The brass knucks are there to allow you to, effectively, enchant your unarmed strikes as a normal weapon. If you want to re-fluff that, then I don't really see what stops you from so doing.
Not anymore. We just had that rug pulled out from under us in the Adventurer's Armory product thread, and it's been said that the new version is going to hold true for the APG version as well.
And personally, I think RP is a strong reason for consideration in class design. When I play a monk, I want it to feel like the characters that inspired the monk. Not Beef McSlabrock or Big McHugelarge.
Thankfully the Flowing Monk sounds like a fix for that on the DEX-monk side of thing. But there's still the inability to enhance unarmed strike at a fair price, and now we don't even have the brass knuckles as a base to reflavor into something that fits the theme.
I will look at the Brass knuckles and see what changed, I guess. If it's substantially worse, then yeah. I feel for ya.
But here's my thing. I understand and respect that you see a monk and think or feel that it should be a graceful, flowing, use enemy's strength against them type. But some of us think Tyson. Or Gracie. And that's not really an incorrect assertion. Some could argue for them being unarmed fighters, not monks, but I contend that it could go either way. And yeah, those guys are pretty beefy. And that's fine. It's also cool, and not any less correct. And even if Tyson wasn't one of the inspirations for the monk, it's pretty difficult to talk about influential unarmed fighters without mentioning James Braddock or Joe Louis. Or Ali.
Edit: Checked out the Brass Knuckle nerf, and may I say...Damn.
They bombed it to the ground, and for virtually no reason. Well. Nevermind! Complain away!
(To be fair, awhile back, Jeranimus Rex posted math proving Temple sword ends up with better damage than Unarmed strike, even with old brass knuckles. Yeah, I don't like that either, because unarmed fighting is cool. *shrug*)
Sorry, but taking out RP as a viable reason is just wrong. What you are saying is the following: "See, you can build a viable Monk if you just do the Brute McClumsypants build.". The problem is that this build is not iconic to the standard Monk, as depicted in fiction and real life at all. Shaolin Monks were not Arnold Schwarzeneggers.
And my other two points, which are more mechanical, still stand. Skirmishing is something which the Monk features scream for him to do. The Monk can take Spring Attack as a bonus feat without even having the prerequisites for it.
I will acknowledge, though, that skirmishing is in general something which doesn't work with Pathfinder as a viable damage option, it is not restricted to the Monk.
As for unarmed attacks, you missed my point. I am not saying "Nerf the Amulet of Mighty Fists because of the Monk", because you are right that it works well for monsters which use separate natural attacks and therefore the pricing is okay.
What I am saying is "find an alternative way to enchant the Monks unarmed attacks with a reasonable pricing". I.e. make available a new magic item or way of enchanting the unarmed attacks for the Monk class ( or any other class which uses "unarmed strikes" as a single attack type ).
What I am saying is "find an alternative way to enchant the Monks unarmed attacks with a reasonable pricing". I.e. make available a new magic item or way of enchanting the unarmed attacks for the Monk class ( or any other class which uses "unarmed strikes" as a single attack type ).
Forgive me for invoking such, but the first thought in my gaming circle is to adapt (either officially, unofficially, or through third party means) the hand wraps from the D&D MMO. Basically, it's a magic item you wear on your hands (I'm not sure off-hand, no pun intended, if it takes up a slot but I don't think it does) that is enchanted in the same manner as a magical weapon in every possible way, and applies all of those benefits to a monk's unarmed attacks. It doesn't have any sort of damage rating of its own and simply allows a monk to hit things with all the benefits of a magical weapon.
(Sorry if this has been mentioned before, just wanted to throw it out there.)
What I am saying is "find an alternative way to enchant the Monks unarmed attacks with a reasonable pricing". I.e. make available a new magic item or way of enchanting the unarmed attacks for the Monk class ( or any other class which uses "unarmed strikes" as a single attack type ).Forgive me for invoking such, but the first thought in my gaming circle is to adapt (either officially, unofficially, or through third party means) the hand wraps from the D&D MMO. Basically, it's a magic item you wear on your hands (I'm not sure off-hand, no pun intended, if it takes up a slot but I don't think it does) that is enchanted in the same manner as a magical weapon in every possible way, and applies all of those benefits to a monk's unarmed attacks. It doesn't have any sort of damage rating of its own and simply allows a monk to hit things with all the benefits of a magical weapon.
(Sorry if this has been mentioned before, just wanted to throw it out there.)
Sounds totally fine and as Pathfinder has taken the DEX-enhancement slot away from the hands, would be very doable.
But that's still recurring to older D&D material to fix the problem, which would open all sorts of doors I want to keep closed. What I want is an official Paizo product which introduces a similar item, so that we all can say "Paizo took care of the problem".
Sorry, but taking out RP as a viable reason is just wrong. What you are saying is the following: "See, you can build a viable Monk if you just do the Brute McClumsypants build.". The problem is that this build is not iconic to the standard Monk, as depicted in fiction and real life at all. Shaolin Monks were not Arnold Schwarzeneggers.
And my other two points, which are more mechanical, still stand. Skirmishing is something which the Monk features scream for him to do. The Monk can take Spring Attack as a bonus feat without even having the prerequisites for it.
I will acknowledge, though, that skirmishing is in general something which doesn't work with Pathfinder as a viable damage option, it is not restricted to the Monk.As for unarmed attacks, you missed my point. I am not saying "Nerf the Amulet of Mighty Fists because of the Monk", because you are right that it works well for monsters which use separate natural attacks and therefore the pricing is okay.
What I am saying is "find an alternative way to enchant the Monks unarmed attacks with a reasonable pricing". I.e. make available a new magic item or way of enchanting the unarmed attacks for the Monk class ( or any other class which uses "unarmed strikes" as a single attack type ).
Iconic to the standard monk? Maybe not, but there's nothing wrong with being a bit unusual, is there? I think it can be fun to not play to stereotypes sometimes.
