I was going to handle the fighters, while you handled the monk. I am doing a complete build though, but it will be a fighter that I will use in a real adventure, not just a DPR contest build.OK I , know I posted a reply to this, and the board even showed it as the last post - but now it seems to be gone. Appologies if this ends up a duplicate.
That sounds fine - I'm prone to throw a feat or two at roleplaying rather than optimization, and I'm no PF expert yet, but it should be intersting to give it a try. The .5 DPR difference was at lvl 8 with a bunch of "all else is equal" assumptions - I expect the difference would increase with levels, 15 just seemed like a big jump at just 2 lvls higher.
What lvl are you looking to build? And what are your thoughts on simplfing assumptions (equivalent STR, magic)?
20 point buy
level 12CRB, UC, UM, and APG.
108000 gp
That keep people from trying to use every book available just to get an edge. I will also build a fighter that is expect to see play in a real game.
If I see a way for you to improve your monk's DPR without sacrificing the concept I will point it out, if nobody else does it first.
I agree that only one enhancement is needed for the monk. The unarmed attack is the weapon. The monk just has the option to use different body parts for the weapon.
I will get to making the fighter now, and figuring out the DRP numbers against an opponent who's CR is equal to the fighter's level. I think the average AC of a CR 12 monster is 27.
dpr is an idiotic system. in 3.5 with trip and stunning fist you could easily land all but 2 consistantly, assuming you wernt hitting a dragon or balor/pit fiend. i know i had monks down to science lol.
I like monks too, but a combat class has to measure in one of two ways: maneuvers, or DPR. Now the monk is decent at maneuvers, it's true - but fighters are ALWAYS going to be better. The monk simply does not have a 'thing' in combat that they excel at.
For entirely unarmed strikes, that's all just fine, right? The only issue there is enchantments, and the rules seem pretty clear (if not entirely satisfying) there: you can Magic Fang and get one "fist" enchanted, Greater Magic Fang and get everything enchanted at +1, or Amulet of Many Fists and get 'em all enchanted to whatever the amulet is.
Whereas under the old interpretation you could get +1 on your unarmed strike from magic fang or magic weapon and more from greater magic fang or greater magic weapon. Amulet of Mighty Fists is over-priced for what it is, and limited with it - and then you'd get the cr@p beaten out of you by the other guy, because you lost out on protection (less cash and no amulet of natural armour) and you have less hit points than the other combat classes.
You mean a monk built around A SINGLE weapon, right? I think that's what I'm testing here - one weapon as half the flurry, and unarmed strike as the other half. Keeps the "something else" money just as much as the "real" TWF could. My thought was that it'll balance OK with that TWF, but I'll concede that against a single weapon two-handed fighter, it'll look pretty wimpy. But the TWF looks pretty wimpy versus the two-hander also, right?
Actually what you just described is fighting with two weapons, because without enhancement the monks unarmed strike is only worth half a weapon.
I don't buy it. Either flurry of blows is like TWF, or it's not.
If it is, and flurry is just like TWF, then as far as I'm concerned, monks -have- TWF. So, I don't see where the 'waste three feats' comes from. If flurry works like TWF, then it works exactly like TWF, and monks have TWF. Monks also effectively have the Double Slice feat, btw.
Ok, maybe it's limited to monk weapons, but I'm fine with that.
You have hit the nail on the head. If it IS TWF, then the monk should be able to take the other TWF feats. Thing is, he cannot by current rulings. The other problem with it, is that a TWF fighter who encounters a target that is only damaged by one of his weapons can just attack with that weapon a greater chance to hit. The monk cannot, because if he does so he is no longer using flurry of blows and reverts to 3/4 BAB.
If the Paizo staff said, "Yes, flurry of blows IS TWF and Double Slice," then fine, I'm not ecstatic, but I can live with it. But no, it 'works like' TWF but it still isn't TWF.
He gets the downside (must have two weapons, unarmed strike is multiple weapons), but not the upside.
level 12
CRB, UC, UM, and APG.
108000 gp
That keep people from trying to use every book available just to get an edge. I will also build a fighter that is expect to see play in a real game.Level 12 looks like it might a particularly bad break point for the monk, what with Two Weapon Rend, but - I'll give it a try anyway. Anyone know how Boar Style is actually supposed to work? Not entirely optimized for my weapon & fist build, but it looks like an attempt to give monk's a version of TWR with the until-stopped duration bleed damage too good to be true . . .
