One thing I always see and worry about is one class looks at a different class and sees something they would like to have and be better at, without realizing that they in return have benefits that that other class does not have. If they got to do as well as that other class in area a--while still holding a significant advantage in area b over that other class, then it isn't fair.
take the rogue and monk discussion. monks do better tripping and throwing, have better ac and better saves. Now if they want to do the damage of a sneak attacking rogue--where does that leave rogues(when everyone is basically able to do the trap job--read the thread where people say you dont need rogues)
if both are doing equal damage--but the monk has better saves, ac and CMB advantage---the rogue is what?
I can see why monks are feeling disappointed--you feel you dont have any speciality. But dont be surprised if that specialty may not come at the cost of some abilities you do have. IE you get brass knuckles as unarmed usable and flurry usable--but you drop to rogue saves and ac. or rogue saves and lose some CMB.
No, no, really, but no. The damage that a monk can deal (if he manages to hit his target) is perfectly fine. There are two problems however: (1) the monk has a very hard time hitting and (2) the monk faces grave difficulties in penetrating damage reduction.
Let's look at those.
I can't hit or why they gave me flurry of misses. Monks are MAD requiring four, sometimes five, ability scores that must be at least above average. This means that monks will have lower bonuses from their abilities on attack and damage rolls. Secondly, unarmed strikes are notoriously difficult to enhance . . . very costly as well. Two and a half times the cost of equally enhanced magical weapon. Third, the monk (and the rogue as well) have no special attack that enhances their to-hit chances. The Bard and Magus do. All of the full-BAB martial classes do. So once you run through the numbers, you are looking at a monk lagging behind other martial classes (except the rogue) by 6-10 points of attack bonus. That is a staggering difference in being able to land hits on an opponent.
The hairy guy beat me up and took my lunch money (or why monks don't fight werewolves). Even when a monk is able to afford an amulet of mighty fists, it is not a magical weapon. Therefore, even a +5 AoMF does not allow unarmed strikes to bypass damage reduction as a similar magic weapon would. Sure, the monk gets past DR/magic at 4th level (which any magic weapon can do), DR/lawful at 10th level (and there are what? Three? Three critters in all of the bestiaries published to date with DR/lawful), and DR/adamantine at 16th level: ah, finally we get a good one. TWELVE LEVELS after other folks can pick up adamantine weapons. Oops.
The high damage die of the monk does not, necessarily mean more damage. In fact, the die have a greater spread and your attack is as likely to cause 2 points of damage as 20. The feats Penetrating Strike and Greater Penetrating Strike would be fantastic for a monk to get through DR . . . but they are fighter only, of course. Pretty much, anything with DR 10 or 15 or (god help us all) 20 that is based on cold iron, silver, chaos, evil, good, or any combination of these with magic, lawful, and adamantine stops dead cold the monk's signature ability: fighting unarmed.
The damage is fine, Hakken, if you can reliably hit. Which monks cannot do without the most painstaking builds.
And having two more good saves than a Rogue doesn't make up for that.
MA
take the rogue and monk discussion. monks have better ac
Untrue.
Chain shirt is 4 Base AC boost, Monk need 18 Wis to meet that.
By time they get upgrades, Rogue has +1 Chain shirt (AC 5 boost).
People want to up hit, not damage.
if both are doing equal damage--but the monk has better saves, ac and CMB advantage---the rogue is what?
um you will be doing 1d10 unarmed while the rogue is still doing 1d6 probably. when you up your hit (which by the way is the same 3/4 bab as the rogue, you hit more often and for more damage than the rogue.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to point out that we are not on the same side here. As a company you(Paizo) have a vested interest in making money, the monk fix will essentially be a waste of money/man hours for you unless it is rolled into a book which you sell.
While as a consumer I(and possibly others) have a vested interest in getting the most bang out of our buck which means that for me I'm better off getting a monk fix than Epic Rules or some other jazz. And frankly there are always going to be other more valuable projects for you unless you guys decide to do a Ultimate Monk type book in order to make the fix.
So at the end of the day whether I complain about it now or complain about it "Soon" doesn't really make a difference does it?
Also unrelated to the issues, soon is the worst word to use ever because it's too indefinite and if it drags on you turn into a joke like the use of "Soon(tm)" on Riot's League of Legends boards.
I don't think that's fair. They aren't WotC. They care about our opinions, even if they aren't selling us something. Jason has said he would look into the monk issue, and he will. Not because it will make them money, but becasue he believes, as some of us do, that it needs tweaking. He also has pride in the product he puts out, and probably doesn't like the idea of a flawed class with his name on it going un-fixed.
At any point, they could have said something like "Nope, we've already looked at it, and that's that. Or said something like "We'll keep that in mind, and fix it in a future release." These would have been acceptable reponses, but it wouldn't have fixed the problem.I trust they will do what they say. Past behavior with open playtests and such tells me they will listen and fix the issue.
Stop it with the "us vs. them" bullshit, please.
um you will be doing 1d10 unarmed while the rogue is still doing 1d6 probably. when you up your hit (which by the way is the same 3/4 bab as the rogue, you hit more often and for more damage than the rogue.
take the rogue and monk discussion. monks have better ac
Untrue.
Chain shirt is 4 Base AC boost, Monk need 18 Wis to meet that.
By time they get upgrades, Rogue has +1 Chain shirt (AC 5 boost).
People want to up hit, not damage.
if both are doing equal damage--but the monk has better saves, ac and CMB advantage---the rogue is what?
At the level that you doing 1d10 + Str + 1 (from an Amulet of Mighty Fists), the Rogue is doing 1d6 + Dex (agile weapon) + 1 (agile weapon needs that +1 enhancement bonus, but you can afford a +2 weapon) + 4d6 sneak attack damage.
Yeah. Sure. The monk does more damage.*
MA
*That was sarcasm.
Monk vs Rogue seemed like the idea was:
Rogues get a list of things to pick from, focus on damage (sneak attack, if they hit, do more damage), encouraged to TWF to boost output.
Monks get a set bit of flavor things and a ki pool for some action choices, focus on hitting (full BAB on flurry, should hit more often, but do less damage) with a TWF like mechanic.
Problem is, monks can't enchant their unarmed strikes like weapons, so the extra hitting falls off as they level.
Monks can't flurry if they do use weapons, and have no damage boost to offset this.
{stuff}
(sigh) Different abilities have different weights, if you will. Certain requirements on the class are counters to those weights. A good example is the paladin - better saves than the monk, smitey goodness, healing power of the cleric, spells - they get a lot.
But they have requirements on them too: At the end of the day the paladin is awesome against evil foes, capable but nothing to write home about against other foes. They can do what combat classes do, though.
The rogue, while weak, is still fit-for-purpose: he can do what rogues do (That said, rogues do need a fix themselves).
The monk isn't. Look at the monk's role, and the rogue can do more of it than the monk can. He's as good defensively as the paladin, but with very limited offensive capacity. The monk has no fall-back option, in fact he barely has an offensive option at all.
One thing I always see and worry about is one class looks at a different class and sees something they would like to have and be better at, without realizing that they in return have benefits that that other class does not have. If they got to do as well as that other class in area a--while still holding a significant advantage in area b over that other class, then it isn't fair.
take the rogue and monk discussion. monks do better tripping and throwing, have better ac and better saves. Now if they want to do the damage of a sneak attacking rogue--where does that leave rogues(when everyone is basically able to do the trap job--read the thread where people say you dont need rogues)
if both are doing equal damage--but the monk has better saves, ac and CMB advantage---the rogue is what?
