While the flavor text lists lots of "weapons" that an unarmed specialist might use, mechanically speaking it's still just TWF. Why should the AoMF be any more expensive at all, regardless of degree?
Amulet of Mighty Fists is also the go-to item for ANY character or NPC who wants to enchant his natural attacks. The Wild Shaping druid, the intelligent magical beast who stalks dangerous prey, the ranger's animal companion to make it an actual threat in combat... it's more than just a monk item, but monks are the ones who it seems to have been tailored for.
You are also thinking on too small of a scale. A +5 AoMF costs 125k. Two +5 weapons cost 100k total AND do not take up a magic item slot.
There are some lengthy threads on this, you might want to read those arguments on the AoMF issues before starting another discussion.
If you analize the monk only, the AoMF should be cheaper than enchanting 2 weapons because it takes the throat slot.
Two weapons vs AoMF:
- +1: 4600 vs 5000
- +2: 16600 vs 20000
- +3: 36600 vs 45000
- +4: 64600 vs 80000
- +5: 100600 vs 125000
The diference grows quickly, also you account for the extra in the Amulets of Natural Armor (50% for extra enchantments in the same slots).
Humbly,
Yawar
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Consider...
The monk needs two weapons to do Flurry of Blows. Two +1 weapons would cost 4600 gold pieces.
Just because SKR and co. make things up to try and justify the AoMF's cost doesn't make them true. Not in pretty much every group I've ever been in. If what they claimed was so clearly true and agreed upon, you'd think their whole "it's under review" thing would've ended long ago.
AoMF is a great deal for natural weapon users. For the monk it's bloody terrible.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Consider...
The monk needs two weapons to do Flurry of Blows. Two +1 weapons would cost 4600 gold pieces.Just because SKR and co. make things up to try and justify the AoMF's cost doesn't make them true. Not in pretty much every group I've ever been in. If what they claimed was so clearly true and agreed upon, you'd think their whole "it's under review" thing would've ended long ago.
AoMF is a great deal for natural weapon users. For the monk it's bloody terrible.
They didn't "make" up the Two-Weapon Fighting text. If you notice the text in Flurry of Blows in 3.5 isn't anything like the text from Pathfinder.
Just because a number of people continued using the assumption of 3.5 = Pathfinder isn't any fault of the designers of Pathfinder.
As for the "it's under review" comment of yours, perhaps you should keep up with what information they tell the forums. The review part is to look at the Monk and Flurry and decide if changes are going to happen since there was confusion, they haven't posted anything official as of yet because they stated they are busy.
You know running a business with deadlines where they have to work on books, adventure paths, etc.
Just because a vocal minority think themselves entitled to something doesn't make it balanced or correct.
Consider...
The monk needs two weapons to do Flurry of Blows.
I missed that part. The monk does *NOT* need two weapons to use Flurry of Blows. It's spelled out right there in the Flurry of Blows description under monk.
And as a note, the FAQ section means less and less to me each time I see a dev post. I respect their opinions and I understand the complexity involved with having so many existing books and rules to refer to when they write new feats and class abilities. But I have a hard time agreeing with their philosophies on how rules should be adjudicated at the table, let alone that most encounters are designed so average, non-optimized characters will win. (Playing 4 installments of Kingmaker have really ratched up my cynicism to that second point.)
Edit: Long story short, take what the devs say with a grain of salt. They design the game and they've designed a great one, but it doesn't mean their word has to be law at your game table. Don't let an official ruling impede your fun, and a good GM will have the same outlook.
Consider...
The monk needs two weapons to do Flurry of Blows.I missed that part. The monk does *NOT* need two weapons to use Flurry of Blows. It's spelled out right there in the Flurry of Blows description under monk.
And as a note, the FAQ section means less and less to me each time I see a dev post. I respect their opinions and I understand the complexity involved with having so many existing books and rules to refer to when they write new feats and class abilities. But I have a hard time agreeing with their philosophies on how rules should be adjudicated at the table, let alone that most encounters are designed so average, non-optimized characters will win. (Playing 4 installments of Kingmaker have really ratched up my cynicism to that second point.)
