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.
I know what you are talking about. He said it would change, but then the APG came out. It was actually sent to the printers after Sean make his statement. It has been out for a year and still no change. As of now the APG is the official version. The APG was just added to the PRD recently so I figured if they were going to change anything it would have been done before the addition to the website.
@concerro
You do know that the latest errata (the one i am talking about) to brass knuckles happened a week ago right?
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.
My vote will be that it's because it goes in an uncustomary body slot. About the only part of your body that you really can't attack with is your neck. Amulet of Mighty Fists actually springs into effect no matter what you're attacking with, whether it's your fists, a flying jump kick, a head butt or the Poison Pit. Unlike a weapon enhancement bonus that only applies to swinging that particular weapon (which could be sundered, disarmed or disintegrated, unarmed strikes can be slightly more versatile.
Might just be because the Monk tends to spend less gold on weapons and armor so they jacked the price up on this to even that out.
..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.
Indeed. Apparently it's good to be a Monk for unarmed attacks. I have no illusions that this won't increase the power of the Monk.
See, I see this as a distinction between what people can buy to improve unarmed strikes, and what a Monk's class features do to improve his unarmed strikes.
You could wear a gauntlet and get up to +10 weapon enhancements on it and not be able to be disarmed (or even have it stolen I believe). This is an unarmed strike option (although not for the Monk).
The amulet can be sundered and stolen (but not disarmed, just like the gauntlet).
The amulet giving a normal person up to +10 weapon enhancements makes it exactly equal in cost:power for unarmed strikes.
Then along comes the monk. His class features gives him higher damage on unarmed strike. It also gives him a superior version of two weapon fighting.
These are the benefits of the Monk, not the amulet. The monk needs decent Dex and Wis to remain competitively defensive, and along with needing a decent Con score, his Strength damage will suffer.
On top of that, he's given a wide range of class features that also do nothing for his offensive combat ability (some defensive and movement based options).
All these things are the balancing factor for his high base damage and flurry of blows.
I think the amulet can stay outside of that balancing factor. Balance the amulet as if anyone who wanted to make unarmed strikes wanted to weapon enhance themselves (note: it makes a great grapple enhancer).
If monks suddenly become awesome... how exactly is that a problem?
.
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.
Yeah, unarmed strikes and natural attacks are fairly close in concept, and the magic can be explained (perhaps more easily) so that it all works the same way. However, the game does have rules for applying them differently, and I think this is just another case where it would continue to be prudent to do so.
An unarmed strike is typically attacking with a body part in a way that would not normally allow for lethal damage. It's more about how you make the attack, than what the attack is with.
A natural attack is lethal by nature: either sharper or harder than normal such that it can damage without any special training.
If you want a fluff reason for the magic to work:
The natural amulet enchants the whole body with a "coating" of enhancement, such that a natural attack applies the enhancements when it physically contacts. This isn't enough for an unarmed strike, because the unarmed strike isn't getting enough "magic" in the attack (a coating on your hands with no lethal bits doesn't let it set off the magic).
For the mighty fists, the magic gathers and discharges when the technique that allows damaging with normally non-lethal means is used. Simply bumping into someone in the street won't set it off, but if you used the same part of your body as a (somehow) lethal shoulder slam, then it sets off the magic. Natural attacks don't have this extra technique, so they don't set off the magic. It's just "swing the way the muscles were meant to, and let the sharp or hard bits hurt the target". The technique is built into the natural attack (which is also why natural attacks don't get iteratives).
I guess, technically, if a creature with a natural attack wanted to use that attack in their iteratives (which is allowed by the rules), I'd let it use Might Fists enhancements. You are using it with combat technique, rather than part of the natural instinctive routine.
It's a fairly corner case, but ultimately self limiting so it would work.
Actually, that makes a better definition for the amulet: The amulet enhances body parts used with attacks gained from BAB (such as off hand TWF or iterative attacks), but not in a natural attack routine.
This is ultimately the difference trying to be emphasized between the two amulets: one is limited by BAB iteratives/TWF rules, while the other can use the entire natural attack routine (as many as you have).
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.
