Why do people consider Monks flawed / broken?


Advice

51 to 89 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Here.

Paizo had to build from this. They've made improvements, but when you're in a hole, climbing up is a pretty obvious choice.


Caineach wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:
Can you explain the Current Flurry of blows Clarification every body is talking about? I am not aware of what you are talking about.
Read carefully, and wearing protective gear if possible.
no way.......
I'm just going to go on pretending that the post doesn't exist.
Later in that thread JJ says that the ruling is causing more problems than they realized, and they will be revisiting it.

can you give me a link? i tried to search for it but found nothing by JJ


Lobolusk, he meant Jason Buhelman (not sure of the spelling). His post is on Page 3 of the thread, I think Post #138. I don't have a link off-hand. Hah! Off-hand.

Master Arminas


Dabbler wrote:
wraithstrike wrote:
The monk has no focus.

I'm going to disagree here, WS, and say the monk is not focussed for one of the traditional four roles in a party: Tank, Healer, Caster, Scout.

Monks actually make very good scouts, if you configure them correctly. What they excel at is mobile support: go to where you need to be and tie down foes. Rather than thinking about the monk as having abilities that do not mesh, consider instead that they have abilities for contingencies.

The monk is a good scout, but I don't see it as a primary job role. A rogue, bard, ranger etc can do it while concentrating on other things.

I am not saying the monks have no strengths, but the class features do not mesh well together. The new clarification forcing you to use a second weapon is not helping either. If you concentrate on using your fist then boosting attack rolls get expensive.

The other things you mentioned are well documented, but I still feel better off taking another class and just taking unarmed strike as a feat, and calling that a monk or martial artist.


I think the big problem with the Monk is that everybody has different ideas on what his role/concept should be.

For example, I think the Monk should be a second string fighter that uses CMBs to help the rest of the group (trips, disarms, bull rushes, etc.). His damage dealing should be by multiple light hits that whittle down the opponent. But to do this you need a decent INT to qualify for the 'improved' line of feats. You also need a decent STR to have any chance to overcome DR, a decent CON to not die easy, a decent WIS to use his monkish abilities, a decent DEX for AC).

SO I am going to agree with some of what is written above. The Monk is MAD (STR, DEX, CON, INT, and WIS), and his abilties don't work well together. Is he supposed to be a mobile light fighter? A standing still multiple attacker? A CMB trickster? His abilities build a little into all these concepts, but not enough to be impressive. Good for flavor and rollplaying, but maybe not the best to be a valued member of the party.


Facet of a Shard wrote:
I think it comes down to play style. It seems like the same people who dislike the monk also revere the wizard. I personally suck as a wizard, and would call him worthless as a class, while I adore the monk and he excels when I employ him.

Not really. I like the idea of the monk. Most of us just don't agree with the execution.

I will also add a monk can be played well. It just is not easy to do, and many times a GM will allow things to happen, which makes the class look better than it is.


The whole d6 weapon issue is one of the reasons I like the Crusader's Flurry feat. The most recent monk I've seen having multiclassed to paladin (though it could be done with cleric) to flurry with a Glaive. d10 at reach really helps that issue.

For pure monks, or something using core, I think I'd prefer combat maneuver focus over straight damage. Monks are a class I've seen excel at things like trip and disarm compared to other classes, so it's a good class to use to do those things as a method of providing strong support to the rest of the party.

Sczarni

In my experience, the main reason many people don't like monks is because their abilities don't synergize all that much with one another, which means that it's very hard to optimize them into a single specialty.

And that's true. However, the converse of this is that the monk has a pretty diverse set of abilities, making him quite effective as a utility character. High all-around saves, pretty good defensive abilities, reasonable damage output with Flurry, high mobility, and maybe a few fun ki tricks.

Does it add up to a crazy-specialized death-dealer like a Magus or a Barbarian? Nope, it sure doesn't. But it can be really fun to play if you want to be able to do a whole lot of different kinds of things pretty well.