Why is the fact that adventure paths are written for 15 point average character's in mind a problem?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
We know SKR didn't get his gf stolen by a monk... they have terrible charisma scores, far too MAD for that. And if it was a high cha monk, SKR the level 1 commoner could've just beaten up the monk and taken his gf back. :p
I really do wonder what monks did to SKR in the past to make him hate them so much, though.
Why is the fact that adventure paths are written for 15 point average character's in mind a problem?
You may have misread what I meant, or I may not have written it clearly enough.
I've seen multiple posts where a dev or a "top guy" (like James Jacob) has said something like "the adventures and encounters are written so that average characters will win". And I say that is a load of manure. The adventures and encounters are FUN, they are well thought out and well DESIGNED, but Kingmaker, by and large, is NOT survivable.
The end boss fight in Varnhold Vanishing? A carnage fest if you don't go through the dungeon in the way the game wants you to. How does the game want you to? As a player you have no idea, because there are no clues whatsoever! The first 2 installments were just as bad, you need alot of creativity and to be on the ball for more fights than should be the case.
Dotting.
MA
Why is the fact that adventure paths are written for 15 point average character's in mind a problem?
You may have misread what I meant, or I may not have written it clearly enough.
I've seen multiple posts where a dev or a "top guy" (like James Jacob) has said something like "the adventures and encounters are written so that average characters will win". And I say that is a load of manure. The adventures and encounters are FUN, they are well thought out and well DESIGNED, but Kingmaker, by and large, is NOT survivable.
The end boss fight in Varnhold Vanishing? A carnage fest if you don't go through the dungeon in the way the game wants you to. How does the game want you to? As a player you have no idea, because there are no clues whatsoever! The first 2 installments were just as bad, you need alot of creativity and to be on the ball for more fights than should be the case.
Fair enough. That will happen what the designers assume is average might be different depending on the group playing.
By that i mean no matter how average or balanced they attempt to make an adventure some group somewhere is going to find it difficult, based on group dynamic, classes, experience with the game, and number of people playing.
Yeah with the exception of the whole of Flurry mentioning;
"as if using the Two-Weapon Fighting feat (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)."
or
"as if using Improved Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)."
or
"as if using Greater Two-Weapon Fighting (even if the monk does not meet the prerequisites for the feat)."
So that's three feats for free and Flurry is better than normal two-weapon fighting since you automatically get to add full strength modifier to each attack. Sounds kinda like Double Slice for free.
So that makes four feats for free. Oh and you count as having FULL BAB.
Yeah Flurry in Pathfinder is such garbage since you have to follow the Two-Weapon Fighting rules like everyone else.
So we get the benefits and penalties of 4 feats for "free", I'll grant you that is pretty cool. I don't have a problem with them refining how FoB works to be TWF(Cause in 3.5, a monk FoB while using TWFing was just so cheesy). Problem is we don't actually get the feats, we can't get TWD or other feats that have the TWFs as reqs. That's just annoying. Why not just grant them the feats then?
And the Full BAB for FoB isn't such a boon, Keeping the FoB at Full-BAB was essential to making it not weaker than 3.5's version. Back in 3.5 FoB just let you make multiple attacks at your highest BAB when you full attacked, no full BAB but no TWF penalties either. Without being at Full-BAB, using Pathfinder's FoB would be useless, a true Flurry of Misses. The Full BAB was a bandaid on the change in mechanics to make it not terrible, and not something I would really say is a great boon to the ability since, yes it helps the first 2 attacks, but all the ones to follow are worthless. A 2H fighter can show us hitting more consistently is more valueable than more attacks, as long as you have the damage to back it up.
So I ask you, do you think that AoMF is too costly or not? Cause I think that it clearly is, especially when it takes up a slot, costs a boat load, RAW doesn't pierce DR, and can't grant abilities if you want the +5 since it caps at +5 total bonus no matter what.
And then came Ultimate Equipment, with the Bodywrap of Insufficient Mighty Strikes and the HAHAHA, SCREW YOU MONK armor quality. Because f&~# Monks, the stole SKR's girlfriend.
You missed the horseshoes of reasonable price (cheaper than AoMF), but not for monks (Horeshoe of brawling rocks for horseshoes).
(As for Zen Archer i don't want to hear it. Even with the Two-Weapon Fighting thing it still works. Specific trumps broad rules. Zen Archer is the exception not the norm.)
