-Attack-focused builds that normally dominate melee combat. Central to my build is the Vital Strike chain and Monkey Grip.
The damage increase from Monkey Grip alone isn't even worth a feat. Monkey Grip + Vital Strike chain, though? Awesomeness :D
I'ld love to see someone actually using in close combat a double flail.
Not to mention making attack of opportunity with it.
Opponent "hey you are fighting with me"
PC "screw you,3 allies of yours just crossed my threatened area, wait there some sec"
Opponent "ok just be quick with those AoO"
Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
+1
Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
monkey grip doesnt let you use a bigger weapon in your off hand
and yes, its a weaboo, final whaaaaantasy inspired feat.
kill it with fire
|
|
Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
So are you okay with Power Attack doing more than that in one swing? Or a Fireball doing that against all creatures in area?
40 damage is not very high.
Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
Oh it's dead in any game I run, dead and never been
Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
So are you okay with Power Attack doing more than that in one swing? Or a Fireball doing that against all creatures in area?
40 damage is not very high.
But with Pathfinder rules, you can get 6 attacks dual-wielding, 4 main hand and 3 off hand. I'll let you do the math. And remember, this is before power attacks or any other bonuses.
|
|
But with Pathfinder rules, you can get 6 attacks dual-wielding, 4 main hand and 3 off hand. I'll let you do the math. And remember, this is before power attacks or any other bonuses.Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
So are you okay with Power Attack doing more than that in one swing? Or a Fireball doing that against all creatures in area?
40 damage is not very high.
thats 7, not 6. also i dont get how the axes are critting on 17, unless you houseruled keen and imp crit stacking
thats 7, not 6. also i dont get how the axes are critting on 17, unless you houseruled keen and imp crit stackingBut with Pathfinder rules, you can get 6 attacks dual-wielding, 4 main hand and 3 off hand. I'll let you do the math. And remember, this is before power attacks or any other bonuses.Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
So are you okay with Power Attack doing more than that in one swing? Or a Fireball doing that against all creatures in area?
40 damage is not very high.
LOL. Guess that's why he needs to do the math himself. And yes, we do household rules a fair number of things I've not been able to get changed yet.
Lunge eh? Well ... I say let them *both* grant reach. Monkeygrip = +5' (to 10' most likely), and Lunge another bit of melee range usable.
Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
So are you okay with Power Attack doing more than that in one swing? Or a Fireball doing that against all creatures in area?
40 damage is not very high.
That depends entirely on the level of the character in question.
|
|
That depends entirely on the level of the character in question.
40 damage is not very high.
And the level of the skill of the playgroup and the player in particular.
I know I have 2 players in my group that I am sure could handle +3 EL every time while I have 3 who are about average to below average so that also is part of things.
|
|
That depends entirely on the level of the character in question.Had a player once who took monkey grip and two weapon fighting. He played a fighter, and took all sorts of improved crit feats, spells, etc. Ever seen someone fight while dual-wielding greataxes with a 17-20 crit range? It is ridiculous. He would do upwards of 40 damage with a single swing. I for one am against monkey grip in general, but that case of breaking the game just cemented it for me.Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
So are you okay with Power Attack doing more than that in one swing? Or a Fireball doing that against all creatures in area?
40 damage is not very high.
Improved Critical is level 8 requirement, so at least level 8. And then if they are adding houserules and such, who knows that's actually going on.
But 40 isn't a lot. Although he says it's before Power Attack and whatever else it was. I'm sure we'll won't get a full build and see how "broken" it was. But since it relied on Monkey Grip, I tend to think it's just the players not used to seeing the damage.
Monkey grip is more of a flavor feat to me, it gives you -2 attack for +2 or 3 average damage, which is not that great. It is not broken in any way at all, I don't see why people who play a fantasy game have such a big problem with joe fighter swinging a bigger sword.
|
|
Monkey grip is more of a flavor feat to me, it gives you -2 attack for +2 or 3 average damage, which is not that great. It is not broken in any way at all, I don't see why people who play a fantasy game have such a big problem with joe fighter swinging a bigger sword.
Bingo, though I do wish it was done more elegantly, like maybe under the Power Attack framework of -1/+2 or something similar. Increased die looks nice, but from a practical standpoint it doesn't do much.
Lots of extra damage type attacks probably should be allowed. Personally I'm really annoyed that Two-Weapon Rend is pretty much total crap. Paizo's lack of attention to wording really bugs me sometimes. Though in their defense, it didn't seem to be a good feat back in 3.5 either (I could be wrong).
Monkey grip is more of a flavor feat to me, it gives you -2 attack for +2 or 3 average damage, which is not that great. It is not broken in any way at all, I don't see why people who play a fantasy game have such a big problem with joe fighter swinging a bigger sword.