Caineach wrote:
TarkXT wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:
DeathQuaker wrote:
Lobolusk wrote:
Can you explain the Current Flurry of blows Clarification every body is talking about? I am not aware of what you are talking about.
Read carefully, and wearing protective gear if possible.
no way.......
I'm just going to go on pretending that the post doesn't exist.
Later in that thread JJ says that the ruling is causing more problems than they realized, and they will be revisiting it.

Actually it was Jason who made that post, not JJ, the actual post is here:

Jason Bulmahn:
Hey there Everyone,

Boy, it sure does look like we've stirred up the hornets nest this time. Let me clear up a few things.

1. Everybody just take a breath. There is no need for the tone I am seeing in some of these posts.

2. Every single one of these FAQ posts and clarifications are discussed by the rules team. No matter who makes the actual post or clarification.

3. Concerning this particular issue...

The intent of this particular rule was to marry the flurry of blows ability to the Two-Weapon Fighting feat tree, so that we could easily control and correct any problems that came up, and to have those corrections universally apply to everything that interacted with it. That said, there was an exception built into the flurry rules to allow them to properly portray the monk ability to beat you to death with various body parts (hence unarmed strike). I will admit that the wording could certainly be better in this regard. Let me give it to you clearly as to what we intended...

Flurry allows you to make multiple attacks as if using Two Weapon Fighting. You can substitute any of these attacks with an unarmed strike if you choose, up to all of them. If a weapon or attack is different than the others, it was the intent to limit that to the maximum number of attacks you could normally take with said weapon while utilizing Two-Weapon Fighting (ie 2 at +6BAB, 3 at +11BAB and so on), with all of those attacks falling into the standard chain of reducing attack bonus (-5 cumulative for each additional attack). It was not the intent to allow you to make more than this using one specific weapon (not unarmed strikes), or to take all of the highest attack bonus attacks with that weapon. This makes the monks attacks, from a baseline perspective significantly better than that of a fighter, who must invest in twice the number of weapon to gain a similar benefit.

That said.. this causes some problems that came to light today as this bounced around the office, namely that it was not common knowledge that it was supposed to work this way and has gone to print without this change. This is obviously a concern and one that I intend to investigate. There is also the problem of the Zen Archer, which clearly does not work with these rules (or rather, it clearly, as its intent, violates these rules). There is also the concern that this system is a bit of a pain to figure out, which is something that does concern me greatly.

We will be evaluating this situation a bit further in the coming days and I would like to thank everyone here for pointing out some of the problems with this ruling.

I hope that clears this up a little for folks. I will see to it that we get to the bottom of this soon.

Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo Publishing

You can find the post on page three, 5 posts from the bottom. I noticed the thread seems to have been closed or something because I can't post in the thread, can't reply to anyone either.


The moderators locked it 'because it's gone well past being a rules question and into being a debate on if the rule works or not and various game design principles'.

Accordingly, I started a new discussion thread in General Discussion here: Flurry of Changes to Flurry of Blows. Feel free to post here.

I have also included all of the relevant quotes from SKR and JB from the original thread at the beginning of my own.

Master Arminas


Mergy wrote:
Dabbler wrote:


Yes way. "Any combination" is apparently not any combination, but Sean does not specify which attacks have to be from which weapons or from feet, which kind of makes it a nonsensical ruling.
Any combination, so long as it exactly follows the format of Two-Weapon Fighting? ;)

Where does 'kick' fit in to the sequence?

wraithstrike wrote:
The monk is a good scout, but I don't see it as a primary job role. A rogue, bard, ranger etc can do it while concentrating on other things.

The monk can do other things as well, just not the same other things.

wraithstrike wrote:
I am not saying the monks have no strengths, but the class features do not mesh well together. The new clarification forcing you to use a second weapon is not helping either. If you concentrate on using your fist then boosting attack rolls get expensive.

