The cost was lowered from three times to two-and-a-half times as a magical weapon with the equivalent bonus in PF, but its still insanely expensive.
Why? Please give me a reason, I can`t think of one.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Because it could apply to three or more attacks, potentially (e.g. a monster with a claw/claw/bite attack routine). Of course, that means that characters with less than three attacks kind of get the shaft, but at least there's the consolation that you can have a +0 flaming amulet of mighty fists for 5,000 gp whereas a +1 flaming longsword costs 8,000 gp (for example).
Because it could apply to three or more attacks, potentially (e.g. a monster with a claw/claw/bite attack routine).
Ok, and because of dragons, the monk has to suffer (even more).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think because of dragons every body has to suffer more...really,
I get what you are saying, but it is what it is, I am sure there is a valid reason for it.
Well, if you were making it from scratch as a custom item, it would cost 18,000 gp --- a continuous use wondrous item using greater magic fang as its base -- minimum caster level 3 times spell level 3 times 2,000 equals 18,000.
So compared to THAT, 5,000 gp is cheap.
It of course still doesn't make much sense--but I guess the idea is that a non-weapon item that enhances your attacks should cost more than a weapon. Of course, since the item is largely intended for monks who are trying to get the most out of unarmed attacks, it doesn't really help. But just imagine: it could be worse.
If they had just left the brass knuckles rules alone, monks would have had another, cheaper option--and your best bet is to ignore the brass knuckles errata and use them as originally written--that brass knucks used by a monk uses the same damage dice as a monk's unarmed strike. (Of course, brass knuckles themselves are a weapon, so you would not be able to combine the effects of enchanted brass knuckles with an amulet of mighty fists)
Ok, and because of dragons, the monk has to suffer (even more).
If you want to save money for your monk, you can always use a magic weapon instead.
I'm ambivalent on the issue; I think the amulet is perhaps a bit too expensive, but I don't think it's hugely too expensive, at least compared to a two-weapon fighter.
I would have guess it was because the designers hate monks (joke).
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This item should have been smashed into two loooooong ago (back in 3.5e at least).
It should be:
Amulet of Mighty Fists
Enhances unarmed strikes like weapon enhancements. EXACTLY like weapons (need the +1, costs the same).
Amulet of Magic Fang
Exactly like the current amulet of mighty fists, but applies to natural attacks only.
.
Yay, fixed. Move along.
Why this is still rotting away in the core books, I have no idea...
This item should have been smashed into two loooooong ago (back in 3.5e at least).
It should be:
Amulet of Mighty Fists
Enhances unarmed strikes like weapon enhancements. EXACTLY like weapons (need the +1, costs the same).Amulet of Magic Fang
Exactly like the current amulet of mighty fists, but applies to natural attacks only..
Yay, fixed. Move along.
How does that fix things for a two-weapon fighter (who's left holding the short end of the stick, all of a sudden)?
I would have guess it was because the designers hate monks (joke).*looks at the amount of Monk stuff in APG and UC*
I'm not laughing, can you tell me when should I start?
Maybe Core? I'm not laughing either.
|
How does that fix things for a two-weapon fighter (who's left holding the short end of the stick, all of a sudden)?
Armed monks can flurry with a single weapon without any problem. So it wouldn't change a thing for the position of the TWF fighter (who isn't doing that bad if you know how to build him).
If you need 'proof', check the battle monk and the master from the GMG, both are able to flurry with a single kama.
Link
How does that fix things for a two-weapon fighter (who's left holding the short end of the stick, all of a sudden)?Armed monks can flurry with a single weapon without any problem. So it wouldn't change a thing for the position of the TWF fighter (who isn't doing that bad if you know how to build him).
Huh? How does the fact that monks can flurry with a single weapon help a (non-monk) TWF fighter's costs?
|
|
Huh? How does the fact that monks can flurry with a single weapon help a (non-monk) TWF fighter's costs?How does that fix things for a two-weapon fighter (who's left holding the short end of the stick, all of a sudden)?Armed monks can flurry with a single weapon without any problem. So it wouldn't change a thing for the position of the TWF fighter (who isn't doing that bad if you know how to build him).
It doesn't help him. It just shows, that allowing the monk a cheaper way to get an enhancement bonus to unarmed strike would not make the TWF fighter worse.
Well a monk can enchant his fists like a magic weapon to not pay the high price of the amulet.
But he can also attack with his feet, knees, elbows, head etc. whatever you see in martial arts films. The amulet gives the bonus to all those attacks. The enchanted fist only counts when you hit with this fist (and it could be full cause you are hanging from a ledge or hold a friend...)
