| 22 people marked this as a favorite. |
Hi all,
Following from some threads concerning monks and suggested changes, I realised that I was in a perfect position to test my own ideas, running a game where by a quirk of fate we have a monk as the primary martial character. The party (when all present) consists of:
Halfling wizard (transmuter)
Human wizard (summoner)
Human rogue
Half-elf cleric of Shelyn
Human Monk
Male Human (Taldan) Monk (Qinggong Monk) 3
LG Medium Humanoid (human)
Init +2; Senses Perception +9
--------------------
Defense
--------------------
AC 16, touch 16, flat-footed 13 (+2 Dex, +1 dodge)
hp 25 (3d8+7)
Fort +5, Ref +6, Will +6; +2 vs. enchantment spells and effects, +2 trait bonus vs. fear effects
Defensive Abilities evasion
--------------------
Offense
--------------------
Speed 40 ft.
Melee +1 Ghost touch Handaxe +6 (1d6+3/x3) and
. . Temple sword +5 (1d8+2/19-20/x2) and
. . Unarmed strike +5 (1d6+2/x2)
Ranged Masterwork Shuriken +6 (1d2+2/x2) and
. . Shuriken +5 (1d2+2/x2)
Special Attacks flurry of blows +1/+1
--------------------
Statistics
--------------------
Str 14, Dex 14, Con 14, Int 10, Wis 16, Cha 10
Base Atk +2; CMB +6 (+8 Grappling); CMD 21 (23 vs. Grapple)
Feats Deflect Arrows, Dodge, Improved Grapple, Improved Unarmed Strike, Scorpion Style (DC 14), Snake Style, Stunning Fist (3/day) (DC 14)
Traits Deft Dodger, Making Good on Promises
Skills Acrobatics +8 (+12 jump), Climb +6, Escape Artist +6, Knowledge (religion) +4, Perception +9, Sense Motive +11, Stealth +8, Survival +4, Swim +6
Languages Common
SQ ac bonus +3, fast movement (+10'), maneuver training, stunning fist (stun), unarmed strike (1d6)
Combat Gear Potion of cure light wounds, Potion of restoration, lesser, Alchemist's fire, Antiplague (2), Bloodblock (3), Healer's kit; Other Gear +1 Ghost touch Handaxe, Masterwork Shuriken (12), Shuriken (50), Temple sword, Backpack (empty), Bedroll, Flint and steel, Silk rope, Torch, 209 GP, 8 SP, 9 CP
--------------------
TRACKED RESOURCES
--------------------
Alchemist's fire - 0/1
Antiplague - 0/2
Bloodblock - 0/3
Healer's kit (10/10 uses remaining) - 0/10
Masterwork Shuriken - 0/12
Potion of cure light wounds - 0/2
Potion of restoration, lesser - 0/1
Shuriken - 0/50
Stunning Fist (3/day) (DC 14) - 0/3
Torch - 0/1
--------------------
Special Abilities
--------------------
AC Bonus +3 The Monk adds his Wisdom bonus to AC and CMD, more at higher levels.
Deflect Arrows Deflect an incoming arrow once per round.
Evasion (Ex) If you succeed at a Reflex save for half damage, you take none instead.
Fast Movement (+10') The Monk adds 10 or more feet to his base speed.
Flurry of Blows +1/+1 (Ex) Make Flurry of Blows attack as a full rd action.
Improved Grapple You don't provoke attacks of opportunity when grappling a foe.
Improved Unarmed Strike Unarmed strikes don't cause attacks of opportunity, and can be lethal.
Making Good on Promises At some point in the past, Professor Lorrimor did you a favor under the condition that he would someday call on you to repay it. After he came to your aid, however, you never saw nor heard from him again, leaving you with a sense of unending anticipa
Maneuver Training (Ex) CMB = other BABs + Monk level
Scorpion Style (DC 14) Standard action: Unarmed strike also reduces target's land speed to 5 ft.
Snake Style Gain +2 on Sense Motive checks, and deal piercing damage with unarmed attacks
Stunning Fist (3/day) (DC 14) You can stun an opponent with an unarmed attack.
Stunning Fist (Stun) (Ex) At 1st level, the monk gains Stunning Fist as a bonus feat, even if he does not meet the prerequisites. At 4th level, and every 4 levels thereafter, the monk gains the ability to apply a new condition to the target of his Stunning Fist. This conditio
Unarmed Strike (1d6) The Monk does lethal damage with his unarmed strikes.
The player was new to Pathfinder, which is one reason I wanted to try my changes after the first few sessions of frustration for the player.
The changes I am making are:
1) Zen Warrior: A monk may choose to use their Wisdom bonus rather than their strength or dexterity bonus for attacks made with special monk weapons, combat maneuvers, or with the monk’s unarmed strike.
2) A monk’s unarmed strike treats the hardness or damage resistance (of any type) of a target as less by one point for every level of monk the character possesses.
3a) Amending the Ki-Pool entry as follows:
As long as he has at least 1 point in his ki pool, he can make a ki strike. At 4th level, ki strike allows his unarmed attacks to gain a +1 enhancement bonus to hit as a magic weapon. At 7th level this increases to +2, at 10th level, his unarmed attacks are +3, at 13th level +4, and at 16th level his unarmed attacks gain a +5 enhancement bonus to hit.
3b) By spending 1 point from his ki pool, a monk can make one additional attack a round at his highest attack bonus.
3c) In addition, he can spend 1 point to move 20 feet in a swift action.
Currently the character only has access to the first two changes. The great thing about this test is that I am running the same adventure for two different groups on two different days. The other group is martial-heavy with a ranger, cavalier, magus, and a barbarian, so there is plenty to compare the monk's performance too.