Oh, and will you be using traits? Again, I'm fine with trying to keep the comparison simple, so I'd just say no - and assume magic items balance out, etc. - but if particular traits/magic iems are important, I guess I'll have to pick particular ones for the monk.
Boar's style works kind of like two weapon rend. It just does bleed damage. It does not stack though.
You can decide if we use traits or not. I do have the core fighter finished. I will post it soon.
Actually what you just described is fighting with two weapons, because without enhancement the monks unarmed strike is only worth half a weapon.I'm not sure I get your point here. Simplifying it down to Fighter-class TWF vs. Monk flurry with half weapon/half unarmed strike, both have two "things" that could be enhanced. That narrow aspect is equal, right? If the fighter has an unenhanced off-hand weapon, is that not also worth "half a weapon"?
My point is, the unarmed strike is a lot harder to enhance. The fighter has the option - if up against a foe vulnerable to only one of his weapons - to not TWF and instead attack with one weapon, and he does so at a greater chance to hit. The monk does not have this option, or rather, he has the option, but to use it makes him less effective, not more, which defies sense and logic.
It's pretty obvious that FoB is NOT like TWF, it's either it's own thing or else it's a nerfed version of TWF. But it sure ain't TWF!
TWF CORE FIGHTER CR 11
Male Dwarf Fighter 12
LN Medium Humanoid (Dwarf)
Init +8; Senses Darkvision (60 feet); Perception +3
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 26, touch 14, flat-footed 22. . (+12 armor, +4 Dex)
hp 100 (12d10+24)
Fort +12, Ref +10, Will +11
Defensive Abilities Bravery +3, Defensive Training
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
Spd 20 ft.
Melee +2 Kukri +23/+18/+13 (1d4+15/15-20/x2) and
. . +3 Kukri +24/+19/+14 (1d4+16/15-20/x2) and
. . Gauntlet (from Armor) +17/+12/+7 (1d3+5/20/x2) and
. . Unarmed Strike +17/+12/+7 (1d3+5/20/x2)
Ranged +1 Longbow, Composite (Str +5) +20/+15/+10 (1d8+9/20/x3)
Special Attacks Weapon Training: Blades, Light, Weapon Training: Bows
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 17/21, Dex 17/19, Con 14, Int 9, Wis 14/16, Cha 8
Base Atk +12; CMB +17; CMD 31 (35 vs. Disarm35 vs. Sunder)
Feats Double Slice, Greater Two-weapon Fighting, Greater Weapon Focus: Kukri, Greater Weapon Specialization: Kukri, Improved Critical: Kukri, Improved Initiative, Improved Iron Will (1/day), Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Iron Will, Two-weapon Fighting, Two-weapon Rend, Weapon Focus: Kukri, Weapon Specialization: Kukri
Skills Climb +9, Ride +8, Survival +15, Swim +9
Languages Common, Dwarven
SQ Armor Training 3 (Ex), Gloves of Dueling, Greed, Hardy +2, Hatred, Slow and Steady, Stability, Stonecunning +2
Combat Gear +1 Longbow, Composite (Str +5), +2 Kukri, +3 Kukri, Arrows (40), Celestial Plate Armor; Other Gear Belt of Giant Strength, +4, Cloak of Resistance, +2, Gloves of Dueling, Headband of Inspired Wisdom, +2, Ioun Stone, Deep Red Sphere
--------------------
SPECIAL ABILITIES
--------------------
Armor Training 3 (Ex) Worn armor -3 check penalty, +3 max DEX.
Bravery +3 (Ex) +3 Will save vs. Fear
Darkvision (60 feet) You can see in the dark (black and white vision only).
Defensive Training (+4) +4 dodge bonus to AC against monsters of the Giant subtype.
Gloves of Dueling These supple leather gloves grant the wearer gains a +4 bonus to his CMD against disarm attacks, attempts to sunder his wielded weapons, and effects that cause him to lose his grip on his weapons (such as grease). The wearer doesn’t drop held weapons when panicked or stunned. If the wearer has the weapon training class feature and is using an appropriate weapon, his weapon training bonus increases by +2.