No, no. Two large Great clubs, standard -2 penalty. And I want full Bab, but only when wielding clubs. I mean, it's not like it's overpowered or anything. Besides, Rogues kinda suck any way, doing this helps make them balanced. Why are you trying to nerf me?
@concerro
You do know that the latest errata (the one i am talking about) to brass knuckles happened a week ago right?
<goes to check errata>
Errata for Core Rulebook First Printing v1.2: 1.3 MB zip PDF
Errata for Core Rulebook Second Printing v2.1: 1.3 MB zip PDF
Errata for Core Rulebook Third Printing v3.0: 1.3 MB zip PDF
Errata for Bestiary First Printing v1.0: 1.5 MB zip PDF
Errata for GameMastery Guide First Printing v1.0: 1.5 MB zip PDF
Errata for Advanced Player's Guide First Printing v1.0: 1.5 MB zip PDF
That is copied and pasted from "My downloads".
I downloaded that APG(1.0) errata back in May so it could not have been put out last week.
@Quantum Steve
Unless you have some special ability you can't weild even two handed a larger two handed weapon.
@concerro
You do know that the latest errata (the one i am talking about) to brass knuckles happened a week ago right?
<goes to check errata>
Errata for Core Rulebook First Printing v1.2: 1.3 MB zip PDF
Errata for Core Rulebook Second Printing v2.1: 1.3 MB zip PDF
Errata for Core Rulebook Third Printing v3.0: 1.3 MB zip PDF
Errata for Bestiary First Printing v1.0: 1.5 MB zip PDF
Errata for GameMastery Guide First Printing v1.0: 1.5 MB zip PDF
Errata for Advanced Player's Guide First Printing v1.0: 1.5 MB zip PDFThat is copied and pasted from "My downloads".
I downloaded that APG(1.0) errata back in May so it could not have been put out last week.
The adventurer's armory errata.
The adventurer's armory errata.
I dont see an adventurer's armory errata listed. At first I thought it was because I don't have a pdf copy so it wont show up for me, but I don't have a pdf of the bestiary either and that shows up. All errata is on the download page, and I just copied and pasted all the errata in my last post.
Here.
It seems that you went on the "my downloads" page to search for the errata. You should have gone to the adventurer's armory page.
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.
Benefit: Brass knuckles allow you to deal lethal damage*.
Drawback: 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).
Note: Monks are proficient with brass knuckles and can use their Monk unarmed damage when fighting with them.
*Adventurer's Armory Errata Update 2.0 — Release Date: 07/21/11
I stand corrected on there being errata, but no change was made. I will also add.
Special Note
Paizo developer Sean K. Reynolds explicitly stated in a Paizo messageboard post that monks DO NOT use their unarmed damage when fighting with brass knuckles even though the latest errata did not change or remove the sentence stating they do. It is the policy of d20pfsrd.com not to change official wording based on developer messageboard posts until and unless such a ruling is added to an official errata or faq.
See the Source link below for Sean's post for more information.
Yes Sean said it, but it did not make the errata.
@Quantum Steve
Unless you have some special ability you can't weild even two handed a larger two handed weapon.
He's trying to say that paying normal price to enhance your unarmed strike is somehow equivalent letting someone dual wield large two-handed weapons.
A better analogy might be that forcing monks to use the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists if they want to go unarmed is equivalent to saying that, unless the rogue pays extra, his sneak attacks are *always* a stab at the kidney from behind. Or that because the damage die on a Greatsword or Greataxe are larger than on a Dagger, the Greatsword or Greataxe should cost more than double the price to enchant.
I checked the download, and there is no reference to removing the "Monk unarmed damage" line. They are now officially monk weapons though.
I have no issue with the creation of monk gloves. That way when he decides to hold something in his hands he loses the benefit of the enhancement, just like the previously mentioned dragon would, but he should not expect to gain the benefits of the amulet without paying for for it.
Ok first of all this post of Sean is ancient (as in pre-APG).
Now can you please stop looking on online pages? (and fan-made ones in particular) for just one minute?
If you open your 1st printing adventurer's armory (like i did) and open the latest errata file you will see that there is no mention of monk's getting unarmed damage die when using brass knuckles.
