| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ok, so the monk-lovers finally got some of their terrorist demands - I mean, humbly requested changes made.
So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself.
Seems like they'd come out even to TWFs, it's basically the same thing except they can keep a hand free for Deflect Arrows or something.
Ok, so the monk-lovers finally got some of their terrorist demands - I mean, humbly requested changes made.
So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself.
I am actually doing the math on this right now,I will post it later.
Seems like they'd come out even to TWFs, it's basically the same thing except they can keep a hand free for Deflect Arrows or something.
Except that, if a monk flurries using a weapon, they can use that same, single weapon with all of their flurry attacks - in other words, they only have to spend half as much money on their weapons as a TWFer. And now that their unarmed strikes can count as both cold iron and silver, it seems like they'd have less trouble with DR than twfers would... to say nothing of the way their unarmed damage scales.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
You know "Better then TWF" is kind of a silly thing to bring up. Everything is better then TWF. At least on its own.
TWF really has no place unless you have an added damage source. Otherwise yes its sub-par but it has always been that was in this system. So saying monks are now better then TWF only means they might be passable.
Don't get me wrong
TWF is great if your a Ninja. Or a paladin with a shield. But if you don't have something that takes advantage of the high number of attacks it will always fall short.
I think we'll see the same function (I think the DPR was log based lased time) just at a higher point on y-axis.
Bypassing as cold iron or silver is level dependent and the hand free for snatch arrows was never really an issue unless you DID use 2 monk weapons. Only if a monk stands still will they get their full BAB, and put them on a level starting point with TWF fighters. Amulet of Mighty Fist puts other classes on the same playing field with natural attacks as far as the +3 and DR are concerned.
Don't get me wrong...I like the changes, even though I never had a problem to begin with the Monk. I just don't think you'll see a huge increase in DPR or them taking over the fighter/barbarian's jobs.
Seems like they'd come out even to TWFs, it's basically the same thing except they can keep a hand free for Deflect Arrows or something.Except that, if a monk flurries using a weapon, they can use that same, single weapon with all of their flurry attacks - in other words, they only have to spend half as much money on their weapons as a TWFer. And now that their unarmed strikes can count as both cold iron and silver, it seems like they'd have less trouble with DR than twfers would... to say nothing of the way their unarmed damage scales.
You have to pick one. Unarmed scaling damage + DR or paying half as much for enchantments, because you literally can't have both.
And can't TWFers attack twice after moving?
Seems like they'd come out even to TWFs, it's basically the same thing except they can keep a hand free for Deflect Arrows or something.Except that, if a monk flurries using a weapon, they can use that same, single weapon with all of their flurry attacks - in other words, they only have to spend half as much money on their weapons as a TWFer. And now that their unarmed strikes can count as both cold iron and silver, it seems like they'd have less trouble with DR than twfers would... to say nothing of the way their unarmed damage scales.
Saving up on a weapon - yes, at the cost of giving up the use of two class features and some very good fighting styles.
Additional options for bypassing DR - yes, long after armed characters can afford the same set of options, and using it forfeits the advantage of only having to buy one weapon.
Scaling unarmed damage - yes, technically. Practically, it's only a minuscule addition to your average DPR. The cost of taking advantage of it includes buying an expensive amulet rather than saving up by sticking with one weapon, and still having problems with DR (see above).
All in all, it's a very small change that doesn't affect the balance of the class drastically. I welcome any positive change to the monk, but instinct tells me it'll be hardly noticeable.
You have to pick one. Unarmed scaling damage + DR or paying half as much for enchantments, because you literally can't have both.
Except literally, you can (since you can interchange weapon and unarmed attacks with flurry). Granted, monks could already do this before the change, but now they have the option of using that single weapon exclusively for all of their attacks.
Saving up on a weapon - yes, at the cost of giving up the use of two class features and some very good fighting styles.
I've never been impressed with Deflect Arrows. It's only one attack per round - and the monk doesn't generally have problems getting close to bad guys anyway.
The "giving up good fighting styles" thing is silly. Unless you're doing Maneuver Master, choosing ANY single style means giving up "some very good fighting styles" since you can only use one at a time - and are there even that many fighting styles that you can't use with a weapon in hand?
Additional options for bypassing DR - yes, long after armed characters can afford the same set of options, and using it forfeits the advantage of only having to buy one weapon.
7th level is not very deep into the game - significant cold iron/silver DR doesn't really start becoming a major issue until mid to high levels (demons/devils all over the place). I mean, I guess fighters can carry around silver weapons on the cheap, but cold iron is a little pricey.