Construction
Requirements Craft Wondrous Item, greater magic weapon; Cost 7,500 gp
Greed +2 to Appraise checks to determine the price of nonmagical goods that contain precious metals or gemstones.
Hardy +2 Gain a racial bonus to saves vs Poison, Spells and Spell-Like effects.
Hatred +1 racial bonus to attacks against Orcs and Goblinoids.
Improved Iron Will (1/day) 1/day, re-roll a Will save.
Slow and Steady Your base speed is never modified by encumbrance.
Stability +4 to avoid being bull rushed or tripped while standing.
Stonecunning +2 +2 bonus to Perception vs unusual stonework. Free check within 10 feet.
Two-weapon Rend You deal an additional 1d10+(STR*1.5) if you hit with both of your weapons.
Weapon Training: Blades, Light +4 (Ex) +4 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Light Blades
Weapon Training: Bows +3 (Ex) +3 Attack, Damage, CMB, CMD with Bows
Hero Lab® and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.
DPR: 99.61 vs AC of 27.
Male Dwarf Fighter (Two-Weapon Fighter) 12
LN Medium Humanoid (Dwarf)
Init +8; Senses Darkvision (60 feet); Perception +3
--------------------
DEFENSE
--------------------
AC 26, touch 14, flat-footed 22. . (+12 armor, +4 Dex)
hp 100 (12d10+24)
Fort +13, Ref +11, Will +12
Defensive Abilities Bravery +3, Defensive Flurry, Defensive Training
--------------------
OFFENSE
--------------------
Spd 20 ft.
Melee +3 Kukri +21/+16/+11 (1d4+12/15-20/x2) and
. . +3 Kukri +21/+16/+11 (1d4+12/15-20/x2) and
. . Gauntlet (from Armor) +17/+12/+7 (1d3+5/20/x2) and
. . Unarmed Strike +17/+12/+7 (1d3+5/20/x2)
Ranged +1 Longbow, Composite (Str +5) +17/+12/+7 (1d8+6/20/x3)
Special Attacks Doublestrike, Improved Balance -1, Twin Blades +2
--------------------
STATISTICS
--------------------
Str 17/21, Dex 17/19, Con 14, Int 9, Wis 14/16, Cha 8
Base Atk +12; CMB +17; CMD 31
Feats Double Slice, Greater Two-weapon Fighting, Greater Weapon Focus: Kukri, Greater Weapon Specialization: Kukri, Improved Critical: Kukri, Improved Initiative, Improved Iron Will (1/day), Improved Two-weapon Fighting, Iron Will, Two-weapon Fighting, Two-weapon Rend, Weapon Focus: Kukri, Weapon Specialization: Kukri
Skills Acrobatics +1, Climb +6, Escape Artist +1, Fly +1, Ride +5, Stealth +1, Survival +15, Swim +6
Languages Common, Dwarven
SQ Greed, Hardy +2, Hatred, Slow and Steady, Stability, Stonecunning +2
Combat Gear +1 Longbow, Composite (Str +5), +3 Kukri, +3 Kukri, Arrows (40), Celestial Plate Armor; Other Gear Belt of Giant Strength, +4, Cloak of Resistance, +3, Headband of Inspired Wisdom, +2, Ioun Stone, Deep Red Sphere
--------------------
SPECIAL ABILITIES
--------------------
Bravery +3 (Ex) +3 Will save vs. Fear
Darkvision (60 feet) You can see in the dark (black and white vision only).
Defensive Flurry +3 (Ex) +3 AC vs. melee when making a full-attack with both weapons.
Defensive Training (+4) +4 dodge bonus to AC against monsters of the Giant subtype.
Doublestrike (Ex) Standard action: Attack once with each weapon (normal two-weapon penalties).
Greed +2 to Appraise checks to determine the price of nonmagical goods that contain precious metals or gemstones.
Hardy +2 Gain a racial bonus to saves vs Poison, Spells and Spell-Like effects.
Hatred +1 racial bonus to attacks against Orcs and Goblinoids.
Improved Balance -1 (Ex) Reduce the penalties for two-weapon fighting or count off-handed one-handed weapon as light.
Improved Iron Will (1/day) 1/day, re-roll a Will save.
Slow and Steady Your base speed is never modified by encumbrance.
Stability +4 to avoid being bull rushed or tripped while standing.
Stonecunning +2 +2 bonus to Perception vs unusual stonework. Free check within 10 feet.