I can see why monks are feeling disappointed--you feel you dont have any speciality. But dont be surprised if that specialty may not come at the cost of some abilities you do have. IE you get brass knuckles as unarmed usable and flurry usable--but you drop to rogue saves and ac. or rogue saves and lose some CMB.
No, no, really, but no. The damage that a monk can deal (if he manages to hit his target) is perfectly fine. There are two problems however: (1) the monk has a very hard time hitting and (2) the monk faces grave difficulties in penetrating damage reduction.
Let's look at those.
I can't hit or why they gave me flurry of misses. Monks are MAD requiring four, sometimes five, ability scores that must be at least above average. This means that monks will have lower bonuses from their abilities on attack and damage rolls. Secondly, unarmed strikes are notoriously difficult to enhance . . . very costly as well. Two and a half times the cost of equally enhanced magical weapon. Third, the monk (and the rogue as well) have no special attack that enhances their to-hit chances. The Bard and Magus do. All of the full-BAB martial classes do. So once you run...
your second point that I bolded I can see. Rogues are the same 3/4 BAB and have the same trouble to hit as you. You however cant get magic unarmed strikes as easy to penetrate DR.
as for MAD--clerics could claim the same against oracles or druids---druids and oracles only need wis or cha---clerics need both. BUT clerics get other benefits that they don't---I dont forget that when thinking of their strengths.
The saves are HUGE. saves decide many fights. If you are that quick to downplay them, offer them up to trade for the BAB and stuff you want. If they REALLY dont mean anything, you should not mind losing them. I know classes that use 2 feats to improve two of their weak saves by +2 each(well often just one)---and you have +3 over the other melee.
I understand monk frustration with the second point--overcoming dpr--I think of brass knuckles as unarmed myself. That would also limit them to the weapon damage also--so maybe brass knuckles doing 1d6 like the rogues weapon instead of the 1d10 of a monk at level 8. so you can get brass knuckles and magic them up--magic two up--just like the rogue who TWFs has to magic two up. leaves rogues and monks about equal in dpr
rogues have trapsense
and sneak attack and
+8 skills,
monks have +4 skills
CMB,
trips,
feats etc(rememer it cost the rogue two feats for the twf and improved twf and if the rogue skimps on str--needs another feat for weapon finesse and money for agile or another feat for dervish)
saves
full BAB??
even before the saves and full bab-the rogue was lacking.
That is why I say I can see monks wanting the ability to magic some kind of weapon to overcome DPR. BUt when compared to rogues then? expect to take a hit in saves or CMB or something--maybe something like skills becoming 2+int----as you become more martial.
people totally downplay the benefits their own class has---but if you ask them if they are willing to give up that benefit--then you find out it does have value
um you will be doing 1d10 unarmed while the rogue is still doing 1d6 probably. when you up your hit (which by the way is the same 3/4 bab as the rogue, you hit more often and for more damage than the rogue.
Unless the rogue sneak attacks with a magic weapon. Apart from that, you have demonstrated that the monk, a combat class, can just about out-hurt the rogue, a non-combat class.
um you will be doing 1d10 unarmed while the rogue is still doing 1d6 probably. when you up your hit (which by the way is the same 3/4 bab as the rogue, you hit more often and for more damage than the rogue.
take the rogue and monk discussion. monks have better ac
Untrue.
Chain shirt is 4 Base AC boost, Monk need 18 Wis to meet that.
By time they get upgrades, Rogue has +1 Chain shirt (AC 5 boost).
People want to up hit, not damage.
if both are doing equal damage--but the monk has better saves, ac and CMB advantage---the rogue is what?
At the level that you doing 1d10 + Str + 1 (from an Amulet of Mighty Fists), the Rogue is doing 1d6 + Dex (agile weapon) + 1 (agile weapon needs that +1 enhancement bonus, but you can afford a +2 weapon) + 4d6 sneak attack damage.
Yeah. Sure. The monk does more damage.*
MA
*That was sarcasm.
And the rogue used 3 feat weapon finesse, twf and improved twf to do that. what did you spend your 3 feats on?
{stuff}(sigh) Different abilities have different weights, if you will. Certain requirements on the class are counters to those weights. A good example is the paladin - better saves than the monk, smitey goodness, healing power of the cleric, spells - they get a lot.
But they have requirements on them too: At the end of the day the paladin is awesome against evil foes, capable but nothing to write home about against other foes. They can do what combat classes do, though.
The rogue, while weak, is still fit-for-purpose: he can do what rogues do (That said, rogues do need a fix themselves).
The monk isn't. Look at the monk's role, and the rogue can do more of it than the monk can. He's as good defensively as the paladin, but with very limited offensive capacity. The monk has no fall-back option, in fact he barely has an offensive option at all.
like I said. if you dont value your saves---offer to trade them up for something. It is one thing to talk the talk---lets see monks walk the walk. If those saves are so useless, let the devs know you will trade them for something else.
One thing I always see and worry about is one class looks at a different class and sees something they would like to have and be better at, without realizing that they in return have benefits that that other class does not have. If they got to do as well as that other class in area a--while still holding a significant advantage in area b over that other class, then it isn't fair.
I agree with this. One of the things I like about the monk is all the intangibles. Yes in straight up numbers related to combat damage the monk has some issue, and yes he doesn't really fit a niche. However, when playing often I will have moments of "I wish I could do this thing that x class can do". Most of those moments were "if I were a monk, I could do this!". Anecdotal, yes, however most of the monk discussions omit or dismiss all the intangibles.
Yes the huge acrobatics bonus sucks, until you really need to cross this chasm with no bridge. Yes not being able to penetrate DR with your fists sucks, until the party ends up captured and have their weapons taken away, now the monk is the hero. Again, intangibles that can't be measured accurately as they are "your use may vary", but they need to accounted for in any fix the developers attempt.
I am not saying that the monks don't have problems, just agreeing that there are a lot of intangible abilities that need to be considered by developers in any fix they attempt that I notice can be glossed over in the forums. Plus the saves are often not given due credit. Do you have any idea how much any fighter would love having Will as a strong save? Yes the fighter hits harder, which is great until he is mind-controlled against you. Not much of a concern for the monk.
Also, one of the things I dislike about these monk threads is that no matter how well intentioned they start, they seem to almost always devolve into arguing about whether/how things are broken and complaining that the Devs need to fix it and haven't done anything yet. This is not necessarily the fault of the thread creators in any way, or those trying to have civil conversations regarding changes to the monk. But given that fact, I find it no wonder that the Devs' reactions to these threads are generally "ugh . . . not again". After all, it is my initial reaction to them.
{stuff}(sigh) Different abilities have different weights, if you will. Certain requirements on the class are counters to those weights. A good example is the paladin - better saves than the monk, smitey goodness, healing power of the cleric, spells - they get a lot.
But they have requirements on them too: At the end of the day the paladin is awesome against evil foes, capable but nothing to write home about against other foes. They can do what combat classes do, though.
The rogue, while weak, is still fit-for-purpose: he can do what rogues do (That said, rogues do need a fix themselves).
