BNW I dont even think its possible to be honest i have never seen a monk that could even come close to outdamaging a fighter if both had competent players.
I'm not buying the fairness argument.
If it's somehow unfair that a monk can one weapon flurry. It must also be unfair that the TWFer can get a shield bonus while TWF with his armor slot not denied him.
It's also unfair that the spellcaster classes can fly, while the non spellcasters cannot. At least according to the caster-martial disparity god.
3) It makes the monk better than the fighter.POSSIBLY. I'd need to see some excel math, but It think this would be close. The thing that takes this off the spreadsheet completely is that this might be true ONLY IF the monk is making full attacks. This is far, far FAR from a given. Whenever the monk moves his damage potential drops well below that of a fighter.
If a monk is not using a flurry, yes, but a monk uses full BAB, same as a fighter, when flurrying. So as long as the fighter is using a light weapon in his off-hand, he and the monk have the same base modifiers to hit. What the monk gets is full strength bonus versus the .5 multiplier of TWF for what is counted as the "off-hand" attacks. So all other bonuses being the same, a monk and TWF fighter have the same chance to hit, while the monk can do a point or two more in damage, while not having the protection of the armor the fighter is wearing.
There is a fear among the monk detractors that if given free reign and silly to hit bonuses the monk will out damage the fighter based on his volume of attacks.
That's not how the game's math works, but the fear is still there.
I think it's anti-monk/gnome rubbish.
Enevhar not even close the fighter can grab gloves of dueling and have +10 damage the monk can't even get then throw on that he also has double slice cause he has the feats so the str mod doesn't matter. and thanks the +8 to hit he can burn PA and still hit on a higher number than the monk for another +12 main hand +6 off hand worth of damage.
So he is easily hitting on +22 main hand +16 off hand higher than the monk.
All numbers assume lvl 20
If a monk is not using a flurry, yes, but a monk uses full BAB, same as a fighter, when flurrying. So as long as the fighter is using a light weapon in his off-hand, he and the monk have the same base modifiers to hit. What the monk gets is full strength bonus versus the .5 multiplier of TWF for what is counted as the "off-hand" attacks. So all other bonuses being the same, a monk and TWF fighter have the same chance to hit, while the monk can do a point or two more in damage, while not having the protection of the armor the fighter is wearing.
3) It makes the monk better than the fighter.POSSIBLY. I'd need to see some excel math, but It think this would be close. The thing that takes this off the spreadsheet completely is that this might be true ONLY IF the monk is making full attacks. This is far, far FAR from a given. Whenever the monk moves his damage potential drops well below that of a fighter.
Ok, so what happens if instead the fighter is using a big honking two handed weapon with fewer attacks but with 1.5str, better weapon damage, a higher enhancement bonus (because he only needs 1) etc?
A monk should not be forced into a comparison with a sub optimal fighter, because not everyone is playing a sub optimal fighter. If two weapon fighting isn't good then avoid it.
Then the fighter Still beats the crap out of the monk in damage because at no point beyond 5th level will the bonuses ever again be the same short of GM favoritism or player incompetence.
A monk cannot do the equivalent of Greater TWF til 15th level. Is it impossible for a fighter to have all the prerequisites and that feat before that level also? If not, then a TWF fighter will never be weaker than a flurrying monk until at least 15th level, so long as base weapon damage is equal. Sure, at high levels, a monk's unarmed damage can outdo most weapon damage, but a high level monk SHOULD be able to wipe the floor with his opponent, so long as he can avoid being hit for the major damage that a high level fighter can dish out.
It would be interesting to see a well-trained rapier and main gauche fighter take on a well-trained kung-fu martial artist/monk. My money would be on the monk because he would use all of his skills to get within the fighter's guard and only then flurry him into unconsciousness or death.
I think that is one of the misconceptions about a monk and flurry, that it is the only attack ever used by the monk and this somehow makes them invincible. But if that many players actually do flurry every single round of every single combat and do not get into trouble because of it, then maybe what needs to be changed is the frequency that a monk can flurry, perhaps make it useable only every other combat round or something like that, rather than nerfing it completely.
Oh, and I wrote this all out before several more posts were made to this thread, but I do not feel like editing, so some of it does not mesh with what has been said.
Monks aren't fighters.
Any and every attempt to compare them is a wasteful exercise.
Fighters are a SAD class, monks are MAD. Thats a huge advantage right out of the gate. A direct result of this disparity is that the fighter's strength score is almost always better. And regardless of feat layout and the flat STR bonus to flurry. Raw STR wins as the base damage motivator. Once weapon skill get factored in, the fighter is way ahead.