We completed the first session with these changes this evening. The edge from having wisdom to hit came into play fighting a burning skeleton, securing one successful hit that finished off the undead. A lucky crit with a hand-axe made him the star of damage dealing against a wraith variant, although that had little to do with my changes. Will keep everyone posted about subsequent sessions.
I'll update on the game on a weekly basis, we're playing every Thursday at the moment.
I think zen warrior is just too good. After playing a zen archer for a while, I realized it just stacks way too much stuff onto an already very strong stat. (will saves, perception, sense motive, ac, etc, throw in wisdom of the flesh for good measure on the skill of your choice)
Casters get this out of their casting stat, fighters out of strength, paladins get WAY more out of charisma than this.
Problem is, the monk is MAD in the extreme. I've looked at other ways to cut it, and wisdom-to-hit is the fairest one I can figure. Anything else messes up existing monk builds too much. I don't think the monk is getting too much out of wisdom, just as a monk with Weapon Finesse isn't getting any less than this out of dexterity (reflex saves, stealth, acrobatics, etc etc. and initiative too, and that's before you throw in an agile weapon) - so this ability isn't any more powerful than a single feat. Plus the physical stats are still important, but they aren't essential to max out any more.
It takes the monk from needing two good scores and two moderate ones to one good score and three moderate ones. That's on a par with most other characters who need as much or less.
Why does the Zen Archer look so good? Two reasons, one is that archers ARE good. The other is that standing next to the ordinary monk they are very effective at what they do. They are not, however, significantly better than most other archer builds, most of whom can do more than the zen archer in other fields.
I like the idea of monks bypassing hardness or DR. I'd probably make it 1/2 monk level though. That way he has an advantage against critters with DR, but he can't outright ignore it.
Well, with the emphasis on wisdom rather than strength individual damage per hit will be less, not more, and he already out-and-out ignores some forms of DR (an ability effectively replaced by this one). With a +5 weapon, anyone ignores pretty much all of them. As is, he can't outright ignore DR, at least not if it's higher than his level - he's just more likely to get some damage through any DR.
The Ki Strike seems like it will just be an irrelevant ability since the monk should already have enhancement bonuses to his attack. I'd be tempted to give them something like the Magus' ability- 1 ki for +1 enhancement that stacks, and scales with level, and allows other abilities to substitute for the flat bonus...
Amulets of mighty fists are rare items, expensive, take up a slot, and take time to make, and it makes the monk utterly dependent on them. My experiences of not being able to get hold of one (not that magic weapons were rare to find) left me with a nerfed character through the better half of an AP. Buffs depend on a friendly buffer, or investing in UMD and more magic items you may not be able to get hold of.
Again, the point here is to get the monk on an even footing with the other martial classes as well as making him actually function as intended. A normal martial can afford a weapon enhanced by that much at that level, the monk can't get an AoMF at that much at that level. It's still useful, mind you, because he doesn't get the enhancement to damage - it's just not utterly crippling if the monk cannot get one.
Good job. I'd have done more, but you also added things I didn't think to.
Just don't be lead astray by the affect buff spells can have. That party is caster heavy, and monk is more reliant and gets the most benefit out of buff spells and magic items. So if the party is giving him mage armor, stat boosts, haste, enlarge person, etc... frequently... that doesn't mean your class changes make the monk "too powerful" or, if you found him to be adequate, that they were not the sole or even necessarily the primary reason for monk seeming "about right."
But consider, Dabbler, that an AMoF can't reach the full +10 anyway, so making it a normal enhancement bonus to Attack and Damage would allow a +5 Equivalent Amulet (which still robs the monk of his necklace slot unless he were to use the combining items rule at a percentile price tax of one of the involved items) to bring him up to the normal +10 total value. (Naturally Monks would want AMoFs without enhancement bonuses on them because enhancement bonuses don't stack.)
I did consider this, but the monk already has rising damage dice in his unarmed combat damage. He doesn't need two automatic bonuses to damage, IMHO - especially as adding to damage is not the object for me.
Good job. I'd have done more, but you also added things I didn't think to.
Thank you. There is MUCH MORE about the monk I would like to change - a lot of the abilities, for example - but I don't consider them essential. Instead I am concentrating on what is essential to make the monk function.
Just don't be lead astray by the affect buff spells can have. That party is caster heavy, and monk is more reliant and gets the most benefit out of buff spells and magic items. So if the party is giving him mage armor, stat boosts, haste, enlarge person, etc... frequently... that doesn't mean your class changes make the monk "too powerful" or, if you found him to be adequate, that they were not the sole or even necessarily the primary reason for monk seeming "about right."
Well the fun here is that the rest of the party are played largely by inexperienced Pathfinder players, they haven't really got their heads around buffs yet even though one is a transmuter. So far they have used enlarge a few times, but nothing more than that. If they do buff him up in future, I'll take this into account.
Casters get this out of their casting stat, fighters out of strength, paladins get WAY more out of charisma than this.
Fighters don't get anywhere near from Str what monks get from wisdom. Paladins and cha are the only thing close, except that cha skills are by and large not as important as wisdom skills (in terms of ranks needed to be useful. A little dip goes a lot further than a little perception)
But, I misread your initial post, I thought you were also giving them wis to damage as well. Just to-hit is very strong, but not over the top.
Yes, I looked at damage as well, and there's no way I'd go there. Maybe as a weapon property, but not as a straight off ability. My main concern was that the monk would be a dip class for the divine casters - but limiting to monk weapons and unarmed strike this is largely minimised. The cleric can get Guided Hand as a feat without dipping monk and losing a level of spell casting, so I don't see a major problem.
I don't know why you think AoMF is any more rare than any other magic item, unless you mean in terms of the number that are seeded through APs. But you can say the same about any particular weapon. They are also no longer that expensive. The monk is also still not dependent on them, since he can use magic weapons just fine.Amulets of mighty fists are rare items, expensive, take up a slot, and take time to make, and it makes the monk utterly dependent on them. My experiences of not being able to get hold of one (not that magic weapons were rare to find) left me with a nerfed character through the better half of an AP. Buffs depend on a friendly buffer, or investing in UMD and more magic items you may not be able to get hold of.