The monk isn't. Look at the monk's role, and the rogue can do more of it than the monk can. He's as good defensively as the paladin, but with very limited offensive capacity. The monk has no fall-back option, in fact he barely has an offensive option at all.
we do agree on one thing---the rogues need a fix---and worse than monks. (I quit playing mine at 2--so it isnt even for selfish reasons I say that.) If you look at posts and people tell other posters why not to take a rogue and how to do the trap finding with other classes and there are people arguing that they just roll passively for EVERYONE to find traps (a rogue ability)
another thing I do agree with you on--the dpr thing. I would have no problem with you all getting brass knuckles or something as unarmed so you could plus them. You should have to plus up two just like the rogue does--and would not stack with AMF then. and like I said--dont forget here that your flurry is free----weapon finesse plus twf plus improved twf costs the rogue 3 feats.
however--with the CMB and saves you get--and the AC without spending money on armor as much?---I think you all downplay that way too much. Most scenarios I play or fights in APs--saves make the difference. hold person or charm or dominate or any wil vs fighter. any fort save vs caster or rogue. How do you stop the monk? there is no weak save to target. that save is bigger than you all admit. Like I said you say it is unimportant?---than offer it up for bargaining.
Ugh,
Folks, seriously. We have stated now many times that we are going to take a look at the monk here soon. We've been under a terribly crunch for the past six months, getting Ultimate Equipment and NPC Codex out the door. We are currently working on Ultimate Campaign and Mythic, trying to get On Time as a department. This has caused us no end of problems and delays, one of which is our not being able to take some time to look into some ways to solve some of the monk issues.
Its still on our list. Near the top in fact, but the schedule has to come first. We will get to it, hopefully in the near future.
Until then, play nice. We are all on the same side here.
Jason Bulmahn
Lead Designer
Paizo PublisingI'd like to point out that we are not on the same side here. As a company you(Paizo) have a vested interest in making money, the monk fix will essentially be a waste of money/man hours for you unless it is rolled into a book which you sell.
While as a consumer I(and possibly others) have a vested interest in getting the most bang out of our buck which means that for me I'm better off getting a monk fix than Epic Rules or some other jazz. And frankly there are always going to be other more valuable projects for you unless you guys decide to do a Ultimate Monk type book in order to make the fix.
So at the end of the day whether I complain about it now or complain about it "Soon" doesn't really make a difference does it?
Also unrelated to the issues, soon is the worst word to use ever because it's too indefinite and if it drags on you turn into a joke like the use of "Soon(tm)" on Riot's League of Legends boards.
Actually, Mythic rules while "epic" in theme are useable at 1st level.
5th tier Champion's text says it lets you move before or after you full attack. So you can move then flurry.Only trouble is Tiers are moved through by deeds, and you have to hope the DM lets you get that far.
like I said. if you dont value your saves---offer to trade them up for something. It is one thing to talk the talk---lets see monks walk the walk. If those saves are so useless, let the devs know you will trade them for something else.{stuff}(sigh) Different abilities have different weights, if you will. Certain requirements on the class are counters to those weights. A good example is the paladin - better saves than the monk, smitey goodness, healing power of the cleric, spells - they get a lot.
But they have requirements on them too: At the end of the day the paladin is awesome against evil foes, capable but nothing to write home about against other foes. They can do what combat classes do, though.
The rogue, while weak, is still fit-for-purpose: he can do what rogues do (That said, rogues do need a fix themselves).
The monk isn't. Look at the monk's role, and the rogue can do more of it than the monk can. He's as good defensively as the paladin, but with very limited offensive capacity. The monk has no fall-back option, in fact he barely has an offensive option at all.
NO ONE IS SAYING THAT HIGH SAVES ARE USELESS. Where you got that I have no idea. But since you want to play this game, let's freaking play.
The Ranger. Full BAB, d10 hit die. SIX skill points and a solid list of class skills. TWO good saves, light armor, medium armor, and shields. Gets a combat style, which grants him five bonus feats without having to meet the prerequisites. Get not one, not two, not three, not four, but FIVE Favored Enemies, receiving at a minimum a +2 bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls against those enemies (and one of those could go up to +10 on both). Gets to add half his ranger level on Survival checks to track. Gets Wild Empathy. Gets Endurance as a sixth bonus feat.
Gets four Favored Terrains where he gets a minimum +2 bonus on Initiative checks, and on Knowledge (geography), Perception, Stealth, and Survival (and one of those could go up to +8). Gets hunter's bond, which can either give an ally half his favored enemy bonuses (as a move action), or he receives an animal companion (and spending one feat makes it just as solid as a Druid's). He gets spells, and there are some really nice Ranger spells on that list, as well as early entry spells that make for a solid list.
He gets Woodland Stride, Swift Tracker, and Evasion (which he can use in medium armor, unlike rogues and monks). He gets Quarry, which means he gets a +2 insight bonus on attack rolls and automatically confirms critical hits. At level 11. He gets Camouflage, Improved Evasion, and Hide in Plain Sight. He gets Improved Quarry, which improves his Insight bonus to +4, and he can designate a new target for Quarry after only 10 minutes. He gets Master Hunter, which allows him to make an attack (at his full attack bonus) as a standard action; hitting the target means they have to make a Fortitude save (DC 10 + one-half the Ranger's level + the Ranger's Wisdom mod) or die. He can do this once per day against each favored enemy he has (five times per day, basically, if he encounters one of each of his favored enemies).
Hakken, the Rogue is a weak class. It isn't useless and it has good things it can do. But it is the Ranger that I normally compare a Monk to, not a Rogue. And compared to this powerhouse class (in Pathfinder), the Monk is horridly weak.
MA
Monk vs Rogue seemed like the idea was:
Rogues get a list of things to pick from, focus on damage (sneak attack, if they hit, do more damage), encouraged to TWF to boost output.
Monks get a set bit of flavor things and a ki pool for some action choices, focus on hitting (full BAB on flurry, should hit more often, but do less damage) with a TWF like mechanic.
Problem is, monks can't enchant their unarmed strikes like weapons, so the extra hitting falls off as they level.
Monks can't flurry if they do use weapons, and have no damage boost to offset this.
You can flurry with weapons, but they must be weapons with the monk special quality. Which are far from the best of weapons.
MA
like I said. if you dont value your saves---offer to trade them up for something. It is one thing to talk the talk---lets see monks walk the walk. If those saves are so useless, let the devs know you will trade them for something else.{stuff}(sigh) Different abilities have different weights, if you will. Certain requirements on the class are counters to those weights. A good example is the paladin - better saves than the monk, smitey goodness, healing power of the cleric, spells - they get a lot.
But they have requirements on them too: At the end of the day the paladin is awesome against evil foes, capable but nothing to write home about against other foes. They can do what combat classes do, though.
The rogue, while weak, is still fit-for-purpose: he can do what rogues do (That said, rogues do need a fix themselves).
The monk isn't. Look at the monk's role, and the rogue can do more of it than the monk can. He's as good defensively as the paladin, but with very limited offensive capacity. The monk has no fall-back option, in fact he barely has an offensive option at all.
NO ONE IS SAYING THAT HIGH SAVES ARE USELESS. Where you got that I have no idea. But since you want to play this game, let's freaking play.
The Ranger. Full BAB, d10 hit die. SIX skill points and a solid list of class skills. TWO good saves, light armor, medium armor, and shields. Gets a combat style, which grants him five bonus feats without having to meet the prerequisites. Get not one, not two, not three, not four, but FIVE Favored Enemies, receiving at a minimum a +2 bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls against those enemies (and one of those could go up to +10 on both). Gets to add half his ranger level on Survival checks to track. Gets Wild Empathy. Gets Endurance as a sixth bonus feat.