Yes there are things the monk does much better than the fighter, but raw damage is not even an option for the monk. People have tried for years and all they've done is build substandard monks.
You make a great point Enevhar, monks don't flurry every round. Unfortunately non-monk players look at FoB and assume that's how the monk is played.
A monk cannot do the equivalent of Greater TWF til 15th level. Is it impossible for a fighter to have all the prerequisites and that feat before that level also? If not, then a TWF fighter will never be weaker than a flurrying monk until at least 15th level, so long as base weapon damage is equal. Sure, at high levels, a monk's unarmed damage can outdo most weapon damage, but a high level monk SHOULD be able to wipe the floor with his opponent, so long as he can avoid being hit for the major damage that a high level fighter can dish out.
It would be interesting to see a well-trained rapier and main gauche fighter take on a well-trained kung-fu martial artist/monk. My money would be on the monk because he would use all of his skills to get within the fighter's guard and only then flurry him into unconsciousness or death.
.
1. Monk flurry will lose to any fighter/barbarian TWF any day of the week.
2. Fighter will have Imp and Greater TWF at earlier levels than the monk.
I think that is one of the misconceptions about a monk and flurry, that it is the only attack ever used by the monk and this somehow makes them invincible. But if that many players actually do flurry every single round of every single combat and do not get into trouble because of it, then maybe what needs to be changed is the frequency that a monk can flurry, perhaps make it useable only every other combat round or something like that, rather than nerfing it completely.
3.Monks flurry because it is all that makes them viable kinda like rogues trying to sneak attack as much as possible.
4. Maybe no one told you Flurry is a fancy name for TWF with a limited subset of weapons its not some god ability its a full attack that is all.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well this might need it's own thread but Monks in combat are Full Rounders.
That is to say that they tend to take full round actions.
Those actions are
1)Spring Attack
2)Charge
3) Flurry of Blows
Depending on their special attacks (Stunning Fist, Perfect Strike, Elemental Fist, Punishing Kick etc....) one of these may be more likely.
I find I Spring Attack roughly half the time.
That so many of the early feats were designed with no awareness of this simple truth is why posters like Ciretose have come to the conclusion that the Devs don't actually play monk characters.
No one takes Scorpion Style because it's a standard.
Vital Strike is in a similar situation ( and that one could be so cool when your base damage is potentially so high)
If a monk is not using a flurry, yes, but a monk uses full BAB, same as a fighter, when flurrying. So as long as the fighter is using a light weapon in his off-hand, he and the monk have the same base modifiers to hit. What the monk gets is full strength bonus versus the .5 multiplier of TWF for what is counted as the "off-hand" attacks. So all other bonuses being the same, a monk and TWF fighter have the same chance to hit, while the monk can do a point or two more in damage, while not having the protection of the armor the fighter is wearing.
3) It makes the monk better than the fighter.POSSIBLY. I'd need to see some excel math, but It think this would be close. The thing that takes this off the spreadsheet completely is that this might be true ONLY IF the monk is making full attacks. This is far, far FAR from a given. Whenever the monk moves his damage potential drops well below that of a fighter.
All other bonuses will NOT be the same. Weapons training alone provides up to an additional +4 on attacks and damage. Greater Weapon Focus gives another +1 on attacks. Weapon specialization and Greater Weapon Specialization add anotehr +4 on damage. Armor training allows for a fighter to get up to a +5 Dex bonus on AC in standard (not mithril) full plate, in addition to the Armor Bonus and any magic. One feat, Double Slice, let's the fighter get full Strength bonus on his off-hand. And since the fighter doesn't need as high a DEX and WIS as the monk, his Strength will usually be higher, adding more of a bonus to attack and damage.
Master Arminas
Well this might need it's own thread but Monks in combat are Full Rounders.
That is to say that they tend to take full round actions.
Those actions are
1)Spring Attack
2)Charge
3) Flurry of BlowsDepending on their special attacks (Stunning Fist, Perfect Strike, Elemental Fist, Punishing Kick etc....) one of these may be more likely.
I find I Spring Attack roughly half the time.
That so many of the early feats were designed with no awareness of this simple truth is why posters like Ciretose have come to the conclusion that the Devs don't actually play monk characters.
No one takes Scorpion Style because it's a standard.
Vital Strike is in a similar situation ( and that one could be so cool when your base damage is potentially so high)
Well said. I am Master Arminas and I support this message.