But the big advantage is for animal companions (or the eidolon?) that have many attacks and don't need to get each limb enchanted seprately.
One can also choose to take a weapon enchantment, such as flaming or keen, without paying the initial +1 "cost." For any other weapon, this means a total +2 enchantment at least. This comes out to be a total of 10,000 gp. Just something to keep in mind.
Something I just thought of.
Its a pain for the monk, but when flurrying, its basically supposed to be on par with enchanting two weapons.
This doesn't mean I like the very expensive amulet. As a monk, I would still rather get the amulet of natural armour. Its cheaper and helps about the same.
|
|
Something I just thought of.
Its a pain for the monk, but when flurrying, its basically supposed to be on par with enchanting two weapons.
This doesn't mean I like the very expensive amulet. As a monk, I would still rather get the amulet of natural armour. Its cheaper and helps about the same.
Why should it be on par with enchanting to weapons when the monk can flurry with a single enchanted weapon just fine?
With temple swords, the nerf to brass knuckles and the change to improved natural attack, there are little reasons to play an unarmed monk. Although some of the fighting styles might make it better.With Cornugon Stun, you might even use Stunning Fist with a temple sword.
Why should it be on par with enchanting to weapons when the monk can flurry with a single enchanted weapon just fine?
It used to be the case that monk weapons were generally quite a bit inferior to an unarmed attack at mid-to-high levels, but then the temple sword came along and closed the gap significantly.
Something I just thought of.
Its a pain for the monk, but when flurrying, its basically supposed to be on par with enchanting two weapons.
This doesn't mean I like the very expensive amulet. As a monk, I would still rather get the amulet of natural armour. Its cheaper and helps about the same.
Why should it be on par with enchanting to weapons when the monk can flurry with a single enchanted weapon just fine?
With temple swords, the nerf to brass knuckles and the change to improved natural attack, there are little reasons to play an unarmed monk. Although some of the fighting styles might make it better.
With Cornugon Stun, you might even use Stunning Fist with a temple sword.
Oh right. I forgot there are monks that use weapons :P
Never mind then.
Also monks before APG didn't rely at amulet of mighty fists for enchantement bonus, you would get either a greater magic weapon or greater magic fang (both spells work on monk, both spells have 1 hour/level) from your party spellcaster, permanency on top if you can. And were using amulet of mighty fists for enchantements like holy and speed.
Of course with the APG they could use the brass knuckles and have one weapon, with normal enchantement costs like anyone else, but that changed due to a late errata and now the best thing for a monk to do is take a temple sword (1d8 19-29/x2) and enchant normally, the thing with the temple sword is that it's one of the two non-light monk weapons and monk is prof. with both of them (the UC has some non-light monk weapons but monks aren't prof. with them), that means that you can hold it two handed and get the full benefit of power attack (you don't get STR*1.5 but at that point i will take what i can).
That's it short version of monk's weapon selection in PF for your convience.
The cost was lowered from three times to two-and-a-half times as a magical weapon with the equivalent bonus in PF, but its still insanely expensive.
Why? Please give me a reason, I can`t think of one.
Paizo hates monks.
Because it's like being able to enchant a double bladed or triple bladed weapon all parts at once for the price of one. The amulet affects any part ofyour body that you use to make an unarmed attack whether it's hand strike, foot strike, or head butt.The cost was lowered from three times to two-and-a-half times as a magical weapon with the equivalent bonus in PF, but its still insanely expensive.
Why? Please give me a reason, I can`t think of one.
Also nobody mentioned it's a bit tricky to disarm an amulet.
Of course with the APG they could use the brass knuckles and have one weapon, with normal enchantement costs like anyone else, but that changed due to a late errata
So what did they do to brass knuckles?
|
Monks aren't the only class that gain use of an Amulet of Mighty Fists. I know my Melee Alchemist loooooves his, even with it being expensive it comes out cheaper to pay just the amulet cost than it would to seperatly enhance his claw/claw/bite as 3 seperate weapons.
Also, a summoner's pet beastie can make excellent use of it as well as any class that has a companion animal like a Palidan, Cavalier, Ranger and Druid.
I don't really see the Amulet as "Monk Hate."
Of course a way around this problem entierly would be to dip into an arcane casting class for 1 lvl and just take Arcane Strike. Problem solved.
|
Also nobody mentioned it's a bit tricky to disarm an amulet.
Disarm, yes. Steal, however...