So let's say a twf has a cold iron weapon and a silver weapon - only ONE of them is going to bypass the particular kind of DR in question, despite having to pay for both special materials. The monk gets to apply cold iron/silver to ALL of his attacks for ZERO cost. Seems like the monk comes out ahead to me.
Scaling unarmed damage - yes, technically. Practically, it's only a minuscule addition to your average DPR. The cost of taking advantage of it includes buying an expensive amulet rather than saving up by sticking with one weapon, and still having problems with DR (see above).
This is why I asked if anyone had crunched the numbers - because I didn't want the typical "oh woe is monks" cry to come up without some recalculation to factor in the new changes. Give me some hard evidence to back up your assertion here - and show your work.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except literally, you can (since you can interchange weapon and unarmed attacks with flurry). Granted, monks could already do this before the change, but now they have the option of using that single weapon exclusively for all of their attacks.You have to pick one. Unarmed scaling damage + DR or paying half as much for enchantments, because you literally can't have both.
You can interchange but any time you use your US you aren't getting the benefit of your weapon enchantment(s).
You can't use both at once.
Additional options for bypassing DR - yes, long after armed characters can afford the same set of options, and using it forfeits the advantage of only having to buy one weapon.7th level is not very deep into the game - significant cold iron/silver DR doesn't really start becoming a major issue until mid to high levels (demons/devils all over the place). I mean, I guess fighters can carry around silver weapons on the cheap, but cold iron is a little pricey.
So let's say a twf has a cold iron weapon and a silver weapon - only ONE of them is going to bypass the particular kind of DR in question, despite having to pay for both special materials. The monk gets to apply cold iron/silver to ALL of his attacks for ZERO cost. Seems like the monk comes out ahead to me.
Meanwhile, everybody else can benefit from armor enchantments and still isn't particularly set back by the 2k gold for Cold Iron and 90 gold for Silver.
This is why I asked if anyone had crunched the numbers - because I didn't want the typical "oh woe is monks" cry to come up without some recalculation to factor in the new changes. Give me some hard evidence to back up your assertion here - and show your work.
If you wanna know so bad why don't you run the numbers yourself?
You've got a calculator and access to the SRD, use them.
If you wanna know so bad why don't you run the numbers yourself?
You've got a calculator and access to the SRD, use them.
I'm not great at crunching the numbers and I wanted some good, honest analysis - that's why I started the thread. I did not, in my original post, say "Hey, I think that monks are much better now and here's why." What I said was: "So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself." I was looking for someone to show me, using math, whether or not I was wrong.
Of course, you and others took it as an opportunity to jump in and start singing the sad, sad "monks suck and will never be awesome until they get pounce and full BAB and free amulets of magic fists at level 1" song. You've completely ignored the question that I asked in my original post - in other words, you've failed to add anything particularly useful to what was meant to be an honest, open and informed conversation, because you were too busy being wrapped up in your own preconceived conclusion. I was (and am) open to being shown that my initial impressions are wrong, but I expect people to demonstrate that to me using some specific evidence that factors in the new changes, not merely the same, tired, recycled arguments.
The fact that you can't (or won't) show me the math indicates to me that you haven't even done it yourself; in other words, you have no evidence to support your claim that the new changes don't make a significant difference. Of course, you didn't let that bother you - you're too busy harping on the same complaint that's been echoed countless times on these boards.
Let me predict the rest of this thread for you: I'm going to post a build of a monk and a twfer. However, it won't be good enough for you. You'll say that I made dumb build choices and (un)intentionally gimped the twfer, or that the level that I chose doesn't count, or some other goal-post-moving or non-sequitor point. Then I'll invite you to submit your own build, and you'll have a choice. You can either
a) Do the math yourself, just to spite me and show me I'm wrong (thus doing the thing that you refused to do earlier, also for spite/ignorance).
b) Not do the math, and cede the point to me.
Neither choice makes you come out looking particularly good.
If you wanna know so bad why don't you run the numbers yourself?
You've got a calculator and access to the SRD, use them.
I'm not great at crunching the numbers and I wanted some good, honest analysis - that's why I started the thread. I did not, in my original post, say "Hey, I think that monks are much better now and here's why." What I said was: "So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself." I was looking for someone to show me, using math, whether or not I was wrong.
Of course, you and others took it as an opportunity to jump in and start singing the sad, sad "monks suck and will never be awesome until they get pounce and full BAB and free amulets of magic fists at level 1" song. You've completely ignored the question that I asked in my original post - in other words, you've failed to add anything particularly useful to what was meant to be an honest, open and informed conversation, because you were too busy being wrapped up in your own preconceived conclusion. I was (and am) open to being shown that my initial impressions are wrong, but I expect people to demonstrate that to me using some specific evidence that factors in the new changes, not merely the same, tired, recycled arguments.