Master Arminas
In the previous thread, I was the most ardent defender of the developers' ruling. I have since been convinced that there is really no way to overpower the monk by allowing them to flurry with a single weapon (although there is a cost disparity compared to other twf characters), and really there is no reason for this ruling other than that it marries twf and flurry so that there are not two mechanics. However, there are so many other issues brought up by this ruling (magic fang/weapon, attack penalty for wielding two one-handed weapons, weapon enchantments on unarmed strikes while grappled or otherwise having restricted body parts, etc.) that I think the developers need to make a comprehensive ruling beyond just "flurry behaves like twf, no flurry with a single weapon", and quick, because there are just too many unresolved issues for players playing monks in PFS play.
Unarmed monk is indisputably more powerful than a weapon-wielding monk, whether they can flurry with one weapon or not, so power level should not really be an issue in this ruling. The issue is, there needs to be many issues cleared up before monks can be played by RAW in PFS play.
Welcome to the club! We have hats! :D
|
In the previous thread, I was the most ardent defender of the developers' ruling. I have since been convinced that there is really no way to overpower the monk by allowing them to flurry with a single weapon (although there is a cost disparity compared to other twf characters), and really there is no reason for this ruling other than that it marries twf and flurry so that there are not two mechanics. However, there are so many other issues brought up by this ruling (magic fang/weapon, attack penalty for wielding two one-handed weapons, weapon enchantments on unarmed strikes while grappled or otherwise having restricted body parts, etc.) that I think the developers need to make a comprehensive ruling beyond just "flurry behaves like twf, no flurry with a single weapon", and quick, because there are just too many unresolved issues for players playing monks in PFS play.
Unarmed monk is indisputably more powerful than a weapon-wielding monk, whether they can flurry with one weapon or not, so power level should not really be an issue in this ruling. The issue is, there needs to be many issues cleared up before monks can be played by RAW in PFS play.
I'm surprised but pleased.
While there is the wealth discrepancy between a single weapon monk and a two-weapon fighter, there is the same wealth spent between the single weapon monk and the two-handed fighter. I would say then that it is TWF that needs to be fixed, not the monk.
The thing is you still don't need more than one weapon: your unarmed strike. You can continue to get all your flurry attacks with unarmed strike, and (with Feral Combat Training) your natural weapons. If you can get all your flurry attacks with them, then why not a kama or a temple sword or a staff?
Master Arminas
So how does a flurry of blows work for a T rex druid monk? 1 Bite/1 Unarmed?
He can bite once, or use flurry of blows to get a bunch of unarmed attacks in. This all changes with Feral Combat Training of course.
The thing is you still don't need more than one weapon: your unarmed strike. You can continue to get all your flurry attacks with unarmed strike, and (with Feral Combat Training) your natural weapons. If you can get all your flurry attacks with them, then why not a kama or a temple sword or a staff?
Master Arminas
I am not going to say "why not get all your attacks with one weapon if you can get the same with unarmed strike or natural weapon", because I'm not looking at this as a power or gold disparity issue, but why not fix the wording of flurry of blows so that one of the interpretations makes sense, and there is a RAW way to deal with one of them, instead of the current situation where both interpretations have RAW problems, and the monk is literally impossible to play by RAW?
(although there is a cost disparity compared to other twf characters)
When you factor in the increased costs monks have on their equipment for attribute enhancements due to their multiple-attribute-dependency issue and the cost of an additional +1 (ki focus) on weapons just to use some of their class abilities with their chosen fighting style, that weapon cost disparity becomes smaller than expected. A monk paying less than a TWF for primary weapon(s) is not that big of a deal considering some of the monk's best abilities (stunning fist, et al) are tied to unarmed strikes, which suffer from DR-penetrating issues (among other things).
Implementing a significant change* to flurry of blows to address a perceived imbalance in weapon cost between them and two-weapon fighters doesn't address the real issue; the underlying issue that should be addressed is the disparity in effectiveness of two-weapon fighting compared to other fighting styles. An expansion of feats and martial class/archetype abilities that provide truly unique benefits (not just small, gimmicky and highly circumstantial uses granted by some TWF-enhancing feats) to make two-weapon fighting a viable option would go a long way towards making the cost of improving two weapons seem a minor issue.