Well I would imagine that left fist, right fist, count...the ruling only applies if you have other weapons. However I do take your point, you can't pick up an awesome kama and make all your attacks with it. However, remember that many maneuvers, such as trip, can replace normal attacks.

wraithstrike wrote:
The other things you mentioned are well documented, but I still feel better off taking another class and just taking unarmed strike as a feat, and calling that a monk or martial artist.

That is perfectly cool if what you want is just a straight-up unarmed combat specialist with no mystic training and no ascetic strength. The idea of the monk is that he is NOT just a fighter with kung fu.


Dabbler, one of Sean's specific examples was a monk receiving the magic fang spell. According to SKR's reading of the rules, only one limb of the monk would be affected by the spell and gain a +1. So, the monk in question would have to divide his flurry attacks in a primary and secondary; one set with the +1 limb and one set with other limbs--because that one limb did not exactly match all of his other limbs.

It opens a can of worms that I thought was done and settled in the change from 3.0 to 3.5, when we buried this idea.

Master Arminas


Perhaps it is not the monk that is broken, but the system of DR. Basically, DR favors builds that focus on doing massive damage with a fewer amount of attacks, and severely punishes builds that focus on doing large numbers of attacks for lesser damage. This issue affects monks, twf fighters who don't choose to do bastard sword/short sword, rogues when they are unable to get sneak attacks, wildshaped druids and summoned creatures.

I think there are a large number of players who love the flavor of builds that do lightning-fast attacks while sacrificing damage-per-hit, but, even though there are a lot of feats and game mechanics which support the ability to build such characters, DR limits the viability of these builds for players in campaigns where the GM is not going to house-rule advantages for these builds.

I don't know that this can be fixed for PFS organized play, but if I were a designer looking at this during the alpha- or beta- testing phases of the game system, I might suggest creating a cap for dr, similar to the stoneskin spell, such as 10 points per HD per day, or DR only applies to the first attack per-character, per-round.


master arminas wrote:

Dabbler, one of Sean's specific examples was a monk receiving the magic fang spell. According to SKR's reading of the rules, only one limb of the monk would be affected by the spell and gain a +1. So, the monk in question would have to divide his flurry attacks in a primary and secondary; one set with the +1 limb and one set with other limbs--because that one limb did not exactly match all of his other limbs.

It opens a can of worms that I thought was done and settled in the change from 3.0 to 3.5, when we buried this idea.

Master Arminas

This is a pickle of a paradox. One could read that a monk only has one type of "unarmed strike" and thus magic fang/weapon would affect any type of attack the monk wishes to represent his unarmed strike being, but this does directly contradict the ruling that a monk is attacking with two different "weapons" when he flurries. Or, one could read that each possible type of unarmed strike is its own weapon, and thus to flurry he would need to have two such spells minimum cast on him, and even more if he wishes to do things like flurry while grappled (enchant both fists, and head), and other situations where the monk would need to flurry or attack with other parts of their body, because their hands are busy.

Sticky, sticky.


I don't see DR as such a problem. Usually when you are facing opponents with DR, you have enough funds to support multiple weapons and weapon types, consumables or other gear that help you overcome it (amulet of magic fists), or feats (e.g. the boar style) which give you enough versatility.
Being prepared for eventualities is what you are expected to do here IMO. Of course this does not work well for "optimized" builds where you focus on just having one super awesome weapon instead of 3 good weapons, and hope that your DM will never use sunder against you ;-)


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master arminas wrote:
Dabbler, one of Sean's specific examples was a monk receiving the magic fang spell. According to SKR's reading of the rules, only one limb of the monk would be affected by the spell and gain a +1. So, the monk in question would have to divide his flurry attacks in a primary and secondary; one set with the +1 limb and one set with other limbs--because that one limb did not exactly match all of his other limbs.

If a creature has two claws, magic fang does not enhance only one of them. I can understand why it may effect hands and not feet, but two hands should be enough to flurry...unless SKR is saying that magic fang now works differently as well?


Sangalor wrote:

I don't see DR as such a problem. Usually when you are facing opponents with DR, you have enough funds to support multiple weapons and weapon types, consumables or other gear that help you overcome it (amulet of magic fists), or feats (e.g. the boar style) which give you enough versatility.

