Jason Bulmahn makes new comment on monks


Pathfinder Society

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Jason Bulmahn (lead designer): "As for the Monk issue. We have decided to reverse our previous ruling on using Flurry with one weapon. You can now do so."

There you go. There were other things in his post too (hence providing the link), but that's the part people have been holding their breath about for so long, so I thought I'd share it with the community.

Happy monking!


Can characters that redid their monks un-redo their monks?

Grand Lodge 1/5

Yay for Paizo and clearing up rules!

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I thought I remembered Mike saying people shouldn't have been rebuilding their monks, since we didn't know if this might happen.

I could be wrong.


Yea, I'm not 100% on whether rebuilds were actually allowed. Hmmm.

And I guess that if that situation came up, they could just rebuild the character.

Grand Lodge 1/5

Just let the folks rebuild. It's not a big deal.

5/5

Jiggy wrote:

I thought I remembered Mike saying people shouldn't have been rebuilding their monks, since we didn't know if this might happen.

I could be wrong.

Correct!

You could rebuild back then, but if you did, you were not getting another rebuild once the issue was resolved was the stance.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Oh snap.

5/5 5/55/55/5

WOoooooOOOOoooooOOOOoooooOOOOooooOOOOOooOOOOOOOooooo

Spoiler:
oooooOOOOOooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
ooooot

The Exchange 5/5

Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

there's FAQ goodness on sunder too. =)

Dark Archive 4/5

The people that did rebuilds have viable characters, because they still work under the ruling. The people who waited and didn't play their characters followed Mike's advice asking for patience.

I could see how an extra rebuild might please a few people, but I don't think it's necessary.

Grand Lodge 4/5

dot

5/5 *

Also a very strict clarification on Vital Strike. VS cannot be combined with charging or Spring Attack.

Dark Archive 4/5

CRobledo wrote:
Also a very strict clarification on Vital Strike. VS cannot be combined with charging or Spring Attack.

That has been true for a very long time.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

1 person marked this as a favorite.
Mergy wrote:
CRobledo wrote:
Also a very strict clarification on Vital Strike. VS cannot be combined with charging or Spring Attack.
That has been true for a very long time.

Yes, but until now our only "proof" of it was the lead designer saying so over and over and over again, always in the same way, and always giving the same rationale.

But now it's "official".

;)

1/5

Thanks, Jiggy. I have to be honest- I gave up following that thread a few days ago (almost immediately after starting to follow it...), so it's good to see that it did, indeed, result in some good housekeeping, so to speak.

I feel like this is a good place to mention that I love Paizo for really trying to keep internal consistency and having the patience in the face of an online mob of disgruntled gamers to make well thought out decisions. Thanks, Paizo.

Grand Lodge 5/5

So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?

While I will obviously uphold this rule for PFS play, I have to say this is probably the single ruling that I MOST disagree with out of every ruling I've heard since I started playing this game. I would be more than willing to share my very simple counter-arguement with Mr. Buhlman, if he wanted to hear it. ;)


No, this is just within the context of flurry of blows and does not touch the general rules of two-weapon fighting.

You can, however, flurry with just one weapon.


Where is the FAQ page? I keep trying to find it but my Fu is weak.

Thanks for the link to the thread Jiggy! I know I wasn't terribly affected by the different weapon limitation, but I am glad I can take off the other brass knuckles that are NOT ghost touch!

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?

How exactly are you getting that?

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Pendin Fust wrote:
Where is the FAQ page? I keep trying to find it but my Fu is weak.

In the top-right corner of every page, there's a link that says "Help/FAQ". Once you click it, there's a box with lots of sections of FAQs - the most recent ones are in the CRB and UC sections.

Grand Lodge 5/5

Cheapy wrote:

No, this is just within the context of flurry of blows and does not touch the general rules of two-weapon fighting.

You can, however, flurry with just one weapon.

The the ruling is still ridiculous, but for slightly different reasons.


Thanks Jiggy!

Grand Lodge 5/5

Jiggy wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?
How exactly are you getting that?

I was getting it from the fact that (or at least my assumption that) Flurry of Blows is based on the TWF rules.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

Seth Gipson wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?
How exactly are you getting that?
I was getting it from the fact that (or at least my assumption that) Flurry of Blows is based on the TWF rules.

Well, that's because when PFRPG came out, they were deliberately trying to "marry" (as they put it) FoB and TWF - it was always the intent that FoB worked like TWF except as otherwise noted. So your original understanding was correct.

They've now changed the monk, by re-divorcing it (at least partially) from TWF rules - not changing the TWF rules themselves.

Silver Crusade

Seth Gipson wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?
How exactly are you getting that?
I was getting it from the fact that (or at least my assumption that) Flurry of Blows is based on the TWF rules.

It's partially based on TWF, but flurry is a different beast. It's a special thing for monks, something that sets them apart.

3/5 RPG Superstar Season 9 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2014 Top 16, RPG Superstar 2013 Top 16

Seth Gipson wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?
How exactly are you getting that?
I was getting it from the fact that (or at least my assumption that) Flurry of Blows is based on the TWF rules.

Flurry of Blows is based on Two-Weapon Fighting, not the other way around.


Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?