RP has not a thing to do with a class's viability or relative power. It's important in other ways, yes, but it's not fair to call a class underpowered while also restricting it. And I never said they were Schwarzeneggers (after all, monks tend to dump CHA, and Arnold's is through the roof), but really, how are they not Ali? Dude had great strength, good dex, and good wisdom. Furthermore, it actually makes sense from a "real-world" view to have lower than average Int. Armored warriors have armor. Unarmored warriors who train bare-handed get punched in the head a lot of times and take brain damage.
I don't know if I agree with you about skirmishing being difficult to use in PF. Full-round attacks are nice, but not getting full-round attacked is also nice...I'd say that for builds who hurt for HP/AC, skirmishing isn't a bad option against tougher, more brawly types. It doesn't kill things very quickly, and you're right, it'd be nice if there were more ways for it to work than Barbarians with pounce, Fighters with Rapid Attack, and Rogues with the Scout archetype. And mounted skirmishing (which is probably the most common historical skirmish tactic) does pretty well for itself.
And yes, now that the brass knuckles are basically the worst monk weapon, the monks DO need a fair way to get enhancement bonuses to their fists. I don't know if I'd like a direct enhancement of the fists (a la Greater Magic Fang,) since it's useful to be able to disarm PCs, and I wouldn't want to sunder anybody's wrists off to do that XP
I swear I'm not trolling when I ask: why do monks need anything other than an Amulet of Mighty Fists (which is expensive for a good reason), and/or their existing magic/lawful/adamantine unarmed progression, and/or greater magic fang with permanency? It's not like they should be spending their money on armour (or in fact many other magic items), so they should be wallowing in cash by the time they come up against enemies with significant DR or other issues.
Besides, in my experience a monk has many weapons at his disposal, such as grapples, trips...and the style feats in Ultimate Combat send a monk's options through the roof.
I'm not seeing why a monk needs an enhancement bonus on their fists that they can't already get some other way. If someone can explain it to me I'd be grateful.
Iconic to the standard monk? Maybe not, but there's nothing wrong with being a bit unusual, is there? I think it can be fun to not play to stereotypes sometimes.
RP has not a thing to do with a class's viability or relative power. It's important in other ways, yes, but it's not fair to call a class underpowered while also restricting it. And I never said they were Schwarzeneggers (after all, monks tend to dump CHA, and Arnold's is through the roof), but really, how are they not Ali? Dude had great strength, good dex, and good wisdom. Furthermore, it actually makes sense from a "real-world" view to have lower than average Int. Armored warriors have armor. Unarmored warriors who train bare-handed get punched in the head a lot of times and take brain damage.
Your arguments are getting progressively more silly. :-/
I don't know if I agree with you about skirmishing being difficult to use in PF. Full-round attacks are nice, but not getting full-round attacked is also nice...I'd say that for builds who hurt for HP/AC, skirmishing isn't a bad option against tougher, more brawly types. It doesn't kill things very quickly, and you're right, it'd be nice if there were more ways for it to work than Barbarians with pounce, Fighters with Rapid Attack, and Rogues with the Scout archetype. And mounted skirmishing (which is probably the most common historical skirmish tactic) does pretty well for itself.
For mounted archers, sure. Charging with a lance on horseback also can get incredible results. But on a general scale, dealing damage quickly, i.e. full-attacking, is the way to go in D20. Killing something before it can kill you back is the most efficient way to win a fight.
And yes, now that the brass knuckles are basically the worst monk weapon, the monks DO need a fair way to get enhancement bonuses to their fists. I don't know if I'd like a direct enhancement of the fists (a la Greater Magic Fang,) since it's useful to be able to disarm PCs, and I wouldn't want to sunder anybody's wrists off to do that XP
That is again assuming that martial artists are somehow restricted to being pugilists. Unarmed combat is a full body contact sport ( not all sorts of martial arts, but the eastern ones ). And Monks don't get separated attacks for fist one, fist two, leg one, leg two and a headbutt, they get one "Unarmed attack" category. As such, they need some full-body enchantment, because forcing them to enchant each limb separately is idiotic. If there are balance issues with some min-maxers getting a bite attack via the Toothy feat, just restrict that enchantment to the pure "Unarmed Strike" progression.
I swear I'm not trolling when I ask: why do monks need anything other than an Amulet of Mighty Fists (which is expensive for a good reason), and/or their existing magic/lawful/adamantine unarmed progression, and/or greater magic fang with permanency? It's not like they should be spending their money on armour (or in fact many other magic items), so they should be wallowing in cash by the time they come up against enemies with significant DR or other issues.
Besides, in my experience a monk has many weapons at his disposal, such as grapples, trips...and the style feats in Ultimate Combat send a monk's options through the roof.
I'm not seeing why a monk needs an enhancement bonus on their fists that they can't already get some other way. If someone can explain it to me I'd be grateful.
Again, I must suppose that you are too working off the supposition that Monks get individual attack progressions with each of their limbs, because otherwise there would be no need to point out that the Amulet of Mighty Fists is expensive "for a good reason". And Monks need to spend their money on the same things as every other character, meaning that they have to get the big six items like everyone else ( in that case, Bracers of Armor substitute for actual armor ) and special stuff like everyone else, too. Their equipment ain't cheaper that for any other class. Actually, since the class has MAD syndrome, their ability enhancement cost is way up, due to the new Pathfinder physical ability enhancers being stuck all on the belt slot.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion the flaw of the thread is the ambiguous term "martial arts", and the thought that somehow not being a monk means you are not a 'martial artist' in pathfinder.
There are many examples of 'western' martial arts that were taught in schools with 'learned masters' and that passed on their knowledge and forms in books. Eastern martial arts include weapon training, and were in some cases weapon focused to the point of "If you are unarmed do something and get armed again". Indeed many made a point of pointing out that any combat without a weapon in your hand is a combat that you are in a bad position to be participating in.
A fighter that specializes in a sword and fights in armor is just as much a martial artist as the unarmed, unarmored monk.
A 'martial attitude' is a matter of how you play your character not what class or even what feats he takes.
