So, Monks can deflect bullets?


Gunslinger Discussion: Round 1

51 to 100 of 112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>

Matrixryu wrote:


Notice that it says 'from a ranged weapon'. According to the raw rules, this means anyone with the Deflect Arrows feat can also deflect bullets.

So, are we going to ignore how impossible this is? Deflecting arrows is one thing, but bullets? I wouldn't mind this if monks couldn't do this until very high levels, but it isn't uncommon for a monk to have this at 2nd level. Though, I suppose this could be a case of "monks need nice things anyway, leave him alone".

Though, the real issue with this in my opinion is that this renders monks immune to gunslingers who haven't found some trick to get off more than one shot per round. There are only two ways around this right now: fire multiple guns per round or lighting reload deed.

Well, irl yadomejutsu is "arrow cutting", accomplished typically with a sword or other weapon (and by hand according to some). A longbow clothyard shaft has an initial velocity of about 175-200 fps (I'm not sure about Japanese bows). An early arquebus or later musket had an initial velocity of about 650-750 fps. Give the ball a 4:1 advantage in velocity... neither is going to be all that visible to the human eye... blocking / cutting is largely based off the position of the weapon launching at you and a knowledge of the trajectory. I understand that it has been done by a few experts but I doubt that was under "battlefield conditions". Then hey, this is a game of fantastic things. So why not? Besides, is the physics of Pathfinder = to the physics of the real world? maybe bullets are slower in PF.

The "it renders a gunslinger useless" arguement is no different than what it does to a crossbowman. And it's just cool :D


I suspect there was some stage magic to the whole catching a .22 by the big fat black belt.

The .22 can easily be under powered, there are so many different loads for a .22.
when you think .22 you think .22 LR which is tiny bullet moving mega fast.
Pretty deadly, in fact there would be NO way to catch this thing.

But there is a .22 sub sonic round, used for urban chipmunks critters and such, moves way way slower, a LOT less powder, also, there is custom hand loads.

So I don't think he's catching any factory loaded .22 LR.

this however is meaningless when talking about DnD monks. Personally I think they should be able to deflect lazer with their kamas.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber
Pendagast wrote:


Personally I think they should be able to deflect lazer with their kamas.

Agreed. :)

Senior Designer

Some of your may boo at this, but I think the fact that a monk can block a bullet is awesome.

We are simulating a heroic fantasy not reality. If we were interested in simulating reality would we have ki, magic, dragons, and armor that exposes the bellybutton?

Just say’n.


Of all the talk of how bad monks suck on the boards, all of a sudden they are a point of contention because they can deflect one bullet per round assuming the character takes the feat in the first place?


Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Some of you may boo at this, but I think the fact that a monk can block a bullet is awesome.

Just this.

Shadow Lodge

Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Of all the talk of how bad monks suck on the boards, all of a sudden they are a point of contention because they can deflect one bullet per round assuming the character takes the feat in the first place?

+1

Seems the saying "Fighters can't have nice things!" is now "Monks can't have nice things!"

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

No, it's still Fighter Cannot Have Nice Things, because we're talking about the feat Deflect Arrows. Monks just have an easier time taking the feat than any other class, and it is associated with the class due to it being one of the only two choices Monks had for their bonus feat for a long time.


Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Of all the talk of how bad monks suck on the boards

Who is saying that?

Monks are awesome!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

Aw man, not the monk argument again.


I am completely ignorant of the "monk sucks" debate, personally. Every Monk I've DMed has been pretty deadly, especially against spellcasters. I find PF Monks to be just scary. I've had a Monk solo an entire party before.


Spes Magna Mark wrote:
The Beast can catch a bullet fired at point-blank range using only two fingers.

He cheated he was holding the gun...at arm length. Mr. Fishy doesn't need to to use a fin when he does that trick, the bullet just knows better, it stops in mid-air.

Liberty's Edge

I'd rule this the way we do in my groups games.

Yes you can deflect bullets.