Twin Blades +2 (Ex) +2 to hit and damage when making a full attack with both weapons.
Two-weapon Rend You deal an additional 1d10+(STR*1.5) if you hit with both of your weapons.
Hero Lab® and the Hero Lab logo are Registered Trademarks of LWD Technology, Inc. Free download at http://www.wolflair.com
Pathfinder® and associated marks and logos are trademarks of Paizo Publishing, LLC®, and are used under license.
The attack modifiers are two lower than they should be since I added the archetype to the last build, and herolab wants it to be done at level 1. [/spoiler]
DPR for the TWF archetype was 88.76
If not for the dueling gloves I think the it would have outperformed the core fighter in DPR.
The weapon master comes in at 98.12 also behind the core fighter. All I did was add +3 instead of +4 to account for the loss of the dueling gloves.
|
If you want to claim that half his attacks are from his left side and half from his right side, then where do head butts fit in?\
"Unarmed Strike: At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet."
No mention of head butts. Yes, head butts are listed elsewhere as a kind of unarmed attack... they just aren't listed amongst the kinds of unarmed attacks for which monks get special damage, flurry, and other benefits.
Since fists, elbows, knees, and feet can indeed be split into left and right groupings assigning half the attacks to each side does seem to work. Which then makes the number of spells / enchantments needed exactly match up with any other class using TWF.
Because the TWF feats don't stack with what they already have, Rkraus2. So, the monk would have to waste three feats (and meet the prerequisites) without being to use those feats, in order to pick up Two-Weapon Defense, Two-Weapon Rend, and the rest of the TWF chain.
Double-slice is a feat taken by nearly all TWF-fighters that allows them to get full STR bonus with bonus hands. Monks, on the other hand (pun intended), DON'T get 1.5xSTR when using a two-handed weapon in a flurry of blows.
First off, a Monk doesn't need Double Slide, because he gets his full strength with Flurry attacks, per Flurry.
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with f lurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands.
And a dual-wielding fighter also doesn't get 1.5 Str, unless wielding a double-weapon. Which monks would receiving 1.5 Str for a double-weapon as well, but their choice is more limited.
As to TWF chain, Flurry specifically says it counts as TWF and Imp TWF, so you would already qualify for those, just not while wield non-monk weapons.
as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)
Note the 'even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat', which is the same verbiage for all free feats, the previous portion of the sentence limiting the weapons for which this free feat can be applied.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Completely aside from the mechanical minutiae that this thread instantly devolved into, there is the whole other issue of flavor.
Short version It boils down to "I VASTLY prefer the flavor it gives the monk."
I think that not only does the OP have a particularly myopic view of the flavor of a monk, but that this reflects a worrysome trend in PF especially of making more and more detailed mechanics that force flavor. This also rears it's ugly head in the fact that, as someone pointed out, headbutts are specifically excluded as a valid monk unarmed strike for some reason.
Making the "allowed" flavor more and more restricted is a bad thing. In my mind the hero from any Kung Fu film can be conceived as a monk. I can find plenty of films where the hero fights with multiple body parts, a single body part, multiple weapons, or a single weapon. Just because you, or anyone else for that matter, cannot see the full breadth of the flavor intended, is no reason to then go restricting that flavor by errataing the mechanics to be more restrictive.
Because the TWF feats don't stack with what they already have, Rkraus2. So, the monk would have to waste three feats (and meet the prerequisites) without being to use those feats, in order to pick up Two-Weapon Defense, Two-Weapon Rend, and the rest of the TWF chain.
Double-slice is a feat taken by nearly all TWF-fighters that allows them to get full STR bonus with bonus hands. Monks, on the other hand (pun intended), DON'T get 1.5xSTR when using a two-handed weapon in a flurry of blows.
First off, a Monk doesn't need Double Slide, because he gets his full strength with Flurry attacks, per Flurry.
A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with f lurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands.
And a dual-wielding fighter also doesn't get 1.5 Str, unless wielding a double-weapon. Which monks would receiving 1.5 Str for a double-weapon as well, but their choice is more limited.
As to TWF chain, Flurry specifically says it counts as TWF and Imp TWF, so you would already qualify for those, just not while wield non-monk weapons.
as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)
Note the 'even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat', which is the same verbiage for all free feats, the previous portion of the sentence limiting the weapons for which this free feat can be applied.