The fact that you can't (or won't) show me the math indicates to me that you haven't even done it yourself; in other words, you have no evidence to support your claim that the new changes don't make a significant difference. Of course, you didn't let that bother you - you're too busy harping on the same complaint that's been echoed countless times on these boards.
Let me predict the rest of this thread for you: I'm going to post a build of a monk and a twfer. However, it won't be good enough for you. You'll say that I made dumb build choices and (un)intentionally gimped the twfer, or that the level that I chose doesn't count, or...
While I am beginning to regret doing all of this work, due to the fact that your latest post is slightly antagonistic in my opinion, my monk is at 17 and my fighter, paladin, and rogue both TWF and Two hander are complete. Will post a spreadsheet when I get home, sorry cannot do so from work, google docs is blocked.
...
Greg
If you wanna know so bad why don't you run the numbers yourself?
You've got a calculator and access to the SRD, use them.
I'm not great at crunching the numbers and I wanted some good, honest analysis - that's why I started the thread. I did not, in my original post, say "Hey, I think that monks are much better now and here's why." What I said was: "So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself." I was looking for someone to show me, using math, whether or not I was wrong.
Of course, you and others took it as an opportunity to jump in and start singing the sad, sad "monks suck and will never be awesome until they get pounce and full BAB and free amulets of magic fists at level 1" song. You've completely ignored the question that I asked in my original post - in other words, you've failed to add anything particularly useful to what was meant to be an honest, open and informed conversation, because you were too busy being wrapped up in your own preconceived conclusion. I was (and am) open to being shown that my initial impressions are wrong, but I expect people to demonstrate that to me using some specific evidence that factors in the new changes, not merely the same, tired, recycled arguments.
And I expect people to give me some indicator of WHY I SHOULD DO THIS WORK FOR THEM.
Don't try and turn this around into some crusade to make Monks the most OP class in the game or some b&*+*~+@. You asked a question about somehow being able to attack multiple times with the same weapon is going to make any sort of significant difference over attacking multiple times with alternating weapons. I asked "how does that work" you responded with "yeah well...they get to save 2k gold on their US", completely ignoring other factors outside this narrow scenario.
Let's take your TWFer, he has two longswords, iunno. He spends 4k to make both Cold Iron while the monk spends nothing, okay cool.
Now look at how regular enchantments ignore DR. You'll eventually want to get your longswords up to +3, which'd be 18k apiece for 36k total. Well whaddaya know, that's the exact same price as a +3 AoMF. Grand total of something like 4k ahead for the Monk, woohoo.
And forgive me if I'm wrong, but cannot someone with two weapons take one attack with both even on a regular attack action, unlike a Monk?
The fact that you can't (or won't) show me the math indicates to me that you haven't even done it yourself; in other words, you have no evidence to support your claim that the new changes don't make a significant difference. Of course, you didn't let that bother you - you're too busy harping on the same complaint that's been echoed countless times on these boards.
That's pretty rich coming from the guy who made a thread based solely around the fact that HE HADN'T RUN THE MATH HIMSELF.
You're the one working against the established position, which is "this hasn't unbalanced anything". The burden of proof is on you to prove that it somehow does.
Let me predict the rest of this thread for you: I'm going to post a build of a monk and a twfer. However, it won't be good enough for you. You'll say that I made dumb build choices and (un)intentionally gimped the twfer, or that the level that I chose doesn't count, or some other goal-post-moving or non-sequitor point. Then I'll invite you to submit your own build, and you'll have a choice. You can eithera) Do the math yourself, just to spite me and show me I'm wrong (thus doing the thing that you refused to do earlier, also for spite/ignorance).
b) Not do the math, and cede the point to me.Neither choice makes you come out looking particularly good.
At least if you posted a build it would justify the existence of the thread. As it stands now, there is no point to this thread other than, in your own words "I'm too lazy to do the math for myself."
And really? "Neither choice makes me coming out particularly good"? This isn't some kind of dick waving contest here skippy, post your build, I'll look at it, and I'll either accept it or find a legitimate reason why it doesn't fit unless you do something really obviously stupid with it like not giving your TWFer any of the Feats in the TWF tree.
So here's a couple of builds I slapped together for comparison.
