If it's not broken in the hands of an archetype it's not broken in the hands of a base class.
Frankly, since TWF already pays with lots of feats and nigh-superhuman dex requirements and an attack penalty, I'm not sure it would be broken to let quarterstaves and other double weapons also be enchanted as a single item.
How so? The vast majority of archtypes are actually LESS powerful than the base class they modify. Giving something 'good' to something that is less powerful and has more restrictions then the base point wouldn't be anywhere close to 'breaking' the game.
So giving the ability to a single archtype is significantly less 'broken' than giving it to a whole base class from a design perspective.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
Quite frankly, most of us who actually play monks and run games that have monks as player characters in them don't care about natural attacks. That is why we have asked, time and again, for an item that only enhances unarmed strikes and not natural weapons.
The answer we have received has been that such an item would be meta-gaming.
As I recall, it was one person's specific suggestion for such an item (a wrap you put on your fist or foot that make you kick or punch harder) that was deemed metagaming. Specifically, the complaint was that there's no conceptual, in-game reason why you could wrap your hand to make it hit harder, but not your hand to make your natural Slam attack better.
I don't recall seeing them shoot down the idea of an item boosting only Unarmed Strikes in general for being Metagaming, but I don't keep too close track of all the monk threads, so maybe you've got a quote somewhere to correct me?
The reason I have seen them give, repeatedly, is that the AoMF is the item monks are expected to use, and if that doesn't work, you need to either fix the AoMF or fix the Monk. Adding an item in a later book that renders the AoMF redundant for monks is stealth errata.
I......what?But that isn't true, it's a single archtype that gets the ability. So yeah maybe it is broken to let an entire BASE class do it.So other classes get to attack with TWF with just one weapon, enchanted as just one weapon, but it's broken to let the monk do this...Do not forget
Spinning Lance (Ex)
At 7th level, a dragoon may alternate attacks with the piercing head of his lance with reach, or with the butt end (treat as a club) against adjacent targets. Unlike a double weapon, the masterwork quality and magical special abilities apply to both ends of the lance, except for those weapon special abilities that apply only to edged weapons.
Pretty much what I've been saying about yours and some others posts, I've just been polite enough not to point out the idiocy of some things said.
If you cannot understand that when imposing MORE restrictions and removing abilities on a base class via archtype doesn't allow for a decent ability or two to be added, some of which might be too powerful to allow for a base class to have...Well, thankfully you aren't the one making design decisions.
Quite frankly, most of us who actually play monks and run games that have monks as player characters in them don't care about natural attacks. That is why we have asked, time and again, for an item that only enhances unarmed strikes and not natural weapons.
The answer we have received has been that such an item would be meta-gaming.
As I recall, it was one person's specific suggestion for such an item (a wrap you put on your fist or foot that make you kick or punch harder) that was deemed metagaming. Specifically, the complaint was that there's no conceptual, in-game reason why you could wrap your hand to make it hit harder, but not your hand to make your natural Slam attack better.
I don't recall seeing them shoot down the idea of an item boosting only Unarmed Strikes in general for being Metagaming, but I don't keep too close track of all the monk threads, so maybe you've got a quote somewhere to correct me?
The reason I have seen them give, repeatedly, is that the AoMF is the item monks are expected to use, and if that doesn't work, you need to either fix the AoMF or fix the Monk. Adding an item in a later book that renders the AoMF redundant for monks is stealth errata.
The first link in flurry of changes to flurry of blows (link on previous page) goes back to a locked thread. THAT thread goes back to all of SKRs comments on 'what do you want to see in ultimate equipment', or whatever the thread was called. I can't remember. That is where the metagaming comments came from . . . and if I am remembering right it was along the lines of 'well, I can't see how someone could wear this and it would enhance their unarmed strike, but not natural weapons. You are just trying to get the same thing cheaper and we are not going to do that because it is meta-gaming.'
If I am remembering right . . . it was months ago.
The problem with fixing the AoMF is that is priced well for critters with 3+ natural attacks. Unfortunately, it is also overpriced for monks. As long as that one item does both, you can't fix it. And they absolutely refuse to consider another item that does the same thing for unarmed strikes only.
MA
|
Too bad all of that is pretty terrible next to the Alchemist making 3 attacks from level 2 at his full bab with no penalty to hit and full bonus from power attack. The Alchemist is literally a better monk.
Except you are forgetting that Monk gains the following benefits for free:
Full BAB progression for a Full-Round attack
Unarmed Strike
Two Weapon Fighting
Improved Two Weapon Fighting
Greater Two Weapon Fighting
Double Slice
Stunning FistDoesn't need a Dex of 19
Can deal non-lethal damage without taking a penalty
Can Disarm, Trip, Sunder and Stun as part of a flurry of blows
Starts Dealing a 1d6 with fists instead of 1d3 and does progressively...
Yes, because at one level when the alchemist picks up a new Ability, he's suddenly much better than the monk. Just like how no one should ever play a fighter because inquisitor gets bane at 5th level.
Do you realize how silly that sounds, and no, that's not "terrible" next to what the monk gets.
Alchemist's natural attacks don't scale with level. Alchemists don't get a full BAB progression. Alchemists don't get more natural attacks as they level. Alchemists can't combine attacks with combat manuevers.
Also, monks also get full bonus from power attack.
|
|
@ Elamdri
If you believe that monk+Flurry+AoMF isa perfectly balanced combo then show us a build.
I never said it was a balanced combo.
I said that you cannot just compare the costs of magic weapons for a TWF class with the costs of a AoMF for a monk and say that AoMF is overpriced based on that comparison.
This is because you are not taking into account the non-monetary costs that the TWF character class has to pay.