...why do monks need anything other than an Amulet of Mighty Fists (which is expensive for a good reason), and/or their existing magic/lawful/adamantine unarmed progression, and/or greater magic fang with permanency?Again, I must suppose that you are too working off the supposition that Monks get individual attack progressions with each of their limbs, because otherwise there would be no need to point out that the Amulet of Mighty Fists is expensive "for a good reason". And Monks need to spend their money on the same things as every other character, meaning that they have to get the big six items like everyone else ( in that case, Bracers of Armor substitute for actual armor ) and special stuff like everyone else, too. Their equipment ain't cheaper that for any other class. Actually, since the class has MAD syndrome, their ability enhancement cost is way up, due to the new Pathfinder physical ability enhancers being stuck all on the belt slot.
I disagree with you that monks need all the same items as other classes to be competitive (especially now), but since--on reflection--that probably largely comes down to play styles within groups, I don't think it's terribly material to this discussion. All I can say is that in my group, my monk has been perfectly successful at middle levels with only a belt of physical perfection +4, boots of speed, ring of protection +2 and a maxed-out grapple capability. (We also play 25 point buy.) That might not work in your experience and that's cool.
I do, however, take your point about the interaction between a monk's unarmed strike and the 'one natural weapon' restriction of greater magic fang.
Sohei can in fact enchant their own fists, you know.
If that'd work for all other Monks, that'd be fine. Although it'd screw the Martial Artist, so, again, no, not fine.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Sohei can in fact enchant their own fists, you know.If that'd work for all other Monks, that'd be fine. Although it'd screw the Martial Artist, so, again, no, not fine.
It wouldn't "screw" the Martial Artist; the Martial Artist has his own method for overcoming DR that is simply different from the Sohei. Two approaches to the same problem, coming from different directions.
My house rule: monks can study Esoteric Techniques to directly enchant their unarmed strike. They pay full market price for the enchantment, but have to spend time training as if they were using the Craft Magic Arms and Armor feat. They can't add the Dancing quality. They can add Throwing, which lets them make a single unarmed strike per round at range, manifesting as a blast of ki.
It wouldn't "screw" the Martial Artist; the Martial Artist has his own method for overcoming DR that is simply different from the Sohei. Two approaches to the same problem, coming from different directions.Sohei can in fact enchant their own fists, you know.If that'd work for all other Monks, that'd be fine. Although it'd screw the Martial Artist, so, again, no, not fine.
Jason, the thing I question is the prohibitive cost of enchanting all unarmed attacks of the "Unarmed attack" type, i.e. the one where your attacks are not counted by you number of limbs but by the normal attack bonus dependant attack routine.
Bypassing DR is another aspect which is problematic with Monks in general, but it would really behoove the designers to address the problem with the cost of enchanting the type of unarmed attacks which just count your body as one weapon, which specifically affects the Monk class and to a lesser extent other classes which want to be unarmed fighters.
If they refuse to do so, it would really be nice to hear for once why they don't think that it is a problem, instead of just trying to sit this one out. Which doesn't work anyway, because this complaint is not going away.
Your arguments are getting progressively more silly. :-/
You are correct, sir :P
That is again assuming that martial artists are somehow restricted to being pugilists. Unarmed combat is a full body contact sport ( not all sorts of martial arts, but the eastern ones ). And Monks don't get separated attacks for fist one, fist two, leg one, leg two and a headbutt, they get one "Unarmed attack" category. As such, they need some full-body enchantment, because forcing them to enchant each limb separately is idiotic. If there are balance issues with some min-maxers getting a bite attack via the Toothy feat, just restrict that enchantment to the pure "Unarmed Strike" progression.
Saying "enchant their fists" was simply easier/more convenient than "Enchant their bodies, explicitly the unarmed strike, and not natural weapons, etc." I know they can attack with kicks and headbutts etc. Which is neat, b/c they can attack with their hands full :D
I still don't, and won't agree that monks are Multi-Attribute Dependent to the point that it forces them into one viable build, or that they must be idiot savants to compete. They do rely on more attributes than most classes, but Magus, Monk, Gunslinger, Ninja, most Paladins, some Fighters, low-level Barbarians (IMO) all have at least 3 attributes they need positive modifiers in, and I see none of those classes as prohibitive based on required abilities to be viable...Let me just add: were I to play 15 point buy (as I believe you said you do,) I would likely sing a different tune about all this, Especially regarding Magi, Monks, Gunslingers, Ninjas and Paladins. But that's why I play 25 at minimum :+)
I still don't, and won't agree that monks are Multi-Attribute Dependent to the point that it forces them into one viable build, or that they must be idiot savants to compete. They do rely on more attributes than most classes, but Magus, Monk, Gunslinger, Ninja, most Paladins, some Fighters, low-level Barbarians (IMO) all have at least 3 attributes they need positive modifiers in, and I see none of those classes as prohibitive based on required abilities to be viable...Let me just add: were I to play 15 point buy (as I believe you said you do,) I would likely sing a different tune about all this, Especially regarding Magi, Monks, Gunslingers, Ninjas and Paladins. But that's why I play 25 at minimum :+)
My groups are indeed playing with 15 point buys and that still remains the "standard" for Pathfinder. If the devs decide one day to make 20 point buy the new standard, then MAD for Monks also will become much less of a problem.
And three good attributes are not a problem. A Monk has four to contend with.
I still don't, and won't agree that monks are Multi-Attribute Dependent to the point that it forces them into one viable build, or that they must be idiot savants to compete. They do rely on more attributes than most classes, but Magus, Monk, Gunslinger, Ninja, most Paladins, some Fighters, low-level Barbarians (IMO) all have at least 3 attributes they need positive modifiers in, and I see none of those classes as prohibitive based on required abilities to be viable...Let me just add: were I to play 15 point buy (as I believe you said you do,) I would likely sing a different tune about all this, Especially regarding Magi, Monks, Gunslingers, Ninjas and Paladins. But that's why I play 25 at minimum :+)
You can deny it, but you can't prove it. Build a monk on 15 point buy without having to dump stats, that can contribute in most AP's, and the entire boards will be singing a different tone. Core+APG if you want to take the challenge.