Gets four Favored Terrains where he gets a minimum +2 bonus on Initiative...
different arguement. yeah--rangers are much more powerful than a monk at least imo. that is why I dont have a problem with monks getting the ability to use knuckles as unarmed and plus them up.
but one of your fellow monks arguement that you are the weakest class is the one I responded too---and someone else brought up rogue first. Rogues are weaker than monks. doesnt mean you cant argue for the knuckles are whatever. but if you start using the false arguement of rogues?--that is why I replied. There is one class out there weaker than you. They gave the ability to find traps to too many toons-----heck bard archaeologist blows rogue away. If there were one class that deserves attention the most right now--it would be rogue---and I dont even play one anymore.
another thing I do agree with you on--the dpr thing. I would have no problem with you all getting brass knuckles or something as unarmed so you could plus them. You should have to plus up two just like the rogue does--and would not stack with AMF then. and like I said--dont forget here that your flurry is free----weapon finesse plus twf plus improved twf costs the rogue 3 feats.
however--with the CMB and saves you get--and the AC without spending money on armor as much?---I think you all downplay that way too much. Most scenarios I play or fights in APs--saves make the difference. hold person or charm or dominate or any wil vs fighter. any fort save vs caster or rogue. How do you stop the monk? there is no weak save to target. that save is bigger than you all admit. Like I said you say it is unimportant?---than offer it up for bargaining.
By 20th level, you get a +5 bonus to AC, plus your Wisdom. Due to MAD, not even with enhancement bonuses and inherent bonuses are you likely to exceed an ability score of 24. That is a total bonus of +12. Yes, it stacks with Bracers of Armor, but Bracers of Armor cost as much as regular magical armor (and go up to +8). Total bonus of +20 (for a solid, well-designed 20th level monk).
+5 full plate gives a +14 bonus. A +4 heavy shield gives another +6. For that same +20 bonus. That is 41,000 gp, plus the masterwork armor and masterwork shield. The monk spends 64,000 gp on his bracers of armor.
So, no. Once again, you are wrong. Monks have to spend more on their AC just to stay at the same level as other martial classes.
Never mind, that the monk cannot get that +5 natural armor bonus from an amulet of natural armor; the slot is taken up by his amulet of mighty fists. The others? Yeah, they can get that easily.
And when you are fighting a monk, you don't rely on spells, poison, or disease . . . you just hit him, because he (on average) has, at best, the same AC as everyone else (oftentimes worse) and fewer hit points.
MA
If there were one class that deserves attention the most right now--it would be rogue---and I dont even play one anymore.
I am working on a Revised Rogue, along the same lines of my different takes on the Monk. Should have the first post on it made by this weekend, if everything goes according to plan.
MA
Once, a rogue was down to fighting an assassin, on a ship, with a broken bottle.
Disarms were all over the place and eventually he stabbed that poor assassin to death.
Great fight. Improved unarmed strikes is also not a wasted feat if a dm makes combats tough, and you won't always have your weapons and armour.
Or carry a few shivs as back ups.
I actually thought that flurry of blows was what allowed the monk to be better at weapons--allowing their full BAB.
WITHOUT making them unstoppable at CMB maneuvers. A monk with ki throw or tripping or grappling is the very best. I had a 3rd level monk totally trivialize a scenario. ac over 22, str 18 and he consistently Ki threw a cmd 30 monster. giving monks full BAB would make them unstoppable in the CMB department. level 11 caster---rogues attacks bounce off stoneskin----monk grapples and fight is over.
flurry should be the fix. like you said---if you can magic the weapons---then flurry with them.
take UMD or have a friendly arcane caster---add shield and mage armor to that for another 8 ac. All the monks I have seen do that. The 3rd level monk that rolled over my scenario had a better ac than the fighter at 22.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
another thing I do agree with you on--the dpr thing. I would have no problem with you all getting brass knuckles or something as unarmed so you could plus them. You should have to plus up two just like the rogue does--and would not stack with AMF then. and like I said--dont forget here that your flurry is free----weapon finesse plus twf plus improved twf costs the rogue 3 feats.
however--with the CMB and saves you get--and the AC without spending money on armor as much?---I think you all downplay that way too much. Most scenarios I play or fights in APs--saves make the difference. hold person or charm or dominate or any wil vs fighter. any fort save vs caster or rogue. How do you stop the monk? there is no weak save to target. that save is bigger than you all admit. Like I said you say it is unimportant?---than offer it up for bargaining.
By 20th level, you get a +5 bonus to AC, plus your Wisdom. Due to MAD, not even with enhancement bonuses and inherent bonuses are you likely to exceed an ability score of 24. That is a total bonus of +12. Yes, it stacks with Bracers of Armor, but Bracers of Armor cost as much as regular magical armor (and go up to +8). Total bonus of +20 (for a solid, well-designed 20th level monk).
+5 full plate gives a +14 bonus. A +4 heavy shield gives another +6. For that same +20 bonus. That is 41,000 gp, plus the masterwork armor and masterwork shield. The monk spends 64,000 gp on his bracers of armor.
So, no. Once again, you are wrong. Monks have to spend more on their AC just to stay at the same level as other martial classes.
Never mind, that the monk cannot get that +5 natural armor bonus from an amulet of natural armor; the slot is taken up by his amulet of mighty fists. The others? Yeah, they can get that easily.
And when you are fighting a monk, you don't rely on spells, poison, or disease . . . you just hit him, because he (on average) has, at best, the same AC as everyone else...
The problem I see with this logic is that the +4 heavy shield is something that not all fighters will have. In fact, many TWF fighters (which I've seen as the comparison for DPR with monks) do not have +4 heavy shield (or will take penalties to attack to compensate). The more common fighter build of having a 2-hander definitely puts the heavy shield out of the equation. This then becomes a case of monks wanting to have their cake and eat it too. Your last statement of "you don't rely on spells, . . . you just hit him" makes me think "so, you want a combat class with no weakness?". The fighter has high AC, so you target his saves (except fortitude). The monk has high saves, so you target his armor, except for the fact too many people were unhappy he had less armor than the fighter, so that is not a weakness either?
I really hate all the comparisons between fighter and monk, I do agree that monk/rogue is probably better. The fact of the matter is a monk should never, in my mind, be able to match the accuracy, damage, or AC of a fighter. The fighter in his chosen weapon should outperform the monk in all combat respects, even combat maneuvers presuming they have both invested equal amounts. After all, that is what all his class bonuses are engineered to do. Having the monk stack up with a fighter in terms of combat is a bit silly in my mind. Fluff-wise it also doesn't make sense. You are telling me that a person who dedicated himself to learning the art of combat is roughly equal to a person who split their time between spiritual enlightenment, and unarmed combat? This is not necessarily an argument that you have made, master arminas, but I have seen it, and the general impression of a lot of the monk fix complaint is that it is what they want.
I think MA is one of the few comparing themself to a ranger. who has the same 4+ in skills and other abilities as a monk. Like you said--others though are not.
I think ranger and monk comparison is fair. rogue probably also with them--but rogue is far behind both of them currently--with ranger>>>monk>>>>>>>>>rogue
an archer fighter will do more dpr than a ranger and with a better ac---but they have no companion---half the skills--no fluff tricks etc. so they should
ranger, monk, rogue all bring something rather than dpr to the table
animal companion, tracking, spells
saves, special moves, tripping
trap finding, sneak attack, 4 more skills per level, little less ac
I can see comparison between those three. but when I do compare them--I see them in the order above. Not rogues above monks. rangers yes--rogues no
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I actually thought that flurry of blows was what allowed the monk to be better at weapons--allowing their full BAB.
WITHOUT making them unstoppable at CMB maneuvers. A monk with ki throw or tripping or grappling is the very best. I had a 3rd level monk totally trivialize a scenario. ac over 22, str 18 and he consistently Ki threw a cmd 30 monster. giving monks full BAB would make them unstoppable in the CMB department. level 11 caster---rogues attacks bounce off stoneskin----monk grapples and fight is over.
flurry should be the fix. like you said---if you can magic the weapons---then flurry with them.
take UMD or have a friendly arcane caster---add shield and mage armor to that for another 8 ac. All the monks I have seen do that. The 3rd level monk that rolled over my scenario had a better ac than the fighter at 22.