OR
You can go in the pathfinder companion section of the forums and see the cries and blood of the poeple there about that change (they must be buried somewhere between the numerous heirloom weapon change threads, oh btw that changed also). You can find such a thread here.
@Quantum Steve
Unless you have some special ability you can't weild even two handed a larger two handed weapon.
He's trying to say that paying normal price to enhance your unarmed strike is somehow equivalent letting someone dual wield large two-handed weapons.
A better analogy might be that forcing monks to use the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists if they want to go unarmed is equivalent to saying that, unless the rogue pays extra, his sneak attacks are *always* a stab at the kidney from behind. Or that because the damage die on a Greatsword or Greataxe are larger than on a Dagger, the Greatsword or Greataxe should cost more than double the price to enchant.
TWF costs double for everyone but weapon using Monks. You whine that unarmed Monks don't get the free money other Monks do, but weapons that can't be disarmed or even put down that do damage equivalent to a large two-handed weapon isn't consolation enough.
TWF costs double for everyone but weapon using Monks. You whine that unarmed Monks don't get the free money other Monks do, but weapons that can't be disarmed or even put down that do damage equivalent to a large two-handed weapon isn't consolation enough.@Quantum Steve
Unless you have some special ability you can't weild even two handed a larger two handed weapon.
He's trying to say that paying normal price to enhance your unarmed strike is somehow equivalent letting someone dual wield large two-handed weapons.
A better analogy might be that forcing monks to use the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists if they want to go unarmed is equivalent to saying that, unless the rogue pays extra, his sneak attacks are *always* a stab at the kidney from behind. Or that because the damage die on a Greatsword or Greataxe are larger than on a Dagger, the Greatsword or Greataxe should cost more than double the price to enchant.
Right. Fighters also get specialization and weapon training. Rogues get Sneak attack. Paladins get Smite. Rangers get favored enemy. These are all considerable bonuses to damage that they, exclusively, get which makes the TWF builds for the above classes viable. Monks get big damage die, sure, but 6-7 attacks in a round doesn't matter worth anything if they can't get past DR. Hence enhancement. Hence they need a way to get it relatively cheaply. Not to mention, bud, that most TWF builds honestly kinda suck anyway (and this isn't new.)
Also, even if your point (buried under alien logic though it may be) were wholly valid and reasonable (something that is under contention at this point,) it's no excuse for predicating your stance on faulty rhetoric.
Ok first of all this post of Sean is ancient (as in pre-APG).
Now can you please stop looking on online pages? (and fan-made ones in particular) for just one minute?
If you open your 1st printing adventurer's armory (like i did) and open the latest errata file you will see that there is no mention of monk's getting unarmed damage die when using brass knuckles.
OR
You can go in the pathfinder companion section of the forums and see the cries and blood of the poeple there about that change (they must be buried somewhere between the numerous heirloom weapon change threads, oh btw that changed also). You can find such a thread here.
The APG came out after the other book so it supercedes it. Since there is no errata to remove the monk damage it is not removed. The fan site was of a recent post, not the old one. Here is the original link from paizo.com, date Tuesday July 26
I already told you I opened the file. There is no change so there is no change.
PS: Sean says the AA one was supposed to be the version to go out with the APG, but someone changed it, and how it is going back to be that way. Darn it. I would not care, but I have a guy in group that likes monks. House rules going into affect.
PS2:Why isn't the AA errata on the same page as everything else. <--rhetorical question.
edit:That fan-made site is often updated faster than the pathfinder(official) site so that was a terrible counter to use.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Personally I see no problem allowing the monk to enchant their entire body as a single weapon following the normal weapon rules. Perhaps with a tatoo or something. You want flaming fists, let yourself get tatood with an fiery image for example.
Monks aren't the super-fighters some people make them out to be, forcing them to pay unreasonable prices just to stay at the same level as other classes is stupid
TWF costs double for everyone but weapon using Monks. You whine that unarmed Monks don't get the free money other Monks do, but weapons that can't be disarmed or even put down that do damage equivalent to a large two-handed weapon isn't consolation enough.@Quantum Steve
Unless you have some special ability you can't weild even two handed a larger two handed weapon.