Again, the point here is to get the monk on an even footing with the other martial classes as well as making him actually function as intended. A normal martial can afford a weapon enhanced by that much at that level, the monk can't get an AoMF at that much at that level. It's still useful, mind you, because he doesn't get the enhancement to damage - it's just not utterly crippling if the monk cannot get one.
Counted the number of magic monk weapons in APs as well?
I played through Curse of the Crimson Throne from start to finish and found no amulets of mighty fists, and one +1 ghost touch kama through the whole AP. Monk weapons, temple sword excepted, are terrible. Temple swords are second rate weapons themselves, but they are the best the monk can get while a fighter will use a rapier, scimitar, or falchion (or falcatta if he really wants to go for a rare weapon). So you take a monk, the iconic unarmed class, orient them for fighting unarmed...then have to use a weapon (if you can find one) for half your adventuring career...
On the flip side, if you take a standard martial class, with the exception of the fighter you aren't really tied to one particular (uncommon) weapon. I mean an archer build is almost invariably tied to a composite longbow, and those are commonly enough used as NPC weapons against you. Other than that, a paladin smiting with a longsword is almost as nasty as one smiting with a scimitar. The most specialisation he can invest is a single feat.
Only the fanatically insistent empty handed monk is dependent on them, in precisely the same way a fighter is dependent on his magic gear. Really don't see the issue. In any case, I don't think class abilities should be used to shore up itemization issues. If your GM never gives the players the item they want/need, that's a GM issue, not a class design one.
I agree, and in my games I often 'place' magic items for characters if they opt not to do their own crafting. That does not mean every GM will do this - my GM in the CoCT adventure was pretty good, but he played it out-of-the-box so far as I could tell. He was bending the rules to let us have the resources to craft our own items as was. Again, if you are bending rules to place specific items for characters because their classes cannot function without them, there's perhaps something wrong with the class in the first place.
May as well give him a 'bonded amulet' and use the wizard bonded item rules. Letting him spend ki on-demand is more interesting, and ultimately more powerful, than a static bonus that doesn't stack with the aomf that he should eventually acquire.
Well, bonded items aren't exactly iconic for semi-mythical monks in film and literature. Monks are presented in the game as being weapon-independent, it'd be nice if they could live up to that.
I'm also keeping an eye on not making sure the monk class isn't made too powerful. He can keep up with the other martials, but he isn't going to exceed them if he gets his AoMF on top. If I redesigned the monk class from scratch, I'd stick unarmed strike at 1d6 damage, make the enhancement full enhancement, and give the monk weapon training with it on top. But that's not this amendment, this is looking at small tweaks that will make the monk function with as few changes as possible. As such, it will not be perfect - but a full re-write on the monk isn't going to happen until Pathfinder 2.0, if that ever happens.
Those look interesting, but you didn't do the one I want to see the most: Monk (and Rogue for that matter) with full BAB.
As I said, I'm looking at minor changes. These change the existing text by +38 words (I have checked), a minimal alteration. Full BAB is a major change, that's something you will not see unless there is a 2nd edition of Pathfinder. I am not sure even then, as Pathfinder aims for as much backward compatibility as it can. No point suggesting a change the devs will never make.
If you run a conventional class, and choose an exotic weapon, well that's your choice of how to play the character knowing the risks involved. If you run a monk, well I guess it's your choice to play a monk, right? No, I think that unless you think some classes SHOULD be more viable than others, then that's a step too far.
You can fix any problem by DM-fiat, but that doesn't ever make it a great idea to rely on that. If that's the answer, why bother ever improving the game at all? I say, don't give the DM extra work to do. Adventure Paths cater to groups without the time to design their own game-worlds and adventures, after all.
As for access to items, well, my AP experience is varied: some, there is plenty. Others, less so. Some DMs are generous, others are stingy. That doesn't make them bad, it just means you need to adjust play style...if your options are between two bad options by class design, then there's an issue.
Edit: But then, this is the reason for the playtest - to see if the changes are right, if they are needed, if they are not overpowered. These are the changes I've settled on for better or worse, so lets see how they play.
It's not even about exotic weapons. If you take weapon focus: Guisarme, you're locked into Guisarme,
You and I have different definitions of "locked into". You mean "lose a +1 bonus" and I mean "cannot function effectively without" - two very definitions. If you are a barbarian, say, and you take Weapon Focus: Greataxe, you only lose +1 by swinging that magic greatsword you just picked up. Super-optimal? No. Still effective? Yes.
If you are a monk and you don't have either a magic monk weapon (which really means a magic temple sword, let's be honest - all the other monk weapons are so awful they really don't have much bearing) or an AoMF, you go from effective to severely nerfed.
Even the fighter, who is a weapon specialist, doesn't lose ALL effectiveness if he doesn't have his favourite weapon. If he does CHOOSE a rare weapon, he does so as a CHOICE. A monk doesn't get that choice, both his options, weapon or amulet, are rare options.
Generally, if you're after any specific weapon type, an AP is likely not going to hand it to you (and certainly won't keep it updated as appropriate for your level).
Longswords and composite longbows are actually pretty ubiquitous. Longsword is not a brilliant weapon (it's only as a good as temple sword) but it's very common, I've found a lot in APs.
There is a big difference between designing your own world or adventure, and changing "Shortsword + 2" to "Kama + 2" as you're reading through the AP. The former is a ton of work. Not doing the latter just smacks of laziness to me. That kind of GM is likely not going to allow a home brew monk.
But those DMs exist, and so if you want a decent monk, we have to persuade the devs to amend the official version. One way is to present workable ideas and play-test them.