The fallacy is that so many rely on catching one bullet. A good Ranger, Fighter, Gunslinger is going to have more than one projectile coming per round.

Rule of thumb, anything worth shooting once is worth shooting again.


At 11gp per bullet you better shoot to kill.

Liberty's Edge

Mr.Fishy wrote:
At 11gp per bullet you better shoot to kill.

17 gold...I buy masterwork. I need to maximize my chance to hit.


Gravefiller613 wrote:

I'd rule this the way we do in my groups games.

Yes you can deflect bullets.

The fallacy is that so many rely on catching one bullet. A good Ranger, Fighter, Gunslinger is going to have more than one projectile coming per round.

Rule of thumb, anything worth shooting once is worth shooting again.

Well, not at low levels... you need BAB of 6 or rapid shot/Haste to get more than 1 off (unless Twfing).


Mr. FIshy has a party.


The wizard has created a ball of pure concentrated fire out of thin air and has the ability of flight.

A MONK CATCHING A BULLET, THIS IS SOOOOOO UNREALISTIC! :p

Really?


Mr. Fishy is married and a guy deflects a bullet gets you?
Have you people met Mr. Fishy? Mr. Fishy goes to sleep at night to get some time away from Mr. Fishy.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

TIER FISHY!

Whoops, wrong thread.


Razz wrote:
I am completely ignorant of the "monk sucks" debate, personally. Every Monk I've DMed has been pretty deadly, especially against spellcasters. I find PF Monks to be just scary. I've had a Monk solo an entire party before.

What you never knew is that all of your personal experiences are wrong, and any fun that you had must be revoked retroactively.


A few years ago, I saw a guy who had been shot in the leg in an aggravated robbery. The caliber was fairly well-sized, probably a. 38 or. 40 or 9mm. The complainant was 100% okay because his Motorola cell phone caught the bullet, getting stuck in the phone itself. I told him to frame it once it was released from evidence. Based on the hole in his pant leg, it would have most likely hit an artery. Lucky fellow.

Not particularly germane to the discussion, but a fun story. Bullet-catching monks? I've seen bullet-catching phones!


Did the phone have levels of monk?

Shadow Lodge Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8

Mr.Fishy wrote:
Did the phone have levels of monk?

Naw, it was a Motorola, that means it was a 5th level Commoner.


It was a large size commoner with age penalties.

Bet he's glad he didn't go for the smartphone. It would have been a bit like a Wizard without time to properly prepare spells. More powerful, but pretty useless to the specific situation.

Liberty's Edge

Starbuck_II wrote:
Gravefiller613 wrote:

I'd rule this the way we do in my groups games.

Yes you can deflect bullets.

The fallacy is that so many rely on catching one bullet. A good Ranger, Fighter, Gunslinger is going to have more than one projectile coming per round.

Rule of thumb, anything worth shooting once is worth shooting again.

Well, not at low levels... you need BAB of 6 or rapid shot/Haste to get more than 1 off (unless Twfing).

I always rapid shot or 2WF.


Monster Jack wrote:
Bob_Loblaw wrote:
Of all the talk of how bad monks suck on the boards

Who is saying that?

Monks are awesome!

Monks are awesome.

But haters are gonna hate.


DM Barcas wrote:

It was a large size commoner with age penalties.

Bet he's glad he didn't go for the smartphone. It would have been a bit like a Wizard without time to properly prepare spells. More powerful, but pretty useless to the specific situation.

This post is awesome.

The Exchange

James Jacobs wrote:

Personally, I have no problems with fantasy monks deflecting bullets. They do this ALL THE TIME in movies.

That said, I wouldn't be surprised to see in Ultimate Combat a sidebar or something that talks about Deflecting Bullets that basically says, "Hey, if you as the GM think it's cool for Deflect Arrows to work on bullets, go for it! But if you don't, that's fine too!"

What's sad is that you would need a frakking sidebar to tell GMs something they should already know. sigh...

Liberty's Edge

Just to chip in with a sour note of "THIS far; no further!"