Levels 5(low level, but high enough so that you are decent) and 15(close to the end of the AP).
PS:I really don't expect for this to be done, but if you get bored one day.....
PS2: It has to be a melee focused build.
|
My groups are indeed playing with 15 point buys and that still remains the "standard" for Pathfinder. If the devs decide one day to make 20 point buy the new standard, then MAD for Monks also will become much less of a problem.
And three good attributes are not a problem. A Monk has four to contend with.
20-pts is standard in Pathfinder Society organized play. Yes I know the book says 15 for Standard Fantasy, but Pathfinder is clearly 'High Fantasy'. Its what Paizo uses for their organized play which is about as official of a Golarion as you can get.
[EDIT] I understand that not every one who uses the Pathfinder rules also uses Golarion but to me Pathfinder=Golarion. I can't comment on yer homebrew world it might be 'Standard Fantasy' and then 15-point guys would be OK.
|
|
You can deny it, but you can't prove it. Build a monk on 15 point buy without having to dump stats, that can contribute in most AP's, and the entire boards will be singing a different tone. Core+APG if you want to take the challenge.
Levels 5(low level, but high enough so that you are decent) and 15(close to the end of the AP).
PS:I really don't expect for this to be done, but if you get bored one day.....
PS2: It has to be a melee focused build.
15 point stat buy
STR 14DEX 14
CON 14
INT 9
WIS 14
CHA 9
So what's the problem? +2 in every stat that matters.
Human bonus in STR.
Now am I gonna go through and fully stat this guy out at 5th and 15th level just to make you happy? No. Those are good enough stats to make a monk at 1st level. If you disagree, that is of course an option that you can choose to exercise.
[EDIT] I don't think a 9 is a dumpped stat now a 7 on the other hand is. But you can go down to a 7 legally in PFS so...
|
|
Build a monk on 15 point buy without having to dump stats, that can contribute in most AP's, and the entire boards will be singing a different tone. Core+APG if you want to take the challenge.
A human monk on a 15 pt buy can begin with Str 16, Dex 14, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 14, Cha 8. There's precisely one "dump" there, and if it's good enough for the standard array, it's good enough for me. You get 5 skill points per level, take Dodge and Toughness for your starting feats (you still have Stunning Fist and you monk bonus feats to pick from), and you have AC 15, 13 hp (and 1d8+3 per level overall) and a reasonable amount of to-hit and damage. Use a temple sword if you want to boost your damage output some; alternatively, swap Str and Dex and Dodge for Weapon Finesse and you can go for the Dex-y monk type. It's not going to be dominant, but it absolutely meets the threshold of "can contribute," particularly alongside other 15 pt builds.
My groups are indeed playing with 15 point buys and that still remains the "standard" for Pathfinder. If the devs decide one day to make 20 point buy the new standard, then MAD for Monks also will become much less of a problem.
And three good attributes are not a problem. A Monk has four to contend with.
20-pts is standard in Pathfinder Society organized play. Yes I know the book says 15 for Standard Fantasy, but Pathfinder is clearly 'High Fantasy'. Its what Paizo uses for their organized play which is about as official of a Golarion as you can get.
[EDIT] I understand that not every one who uses the Pathfinder rules also uses Golarion but to me Pathfinder=Golarion. I can't comment on yer homebrew world it might be 'Standard Fantasy' and then 15-point guys would be OK.
I don't play PFS. But I play a lot of AP's, which are to me even more official than PFS. And AP's are designed on the premise of the PC's being built with a 15 point buy.
|
|
I don't play PFS. But I play a lot of AP's, which are to me even more official than PFS. And AP's are designed on the premise of the PC's being built with a 15 point buy.
Really? How do you get that, show me that paragraph where it says '15 point builds are the assumption for this AP'.
If your going by the pre-gens in the back, you should know that Carrion Crown doesn't have pre-gens to use as an example. And BTW if your using the pre-gens as your yardstick for character examples whats so wrong with Sajan. He's a totally effective character when paired with the other pre-gens.
Really? How do you get that, show me that paragraph where it says '15 point builds are the assumption for this AP'.
How about that the pre-gens always were built with a 15 point buy? Honestly, if you want an official confirmation, hunt it up yourself, because the search engine on this message board sadly is pretty lacking and I don't plan to waste half an hour for your snippish reply.
If your going by the pre-gens in the back, you should know that Carrion Crown doesn't have pre-gens to use as an example. And BTW if your using the pre-gens as your yardstick for character examples whats so wrong with Sajan. He's a totally effective character when paired with the other pre-gens.
Besides him having a horrible Wisdom score for a Monk, you mean. And if you really think that the APs as of Carrion Crown are built for parties with a 20 point buy, when before they were clearly built for a 15 point buy party of four PC's, then I question your powers of observation.
2 participants. This is going to be fun. I will probably make another thread once the builds are posted, just so this one is not hijacked.
|
|
Levels 5(low level, but high enough so that you are decent) and 15(close to the end of the AP).
PS:I really don't expect for this to be done, but if you get bored one day.....
PS2: It has to be a melee focused build.
Its exactly gonna make you happy but go through the Kingmaker AP and check out the pre-gens in the back Amiri, Harsk, Lini, and Sajan.
Right around 15 points everybody had one 8 (or 6).
And you can find 1st level, 4th level, 7th level, 10th level, 13th level, and 15th level builds for these characters.
PS No whining about how the pre-gens suck. Please.
A few points in strength don't make a monk into the incredible hulk. You NEED strength in order to perform any of the crazy acrobatics "iconic monks" tend toward, and all martial artists went through vigorous strength training.
Nor does a bard have to be an eastern martial artist. All of the monk abilities (perhaps names aside) work perfectly for any manner of light armored brute, and they can now wield swords along with their quarterstaves and fists thanks to the new temple sword.