Note also that it says 'as if using' rather than 'as a bonus feat' like it does with the monk bonus feats. Or compare with the ranger's ability to TWF for free provided he's not overburdened with armor and equipment--yup, those are specified as bonus feats.
Flurry emulates the extra attacks and attack penalties of Two Weapon Fighting, just as the Grab ability emulates the CMB bonus and freedom from AoOs of Improved Grapple. Neither one is the same as having the feat, and having Flurry does not allow you to qualify for Two Weapon Defense per RAW any more than having Grab allows you to qualify for Greater Grapple.
As to TWF chain, Flurry specifically says it counts as TWF and Imp TWF, so you would already qualify for those, just not while wield non-monk weapons.
as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)
...with regard to the extra attacks. It says nothing about actually possessing the feats as pre-requisites to other feats.
Note the 'even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat', which is the same verbiage for all free feats, the previous portion of the sentence limiting the weapons for which this free feat can be applied.
But it does not give you the feats, therefore you do not have the feats when looking for further feats in the chain. You can only attack as if you had them. Big difference.
But it does not give you the feats, therefore you do not have the feats when looking for further feats in the chain. You can only attack as if you had them. Big difference.
Not any any table that -I'm- running. It's very easy, Flurry is either the same as TWF, or it's different. If it's the same, then it's the same.
And for the record, I really DO believe that's what was intended with this rule change. Okay, maybe that's not exactly what they wrote on the page, but if it were that easy to write rules that were crystal clear, fun, and easy to understand at the same time, we wouldn't have this thread in the first place.
this reflects a worrysome trend in PF especially of making more and more detailed mechanics that force flavor.Here I may disagree - I like mechanics to reinforce flavor. And sometimes, limiting is part of that. But yeah, it can go too far.
I'm not quite sure what you mean by reinforce flavor, especially as distinct from limiting it, but here is a concrete example of my problem with rulings that remove the rules support for flavorful things.
Guan Yu kicks ass with his glaive
For those of you who know your Chinese history (or have played Dynasty Warriors), you are aware that Guan Yu was a badass and he was famous for his fighting style involving a glaive. He and his ilk from the Three Kingdoms are also textbook examples of Sohei monks, as demonstrated in the above scene). Now, say a new PFS player wants to make a character "kind of like the guys from the Three Kingdoms (or Dynasty Warriors)". Pre-FoB "clarification", I could have directed them to the Sohei and pointed out that it lets them make a mounted warrior who can eventually kick people's asses with a flurry of spear/polearm/sword/arrow attacks. Great, they get to be their favorite character from Dynasty Warriors.
Now, however, I would have to explain to them that according to the rules they can't make that character, since the wuxia themed class can't use a single large weapon to do their martial arts anymore. The zeal of people to tie flavor to mechanics has just sucessfully removed a well-attested and famous character concept from the game.
That is why I have a problem with the change to FoB.
Not any any table that -I'm- running. It's very easy, Flurry is either the same as TWF, or it's different. If it's the same, then it's the same.
But it does not give you the feats, therefore you do not have the feats when looking for further feats in the chain. You can only attack as if you had them. Big difference.
I'd like your table then, but that's a house rule. Fact is, FoB is NOT the same as TWF, even with the ruling. There are too many exceptions and differences.
And for the record, I really DO believe that's what was intended with this rule change. Okay, maybe that's not exactly what they wrote on the page, but if it were that easy to write rules that were crystal clear, fun, and easy to understand at the same time, we wouldn't have this thread in the first place.
It may be what was intended, but it isn't what is written or what was said. I agree, sometimes it is as Confucius said: "I know you say you understand what you think I said, but I do not think you realise that what I said is not what I meant."
One way or the other, I hope this gets clarified. At the moment, the ruling makes it all a bigger mess with bigger questions.
Glandis that last post helps us understand where your coming from. If improved crit Kukri is considered OP in your area then yes most builds a monk puts out would be closer to the fighter since the optimazation level is clearly different than what most of us are used to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Simply put: if a high-level flurry can't look like this, something is seriously wrong.
Interpreting Flurry strictly as TWF takes away the possibility of that flavor, while the flavor the change supposedly supports is equally available under either interpretation.
12 level core fighter using TWFand etc.