Being prepared for eventualities is what you are expected to do here IMO. Of course this does not work well for "optimized" builds where you focus on just having one super awesome weapon instead of 3 good weapons, and hope that your DM will never use sunder against you ;-)

It's very expensive to have weapons for every DR type you will face at mid-levels. One could even say impossible, considering character wealth per level limitations. But for a monk who focuses his resources on improving his unarmed strike (which in another thread has convincingly been theorycrafted to be the best DPR build), it is downright impossible - you can't go out and buy new hands, thus material based DR becomes impossible for the monk to bypass (yes, there are new feats in recent books, but that is an expensive use of feats, and the monk should work with core materials only.)


Mike J wrote:

I ended up having to give him a custom magic item that lets him burn ki points as a free action and overcome 5 points of DR for each point burnt for one round. That has worked nicely. But without it, the Monk is useless against a good 50% of the monsters at 13th level.

To me, the DR issue is the biggest flaw.

Make an amulet of mighty fists that does not modify natural weapons, only unarmed strikes. Price it at 2k/+1 and let the monk buy one.

Easy,

James


It is that descriptive text in magic fang again, I'm afraid; the one they never got around to fixing:

Quote:
Magic fang gives one natural weapon or unarmed strike of teh subject a +1 enhancement bonus on attack and damage rolls. The spell can affect a slam attack, fist, bite, or other natural weapon. The spell does not change an unarmed strike's damage from nonlethal damage to lethal damage.

Bolded text is mine. They never put an (s) on the end of fist. And it specifies one natural attack or unarmed strike as the subject. But it has never been errated.

And Dabbler? Each of those claws needs a seperate magic fang. Sorry.

Master Arminas


james maissen wrote:
Mike J wrote:

I ended up having to give him a custom magic item that lets him burn ki points as a free action and overcome 5 points of DR for each point burnt for one round. That has worked nicely. But without it, the Monk is useless against a good 50% of the monsters at 13th level.

To me, the DR issue is the biggest flaw.

Make an amulet of mighty fists that does not modify natural weapons, only unarmed strikes. Price it at 2k/+1 and let the monk buy one.

Easy,

James

Unfortunately, SKR also shot down that idea in the Ultimate Equipment Discussion Thread from which all of this spawned. He said (and I am paraphrasing) that 'we (meaning Paizo) are not going to do a stealth errata in UE. There will not be a piece of equipment that does what an amulet of mighty fists does only cheaper. That would make the AoMF obsolete and we are not going to obsolete a core rulebook item.'

Paraphrasing. But that is reasonably close to what he said.

Master Arminas


Mabven the OP healer wrote:
Sangalor wrote:

I don't see DR as such a problem. Usually when you are facing opponents with DR, you have enough funds to support multiple weapons and weapon types, consumables or other gear that help you overcome it (amulet of magic fists), or feats (e.g. the boar style) which give you enough versatility.

Being prepared for eventualities is what you are expected to do here IMO. Of course this does not work well for "optimized" builds where you focus on just having one super awesome weapon instead of 3 good weapons, and hope that your DM will never use sunder against you ;-)
It's very expensive to have weapons for every DR type you will face at mid-levels. One could even say impossible, considering character wealth per level limitations. But for a monk who focuses his resources on improving his unarmed strike (which in another thread has convincingly been theorycrafted to be the best DPR build), it is downright impossible - you can't go out and buy new hands, thus material based DR becomes impossible for the monk to bypass (yes, there are new feats in recent books, but that is an expensive use of feats, and the monk should work with core materials only.)

Masterwork / +1 weapons are dirt cheap at those levels. Bypassing the DR will well make up for the +2/+3/+4 lacking in damage.

And a monk can buy an amulet or use brass knuckles or monk weapons in those corner cases.
If those monsters start to be the standard encounter, then weapons can be upgraded and feat selections adapted accordingly.
Consumables like weapon blanches (adamantine, cold iron, ...) will help you with the occasional dual-DR or the type you are lacking.
Finally, wands with align/versatile/greater magic weapon or your friendly party cleric/wizard will help you out here.