My own monk, Twigs, is a (miraculously) 10th level bruiser, converted from my first rogue character. (Not for any dislike of the class, merely for a lack of flanking buddies.) He's currently been betrayed on his way out of Acheron, and is now being handed over to mephistopholes... I may not get to play him again. ;(
He's a cockney lowlife specialising in running away from his problems (not unlike a certain wizzard...) and cheap shots (his stunning/sickening fist attacks, coupled with trip and ki throw.) We've taken to referring to his "ki" pool as a "grit" pool instead.
He also, thanks to a bit of DM fiat, flurries with his dagger, but this is more than possible with a sai or chakram instead.
A high strength score, essential for ANY melee'r (although finesse is still a viable option, but you want a figure more like 14/18 than a strength of 10) means he's outdamaging most of his party members and saving their sorry hides through sheer luck and cowardice. He's a lot of fun to play.
... hasn't this thread strayed a bit far off of topic? The lack of monks is simply because the game isn't set in Tian Xia until the upper levels...
So really, te monk simply needs a more open minded approach to make it work for your character concept. There's really nothing to it. I'm also removing myself from this thread, because damn it, I'm not getting sucked into ANOTHER bloody monk thread.
... Rats, I guess I already have been...
PS No whining about how the pre-gens suck. Please.
LOL. Darn. You can't be calling me on stuff before I do it. :)
A few points in strength don't make a monk into the incredible hulk. You NEED strength in order to perform any of the crazy acrobatics "iconic monks" tend toward, and all martial artists went through vigorous strength training.
Nor does a bard have to be an eastern martial artist. All of the monk abilities (perhaps names aside) work perfectly for any manner of light armored brute, and they can now wield swords along with their quarterstaves and fists thanks to the new temple sword.
My own monk, Twigs, is a (miraculously) 10th level bruiser, converted from my first rogue character. (Not for any dislike of the class, merely for a lack of flanking buddies.) He's currently been betrayed on his way out of Acheron, and is now being handed over to mephistopholes... I may not get to play him again. ;(
He's a cockney lowlife specialising in running away from his problems (not unlike a certain wizzard...) and cheap shots (his stunning/sickening fist attacks, coupled with trip and ki throw.) We've taken to referring to his "ki" pool as a "grit" pool instead.
He also, thanks to a bit of DM fiat, flurries with his dagger, but this is more than possible with a sai or chakram instead.
A high strength score, essential for ANY melee'r (although finesse is still a viable option, but you want a figure more like 14/18 than a strength of 10) means he's outdamaging most of his party members and saving their sorry hides through sheer luck and cowardice. He's a lot of fun to play.
... hasn't this thread strayed a bit far off of topic? The lack of monks is simply because the game isn't set in Tian Xia until the upper levels...
So really, te monk simply needs a more open minded approach to make it work for your character concept. There's really nothing to it. I'm also removing myself from this thread, because damn it, I'm not getting sucked into ANOTHER bloody monk thread.
... Rats, I guess I already have been...
I will make another thread so people can discuss martial artist on this one. I really want to see what the unarmed fighter variant will look like in Ultimate Combat.
|
|
How about that the pre-gens always were built with a 15 point buy? Honestly, if you want an official confirmation, hunt it up yourself, because the search engine on this message board sadly is pretty lacking and I don't plan to waste half an hour for your snippish reply.
Besides him having a horrible Wisdom score for a Monk, you mean. And if you really think that the APs as of Carrion Crown are built for parties with a 20 point buy, when before they were clearly built for a 15 point buy party of four PC's, then I question your powers of observation.
Your the one that made the claim of the APs being designed for 15 point characters not me. So the burden of proof is on you my friend.
So now were back to whinig about the pre-gens? Low Wisdom huh? Shuffle yer points around and get all 14s and two 9s, better now?
Stop being deliberatly obtuse and just admit that you can build a monk at 15 points. And that they can contibute in a 15-point party.
The Carrion Crown was just to point out how there is nothing in the APs now to give any indicatot of character power level. And what if the first AP I bought was Carrion Crown, how am I supposed to go back and read material I dont have to gain an insight into the power level of characters. Just pointing out that newer GMs wont have access to the pre-gens (dont know about Jade Regent yet) so using them to gauge power level won't be an option, so now were back to no official word in any adventure path about character creation, except for PFS.
|
|
The APs are robust enough to handle a nice range of builds. The assumption for all adventures we publish is that PCs use the standard build (15 points) since that's the baseline. We generally build the adventures on the tough end of things, though, so if you have an inexperienced group of players, a 20 point or even a 25 point build might be a better choice.
Of course, I generally just let my players roll for their stats...
In any case, player skill can affect game play as much as whatever starting ability score array you use, which can all be negated anyway depending on luck of the dice. You as the GM know your players' skill level, and you know what kind of game you want to play, so the actual ability method you choose is 100% up to you
And it didn't take me a half-hour to find it either.
Two searches.And as an aside, you can roll better guys than the 15-point buy. My group uses the point buy system as a saftey net incase you roll up an absolute turd character, you can always get a decent character with the point buy system. Of course we use 20 (or 25 points) so were all cooler than you.
And it didn't take me a half-hour to find it either.
Two searches.
And as an aside, you can roll better guys than the 15-point buy. My group uses the point buy system as a saftey net incase you roll up an absolute turd character, you can always get a decent character with the point buy system. Of course we use 20 (or 25 points) so were all cooler than you.
We don't use rolling stats, because it results in some players being overpowered and dominating the whole AP, while others have to sit on their average characters.
And, well, I am not seeing what your point is anymore. You actually never had one, because as you can see, I was right, 15 point buy is the standard assumption by Paizo. So, thanks for playing.
And you can do a half-way okay Monk with a 15 point buy, but your character will be worse than a similarly built character of any other class. Which exerbates the other main problems the Monk has, as enumerated by me on the last page.
|
|
We don't use rolling stats, because it results in some players being overpowered and dominating the whole AP, while others have to sit on their average characters.
And, well, I am not seeing what your point is anymore. You actually never had one, because as you can see, I was right, 15 point buy is the standard assumption by Paizo. So, thanks for playing.