Oh boy. I'm still in for my monk build, but I gotta say - Improved Crit Kukri? And they're not even Exotic in PF? Yes, it's "legal". No, no one I play with would let it in their game (or other extremities like the 3.x Spiked Chain).
Life has intervened, so it may take a day, but yeah - the only question is how BADLY is the monk outclassed. Of course, I'm sure a 12th level Fafhrd is outclassed by this. Silly fool, wielding a sword and handaxe . . . doesn't he know ANYTHING about fighting? ;-)
Kukri's were not the best weapon I could have used. I could have went Falcata for 15-20/X3 for slashing damage, and then had a cestus 17-20/x2 as the other weapon to handle bludgeoning and piercing.
I don't even like the kukri that much but taking weapon focus for two different weapons is too feat intensive. The TWF feat tree alone takes up too many feats, IMHO.
The kukri combo can still be out damaged by a THW fighter using a lot less feats, and not having to worry about dex.
As for my last build if I can get someone to haste the fight it goes up to about 123.
What is a Fafhrd?
edit: The Falcata and Cestus might do less damage, but they can overcome more DR types.
I agree that would be a mistake. My way of looking at the FoB preserves that possibility, IMO *better* than just flurrying with the single large weapon, by mixing half the blows as from the awesome glaive itself, and half as from amazing monk-fu: haft-sweeps, kicks, flat-blade smashes, pole-kick lunges, a fist exploding from hiding behind the glaive-blade . . . any one or all of those. Mechanically, half your flurry is based on the glaive, and half based on your unarmed attack. Descriptively, you have great creative freedom.
You see, Glandis, this is still possible under the FoB interpretation of 'any combination' - it does not prohibit you from any of these possibilities - you can have it both ways. However the TWF version DOES prohibit possibilities.
FoB 'any combination' interpretation: Allows TWFing as you describe and multi-attacks with one weapon.
FoB 'TWF only' interpretation: Allows TWFing as you describe.
So which option maximises FUN? The first, because you can do more with it and fulfil any flavour.
What do you mean by they will find interesting ways to bring that style into play?
No PF does not have a recommended reading list.
As for the Fafhrd reference I do wish that I could take two different weapons without suffering for it though. It just takes too many feats for it to work like I want it to. A fighter could use the cestus which is only 17-20 with improved critial and still do 92.85 points of damage per round. The base damage is only 1d4.
The idea of a single flurry weapon is also because it cost less to maintain. That allows you to have more money to put towards defense and anything else you might want. The amulet of mighty fist, and/or paying for two weapons is expensive.
Due to the monk needing several ability scores to be decent to get the most out of it, forcing players to pay for one more thing is just not something many people like.
I just realized that one of the big issues we see on this wraith, Monks getting twice the attacks for the cost of one weapon, is actually in another class. Dragoon can take a lance and make it a double weapon but the enchantments funtion for both ends.
What do you mean by they will find interesting ways to bring that style into play?At the pure description level, rather than "my first swing is a 24, my next is a 17, my next is a 21 . . . ", I'd hope to hear "I swing the glaive at his body - 24 hits, right? So I use the rebound from that hit to swing the haft at his knee - 17 misses? - and spin the glaive in my hand for an overhead strike at his head - 21 . . . "
At the more mechanical level, there's now a "second side" to his attack - maybe that encougrages his to take a wider variety of feats (e.g., going back to a weapon & unarmed strike style, since you're going to be using the strike half the time anyway, maybe you take that Gorgon's Fist that looked like a "waste" when your flurry could be with just the one weapon). Or to do a ver of your falcata/cestus choice and enchant one weapon with fire and the strike with ice.
I value that kind of variety and interest over pure numerical effectiveness any day of the week and twice on Sundays (good thing it's not Sunday anymore:-) Now, I don't want to see HUGE disparities in numerical effectiveness (explaining why things like twin imp crit kukri don't really fly), but both my GM's and I (on the rare occassions I GM) prefer "wide" characters to "narrow" ones (if that makes sense).
If I am forced to use more resources it makes me less likely to spend more feats on something I don't want to support. It is more efficient to support the one weapon I really like than to try to support two weapons equally especially if one is noticably better than the other. More than likely it just pushes the use of double weapons since you can also wield them as two handed weapons if you can only get a standard attack in, and then go with TWF for full attacks.