You are obviously not one of those types of GMs, so I don't really know what you're going to get out of the playtest for the ki strike. Either you intentionally don't give him an item or let him buy one as per the standard rules, so you can say, 'look, it's working,' or you do, and it's kinda pointless.
Yes, I'm in a catch-22 situation there. AS I mentioned, I'm running the same AP for two separate groups, and I have 'placed' items for that group's warriors - and they have some crafters in the party too. I will see what feat choices the wizards in the monk's group select before I make a hard and fast choice.
That said, I'm anticipating that the changes will be employed with an AoMF at some point, the enhancement from ki strike being superior to the enhancement of the AoMF at a comparable level (by +1 or +2) testing it and having an AoMF are not incompatible. I know there is one in the AP that the party can find at some point, so I may not need to place anything.
In any case, I like where you're going with it, and will likely do the same sort of thing if any of my players ever expresses a desire to play a monk.
Thanks! We'll just have to see how it goes.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you want to use anything other than a longsword then you deserve what ever you get. The game system needs to be carefully designed to punish character concepts that use weapons that look interesting because otherwise
My biggest concern is early access to Wis-attack means the class is ridiculously attractive for 1-level dips by druids and clerics. Similar to the way that master of many styles is the go-to dip for many full-BAB classes. It really annoys me (and in that regard I think Master of Many Styles is poorly designed).
Something that I think should be considered: paladin and magus class set precedent for the x/day get an enhancement to your weapon (weapon bond and arcane points). Something similar would work well for monks too: once a day gain Wis-to-Attack for a number of minutes equal to monk level. At level 4 and every 3 levels thereafter gain it one more daily use. This would discourage 1-level dips by cleric/druid. At the same time, additional effects can be exposed as the monk levels (wis-to-damage, haste, weapon effects: defending, flaming, etc).
Point 2 is made superfluous by point 3: having a growing enhancement bonus on unarmed strikes allows you to bypass many DRs anyway. I wouldn't use "2".
You and I have different definitions of "locked into". You mean "lose a +1 bonus" and I mean "cannot function effectively without" - two very definitions. If you are a barbarian, say, and you take Weapon Focus: Greataxe, you only lose +1 by swinging that magic greatsword you just picked up. Super-optimal? No. Still effective? Yes.
This really doesn't follow. It's 'only +1' if you take the feat, why is the monk suddenly nerfed because he's down +1? Is that +1 damage really gamebreaking? You already handled DR, which is the main reason everyone needs magic weapons. With that change alone the monks reliance on magic weapons is greatly reduced. Yeah, more to-hit is good, but if it's 'only +1' for the feat, it's 'only +1' for the weapon.
Because without a magic weapon/AMoF, he's also down 1-5 points of to-hit. A fighter can pick up a +1 longsword or a +1 great-axe and not see much difference in functionality in terms of accuracy. A monk needs an AMoF/+1 temple sword in order to function, otherwise he will either lose accuracy, thus losing efficacy.
This really doesn't follow. It's 'only +1' if you take the feat, why is the monk suddenly nerfed because he's down +1? Is that +1 damage really gamebreaking? You already handled DR, which is the main reason everyone needs magic weapons. With that change alone the monks reliance on magic weapons is greatly reduced. Yeah, more to-hit is good, but if it's 'only +1' for the feat, it's 'only +1' for the weapon.You and I have different definitions of "locked into". You mean "lose a +1 bonus" and I mean "cannot function effectively without" - two very definitions. If you are a barbarian, say, and you take Weapon Focus: Greataxe, you only lose +1 by swinging that magic greatsword you just picked up. Super-optimal? No. Still effective? Yes.
Do you cap your magic weapons at +1 across the board? No? They get access to weapons up to +5, so if you are comparing the monk without his AoMF to a barbarian with a +5 fgreatsword instead of his prefered greataxe, it's not "only +1", it's +5. That's a LOT.
I didn't realize this was a fix with the intent of catching the devs eye. From that perspective the enhancement bonus seems even more out of place. By design, game presumes everyone is equipped relatively equally.
I have to point out that in the many games I have played, this doesn't happen in practice.
If they aren't, that is strictly a flaw with the DM. There's really no getting around that. The game has rules built in for acquiring weapons that were not dropped.
Can you show me the page? The devs write adventure paths with strictly limited items in them, which makes me suspect that this is NOT actually part of the design philosophy.
There's really no reason the devs would even consider instituting a class feature that only functions when the basic wealth mechanics are ignored. Make it stack, make it cost ki, and then you have something that's in line with existing game design.
I did consider a ki-based ability, but if it cost ki I'd feel obliged to add to damage too - along the lines of: "Expend one point of ki as a swift action to manifest an effect identical to greater magic fang on the monk themselves, using monk level as caster level." This would add to damage as well as accuracy, though, and it would infringe more on the AoMF that the devs have said they do not want to make redundant. However, they made the bladebound magus who gets an automatic fully enhanced magic weapon for free, so the enhancement is not without precedent of it's own, so I went that road.
If you want to use anything other than a longsword then you deserve what ever you get. The game system needs to be carefully designed to punish character concepts that use weapons that look interesting because otherwise
Do I detect a hint of sarcasm? It's not what I meant, though. What I meant was that if you have chosen a weapon that is rare and exotic, you kind of expect to not find them easily and are prepared to wait until you can get it enchanted, or make contingency plans to enchant your own. Enchanting a single weapon costs half of what you need to enchant an AoMF, and takes half as long, and that makes it easier whichever way you look at it.
My biggest concern is early access to Wis-attack means the class is ridiculously attractive for 1-level dips by druids and clerics.
Have you seen the feat Guided Hand? One pre-req feat and the cleric gets wisdom-to-hit on his deities favoured weapon. So why dip monk for an ability that you can get with your feats and not lose out on spell-casting? As for druid, how many monk weapons do they use?