And you can do a half-way okay Monk with a 15 point buy, but your character will be worse than a similarly built character of any other class. Which exerbates the other main problems the Monk has, as enumerated by me on the last page.
Wow. Ok, well I only meant that as a joke. But I guess I really am cooler than you after all.
If you still insist that a 15-point Monk sucks in comparison to other 15-point characters, even after I proved they dont, then you just dont want to believe it. So no ammount of pointless bickering back and forth is going to change your mind. But just for the sake of my personal satisfaction lets look at your previous points.
1.) MAD
Well, Ok. But 14s are good stats for a 15-point character so...
2.) Bad synergy between class focuses ( i.e. Flurry of Blows vs. Skirmishing )
If you stand toe-to-toe with a monster just because you want to flurry every round, you deserve it when you die.
3.) Difficulty ( i.e. exorbitant cost ) of enchanting unarmed attacks.
Use Magic Device + wand of magic weapon (or GMW). Problem solved and you could probably just convinvce a party member to use the wand on you without investing in the skill. OR you could take the Master Craftsman feat and make yer own magic stuff at half-price.
I fully expect you to disagree with all of the above, so go ahead. But you know your wrong, even if you won't admit it on this board.
Wow. Ok, well I only meant that as a joke. But I guess I really am cooler than you after all.
If you still insist that a 15-point Monk sucks in comparison to other 15-point characters, even after I proved they dont, then you just dont want to believe it. So no ammount of pointless bickering back and forth is going to change your mind. But just for the sake of my personal satisfaction lets look at your previous points.
1.) MAD
Well, Ok. But 14s are good stats for a 15-point character so...2.) Bad synergy between class focuses ( i.e. Flurry of Blows vs. Skirmishing )
If you stand toe-to-toe with a monster just because you want to flurry every round, you deserve it when you die.3.) Difficulty ( i.e. exorbitant cost ) of enchanting unarmed attacks.
Use Magic Device + wand of magic weapon (or GMW). Problem solved and you could probably just convinvce a party member to use the wand on you without investing in the skill. OR you could take the Master Craftsman feat and make yer own magic stuff at half-price.I fully expect you to disagree with all of the above, so go ahead. But you know your wrong, even if you won't admit it on this board.
Do you know how much of an arrogant arse you sound like? I suppose not, because apparently you cannot even conceive of the notion that someone may come to different conclusions than you. And, no, you did not "prove" anything, you just voiced your opinion.
The first two points you address are providence of your own opinion, which I personally regard as wrong, so there's not much I can say to that.
But on the third point your presented option is terrible. Using a wand of Greater Magic Fang would have to be done on each limb, as they, for purposes of the game system, do count as separate attacks, although for the purposes of the unarmed strike of the Monk ( or any other class ) they do not. As such, someone only enchanting one fist would always be forced to attack with that, lest he lose his bonus to hit and damage. Of course a few people will want such a special character concept, but as I mentioned at least two times on the last two pages, for most people the concept of the Monks unarmed attacks is of full body contact strikes. As such, your "solution" doesn't work. And is incredibly costly over time, too.
|
|
Do you know how much of an arrogant arse you sound like? I suppose not, because apparently you cannot even conceive of the notion that someone may come to different conclusions than you. And, no, you did not "prove" anything, you just voiced your opinion.
The first two points you address are providence of your own opinion, which I personally regard as wrong, so there's not much I can say to that.
But on the third point your presented option is terrible. Using a wand of Greater Magic Fang would have to be done on each limb, as they, for purposes of the game system, do count as separate attacks, although for the purposes of the unarmed strike of the Monk ( or any other class ) they do not. As such, someone only enchanting one fist would always be forced to attack with that, lest he lose his bonus to hit and damage. Of...
If I sound arrogant its because when I deal with people who insist on refusing to admit when their argument have fallen apart then I tend to stop treating them as equals...
1) If you can't admit that 14s are good stats for a 15 point build, thats your problem not mine.
2) So what exactly is the problem here then? You say bad synergy between abilities like that explains everything. Yes a monk should run in and out of combat, using flurry of blows when opportunities present themselves. Yes that means that you get to use flurry of blows every 4 rounds (lets say). So?
I'm not seeing the issue here. If you insist on running your monk as a front-line fighter who stands toe-to-toe with the monster (like a Barbarian/Fighter/Paladin) you deserve what you get when the monster hands you your ass.
3) You wanted options, I gave you options. B+%~+ing about the options is just bad form. Also I didn't say magic fang, I said magic weapon (and greater magic weapon) which is on way more spell lists. If you have someone in your party willing to cast it, then the cost is FREE!!!
I also notice you didn't comment on taking the feats and making your own magic items for half-price. Hmmmm...I wonder why that is?
If I sound arrogant its because when I deal with people who insist on refusing to admit when their argument have fallen apart then I tend to stop treating them as equals...
1) If you can't admit that 14s are good stats for a 15 point build, thats your problem not mine.
2) So what exactly is the problem here then? You say bad synergy between abilities like that explains everything. Yes a monk should run in and out of combat, using flurry of blows when opportunities present themselves. Yes that means that you get to use flurry of blows every 4 rounds (lets say). So?
I'm not seeing the issue here. If you insist on running your monk as a front-line fighter who stands toe-to-toe with the monster (like a Barbarian/Fighter/Paladin) you deserve what you get when the monster hands you your ass.3) You wanted options, I gave you options. B@#&&ing about the options is just bad form. Also I didn't say magic fang, I said magic weapon (and greater magic weapon) which is on way more spell lists. If you have someone in your party willing to cast it, then the cost is FREE!!!
I also notice you didn't comment on taking the feats and making your own magic items...
You know something, I think I'll stop conversing with you, since you are not worth it as a person. You can bask a few moments in the knowledge that you managed to "win" the discussion by treating a fellow discussion member as dirt, while I go on and continue talking with people who are worth having a conversation. Buh-bye.
|
|
You know something, I think I'll stop conversing with you, since you are not worth it as a person. You can bask a few moments in the knowledge that you managed to "win" the discussion by treating a fellow discussion member as dirt, while I go on and continue talking with people who are worth having a conversation. Buh-bye.