He's trying to say that paying normal price to enhance your unarmed strike is somehow equivalent letting someone dual wield large two-handed weapons.
A better analogy might be that forcing monks to use the overpriced Amulet of Mighty Fists if they want to go unarmed is equivalent to saying that, unless the rogue pays extra, his sneak attacks are *always* a stab at the kidney from behind. Or that because the damage die on a Greatsword or Greataxe are larger than on a Dagger, the Greatsword or Greataxe should cost more than double the price to enchant.
Right. Fighters also get specialization and weapon training. Rogues get Sneak attack. Paladins get Smite. Rangers get favored enemy. These are all considerable bonuses to damage that they, exclusively, get which makes the TWF builds for the above classes viable. Monks get big damage die, sure, but 6-7 attacks in a round doesn't matter worth anything if they can't get past DR. Hence enhancement. Hence they need a way to get it relatively cheaply. Not to mention, bud, that most TWF builds honestly kinda suck anyway (and this isn't new.)
Also, even if your point (buried under alien logic though it may be) were wholly valid and reasonable (something that is under contention at this point,) it's no excuse for predicating your stance on faulty rhetoric.
Might also help his point if the Amulet didn't cost MORE than what a TWF pays, and the game was in the habit for making oversized or otherwise high damage dice weapons cost more to enchant to balance them out in any case besides a monk's unarmed strike.
Monks have full Bab when flurrying.
Oh, youre right of course. Still, do you really want to compare a TWF Fighter at say lvl 15 or 20 to a flurrying monk at the same lvl (both can invest the same amount of money into their weapons / amulet of mighty fists) and claim the monk will have any change to come close in dmg?
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.
You can do what you like in your game. :)
What I meant is that 2d10 or 1d8 isn`t that big of a difference if +1d6 energy damage, +3 enhancement damage, +6 STR bonus, +8 power attack bonus are added. (Of course, a Fighter will add +4 from improved weapon spec. & +4 weapon training to that!)
Compare
2d10 + 1d6 + 14 19-20/x2 (monk with unarmed strike & improved crit)
to
1d8 + 1d6 +22 15-20/x2 (fighter with scimitar * improved crit)
Still think the dmg dice are that big a deal?
@concerro
Ok i thought that it was the old SKR's post.
The brass knuckles first came with the AA (adventurer's armory) and monk could not use unarmed strike damage die with them, then the APG came and monks can use unarmed strike damage die with them, then (a week ago) an errata to AA came and monks can't use unarmed strike damage die with them (again).
Are you telling me that in your copy of the AA (after the latest errata) it says that monks can use the unarmed strike damage die with the brass knuckles?
Oh yes i am 100% with you, house rule the brass knuckles into what they are in the current printing of the APG, but unfortunately those playing at PFS don't have this option.
Yes i was curious why the AA errata wasn't along with the other errata.
Yes i know that d20PFSRD is faster than PRD and i love the work they are doing but that doesn't change the fact that they are a fan site.
Might also help his point if the Amulet didn't cost MORE than what a TWF pays, and the game was in the habit for making oversized or otherwise high damage dice weapons cost more to enchant to balance them out in any case besides a monk's unarmed strike.
Unarmed Monks pay only 25% more because they use a non-weapon slot for enhancements and also the unique advantages their weapon has (i.e. can't be disarmed, uses no hands, etc.)
Weapon using Monks get a 50% discount because, unlike other classes, they don't have a class feature to increase their damage with a weapon.
Right. Fighters also get specialization and weapon training. Rogues get Sneak attack. Paladins get Smite. Rangers get favored enemy. These are all considerable bonuses to damage that they, exclusively, get which makes the TWF builds for the above classes viable. Monks get big damage die, sure, but 6-7 attacks in a round doesn't matter worth anything if they can't get past DR. Hence enhancement. Hence they need a way to get it relatively cheaply. Not to mention, bud, that most TWF builds honestly kinda suck anyway (and this isn't new.)
Also, even if your point (buried under alien logic though it may be) were wholly valid and reasonable (something that is under contention at this point,) it's no excuse for predicating your stance on faulty rhetoric.