Of course if it IS a major issue, we can delay it until 2nd level. It's already out there in the sensei archetype at 2nd level, and I haven't heard of that being an issue.
As to the other points, I do take your point - as I said, I considered a Greater Magic Fang effect, but there are reasons I didn't want to go that road.
Dipping for wis to-hit is pretty attractive, even if it's at second level. ClericsRule #1: Thou shalt not lose caster levels.
In other words, if a Cleric or Druid are willing to nerf themselves to get wisdom to hit, that's no skin off my back. (I can't speak for Inquisitors but they still would rather not lose caster levels if possible and I doubt it would break anything to let them dip for it.)
meh, the druids would still love it (though it would lessen the power of wildshape).
Do you cap your magic weapons at +1 across the board? No? They get access to weapons up to +5, so if you are comparing the monk without his AoMF to a barbarian with a +5 fgreatsword instead of his prefered greataxe, it's not "only +1", it's +5. That's a LOT.Why are you comparing a destitute monk to a barbarian with a 50,000gp sword? This is purely a contrived dilemma. It does not happen. And if it does, that monk player should talk to his gm, and ask what he did to piss him off, lol.
<Facepalm>
You really need to keep track of what we're discussing in terms of 'found loot' vs 'visiting magic-mart'.
I have to point out that in the many games I have played, this doesn't happen in practice.Really? You've played in many games where one guy has a +5 sword and another doesn't even have a +1? Why do you keep playing with that gm?
Not a +5 sword, I guess technically Serithtial was a +4 weapon, with lots of whistles and bells (at least another +3 in properties). No amulet of mighty fists to be found, though.
The DM was in many ways a good DM - but he didn't see why he needed to place loot just for us to have nice toys, and he didn't like magic item shops. Hell, I don't like magic item shops myself; in my games players have to find an artisan to commission to make what they want. For various very reasons we weren't often in a situation to 'shop' for stuff (either we weren't in a major population centre, or it was in lock-down thanks to plague). Eventually, the DM realised what the problem was - it took a while, everyone else was doing just fine with 'found' loot, I have to point out - and gave us some down-time to do some crafting and trade stuff we found for what we needed to do said crafting. I still had to go through several levels of suckage before this happened, though.
Can you show me the page? The devs write adventure paths with strictly limited items in them, which makes me suspect that this is NOT actually part of the design philosophy.Where do you get this notion that they are 'strictly limited?' They seed loot throughout the game, because that's what players expect, and for verisimilitude. Every AP I've ever read also includes the sizes of settlements, and I think frequently even list the gp value of items available there. There is also the 'Available magic items' chart in the dmg that lists gp caps by settlement sizes. The game presumes you get the opportunity to buy stuff. If you're not, again, that is the fault of the gm. (or the decision, some like to play low-magic games, but that should affect everyone equally)
Yes, low magic SHOULD effect everyone equally - but it doesn't.
The game mechanics may presume you will get the opportunity to buy stuff, but not every adventure is flush with these opportunities; in fact in many adventures I have read and played in there are some extended periods (pretty much entire modules) where this does not happen.
I did consider a ki-based ability, but if it cost ki I'd feel obliged to add to damage too - along the lines of: "Expend one point of ki as a swift action to manifest an effect identical to greater magic fang on the monk themselves, using monk level as caster level." This would add to damage as well as accuracy, though, and it would infringe more on the AoMF that the devs have said they do not want to make redundant. However, they made the bladeboundGreater magic fang doesn't necessarily infringe on the aomf. The amulet can be enchanted with other affects without the usual +1. So the monk could use GMF to get his enhancement bonus, then load up his aomf with cool abilities. GMF lasts too long though, imo. It would become a no-brainer. There's no decision to make. If a monk can spend ki on that, he will. If its lower duration, like the magus or pal abilities, then he has to actually decide when to use it. It becomes more tactically interesting.
Gaining the bonus to damage as well as to hit is the infringement I am thinking of - otherwise the AoMF is able to add just properties, and the monk can end up ahead of the curve to the normal martial class. Say at 10th level you could normally afford a +2 AoMF, to a normal martial's +3 weapon. With GMF you would get +3 to hit and damage, and then could have an amulet for another +2 worth of properties. That's now the same as a +5 weapon. My system, you get +3 to hit but not +3 to damage. With the AoMF you have to choose between the static bonus to damage, and properties. You take +2 of properties, you lose out on damage so you don't have the equivelant of a +5 weapon any more (it's a little better than a +3 weapon, but then it still costs more and takes up a neck slot). If for whatever reason you don't get the AoMF, you can still hit as accurately as the guy with the +3 weapon.
If there's no decision to make, then making it a feature of ki-strike as I have done is the better option as well as one reason I settled on it. If it's lower duration, then ki's limited pool means it will struggle to do the task we want of it. However, my making it NOT magic fang, I can adjust it so it's a weak cousin. Always on, but no enhancement bonus to damage - seems a fair trade.
Dipping for wis to-hit is pretty attractive, even if it's at second level. Clerics get few feats, and if you're making a martial cleric, monk is already front loaded with all kinds of goodies.
Then why isn't every druid and cleric dipping sensei monk for just this advantage since that archetype was released? I mean I am sure it's great for some designs, but not all of them. Not only do they have to dip monk, they have to blow a feat for Crusader's Flurry, because wisdom-to-hit only works with unarmed strike and monk weapons. Against that, a cleric can take Channel Smite followed by Guided Hand, and get wis-to-hit without losing any casting levels.
Another option would be to scrap the enhancement thing all together, leave to-hit with strength, but give the monk a to-hit bonus equal to his wisdom modifier, capped at his monk level. This would prevent dippage, and make them much more accurate, which is one of their biggest issues, but still effectively remove their Mad, since strength is still effectively a tertiary stat...