Dwarf Monk 8
Str 16 (22) Dex 12 Con 12 (14) Int 8 Wis 14 (16) Cha 6
BAB: +6 Flurry BAB: +6/+6/+1/+1 HP: 8+16+35 = 59
AC: 10 + 1 Dex + 3 Wis + 1 Ring + 2 Monk +1 Dodge = 18
Fort: +8 Ref: +7 Will: +9
Feats (4+3) = Weapon Focus: Unarmed Strike, Stunning Fist, Dragon Strike, Dragon Ferocity, Dodge, Deflect Arrows, Combat Reflexes
Amulet of Mighty Fists +1 (4,000) Ring of Protection +2 (8,000) Belt of Giant Str + 4 (16,000)
Attack Sequence: +6 BAB + 4 Str + 1 Weapon Focus + 1 Amulet = +14/+14/+8/+8
Damage: 1d10 + 1 Amulet + 9 Str = 1d10+10
Human Fighter 8
Str 14 (22) Dex 17 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 8 Cha 8
BAB: +8 TWF BAB: +6/+6/+1/+1
AC: 10 + 3 Dex + 7 Armor +1 Ring = 21 HP: 10 +42 + 8 + 8 = 68
Fort: +7 Ref: +5 Will: +1
Feats (10): Weapon Focus: Shortsword, Weapon Specialization: Shortsword, Greater Weapon Focus, Two-Weapon Fighting, Improved Two-Weapon Fighting, Toughness, Double Slice, Two-Weapon Defense, Combat Reflexes, Improved Critical: Short Sword
Attack: +6 BAB + 4 Str + 1 Weapon Focus + 1 Greater Weapon Focus + 1 magic +1 Weapon Training = +16/+16/+10/+10
Damage: 1d6 +4 Str + 2 Weapon Specialization + 1 Magic + 1 Weapon Training = 1d6+10 (17-20 x2)
+1 Mithral Shortsword 3300
+1 Cold Iron Shortsword 4300
Breastplate +2 4,150
Ring of Protection +1 2,000
Belt of Str +4 = 16,000
Some notes on these:
As I said in my original post, I'm really not great at crunching the numbers, not least of which because I'm not familiar with a lot of the optimal build strategies - so these are just good quick efforts to establish a general baseline.
I'm also a little iffy on the equipment selection, especially for Slicey. I threw the ring in there as a reasonable choice to soak up some of the last gold pieces, but there's still a decent chunk of that 33k left over that I'm not sure how to effectively spend.
I've also left out short-term buffs, even though they would tend to favor the monk. Ashiel is surely wincing in great psychic pain right now, but I didn't want to spark one of those consumable item arguments in this thread. I would like to note, however, that Enlarge Person would kick the monk's weapons from 1d10 to 3d6 - pretty good hop. The fighter would only go from 1d6 to 2d6 though - not as impressive. Similarly, at 8th level one could reasonably expect the monk to have his wizard buddy slapping a mage armor spell on him, which would actually give him a higher AC than the fighter. I only bring this specific buff up because (1) it's super cheap and would last for 8 hours if a teammate cast it and (2) The fighter himself could not benefit from it.
I did not do a ranger build because their favored enemy bonuses seem very situational and they seem to be considered one of the best melee classes anyway. Fighter seems like a more appropriate baseline comparison.
So, on to my analysis:
Fighter comes out ahead in AC, unsurprisingly. However, his AC doesn't outstrip the (unbuffed) monk's by nearly as much as I would've expected, and doesn't seem exceptionally high for the level. Of course, now that I think about it, the fighter AC should probably be 3 higher - I didn't give him full plate because of the dex bonus limitations, but I just remembered about armor training. So I guess fighter comes out pretty solidly ahead with 24 AC.
To-hit is closer than I expected; it's hard for the fighter to juice up the weapons due to the cost. Also, only half of his attacks will be cold iron or silver - if this kind of DR really IS important, then he's at a disadvantage compared to the monk, who gets both types without having to pay anything. This advantage seems like it would only increase at high levels.
On damage, it looks like a toss-up to me. The monk gets some pretty good benefits from Dragon Ferocity, so his static damage bonus equals that of the fighter. This is going to turn into a bigger advantage later on, as the monk gets more benefit out of pumping his strength than the fighter does (since he's adding 150% of Str bonus to all of his attacks instead of just the flat str bonus). I expect this would probably mitigate some of the advantage that the fighter will reap from weapon training and greater weapon specialization.
The monk has a much larger damage die, and as I noted earlier, an Enlarge Person would make this even better. I didn't factor in Elemental Fist because it's got a limited number of uses per day, but that also tips the scale in the monk's favor. The fighter has a much better threat range, though, and that might be the tipping point in all of this.