So I do not see this as an impossible task :-)


Sangalor wrote:
Mabven the OP healer wrote:
Sangalor wrote:

I don't see DR as such a problem. Usually when you are facing opponents with DR, you have enough funds to support multiple weapons and weapon types, consumables or other gear that help you overcome it (amulet of magic fists), or feats (e.g. the boar style) which give you enough versatility.

Being prepared for eventualities is what you are expected to do here IMO. Of course this does not work well for "optimized" builds where you focus on just having one super awesome weapon instead of 3 good weapons, and hope that your DM will never use sunder against you ;-)
It's very expensive to have weapons for every DR type you will face at mid-levels. One could even say impossible, considering character wealth per level limitations. But for a monk who focuses his resources on improving his unarmed strike (which in another thread has convincingly been theorycrafted to be the best DPR build), it is downright impossible - you can't go out and buy new hands, thus material based DR becomes impossible for the monk to bypass (yes, there are new feats in recent books, but that is an expensive use of feats, and the monk should work with core materials only.)

Masterwork / +1 weapons are dirt cheap at those levels. Bypassing the DR will well make up for the +2/+3/+4 lacking in damage.

And a monk can buy an amulet or use brass knuckles or monk weapons in those corner cases.
If those monsters start to be the standard encounter, then weapons can be upgraded and feat selections adapted accordingly.
Consumables like weapon blanches (adamantine, cold iron, ...) will help you with the occasional dual-DR or the type you are lacking.
Finally, wands with align/versatile/greater magic weapon or your friendly party cleric/wizard will help you out here.

So I do not see this as an impossible task :-)

It still punishes the fast attack/low damage builds, because a slow attack/high damage build doesn't even need to worry about bypassing DR, because such a high percentage of their damage still goes through despite the DR.


james maissen wrote:
Mike J wrote:

I ended up having to give him a custom magic item that lets him burn ki points as a free action and overcome 5 points of DR for each point burnt for one round. That has worked nicely. But without it, the Monk is useless against a good 50% of the monsters at 13th level.

To me, the DR issue is the biggest flaw.

Make an amulet of mighty fists that does not modify natural weapons, only unarmed strikes. Price it at 2k/+1 and let the monk buy one.

Unfortunately the Amulet of Mighty Fists is not configured the normal way, it seems to be bonus squared x 5000gp in cost.

I don't think we can really count the amulet as a weapon, which is bonus squared x 2000gp.

If it was a spell effect, it would be based on Greater Magic Fang, a 3rd level spell, and it would cost spell level x caster level x 2000gp, which for a +2 amulet is 3 x 8 x 2000gp = 48,000gp.

In other words, it's currently the amulet as is or nothing.

Again, a Greater Ki Focus effect for weapons would be perfect...

Edit: Alignment/Class restriction reduces the cost by 30%, so perhaps we could use that to bring down the Amulet's cost to bonus squared x 3500gp.


Mabven the OP healer wrote:
Sangalor wrote:
Mabven the OP healer wrote:
Sangalor wrote:

I don't see DR as such a problem. Usually when you are facing opponents with DR, you have enough funds to support multiple weapons and weapon types, consumables or other gear that help you overcome it (amulet of magic fists), or feats (e.g. the boar style) which give you enough versatility.

Being prepared for eventualities is what you are expected to do here IMO. Of course this does not work well for "optimized" builds where you focus on just having one super awesome weapon instead of 3 good weapons, and hope that your DM will never use sunder against you ;-)
It's very expensive to have weapons for every DR type you will face at mid-levels. One could even say impossible, considering character wealth per level limitations. But for a monk who focuses his resources on improving his unarmed strike (which in another thread has convincingly been theorycrafted to be the best DPR build), it is downright impossible - you can't go out and buy new hands, thus material based DR becomes impossible for the monk to bypass (yes, there are new feats in recent books, but that is an expensive use of feats, and the monk should work with core materials only.)