@wroy
At this point I am fully convinced that whether there is a gold disparity or not is not really the issue. It is fine if the monk only needs to spend half the gold that other two-weapon fighters have to. The issue now is that there are problems with the Rules as Written whether a monk can flurry with one weapon or needs two. The developers need to choose one interpretation and fully describe all of the implications of it, because both interpretations are not fully described in the text of FoB, leading to actual in-game issues that can not be resolved by straight RAW.
|
Here is a two-weapon fighter that I made and it will out damage a monk any day with only a 13 str.
20th level Human two-weapon Fighter
Str: 13
Dex: 24 (30 Belt of Physical Might +6)
Con: 14 (20 Belt of Physical Might +6)
Int: 8 (12 Headband of Mental Prowess +4)
Wis: 14 (18 Headband of Mental Prowess +4)
Cha: 15
Spd: 30ft
Initiative: + 12
Traits: ( Reactionary +2 Init, Killer)
HP: 20d10 + 140
AC: 42 (43 Dodge)(44 Hasted)
Fort: + 22
Ref: +21
Will: + 15 (20 vs Fear)(23 with Touch of Rage)(28 with Touch of Rage vs Fear)
Special: Human Traits, Bloodline Arcana: You gain the orc subtype, including darkvision 60 feet and light sensitivity. If you already have darkvision, its range increases to 90 feet. Whenever you cast a spell that deals damage, that spell deals +1 point of damage per die rolled.
Fighter Abilities: Bravery +5, Armor Training 4, Armor Mastery, Weapon Training 4, Weapon Mastery, Dr 5/-.
Feats: Skill Focus(Survival), Eldritch Heritage(Touch of Rage), Sickening Critical, Critical Focus, Exotic Weapon Proficiency(Wakizashi), Weapon Focus(Wakizashi), Greater Weapon Focus(Wakizashi), Weapon Specialization(Wakizashi), Greater Weapon Specialization(Wakizashi), Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Greater Two-Weapon Fighting, Double Slice, Two-Weapon Defense, Power Attack, Furious Focus, Improved Critical, Dodge, Stunning Assault, Dazing Assault, Weapon Focus, Two-Weapon Rend.
+5 agile brilliant energy wakizashi: + 41/+30/+25/+20 (-2 Two-Weapon and -6 Power Attack)
+5 agile brilliant energy wakizashi: +41/+30/+25
(Hasted): +42/+42/+31/+26/+21/ +42/+31/+26
Damage: 1d6 + 10 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 12 15-20 x3 (DC Fort Stunned and Dazed per hit)(On Crit Sickened for 1 minute)
Damage: 1d6 + 10 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 12 (Two-Weapon Rend add 1d10 + 15 damage per round)
(Hasted and Touch of Rage): +50/+50/+39/+34/+29 +50/+39/+34
Damage: 1d6 + 10 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 12 + 8 15-20 x3
Damage: 1d6 + 10 + 6 + 5 + 4 + 12 + 8 15-20 x3 (Two-Weapon Rend add 1d10 + 15)
Gear: x2 +5 agile brilliant energy wakizashi, +5 mithral fullplate, Ring of Protection +5, Cloak of Resistance +5, Amulet of Natural Armor +5, Headband of Mental Prowess +4, Ring of Friend Shield, Boots of Speed, Gloves of Dueling, Manual of Quickness of Action +4.
Ok the previous 11-page, 568-post thread on this discussion was locked. But the moderator said if we wanted to continue discussing start a new thread: here it is. We are not going to let this go quietly away.
OK, the way I look at it is like this:
IF we treat flurry as TWF ONLY, nothing else special about it, then "to be fair" we need to allow the monk access to all the TWF feat-tree as if they had them: Two Weapon Defence, Two Weapon Rend etc.
However, currently monks do not have access to these feats. That being said, as they do not get all the advantages of TWF is it "fair" to lumber them with its disadvantages as well? Attacking a full flurry with one weapon is one of the few advantages a monk gets compared to many disadvantages in combat. This also raises the spectre of which attacks are which, and it all gets horribly confusing.
What it really comes down to is this: is it broken to allow a monk to use flurry for one weapon alone? Monk weapons are not exactly overpowered, and monks are offensively quite weak when it comes to damage dealing so I would say no, it's not overpowered, given that they do not have the ability to choose any of the TWF feats that require TWF as a pre-requisite.
This change...no, nerf, is apalling, and I am angry. Why does paizo feel the need to constantly nerf and destroy the weakest class in the game? Do they take sick pleasure in it?
Unarmed strike is a single weapon, whether you use fist, foot, elbow, whatever. That's how it's always been, how it should always be, and the most sensible way to treat it. Paizo are the ones that confused the freaking issue with the flurry rules using TWF to describe how it works.