So... I'm not blown away. But like I said, I'm not great at crunching the numbers, and I'm sure I've made mistakes/overlooked things here.
And I expect people to give me some indicator of WHY I SHOULD DO THIS WORK FOR THEM.
I didn't, did I? Then again, all I did is ask if anyone had already done the math. You hadn't, and didn't want to, but for some reason decided to pop into this thread to make comments unrelated to what I was seeking. Why did you do that, exactly?
Now look at how regular enchantments ignore DR. You'll eventually want to get your longswords up to +3, which'd be 18k apiece for 36k total. Well whaddaya know, that's the exact same price as a +3 AoMF. Grand total of something like 4k ahead for the Monk, woohoo.
At the lower levels, if you put cold iron on both sword, you don't have the silver type - you're at a disadvantage there. Sure you could silver up your weapon, but then that weapon is at a -1 penalty. And even if you have one silver weapon and one cold iron weapon, only half of your weapons will be effective against enemies who have either DR/Silver or DR/cold iron. The monk gets to be effective against both for free.
And when we want a +5 bonus, we're talking about the monk being 50k ahead (+5 Amulet = 50,000. 2 +5 sword = 100,000). Kind of a significant edge, I'd say.
And forgive me if I'm wrong, but cannot someone with two weapons take one attack with both even on a regular attack action, unlike a Monk?
You're wrong, but I forgive you:
If you get more than one attack per round because your base attack bonus is high enough (see Base Attack Bonus in Classes), because you fight with two weapons or a double weapon, or for some special reason, you must use a full-round action to get your additional attacks. You do not need to specify the targets of your attacks ahead of time. You can see how the earlier attacks turn out before assigning the later ones.
That's pretty rich coming from the guy who made a thread based solely around the fact that HE HADN'T RUN THE MATH HIMSELF.You're the one working against the established position, which is "this hasn't unbalanced anything". The burden of proof is on you to prove that it somehow does.
Please go back and read my original post wherein I asked a question: namely, has anyone done the math on this yet? Did that question contain any argument about the effectiveness of the monk?
At least if you posted a build it would justify the existence of the thread. As it stands now, there is no point to this thread other than, in your own words "I'm too lazy to do the math for myself."
And yet for some reason you keep posting in it. Please, by all means, feel free to ignore this thread. I think we'd both be happier.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hmm.
The way to exploit the new rulings, I think, is to have a monk who uses one highly-enchanted temple sword with both hands.
This gives you an interesting hybrid of the two-weapon fighter and two-handed weapon fighter approaches. This monk makes the the same number of attacks as the two-weapon fighter, but is getting his full Str bonus on every blow (instead of half Str damage on half the attacks, because flurry means full Str on all blows), and a 3:1 Power Attack ratio on damage (because Flurry of Blows doesn't do anything to Power Attack's increased damage for using two hands on the weapon).
This monk doesn't even think about the AoMF; he's using an enchanted weapon to do damage like a standard two-handed-weapon fighter, not unarmed strikes.
Hmm.
The way to exploit the new rulings, I think, is to have a monk who uses one highly-enchanted temple sword with both hands.
This gives you an interesting hybrid of the two-weapon fighter and two-handed weapon fighter approaches. This monk makes the the same number of attacks as the two-weapon fighter, but is getting his full Str bonus on every blow (instead of half Str damage on half the attacks, because flurry means full Str on all blows), and a 3:1 Power Attack ratio on damage (because Flurry of Blows doesn't do anything to Power Attack's increased damage for using two hands on the weapon).
This monk doesn't even think about the AoMF; he's using an enchanted weapon to do damage like a standard two-handed-weapon fighter, not unarmed strikes.
Now that is something I hadn't considered. Not sure if it's RAI, but it seems to be RAW.
While I am beginning to regret doing all of this work, due to the fact that your latest post is slightly antagonistic in my opinion, my monk is at 17 and my fighter, paladin, and rogue both TWF and Two hander are complete. Will post a spreadsheet when I get home, sorry cannot do so from work, google docs is blocked.
My bad. Rynjin touched a nerve with me and I overreacted. I started this thread to see some real, objective analysis, and instead I got... not that.
While I am beginning to regret doing all of this work, due to the fact that your latest post is slightly antagonistic in my opinion, my monk is at 17 and my fighter, paladin, and rogue both TWF and Two hander are complete. Will post a spreadsheet when I get home, sorry cannot do so from work, google docs is blocked.My bad. Rynjin touched a nerve with me and I overreacted. I started this thread to see some real, objective analysis, and instead I got... not that.