No, it's not. Strength stays as important as ever, you just gave the strength-based monk much better odds to hit above and beyond even full BAB classes. I mean, you could get the same odds to hit with several mediocre stats and this system, yes, but stop and think of what a good optimiser could do with this and two good stats. I want to avoid allowing the monk to be better at DPR than the other martials - I just want him on the same playing field.
It wouldn't prevent dippage either, because there is still benefit to be had - especially if you go for a 'battle cleric' build with less wisdom and more strength. That's the build most likely to go for wis-to-hit in the first place, after all. In his case he'll only get +1 or +2 out of wisdom-to-hit. That's the same as a one or two level dip in your suggestion, and I have stated that Zen Warrior could be made a 2nd level ability...
The monk already can have better than +5 amulet, since he can pick up wands/scrolls/whatever of magic fang, or get the party druid to cast it on him. Letting him occasionally boost it up is no different than what the magus, paladin, inquisitor, etc, etc, do all the time. And I thought the whole point to this exercise is that monks need help. A generic non stacking enhancement to hit literally does nothing for a monk who's properly equipped. Class features that do nothing are not well designed imo. And multiple to-hit only enhancement is also just weird. Magic enhancement is virtually always to both. If it must be always on, make it an insight or 'focus' bonus or something, then it stacks, is not weird, and actually addresses one of the monks biggest weaknesses, which is accuracy...
The problem with the monk running entirely on GMF is that he becomes dependant on it, which no other class does. Eventually, the paladin/inquisitor/magus/etc. gain the ability to get a +5 weapon and +5 in bonuses, monks don't. They need something where they can get eventually get +10, AMoF+ ki strike allow him to get this.
As for me personally in terms of attacking, I'd make Dex to-hit and Wisdom for damage myself. As-is, this particular monk doesn't have a huge damage output, and playing with a pair of wizards and a cleric, he's going to be completely obsoleted if the players have any idea what they're doing. The Wisdom damage boost allows him to be a little bit more competitive eventually. Not to mention, it basically breaks the Monk to Dex Primary, Wis Secondary, Con Tertiary, cutting out it's MADness quite a bit.
Too much of your design philosophy stems directly from bad GMing. I don't care for magic shops either, and don't use them in my world. But I also tailor very specific items for the players. If you don't use the former, you have to do the latter. I've read a lot of APs, and played through a handful. I've never seen one that was literally so fast-paced the party didn't have time to run to town once in a while to buy & sell stuff. (
No DM is perfect, is all I can say to that, and I HAVE seen fast-paced games. I do take your point, but I just do not like the idea that specific equipment needs to be placed to make characters viable. I do it, but I completely understand the DM who doesn't. Surely the game is better if it requires less intervention...
The monk already can have better than +5 amulet, since he can pick up wands/scrolls/whatever of magic fang, or get the party druid to cast it on him.
Where did this druid spring from? Is every party supposed to have one?
Letting him occasionally boost it up is no different than what the magus, paladin, inquisitor, etc, etc, do all the time. And I thought the whole point to this exercise is that monks need help. A generic non stacking enhancement to hit literally does nothing for a monk who's properly equipped. Class features that do nothing are not well designed imo.
They are all self-buffing classes, I agree. And yes, I want to improve the monk's abilities. As for the enhancement not helping the monk, I will have to point out that it will on average always put them +1 to hit better off than they were relying on the amulet alone. If they are willing to forgo a little static damage, they can add properties and not lose out on hitting, which IS an advantage. For example, you could have at 16th level a +5 AoMF...or you could have an agile holy axiomatic AoMF without losing the +5 to hit. Stronger, yes, but you still gave up your neck slot, so not too strong. But yes, it does something - if I thought it did nothing, I would not have included it.
Certainly if it doesn't do enough, it can be improved to a full enhancement, but I don't want to start out there.
And multiple to-hit only enhancement is also just weird. Magic enhancement is virtually always to both. If it must be always on, make it an insight or 'focus' bonus or something, then it stacks, is not weird, and actually addresses one of the monks biggest weaknesses, which is accuracy...
I agree, the monk needs accuracy. He lacks accuracy because of MAD and lack of enhancement. He is also overly dependent on the AoMF for that enhancement. MAD I deal with elsewhere, so that's not an issue, all going as planned. The problem, as I see it, with an insight bonus is this: How do you make it enough to make up for not having an AoMF and should you lack one, or for that item's limitations if you do, and yet not make it too good either if you have one?
If we add an insight bonus through ki-strike of +1 at 4th level, +2 at 10th level, and +3 at 16th level, does that help? Not enough, as a normal martial would have +3 at 10th level and +5 at 16th. However, if you have an AoMF at +2 at 10th, you are now +1 ahead of the martial if you have one. At 16th level, you are likely all +3 ahead of the martial.
So the only way I see to do it is with a bonus that doesn't stack...and I don't want to add it to damage because that really does push out the AoMF and the damage dice for the unarmed strike increase anyway. I don't like it, but I see it as the most workable patch.
Yeah, the str and wis thing is too much. That just kinda came to me so I threw it out there. I think dipping for wis to hit is good for certain builds, but I also don't mind that. I like interesting multiclass builds, so that's not really a detraction for me.
I'm glad you like it. I'll see how the monk plays, that's the point of this, and keep all your suggestions in mind.
As for me personally in terms of attacking, I'd make Dex to-hit and Wisdom for damage myself. As-is, this particular monk doesn't have a huge damage output, and playing with a pair of wizards and a cleric, he's going to be completely obsoleted if the players have any idea what they're doing. The Wisdom damage boost allows him to be a little bit more competitive eventually. Not to mention, it basically breaks the Monk to Dex Primary, Wis Secondary, Con Tertiary, cutting out it's MADness quite a bit.