Shield is caster-only, so that nixes the caster placing it on a monk. UMD? Charisma based . . . the only ability score a monk doesn't need.
How exactly did a 3rd level monk with an 18 Strength get an AC of 22? That is a +12 bonus . . . all coming from Dexterity, Wisdom, and mage armor (I guess). Your monk had an 18 in Str, Dex, and Wis, perchance? That is 47 points in point-buy; no wonder he did so well. How did he get Ki Throw? You have to have Improved Trip first . . . which isn't available as a monk bonus feat until level 6. So, he would have to spend a feat on Combat Expertise (and have an Int of 13), another feat (regular, not bonus) on Improved Trip, and a third feat (regular not bonus) on Ki Throw. That is all three if human, and now he is up to a 50-point buy. Before Con.
Combat maneuvers are very good . . . at low levels. They rapidly become not so good once you are fighting creatures with four or more legs or that are Large-sized or larger.
Uh, just as an aside, you do realize that canon monks ARE full BAB with Combat Maneuver, correct? Maneuver Training (3rd level monk core ability) allows him to use his class level instead of his BAB in calculating his CMB (NOT his CMD, however).
MA
The problem I see with this logic is that the +4 heavy shield is something that not all fighters will have. In fact, many TWF fighters (which I've seen as the comparison for DPR with monks) do not have +4 heavy shield (or will take penalties to attack to compensate). The more common fighter build of having a 2-hander definitely puts the heavy shield out of the equation. This then becomes a case of monks wanting to have their cake and eat it too. Your last statement of "you don't rely on spells, . . . you just hit him" makes me think "so, you want a combat class with no weakness?". The fighter has high AC, so you target his saves (except fortitude). The monk has high saves, so you target his armor, except for the fact too many people were unhappy he had less armor than the fighter, so that is not a weakness either?
I really hate all the comparisons between fighter and monk, I do agree that monk/rogue is probably better. The fact of the matter is a monk should never, in my mind, be able to match the accuracy, damage, or AC of a fighter. The fighter in his chosen weapon should outperform the monk in all combat respects, even combat maneuvers presuming they have both invested equal amounts. After all, that is what all his class bonuses are engineered to do. Having the monk stack up with a fighter in terms of combat is a bit silly in my mind. Fluff-wise it also doesn't make sense. You are telling me that a person who dedicated himself to learning the art of combat is roughly equal to a person who split their time between spiritual enlightenment, and unarmed combat? This is not necessarily an argument that you have made, master arminas, but I have seen it, and the general impression of a lot of the monk fix complaint is that it is what they want.
Animated is a +2 shield special property, which adds 20,000 gp to the fighter's cost . . . and still winds up 3,000 gp below the amount that the monk had to spend. It is very easy to pick up a +6 shield bonus to AC at high levels, even for a two-handed fighter or a two-weapon fighter.
MA
I actually thought that flurry of blows was what allowed the monk to be better at weapons--allowing their full BAB.
WITHOUT making them unstoppable at CMB maneuvers. A monk with ki throw or tripping or grappling is the very best. I had a 3rd level monk totally trivialize a scenario. ac over 22, str 18 and he consistently Ki threw a cmd 30 monster. giving monks full BAB would make them unstoppable in the CMB department. level 11 caster---rogues attacks bounce off stoneskin----monk grapples and fight is over.
flurry should be the fix. like you said---if you can magic the weapons---then flurry with them.
take UMD or have a friendly arcane caster---add shield and mage armor to that for another 8 ac. All the monks I have seen do that. The 3rd level monk that rolled over my scenario had a better ac than the fighter at 22.
Shield is caster-only, so that nixes the caster placing it on a monk. UMD? Charisma based . . . the only ability score a monk doesn't need.
How exactly did a 3rd level monk with an 18 Strength get an AC of 22? That is a +12 bonus . . . all coming from Dexterity, Wisdom, and mage armor (I guess). Your monk had an 18 in Str, Dex, and Wis, perchance? That is 47 points in point-buy; no wonder he did so well. How did he get Ki Throw? You have to have Improved Trip first . . . which isn't available as a monk bonus feat until level 6. So, he would have to spend a feat on Combat Expertise (and have an Int of 13), another feat (regular, not bonus) on Improved Trip, and a third feat (regular not bonus) on Ki Throw. That is all three if human, and now he is up to a 50-point buy. Before Con.
Combat maneuvers are very good . . . at low levels. They rapidly become not so good once you are fighting creatures with four or more legs or that are Large-sized or larger.
Uh, just as an aside, you do realize that canon monks ARE full BAB with Combat Maneuver, correct? Maneuver Training (3rd level monk core ability) allows him to use his...
aye those inconsistencies were brought up to me here later on this board MA. It was my 4th time GMing so I asked a 2 star GM who happened to be playing at my table during a break if the character was legal--and he had told me yes--so I did not check. He had convinced us that master of many styles allowed him to take any feat without prereqs. Wasn't until I checked on here that I learned that only applied to style feats that you first took the first style feat for.
ouch canon monks scare me then. I know the tripping and grappling doesnt do damage in and of itself. but as a GM--the maneuvers basically invalidate all of your monsters as you are suppose to play them in PFS scenarios. To counter the CMB moves---you have to play unorthodox and knowing what the monk is capable of---and that is not allowed in PFS. The monks pretty much always immobilize the BBEG and the party masacres it.
like I said--I am not against you all if you want to fight for changes to flurry or something. but comparing yourself to rogues?? cmon. The last rogue I myself have seen is when I played mine. I know there are some out there, but all I see are urban rangers, bards , seekers, alchemist or the ability arcane insight. Or someone uses open/close cantrip, or unseen servant, or summons a creature to go down hall etc.
at lower levels--a skeleton key probably has a greater open locks chance than most rogues.
Animated is a +2 shield special property, which adds 20,000 gp to the fighter's cost . . . and still winds up 3,000 gp below the amount that the monk had to spend. It is very easy to pick up a +6 shield bonus to AC at high levels,...The problem I see with this logic is that the +4 heavy shield is something that not all fighters will have. In fact, many TWF fighters (which I've seen as the comparison for DPR with monks) do not have +4 heavy shield (or will take penalties to attack to compensate). The more common fighter build of having a 2-hander definitely puts the heavy shield out of the equation. This then becomes a case of monks wanting to have their cake and eat it too. Your last statement of "you don't rely on spells, . . . you just hit him" makes me think "so, you want a combat class with no weakness?". The fighter has high AC, so you target his saves (except fortitude). The monk has high saves, so you target his armor, except for the fact too many people were unhappy he had less armor than the fighter, so that is not a weakness either?
I really hate all the comparisons between fighter and monk, I do agree that monk/rogue is probably better. The fact of the matter is a monk should never, in my mind, be able to match the accuracy, damage, or AC of a fighter. The fighter in his chosen weapon should outperform the monk in all combat respects, even combat maneuvers presuming they have both invested equal amounts. After all, that is what all his class bonuses are engineered to do. Having the monk stack up with a fighter in terms of combat is a bit silly in my mind. Fluff-wise it also doesn't make sense. You are telling me that a person who dedicated himself to learning the art of combat is roughly equal to a person who split their time between spiritual enlightenment, and unarmed combat? This is not necessarily an argument that you have made, master arminas, but I have seen it, and the general impression of a lot of the monk fix complaint is that it is what they want.