No problem :-)
BTW just FYI (I love acronyms...), my monk is the sort who is two handing a temple sword.
I construe the sentence in flurry about full strength bonus to mean he only receives his strength bonus with it however not time and a half strength.
Example (2-Hand Flurry damage): Strength + Weapon Enhancement + (3 for 1 PA) + (any other factors)
^That's from Dragon Style.
Though I'm more than a bit confused where the 22 Str on both of these guys comes from.
Somebody deleted a post methinks.
Sorry I left out some of the detailed annotations. The 22 strength comes from the base 16, +4 from the belt, and then the +2 from level 4 and 8 ability increases.
And when we want a +5 bonus, we're talking about the monk being 50k ahead (+5 Amulet = 50,000. 2 +5 sword = 100,000). Kind of a significant edge, I'd say.
That's incorrect. Per the new rules here:
"We have decided to adjust the price of the amulet of mighty fists. The new prices are as follows: 4,000 gp (+1), 16,000 gp (+2), 36,000 gp (+3), 64,000 gp (+4), 100,000 gp (+5)."
To-hit is closer than I expected; it's hard for the fighter to juice up the weapons due to the cost. Also, only half of his attacks will be cold iron or silver - if this kind of DR really IS important, then he's at a disadvantage compared to the monk, who gets both types without having to pay anything. This advantage seems like it would only increase at high levels.
At higher levels, a +3 or better enhancement bonus makes DR/Silver and DR/Cold Iron moot anyway.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The above is a spreadsheet with some DPR calculations for a monk and some other classes.
A monk Two handing a temple sword is as far as I know the highest DPR monk available. So I calculated a monk doing so.The conclusions I draw are as follows:
1.) A monk with this build can keep decent AC, Good saves (slightly below a paladin), and DPR that is equal to a two weapon fighting rogue or slightly above a non-Smiting paladin.
2.) This means that in my eyes the two-handing monk is going to be the only truly viable pure 20 level core monk build. Even with the cost reduction on AoMF having to pay for what is basically two weapons will mean a monk will either have to do substandard DPR or have substandard AC.
3.) The pure unarmed fighting monk with 20 levels of monk and no archetypes is still not in a good place, however I do not see how to fix it without a complete rewrite of the class. I see why the changes were done as they are due to the fact that anymore would have unbalanced several archetypes.
In summation a single weapon wielding monk is in my opinion now viable, and I cannot see any more changes being done to the monk in this edition due to the fact that all of the changes will ripple outwards and effect several of the already good monk archetypes in such a way as to potentially make them overpowered.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thanks for the math Coven. Pretty much what I expected.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you wanna know so bad why don't you run the numbers yourself?
You've got a calculator and access to the SRD, use them.
I'm not great at crunching the numbers and I wanted some good, honest analysis - that's why I started the thread. I did not, in my original post, say "Hey, I think that monks are much better now and here's why." What I said was: "So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself." I was looking for someone to show me, using math, whether or not I was wrong.
I started writing this response with, "There are not very many numbers to crunch." However, now I see that by crunching numbers you meant comparing representative builds. That is the hard way to do the comparison. Each build has many choices that have little to do with the effectiveness of DPR. It is like comparing two small snapshots of two national parks in order to decide which one is more beautiful.
Let us instead focus on the differences between their two attack methods.
The monk with Flurry of Blows has to buy only one weapon and the fighter with Two-Weapon Fighting feat has to buy two weapons. The mathematics of Two-Weapon Fighting say that the best advantage is to spend as much as possible on the primary-hand weapon and buy the off-hand weapon with the remaining cash.
Thus, if a player constructed a character at level and spend one quarter of the character's Wealth by Level on weapon enchantments, this is what he or she could afford:
4th level: two masterwork weapons
5th level: +1 and masterwork
6th level: +1 and +1
7th level: +1 and +1
8th level: +2 and masterwork
9th level: +2 and +1
10th level: +2 and +1
11th level: +3 and masterwork
12th level: +3 and +2
13th level: +4 and +1
14th level: +4 and +2
15th level: +5 and +2
16th level: +6 and +1
17th level: +7 and +1
18th level: +8 and +1
19th level: +9 and +2
20th level: +10 and +3
We have some oddities, such as 16th level, where the difference between the +6 weapon (really +5 flaming) in the primary hand and the +1 weapon in the off hand mean that taking the -2 penalty for Two-Weapon Fighting is not worth it against any challenging opponent. The best two-weapon-fighting strategy is to not use Two-Weapon Fighting. There are a few exceptions, such as the Two-Weapon Warrior figher archetype has no penalties for using Two-Weapon Fighting at this level, or a rogue who has quaffed a potion of Greater Invisibility for perpetual sneak attacks and is buffed by a bard song, or the pre-FAQ monk who had to fight with two weapons or watch his +16 full BAB drop down to a +12 3/4 BAB. This is a bad level at which to look at a TWF fighter.