Dodge? Maybe. But to actually deflect a bullet fired from a musket? Not a chance. This stops my ability to suspend disbelief and have fun with the game. The game breaks for me >>right there<< with the sound of reality cracking with an ominous S-N-A-P.

GET OFF MY LAWN!!

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

Nah, my suspension of disbelief snaps when I realize you expect a man to kill a 747 with a 3-foot piece of metal.

Liberty's Edge

Matrixryu wrote:
Sure, there is a lot of stuff that people suspend disbelief for in these games. However, feats are supposed to be based on things that are (somewhat) physically possible. I would understand if this was some sort of high level monk ability, but theoretically any level 1 human commoner can take improved unarmed strike and deflect arrows and render himself nearly immune to bullets. That's stretching my suspension of disbelief a little too far.

Where does it say that feats are supposed to be based on things that are (somewhat) physically possible? I think that's just your own preconception.

And by the way, you're saying that you're perfectly fine with a level 1 human commoner who is nearly immune to arrows?


Hi you all, new guy on the board.
This, on page 6 on the playtest pdf file under the 'Range and Penetration' paragraph, is interesting:
"Armor, manufactured or natural, provides
little protection against the force of a bullet at short range. When
firing upon a target within a firearm’s first range increment, the attack
resolves against the target’s touch AC. At higher range increments, the
attack resolves normally (including taking the normal cumulative –2
penalty for each full-range increment)."

So, it can be read as "deflect arrows allows the character to deflect bullets after the first range of increment [because of the loss of projectile's force]. "
1) armor [...] provides little protection against the force of a bullet at short range
2) these firearms have superior enhanced force only at short range
3) at long range [beyond the first range increment in game of terms] can be considered like sling bullets, which can be deflected with the appropriate feat

Or something like that...


Steel_Wind wrote:

Just to chip in with a sour note of "THIS far; no further!"

Dodge? Maybe. But to actually deflect a bullet fired from a musket? Not a chance. This stops my ability to suspend disbelief and have fun with the game. The game breaks for me >>right there<< with the sound of reality cracking with an ominous S-N-A-P.

GET OFF MY LAWN!!

How is deflecting a bullet different from flinging spells, or growing wings capable of flight?

It's magic, man. Pathfinder operates on the scale of legendary heroes and their impossible exploits. Dodging/deflecting bullets is right there along with casting reality-changing spells and wrestling a dragon with one's bare hands.


Why does this still seem to be an issue?

Lets stop flamen the guy/girl and move on...


Penn and Teller do this trick a couple times a week at the Rio in Vegas...

Liberty's Edge

amorangias wrote:


How is deflecting a bullet different from flinging spells, or growing wings capable of flight?

I'm not required to rationally justify a visceral reaction.

But I would observe that where the same rules IGNORE magical armor as being useless to protect against a bullet, yet somehow permits FLESH to deflect that same bullet?

That would be the point where the verisimilitude starts to break down in the "rules digestive tract" into something rather brownish and smelly to me.

If said deflection required something like a magical adamantine Sai or even magical adamantine bracers to be employed? Then I'm more accepting. Then it's no better or worse than a light saber in Star Wars or Wonder Woman's bracers, I suppose. Either way, I can live with that.

But the back of a monk's hand deflecting a bullet?

Not at my table. YMMV (and clearly does).


Steel_Wind wrote:

But the back of a monk's hand deflecting a bullet?

Monks use their palms for this.


Steel_Wind wrote:
amorangias wrote:


How is deflecting a bullet different from flinging spells, or growing wings capable of flight?

I'm not required to rationally justify a visceral reaction.

But I would observe that where the same rules IGNORE magical armor as being useless to protect against a bullet, yet somehow permits FLESH to deflect that same bullet?

That would be the point where the verisimilitude starts to break down in the "rules digestive tract" into something rather brownish and smelly to me.

If said deflection required something like a magical adamantine Sai or even magical adamantine bracers to be employed? Then I'm more accepting. Then it's no better or worse than a light saber in Star Wars or Wonder Woman's bracers, I suppose. Either way, I can live with that.