To be fair (and not to devolve into any argument) what exactly stops a monk from using an animated shield? As far as I can tell, you do not take a penalty from not having shield proficiency while the shield is animated. I also don't think it is unreasonable for the monk to work harder/pay more to get AC, as it makes sense for it to be a weakness, especially compared to a plate-wearer.
Quick edit to clarify: I am not defending the extent to which the difficulty/cost is ramped up for the monk. I have not looked into it enough to take a stance on that. Merely saying it should still be significantly harder for a monk to get the same AC as a plate-wearer with a shield (if possible at all).
hey I have another question for you MA
in that same scenario--the 3rd level monk had tripped and then grappled the dire wolf zombie. I quit trying to stand up and just attacked him. so I was at neg 4 for being on ground---but I ruled him as being on ground also (he was grappling)which cancelled it out. he claimed he was still standing up as he grappled the zombie(which was down)---I went with my ruling but he was mad.
who was right?
if he was grappling--he should not get the +4 to hit it while it takes a neg 4 to hit him right? how are you grappling then?
ouch canon monks scare me then. I know the tripping and grappling doesnt do damage in and of itself. but as a GM--the maneuvers basically invalidate all of your monsters as you are suppose to play them in PFS scenarios. To counter the CMB moves---you have to play unorthodox and knowing what the monk is capable of---and that is not allowed in PFS. The monks pretty much always immobilize the BBEG and the party masacres it.
like I said--I am not against you all if you want to fight for changes to flurry or something. but comparing yourself to rogues?? cmon. The last rogue I myself have seen is when I played mine. I know there are some out there, but all I see are urban rangers, bards , seekers, alchemist or the ability arcane insight. Or someone uses open/close cantrip, or unseen servant, or summons a creature to go down hall etc.
at lower levels--a skeleton key probably has a greater open locks chance than most rogues.
Canon fighters, rangers, bards, and barbarians out to scare you more. The can take the same feats (Improved Trip, Improved Grapple), but can add their weapon's enhancement bonus to their CMB. The new brawling armor property? +1 special ability, adds a +2 on all grapple checks and stacks with everything. Weapon Focus and Greater Focus? Add to CMB as well.
Fighters add their weapon training on CMB, if the weapon they are wielding can be used for the maneuver in question; gloves of dueling only increase the bonus to CMB from weapons training.
PLUS, the more martial characters are likely (to say the least) to have a higher Strength than the monk, pumping their CMB up still more.
Monks can have an OUTSTANDING CMD, but actually performing maneuvers? They are second-rate (except for archetypes such as the maneuver master, and even they quickly reach the point where they cannot effectively use maneuvers).
MA
To be fair (and not to devolve into any argument) what exactly stops a monk from using an animated shield? As far as I can tell, you do not take a penalty from not having shield proficiency while the shield is animated. I also don't think it is unreasonable for the monk to work harder/pay more to get AC, as it makes sense for it to be a weakness, especially compared to a plate-wearer.
Quick edit to clarify: I am not defending the extent to which the difficulty/cost is ramped up for the monk. I have not looked into it enough to take a stance on that. Merely saying it should still be significantly harder for a monk to get the same AC as a plate-wearer with a shield (if possible at all).
If a monk uses a shield (even a ring of force shield or an animated shield, he loses his flurry of blows, class AC bonus, and fast movement.
It is difficult for a monk to get the same (not better, but same) AC as a full-plate/shield character. And generally speaking more expensive. I have managed to do it on a 19th and 20th level monk, but only by spending more than 275,000 gp on inherent bonuses in Wisdom and Dexterity.
MA
To be fair (and not to devolve into any argument) what exactly stops a monk from using an animated shield? As far as I can tell, you do not take a penalty from not having shield proficiency while the shield is animated.As a move action, an animated shield can be loosed to defend its wielder on its own. For the following 4 rounds, the shield grants its bonus to the one who loosed it and then drops. While animated, the shield provides its shield bonus and the bonuses from all of the other shield special abilities it possesses, but it cannot take actions on its own, such as those provided by the bashing and blinding abilities. It can, however, use special abilities that do not require an action to function, such as arrow deflection and reflecting. While animated, a shield shares the same space as the activating character and accompanies the character who activated it, even if the character moves by magical means. A character with an animated shield still takes any penalties associated with shield use, such as armor check penalty, arcane spell failure chance, and nonproficiency. If the wielder who loosed it has an unoccupied hand, she can grasp it to end its animation as a free action. Once a shield has been retrieved, it cannot be animated again for at least 4 rounds.The shield's still basically equipped, it just frees up your hand to use a weapon. A monk loses...well, everything a monk loses for using a shield even while the shield is animated.
Ah, thanks for the clarity, I missed that. I still think that a significant cost difference between said plate-wearing animated shield-using fighter and the monk should be present. Though again, the amount of said cost may need to be revisited in the overall consideration of any fix where AC is touched.
ouch canon monks scare me then. I know the tripping and grappling doesnt do damage in and of itself. but as a GM--the maneuvers basically invalidate all of your monsters as you are suppose to play them in PFS scenarios. To counter the CMB moves---you have to play unorthodox and knowing what the monk is capable of---and that is not allowed in PFS. The monks pretty much always immobilize the BBEG and the party masacres it.
like I said--I am not against you all if you want to fight for changes to flurry or something. but comparing yourself to rogues?? cmon. The last rogue I myself have seen is when I played mine. I know there are some out there, but all I see are urban rangers, bards , seekers, alchemist or the ability arcane insight. Or someone uses open/close cantrip, or unseen servant, or summons a creature to go down hall etc.
at lower levels--a skeleton key probably has a greater open locks chance than most rogues.
Canon fighters, rangers, bards, and barbarians out to scare you more. The can take the same feats (Improved Trip, Improved Grapple), but can add their weapon's enhancement bonus to their CMB. The new brawling armor property? +1 special ability, adds a +2 on all grapple checks and stacks with everything. Weapon Focus and Greater Focus? Add to CMB as well.
Fighters add their weapon training on CMB, if the weapon they are wielding can be used for the maneuver in question; gloves of dueling only increase the bonus to CMB from weapons training.
PLUS, the more martial characters are likely (to say the least) to have a higher Strength than the monk, pumping their CMB up still more.
Monks can have an OUTSTANDING CMD, but actually performing maneuvers? They are second-rate (except for archetypes such as the maneuver master, and even they quickly reach the point where they cannot effectively use maneuvers).
MA
oh great. just what we need. more trivialization of BBEG. caster in small rooms with grapplers coming at them. hopefully I can get a spell off on that fighter and turn him to my side---but you know what?--PFS doesnt even allow me to change spell list on BBEG so if not listed I can't.
so far most fighters seem to be two handed or board and sword. bards seem to do the rogue thing with magic and rangers seem to like their bows--occasional twf. berserkers though I have noticed like the grapple also. grappling is too often a game over thing with a caster if they dont have a d-door. and if d-door is not listed you cant give it to them in PFS even if they could have memmed it.
the reason fighters dont scare me as much is the last two scenarios I have played----the fighters got confusion cast on them by both BBEGs and wound up doing more damage to us than they did the BBEG. we were doing a 1-2 level scenario--with a 3rd level fighter. confusion--rolled-attack nearest and he almost cut the cleric in two.
hey I have another question for you MA
in that same scenario--the 3rd level monk had tripped and then grappled the dire wolf zombie. I quit trying to stand up and just attacked him. so I was at neg 4 for being on ground---but I ruled him as being on ground also (he was grappling)which cancelled it out. he claimed he was still standing up as he grappled the zombie(which was down)---I went with my ruling but he was mad.
who was right?
if he was grappling--he should not get the +4 to hit it while it takes a neg 4 to hit him right? how are you grappling then?