They would rather nerf the monk than admit the pricing for AoMF is way out of whack for a monk. Instead of saying that, they feel the need to justify its multi-weapon buffing properties by insisting unarmed are different weapons...nerfing the monk... just to say, "See! AoMF is useful!"
This nerf disgusts me and I demand that it be undone!
Sing it sister, sing it!
Master Arminas
| 2 people marked this as FAQ candidate. |
Well, Jason Bulmahn, have ya'll made any decisions yet? I think over the course of this thread, the locked thread, and myriad of other threads that have simply blossomed out of the woodwork since last Friday (or was it Thursday?) we have highlighted all of the many unintended consequences that would arise. It would be nice, however, to hear the direction that your discussions are travelling in.
Master Arminas
The last several FAQs have come out on Tuesdays... I'm still hopeful we might get something today but then again this issue only arose on Thursday.
This blog is about the Advanced Race book. So really we just need to be patient until they post something about it.
The equipment in question is likely the longspear and various other reach weapons.
Reach+Flurry has been a holy grail for monk players for years. Now we have it, and the Devs may not like it's implementation.
Flurrying with a reach weapon isn't particularly new. In 3.5, the Eberron Campaign Setting had a feat allowing a monk to flurry with a longspear. And before that, the Shou Disciple prestige class from Unapproachable East had the ability to flurry with any martial weapon.
Not surprisingly, neither of those abilities caused anyone's brain to explode.
So paizo wanted to improve their hit percentage so the boosted the bab of flurry [..]
Actually, the Pathfinder monk and the 3.5 monk are fairly similar in hit percentage, I think.
Level 1:
Pathfinder monk -1/-1
3.5 monk -2/-2
Level 8:
Pathfinder monk +6/+6/+1/+1
3.5 monk +5/+5/+0
Level 11:
Pathfinder monk +9/+9/+4/+4
3.5 monk +8/+8/+8/+3
Level 16:
Pathfinder monk +14/+14/+9/+9/+4/+4/-1
3.5 monk +12/+12/+12/+7/+2
As an aside, I actually like the Pathfinder decision to use Two-Weapon Fighting as a base for how Flurry of Blows works. I think it's quite elegant.
If a monk can flurry with one weapon (not an unarmed strike), they are greatly overpowered when compared to a melee Two-Weapon Fighting <insert your favorite class>.
I don't know what to tell you. I don't think monks were overpowered in 3.5 (ha!) and I don't think they were overpowered using the more advantageous weapon flurrying interpretation in Pathfinder.
Have you ever played a monk who used a weapon?
Have you ever played a monk who used a weapon?
I know that question wasn't directed at me, but it is an interesting one. For my own characters (back when I got to play instead of DM), I almost always went with my unarmed strike. Oh, I carried a few shuriken to toss, and perhaps a silver or cold iron kama, but I spent my feats and my gold improving my unarmed strike as best I could.
Weapons were never my first choice. One feat I did like from 3.5 that I wish had been carried over (in some form) was Water Splitting Stone from Players Handbook II. It was a simple feat: when you successfully attack a creature who possesses damage reduction that is effective against your attack, you gained a +4 damage bonus on that attack. The prerequisites were Dex 13, Wis 13, Improved Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, and BAB +9.
So, if you were fighting a Werewolf with DR 15/silver, and using your unarmed strikes, each hit gained a +4 (unnamed) bonus to your damage. I wish Paizo would do something similar for Pathfinder, because that one feat made playing monks so much simpler.
Master Arminas
2. The 800 lb gorilla in the room that no one is really talking about but I'm betting everyone is upset over is magical equipment cost and its impact on attack bonuses, damage, etc. If a monk can flurry with one weapon (not an unarmed strike), they are greatly overpowered when compared to a melee Two-Weapon Fighting <insert your favorite class>.Here's why: Any melee Two-Weapon Fighting <whatever> must magic two weapons resulting in lower bonuses. An unarmed monk can use Amulet of Mighty Fists, but the cost is 2.5 x one weapon magic cost (a slight hit, but there are efficiencies that somewhat offset the penalty). The one-weapon monk gets to pay to magic one weapon and yet gets all those additional attacks with a higher bonus. Both the monk and the melee TWF <whatever> face the same limitations of having to make a full-attack to get the extra attacks, etc., etc., etc. and so are a fair direct comparison.