Three points to make here: the first is that this monk is hitting more accurately, and more hits = more damage. The second is that more hits and wisdom primary also means more stuns from stunning fist. The third is that by bypassing DR, ALL that damage is going to take.
That said, as I originally declared I am not looking to put the fighter out of business in terms of DPR. I want him to be viable, and not be ignored. I'm a minimalist insomuch as I want to do enough to keep the monk able to do his job, but not so much that it can be exploited to put another martial out of work.
Three points to make here: the first is that this monk is hitting more accurately, and more hits = more damage. The second is that more hits and wisdom primary also means more stuns from stunning fist. The third is that by bypassing DR, ALL that damage is going to take.
That said, as I originally declared I am not looking to put the fighter out of business in terms of DPR. I want him to be viable, and not be ignored. I'm a minimalist insomuch as I want to do enough to keep the monk able to do his job, but not so much that it can be exploited to put another martial out of work.
Ah, I missed that you didn't want to make the monk more powerful than the fighter. Personally, I don't think that it's enough, as the fighter is still less powerful, and less interesting than something like a ranger or barbarian, the classes that I think that both the monk and fighter should be equalling. That being said, your changes are quite effective at making the monk better, though I think that there should be an ability there that allows him to treat his monk level as his BAB for meeting feat prerequisites.
To be perfectly honest though, porting the Warblade and Swordsage from Bo9S- or making things like them is probably easier than fully rebuilding both the fighter and monk to make them more interesting.
Ah, I missed that you didn't want to make the monk more powerful than the fighter. Personally, I don't think that it's enough, as the fighter is still less powerful, and less interesting than something like a ranger or barbarian, the classes that I think that both the monk and fighter should be equalling. That being said, your changes are quite effective at making the monk better, though I think that there should be an ability there that allows him to treat his monk level as his BAB for meeting feat prerequisites.
My aim is to get him to the DPR level of a non-smiting paladin, really. After that he has DR-bypass, stunning fist and FoB to work in his favour.
To be perfectly honest though, porting the Warblade and Swordsage from Bo9S- or making things like them is probably easier than fully rebuilding both the fighter and monk to make them more interesting.
That leaves the people without the new classes in the drink, though.
Even without MAD the monk suffers accuracy issues. It's most notable when they have to move, or using AOOs, but even flurry lags because they have no static bonuses to hit. (rogue has same issue) I say the enhancement bonus to hit is 'useless' because on a properly geared monk he should be getting his enhancement elsewhere.
I agree the 3/4 BAB is an issue, but it's not one easily tackled. Where else is the monk going to get his enhancement bonus, if not the AoMF? Unless you are saying it's the old "Get the (maybe non-existent) druid to cast..." argument. The monk should at least be self-sufficient on this.
Yeah, it will allow the monk who has access to custom items to build a sweet aomf with a bunch of abilities and no enhancement. But that also means that any normal aomf that does have enhancement is now garbage. It also still doesn't address the accuracy issue.
An amulet with a bonus still boosts damage, remember. Unless we use the GMF course, in which case it wouldn't do even that. I do get your point about the insight bonus, though - it's worth thinking about.
An insight bonus let's any aomf still be appealing and addresses the accuracy issue. Your comment about a 'normal martial having +3' only applies if the GM is not doing his job. Once again we go back to bad GMing. If the GM is doing his job, everyone should have relatively the same amount of wealth, in which case the monk's aomf...
Once again, you are insisting it's the GMs job to ensure the characters are properly equipped, and I know many don't always agree with this.
OK, second session ran tonight. A short session, as they completed the module, but good nonetheless.
DR bypass didn't come into it, again the only real effect was getting the extra +1 to hit from Wisdom. This proved useful against a grey ooze and a ghost that kept summoning creatures to attack the party. A strong fighter joined them (new player for a few weeks) and the two worked well together through the two combats that took place - especially in the second, as the fighter was often tied down fighting summoned creatures. The monk had to disrupt the spells of the casting ghost a few times, using his speed and acrobatics to reach him. The fighter got the kill, but the monk can honestly claim to have contributed.
In the next module there are some creatures with DR, and I look forward to seeing how the monk performs with them in the mix.
not gonna lie, probably gonna steal the DR penetration thing for my monk. dabbler would you mind if I posted the results here? it would make for an easier reference point for people to see the results.
Sure, go ahead! I've used it in my own complete re-writes as well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Third session:
Things got interesting. The monk was able to participate in more depth using stealth to help scout the bivouac of an orc raiding party that had taken some prisoners the party had to rescue. He and the rogue made a good team, and the wisdom boost enabled him to score hits he would otherwise have failed on.
Getting the drop on an orc scout (ranger 2), he applied a stunning fist that worked (thank you maxed wisdom & wis-to-hit), and with two rounds of flurry brought the orc down. Multiple attacks does work, if they hit and if they can damage.
Engaging the orcs, the monk was buffed with an owls wisdom (this had the same effect as buffing with cat's grace on a dex build with Weapon Finesse), and sneaked around with the rogue to ambush the ambushers. Some very strategic buffs allowed the party to storm through the orcs (most were just basic 1st level orcs) without taking much damage at all.
More difficulties were faced when they faced down the orc chieftain, an orc barbarian who raged against the new half-giant fighter in the party. Both managed a simultaneous take-down on one another, the monk was more of a bit-player in this encounter, but still functioned adequately.
At the end of this session, I would conclude the monk is not hitting quite as often as the fighter, but that's down to his lower primary stat. His wis-to-hit is making his flurry effective when he uses it, but his damage output is behind the fighter's. His stunning fist has made up the difference in the one fight it mattered.
well my monk is going to be playtested this sunday, wish the shaolin luck, as he is starting at level 2.
@Dabbler: Keep it coming. I think this is the most useful thing someone can do for any of these monk variants is to actually try them out and discuss how they did, both good and bad.