Well, to start with, a monk can trip in place of an attack in a flurry. But grapple is a standard action. He would have to start his grapple on the following round, after your dire wolf would have stood up. (He goes, you go, he goes, you go, etc.)
So, basically the scenario itself is a no-go. Absent any archetype special abilities of which I am unaware, let me add.
Now, if he starts a grapple, both creatures gain the grapple condition (page 183 of the CRD). And there's a lot more on the subject there. Grappled (a condition) is defined on page 574 of the CRD.
A grappled creature is restrained by a creature, trap, or effect. Grappled creatures cannot move and take a -4 penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a -2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform. A grappled creatuer who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (Dc 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level), or lose the spell. Grappled creatures cannot make attacks of opportunity.
A grappled creature cannot use stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if a special ability, such as hide in plain sight, would normally allow it to do so. If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on its CMD to avoid being grappled, but receives no other benefit.
Hope that helps.
MA
Fair or not it's true. I never said they're WotC, and they care about our opinions because they're selling us something.
It's intelligent business practice to care about your consumers and give them good products because people who like you and like your product will keep buying. But that doesn't mean that we're friends or that we're on the same side.
I doubt Jason intended that remark to be some broad 'kumbaya' comment. I suspect he was meaning it in the context of game design.
.You want the game to be as good as it can be and so does the paizo design/development team. You're on the same side in that endeavour, irrespective of whether you're going to pay him anything or not.
hey I have another question for you MA
in that same scenario--the 3rd level monk had tripped and then grappled the dire wolf zombie. I quit trying to stand up and just attacked him. so I was at neg 4 for being on ground---but I ruled him as being on ground also (he was grappling)which cancelled it out. he claimed he was still standing up as he grappled the zombie(which was down)---I went with my ruling but he was mad.
who was right?
if he was grappling--he should not get the +4 to hit it while it takes a neg 4 to hit him right? how are you grappling then?
Well, to start with, a monk can trip in place of an attack in a flurry. But grapple is a standard action. He would have to start his grapple on the following round, after your dire wolf would have stood up. (He goes, you go, he goes, you go, etc.)
So, basically the scenario itself is a no-go. Absent any archetype special abilities of which I am unaware, let me add.
Now, if he starts a grapple, both creatures gain the grapple condition (page 183 of the CRD). And there's a lot more on the subject there. Grappled (a condition) is defined on page 574 of the CRD.
...A grappled creature is restrained by a creature, trap, or effect. Grappled creatures cannot move and take a -4 penalty to Dexterity. A grappled creature takes a -2 penalty on all attack rolls and combat maneuver checks, except those made to grapple or escape a grapple. In addition, grappled creatures can take no action that requires two hands to perform. A grappled creatuer who attempts to cast a spell must make a concentration check (Dc 10 + grappler's CMB + spell level), or lose the spell. Grappled creatures cannot make attacks of opportunity.
A grappled creature cannot use stealth to hide from the creature grappling it, even if a special ability, such as hide in plain sight, would normally allow it to do so. If a grappled creature becomes invisible, through a spell or other ability, it gains a +2 circumstance bonus on
I had quit trying to stand up---every time I tried to stand up--he took an aoo and as I was a zombie I took the attack and then only stood up anyhow. then his next turn he tripped me again. so I finally stayed down. on his turn he grappled.
we both did apply the neg 4s to dex and such---but he tried to claim that the wolf was on the ground but he wasn't. is that possible while you are grappling? wouldn't you both be rolling on the ground together? and if both sides had extra people there--you would both be grappled AND prone for the opposite side? and attacks against each other would only have the neg 2 applied?
Monk vs Rogue seemed like the idea was:
Rogues get a list of things to pick from, focus on damage (sneak attack, if they hit, do more damage), encouraged to TWF to boost output.
Monks get a set bit of flavor things and a ki pool for some action choices, focus on hitting (full BAB on flurry, should hit more often, but do less damage) with a TWF like mechanic.
Problem is, monks can't enchant their unarmed strikes like weapons, so the extra hitting falls off as they level.
Monks can't flurry if they do use weapons, and have no damage boost to offset this.You can flurry with weapons, but they must be weapons with the monk special quality. Which are far from the best of weapons.
MA
Yeah forgot that bit. But not only are they not the best of weapons, it limits his damage output at all but the lowest levels.
I would rule that if you grapple a prone creature, you are prone, Hakken. But I cannot cite a rule for it. Luckily for me, I don't do Society Play. Zombie does make a difference, what with being staggered and all. It might have been better to stay down and eat the -4 penalty and just go ahead and attack. Did you add the +2 to your CMD for having four legs? You should have had a +8 bite attack AND a +8 slam attack.
MA
With deadly sneak and a potion of invisibility and potion of fly, my group's rogue one-shotted the dragon at the beginning of chapter 4 in RotR. Granted, the player has an advanced degree in system mastery...but my monk has NEVER matched the sneak attack damage. That's why there is now a statue of him in Sandpoint.
aye that is what I finally did--stay down and try to bite---was a +14 to hit with the wolf--so took the +14 to hit from down--rolled a 11-4 for being down for 21--he said miss
he on his turn grappled. I then rolled a 10-2 for grappled (he thought it should have been -6--both me and all the players at the table including another gm agreed with me that it would be neg 2) and got a 22--he said miss. (he later admitted I should have hit him because he had forgotten his neg to dex) that was after the fight--we figured up what damage would have been done and had the cleric heal it
aye the cmd 30 was including the bonus for legs.
I just wanted to check with you since you play a monk what you would think on grappling. To me it seems obvious you would have to be on same level.
Well, to be sure, I think you should both be prone, if he was trying to grapple a prone character. So the -4 on attack rolls balances out with the -4 penalty to AC. So only the -2 from grapple would apply; that and the -4 penalty to Dexterity from Grapple. Which will reduce the monk's AC by 2.
But, I've had days like that myself where I didn't look up something I knew I should have . . . and one of my players pulled something he shouldn't have. I feel your pain.
Speaking on the topic; the fact that you gain the Grappled Condition along with the opponent is one reason my monks never grapple. Trip? Yes. Disarm? All the time. Sunder? Oh, yeah, especially after 16th level when I ignore hardness. The rest? Few and far between. I don't even take the feats.
After all, if I grapple the BBEG, I make my own AC worse against his minions--who will probably get flanking bonuses as well.
EDIT: And your monk player's CMB should have been +9 (Monk class level (3) + Str (4) +2 from improved grapple). Weapon Focus (unarmed) doesn't apply to grapples, and he wasn't high enough a level to have an amulet of mighty fists . . . which still doesn't apply to grapples. LOL So, he rolled a 19 or 20 to grapple you? Prone doesn't give a penalty to CMD, after all.
MA
To be honest, Grappling a Prone creature does not make you Prone. I wish I could find the post for you, but my search-fu is lacking. Anyway, the Designers clarified that Grappling is "like grabbing someone's arm" and not necessarily Grecko-Roman Wrestling.
Think of it like this, if I grab your arm, I've got you grappled. If I then (on the following turn) twist it behind your back and shove you against the wall, I've got you pined.
Think of it also in another term, like a cop. You could trip someone, and then grab their arm (grappled) while standing over them. Then you pull it behind their back, and grab the other arm (pinned). Then you handcuff them (restrained) so they can't escape. All the while, you're standing above them, and not prone.