The eighth-level Slicey McStabberson build would do better to trade his set of a +1 mithral shortsword (3010gp) and a +1 cold iron shortsword (4310gp) for a +2 alchemical silver longsword (8315gp) and a cold iron shortsword (10gp). With that combination, he would have more hits with the weapon that does more damage at the cost of an equal number of fewer hits with the weapon that does less damage. He could also for an extra 300gp upgrade that shortsword to masterwork, for one additional chance out of 20 of hitting.
The eight-level monk with DPR ambitions, on the other hand, should pass up that expense 4,000gp +1 Amulet of Might Fists, and purchase the more-expensive-but-still-affordable 8,000gp +2 temple sword.
As for TWF combat, the eighth-level monk has an advantage. Both his primary and his off-hand attacks are made with a +2 weapon. The fighter's primary attacks are made with a +2 weapon, but his off-hand attacks are made with an unenchanted weapon. He hits less often. If the off-hand weapon is masterwork, his expected number of hits on each pair of primary and off-hand hits is 1/20th smaller. And his off-hand weapon does three less damage or worse (1d6 + 0.5*Str versus 1d8+2+Str).
The fighter would have to use two of his bonus feats, such as Weapon Focus(longsword) and Weapon Specialization(longsword), to make up the difference. Were you planning on using those bonus feats for something else?
The monk's superiority in TWF is balanced by his inferiority in standard-action attacks. The fighter hits with +8 BAB on those, but the monk drops to +6 BAB. And if the fighter did take Weapon Focus(longsword) and Weapon Specialization(longsword), he is far superior.
As for which is superior overall, it depends on the bonus feats taken by the fighter and the ratio of full attacks to standard attacks.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but what you're saying seems to be that if a Monk pumps Str and doesn't fight bare-handed, then they'll be able to compete with a Fighter who doesn't have weapon training or any feats.
I have not crunched the numbers, but I believe the monk has received a major boost this way.
As others have pointed out, he now only needs one weapon to flurry.
Unlike other TWFs (except maybe TWW) he can do it with 1-handed weapons, resulting in higher damage, power attack bonuses etc.
He saves on feats like double slice.
Since he only needs one weapon, he can spend as much cash as he wants on that one or - alternatively - have several weapons like that with similar properties tucked away.
Weapon focus/specialization etc. (martial artist...) pay off better as well this way.
It is easier to get more interesting weapons for flurrying (e.g. through crusader's flurry) now as well, due to the lifted restriction. You can mix and optimize with other archetypes to hit better as well now, too.
Something that has not been boosted is his unarmed strike. Personally I have never seen that as a problem, it's more a matter of style if you want to use weapons or your hands for that IMO.
Finally, I believe Treantmonk already mentioned in his guides that you can use shuriken (with deadly aim) with flurry of blows, so you can always flurry - even alternatingly - with that one weapon now. So ranged attacks, or at least the option to use them, have been boosted as well.
Having effectively one hand free opens up a lot of options, e.g. mixing in a spellcasting class. I like it :-)
Ok, so the monk-lovers finally got some of their terrorist demands - I mean, humbly requested changes made.
So... has anyone crunched the numbers on a monk builds like this? Seems like monks now come out way ahead of two-weapon fighters, but I'm too dumb/lazy to do the math for myself.
Thank you for that blog link, I had not seen this before :-)
I actually want to add something to my previous post: UAS has been boosted, though not in the to-hit department. Being able to bypass silver/cold iron is really cool and something other classes like the unarmed fighter don't have.
With styles you can now mix and bypass
- slashing, bludgeoning, piercing
- cold iron, adamantine, silver
- magic
- lawful
- good/evil... alignment restriction with a simple +2 amulet of mighty fists
So again, this has been boosted, just not in the to-hit department.
How are you getting that last part? Overcoming DR good/evil?
How are you getting that last part? Overcoming DR good/evil?
As stated with a simple +2 amulet(holy). I was referring to the cost, if that is confusing. No need to get that +3 anymore to bypass silver or cold iron. That leaves you free to get abilities on it :-)
Ok, gotcha.