In short forcing me to be inefficient in one area just means I have to make up for it somewhere else.
PS:When I use the words "I" and "me" it is in a general form.
I just realized that one of the big issues we see on this wraith, Monks getting twice the attacks for the cost of one weapon, is actually in another class. Dragoon can take a lance and make it a double weapon but the enchantments funtion for both ends.
I had forgotten about that, and the monk actually needs it since I could take the extra gold to boost stats, and AC.
Sometimes, I find, restricting possibilities is good. Tell a player (via the mechanics) "just go ahead and swing your weapon 14 times", and that's what many will do. Tell them they have to mix it up with half the blows from another style, and they're more likely to find find interesting ways to bring that style into play.
Yeas but it's not fun if you go into all that descriptive effort and then fail to land a hit, is it? Restricting mechanics to try and get good RP isn't a brilliant tactic as far as I am concerned, the two are not really that closely tied.
Um, you understand that "as I describe" IS (or rather, can be) multi-attacks with one weapon, just with two different mechanical implementations? Like if the two ends of a double weapon had different enchantments, there'd be two mechanical ways to conduct the multi-attack with that weapon?FoB 'any combination' interpretation: Allows TWFing as you describe and multi-attacks with one weapon.
FoB 'TWF only' interpretation: Allows TWFing as you describe.
Yes, and the result is the same: if you are fighting an iron golem with a a +3 adamantine glaive then half those attacks are not going to achieve much if the monk is under 16th level. What any sane combatant wants to do is score more hits with the business end of the glaive, period.
A fighter with TWF can ditch the TWF side of things and concentrate on hitting with normal attacks, and he is rewarded with in effect a +2 bonus to hit. A monk cannot, because then he is not using FoB and reverts to 3/4 BAB.
This is why the mechanical interpretation of FoB = TWF is both a bit silly and very unfair.
Giving the monk all the attacks does give him an advantage over the fighter, it's true, but he is still behind chances to hit AND his attacks do not gain strangth x 1.5 damage as the fighter with a glaive would achieve. In other words, shock horror, he might actually match the fighter for DPR for that one fight.
I mean, I'm fine with you still not liking my approach - I just want to be sure it IS my approach you don't like, not an innaccurate understanding of my approach.
No, I do understand your approach, and it's still agreeing to hit the monk with the nerf-bat for no readily apparent reason. Everything you want to do can be done under the 'old' interpretation of FoB, you don't need the new (provisional) ruling to do what you want - it just doesn't STOP you doing what you want.
The idea of a single flurry weapon is also because it cost less to maintain. That allows you to have more money to put towards defense and anything else you might want. The amulet of mighty fist, and/or paying for two weapons is expensive.
Yes and no. Yes, you could have one +5 weapon instead of two +4 weapons. But you still cannot use your quivering palm or stunning fist through that weapon - you need ki focus for that, which is conveniently worth that extra +1. So, not that huge an advantage, more you don't get lumbered with a disadvantage.
I am curious about something? Why is everyone comparing the Monk core class to fighters? Wouldnt a cleric or rogue be a better comparison? After all, they are not a fighter sub-class like the paladin, barbarian or cavalier. They are either a rogue or priest sub-class, I cannot remember which off the top of my head.
Please note: My use of the word sub-class is a reference to the first edition rules. A sub-class was designed and based (at least in part) on the parent class. I am aware that the monk is now it's own core class, but is indisputably evolved from the same sub-class monk that was used in first edition.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The monk was not a sub-class of anything in 1st Edition AD&D. It was in it's own, unique, group. In 2nd Edition, the monk was removed from the game, only to return as a kit for the cleric/priest class. A kit that pretty much sucked and was NOTHING like the original AD&D monk.
3rd Edition restored the monk to a Core Class, but took away many of the martial mystic properties, lowered the hand-to-hand (i.e. unarmed) damage, and used that fuggly flurry where the monk gained additional attacks at every 3 points of BAB instead of 5.
Which then resulted in the 3.5 version that was still weak, but I actually liked: because it (for me) represented a return in part back to the original 1st edition monk with its ability to flurry with three attacks at +15. It still had problems, don't get me wrong, but it was better than 3rd Edition.