My point was that a rogue needs a Dex of 19 and has to sink 4 feats to come close to getting the same number of attacks as a monk, and yet the monk will still have a better BAB. Also, the monk can use power attack to full effect while the Rogue only gets a 1/1 trade for his off hands.
Also, if the rogue wants to use all that Dex to hit, he's gotta sink another feat for Weapon Finesse.
My point is this, if you are just comparing the costs of weapons for a TWF character and the costs of an AoMF, then you are not taking everything into account.
Another way to say it is: "How much would you pay for 5 feats?"
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Since my earlier post seems to have been removed, let me restate the core of the matter:
If you think it is good design to fix perceived problems in a class with a magic item in a non-core rulebook, you have no idea what you're doing in game design. I am very glad paizo hasn't caved to the incessant demands to do exactly that.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Quite frankly, most of us who actually play monks and run games that have monks as player characters in them don't care about natural attacks. That is why we have asked, time and again, for an item that only enhances unarmed strikes and not natural weapons.
The answer we have received has been that such an item would be meta-gaming.
And yet, in Ultimate Equipment, they come out with the brawler armor property, which cannot be placed on bracers of armor (light armor only, and bracers aren't light armor). That has a price of only a +1 special armor property, so you can get it for as cheap as 4,150 gp, plus the cost of the armor (+1 brawling). That gives a +2 untyped bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls with unarmed strike. Not with natural weapons.
A fighter wearing brawling armor, with an amulet of the mighty fists, that has selected close combat weapons for his weapon training, and has gloves of dueling, has at least a +5 bonus on attack and damage rolls over a monk with the same AoMF and level of enhancement bonus. And has spent less money to do it. That is before Strength, before even BAB.
This one item is, forgive me for saying it, a slap in the face of everyone who has championed the monk. Monks cannot have an item which only affects unarmed strikes . . . but fighters? Rogues? Rangers? Barbarians? Paladins? Bards? Clerics? Druids? They can.
MA
Except you are forgetting that Monk gains the following benefits for free:
Full BAB progression for a Full-Round attack
Unarmed Strike
Two Weapon Fighting
Improved Two Weapon Fighting
Greater Two Weapon Fighting
Double Slice
Stunning FistDoesn't need a Dex of 19
Can deal non-lethal damage without taking a penalty
Can Disarm, Trip, Sunder and Stun as part of a flurry of blows
Starts Dealing a 1d6 with fists instead of 1d3 and does progressively more damage as he levels, eventually punching with fists that a greatsword's damage dice.
So yeah, you gotta pay a little bit more to enhance your Mack truck fists than other classes have to pay, but look at all you get for FREE that other classes don't.
Also, if one of those classes loses an arm, they can no longer TWF. A monk can, since he can use any appendage as a part of his Flurry.
Okay, let's take a look at these one at a time:
1. Full BAB progression for a Full-Round attack.
Actually, it is full BAB-2 and is only for flurry attacks. Not when moving, not on attacks of opportunity, not for anything else. The monk is the ONLY class in the Core Rulesbook that actually has a lower chance to hit when he takes a single aimed shot.
2. Unarmed Strike. Can deal non-lethal damage without taking a penalty. Starts Dealing a 1d6 with fists instead of 1d3 and does progressively more damage as he levels, eventually punching with fists that a greatsword's damage dice.
Wow. The monk gets to punch things. You know, that is kind of what the monk is supposed to do. He is supposed to be the best unarmed, unarmored fighter in the game . . . but guess what? He isn't. The fighter archetypes brawler and unarmed fighter blow him out of the water with equal levels of wealth: so do unarmed barbarians and rangers.
3. Two Weapon Fighting. Improved Two Weapon Fighting. Greater Two Weapon Fighting. Double Slice. Gets to ignore ability score prequisites.
First, he doesn't actually get these feats, and therefore cannot qualify for feats with these as prequisites. Second, every single other class in the game has the option of being able to two-weapon fight or fight with one weapon or fight with a two-handed weapon; monks don't. They are locked into 'TWF as flurry' because their BAB drops when they don't flurry. Yet, flurry keeps them from using their high mobiity. It is a catch-22. PS, Rangers get to ignore the prerequsites on their bonus feats too.
4. Stunning Fist.
Gee, the monk gets a bonus feat that anyone can get. And he gets power-ups to it over the course of 20 levels! Here's something you might not have considered: to use stunning fist, you have to declare it before your attack. If you miss, it is wasted. If you hit, and you don't deal damage (say because of . . . damage reduction?), it is wasted. Even if you hit and even if you deal damage, your opponent gets a Fortitude save throw and most CR appropriate creatures have a greater than 50% chance of making said saving throw.
5. Can Disarm, Trip, Sunder and Stun as part of a flurry of blows.
Guess what? Anyone can disarm, sunder, and trip in place of a normal melee attack, not just monks using flurry of blows. Read the sections on combat maneuvers again, pages 182-184 of the Core Rules Document. Folks other than monks who select Stunning Fist as a feat can also get a free attempt once per round . . . just like a monk.
Wow. We all this free stuff that . . . one or more other classes (if not every class) gets. Only unique thing is our increased damage on unarmed strike, and because of THAT, we have to pay 2.5 times as much to get enhancement bonuses on unarmed strike. Gee, thanks.
MA
|
|
A rogue is not the better class to compare with a monk. A monk is a martial class, the rogue is not. And besides it is not like the rogue are the better TWF out there.@ Elamdri
If you believe that monk+Flurry+AoMF isa perfectly balanced combo then show us a build.
I never said it was a balanced combo.