Masterwork / +1 weapons are dirt cheap at those levels. Bypassing the DR will well make up for the +2/+3/+4 lacking in damage.

And a monk can buy an amulet or use brass knuckles or monk weapons in those corner cases.
If those monsters start to be the standard encounter, then weapons can be upgraded and feat selections adapted accordingly.
Consumables like weapon blanches (adamantine, cold iron, ...) will help you with the occasional dual-DR or the type you are lacking.
Finally, wands with align/versatile/greater magic weapon or your friendly party cleric/wizard will help you out here.

So I do not see this as an impossible task :-)

It still punishes the fast attack/low damage builds, because a slow attack/high damage build doesn't even need to worry about bypassing DR,...

My Zen Archer took clustered shots so NYAH! :P

Also weapon blanch is cheap.


We've had a few monks at our table, yet to see them 'broken' or 'sub-par'.


Mabven the OP healer wrote:
...It still punishes the fast attack/low damage builds, because a slow attack/high damage build doesn't even need to worry about bypassing DR, because such a high percentage of their damage still goes through despite the DR.

Those builds usually assume that you just get weapon X (like a +5 weapon) and everything will work out with that weapon. Eating a DR of 10 on just 3 attacks (assuming all hit) reduce your effective damage output probably more then going with 5 attacks without a DR penalty.

And finally, this is where power attack and maneuvers come in.

Look, I understand why you see a problem here. I have played a pre-PF monk in a 2 year campaign (Cauldron - Shackled City) and it was not very easy. However, I still managed to contribute meaningfully, and once I had some kamas and the cleric started casting greater magic weapon on my fists each day, the problems were quickly solved.

This is a team game. The fighter who does not need the buff for his weapon has much lower saves, no spell resistence, immunity to diseases etc. So it's just a different area where support is needed. No disadvantage for those kinds of characters IMO :-)


Thank you for the opinions and clarifications. If I was to make simple changes to the class in order to improve its overall performance, it seems the areas of focus would:

1. Allow Monks to move while performing Flurry of Blows. But, how much movement would be balanced?

2. Maybe allow Monks (exclusively) to enchant their fists and feet as weapons.


master arminas wrote:

There will not be a piece of equipment that does what an amulet of mighty fists does only cheaper. That would make the AoMF obsolete and we are not going to obsolete a core rulebook item.'

Paraphrasing. But that is reasonably close to what he said.

Master Arminas

But it wouldn't, the AoMF gives the enchantment to all natural attacks as well and that's the justification for the price imho.

But they can figure out their monk class and hopefully it will get the love that they spent on other classes, like I said before.. I wouldn't be unhappy with a .pdf for sale that redid the monk if it was done well.

-James


Cross posted from another thread. There are some items in the post that are relevant to this thread:

Me wrote:

I'm thinking that a comprehensive monk re-write would need to be structured in such a way as to allow a player to build everything from a traditional 3.x monk, a more wuxia monk, a pugilist, and a range of other concepts that fit under the same roof. For class design, the designer would probably want to look to how some of the Super Genius Game classes have been structured (how abilities have been given out) and to the Qinggong monk. You'd also want a default set of archetypes (kits) that would would be included with the new monk.

I think that part of the problem with the monk design, is that in many ways since it has so many set class abilities, it is less customizable. Compare it to a fighter (lots of bonus feats), a rogue (rogue talents, etc), or a spellcaster (spells galore), there are less knobs to turn to make the monk you envision and a greater need to turn the knobs in the right way in order to not create a slightly underpowered/unfocused build.


The qigong monk gave the class those knobs and it could easily expanded (which can only be an increase in power to every monk) and I think an option in there to spend 1 ki point and move half your speed as a swift action is a balanced way to address the mobility issue.

DR is a big problem for monks, though.

Also, I'm pretty sure the best caster killer is druid, with a full suite of spells, pounce/grab and scent/blindsight.