So its ok for you to say 'Im not worth it as a person' but when I point out your being unreasonable for not admitting your arguments are groundless, then I'm being an ass. Ok. I'm fine with that.
Now I'm 100% sure I'm cooler than you.
'UMD a Wand of Magic Fang/Magic Weapon' is not a solution. UMD is a cross-class skill for monks, based on the one ability score a monk can absolutely, totally ignore. So the monk has to jump through considerable hoops to gain the ability to get his most iconic weapon up to the level of the fighter's weapon...for three hours.
Hey guys. Let's try and keep a bit of perspective here. If you've never PLAYED a 15 point monk in an AP, you don't have as much frame of reference as those who have. Also, name-calling isn't a good way to make a convincing argument, it really plays havoc with your ethos.
You've both made some valid points, and both have had some...invalid points, too. That's ok, but I think if we take a step back here, we'll realize that differences of opinions are a good thing, and maybe feel inclined to ease up a bit and laugh off the sour feelings.
'UMD a Wand of Magic Fang/Magic Weapon' is not a solution. UMD is a cross-class skill for monks, based on the one ability score a monk can absolutely, totally ignore. So the monk has to jump through considerable hoops to gain the ability to get his most iconic weapon up to the level of the fighter's weapon...for three hours.
Five hours. You can only use a wand of Greater Magic Fang, because the unarmed strikes don't count as manufactured weapons. But otherwise you are completely right.
Hey guys. Let's try and keep a bit of perspective here. If you've never PLAYED a 15 point monk in an AP, you don't have as much frame of reference as those who have. Also, name-calling isn't a good way to make a convincing argument, it really plays havoc with your ethos.
You've both made some valid points, and both have had some...invalid points, too. That's ok, but I think if we take a step back here, we'll realize that differences of opinions are a good thing, and maybe feel inclined to ease up a bit and laugh off the sour feelings.
There are enough reasonable people with which to have a discussion on the Paizo messageboards, so I am quite content in forever ignoring one arrogant dude.
'UMD a Wand of Magic Fang/Magic Weapon' is not a solution. UMD is a cross-class skill for monks, based on the one ability score a monk can absolutely, totally ignore. So the monk has to jump through considerable hoops to gain the ability to get his most iconic weapon up to the level of the fighter's weapon...for three hours.Five hours. You can only use a wand of Greater Magic Fang, because the unarmed strikes don't count as manufactured weapons. But otherwise you are completely right.
A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
'UMD a Wand of Magic Fang/Magic Weapon' is not a solution. UMD is a cross-class skill for monks, based on the one ability score a monk can absolutely, totally ignore. So the monk has to jump through considerable hoops to gain the ability to get his most iconic weapon up to the level of the fighter's weapon...for three hours.Five hours. You can only use a wand of Greater Magic Fang, because the unarmed strikes don't count as manufactured weapons. But otherwise you are completely right.A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
Hm, that's interesting, the groups I've played with always handled that differently.
Hm, that's interesting, the groups I've played with always handled that differently.'UMD a Wand of Magic Fang/Magic Weapon' is not a solution. UMD is a cross-class skill for monks, based on the one ability score a monk can absolutely, totally ignore. So the monk has to jump through considerable hoops to gain the ability to get his most iconic weapon up to the level of the fighter's weapon...for three hours.Five hours. You can only use a wand of Greater Magic Fang, because the unarmed strikes don't count as manufactured weapons. But otherwise you are completely right.A monk's unarmed strike is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.
No doubt it colors your perspective. That one line of text (Found under Monk, Unarmed strike) makes a really big difference once you get to thinking about it. *cough*Mypost-inthat-Adventurer'sArmory-Thread*Cough*
No doubt it colors your perspective. That one line of text (Found under Monk, Unarmed strike) makes a really big difference once you get to thinking about it. *cough*Mypost-inthat-Adventurer'sArmory-Thread*Cough*
No, it doesn't. Using a wand of either Greater Magic Weapon and so on is prohibitively expensive, because if you want to keep the flavour of unarmed combat ( your whole body is your weapon ), as per the rules you still need to enchant every limb separately.
And your idea of making your unarmed strike masterwork via that spell is speculative, to say the least. The full spell description calls for an "item" to be transformed, which I think a limb does not fall under.
|
|
Using a wand of either Greater Magic Weapon and so on is prohibitively expensive, because if you want to keep the flavour of unarmed combat ( your whole body is your weapon ), as per the rules you still need to enchant every limb separately.
No, as per the "flavor" you have to enchant every limb separately. Every character only has one unarmed strike. The rules don't differentiate between punching someone, kicking them or headbutting them - it's all unarmed. (And while the monk rules specifically call this out, the truth is "I kick him" is something that anyone should be able to declare, so it basically applies to everybody.) So by the rules (not by the flavor), magic weapon or magic fang are both good enough to cover any unarmed attack you make - because you only have the one.
Using a wand of either Greater Magic Weapon and so on is prohibitively expensive, because if you want to keep the flavour of unarmed combat ( your whole body is your weapon ), as per the rules you still need to enchant every limb separately.No, as per the "flavor" you have to enchant every limb separately. Every character only has one unarmed strike. The rules don't differentiate between punching someone, kicking them or headbutting them - it's all unarmed. (And while the monk rules specifically call this out, the truth is "I kick him" is something that anyone should be able to declare, so it basically applies to everybody.) So by the rules (not by the flavor), magic weapon or magic fang are both good enough to cover any unarmed attack you make - because you only have the one.
After wasting the requisite half hour combing through threads about the issue, I come to the conclusion that many people share my opinion ( probably because there was a ruling on the matter in D&D 3.5 ), while the devs stayed the hell away from the subject, as always with Monk-related matters.