I said that you cannot just compare the costs of magic weapons for a TWF class with the costs of a AoMF for a monk and say that AoMF is overpriced based on that comparison.
This is because you are not taking into account the non-monetary costs that the TWF character class has to pay.
My point was that a rogue needs a Dex of 19 and has to sink 4 feats to come close to getting the same number of attacks as a monk, and yet the monk will still have a better BAB. Also, the monk can use power attack to full effect while the Rogue only gets a 1/1 trade for his off hands.
Also, if the rogue wants to use all that Dex to hit, he's gotta sink another feat for Weapon Finesse.
My point is this, if you are just comparing the costs of weapons for a TWF character and the costs of an AoMF, then you are not taking everything into account.
Another way to say it is: "How much would you pay for 5 feats?"
I feel like you're missing my point. My point is that the monk gets the benefit of 5 feats for free and don't have to pump DEX to qualify for those feats. So yes, while other classes don't have to spend as much money to get the same enhancement bonuses as the monk, they have to spend other resources to do so.
Look at it this way:
Two +5 weapons costs 100,000g
A +5 AoMF and 5 feats costs 125,000g
If you could buy 5 feats for 25,000g, you bet that I would take that deal. Because that's the opportunity cost of the AoMF for a Monk.
Ok my two cents:
Cent 1: AoMF is AMAZING for NATURAL ATTACKS. The price is fair and balanced considering that several builds/creatures can get upwards of 4 natural attacks a round.
Cent 2: AoMF is HORRIBLE for MONK UNARMED STRIKES. It is quite overpriced once you reach +3 or higher. (the argument of why has been repeated often thru this thread)
Us monk fans do not want an item that makes the AoMF obsolete because we want something that works ONLY for unarmed strikes. That way the natural attacking barbarians, alchemists, rangers, druids, etc. can use AoMF for their natural attacks and the Monks (and other unarmed strike based builds) can use X weapon/item (i would love to see 3: one for feet, one for wrists (elbows) and one for hands depending on the type of unarmed attacker you are) for their own use. Not that complicated and would keep the AoMF relevant.
Yes the Monk can just use Magic/Greater Fang but why should it have to? The Fighter doesn't need to use Magic Weapon/Greater to have a cool weapon so why can't we have the same for our own thing for the MONK cool weapon (unarmed strikes)?
Implementing this item would stop everyone from whining which is getting annoying to ALL of us.
|
|
snip:A rogue is not the better class to compare with a monk. A monk is a martial class, the rogue is not. And besides it is not like the rogue are the better TWF out there.@ Elamdri
If you believe that monk+Flurry+AoMF isa perfectly balanced combo then show us a build.
I never said it was a balanced combo.
I said that you cannot just compare the costs of magic weapons for a TWF class with the costs of a AoMF for a monk and say that AoMF is overpriced based on that comparison.
This is because you are not taking into account the non-monetary costs that the TWF character class has to pay.
My point was that a rogue needs a Dex of 19 and has to sink 4 feats to come close to getting the same number of attacks as a monk, and yet the monk will still have a better BAB. Also, the monk can use power attack to full effect while the Rogue only gets a 1/1 trade for his off hands.
Also, if the rogue wants to use all that Dex to hit, he's gotta sink another feat for Weapon Finesse.
My point is this, if you are just comparing the costs of weapons for a TWF character and the costs of an AoMF, then you are not taking everything into account.
Another way to say it is: "How much would you pay for 5 feats?"
I feel like you're missing my point. My point is that the monk gets the benefit of 5 feats for free and don't have to pump DEX to qualify for those feats. So yes, while other classes don't have to spend as much money to get the same enhancement bonuses as the monk, they have to spend other resources to do so.
Look at it this way:
Two +5 weapons costs 100,000g
A +5 AoMF and 5 feats costs 125,000gIf you could buy 5 feats for 25,000g, you bet that I would take that deal. Because that's the opportunity cost of the AoMF for a Monk.
You said the price of the AoMF is Ok because the monk have extra effective feats taht compensate for the extra price.
But no, Flurry do not compensate that....
Hey, you're free to disagree, but I believe that if you are not looking at the non-monetary costs of TWF, then you're doing it wrong.
|
|
Ok my two cents:
Cent 1: AoMF is AMAZING for NATURAL ATTACKS. The price is fair and balanced considering that several builds/creatures can get upwards of 4 natural attacks a round.
Are you high? AoMF is ridiculously under priced for Natural Attacks. All a creature needs is 3 natural attacks and an AoMF is already cheaper than manufactured weapons. Taking into account that many creatures have 5 natural attacks (Eidolons can have up to 7) and that many of those natural attacks use full BAB, I would say that AoMF is increasingly underpriced as the Natural Attacks go up.
Ok my two cents:
Cent 1: AoMF is AMAZING for NATURAL ATTACKS. The price is fair and balanced considering that several builds/creatures can get upwards of 4 natural attacks a round.
Are you high? AoMF is ridiculously under priced for Natural Attacks. All a creature needs is 3 natural attacks and an AoMF is already cheaper than manufactured weapons. Taking into account that many creatures have 5 natural attacks (Eidolons can have up to 7) and that many of those natural attacks use full BAB, I would say that AoMF is increasingly underpriced as the Natural Attacks go up.
No I am not high..and I agree with that it is possibly underpriced. My point was more that no one is arguing that it is OVERPRICED when it comes to natural attacks. I did not want to start an ADDITIONAL argument about it being/not being overpriced for natural attacks.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The first link in flurry of changes to flurry of blows (link on previous page) goes back to a locked thread. THAT thread goes back to all of SKRs comments on 'what do you want to see in ultimate equipment', or whatever the thread was called. I can't remember. That is where the metagaming comments came from . . . and if I am remembering right it was along the lines of 'well, I can't see how someone could wear this and it would enhance their unarmed strike, but not natural weapons. You are just trying to get the same thing cheaper and we are not going to do that because it is meta-gaming.'