*Snip*
@Mathmuse
Please remember that the fighter is going to save quite a bit of gold on armor due to the fact that a 15 point buy monk cannot really afford more than a 14 wisdom to start with which means he will not be equaling a fighter in an unenchanted breastplate until about level 7-8.
If you check the spreadsheet I supplied you will see that the monk is spending more on AC at pretty much every level and is behind until roughly level 12.
The fighter is going to have superior DPR even without WF, GWF, WS, and GWS. I feel that is fine. Fighters only get one thing mostly and they should in my opinion be good at it.
I ran those numbers too. Link
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My friend does this. ALso make sure to put the guided property on your weapon. Then you dump strength and use wisdom for attack rolls, damage, AC and ki pool.Hmm.
The way to exploit the new rulings, I think, is to have a monk who uses one highly-enchanted temple sword with both hands.
This gives you an interesting hybrid of the two-weapon fighter and two-handed weapon fighter approaches. This monk makes the the same number of attacks as the two-weapon fighter, but is getting his full Str bonus on every blow (instead of half Str damage on half the attacks, because flurry means full Str on all blows), and a 3:1 Power Attack ratio on damage (because Flurry of Blows doesn't do anything to Power Attack's increased damage for using two hands on the weapon).
This monk doesn't even think about the AoMF; he's using an enchanted weapon to do damage like a standard two-handed-weapon fighter, not unarmed strikes.
While being purely wisdom based and using the "Guided" property is definitively the best late game option available, it is extremely punitive in the early game as you will not be able to afford a guided AoMF until level 4 or a +1 Guided temple sword until level 5. Even then you are spending the majority of your WBL on your weapon which will mean your AC will not be able to keep up. Reasonably you will make these purchases at levels 6-8 which means your character will be doing very little in combat for 3-7 levels. I believe most players would find this unpalatable.
Now if the character was created past level 8 then it will not experience this problem, my question as a GM would be; How did this character survive until this level?
My friend does this. ALso make sure to put the guided property on your weapon. Then you dump strength and use wisdom for attack rolls, damage, AC and ki pool.Hmm.
The way to exploit the new rulings, I think, is to have a monk who uses one highly-enchanted temple sword with both hands.
This gives you an interesting hybrid of the two-weapon fighter and two-handed weapon fighter approaches. This monk makes the the same number of attacks as the two-weapon fighter, but is getting his full Str bonus on every blow (instead of half Str damage on half the attacks, because flurry means full Str on all blows), and a 3:1 Power Attack ratio on damage (because Flurry of Blows doesn't do anything to Power Attack's increased damage for using two hands on the weapon).
This monk doesn't even think about the AoMF; he's using an enchanted weapon to do damage like a standard two-handed-weapon fighter, not unarmed strikes.
While being purely wisdom based and using the "Guided" property is definitively the best late game option available, it is extremely punitive in the early game as you will not be able to afford a guided AoMF until level 4 or a +1 Guided temple sword until level 5. Even then you are spending the majority of your WBL on your weapon which will mean your AC will not be able to keep up. Reasonably you will make these purchases at levels 6-8 which means your character will be doing very little in combat for 3-7 levels. I believe most players would find this unpalatable.
Now if the character was created past level 8 then it will not experience this problem, my question as a GM would be; How did this character survive until this level?
This is definitely the question to answer.
Also, where are you getting Wisdom to damage?
The Guided property lets you use Wisdom in the place of strength for attack and damage rolls (Source).
Relying on a very specific weapon enhacement for your main fighting style doesn't seem like a good idea to me.
I've done things like giving an Agile cestus to my Gunslinger, because melee is not something he wants to be doing very often.
But I'm not sure if giving up Strength because of an weapon property is a very smart idea.
1- you can lose your weapon. It can be stolen/sundered... whatever
2- How do you survive 'til you get that enhancement?
3- How can you eb sure that you get said enhancement?
So, Agile/Guided weapons are, IMO, pretty awesome for someone who doesn't depend on the enchanted weapons. But buying a Guided AoMF so the Monk is not as MAD is a pretty risky gamble IMHO.
In PFS play, you can expect to have your first 4,000 GP item around halfway through 4th level. You'd likely get your headband of Wisdom shortly thereafter.
Levels 1-3 are going to be unpleasant, but not horrifically so.
Yeah, I would say that dumping strength to seven on a monk because you expect to guided weapon/amulet is not a smart move unless you're starting at high enough level for it to be a non-issue and have a GM who won't grill you on backstory.
However, you can get away with a decent-but-low strength, and pumping wisdom as you level. The steal/sunder issue can (eventually) be offset with a backup weapon.