If your definition of Two-Weapon Fighting also says you can use "any combination of unarmed strikes or attacks with a special monk weapon", then yes. Otherwise, no.

Grand Lodge 5/5

RainyDayNinja wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?
How exactly are you getting that?
I was getting it from the fact that (or at least my assumption that) Flurry of Blows is based on the TWF rules.
Flurry of Blows is based on Two-Weapon Fighting, not the other way around.

That's what I said...

5/5

Thabks Jiggy for helping me monitor one thread after 900 post. Thanks for your time in keeping up to date on that thread.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

@Chris Bonnet: That credit actually goes to Cheapy. I never followed that thread, but then I saw it in the recent activity sidebar with the last post being from Cheapy. It occurred to me that I hadn't seen that thread in that sidebar in a while, and also that Cheapy isn't the sort to engage in endless debates, so I figured something must be up and I clicked it.

That's how I found out about it.

So thanks, Cheapy!

Grand Lodge 5/5

Ok, just to be clear, the end of the monk ruling is that a monk may use a single weapon for all of their attacks with their flurry of blows. They dont have to have some of the hits being unarmed also, they just (flavor-ish-ly) toss the weapon between hands and continue attacking with it?


Seth, yep...that's what the rules were changed to. I think a more accurate "flavor-ish-ly" way of looking at it is them just whacking more often with the weapon.

And you're welcome Jiggy / Chris!

The Exchange

Well my monk questions are cleared up now i need to know about non monks (or monks without FoB) using 2 weapon fighting with 2 unarmed attacks......

5/5 *

I always just thought of FoB as Rapid Shot for melee. Which it kinda is now.

Sczarni 4/5

What do you need to know about your TWF unarmed characters?

Fists count as light weapons... Math is easy from there.

The Exchange

lantzkev wrote:

What do you need to know about your TWF unarmed characters?

Fists count as light weapons... Math is easy from there.

But can you 2 weapon unarmed strike and unarmed strike? Several things make it sound like i could but it never says clearly yes or no that i can see. i need it official because it is for PFS

Grand Lodge 5/5

Jiggy wrote:
Jason Bulmahn

Jason who?


Michael Azzolino wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Jason Bulmahn
Jason who?

You might know him from his work on Dungeonscape, the 3.5 book.

Dark Archive 4/5

This is a great ruling, and clears a lot of arguments up at my tables. - Great to see!

Nice to bring the ability back in line with the intent, particularly with regards to iconic Monks like Sajan, who uses a Temple sword and has been flurrying with it for some time now...

Sczarni 4/5

Andrew R wrote:
lantzkev wrote:

What do you need to know about your TWF unarmed characters?

Fists count as light weapons... Math is easy from there.

But can you 2 weapon unarmed strike and unarmed strike? Several things make it sound like i could but it never says clearly yes or no that i can see. i need it official because it is for PFS

There's nothing that needs to be specifically said as far as I can see. Unless you're playing the Black Knight from the Holy Grail you should have at least two limbs to perform a unarmed strike from and therefor have "two light weapons"

Dark Archive 4/5

The barbarian rage power chain for Brawler more-or-less confirms that you can TWF with unarmed strikes.

Silver Crusade 5/5 5/5 ***

I am glad that mine hands are no longer chained, Ka. If I need to use my Adaminetine Kama to get by hardness, I can with a flurry, Ka. If I have a creature that burns when I use an unarmed attack, I can now use my weapon, Ka.

This is good, Ka.

Grand Lodge 5/5

krawford wrote:

I am glad that mine hands are no longer chained, Ka. If I need to use my Adaminetine Kama to get by hardness, I can with a flurry, Ka. If I have a creature that burns when I use an unarmed attack, I can now use my weapon, Ka.

This is good, Ka.

*sniffs around*

I smell chikin!

Grand Lodge

RainyDayNinja wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
Jiggy wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So I guess by extention, then, that mean that someone can use Two-Weapon Fighting with only a single weapon now?
How exactly are you getting that?
I was getting it from the fact that (or at least my assumption that) Flurry of Blows is based on the TWF rules.
Flurry of Blows is based on Two-Weapon Fighting, not the other way around.

As of the new ruling, neither are based on each other. They are totally separate mechanics.

Grand Lodge 5/5

So can you stack them now that they are separate mechanics? If not, then why not?

Grand Lodge

Seth Gipson wrote:
So can you stack them now that they are separate mechanics? If not, then why not?

You can't stack them because flurry of blows is a full attack action as is two weapon fighting. You choose one or the other.


Seth Gipson wrote:
So can you stack them now that they are separate mechanics? If not, then why not?

Rules debates don't belong in the PFS forums.

Grand Lodge 5/5

hogarth wrote:
Seth Gipson wrote:
So can you stack them now that they are separate mechanics? If not, then why not?
Rules debates don't belong in the PFS forums.

I havent done any debating in this thread, thank you very much. I have asked questions, stated opinions (mostly in the negative about my feelings towards this ruling) and made sweeping generalizations, but no debating.

Grand Lodge 2/5 RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32

I think he was preempting it, not replying to it.

Community / Forums / Organized Play / Pathfinder Society / Jason Bulmahn makes new comment on monks All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.