If I am remembering right . . . it was months ago.
The problem with fixing the AoMF is that is priced well for critters with 3+ natural attacks. Unfortunately, it is also overpriced for monks. As long as that one item does both, you can't fix it. And they absolutely refuse to consider another item that does the same thing for unarmed strikes only.
MA
Yeah, that's the same thread I was thinking of. I guess we just remember it differently.
And, going back to look at it, here's what I see:
I see Sean K saying the concept of handwraps that don't also boost other hand-based attacks is a bit metagamey. He isn't saying anything about an unarmed-only AoMF here.
A little later he even says he's not ruling the idea of an unarmed-only item out altogether.
Further on, Sean addresses AoMF directly. He doesn't mention metagaming at all. His main point here is that he doesn't want to invalidate the AoMF, which he thinks a cheaper, unarmed-only AoMF would do.
He reiterates this point in the last half of this post. "You're talking about adding an option in a new book that is clearly better than an option in that core rulebook. It invalidates that part of the core rulebook, like a new version of the bard class that has d12 Hit Dice but only 4 skill points per level. "Some people would still play the old bard because it has more skill points" doesn't change that the new bard is better than the old bard. You're invalidating something in the baseline game. That's rules creep. That's bad." Again, no mention of metagaming.
And here Sean explains why invalidating a Core option is Bad, even if the class really needs it.
MA, I've seen you make this "meta-gaming" argument in a few different places, but man, it's just not holding up for me.
|
|
Okay, let's take a look at these one at a time:
1. Full BAB progression for a Full-Round attack.
Actually, it is full BAB-2 and is only for flurry attacks. Not when moving, not on attacks of opportunity, not for anything else. The monk is the ONLY class in the Core Rulesbook that actually has a lower chance to hit when he takes a single aimed shot.
2. Unarmed Strike. Can deal non-lethal damage without taking a penalty. Starts Dealing a 1d6 with fists instead of 1d3 and does progressively more damage as he levels, eventually punching with fists that a greatsword's damage dice.
Wow. The monk gets to punch things. You know, that is kind of what the monk is supposed to do. He is supposed to be the best unarmed, unarmored fighter in the game . . . but guess what? He isn't. The fighter archetypes brawler and unarmed fighter blow him out of the water with equal levels of wealth: so do unarmed barbarians and rangers.
3. Two Weapon Fighting. Improved Two Weapon Fighting. Greater Two Weapon Fighting. Double Slice. Gets to ignore ability score prequisites.
First, he doesn't actually get these feats, and therefore cannot qualify for feats with these as prequisites. Second, every single other class in the game has the option of being able to two-weapon fight or fight with one weapon or fight with a two-handed weapon; monks don't. They are locked into 'TWF as flurry' because their BAB drops when they don't flurry. Yet, flurry keeps them from using their high mobiity. It is a catch-22. PS, Rangers get to ignore the prerequsites on their bonus feats too.
4. Stunning Fist.
Gee, the monk gets a bonus feat that anyone can get. And he gets power-ups to it over the course of 20 levels! Here's something you might not have considered: to use stunning fist, you have to declare it before your attack. If you miss, it is wasted. If you hit, and you don't deal damage (say because of . . . damage reduction?), it is wasted. Even if you hit and even if you deal damage, your opponent gets a Fortitude save throw and most CR appropriate creatures have a greater than 50% chance of making said saving throw.
5. Can Disarm, Trip, Sunder and Stun as part of a flurry of blows.
Guess what? Anyone can disarm, sunder, and trip in place of a normal melee attack, not just monks using flurry of blows. Read the sections on combat maneuvers again, pages 182-184 of the Core Rules Document. Folks other than monks who select Stunning Fist as a feat can also get a free attempt once per round . . . just like a monk.
Wow. We all this free stuff that . . . one or more other classes (if not every class) gets. Only unique thing is our increased damage on unarmed strike, and because of THAT, we have to pay 2.5 times as much to get enhancement bonuses on unarmed strike. Gee, thanks.
MA
1: Every TWF is BAB-2. The Monk has the same BAB as a fighter or Ranger TWF.
2: How are they better than the monk exactly. They do 1d3 damage with unarmed strikes and have to spend 5 feats to do the same thing that a monk does without any feat tax.
3: The monk pretty much has every feat in the TWF tree. The only one's he doesn't have are Two Weapon Defense, which is garbage, and Two Weapon Rend, which exists to make up for the lower off-hand damage of TWF, which the monk doesn't suffer from. Flurry and the Monk's speed not synergizing is a problem with Monk design, not the cost of AoMF. AoMF cost compares a regular TWF using his Full-Round Attack vs. a Monk's. The fact that Flurry and another Monk's ability don't sync well is unfortunate, but has no bearing on the Amulet's cost.
4: The monk can make better use of Stunning Fist than any other class, it allows him to Flurry easier, and procs Medusa's Wrath.
Everything you described: Declaring it before attacking, having to hit, and the save...all that stuff applies to many good abilities. Those are to balance the fact of how good Stunning Fist is.
5: Yeah, I was under the impression all Combat Maneuvers were standard actions. Sorry bout that.
The point is not exclusivity. Yes, other classes have access to what the monk gets. The point is that Monks don't have to spend resources to get those features. Other classes DO. My point is that while the monk has to pay more to get his AoMF, the other classes have to spend non-monetary resources to TWF as good as a Monk can naturally.