Flurry of Blows (Ex)
Starting at 1st level, a zen archer can make a flurry of blows as a full-attack action, but only when using a bow (even though it is a ranged weapon). He may not make a flurry of blows with his unarmed attacks or any other weapons. A zen archer does not apply his Strength bonus on damage rolls made with flurry of blows unless he is using a composite bow with a Strength rating.
A zen archer’s flurry of blows otherwise functions as normal for a monk of his level.
I do not see anything specific for the zen archer to avoid the FoB=TWF madnees.
As written and clarified Zen archer only works for a humanoid wih four arms.
Perhaps the exception is the part where it states that the Zen Archer can only use Flurry with a BOW.
That seems like a fairly large exception considering how Flurry works.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Question: So, if the amulet of mighty fists is priced as it is for two-weapon fighting, and (as the developers have said) there is an additional charge because you cannot disarm unarmed strikes, sunder unarmed strikes, or steal unarmed strikes . . . then where is the charge for being able to be used on natural weapons?
We have been told repeatedly, that unarmed strikes are not natural weapons, and without the Feral Combat Training feat, things that affect unarmed strikes do not affect natural weapons.
But for the Amulet of Mighty Fists, suddenly natural weapons gets a free ride?
Look, in all these discussions over the years, the reason for the hefty price tag of the AoMF has always been given as that it affects unarmed strikes and natural weapons equally. Broken down, the AoMF costs 2,000 gp multipled by the enhancement bonus squared (unarmed strike) plus one and one-half times 2,000 gp multiplied by the enhancement bonus squared (natural weapons as a secondary property).
That pricing works out perfectly. Which then begged the question, why the hell does a monk have to pay that added tax of affecting natural weapons on his unarmed strikes? At that point, is when people started stammering and sputtering and saying, well, it really isn't because the AoMF affects natural weapons, it is because unarmed strikes for a monk are two-weapons and they cannot be disarmed, sundered, or stolen.
For years, we players of monks have asked time and again for an item that applies to unarmed strikes and not natural weapons. But we get told, time and again, that our desire for such is meta-gaming, that it breaks verisimiltude because why cannot a creature wear this amulet and get the same bonus as a monk? Natural weapons and unarmed strikes are the same!
Exception for Improved Natural Attack. And that you get iterative attacks with UAS. And that a monk cannot add natural attacks to his flurry of blows. But other than that they are just the same thing. So we are not going to charge extra on the AoMF for affecting natural weapons, no. ALL of the price is because unarmed strikes (for a monk) are two-weapons and cannot be disarmed, stolen, or sundered.
Right. That argument stank the first time it was used and it stinks today.
To make a long story short, the amulet of mighty fists is horrendously overpriced for unarmed strikes. Maybe it is appropriate for critters and natural attacks, but not for unarmed strikes. You want the monk the pay extra for not being able to be disarmed or sundered, or having his weapons able to be stolen? Fine. Charge 2,500 gp x the bonus squared, or even 3,000 gp x the bonus squared, and we will be as happy as clams. Don't let it apply to natural weapons. But no, we cannot obsolete the sacred holy cow of the amulet of mighty fists because it breaks what we intended for the monk to be in Pathfinder.
Gentlemen, a piece of advice if you don't mind. We really don't care what you intended. We just want a class that works. That can stand on its own two feet and do what a monk is supposed to do. And that, gentlemen, is fight unarmed and unarmored as well as any full-plate armored, greatsword wielding fighter.
That is the purpose of the monk. To fight unarmed.
MA
Ah, Monk thread #103574839.
Regarding the AoMF, my problem with it is as follows: The fact that it is a single item is the biggest issue. This prices it out of cost-competitiveness very handily. Consider the case for PFS. The minimum Fame to purchase the AoMF is 18, which requires a minimum of 9 sessions (level 4). A +2 equivalent AoMF, which costs 20k, is 36 Fame, or minimum 18 sessions (level 7). A +3 is 49 Fame, which is a minimum of 25 sessions (level 9). +4 is 58 Fame, minimum 29 sessions (1 xp shy of level 11). You can NEVER have sufficient fame in PFS to afford a +5 AoMF prior to character retirement at level 12. This also assumes that you receive 100% of your possible Fame, when the base PFS assumption is 75%. If you get 75%, you cannot afford a +4 pre-retirement.