I think a significant percentage of DMs just don't put in situations that play to their strengths: Terrain, enemies ambushing from difficult-to-reach areas, etc. If combat always happens on flat ground, in tightly-confined areas where even plate-clad warriors can easily run up to the enemy in a single round, the increased mobility and lack of an armor check penalty just isn't going to seem very special.

When I DM, less than about 20% of all combats occur on flat ground.


1 person marked this as FAQ candidate.
Mabven the OP healer wrote:
Perhaps it is not the monk that is broken, but the system of DR. Basically, DR favors builds that focus on doing massive damage with a fewer amount of attacks, and severely punishes builds that focus on doing large numbers of attacks for lesser damage. This issue affects monks, twf fighters who don't choose to do bastard sword/short sword, rogues when they are unable to get sneak attacks, wildshaped druids and summoned creatures.

If it's the DR that bugs you, then perhaps some kind of Clustered Shots equivalent feat for Flurry of Blows, or two-weapon fighters in general (or both) is in order?

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

I actually think the whole game would be much better without DR. It creates more problems than it solves. Creatures that are resistant to certain attacks... I prefer the regeneration system where certain things can bypass their healing, but you can still bring them down quickly if you concentrate your attacks. Like, a monk pummeling a troll into unconsciousness and then burning the body afterward.

Gluttony, what is Clustered Shots?

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber

Clustered Shots.

I think DR is good for things that simply cannot be hurt with normal weapons, but needs to be used sparingly.

RPG Superstar 2015 Top 8

Thanks, TriOmegaZero. And yeah, I'd be okay with DR if it was much rarer.

I think that kind of feat/ability would be good for monks flurry, and would help with the DR issue---maybe enough that we'd clamor less for better monk magic items, which is how this whole series of conversations started.


DeathQuaker wrote:

Thanks, TriOmegaZero. And yeah, I'd be okay with DR if it was much rarer.

I think that kind of feat/ability would be good for monks flurry, and would help with the DR issue---maybe enough that we'd clamor less for better monk magic items, which is how this whole series of conversations started.

I find DR to be highly dependant on GM. Until coming to these boards, I thought DR was a neat idea that was poorly implemented because it never affected anything. Yet here I see lots of people talking about how it shuts down builds and is a major factor in their character design. Its generally a non-issue for my groups asside from the occasional pulling out of a backup weapon at low levels to fight skellies/zombies.


Hmm... So how about this (It's basically Clustered Shots with edits):

Quote:

Clustered Flurry (Combat)

You take a moment to carefully aim your blows, causing them all to strike nearly the same spot.

Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Combat Expertise, Flurry of Blows, BAB +6.

Benefit: When you make an attack with the Flurry of Blows ability, total the damage from all hits before applying the opponent's damage reduction.

Special: If the massive damage optional rule is being used (Core Rulebook 189), that rule applies if the total damage you deal with this feat is equal to or exceeds half the opponent's full normal hit points (minimum 50 points of damage).


Gluttony wrote:

Hmm... So how about this (It's basically Clustered Shots with edits):

Quote:

Clustered Flurry (Combat)

You take a moment to carefully aim your blows, causing them all to strike nearly the same spot.

Prerequisites: Improved Unarmed Strike, Combat Expertise, Flurry of Blows, BAB +6.

Benefit: When you make an attack with the Flurry of Blows ability, total the damage from all hits before applying the opponent's damage reduction.

Special: If the massive damage optional rule is being used (Core Rulebook 189), that rule applies if the total damage you deal with this feat is equal to or exceeds half the opponent's full normal hit points (minimum 50 points of damage).

I would make Hammer the Gap a pre-requisite for this feat - that's the one that gives you +1 to damage for each previous iterative attack that hit and damaged. Nice when flurrying.


With the new ruling, I found myself driven to do a complete rewrite that (hopefully) fixs the monk without it becoming overpowered. I would love to hear your thoughts. A Monk for All Editions

Master Arminas

51 to 89 of 89 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Why do people consider Monks flawed / broken? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice