| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know, I think I saw somewhere, while reading through this thread, that someone doesn't allow Elves, Trolls Drwaves, etc. into their European fantasy game as they aren't European. I laughed, considering Elves, Dwarves, Giants, and other things, as we know them to be, are mostly pulled from Norse Mythology.
Here's a kicker for Dwarf Fans. Dwarves, were originally Elves in Norse Mythology. Dun Dun Dun!!!
You know, I think I saw somewhere, while reading through this thread, that someone doesn't allow Elves, Trolls Drwaves, etc. into their European fantasy game as they aren't European. I laughed, considering Elves, Dwarves, Giants, and other things, as we know them to be, are mostly pulled from Norse Mythology.
Here's a kicker for Dwarf Fans. Dwarves, were originally Elves in Norse Mythology. Dun Dun Dun!!!
thats right they were svartalfr or "dark elves" i believe. I have to think there are more appropriate games for historical type play, namely turn-based board games with cards like the Catan game. Clearly you history buffs don't fit in with a fantasy rpg crowd. ;-)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
In regards to gauntlets and monks, I believe SKR has already ruled in that gauntlets being listed as an "unarmed strike" is a mistake. If you have a weapon of any kind, you are "armed". I think that is all stuff that was hashed out when the APG came out and people were discussion cesti and rope gauntlets.
What a long running mistake it has been then.
Gauntlet: These metal gloves protect the hands and let character's deal normal damage with unarmed strikes rather than subdual damage. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet.
Gauntlet: This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets.
Gauntlet: This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack. The cost and weight given are for a single gauntlet. Medium and heavy armors (except breastplate) come with gauntlets. Your opponent cannot use a disarm action to disarm you of gauntlets.
Hell, they even modified it a bit from each edition to the next, and updated the descriptions of the gauntlet. The gauntlet has changed each time the editions moved along, but they have always been unarmed strikes; and have always considered unarmed attacks (meaning that you can channel spells through them).
Sean K. Reynolds is nice and awesome. I think he's a great guy. I read his blog sometimes. I think he cares about the game. I don't think I really care to hear what he said is "intended" for monks; because last I checked, he was also the guy who tried to suggest that you had to cast greater magic fang on different limbs and keep track of which of your limbs you were making unarmed strikes with and having to treat is as TWF, and so on and so forth. It seems obvious to me - with no disrespect to Sean as a person - that he is pretty clueless as to how monks work, or are/were supposed to work. I've wondered if he has nursed some sort of anti-monk grudge going by how all his "clarifications" always hurt the monk, or in some cases actually go directly against the rules to make monks worse. I know he likes Clerics though (he wanted clerics to have more combat spells to "let them have fun" like martials by casting some spells).
If this is a "mistake", it's a mistake that has existed since 3.x/PF have existed, and a "mistake" that was not corrected each time even though the text of the gauntlets have clearly been updated each time. There is only one thing that is clearly the same between 3.0, 3.5, and PF, and that's that gauntlets are enhanced unarmed strikes.
Ironically, it's a "mistake" that actually fixes one of the biggest complaint with monks that exists and one that the devs have tried to downplay on several occasions. The whole Amulet of Mighty Fists problem. People complain because monks effectively lose a neck-slot in PFS and have to pay inordinate amounts of gold to be able to fight with their class feature (which is more or less inferior to mundane weapons for most levels). The devs said "Well that's because the AoMF is for natural attacks too, and we have to price it based on its true value". Not really a big deal when you consider that since 3.0, it has been legal to use gauntlets for your unarmed strike buffing needs. Nothing by RAW stops you from wearing a +1 cold iron gauntlet and pummeling the snot out of an evil fey with your unarmed strike; and never has.
So while the devs are finally going "okay, okay, the monk has problems", it is at a point where they also need to admit some serious responsibility for those problems. They have been creating problems for monks that don't exist, and their recent "clarifications" are both nonsensical and set the monk back significantly. They tried to say that gauntlets =/= unarmed strikes when the text clearly says they do, and then errata'd knuckles, and we have to tell pro-monk fans that despite the printed rules their brass knuckles don't work anymore and are thus useless.
Then they tried to say that flurry of blows was giving monks a neutered version of dual-wielding, and that monks couldn't make multiple attacks with the same weapon because doing so would make their neutered version of "dual-wielding" would somehow be unfair to the other martial classes.
I mean, it's mind boggling. I'm not even a monk fanboy/girl or anything. I'm usually first in line to say "Hey, these guys have problems as written, here's a laundry list as to why they suck, but the concept is nice"; but jeez. It looks like they're not even trying, and this stuff is making them look really bad as designers or even just as people who know how to play the game. It's disheartening. It diminishes good faith in their product. At least to me.
I'd go with what's written on this one. Gauntlets are unarmed strikes. Play it, love it. Let the monks have a cookie. Let the natural attack mongering barbarians, rangers, druids and monstrous races enjoy their amulets of mighty fists. Let the monks have their +1 flaming gauntlets as the rules say they can, and stop mistaking the monk for a latrine. He's been pooed on enough by his class. No sense pooing on him with nonsensical "fixes" and "clarifications".
I get all that. I was just letting you know where there might have been a gap in your "research". Check out the APG threads, or search for "monk" "gauntlets" or "monk" "cestus" if you want to read them. Personally I don't see a problem with monks strapping exotic materials to their fists to bypass DR.
I get all that. I was just letting you know where there might have been a gap in your "research". Check out the APG threads, or search for "monk" "gauntlets" or "monk" "cestus" if you want to read them. Personally I don't see a problem with monks strapping exotic materials to their fists to bypass DR.
Well thank you. :)
I would allow it if it was requested. As far as I know, monks are not specifically proficient with gauntlets, but gauntlet proficiency is wonky anyway in that it specifically notes that you are making an unarmed strike. Last I checked, monks aren't specifically proficient with unarmed strikes, but that all creatures are proficient with unarmed strikes (but need the Improved Unarmed Strike feat to threaten).
So giving it some thought, yes, I would allow monks -- or anyone else -- to use gauntlets. Seeing as an attack with a gauntlet is an unarmed strike, it doesn't even require proficiency as a normal weapon (because you do not require proficiency for unarmed strikes). It also eliminates the 2 largest problem with monks that is noted on the boards; impossible to overcome damage reductions and overly expensive enhancement bonuses.
The more I examine the rules, the more that I think that this is entirely legal in accordance with the rules; because a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed strike. That being said, it applies evenly across the board. Wearing special gauntlets would be nice for a fighter, some magi, and perhaps even some of the more martially minded spellcasters (I know that clerics might like delivering inflict spells through their unarmed attacks).
The one problem with all this... even if the monk is proficient with the gauntlet and dealt monk unarmed strike damage with it... is that is still does not make the gauntlet a "monk weapon" for the purposes of a flurry or any other monk abilities.
Hmmm, not all gauntlets are giant knight gauntlets just as not all longswords are big and fat. The gauntlets could be leather, "natural" if you will. Straps and gloves, bands, fingerless gauntlets, cords, half-bracers. Many martial arts actually wear gloves of different types. More to cushion the blows, but it could be done for the reverse reason--fingerless iron glove to break faces and free fingers for grappling and eye-gouging.
I don't entirely agree with you Ashiel, but I am starting to come to your way of thinking. The gauntlet idea has been ruled against before, in decisions that keep with the aesthetic that monks don't put things on their hands, because that will screw with their power and effectiveness of their unarmed strike.
As an aside, for the monks of my setting, they actually use a lot of polearms(naginata/halberd pike, spear) especially the low level monks. A naginata evens up the damage at low levels. The training of the unarmed is something the monks steadily work towards. When they get to a decent level, they will often abandon the polearm and go more unarmed. Having the unarmed as a back-up means they can do okay if they get the pole sundered or taken unawares/disarmed.
The one problem with all this... even if the monk is proficient with the gauntlet and dealt monk unarmed strike damage with it... is that is still does not make the gauntlet a "monk weapon" for the purposes of a flurry or any other monk abilities.
"Unarmed Strike" isn't listed as a "monk weapon" either. So what? You can flurry with your fists.
An attack with a gauntlet is an unarmed strike for all intents and purposes anyway. You don't need any special kind of proficiency for it.
The one problem with all this... even if the monk is proficient with the gauntlet and dealt monk unarmed strike damage with it... is that is still does not make the gauntlet a "monk weapon" for the purposes of a flurry or any other monk abilities."Unarmed Strike" isn't listed as a "monk weapon" either. So what? You can flurry with your fists.
An attack with a gauntlet is an unarmed strike for all intents and purposes anyway. You don't need any special kind of proficiency for it.
Exactly as Aratrok notes. Gauntlets are considered unarmed attacks. Unarmed Strikes specifically. All creatures are proficient with unarmed strikes. However, everyone from a commoner to a fighter provokes attacks when swinging with a gauntlet unless they have Improved Unarmed Strike because unarmed strikes do not threaten and provoke attacks without the feat.
In essence everyone is proficient with gauntlets. Likewise, monks can flurry with unarmed strikes, and thus can flurry with gauntlets.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmmm, not all gauntlets are giant knight gauntlets just as not all longswords are big and fat. The gauntlets could be leather, "natural" if you will. Straps and gloves, bands, fingerless gauntlets, cords, half-bracers. Many martial arts actually wear gloves of different types. More to cushion the blows, but it could be done for the reverse reason--fingerless iron glove to break faces and free fingers for grappling and eye-gouging.
I don't entirely agree with you Ashiel, but I am starting to come to your way of thinking. The gauntlet idea has been ruled against before, in decisions that keep with the aesthetic that monks don't put things on their hands, because that will screw with their power and effectiveness of their unarmed strike.
As an aside, for the monks of my setting, they actually use a lot of polearms(naginata/halberd pike, spear) especially the low level monks. A naginata evens up the damage at low levels. The training of the unarmed is something the monks steadily work towards. When they get to a decent level, they will often abandon the polearm and go more unarmed. Having the unarmed as a back-up means they can do okay if they get the pole sundered or taken unawares/disarmed.
That is one thing that always struck me as wonky. Ok, the monk, using his bare hands (at 16th level, with a Str 12), can generate enough force in a single blow to shatter a non-magical greatsword (10 hit points vs. 2d8 damage, avg dmg of 9+1 for 10; ignoring hardness thanks to ki strike adamantine).
But, you put on a pair of brass knuckles, which transforms everyone else's damage from non-lethal to lethal while remaining exactly the same, and instead of doing 2d8+1, now you are doing 1d3+1? Your punch got weaker because you slid a half-pound of metal over your fingers?
Seriously?
MA
It does seem a bit funny.
Hmm. If you make a defensive monk, and add it to a party with good defences, that isn't worried about quickly triumphing, the monk can do really well. You also then avoid the "you didn't do very much damage" problem. Add a defensive monk to an offence based party, they can still shine, they become a blocker/pursuer.
Those saves, a great ac possible with only high wis and smart feat choices. You don't need the items, don't need to talk to crafters or merchants. Just "be".
Course I love high ac and dragging fights out, slowly winning. Steady light-boxer style. Weave weave, jab jab, hook, step around, cover, crack a joke or goad. Stay alive and have fun.
How is the monk blocking anything? Fighter with reach weapons and Combat Patrol don't even block that well at higher levels unless the GM starts to play nice.
Unless the fight is an enclosed area there is nothing that stops the bad guys from going around the monk, and if I have to choose who to kill the monk that is struggling to hurt me or a caster, it is not hard to figure out who is going to get my attention.
edit:Your high AC won't help if I play my NPC's like they want to live. Every round the bad guys are alive is another round they get to kill someone. It might be you or it might be a party member. Allowing the bad guys to stick around is just a bad idea.
I have a question for Wraithstrike and Ashiel.
Do you allow monks proficiency with gauntlets?
I don't, but I do allow them to have the cestus and brass knuckles, and deal unarmed monk strike damage through them. The cestus does bludgeoning and piercing damage with a 19-20 crit range so I really like to recommend it as a weapon for monks.
I don't, but I do allow them to have the cestus and brass knuckles, and deal unarmed monk strike damage through them. The cestus does bludgeoning and piercing damage with a 19-20 crit range so I really like to recommend it as a weapon for monks.I have a question for Wraithstrike and Ashiel.
Do you allow monks proficiency with gauntlets?
Of course you wouldn't. We've already determined that gauntlets are unarmed strikes. All creatures are proficient. :)
Speaking of unarmed strikes, my players are gonna think I'm a b&&@*. I'm running a red hand of doom remix with expanded content and new NPCs, and the green dragon that they're fighting early in the campaign has Improved Unarmed Strike. >:3
14 HD dragon, attack routine means +14/+9/+4 unarmed strike routine, plus a ton of natural attacks at +9. Before modifiers of course (he's actually got a greater than +10 on all his natural attacks). Gave him deflect arrows too. Kind of a b&&&! move since he'll spend most of his time hazing the party by flying over and dropping acid cones on the PCs, and being able to ignore 1/round ranged attacks will be amusing. :3
a lot of martial art styles use gauntlets. Tis nothing special. a bare forearm has no realistic chance of stopping a knife. and the weight of the gauntlet adds impact to the punch as well. same reason a knife or sword has more impact than a karate chop. the concept of masterwork (or magic) gauntlets adding to a monk's flurry accuracy makes sense.
i would also personally houserule that the monk can wear a haramaki or a suit of silken ceremonial armor and still get his monk bonus to AC as neither armor is truly limiting. silken ceremonial armor is just enough cloth to stop a knife or arrow, and the haramaki is just a belt.
Of course you wouldn't. We've already determined that gauntlets are unarmed strikes. All creatures are proficient. :)I don't, but I do allow them to have the cestus and brass knuckles, and deal unarmed monk strike damage through them. The cestus does bludgeoning and piercing damage with a 19-20 crit range so I really like to recommend it as a weapon for monks.I have a question for Wraithstrike and Ashiel.
Do you allow monks proficiency with gauntlets?
"With" unarmed strikes is not the same as "while using" unarmed strikes. :)
a lot of martial art styles use gauntlets. Tis nothing special. a bare forearm has no realistic chance of stopping a knife. and the weight of the gauntlet adds impact to the punch as well. same reason a knife or sword has more impact than a karate chop. the concept of masterwork (or magic) gauntlets adding to a monk's flurry accuracy makes sense.
i would also personally houserule that the monk can wear a haramaki or a suit of silken ceremonial armor and still get his monk bonus to AC as neither armor is truly limiting. silken ceremonial armor is just enough cloth to stop a knife or arrow, and the haramaki is just a belt.
Mmm, +5 silken ceremonial armor w/ kilt. I'll take two please. One for my wizard, and one for my wizard's simulacrum. :3
But yes, at least unarmed swordsages in the Tome of Battle got light armor. You could have a monk in leather. Incidentally, Monk in light armor.
EDIT: Too bad monks aren't like this. :)
+5 silken ceremonial armor w/ kilt isn't a bad thing. allowing monks to wear such a thing could allow some interesting visuals. monk w/ light armor makes sense. could be a low level feat.
+5 silken ceremonial armor w/ kilt isn't a bad thing. allowing monks to wear such a thing could allow some interesting visuals. monk w/ light armor makes sense. could be a low level feat.
Agreed actually. I have no problem with monks wearing some armor. One of their biggest problems is they lack non-melee capabilities, but can't keep up with hit/damage/AC of other martials who get more tricks in a standard game. In a 40+ point buy it's not so bad, but my group plays standard 15 PB; and I've shown before how a ranger with a longsword and shield can out damage a monk while having a higher AC, using nothing more than power attack. If the two are hasted, it's not even a contest.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's ridiculous for a man with years of hard practice and dedication to beat a dragon in a fist fight, but not ridiculous for a random person with slightly above base intelligence to be able to shoot rainbows out of his hands that are so intense they blow your mind.
Needed this laugh.
+1 so hard
+5 silken ceremonial armor w/ kilt isn't a bad thing. allowing monks to wear such a thing could allow some interesting visuals. monk w/ light armor makes sense. could be a low level feat.Agreed actually. I have no problem with monks wearing some armor. One of their biggest problems is they lack non-melee capabilities, but can't keep up with hit/damage/AC of other martials who get more tricks in a standard game. In a 40+ point buy it's not so bad, but my group plays standard 15 PB; and I've shown before how a ranger with a longsword and shield can out damage a monk while having a higher AC, using nothing more than power attack. If the two are hasted, it's not even a contest.
As an example, 6th level Ranger vs Monk, 15 PB. Both human.
Ranger: 18, 16, 14, 7, 14, 7. (+1 Wis at 4th)
Monk: 14, 16, 14, 7, 16, 7. (+1 Con at 4th)
Assuming both have access to greater magic weapon from the party's Wizard (this gives an advantage to the monk as he doesn't have to rely on an AoMF to get his hit and damage, just to show this isn't about gear) provides a +2 to hit and damage to both.
Ranger's to-hit is +6 BAB, +4 Str, +2 weapon = +12/+7
w/Power Attack: +10/+5
Monk's to-hit is +6, +2 Str, +2 weapon, +2 flurry = +8/+8/+3
Ranger's Damage: 1d8+6 or 1d8+10
Monk's Damage: 1d8+4
Ranger's AC: 21 (+6 from chainmail, +2 from dex, +2 shield)
Monk's AC: 18 (+1 dodge, +3 dex, +3 wisdom, +1 class)
Attack Routine vs CR 6 Enemy (Average AC 19 by creation guidelines)
Ranger: +12/+7 (65%/40%), DPR: 11.025 (not counting crits)
w/Power Attack: +10/+5 (55%/30%), DPR: 12.325
Monk: +8/+8/+3 (45%/45%/20%), DPR: 9.35 (not counting crits)
Haste adds +1 to hit and an additional attack but monks cannot make an additional unarmed strike while hasted, per RAW.
Ranger: +13/+13/+8 (70%/70%/45%), DPR: 19.425 (not counting crits)
w/Power Attack: +11/+11/+6 (60%/60%/35%), DPR: 22.475
Monk: +9/+9/+4 (50%/50%/25%), DPR: 10.625 (not counting crits)
So assuming the monk is specking AC, he still ends up with AC lower than the ranger (who can afford chainmail + heavy shield at 1st level), and that's assuming we spent a bonus feat on dodge. If the monk tries to push damage, he can beat the ranger if he gets an 18 Str (resulting in an abysmal AC), but then the Ranger pulls ahead again if the pair are hasted. Meanwhile, the Ranger has the option to drop his completely mundane shield (notice that the ranger has no magic gear here boosting his AC) and drop to 19 AC (still higher than the monk's) and draw a 2 hander like a greatsword and make his melee damage skyrocket like so...
Ranger: +13/+13/+8 (70%/70%/45%), DPR: 27.75 (not counting crits)
w/Power Attack: +11/+11/+6 (60%/60%/35%), DPR: 32.55 (not counting crits)
So with the monk pushing AC like a drug dealer, he can't keep up with the Ranger wearing a piece of armor he gets with his starting gear. Toss on +natural (which the ranger can give himself) and +deflection and the gap doesn't close. The only way to catch the monk up is via mage armor. Which the monk cannot reliably sustain on his own without being a drain on the party (either he's chugging potions like an addict for mage armor or wasting the wizard's spells that could be better used to disrupt enemy mages, since his magic missile is up to 3d4+3 at this level). Even then the monk only catches the ranger in AC (but not damage). The ranger also gets full benefit from haste which is a big deal as it's arguably the most common martial buff (haste does not grant monks additional unarmed strikes, nor does the speed boost stack with a monk's speed increases, so haste is only a +1 to hit and AC for a monk).
Now just for poops and giggles, let's put these two against a melee opponent that should be relatively easy for the two of them. Let's say an Ogre (CR 3 vs 6th level PCs).
. Average damage per hit 16 (2d8+7)
Ogre's Average DPR vs Ranger
+7 vs 21 (30%) = 4.8
Ogre's Average DPR vs Monk
+7 vs 18 (50%) = 8
Ranger's HP: 45 (6d10+12)
Monk's HP: 39 (6d8+12)
Ogre's HP: 30
To avoid recalculating everything again, assume the ogre is wearing chainmail so his AC is 19. It would take...
9.375 rounds for the Ogre to kill the ranger.
4.875 rounds for the Ogre to kill the monk.
2.434 rounds for the Ranger to kill the ogre (w/o haste)
2.823 rounds for the Monk to kill the ogre (with haste)
0.921 rounds for the Ranger to kill the ogre (with haste)
4.235 rounds for the Monk to kill the ranger (with haste)
1.198 rounds for the Ranger to kill the monk (with haste)
Did I mention that the Ranger has more skill points? :P
Haste adds +1 to hit and an additional attack but monks cannot make an additional unarmed strike while hasted, per RAW.
Could you explain this reasoning? I'm assuming it's because of the line, "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon."
However, the Monk's Unarmed Strike is treated as both a natural and manufactured weapon. This would lead me to believe the Monk does gain an extra attack from Haste.
Is there another reason why the Monk doesn't gain the extra attack from Haste?
it's clear to me looking at the longevity of this thread and the posts contained herein,that the op achieved their ultimate goal...:TROLLING TO PISS OFF LOTS OF PEOPLE.
We're not pissed off, we are just debating.
Hell, they even modified it a bit from each edition to the next, and updated the descriptions of the gauntlet. The gauntlet has changed each time the editions moved along, but they have always been unarmed strikes; and have always considered unarmed attacks (meaning that you can channel spells through them).
I agree, it SHOULD be allowed, and certainly it was used in the Neverwinter Nights CRPG. I'd love for it to be so. However, I seem to recall a statement by one of the devs that gauntlets do NOT transmit the unarmed strike damage, because they place a barrier between your skin and the thing you are hitting.
Dumb, I know, but there you are. Hence my idea that ki-focus weapons should allow you to deliver unarmed strike damage through the weapon in question...
But here's another question:
Do you pay for each gauntlet individually, or are they enchanted and paid for as a pair?
I think he meant the OP was trolling. I don't think he was. He is just stuck in a certain mindset. In another thread he was asking about how to handle a PC that wants to play an orc. I am assuming in his word certain monsters can be killed on sight, and they don't really have emotions and so on. As a contrast in my game, many monsters are more inclined to be evil, but not all goblins, kobolds, and orcs are evil.
Hmm. If you make a defensive monk, and add it to a party with good defences, that isn't worried about quickly triumphing, the monk can do really well. You also then avoid the "you didn't do very much damage" problem. Add a defensive monk to an offence based party, they can still shine, they become a blocker/pursuer.
Those saves, a great ac possible with only high wis and smart feat choices. You don't need the items, don't need to talk to crafters or merchants. Just "be".
Course I love high ac and dragging fights out, slowly winning. Steady light-boxer style. Weave weave, jab jab, hook, step around, cover, crack a joke or goad. Stay alive and have fun.
How is the monk blocking anything? Fighter with reach weapons and Combat Patrol don't even block that well at higher levels unless the GM starts to play nice.
Unless the fight is an enclosed area there is nothing that stops the bad guys from going around the monk, and if I have to choose who to kill the monk that is struggling to hurt me or a caster, it is not hard to figure out who is going to get my attention.
edit:Your high AC won't help if I play my NPC's like they want to live. Every round the bad guys are alive is another round they get to kill someone. It might be you or it might be a party member. Allowing the bad guys to stick around is just a bad idea.
Why would they ignore the monk? How do the enemies know the monk has a really high AC until they test it? How do they know they can possibly get away with allowing a flank or rear charge if they ignore the monk and attack others? If the monk blocks their path, why won't they attack the monk?
I get some dislike a few chars playing defensive, but the monsters and foes don't come in with dm knowledge.
|
Hmm. If you make a defensive monk, and add it to a party with good defences, that isn't worried about quickly triumphing, the monk can do really well. You also then avoid the "you didn't do very much damage" problem. Add a defensive monk to an offence based party, they can still shine, they become a blocker/pursuer.
Those saves, a great ac possible with only high wis and smart feat choices. You don't need the items, don't need to talk to crafters or merchants. Just "be".
Course I love high ac and dragging fights out, slowly winning. Steady light-boxer style. Weave weave, jab jab, hook, step around, cover, crack a joke or goad. Stay alive and have fun.
How is the monk blocking anything? Fighter with reach weapons and Combat Patrol don't even block that well at higher levels unless the GM starts to play nice.
Unless the fight is an enclosed area there is nothing that stops the bad guys from going around the monk, and if I have to choose who to kill the monk that is struggling to hurt me or a caster, it is not hard to figure out who is going to get my attention.
edit:Your high AC won't help if I play my NPC's like they want to live. Every round the bad guys are alive is another round they get to kill someone. It might be you or it might be a party member. Allowing the bad guys to stick around is just a bad idea.
Why would they ignore the monk? How do the enemies know the monk has a really high AC until they test it? How do they know they can possibly get away with allowing a flank or rear charge if they ignore the monk and attack others? If the monk blocks their path, why won't they attack the monk?
I get some dislike a few chars playing defensive, but the monsters and foes don't come in with dm knowledge.
It's nothing about disliking defensive chars. We would all love to play efficient defensive characters! Problem is that the game's paradigm doesn't really help us do that.
Monsters don't come with DM knowledge, but they come with Intelligence, and many of them with genius-level one at that. If I'm a moderately intelligent bad guy and I see a menacing martial arts warrior standing between me and his robe and pointy hat buddies, will I play nice cinema-style-rule-of-cool-demands-it and go mano a mano with the Monk, or will I walk over/around him and dissect his healing and magic support? I know what I would do.
Hmm. If you make a defensive monk, and add it to a party with good defences, that isn't worried about quickly triumphing, the monk can do really well. You also then avoid the "you didn't do very much damage" problem. Add a defensive monk to an offence based party, they can still shine, they become a blocker/pursuer.
Those saves, a great ac possible with only high wis and smart feat choices. You don't need the items, don't need to talk to crafters or merchants. Just "be".
Course I love high ac and dragging fights out, slowly winning. Steady light-boxer style. Weave weave, jab jab, hook, step around, cover, crack a joke or goad. Stay alive and have fun.
How is the monk blocking anything? Fighter with reach weapons and Combat Patrol don't even block that well at higher levels unless the GM starts to play nice.
Unless the fight is an enclosed area there is nothing that stops the bad guys from going around the monk, and if I have to choose who to kill the monk that is struggling to hurt me or a caster, it is not hard to figure out who is going to get my attention.
edit:Your high AC won't help if I play my NPC's like they want to live. Every round the bad guys are alive is another round they get to kill someone. It might be you or it might be a party member. Allowing the bad guys to stick around is just a bad idea.
Why would they ignore the monk? How do the enemies know the monk has a really high AC until they test it? How do they know they can possibly get away with allowing a flank or rear charge if they ignore the monk and attack others? If the monk blocks their path, why won't they attack the monk?
I get some dislike a few chars playing defensive, but the monsters and foes don't come in with dm knowledge.
I never said they would not test it, and tactically it is better to kill the casters first. The only way I would really stop is if I had a good reason to stop. Basically it is a question of how much can person A hurt me vs how much can person B hurt me. That monk has to have offense to become priority number 1.
IF the monk is actually blocking the path they do have to attack him, but if he is just kinda/sorta in the way they can just go around him.
GM knowledge is not needed. Casters die first unless something else proves it should be dealt with first. How is the monk going to become that priority?
That might work for a round or two, assuming the monk is using scrolls, but that is something anyone with ranks in bluff and/or umd could do. The monk is still not a priority though unless his spell has more of an influence than the caster's spell. If a caster is being outspelled, for lack of a better term, by a monk then you need a new caster.
As for flashy affect that is not specific enough.
I will also add the SLA's don't look like spells so using SLA's won't fool anyone either.
You don't need ranks in either of those to know someone is casting. You need ranks to identify spells.
If some takes an action it is obvious in most people's games they are the cause of the affect. Otherwise a caster using charm person would never be identified.
Looking impressive is not as impressive as being effective. Effectiveness is what gets someone attention, not pretty colors. If the monk drops a fireball, and the wizard makes 2 bad guys run away, go to sleep, or otherwise takes them out of combat then the wizard/sorcerer despite not having anything that looks like an explosion is having a better affect. He has reduced action economy. He is still the primary target. Now if I am running an Ogre or other not so smart monster I will play it down to its intelligence, but it the creature is of average intelligence or higher it will know who to go for, and it won't be the monk.
Haste adds +1 to hit and an additional attack but monks cannot make an additional unarmed strike while hasted, per RAW.
Could you explain this reasoning? I'm assuming it's because of the line, "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon."
However, the Monk's Unarmed Strike is treated as both a natural and manufactured weapon. This would lead me to believe the Monk does gain an extra attack from Haste.
Is there another reason why the Monk doesn't gain the extra attack from Haste?
Good question.
I don't know any reason why he would not be allowed the extra attack.How is the monk going to become that priority?
When fighting intelligent foes he could bluff them into thinking he was easy pray or dangerous enough to warrant an attack on him.
Against animales or magical beasts he could use some smell on himself that makes him smell like easy pray. Similar to the stuff in pheromone arrows only weaker to not give such a bonus to hit and damage.
Telling someone you are more dangerous than a caster without any proof is going to cause you to mostly get a penalty to bluff especially if he is standing up front. Even if you bluff them for one round somehow making them continue to beleive will require more than a decent bluff, and most monks don't have the skill points to push into charisma, not the feats to spare for thinks like skill focus.
PS:I was assuming intelligent creatures. I don't expect for animals to know to go after casters first.
Haste adds +1 to hit and an additional attack but monks cannot make an additional unarmed strike while hasted, per RAW.
Could you explain this reasoning? I'm assuming it's because of the line, "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon."
However, the Monk's Unarmed Strike is treated as both a natural and manufactured weapon. This would lead me to believe the Monk does gain an extra attack from Haste.
Is there another reason why the Monk doesn't gain the extra attack from Haste?
A monk's unarmed strikes are treated as natural or manufactured weapons for the purposes of spells and effects that enhance or improve natural or manufactured weapons. It has to be a spell or effect that enhances or improves the weapon. Greater magic weapon is legal. Hell, disrupting weapon is legal. Haste does not affect them however, because haste merely affects the creature and gives them the option to make another attack with a natural or manufactured weapon.
But here's another question:
Do you pay for each gauntlet individually, or are they enchanted and paid for as a pair?
Individually as per gauntlets. Nothing stopping the monk from having a +1 flaming and +1 frost gauntlet. Just like there's nothing stopping you from having two short swords. Simply declare which one you're using for an individual unarmed strike.
"I will make 3 attacks with my +3 flaming gauntlet, and 2 attacks with my +5 gauntlet" would be sufficient. Or you could just make all the attacks with one gauntlet. Unless you buy into Sean K's "gotta use different parts of your body", in which case this also works for that (in fact it would be borderline required for that to work at all).
Haste adds +1 to hit and an additional attack but monks cannot make an additional unarmed strike while hasted, per RAW.
Could you explain this reasoning? I'm assuming it's because of the line, "When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon."
However, the Monk's Unarmed Strike is treated as both a natural and manufactured weapon. This would lead me to believe the Monk does gain an extra attack from Haste.
Is there another reason why the Monk doesn't gain the extra attack from Haste?
A monks gains an extra attack from haste like any other character. What is at issue is whether a monk spending a point of Ki is granted an additional extra attack. This is because of a line in the spell haste
When making a full attack action, a hasted creature may make one extra attack with one natural or manufactured weapon. The attack is made using the creature's full base attack bonus, plus any modifiers appropriate to the situation. (This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a speed weapon, nor does it actually grant an extra action, so you can't use it to cast a second spell or otherwise take an extra action in the round.)
Now, to complicate things further, nowhere in the Ki Pool description is the extra attack called a haste effect. Also its not quite the same attack bonus as haste uses your highest BAB, while Ki Pool uses your highest flurry attack bonus. But I think its reasonable for a GM to rule that they are similar enough.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Overbearing fans of anything can turn people off for a very long time.
Amen to that. But I don't know of too many overbearing monk fans, because the class itself is a meaningless mishmash of unrelated abilities that don't work together, and is so awful in play that I can't imagine one living past 3rd level or so. The mechanics seem to have been specifically designed to severely punish anyone who picks it for the flavor.
I'm not so sure about that. I don't think gauntlets are really weapons. They don't have their own damage and all the magic gauntlet items are wondrous items and none have weapon properties. They are also listed in the unarmed attacks section of the weapon table with unarmed strike, which is also only sort of a weapon and unenchantable.
Individually as per gauntlets. Nothing stopping the monk from having a +1 flaming and +1 frost gauntlet. Just like there's nothing stopping you from having two short swords. Simply declare which one you're using for an individual unarmed strike.
You might have a good point there. To my knowledge however you can still get them crafted out of special materials, made masterwork, and enhanced; so we could discuss that a bit more and try to figure that out as a group.
A monks gains an extra attack from haste like any other character. What is at issue is whether a monk spending a point of Ki is granted an additional extra attack. This is because of a line in the spell haste.
Now, to complicate things further, nowhere in the Ki Pool description is the extra attack called a haste effect. Also its not quite the same attack bonus as haste uses your highest BAB, while Ki Pool uses your highest flurry attack bonus. But I think its reasonable for a GM to rule that they are similar enough.
Except that they cannot legally make unarmed strikes via haste. Haste does not enhance or improve a weapon or natural attack. They cannot legally as in within the rules make an extra attack via haste with an unarmed strike. With a kama, sure, but then you need to split your GMW between unarmed or kama, and you're stuck dealing 1d6 damage instead of enjoying your class feature.
A monk can stack his extra attack via sacrificing Ki to make an extra attack even if hasted, and could even do so after making an extra kama-attack. I suppose that monks could carry a kama just for when they're hasted, but it seems a bit wonky to me (and means they need a 2nd greater magic weapon casting for their kama).
In fact, the one thing the monk actually does have going for him is the extra attack stacks with everything that I've seen that can grant extra attacks. The only problem is monks eat through their ki pool like they were addicted to it. You only get 1/2 level + wisdom mod. That means about 20 points at best at 20th level (assuming you pump Wisdom like a fighter pumps Strength). Given that you have to use this very limited resource to power your other monk abilities as well, and your Ki-strike turns off if you hit 0 points (meaning your actual ki pool is equal to pool-1 if you insist on keeping ki strike active), it is pretty sad.
Now I'm curious. I want to see how their damage and AC match up if the monk spends ki like an addict.
========================================================
Ranger: +12/+7 (65%/40%), DPR: 11.025 (not counting crits)
w/Power Attack: +10/+5 (55%/30%), DPR: 12.325
Monk: +8/+8/+3 (45%/45%/20%), DPR: 9.35 (not counting crits)
w/+1 Attack: +8/+8/+8/+3 (45%/45%/45%/20%), DPR: 11.475
So the monk even burning a ki point can't keep up with the un-specialized ranger wielding a longsword and using 1-handed power attack while using a shield. Since we were trying to compete in the AC department with the ranger we have a very good 16 Wisdom, so we can do this 6 times per day. In essence, we can have less AC than the Ranger and almost deal the same amount of damage as him 6 times per day.
Hang on, I thought casters usually cast invisibility on themselves in the first round, followed by buffs and then battlefield control.
One guy disappeared and doesn't appear to be doing anything, the other guy grew to twice his size and is racing forward to attack me... which one will I attack?