Another example is a classic Cowboy/Western trope. You're chasing a 'bad guy' so you hit him with a lasso and trip him. Then you rush forward and hog tie him while kneeling/standing over him. They're never prone, but it still uses the Grapple rules (within reason).
However, if your player says something like, "Oh, he's tripped? Well then, I tackle him on the ground and grapple him" then I'd tell him he's prone too because he tackled him.
EDIT: And your monk player's CMB should have been +9 (Monk class level (3) + Str (4) +2 from improved grapple). Weapon Focus (unarmed) doesn't apply to grapples, and he wasn't high enough a level to have an amulet of mighty fists . . . which still doesn't apply to grapples. LOL So, he rolled a 19 or 20 to grapple you? Prone doesn't give a penalty to CMD, after all.
Prone does give a penalty to CMD.
Miscellaneous Modifiers
A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD. Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD. A flat-footed creature does not add its Dexterity bonus to its CMD.
The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.
When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus.
Trip and Grapple are two of the maneuvers I consider key as part of a Monk offense I call Penalty Stacking.
Sounds like the monk player was cheating and playing an illegally built monk. If Hakken is coming in and defending the monk saying it is fine based on a cheating and illegally built monk, I think we can just discount his arguments.Well, to be sure, I think you should both be prone, if he was trying to grapple a prone character. So the -4 on attack rolls balances out with the -4 penalty to AC. So only the -2 from grapple would apply; that and the -4 penalty to Dexterity from Grapple. Which will reduce the monk's AC by 2.
But, I've had days like that myself where I didn't look up something I knew I should have . . . and one of my players pulled something he shouldn't have. I feel your pain.
Speaking on the topic; the fact that you gain the Grappled Condition along with the opponent is one reason my monks never grapple. Trip? Yes. Disarm? All the time. Sunder? Oh, yeah, especially after 16th level when I ignore hardness. The rest? Few and far between. I don't even take the feats.
After all, if I grapple the BBEG, I make my own AC worse against his minions--who will probably get flanking bonuses as well.
EDIT: And your monk player's CMB should have been +9 (Monk class level (3) + Str (4) +2 from improved grapple). Weapon Focus (unarmed) doesn't apply to grapples, and he wasn't high enough a level to have an amulet of mighty fists . . . which still doesn't apply to grapples. LOL So, he rolled a 19 or 20 to grapple you? Prone doesn't give a penalty to CMD, after all.
MA
wha?
where did I say it was fine? If anything I wish I had known the rules before I came on here and found them out. It was my fourth time GMing and another senior GM had assured me it was a legal build. If anything it made a headache for me. Had I known, he would NOT have been using Ki throw.
EDIT: And your monk player's CMB should have been +9 (Monk class level (3) + Str (4) +2 from improved grapple). Weapon Focus (unarmed) doesn't apply to grapples, and he wasn't high enough a level to have an amulet of mighty fists . . . which still doesn't apply to grapples. LOL So, he rolled a 19 or 20 to grapple you? Prone doesn't give a penalty to CMD, after all.Prone does give a penalty to CMD.
Miscellaneous Modifiers
A creature can also add any circumstance, deflection, dodge, insight, luck, morale, profane, and sacred bonuses to AC to its CMD. Any penalties to a creature's AC also apply to its CMD. A flat-footed creature does not add its Dexterity bonus to its CMD.
The character is lying on the ground. A prone attacker has a –4 penalty on melee attack rolls and cannot use a ranged weapon (except for a crossbow). A prone defender gains a +4 bonus to Armor Class against ranged attacks, but takes a –4 penalty to AC against melee attacks.When you attempt to perform a combat maneuver, make an attack roll and add your CMB in place of your normal attack bonus.Trip and Grapple are two of the maneuvers I consider key as part of a Monk offense I call Penalty Stacking.
I stand corrected. Forgot about that part.
MA
To be honest, Grappling a Prone creature does not make you Prone. I wish I could find the post for you, but my search-fu is lacking. Anyway, the Designers clarified that Grappling is "like grabbing someone's arm" and not necessarily Grecko-Roman Wrestling.
Think of it like this, if I grab your arm, I've got you grappled. If I then (on the following turn) twist it behind your back and shove you against the wall, I've got you pined.
Think of it also in another term, like a cop. You could trip someone, and then grab their arm (grappled) while standing over them. Then you pull it behind their back, and grab the other arm (pinned). Then you handcuff them (restrained) so they can't escape. All the while, you're standing above them, and not prone.
Another example is a classic Cowboy/Western trope. You're chasing a 'bad guy' so you hit him with a lasso and trip him. Then you rush forward and hog tie him while kneeling/standing over him. They're never prone, but it still uses the Grapple rules (within reason).
However, if your player says something like, "Oh, he's tripped? Well then, I tackle him on the ground and grapple him" then I'd tell him he's prone too because he tackled him.
that does bring up the point that MA brought up about grapple though
If
successful, both you and the target gain the grappled condition
(see the Appendices).
so did it grab your arm also? if not it is closer to the greco roman wrestling. cause that sentence makes it sound more like you are wrestling. and yeah--the wolf was on the ground when he jumped on it to grapple it. arm bars on a wolf would be hard--an on the ground wolf that was tripped, I see wrestling as your best bet to keep that bite away--but maybe that is just me. when you close in to grappling range you would lose the bonus for it being prone--if you were grappling you have to get down to its level--I guess would be my call.
Trip and Grapple are two of the maneuvers I consider key as part of a Monk offense I call Penalty Stacking.
lol THAT---that is exactly what our monks do. Which is why when I hear monks are weak I go HUH? They pretty much lock down anything once they start piling up the penalties.
A Maneuver Monk (whether Archetype or not) works great against Medium or similar sized creatures (Large can still work, but it's harder). The problem with Maneuvers, is once you get above 10th level, most of the Monsters stop being Medium size, or even Large. They start being Huge, Gargantuan, or Colossal, and a lot of them also have a BAB = to HD.
This is going to be slightly half-assed but I'm looking at the Monster Creation rules.
Take a Gargantuan Magical Beast at CR 15. Gargantuan means his base strength is going to be 34, but his Dex will be 6, and his size modifier to CMD is +4. His HD is 20 and his BAB is fast meaning equal to his HD.
So Generic Gargantuan Magical Beast is going to have a base CMD of 10 + 20 + 12 + 4 - 5 = 41 CMD and that's just a generic bi-pedal monster, while many such creatures will have multiple legs, abilities and other things that bump the CMD even higher.
Now 1 on 1, a Grapple character is going to have BAB 15 + Ability Score + 4 (feats) on a Grapple check. You're looking at roughly +26 to Grapple.
Now, I checked roughly 25 of the CR 15 Monsters published by Paizo, and all of the CMDs I click on fell between 40 and 50, except one which was 54. So Generic Magical Beast is right in the range of where he should be for CMD, but many of them also had things like CMD 44 (48 vs trip) because they had more than two legs. Generic Magical Beast doesn't have that.
So for a Monk, he's got to succeed on the Trip which is going to require roughly 15 or better, then a Grapple, then another Grapple for the Pin. Odds are, that the Monk, or Fighter, or Barbarian, isn't likely to be able to maintain that Grapple for long, if he succeeds in the first place.
This is also an 'easy' encounter for an APL 15 party. If it were APL +2 or +3, he'd be nearly impossible to Maneuver against.
There is a reason most people say don't focus on a Maneuver build going into high levels. Against many of the CR appropriate monsters, they often times just don't work, or rarely work. Against a CR appropriate medium NPC, they're fantastic but said NPCs also have things like Freedom of Movement, so no Grapple in the first place.