Also, AoMF is not 2.5 more expensive, it's 1.25 times more expensive.
Two +1 weapons is 4000g, a +1 AoMF is 5000g. that's 1.25 the cost, not 2.5
Two +5 weapons are 100K, a +5 AoMF is 125K. Again, 1.25 the cost, not 2.5
|
|
No I am not high..and I agree with that it is possibly underpriced. My point was more that no one is arguing that it is OVERPRICED when it comes to natural attacks. I did not want to start an ADDITIONAL argument about it being/not being overpriced for natural attacks.Ok my two cents:
Cent 1: AoMF is AMAZING for NATURAL ATTACKS. The price is fair and balanced considering that several builds/creatures can get upwards of 4 natural attacks a round.
Are you high? AoMF is ridiculously under priced for Natural Attacks. All a creature needs is 3 natural attacks and an AoMF is already cheaper than manufactured weapons. Taking into account that many creatures have 5 natural attacks (Eidolons can have up to 7) and that many of those natural attacks use full BAB, I would say that AoMF is increasingly underpriced as the Natural Attacks go up.
Lol, sorry. You have a good point, one heated discussion per thread is a good idea.
|
|
2: How are they better than the monk exactly. They do 1d3 damage with unarmed strikes and have to spend 5 feats to do the same thing that a monk does without any feat tax.Because they do more damage and miss less. If you do not belive that make a couple of builds and compare.
Well forgive me, but isn't this more a problem of power creep in the archetypes over a problem with the monk?
If the monk is supposed to be the best TWF character, isn't the problem with the archetypes and not the monk?
Also, what happens to one of those characters if I cut their arms off? Because the monk can still Flurry without his arms.
Also, those classes are using AoMF to enhance their unarmed strikes too. So what does that have to do with the issue of whether AoMF is overpriced? Even if those classes are better than the monk, isn't AoMF just as overpriced for them as it is for the monk?
|
|
unarmed fighters do less damage than TWF. So there is not really power creep.2: How are they better than the monk exactly. They do 1d3 damage with unarmed strikes and have to spend 5 feats to do the same thing that a monk does without any feat tax.Because they do more damage and miss less. If you do not belive that make a couple of builds and compare.Well forgive me, but isn't this more a problem of power creep in the archetypes over a problem with the monk?
If the monk is supposed to be the best TWF character, isn't the problem with the archetypes and not the monk?
Unarmed fighting is a type of TWF.
Let me rephrase: If the monk is supposed to be the best Unarmed fighter, and other classes are better an unarmed fighting, then isn't the problem with the archetypes that allow that rather than a problem with the monk?
my two cents: It has always kind of bugged me that the Amulet of Mighty Fists works on teeth, claws, and horns. Mighty Strikes or Mighty Blows works better. And then Fists could be the unarmed only version.
|
|
Hardly. Archery and THF do more damage. if the monk fails to be good at Unarmed fighting it is monks fault.unarmed fighters do less damage than TWF. So there is not really power creep.2: How are they better than the monk exactly. They do 1d3 damage with unarmed strikes and have to spend 5 feats to do the same thing that a monk does without any feat tax.Because they do more damage and miss less. If you do not belive that make a couple of builds and compare.Well forgive me, but isn't this more a problem of power creep in the archetypes over a problem with the monk?
If the monk is supposed to be the best TWF character, isn't the problem with the archetypes and not the monk?
Unarmed fighting is a type of TWF.
Let me rephrase: If the monk is supposed to be the best Unarmed fighter, and other classes are better an unarmed fighting, then isn't the problem with the archetypes that allow that rather than a problem with the monk?
How are you comparing archery to unarmed TWF? That's like comparing Apples to a Buick. They're so different.
An archer doing more damage has nothing to do with anything. I was stating that if a Monk is inferior to other unarmed fighting classes, then there is a problem with those class archetypes and NOT the monk.
There is no value in stating that An archer does more damage than the monk because it has nothing to do with the discussion at hand.
Also, I fail to see how even if the monk is not the best unarmed fighter, that it has any bearing on the cost of AoMF. AoMF is the same price for any unarmed fighter character.
The point is this
AoMF is only 1.25 the cost of two magic weapons of equal enhancement bonus. Considering that unarmed strikes can't be disarmed, don't have to be drawn, and are easily hidden.
Hell why even bring in fighter archtypes a core fighter could easily hold his own if not surpass the monk at the unarmed game.
|
|
@ Elamdri.
Unarmed fighter are not more powerful thatn archers or THF and really not better than TWF. So there is not power creep in the archetypes, that was your question before.
And again if you do not believe make a couple of build and see what happens.
a quick build for an unarmed fighter 12 level
** spoiler omitted **...
That's not a legal character, Bodywraps and Monk's Robes take the same slot.
That's another thing, making the bodywraps take the same slot as the monk's robe. Kind of a dick move.
|
|
That's not a legal character, Bodywraps and Monk's Robes take the same slot.@ Elamdri.
Unarmed fighter are not more powerful thatn archers or THF and really not better than TWF. So there is not power creep in the archetypes, that was your question before.
And again if you do not believe make a couple of build and see what happens.
a quick build for an unarmed fighter 12 level
** spoiler omitted **...
Hey you are right. I supose the fighter have to conform with
+24/+19/+14 (1d6+28 20/x2).
How is the attack routine of level 12 unarmed monk ?