But the back of a monk's hand deflecting a bullet?

Not at my table. YMMV (and clearly does).

Rename it Dodge Bullet

Oh my god it's a miracle, all the problems are solved.

Scarab Sages

Personally, I think the flaw is that a monk can't deflect siege weapons.


Matthew Trent wrote:
Personally, I think the flaw is that a monk can't deflect siege weapons.

They can't?

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 4

Pendagast wrote:
They can't?
[b wrote:

Deflect Arrows (Combat)[/b]]You can knock arrows and other projectiles off course, preventing them from hitting you.

Prerequisites: Dex 13, Improved Unarmed Strike.

Benefit: You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to use this feat. Once per round when you would normally be hit with an attack from a ranged weapon, you may deflect it so that you take no damage from it. You must be aware of the attack and not flat-footed. Attempting to deflect a ranged attack doesn't count as an action. Unusually massive ranged weapons (such as boulders or ballista bolts) and ranged attacks generated by natural attacks or spell effects can't be deflected.

No, they can't.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber
Pendagast wrote:
Matthew Trent wrote:
Personally, I think the flaw is that a monk can't deflect siege weapons.

They can't?

My monks can.

RPG Superstar 2011 Top 4

Oh 3.5, you so silly.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Lost Omens, Pawns, Rulebook Subscriber

hatersgonnahate.jpg

Sovereign Court

Stephen Radney-MacFarland wrote:

Some of your may boo at this, but I think the fact that a monk can block a bullet is awesome.

We are simulating a heroic fantasy not reality. If we were interested in simulating reality would we have ki, magic, dragons, and armor that exposes the bellybutton?

Just say’n.

Ditto. Let 'em block bullets, as per RAW.


Monks already do things that are unrealistic. A monk's unrealism automatically overrides any realism the gun and bullets may bring into the game.

This is the same guy that, with abundant step, can jump about the room with a cloud of smoke and the actual word 'Poof!' appearing in bold letters where he once stood.

1. Put monk in future setting.
2. Fire laser at monk.
3. Monk deflects laser with shiny bracers.
4. Monk catches next beam with special mirrored gloves.
5. Monk throws laser back at attacker.
5. Trollface.

TriOmegaZero wrote:
hatersgonnahate.jpg

Indeed they can, will, and do hate.

Council of Theives spoiler:
In the third module, What Lies in Dust, there's a soulbound doll named Mr. Straw with the deflect arrows feat. I am now picturing a child's toy deflecting bullets with a tiny toy pitchfork and it amuses me...

Grand Lodge

Pendagast wrote:

so why is it impossible to believe you could catch a bullet (and need different rules for) than it its to catch an arrow?

When I was a kid I watched a guy on TV catch a bullet in his TEETH.

As far as a fantasy game is concerned, whats the difference?

They do the same damage, but the bow has much better range. As printed the bow is a better weapon, so wouldn't it be harder to catch an arrow than a bullet using that logic?

I remember the show as well as it also broadcast in Australia... 'Thats Incredible'.

Mind you there was a lot of line up preparation and the use of a ceramic cup the guy held in his teeth BUT it worked. And if it can work in the modern day, then it can work even better in magic land.

Dark Archive

Luther wrote:
** spoiler omitted **

Spoiler:
One of my players took such a liking to that one he saved the gem and remade him into a full size scarecrow construct with the same feat. Had to bend the rules a little for it to work but I figured why not.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Pendagast wrote:
Matthew Trent wrote:
Personally, I think the flaw is that a monk can't deflect siege weapons.

They can't?

My monks can.

I loved that tier of feats. A player of mine had it in my epic game.

See him deflect disintegrates, orb spells and siege engine projectiles was really awesome.

PF currently has something similar for shields (but not siege engine projectiles), but I wouldn't mind see this for monks again.

51 to 100 of 112 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Ultimate Combat Playtest / Gunslinger Discussion: Round 1 / So, Monks can deflect bullets? All Messageboards