You can attempt to take an item from a foe as a standard action. This maneuver can be used in melee to take any item that is neither held nor hidden in a bag or pack. You must have at least one hand free (holding nothing) to attempt this maneuver. You must select the item to be taken before the check is made. Items that are simply tucked into a belt or loosely attached (such as brooches or necklaces) are the easiest to take. Items fastened to a foe (such as cloaks, sheathed weapons, or pouches) are more difficult to take, and give the opponent a +5 bonus (or greater) to his CMD. Items that are closely worn (such as armor, backpacks, boots, clothing, or rings) cannot be taken with this maneuver. Items held in the hands (such as wielded weapons or wands) also cannot be taken with the steal maneuver—you must use the disarm combat maneuver instead. The GM is the final arbiter of what items can be taken. If you do not have the Improved Steal feat or a similar ability, attempting to steal an object provokes an attack of opportunity from the target of your maneuver.
So what did they do to brass knuckles?
Of course with the APG they could use the brass knuckles and have one weapon, with normal enchantement costs like anyone else, but that changed due to a late errata
They removed the part that allows a monk to apply his unarmed damage die and categorized them as light weapons.
That pretty much makes them another useless weapon.Though it did far greater damage to the monk than losing a weapon with very good damage die, they make the lives of DEX based monks very difficult and here is why:
Before the nerf a monk you effectively dump STR (STR 10) and pump up DEX, piranha strike was doubling as power attack and the good damage die of a monk's unarmed strike was able to make up some if not all of the STR difference, still this build didn't outdamage the above mentioned temple sword STR build but could do comparable damage with that. You know what was the good thing with that DEX build? You only needed 2 abilities DEX and WIS where the STR based temple sword requires 3 abilities STR, DEX and WIS.
At this point i really hope UC has some very good things for monksm, i know it has a lot of things for monks, i just don't know how many of them are actually good ones.
|
|
Because it's like being able to enchant a double bladed or triple bladed weapon all parts at once for the price of one. The amulet affects any part ofyour body that you use to make an unarmed attack whether it's hand strike, foot strike, or head butt.
Do you charge extra if someone wants to enchant a dagger? After all, it not only enchants the point of the dagger but also the blade.
Unarmed Strike is one weapon for the monk. Being able to kick or punch your opponent does not grant you extra attacks.There should be no difference between enchanting an unarmed strike and enchanting a temple sword.
|
Yep, unarmed strike is a single abstract attack as Jadeite says.
A monk could have three arms, forty arms, or no arms, and it wouldn't make a difference. Unarmed strike would still function the same for all of those monks.
A flurry of blows with unarmed strike could be anything from "right punch, right elbow, left backhand, right kick" to "headbutt, double-hand palm-strike, right knee, double-hand palm-strike" to "left kick, left kick, left kick, left kick."
Monks shouldn't be charged extra just so they can live up to their flavor. Make an item(or better yet, a self-enhancing option) for monks/unarmed-strike-users and another for the natural weapons/claw-claw-bite crowd.
Because it's like being able to enchant a double bladed or triple bladed weapon all parts at once for the price of one. The amulet affects any part ofyour body that you use to make an unarmed attack whether it's hand strike, foot strike, or head butt.
That is fluff reasoning, but makes no sense when you look at it from a game balance perspective. The monk can flurry with just one weapon, you know?
EDIT:
Our new houserule: starting at level 4, a monk is treated as if he had greater magic weapon (CL = monk class level) active as long as he has a ki point left.
Amulet of mighty fists can add further enchantments (holy, flaming...), which justifies its price tag.
Monks aren't the only class that gain use of an Amulet of Mighty Fists. I know my Melee Alchemist loooooves his, even with it being expensive it comes out cheaper to pay just the amulet cost than it would to seperatly enhance his claw/claw/bite as 3 seperate weapons.
Also, a summoner's pet beastie can make excellent use of it as well as any class that has a companion animal like a Palidan, Cavalier, Ranger and Druid.
I don't really see the Amulet as "Monk Hate."
Of course a way around this problem entierly would be to dip into an arcane casting class for 1 lvl and just take Arcane Strike. Problem solved.
The Amulet is not necessarily in itself 'Monk Hate'. It's priced reasonably for enhancing natural weapons. The fact that it's the only game in town for enhancing the Monk's unarmed strike, however, is. An unarmed strike is a single weapon. Just like the Temple Sword, which we let the Monk flurry with just fine. The only difference between it and and a single weapon is that it can be described in any number of ways. Paying nearly three times as much for the right to describe my unarmed strike as a punch, kick, or headbutt while maintaining the enhancements I've paid for.