So, as to what you are saying, that's, like, just your opinion, man.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
Using a wand of either Greater Magic Weapon and so on is prohibitively expensive, because if you want to keep the flavour of unarmed combat ( your whole body is your weapon ), as per the rules you still need to enchant every limb separately.No, as per the "flavor" you have to enchant every limb separately. Every character only has one unarmed strike. The rules don't differentiate between punching someone, kicking them or headbutting them - it's all unarmed. (And while the monk rules specifically call this out, the truth is "I kick him" is something that anyone should be able to declare, so it basically applies to everybody.) So by the rules (not by the flavor), magic weapon or magic fang are both good enough to cover any unarmed attack you make - because you only have the one.
Correct.
A monk is not attacking with a "hand" or a "foot" or a "head" - just an "unarmed strike." You cast MF/MW/GMF/GMW on the "unarmed strike," which as noted is treated as *A* manufactured weapon/*A* natural weapon, singular. Those spells affect a single manu/nat weapon, singular.
One spell is all that is needed.
Ruling otherwise requires a flavorized inference that is not present in the literal rules text, and which is a ruling to the detriment of the monk.
Correct.
A monk is not attacking with a "hand" or a "foot" or a "head" - just an "unarmed strike." You cast MF/MW/GMF/GMW on the "unarmed strike," which as noted is treated as *A* manufactured weapon/*A* natural weapon, singular. Those spells affect a single manu/nat weapon, singular.
One spell is all that is needed.
Ruling otherwise requires a flavorized inference that is not present in the literal rules text, and which is a ruling to the detriment of the monk.
I am not sure Sean Reynolds agrees with you on that topic...
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2008 Top 4, Legendary Games
|
I am not sure Sean Reynolds agrees with you on that topic...Correct.
A monk is not attacking with a "hand" or a "foot" or a "head" - just an "unarmed strike." You cast MF/MW/GMF/GMW on the "unarmed strike," which as noted is treated as *A* manufactured weapon/*A* natural weapon, singular. Those spells affect a single manu/nat weapon, singular.
One spell is all that is needed.
Ruling otherwise requires a flavorized inference that is not present in the literal rules text, and which is a ruling to the detriment of the monk.
That's fine. We don't always agree on everything.
That said, his post in that thread seems more like a stream-of-consciousness brainstorm than an actual specific and definitive statement. A lot of ifs and supposes.
I am but a humble contributor. I calls em as I sees em. You can take my statements for what they're worth.
|
|
Also, lets stop comparing monks to fighters shall we?
Instead how about we compare then to a class that is way more similar on mulitple issues...the rogue.
HD: d8 (both)
Skill Ranks: rogue 8; monk 4 (both more than most other classes)
Base Attack: medium (both)
Saves: rogue good Refex; monk all good saves
Weapon Proficiency: rogue simple and special rogue weapons; monk special monk weapons plus some simple weapons
Armor Proficiency: rogue Light armor only, no shields; monk no armor or shields
Abilities: multiple unique special abilities (both)
No one complains that rougues aren't front line fighters, so why do people assume that monks should be able to act as front line fighters?
Just because monks are better fighters than rogues doesn't mean you can expect them to be as good at fighting as fighters.
Yeah I can see your wheels turning already thinking your so clever to point out the Full Base Attack that monks get when using flurry of blows. Thats like saying that rogues do as much damage as fighters just because when they sneak attack they do. Rogues do that damage under special cicumstances, monks get their base attack under special circumstances.
Lets compare Merisiel and Sajan's level 1 stats...
Merisiel: Str 12, Dex 17, Con 12, Int 10, Wis 13, Cha 10
HP 10
AC 16 (t 14, ff 12)
Saves F +1, R +5, W +1
Attack rapier +1 (1d6+1, 18-20/x2)
Special +1d6 sneak attack
CMB +1; CMD 15
Sajan: Str 15, Dex 15, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 12, Cha 8
HP 11
AC 14 (t 14, ff 11)
Saves F +4, R +4, W +3
Attack unarmed strike +2 (1d6+2) or flurry of blows +1/+1 (1d6+2)
Special stunning fist (1/day, DC 11)
CMB +2; CMD 15
I'll do you one better and use some (rules neutral) 4e stuff and catigorize both classes as Strikers. Fighters are Defenders.
And yes the character role stuff from 4e works for Pathfinder too.
Fighter Role: Defender. You are very tough and have the exceptional ability to contain enemies in melee.
Rogue Role: Striker. You dart in to attack, do massive damage, and then retreat to safety. You do best when teamed with a defender to flank enemies.
Sounds just like it could be in a Pathfinder book to me.
Monk Role: Striker. You typically eschew weapons in favor of unarmed attacks, and you avoid armor in favor of maneuverability and agility. Few can match your speed and poise on the battlefield. Your powers are more than simple attacks; they are complex forms that allow you to strike and move with unmatched grace. You lean toward controller as a secondary role.
Now granted parts of that don't fit well in a Pathfinder book but, if you remove the sentance that pertains to 4e powers...
Monk Role: Striker. You typically eschew weapons in favor of unarmed attacks, and you avoid armor in favor of maneuverability and agility. Few can match your speed and poise on the battlefield. You lean toward controller as a secondary role.
Not everything in 4e is crap. Theres some good stuff in there too, rests and recovering powers, quests, the 3 tier system, healing surge.
But I digress, Monks arent fighters, they aren't desgined as fighters, they arent meant to fill the role of a fighter. Stop complaining about monks not being front-line fighters or somesuch. They fill a different role in the adventuring party paradigm.
For those who care or are interested in such things....
Pathfinder Core Classes by Role
Controller: Druid, Wizard
Defender: Fighter, Paladin
Striker: Barbarian, Monk, Ranger, Rogue, Sorcerer
Leader: Bard, Cleric
Ii avoided making decisions on APG, UM, and UC classes to avoid further arguments spurred on by my personal views. Not sure about Barbarian myself either but thats what they are in 4e and a lot of things between 3.5, 4e, and Pathfinder are still similar.
Heres something I just notice while compiling this information, all strikers listed above except for the Sorcerer get 4 or more Skill Ranks per level.
Wow that was quite a rant! I'm done now.