LG Large Humanoid (dwarf)
Init +0; Senses Darkvision; Perception +19
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 21 (19 Lunging), touch 17, flat-footed 21 (+4 armor, -1 size)
hp 111 (12d8+36)
Fort +13, Ref +11, Will +15
Defensive Abilities Defensive Training, Evasion, Improved Evasion; Immune Diamond Body, disease,
poison
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 60 ft. Reach 10 (15 Lunging)
Melee Unarmed Strike +17/+12 (4d8+21/x2)
Special Attacks Flurry of Blows +17/+17/+12/+12/+7, Ki Strike, Lawful, Ki Strike, Magic
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 26, Dex 11, Con 16, Int 7, Wis 18, Cha 7
Base Atk +9; CMB +22 (+24 Bull Rushing, +24 Grappling); CMD 37 (39 vs. Bull Rush, 39 vs. Grapple)
Feats Deflect Arrows, Dragon Ferocity +4, 1d4+8 rds, Dragon Style, Improved Bull Rush, Improved
Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, Lunge, Medusa's Wrath, Monk Weapon Proficiencies, Power Attack
-3/+6, Step Up, Stunning Fist (13/day) (DC 20), Weapon Focus (Unarmed Strike)
Traits Deft Dodger, Indomitable Faith
Skills Acrobatics +16, Perception +19
Languages Common, Dwarven
SQ Abundant Step, AC Bonus +8, Fast Movement (+40'), Greed, Hardy +2, Hatred +1, High Jump
(+12/+32 with Ki point), Ki Defense, Ki Pool, Maneuver Training, Purity of Body, Slow and Steady, Slow
Fall 60', Stability +4, Still Mind, Stonecunning +2, Stunning Fist (Stun, Fatigue, Sicken, Stagger), Unarmed
Strike (2d8), Wholeness of Body (12 HP/use)
Gear Amulet of Mighty Fists +2, Belt of Giant Strength, +6, Bracers of Armor, +4, Cloak of
Resistance, +2, Headband of Inspired Wisdom, +4, Robe, Monk's
--------------------
TRACKED RESOURCES
--------------------
Ki Pool (Su) - 10
Stunning Fist (13/day) (DC 20)
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
Abundant Step (Su) For 2 Ki points, use dimension door.
AC Bonus +8 The Monk adds his Wisdom bonus to AC and CMD, more at higher levels.
Darkvision (60 feet) You can see in the dark (black and white vision only).
Defensive Training +4 Gain a dodge bonus to AC vs monsters of the Giant subtype.
Deflect Arrows Deflect an incoming arrow once per round.
Diamond Body (Su) At 11th level, a monk gains immunity to poisons of all kinds.
Dragon Ferocity +4, 1d4+8 rds Gain bonus on unarmed attacks, and you can cause opponents to be
shaken
Dragon Style Gain +2 bonus against sleep, paralysis, and stun effects, and can ignore difficult terrain
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Permanent Enlarge Person
How's that?
Your attacks:
+24/+19/+14 (1d3+28 20/x2) (Reach 5)
Your average damage if all attacks hit: 90
Mine:
+17/+17/+17/+12/+12/+7 (4d8+20/x2) (Reach 10-15) (+2 Attacks if Medusa's Wrath Procs)
Average damage:228 (304 on Medusa's Wrath)
If you want, you can forgo the Bracers, get a wand of mage armor and have the wizard tap you with it before you go into a dungeon. That way you can afford an amulet of mighty fists +3.
I get a kick out of all of the people who say "A monks Unarmed Strike can't be disarmed" as justification that an AoMF is reasonably priced for monks. I mean, how often does your DM actually use the disarm maneuver? How often is it included as a primary tactic for an NPC to use in a published module? As a secondary tactic, maybe 10% of the time? As a primary tactic, maybe 2% of the time depending on the party's prior choices?
The monk can't get disarmed unless you kill him because he can use unarmed strike with any part of his body. But the poor weapon classes need to spend all of 15 gold to get a pair of weapon cords that allow them to retrieve a disarmed weapon as a swift action. Therefore the difference in pricing between a magical weapon and the AoMF should be 15 gold, right?
Ooooh, i know what else! If you cast Mage's Disjunction on melee weapons they lose their magical bonuses, but they still retain the masterwork quality of the weapon. So if Mage's Disjunction is cast on an AoMF then the monk's unarmed strike still retains its masterwork quality, right? Oh, it doesn't, because it's a natural weapon so it couldn't have been made with the masterwork quality.
Well if UAS is a natural weapon, it means that it benefits like most other natural weapons so each attack is a primary attack and uses the monk's full BAB, right? Oh, that's not the case? Hm, shucks.
Well at least the monk's secondary attacks are only at -5 to hit because UAS is a natural weapon, right? Oh, shoot, we only get iterative attacks at -5 and -10 like a normal player class.
Well at least I can make my unarmed strike out of cold iron, mithril, and adamantine. Oh I can't, but it counts as adamantine at 16th level. Okay. That means other classes only get to have adamantine as an option for their primary melee weapon, but not until level 16, right? Oh no, they can just buy a cold iron longsword at level 1 for 30 gold pieces? Oh.
Well at least I have a full BAB progression because I'm a pure melee class. Wait, I only get a full BAB progression if I can take a full attack action, and even then I'm forced to use TWF rules even though I may not want to? Nuts.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I get a kick out of all of the people who say "A monks Unarmed Strike can't be disarmed" as justification that an AoMF is reasonably priced for monks. I mean, how often does your DM actually use the disarm maneuver? How often is it included as a primary tactic for an NPC to use in a published module? As a secondary tactic, maybe 10% of the time? As a primary tactic, maybe 2% of the time depending on the party's prior choices?
The monk can't get disarmed unless you kill him because he can use unarmed strike with any part of his body. But the poor weapon classes need to spend all of 15 gold to get a pair of weapon cords that allow them to retrieve a disarmed weapon as a swift action. Therefore the difference in pricing between a magical weapon and the AoMF should be 15 gold, right?