You might want to find that invisible guy. He seems to be causing the problems. :)
But really invis is not used in every combat, and if some invisible dude is ruining your life staying around to fight is not the answer if you have no way of dealing with him. Of course you probably can't outrun the monk, so hopefully you have buddies. Then again if the monk's offense is not good then he probably won't be using grapple to restrain you.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Incidentally because I like the monk concept but dislike the mechanics, I took the 3.5 monk more or less as is (reshuffled a few errant abilities where they became redundant) and gave them the power progression and power list of a psychic warrior and it has been nothing except wonderful.
They have no wonky mechanics such as "I have full BAB but only sometimes". Their flurry of blows is simple and strait-forward (they make more attacks, it's not some sort of pseudo-TWF). They are Wisdom prime (wisdom improves their AC and is the key ability for their psionic powers). The psionic powers represent Ki energy and intense inner discipline. They are weaker than martial classes but make up for it with their supernatural capabilities. Their tanking abilities are supplemented with powers like inertial armor which last hours and can be boosted to keep AC relevant. Dex/Wisdom focused old-man gurus can be made with powers like hammer and painful strike allow them to emphasis Dexterity and Wisdom over strength and still be a melee contender.
All in all my group has had great experiences with this monk remix. In accordance with the OP, it's worth noting that I have a group of elven assassins who use this monk variety. They are called "The Nocturne" and emphasize stealth, mysticism, and martial skill. They use powers like chameleon and concealing amorpha to sneak into places like the Predator and then quickly dispatch enemies with their unarmed skills or weapons before making a quick and slippery get-away. Using secret aesthetic magics like dimension slide makes them hard to pin down and difficult to avoid.
Except that they cannot legally make unarmed strikes via haste. Haste does not enhance or improve a weapon or natural attack. They cannot legally as in within the rules make an extra attack via haste with an unarmed strike. With a kama, sure, but then you need to split your GMW between unarmed or kama, and you're stuck dealing 1d6 damage instead of enjoying your class feature.
I see how you can come to that conclusion, but I believe that line in the Unarmed Strikes section of the monk description is referring to spells like greater magic fang being applicable to unarmed strikes. I find it highly unlikely that unarmed strikes were intended to be left out of haste entirely. That is just rather arbitrary. But then debating RAI is always murky.
What I do for the "sometimes full BAB" problem is to divorce it from Flurry of Blows, and make it item use dependent. Monks in my games get a full BAB period, as long as they use unarmed strikes and monk weapons. If they pick up a longsword and start fighting with it, they go down to 3/4s BAB, temporarily losing any feats that are dependent on it. That way its just like the armor restriction, a penalty for using the wrong stuff.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
I see how you can come to that conclusion, but I believe that line in the Unarmed Strikes section of the monk description is referring to spells like greater magic fang being applicable to unarmed strikes. I find it highly unlikely that unarmed strikes were intended to be left out of haste entirely. That is just rather arbitrary. But then debating RAI is always murky.Except that they cannot legally make unarmed strikes via haste. Haste does not enhance or improve a weapon or natural attack. They cannot legally as in within the rules make an extra attack via haste with an unarmed strike. With a kama, sure, but then you need to split your GMW between unarmed or kama, and you're stuck dealing 1d6 damage instead of enjoying your class feature.
I'm not really advocating that monks shouldn't be able to. In fact, I think it's kind of sad. But RAW, they can't. Since the one thing we all share online while discussing the classes is the RAW, I tend to stick to it as closely as possible when I'm examining, critiquing, and commenting on the classes.
Incidentally, if you house ruled it to allow monks to get the extra attack via haste, the monk still doesn't catch the ranger in damage per round, but it does at least make it a little less embarrassing.
I'm not so sure about that. I don't think gauntlets are really weapons. They don't have their own damage and all the magic gauntlet items are wondrous items and none have weapon properties. They are also listed in the unarmed attacks section of the weapon table with unarmed strike, which is also only sort of a weapon and unenchantable.
Individually as per gauntlets. Nothing stopping the monk from having a +1 flaming and +1 frost gauntlet. Just like there's nothing stopping you from having two short swords. Simply declare which one you're using for an individual unarmed strike.
Yet you can enchant a shield and use it as a weapon, even though it is not, technically, a weapon. I would gladly allow this for gauntlets.
|
But then debating RAI is always murky.
That is what FAQ is for :)
I think in most of these threads the good news is that fixing the monk is doable. A lot of good solutions have been proposed, and the devs have stated they are aware of the issues and plan to fix it, but need to figure out how to do it, since it will require some fundamental changes to a core class beyond simple errata.
And any changes to the core rulebook have to fit the existing work count...unless you are doing a full revision.*
I've said many time that I think simply making the monks hands into actual enchantable at appropriate levels (perhaps at the time they are functionally made "magic") fixes 90% of my concerns with the class.
Making rituals that enhance your body that cost the same as a double weapon is a simple fix that allows the monk the ability to hit things effectively with their iconic weapon and I don't think is at all overpowered.
I personally would prefer a simple solution to a complete overhaul, as overhauls invariably include unintended consequences.
* I am personally in favor of a fully backward compatible Pathfinder 1.5 with adjustments made for lessons learned, but that scares half the board into a panic.