Just because it's a fantasy game doesn't mean basic physics should be ignored. I know, I know... the rules don't say you can't swing a 15 foot long sword, right? ;-)
Monkey grip is more of a flavor feat to me, it gives you -2 attack for +2 or 3 average damage, which is not that great. It is not broken in any way at all, I don't see why people who play a fantasy game have such a big problem with joe fighter swinging a bigger sword.Just because it's a fantasy game doesn't mean basic physics should be ignored. I know, I know... the rules don't say you can't swing a 15 foot long sword, right? ;-)
thats why you get a -2, even with special training to use a really big sword its still hard to do...i don't care so much about the reality aspect, for me its more about denying someone a nice flavor feat over semantics
I'm talking about swinging a 15 foot sword in a ten foot corridor, not just being able to wield the weapon. There are no rules that say you can't do it, so many folks are of the opinion that DMs should just "let it go" in the name of fantasy. I disagree, personally. Basic things that require a ridiculous amount of suspension of disbelief should not be ignored imo.
I see your point, but is a large creature using a sword in a ten foot hallway impossible then?
and I do think it would be closer to an 8 foot sword, definetly not 15 feet though
|
Lunge eh? Well ... I say let them *both* grant reach. Monkeygrip = +5' (to 10' most likely), and Lunge another bit of melee range usable.
I'd like to see you say that after you try this in play. I did in one 3.5 campaign; it was the last time I ever allowed Monkey Grip. The player ended up getting a Large Spiked Chain (it was a reach weapon in 3.5), then he got the Wizard to enlarge him. Combined with Combat Reflexes, no one could even get close to him. It was ridiculously broken.
I'd like to see you say that after you try this in play. I did in one 3.5 campaign; it was the last time I ever allowed Monkey Grip. The player ended up getting a Large Spiked Chain (it was a reach weapon in 3.5), then he got the Wizard to enlarge him. Combined with Combat Reflexes, no one could even get close to him. It was ridiculously broken.Lunge eh? Well ... I say let them *both* grant reach. Monkeygrip = +5' (to 10' most likely), and Lunge another bit of melee range usable.
Did he use trips and/or weapon finesse?
I for one hope Paizo will in fact introduce a Monkey Grip like feat. My paladin is starting to miss his red haired female human chain mail bikini wearing large greatsword wielding berserker cohort. :(
I see your point, but is a large creature using a sword in a ten foot hallway impossible then?I would as a DM determine how long the sword is and then determine how far from the center of the corridor it is and if the sword is close to or longer than that, wielding the sword effectively becomes difficult to impossible.
and I do think it would be closer to an 8 foot sword, definetly not 15 feet thoughWell I was talking about Huge swords... but yeah, 8 feet is ridiculously big for a medium creature to carry. I would imagine he'd get stuck in doorways a lot. *laughs*
maybe a scabbard at the waist...it extends backwards pretty far and would have to open through a side, as drawing it out normally would be nigh impossible
Wait, wait, wait.
You're "ok" with guys that can tear open the fabric of the universe at the drop of a hat, turn UP into DOWN by commanding gravity to do what THEY want to do, BUT ... you'll stop to argue the finer points of a guy in a hallway swinging a sword!?!?!?!
On that chain-guy, were all of those AoO's being used for trips? If so, I can see that working ... 1 time. After that, whatever got tripped will stand, take another AoO, but then can't be re-tripped from that status (official rules back this apparently), so ... *why* couldn't they get back up and continue to get at his butt?
I think the final word on this should simply be, whether or not Paizo creates a Pathfinder Monkey Grip feat, those of us that don't like will simply not use/not allow it to be used. Those who are in this solely for gits and shiggles will use it as they please.
|
|
Wait, wait, wait.
You're "ok" with guys that can tear open the fabric of the universe at the drop of a hat, turn UP into DOWN by commanding gravity to do what THEY want to do, BUT ... you'll stop to argue the finer points of a guy in a hallway swinging a sword!?!?!?!
On that chain-guy, were all of those AoO's being used for trips? If so, I can see that working ... 1 time. After that, whatever got tripped will stand, take another AoO, but then can't be re-tripped from that status (official rules back this apparently), so ... *why* couldn't they get back up and continue to get at his butt?
That's why I stopped caring about reality for fighting classes. It's always been a problem when people let wizards run amok, but fighters have to use real world physics and logic to do what they do. Like a 20 BAB attacking 4 times in 6 seconds is too unrealistic, or 7 times if he has the full Two-Weapon Fighting tree.
At that level, even a figher is superhuman. Let him do superhuman things. If he is wielding 2 oversized flails and wreaking havoc, GREAT. That's what a level 20 fighter is suppose to do. And then he meets a wizard, and the wizard hits with a Trap the Soul, and that's that. Or a cleric with 3.0 Harm :)
Does anyone else just wish that monkeygrip would just die already?
NO
P.S.
Why do you hate it so much???
Instead of having it work on large weapons, why not have it just work to let two handed weapons be one handed weapons? They already have a feat like that in Dwarves of Golarion, so I don't think it will be that game breaking. Especially with people already using two handed swords and whatnot.
Wait, wait, wait.
You're "ok" with guys that can tear open the fabric of the universe at the drop of a hat, turn UP into DOWN by commanding gravity to do what THEY want to do, BUT ... you'll stop to argue the finer points of a guy in a hallway swinging a sword!?!?!?!