Dude...last PFS scenario I played, the GM cast grease on the barbarian's sword...just sayin'...
Just going to throw this out there, for all the people complaining about the monk being less effective in combat than a fighter. When they started working on Pathfinder, they stated that the fighter was supposed to be the premier fighting class (unlike 3.5 where it was overshadowed by classes, like the monk, in combat ability).
AKA, the fighter is supposed to be the better "fighter" between it and the monk.
|
|
Just going to throw this out there, for all the people complaining about the monk being less effective in combat than a fighter. When they started working on Pathfinder, they stated that the fighter was supposed to be the premier fighting class (unlike 3.5 where it was overshadowed by classes, like the monk, in combat ability).
AKA, the fighter is supposed to be the better "fighter" between it and the monk.
The Monk Fans think that Monks should outdo Fighters in unarmed damage.
Question is, why play a Fighter then?
|
|
I get a kick out of all of the people who say "A monks Unarmed Strike can't be disarmed" as justification that an AoMF is reasonably priced for monks. I mean, how often does your DM actually use the disarm maneuver? How often is it included as a primary tactic for an NPC to use in a published module? As a secondary tactic, maybe 10% of the time? As a primary tactic, maybe 2% of the time depending on the party's prior choices?
Do you realize that the rules would be terrible if they were based on "oh, the DM's don't do it THAT often." Btw, I have yet to run a caster vs my party that did not grease the martial charater's weapons.
The monk can't get disarmed unless you kill him because he can use unarmed strike with any part of his body. But the poor weapon classes need to spend all of 15 gold to get a pair of weapon cords that allow them to retrieve a disarmed weapon as a swift action. Therefore the difference in pricing between a magical weapon and the AoMF should be 15 gold, right?
Which is why I think weapon cords are a terrible idea and should never have been added. Although doesn't help much vs. a greased weapon.
Ooooh, i know what else! If you cast Mage's Disjunction on melee weapons they lose their magical bonuses, but they still retain the masterwork quality of the weapon. So if Mage's Disjunction is cast on an AoMF then the monk's unarmed strike still retains its masterwork quality, right? Oh, it doesn't, because it's a natural weapon so it couldn't have been made with the masterwork quality.
Are you arguing that if a 9th level spell is cast on you, then you'll have -1 to hit compared to a martial character? THAT'S your biggest concern at that moment?
Well if UAS is a natural weapon, it means that it benefits like most other natural weapons so each attack is a primary attack and uses the monk's full BAB, right? Oh, that's not the case? Hm, shucks.Well at least the monk's secondary attacks are only at -5 to hit because UAS is a natural weapon, right? Oh, shoot, we only get iterative attacks at -5 and -10 like a normal player class.
...you're arguing that monk's fists should be natural weapons? You're really stretching there man.
Well at least I can make my unarmed strike out of cold iron, mithril, and adamantine. Oh I can't, but it counts as adamantine at 16th level. Okay. That means other classes only get to have adamantine as an option for their primary melee weapon, but not until level 16, right? Oh no, they can just buy a cold iron longsword at level 1 for 30 gold pieces? Oh.
Get two Temple Swords. Problem solved. As you get better Amulets of mighty fists, you'll start to ignore those DRs anyway. A +3 Amulet of Mighty fists and 2 adamantine temple swords will get you through just about everything but alignment DR.
Well at least I have a full BAB progression because I'm a pure melee class. Wait, I only get a full BAB progression if I can take a full attack action, and even then I'm forced to use TWF rules even though I may not want to? Nuts.
Somewhere there is a TWF Rogue just dying to hear you complain while giving you a patronizing look. Yes, it must be AWFUL. Could you imagine if there was some poor schlub out there who had to use a 3/4 BAB and TWF all the time...oh wait...
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Just going to throw this out there, for all the people complaining about the monk being less effective in combat than a fighter. When they started working on Pathfinder, they stated that the fighter was supposed to be the premier fighting class (unlike 3.5 where it was overshadowed by classes, like the monk, in combat ability).
AKA, the fighter is supposed to be the better "fighter" between it and the monk.
The Monk Fans think that Monks should outdo Fighters in unarmed damage.
Question is, why play a Fighter then?
To be the best at armed combat.
| 1 person marked this as FAQ candidate. 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The Monk Fans think that Monks should outdo Fighters in unarmed damage.
Question is, why play a Fighter then?
Because maybe, just MAYBE, a player wants to play a really cool, powerful character that uses a sword, or an axe, or a sword AND an axe, or maybe an axe and a shield.....
/sarcasm off.
Really though, fighters have TONS of options, and every single manufactured weapon can be any single fighter's niche. In fact, with weapon training 4, almost every fighter can be have up to 4 weapon niches that encompass a variety of styles of weapons.
Why can't the monk just get to be the premier, awesome, cool, best-there-is when it comes to fighting without weapons? Why can't the flavor be supported by mechanics??
The devs can make the errata, it is possible. It won't interfere with "core" or whatever their excuse is because there already IS errata to the CRB. How much harm will 4 paragraphs of clarification or setting things right actually do??
For instance, the Robe of Stars is in the CRB. In the CRB, you CANNOT use the Robe of Stars to physically come back to your plane of origin. You can't! It was never errata'ed! It was never (to my knowledge) answered via FAQ! But Ultimate Equipment comes out, and suddenly the Robe of Stars lets you hop back and forth between the Astral Plane and the Prime Material Plane, AT WILL, for 58k. A get-out-of-jail free ticket, at will, that you can use to rest, heal up, escape combat for a while, buff up, whatever.