A +5 weapon costs 50k and can be purchased at the same time the AoMF user is getting his +3 AoMF. Yes, each weapon costs slightly more than the +3 AoMF, but these are +5 weapons we're talking about, and we're still assuming TWF.
Tell me: who is going to be hitting more? Who is going to be hitting harder?
| 6 people marked this as a favorite. |
Can't we just be proactive and ban all threads with either "Monk" "Flurry of blows" or "AMF" in the title?
It would seem that would cut down about 90% of the crap on the boards.
Also on a personal note, Making it personal with regards to the designers is uncalled for.
If you don't like a product, don't buy it.
If you don't like how a company does thing, vote with your wallet.
But please don't come here and be a dick to those that put out a game that most of us really like.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. |
AMF Works as long as you use it for weapon properties and get GMW/GMF to take care of your enhancement bonus. Since this is the most efficient method of dealing damage anyways, that's okay. In fact, since Unarmed Strike requires only one buff as opposed to two, one could argue that unarmed strikes come out ahead in this regard.
Compare, getting two +1 weapons with +5 worth of weapon enhancements. That's 72k*2, or 144k, which is actually more expensive than an AoMF. Also, you come out ahead on damage doing this against all but the most ridiculous amount of DR.
Actually, you need one casting per weapon if you want more than a +1 from greater magic fang. If you go by SKRs ruling that each limb is a seperate weapon and needs to be enchanted seperately. You need NINE greater magic fang spells in order to enhance all of a monk's potential unarmed attacks. And he said quite clearly, that if even ONE potential attack differs from the rest, you have to divide up your attacks and not make them all with your highest enhancement. So if you have two GMF spells giving a +3 bonus (one on each fist), then you have to split your unarmed strikes between one fist and either your elbows, knees, feet, or head . . . which are not enhanced.
No, Soulgambit. This gets really expensive, really fast for a monk.
MA
Yeah, alot of the Alchemist builds are pretty wild, and those aren't even CRB, they can get Sneak Attack (one of the alleged things that "should be" unique to rogues), and the devs STILL leave them alone.
But the lowly CRB monk just can't get a single friggin' break on his very most basic class feature.
THAT is the crux of the issue.
To be fair, I love the Amulet of Mighty Fists. My Feral Mutagen Alchemist with an Agile AMF getting Dex to hit and damage with Claw/Claw/Bite at full BAB with sneak attack from vivisectionist as gravy? I love to watch the Rogues and Ninjas cry..and Monks as well, of course.
Yup. I'm doing the same. It's excellent. Not caster level powerful, but it lets me be a melee character and still be competent.
I just don't play rogues or monks in PF. It sucks, they're my favorite classes thematically, but I've learned to harness the power of re-fluffing to make classes that don't suck as stand-ins for them.
They have if you bother to look it up, but the reality is you can't compare a optimized archtyped anything and expect the average CRB monk to "stand up." Stop being ignorant and compare it to a monk that is optimized. The problem is lack of system 'mastery' and making poor choices on the monk build as opposed to having your choices made for you on the archtyped alchemist.
Of course, it's just so darn flavorful and fun. I've got something that is better than TWF/ITWF/GTWF/Double Slice for the cost of a single discovery at level 2. I'm like level four and I'm already looking for flavor feats rather than "Omg I must have this feat next to barely keep up with the game." Has anybody pushed the Feral Alchemist to the absolute limit of what it can do? It'd be scary as all get out.
Don't get me wrong, I LIKE playing freakshow characters with tentacles and tumors and stuff, so I've been gleefully playing it up with my current Viv. beastmorph alchemist. Best part so far is when the party met a hag and he immediately began lusting after and hitting on her *bigtime* (despite usually being as shy and reserved as you'd expect of someone w/ Cha 5) because of how unbelievably attactive he found her. :)
But it does kind of bother me that in order to be a good rogue in PF, you have to shoehorn yourself into the role of a guy the dissects cadavers AND living things, and deals with all sorts of horrible mutations, injections, etc...
Kind of kills the "dashing rogue" theme.
My AC shoots to the sky when I drink my dex mutagen, I end up being around 23 or so before even bothering to buff for a fight. I also have a bucket of skill points, a high Dex, decent Con and a decent Int because I'm not tossing bombs. This isn't high end optimization.
Post a build or didn't happen :P