Yep. Does the Fighter or any other class have the "ignore basic facts" class feature? I think not. Spells don't count. If a Fighter gets magic items, he too can have magical effects that help him do things he normally couldn't... but no one by their very nature is allowed to just ignore the fact that if you have a ten foot object strapped to your back you're going to get stuck in a doorway. You want to make some magic item to help alleviate that problem, great. But letting a character ignore physics without magic takes away from the game imo.
That's why I stopped caring about reality for fighting classes. It's always been a problem when people let wizards run amok, but fighters have to use real world physics and logic to do what they do. Like a 20 BAB attacking 4 times in 6 seconds is too unrealistic, or 7 times if he has the full Two-Weapon Fighting tree.At that level, even a figher is superhuman. Let him do superhuman things. If he is wielding 2 oversized flails and wreaking havoc, GREAT. That's what a level 20 fighter is suppose to do. And then he meets a wizard, and the wizard hits with a Trap the Soul, and that's that. Or a cleric with 3.0 Harm :)
There's not caring about reality and there's taking suspension of disbelief to ridiculously inane heights. I cannot and will not just ignore that a character with a gigantic sword is going to have issues moving through doorways and fighting in narrow corridors, I'm sorry.
(I can see the responses now... and sorry for being slightly brusque, but I feel very strongly about this)
"It's just a game! Loosen up!"
>.< It may just be a game, but it's not a board game. It's a game where it's important to be able to immerse yourself in the setting and your character. I can't do that if basic realism is thrown to the wind. Play your games the way you like, but I want it known why I feel the way I feel.
and i want people to know that -2 attack for +2 or 3 average damage does not a broken feat make
it may not fit reality but the mechanics are completely sound
I'm going to agree with Dork Lord on the realism issue, I've DMed and had players trying to swing a greatsword (about 6ft long) in a corrador 8 ft high and 5 ft wide, and remember the shoulder is at about 5 feet 6 inches from the ground for a 6 foot human.
Heck I even have a realism problem with how the system handles size categories, the size modifier for AC, Attack, CMD, CMB should be 2 times bigger, the weight of armour and weapons of of different size categories and lifting capaities should be 8x not 2x (ie large is 8x, huge is 64x, small is 1/8th), simple math proves this, if all three dimensions are doubled then the volume is 2 exp 3 = 8 times bigger. Even the land speed should double not increase in 10ft increments, when one doubles their size, ie enlarge spell.
I do however acknowledge that a fantasy game should be allowed to bend some rules, but not break or dismiss them, If a player wanted monkey grip as a feat I would change the requirements to include a strength score of 19 for a medium sized character and they must acknowledge that any weapon bigger than them will be useless underground or in building for large sized and smaller creatures.
|
>.< It may just be a game, but it's not a board game. It's a game where it's important to be able to immerse yourself in the setting and your character. I can't do that if basic realism is thrown to the wind. Play your games the way you like, but I want it known why I feel the way I feel.Just because it's a fantasy game doesn't mean basic physics should be ignored. I know, I know... the rules don't say you can't swing a 15 foot long sword, right? ;-)
There's not caring about reality and there's taking suspension of disbelief to ridiculously inane heights.
So, you're OK with a Fighter falling from 300 feet and taking 70 damage on average ? Meaning that a Fighter from level 10+ will just walk away from that ? Because that's basic realism, you know. ;-)
actually it depends on the weapon. a bastard sword goes from d10 to 2d8 (5.5 avg to 9 avg). just sayinand i want people to know that -2 attack for +2 or 3 average damage does not a broken feat make
it may not fit reality but the mechanics are completely sound
power attack is still better in all ways and is it "broken"?
So, you're OK with a Fighter falling from 300 feet and taking 70 damage on average ? Meaning that a Fighter from level 10+ will just walk away from that ? Because that's basic realism, you know. ;-)
>.< It may just be a game, but it's not a board game. It's a game where it's important to be able to immerse yourself in the setting and your character. I can't do that if basic realism is thrown to the wind. Play your games the way you like, but I want it known why I feel the way I feel.Just because it's a fantasy game doesn't mean basic physics should be ignored. I know, I know... the rules don't say you can't swing a 15 foot long sword, right? ;-)
There's not caring about reality and there's taking suspension of disbelief to ridiculously inane heights.
No I'm not and I never said that. :-p
I've actually said in other threads that I dislike that aspect of hitpoints. If I'm running a game and a Fighter falls 300 feet and survives he's probably going to have a broken leg or two. He survived because he's experienced and tougher (mostly it's because as an experienced adventurer he knows how best to land to avoid instant death or grabbed onto a cliff face or other things to help lessen the impact) Is that in the rules? Nope, but it makes sense. Likewise I wouldn't allow someone to take a 2 round swim in a river of lava and come out just fine because it "only" deals 20d6 hit points a round. I actually had a player try that in one of my games.... he was trying to prove how tough he was. He was very upset when I told him his character sunk beneath the lava and was never heard from again.
|
|
I actually had a player try that in one of my games.... he was trying to prove how tough he was. He was very upset when I told him his character sunk beneath the lava and was never heard from again.
So you're one of the "I don't care if the rules say otherwise, your character is dead because I said so" GMs ?
Mmmmkay.