Both the monk and the TWF <whatever> need to be treated equally when it comes to the magic cost. It seems pretty clear to me that the answer from the designers is that if you want all those attacks, you will be paying at least 2 x magic cost (2.5 x cost if you go unarmed). I don't see how they could choose anything else.
See my previous post. Your comparison is failing to take into account the facts that:
- Weapon costs do not exist in a vacuum separate from all other equipment costs. The monk has substantially increased equipment costs enhancing attributes due to MAD, which reduce the gap present when you only compare weapon costs between monks and non-monk TWFers.
- A weapon-using monk has to usually inflate his weapon cost by a +1 factor to get ki focus if he wants to use some important monk abilities with his weapon.
- A monk has to pay 2.5x plus spend their neck slot to enhance unarmed strikes; weapon-using monks need to either pay this inflated cost to some extent or give up on having any augmentation to their unarmed strikes for secondary purposes. Enough feats enhance or trigger from unarmed strikes to keep this at least some consideration for many weapon-using monk builds.
Rather than an 800 lb. gorilla, it's more like an 80 lb. gorilla that can be tossed around without too much effort.
2. The 800 lb gorilla in the room that no one is really talking about but I'm betting everyone is upset over is magical equipment cost and its impact on attack bonuses, damage, etc. If a monk can flurry with one weapon (not an unarmed strike), they are greatly overpowered when compared to a melee Two-Weapon Fighting <insert your favorite class>.
Here's why: Any melee Two-Weapon Fighting <whatever> must magic two weapons resulting in lower bonuses. An unarmed monk can use Amulet of Mighty Fists, but the cost is 2.5 x one weapon magic cost (a slight hit, but there are efficiencies that somewhat offset the penalty). The one-weapon monk gets to pay to magic one weapon and yet gets all those additional attacks with a higher bonus. Both the monk and the melee TWF <whatever> face the same limitations of having to make a full-attack to get the extra attacks, etc., etc., etc. and so are a fair direct comparison.
Both the monk and the TWF <whatever> need to be treated equally when it comes to the magic cost. It seems pretty clear to me that the answer from the designers is that if you want all those attacks, you will be paying at least 2 x magic cost (2.5 x cost if you go unarmed). I don't see how they could choose anything else.
You have a point, but actually the differences are not that huge.
Half the cost of a weapon is +1 less. Seriously, two +2 weapons cost less than one +3 weapon. Now consider what the TWFing conventional full BAB warrior has:
Two weapons (and favoured enemy)
Two weapons (and rage)
Two weapons (and weapon training + weapon specialisation)
Two weapons (and smite evil)
Suddenly that extra +1 doesn't look so fantastic. I agree, there needs to be a certain level of parity, but you also have to consider all the angles and judge the whole, not just the individual parts.
If you really do not like it, though, a simple requirement that you can only flurry like this with a ki-focus weapon suddenly takes the problem away again, because that requires a +1 equivelant bonus. In that event, I would say you should flurry with ANY ki-focus weapon.
Netherek, that would solve a lot of issues. I did much the same thing with my medium BAB monk redesign, but it was enhancement bonuses, ala the Magus's arcane strike. Fighter weapons training would indeed fix the problem, and keeping the 3.5 15/15/15/10/5 BAB would be simple.
Well done; well done, I say.
Master Arminas
|
|
2. The 800 lb gorilla in the room that no one is really talking about but I'm betting everyone is upset over is magical equipment cost and its impact on attack bonuses, damage, etc. If a monk can flurry with one weapon (not an unarmed strike), they are greatly overpowered when compared to a melee Two-Weapon Fighting <insert your favorite class>.
That's really wrong. You're saying a monk with a single weapon can out-damage a TWF ranger or fighter or paladin? That's just... incorrect.
The KISS solution for flurry of blows is 3.5 flurry rules (one extra attack, 2nd extra attack at 11, both at highest BAB; penalties start at -2, -1 at 5th, gone at 9th) with full BAB. Seriously, that's really really simple to implement.
Add a line that you can't flurry and TWF if you want, but as long as "unarmed strike is one and the same weapon" remains a consistent rule...like it should... you can't TWF with unarmed alone anyway and weapon + unarmed TWF seems really not worth it.
While we're at upgrading back to 3E rules, re-allowing 2ndary natural attacks after a flurry would be nice. As would Imp. Natural Attack (unarmed strike). As would Fast Movement applying to all modes of movement.
Then all you have to do is fix the AoMF and switch back to 3E tumble DCs and Monk starts looking sort of decent!