Why are Monks the only class that need free money to TWF?
Why are Monks the only class that need free money to TWF?
There is absolutely no need to nerf or penalize flurry by making it insanely expensive to enchant unarmed blows.
Yes i know that d20PFSRD is faster than PRD and i love the work they are doing but that doesn't change the fact that they are a fan site.
Why is that a factor? I originally cited the official site as my source of incorrect info. I only went there because I remembered they normally get things updated faster. When both sites had the same info.....
There is absolutely no need to nerf or penalize flurry by making it insanely expensive to enchant unarmed blows.
Why are Monks the only class that need free money to TWF?
A Monks unarmed blows are a lot better than their armed attacks, that's why Monks use them.
How is a 25% increase to cost "insanely expensive"? Especially considering all the advantages unarmed attacks get.
|
There is absolutely no need to nerf or penalize flurry by making it insanely expensive to enchant unarmed blows.
Why are Monks the only class that need free money to TWF?
A Monks unarmed blows are a lot better than their armed attacks, that's why Monks use them.
How is a 25% increase to cost "insanely expensive"? Especially considering all the advantages unarmed attacks get.
Till 8th level, a Temple Sword is superior. After that, a Temple Sword is superior while using Power Attack. And cheaper to enchant. And it 150%, not 25%.
There is absolutely no need to nerf or penalize flurry by making it insanely expensive to enchant unarmed blows.
Why are Monks the only class that need free money to TWF?
A Monks unarmed blows are a lot better than their armed attacks, that's why Monks use them.
How is a 25% increase to cost "insanely expensive"? Especially considering all the advantages unarmed attacks get.
150%.
Question: Do you feel Fighters should pay more for their weapon echantments, because the get Weapon Specialization, Weapon Training and an bucketload of Combat Feats?
Till 8th level, a Temple Sword is superior. After that, a Temple Sword is superior while using Power Attack. And cheaper to enchant. And it 150%, not 25%.
150%.
Question: Do you feel Fighters should pay more for their weapon echantments, because the get Weapon Specialization, Weapon Training and an bucketload of Combat Feats?
Firstly, I'm not going to explain my math again. You both know well what I mean and are being intentionally obtuse.
If a Temple Sword is superior, despite not getting the Monk's bonus damage, then use it and take your free money.
The reason unarmed Monks pay 25% more to TWF is not because they get good damage. Weapon using Monks get 50% off because they don't get good damage.
The reason unarmed Monks pay 25% more is because of the unique advantages they get with unarmed attacks. They don't have to hold their weapons, you can't take their weapons away, they get full Str and PA on offhand attacks, etc.
Maybe 25% more to enchant is too much to pay for a Monks unique weapons, but unarmed Monks aren't so worthless that they need great weapons with great unique benefits and great damage, AND free money.
If a Temple Sword is superior, despite not getting the Monk's bonus damage, then use it and take your free money.
The reason unarmed Monks pay 25% more to TWF is not because they get good damage. Weapon using Monks get 50% off because they don't get good damage.
The reason unarmed Monks pay 25% more is because of the unique advantages they get with unarmed attacks. They don't have to hold their weapons, you can't take their weapons away, they get full Str and PA on offhand attacks, etc.
Maybe 25% more to enchant is too much to pay for a Monks unique weapons, but unarmed Monks aren't so worthless that they need great weapons with great unique benefits and great damage, AND free money.
Why then can one enchant a monks unarmed strike with greater magic weapon? This is not consistent with your view of flurry as TWF. Why? Because flurry ISN'T TWF, but a unique monk special ability, for which he shoulnd't be penalized.
Why is that a factor? I originally cited the official site as my source of incorrect info. I only went there because I remembered they normally get things updated faster. When both sites had the same info.....
I agree. To put a finer point on it, why do I need to reference Adventurer's Armory (a book I don't own) and its associated errata to make my APG work? Pretty sure there's nothing in either book that indicates you need one for the other. Now I see that some things in the APG were reprints of AA designed to reach a wider audience, but each book should stand alone. The APG errata (and the corresponding info on the Paizo-official PRD here) make no mention of a change, so I use them as printed.