But that's not the point. The point is, CRB material has been stealth errata'ed via publication, as recently as the last 6 weeks. The Robe of Stars, which is a luxury item for most players, and I would bet my lucky robe of stars that 98% of groups never even use it or include it in treasure troves. THE ROBE OF STARS was important enough to get errata'ed!
Wrap your head around that, and see if your brain doesn't implode. Afterwards, try to come up with a reason why a GOOD, mechanically sound, easy-to-adjudicate item couldn't be written for monks. Sorry, but the Body Wraps of Awful Mechanic is horrible. Unless of course all magical weapons are changed so that the enhancement bonus only gets applied to the first 1, 2, or 3 attacks made each and every round.
They may think that, but the truth is that wasn't the design philosophy so I think they're always going to be unhappy. People tend to forget this is a published rule set of what amounts to 3.5 house rules that the Paizo crew used. Just like playing with a new group there are probably things you aren't going to agree with as it isn't your "playbox."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The sheer level of contempt you hold for people who want the Monk to actually be good with their unarmed strikes (which truthfully is what the class exists for) is just amazing. But sure, let's just cover the pages where the Monk entries are in our CRB's and pretend it never existed, since apparently the Unarmed Fighter is what we were always supposed to play and never the Monk.
That's fair, Skylancer. It's also one of the reasons i will never, ever play PFS or ever recommend or even suggest someone try PFS.
|
|
To be the best at armed combat.
Because maybe, just MAYBE, a player wants to play a really cool, powerful character that uses a sword, or an axe, or a sword AND an axe, or maybe an axe and a shield.....
What's the difference between unarmed and armed combat? I mean, sure, flavor and everything. But in the end it's rolling X attacks against an adjacent foe.
If Monk was to be better than Fighter at rolling X attacks against an adjacent foe, why play a Fighter? Your argument is "because it's cool to swing an axe". I say it's irrelevant. This is D&D. D&D is a wargame ruleset with some lip service to role-playing slapped on the top. In a wargame, if bardiches are better than guisarmes, nobody is going to use the latter except for a bunch of funky weirdos who think it's cool to use the not-optimal thing, or who get high on the fact that they're using guismares. I mean they're sexeh all right, sure, but that doesn't change the fact that D&D/PF is a game about Killing Things. You want to be good at that, if possible.
The same is going to happen if Monks > Fighters in unarmed. There will be no point of playing a Fighter, unless you're into ranged weapons or your prefer suboptimal character for flavor reasons. Between having equivalent AC, better saves, superior mobility and some funky magical bonus shizzle, the Monk would be superior choice for anybody who wants to Kill Things to Death in melee.
And finally, your arguments are circularly self-defeating. Observe:
A: We're not happy with Monks. They need a power boost! (read: mechanics are important)
B: But hey, that would make Fighters obsolete at melee? What would be the point of playing a melee Fighter then?
A: Because swords and axes and shields are cool! (read: mechanics are not important)
Given that the last or last 2 attacks commonly don't actually hit, even if you are a fighter. does it really even matter that it is restricted to the first couple of attacks? You get to pick and choose when it goes off. If you flurry and want to disarm the first attack, why would you pop off a flaming attack on it? Resolve the disarm and use the body wrap on the rest of the attacks of the flurry. The Monk does ridiculous amounts of base damage with their fist at the higher levels, the vital strike chain was basically written for them.
Trying to play the monk in PFRPG how you played it in 3.5 is basically trying to "do it wrong." The monk is no longer the damage machine, the fighter is.
As for flavor, as many times as I've been disappointed by the flavor vs mechanics... Be ready to be disappointed, and move on the is the best advice I can give you.
|
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
The devs can make the errata, it is possible. It won't interfere with "core" or whatever their excuse is because there already IS errata to the CRB. How much harm will 4 paragraphs of clarification or setting things right actually do??
For instance, the Robe of Stars is in the CRB. In the CRB, you CANNOT use the Robe of Stars to physically come back to your plane of origin. You can't! It was never errata'ed! It was never (to my knowledge) answered via FAQ! But Ultimate Equipment comes out, and suddenly the Robe of Stars lets you hop back and forth between the Astral Plane and the Prime Material Plane, AT WILL, for 58k. A get-out-of-jail free ticket, at will, that you can use to rest, heal up, escape combat for a while, buff up, whatever.
But that's not the point. The point is, CRB material has been stealth errata'ed via publication, as recently as the last 6 weeks. The Robe of Stars, which is a luxury item for most players, and I would be my lucky robe of stars that 98% of groups never even use it or include it in treasure troves. THE ROBE OF STARS was important enough to get errata'ed!
That's not stealth errata, that's just plain errata. The next time they update the CRB (which they only do when they reprint the book), that change will most likely be included. At that point, the PRD will be updated as well, making the errata available to everyone.
'Stealth' in this case doesn't mean 'unannounced'.
If the monk needs a Cheap AoMF, then it needs to have a Cheap AoMF available in the CRB. Otherwise, new players coming to the game are going to shell out their hard-earned $50, crack open their fancy new book, and get shafted with a class that does not work right. Do you tell them "No, you need to pay another $45 to get Ultimate Monktronics, so the monk can buy his Cheap AoMF and work properly?"
That new player is going to say "F-You, man! I'mma go play Mouse Guard!" As well they should. It's a wonderful game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Trying to play the monk in PFRPG how you played it in 3.5 is basically trying to "do it wrong." The monk is no longer the damage machine, the fighter is.
The Monk was bad in 3.5e, and it's just as bad if not worse in PF. What ever gave you the idea that the Monk EVER outdid the Fighter in that edition?