And then came Pathfinder. In many respects, the Pathfinder Monk is a step backwards again; gone is the idea of the monk having multiple attacks at his highest attack bonus. He's no longer unique, instead sharing two-weapon fighting with the fighter, ranger, rogue, and bard. Pathfinder (and Paizo) had some cool ideas, and overall they did a decent (not great, but decent) conversion of the monk. But then they went and powered up everything else and left the monk behind in the dust.
What the developers should have done, was to retain the 3.5 flurry (15/15/15/10/5), incorporated adding an attack from ki, and given monks Weapon Training ala the fighter for their unarmed strikes and monk weapons. No two-weapon fighting BS, no 'virtual' BAB, and not nearly as much confusion. It would have helped in the damage department as well and made the monk a lot more competitive with the martial classes, while retaining his unique flavor.
They should have added a ki option to spend a point of ki and get an extra attack on a standard action as well. Which would have transformed the class into a fantastic light skirmisher; barbarians can get pounce, yet the monk can only lay into a target with a flurry of fists, kicks, and sticks on a full-attack.
Ki Strike should have actually provided an enhancement bonus of between +1 and +5 on a monks unarmed strikes; fixing the disparity between monks getting their primary attack form enchanted and everyone else. And by doing that one thing (ki strike bestowing an actual enhancement bonus), DR wouldn't be a problem. Or hitting an incorporeal creature.
So, to make a long story short, Weslocke, no; a monk shouldn't be a poor man's rogue, fighter, or cleric. He is what he is, and that's all that he is.
Master Arminas
Then why are you all comparing the monk class to the fighter and no other?
As for the Fafhrd reference I do wish that I could take two different weapons without suffering for it though. It just takes too many feats for it to work like I want it to.Philosophical difference, then, to a degree. I mean, I too want a reasonably effective character, and I agree that there is such a thing as TOO much disparity in effectiveness. But if I want a Fafhrd, I'm gonna have a Fafhrd.
One way my various groups have dealt with that is to recognize that any system will have extreme outliers of effectivesness. We're good at FINDING them, usually. The 3.x Spiked Chain. Improved Crit Kukri. One player thinks the two-handed falcata is just a monster weapon. When we find those kinds of things, we don't play with them. They invalidate too many other concepts. Fafhrd (and dozens like him) should be reasonably competitive with kukri-guy, so - kukri guy can't have Improve Crit. Or something. Any build that is outrageously more powerful just needs adjusting.
Values of "outrageously" will vary from group to group, of course.
If you play to a high enough level to get the same special feats for the 2nd weapon it evens out some, but if you are not a fighter those feats are more valuable. If you are a fighter then level 16 is the even point. Fafhrd should not have to wait an additional 4 levels to make both weapons equally viable.
Yeah the kukri(any twf person using one weapon type) will still be ahead at level 16, but not as much as at level 12. The issue is not really the kukri, but it is just better to use two weapons of the same type.
I'm meh about the +2, as stated above, but it does bother me that the monk has no good "one solid blow" options, ONLY the flurry. Maybe there outta be some bonus feat options like the 3.x Decisive Strike alternate class feature (at monk lvl BAB, I guess)? But that's a seperate concern in my mind.
That +2 seems like a small number, but it can get you 10 more points of damage.
That means the monk gets a +15 when trying to activate find weakness. The DC is 22 which is .68 chance of it activating. .68x2= 1.36.87.94 is the DPR with find weakness added in assuming it works 68% of the time.
Adding +1.36 which is less than 2 gave the monk 8 more points of DPR. +2 would probably have been a double digit difference. That is why even though a monk and TWF'ers have more attacks they normally do less damage than using a two handed weapon.
Then why are you all comparing the monk class to the fighter and no other?Probably my fault. I frequently saw the claim (in other threads) that a half weapon/half unarmed strike monk would be outrageously weak compared to even a TWF fighter doing the same thing. My gut said "that don't sound likely." So I did a rough compare at 8th lvl of a monk vs a weapon & Unarmed Strike TWF fighter - the monk won. I changed the TWF to Longsword/Shortsword - the fighter caught up.
But when folks here think TWF fighter, they apparently think "dual-wield kukri-focused dealer of death." That looks pretty dominant. But it looks dominant over TONS of TWF fighter options, so I'm not sure where that leaves me. Getting an apples-apples compare is hard, because what everyone calls an apple varries widely.
Unarmed strike does 87.06 using the fighter I posted earlier.