At the risk of sounding like a neo-grognard, when this kind of stuff came up in 3.X, my group and I just used whichever book's version we liked more. So what if your Adventurer's Armory says brass knuckles are crap? These here on my fists are APG brass knuckles. Boo ya! ;)
And, on-topic: I agree with the argument separating the effects of amulet of mighty fists based on type of attack used, but I don't like it taking different items to do so. I know this is counterintuitive based on price, but how's this for a compromise:
You buy an amulet +X at the listed price. It works as advertised for natural weapons. However, when used for unarmed strikes, it grants an enhancement bonus equal to a "normal" weapon with equivalent price, rounded down. So, if you have the 5000gp amulet, it's +1 across the board. The 20,000gp amulet, though, would be +2 for natural attacks and +3 for unarmed strikes (since the nearest standard weapon price to this in the downward direction is 18,000gp = +3). This way a party can shuffle the item back and forth between the monk and the druid if necessary (a current option). Might be a corner case, but I like compatibility with current rules.
Why then can one enchant a monks unarmed strike with greater magic weapon? This is not consistent with your view of flurry as TWF. Why? Because flurry ISN'T TWF, but a unique monk special ability, for which he shoulnd't be penalized.
If a Temple Sword is superior, despite not getting the Monk's bonus damage, then use it and take your free money.
The reason unarmed Monks pay 25% more to TWF is not because they get good damage. Weapon using Monks get 50% off because they don't get good damage.
The reason unarmed Monks pay 25% more is because of the unique advantages they get with unarmed attacks. They don't have to hold their weapons, you can't take their weapons away, they get full Str and PA on offhand attacks, etc.
Maybe 25% more to enchant is too much to pay for a Monks unique weapons, but unarmed Monks aren't so worthless that they need great weapons with great unique benefits and great damage, AND free money.
Because it's a spell. Spells don't work the same as items, nor should they have to.
Because it's a spell. Spells don't work the same as items, nor should they have to.
Why then is:
"Because its flurry. Flurry dioes not work the same as TWF, nor should it have to."
NOT a valid argument in your view?
Balance-wise I think there can be no doubt that an amulet of mighty fists with its price halved would not make the monk an uberclass at all, but instead help a class thats arguably one of the weakest in the game.
The amulet of mighty fist was not made just for the monk so I see now reason to halve the price for the monk's sake.
I do think monk's don't get really good options for their unarmed attacks and enhancing them. I think a better answer would have been to scale back the base damage, and then have an item that works for the monk.
Because it's a spell. Spells don't work the same as items, nor should they have to.
Why then is:
"Because its flurry. Flurry dioes not work the same as TWF, nor should it have to."
NOT a valid argument in your view?
Balance-wise I think there can be no doubt that an amulet of mighty fists with its price halved would not make the monk an uberclass at all, but instead help a class thats arguably one of the weakest in the game.
Ok, fair enough, how 'bout this?
Because Greater Magic Weapon is balanced around weapons, and the Amulet of Mighty Fists is balanced around Flurry of Blows and Natural Attacks.
We're not asking for the Amulet of Mighty Fists to be changed, precisely. We realize that it's fairly priced for enhancing natural attacks (though some of us would prefer it be called the Amulet of Tooth and Claw or something, to more clearly reflect its actual purpose.) We just want the monk to have the option to directly enhance his unarmed strike the same at the cost of a single weapon, because that is what it is.
Because Greater Magic Weapon is balanced around weapons, and the Amulet of Mighty Fists is balanced around Flurry of Blows and Natural Attacks.
NA sure, flurry of blows - no way.
Otherwise: What Grae wrote.
So basically, the Amulet of Mighty Fists is overpriced because "Here there be Dragons"
Why is that a factor? I originally cited the official site as my source of incorrect info. I only went there because I remembered they normally get things updated faster. When both sites had the same info.....I agree. To put a finer point on it, why do I need to reference Adventurer's Armory (a book I don't own) and its associated errata to make my APG work? Pretty sure there's nothing in either book that indicates you need one for the other. Now I see that some things in the APG were reprints of AA designed to reach a wider audience, but each book should stand alone. The APG errata (and the corresponding info on the Paizo-official PRD here) make no mention of a change, so I use them as printed.