In the House Rules document that I've been working on, I allow monks to train in Esoteric Techniques once they get their Ki Pool, essentially giving them Craft Magic Arms and Armor only for the purpose of enhancing their unarmed strike, but still have them pay full market price (without an increase in crafting/training time). I call the AMoF 'The Amulet of Tooth and Claw' and have it apply only to natural attacks.
The monk CAN flurry with only one weapon, but most of those weapons do 1d4 or 1d6 damage. The extra cost reflects that the monk is functionally two weapon fighting, even if unarmed strike is technically one abstract attack the cost of improving it is still equivalent to two weapons.
I didn't know about the nerf to brass knuckles... that sucks for my monk who uses a set.
|
Because it's like being able to enchant a double bladed or triple bladed weapon all parts at once for the price of one. The amulet affects any part of your body that you use to make an unarmed attack whether it's hand strike, foot strike, or head butt.The cost was lowered from three times to two-and-a-half times as a magical weapon with the equivalent bonus in PF, but its still insanely expensive.
Why? Please give me a reason, I can`t think of one.
Yeah, I'm sorry, but this is just plain wrong and contrary to the RAW. "unarmed attacks" is an abstract single weapon. Essentially, all parts of the monk's body are a single weapon. You can't enchant a fist or a foot, and each limb does not count as a separate weapon. The entire monk is one thing to enhance.
Also, the amulet is limited to +5 total, while weapons are not. Don't even get me started on the price differential. Bras knuckles were a reasonable, appropriately priced item to solve this problem and should never have been nerfed. It certainly wasn't done for balance reasons. I've yet to see the endless threads about overpowered monks winning the game because of their brass knuckles of doom. Actually, most threads are about how monks suck.
Looks like I'm back to bargaining for magic weapon or magic fang from a party member. Its sad that enchanting unarmed attacks has become so expensive that the best move (again) is to outsource the job.
EDITED FOR CLARITY
He's functionally Two Weapon Fighting, but he never, ever, ever needs two weapons to do it. He can flurry with a single fist, if he wants. He can flurry with a single 1d8 19-20/x2 trip weapon. The Amulet of Mighty Fists is the only time a monk ever has to pay a tax for his flurry, and it's a bigger tax than any other TWF has to pay.
This item should have been smashed into two loooooong ago (back in 3.5e at least).
It should be:
Amulet of Mighty Fists
Enhances unarmed strikes like weapon enhancements. EXACTLY like weapons (need the +1, costs the same).Amulet of Magic Fang
Exactly like the current amulet of mighty fists, but applies to natural attacks only..
Yay, fixed. Move along.Why this is still rotting away in the core books, I have no idea...
The main thing that makes this a non-ideal fix is the high metagamey element. Making a distinction between an animal companion's (or wildshaped druid's) different natural weapons and a monk's unarmed strikes coming from different sources requires a recognition of the game rule differences between the two when simulationism would definitely lump them together.
That said, I don't find it a really compelling distinction given the number of other times we make the distinction.
Vow of Poverty.
The game already makes considerable distinctions between unarmed strike and natural weapons. Natural Weapons don't get iterative attacks, for example, not too mention the very existence of the Slam attack. Making another one so that the monk can enhance his unarmed strike for a reasonable price would hardly be any worse.
He's functionally Two Weapon Fighting, but he never, ever, ever needs two weapons to do it. He can flurry with a single fist, if he wants. He can flurry with a single 1d8 19-20/x2 trip weapon. The Amulet of Mighty Fists is the only time a monk ever has to pay a tax for his flurry, and it's a bigger tax than any other TWF has to pay.
That's because a Monk gets a significantly better damage die with his unarmed attacks than any other TWF character can ever hope for with their weapons.
The more you get, the more tax you pay. It's simple math.
That's because a Monk gets a significantly better damage die with his unarmed attacks than any other TWF character can ever hope for with their weapons.
The more you get, the more tax you pay. It's simple math.
No, its not so simple. There are a few BUTS you have not taken into account, if you compare the monk to a TWF Fighter:
A d20 sounds great for damage, but its only 20/x2 and most of the damage is done from STR bonus at high levels anyway.
3/4 BAB.
He's functionally Two Weapon Fighting, but he never, ever, ever needs two weapons to do it. He can flurry with a single fist, if he wants. He can flurry with a single 1d8 19-20/x2 trip weapon. The Amulet of Mighty Fists is the only time a monk ever has to pay a tax for his flurry, and it's a bigger tax than any other TWF has to pay.