At the risk of sounding like a neo-grognard, when this kind of stuff came up in 3.X, my group and I just used whichever book's version we liked more. So what if your Adventurer's Armory says brass knuckles are crap? These here on my fists are APG brass knuckles. Boo ya! ;)
If you are going to play in official games or just games who want to follow the rules as much as possible you have to keep up with the changes. Forums help a lot with that.
Now we all know that it takes some time for Paizo to reflect changes and/or new material to the PRD.They will be changed in the errata of the APG when the next printing of APG is due to come out (remember that Paizo does errata files when a book goes for a next printing). (unless of course they realize their mistake and change the brass knuckles back)
I don't say use whatever i like, i most certainly don't like this change to brass knuckles and what it means for monks. I always try to use the latest version of something.
Why is that a factor? I originally cited the official site as my source of incorrect info. I only went there because I remembered they normally get things updated faster. When both sites had the same info.....
Yes i know that d20PFSRD is faster than PRD and i love the work they are doing but that doesn't change the fact that they are a fan site.
Because fan site means that it can't be used for RAW (more likely PFS), also fan site means (for me) that i can't trust 100% what they are writing, yes i will reference it and maybe make a ruling on what i see if i am in a hurry but when i find time will go to look on my books and/or PRD.
I don't say use whatever i like, i most certainly don't like this change to brass knuckles and what it means for monks. I always try to use the latest version of something.
Fair enough. By this argument I'd still go with the APG, since it's the newer source, and newer errata to an older book don't quite cut the mustard in my opinion. Doesn't explain why the two sources are different at all, though, and then boils down to an argument based on semantics. So, I'll decline further argument since I feel it likely that we'd both just go around in circles.
However, do note that the errata usually get posted to the PRD rather quickly (stuff there is already current to 2nd printing, and has been for awhile). If official APG errata, or a change to the PRD for that matter, show up soon then we'll be able to put the issue to rest.
I don't say use whatever i like, i most certainly don't like this change to brass knuckles and what it means for monks. I always try to use the latest version of something.Fair enough. By this argument I'd still go with the APG, since it's the newer source, and newer errata to an older book don't quite cut the mustard in my opinion. Doesn't explain why the two sources are different at all, though, and then boils down to an argument based on semantics.
It's no semantics, it's just that the poeple of Paizo changed their minds about brass knuckles (at least twice it seems) and that Paizo doesn't publish errata until a reprinting is made.
The reason the two sources are different is because of the following:1)First AA came out and brass knuckles was a kind of debate due to kinda weird wording.
2) Then errata for AA comes out and no change to brass knuckles iirc.
3) Then APG came out and brass knuckles are changed.
4) Then errata for APG comes out and no change to brass knuckles.
5) Then errata for AA comes out and brass knuckles are changed.
Now the only reason that the change wasn't made to the APG rather than the AA is that AA made a reprint (i think 3rd edition now) before APG, so if they don't change their minds until the next APG reprint comes around the change will also be reflected in the APG. The above also means that the PRD isn't likely to be updated until APG errata comes out because PRD seems to have only info from the pathfinder roleplaying game line and not from other lines.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Flaming Amulet of Mighty Fists = 5,000 gold
+1 Flaming Longsword = 8,000 gold
Holy Amulet of Mighty Fists = 20,000 gold
+1 Holy Longsword = 16,000 gold
It's not really 2.5 times the cost because you have options to do things you can't do with a normal weapon. It also stacks with Greater Magic Fang.
It's still not stellar but it's not as bad as you paint it.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 16
|
Now the only reason that the change wasn't made to the APG rather than the AA is that AA made a reprint (i think 3rd edition now) before APG, so if they don't change their minds until the next APG reprint comes around the change will also be reflected in the APG. The above also means that the PRD isn't likely to be updated until APG errata comes out because PRD seems to have only info from the pathfinder roleplaying game line and not from other lines.
It's sort of in an errata holding pattern. You know it's coming but it's not so clear when.