The temple sword is something of an exception. Otherwise, the monk's unarmed flurry attacks are vastly superior to the same monk using a single weapon to flurry. It makes sense that the tax on the former would be higher than the tax on the latter.
That's because a Monk gets a significantly better damage die with his unarmed attacks than any other TWF character can ever hope for with their weapons.
The more you get, the more tax you pay. It's simple math.No, its not so simple. There are a few BUTS you have not taken into account, if you compare the monk to a TWF Fighter:
A d20 sounds great for damage, but its only 20/x2 and most of the damage is done from STR bonus at high levels anyway.
3/4 BAB.
Monks have full Bab when flurrying.
Since most damage comes from STR, then I'm sure you won't have any problems with my Rogue duel wielding large great clubs. They're only 2d8 20/x2.
Well, if they're greatclubs, he can't dual wield them because that's a two-handed weapon, and if they're Large greatclubs, he can't wield them at all, because a Medium creature cannot wield a Large two-handed weapon. And since a plain club is a one-handed weapon, a Large one would be two-handed for your Medium sized rogue. And if you wielded two light weapons, they'd both count as one-handed, so between TWF penalties, size penalties, and a 3/4 BAB, you probably wouldn't find yourself doing very well anyway. Other than all that, yeah, no problem.
A fighter dual wielding a Bastard Sword and a Handaxe rolls bigger damage dice than one wielding a pair of daggers, but that doesn't mean those weapons cost more to enhance.
He's functionally Two Weapon Fighting, but he never, ever, ever needs two weapons to do it. He can flurry with a single fist, if he wants. He can flurry with a single 1d8 19-20/x2 trip weapon. The Amulet of Mighty Fists is the only time a monk ever has to pay a tax for his flurry, and it's a bigger tax than any other TWF has to pay.The temple sword is something of an exception. Otherwise, the monk's unarmed flurry attacks are vastly superior to the same monk using a single weapon to flurry. It makes sense that the tax on the former would be higher than the tax on the latter.
No it's not, even if you pay normally the monk still gets the -1/+2 ratio of power attack but the one using the temple can get the -1/+3 ration of power attack.
The only way to make a good unarmed monk is gone along with the brass knuckles.
I would have to guess it was because the designers hate monks (joke).
That's word for word what I was going to write (minus the (joke))
This item should have been smashed into two loooooong ago (back in 3.5e at least).
It should be:
Amulet of Mighty Fists
Enhances unarmed strikes like weapon enhancements. EXACTLY like weapons (need the +1, costs the same).Amulet of Magic Fang
Exactly like the current amulet of mighty fists, but applies to natural attacks only..
Yay, fixed. Move along.Why this is still rotting away in the core books, I have no idea...
..but a monk can have his hands full and attack with almost any body part. He does not even lose attacks from doing so like a monster with natural attacks would.
Let compare a dragon holding an item in its claws and a monk doing the same thing. The dragon just lost two attacks. It seems the monks benefits from it more than anyone else.
They removed the part that allows a monk to apply his unarmed damage die and categorized them as light weapons.
That is not completely true. They are no longer monk weapons RAW, but they still allow for the monk unarmed damage.
Brass Knuckles: These close combat weapons are designed to fit comfortably around the knuckles, narrowing the contact area and therefore magnifying the amount of force delivered by a punch. They allow you to deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks. You may hold, but not wield, a weapon or other object in a hand wearing brass knuckles. You may cast a spell with a somatic component while wearing brass knuckles if you make a concentration check (DC 10 + the level of the spell you're casting). Monks are proficient with brass knuckles and can use their monk unarmed damage when fighting with them.
edit:They are monk weapons.
They removed the part that allows a monk to apply his unarmed damage die and categorized them as light weapons.
That is not completely true. They are no longer monk weapons RAW, but they still allow for the monk unarmed damage.
Brass Knuckles: These close combat weapons are designed to fit comfortably around the knuckles, narrowing the contact area and therefore magnifying the amount of force delivered by a punch. They allow you to deal lethal damage with unarmed attacks. You may hold, but not wield, a weapon or other object in a hand wearing brass knuckles. You may cast a spell with a somatic component while wearing brass knuckles if you make a concentration check (DC 10 + the level of the spell you're casting). Monks are proficient with brass knuckles and can use their monk unarmed damage when fighting with them.edit:They are monk weapons.
They must not have changed it yet.
The errata i am speaking of is done on the adventurer's armory and SKR said that thy will change the APG entry as well.