Question: How is your monk's role evolving? Are you seeing anything you feel you could extrapolate out a few levels on with regard to combat roles (i.e. front liner vs. skirmisher vs. scout)?
And Another Question: Is your group (and are you) willing to allow you to continue to tweak the variant class rules as you go or do you plan to stick with this specific set of rules even if it starts to become apparent that something has gone awry?
@Dabbler: Keep it coming. I think this is the most useful thing someone can do for any of these monk variants is to actually try them out and discuss how they did, both good and bad.
Question: How is your monk's role evolving? Are you seeing anything you feel you could extrapolate out a few levels on with regard to combat roles (i.e. front liner vs. skirmisher vs. scout)?
Thinking back on how the monk acted in the last session, he's actually doing just what the monk should do: getting in a position to get the drop on the enemy, then taking them unaware. The difference being, he pulled it off.
And Another Question: Is your group (and are you) willing to allow you to continue to tweak the variant class rules as you go or do you plan to stick with this specific set of rules even if it starts to become apparent that something has gone awry?
If an idea starts failing I'll reconsider it. There's no point not being flexible, after all.
On enhancement, what about giving self only magic fang and greater magic fang as ki SLAs? An AMF would still save ki and penetrate DR if enhanced with straight plusses.
I have considered it, but if you are using an ability every time you get into a situation, you may as well make it permanent. I have considered making the ability the equivelant of magic fang just for the sakes of convenience (as I am using hero lab, and it's hard to make an enhancement only bonus in that), and rely only on the DR bypass ability for getting past DR.
I'm going to see how it pans out over the next few levels.
Well, one casting of GMF/W will last you through most of the adventuring day.
Now that the ruling of being able to flurry with only one weapon has come down, I really think the solution should be to simply give monks an ability to enhance their unarmed strikes at the same price as any other weapon without taking up an item slot.
I think self-enhancement to +5 is the way to go. Then the AoMF is gravy, but not redundant gravy.
I favor a slotless item that would apply exclusively to unarmed strikes (or possibly just ki users) and would provide the same benefits as a magic weapon 1-10.
The AoMF doesn't become redundant in my view as it would remain the go to item for Natural Attack builds and Druids/Animal Companions, who are already the ones getting the best returns on it now.
Well since 3.5 i have allowed sacred oils, that grant engagement bonus' as well as magical properties. The it takes is the as when you do it for a weapon, but the cost is an additional 500.
I favor a slotless item that would apply exclusively to unarmed strikes (or possibly just ki users) and would provide the same benefits as a magic weapon 1-10.
Paizo have already stated that they will not do this. The AoMF is for monks, and is to be used primarily for monks. So I work with it, and the only way I can find for the monk to stay competitive is to add natural enhancement.
If I may, I posted a rather more extreme monk fix on this board a few days ago. It seems to be very functional. I ran a campaign in which a player tested it for levels 4 through 7, and I am currently playing a level 2 monk based on that fix in another player's campaign.
It avoids the GMF addiction by first having a full BAB, and second, gaining enchantment for ki points through the Disciplined Defense ability. The buffed Extra Ki feat, as well as the improved human's alternate favored class bonus, help with the higher ki intensity.
GMF addiction is caused by the AoMF being such a poor must-have item for the monk.
I favor a slotless item that would apply exclusively to unarmed strikes (or possibly just ki users) and would provide the same benefits as a magic weapon 1-10.Paizo have already stated that they will not do this. The AoMF is for monks, and is to be used primarily for monks. So I work with it, and the only way I can find for the monk to stay competitive is to add natural enhancement.
Paizo won't do it (though SKR also claimed that one of the reasons they wouldn't create an unarmed strike alternative to the AoMF it was that it would make no sense to create a magic item that enhances unarmed strikes but not natural attacks, then Paizo released the Brawling armor property in UE, so whatever), but I think that's kind of a moot point once you're already house ruling in multiple changes to the class that Paizo almost certainly wouldn't use either.
GMF addiction is caused by the AoMF being such a poor must-have item for the monk.
GMF/AoMF addiction is caused by the medium BAB progression and lack of damage enhancement bonus.
However, a full BAB solves both problems. Here's how:1. Lack of accuracy - solved by the full BAB giving a +1 to +5 (depends on the level you compare medium to full bab at) attack bonus.
2. Lack of damage - solved by the full BAB giving iterative attacks sooner and up to a larger cap. Flurry of blows in addition to the ki point attack power = 9 attacks at level 16, three of which are at the highest BAB -2.
Paizo won't do it (though SKR also claimed that one of the reasons they wouldn't create an unarmed strike alternative to the AoMF it was that it would make no sense to create a magic item that enhances unarmed strikes but not natural attacks, then Paizo released the Brawling armor property in UE, so whatever), but I think that's kind of a moot point once you're already house ruling in multiple changes to the class that Paizo almost certainly wouldn't use either.
...and they wouldn't use it because? I'm working within the constraints they have already stated they will not go beyond. If nothing else it allows us to field-test ideas.
GMF addiction is caused by the AoMF being such a poor must-have item for the monk.GMF/AoMF addiction is caused by the medium BAB progression and lack of damage enhancement bonus.
However, a full BAB solves both problems. Here's how:
1. Lack of accuracy - solved by the full BAB giving a +1 to +5 (depends on the level you compare medium to full bab at) attack bonus.
2. Lack of damage - solved by the full BAB giving iterative attacks sooner and up to a larger cap. Flurry of blows in addition to the ki point attack power = 9 attacks at level 16, three of which are at the highest BAB -2.
The monk already has full BAB when using flurry of blows. When they flurry, they still have problems hitting. More attacks doesn't help with damage if they don't inflict any, and the monk still has DR issues, in part thanks to the AoMF.
Monk's problems hitting come from two other sources that stack up against the monk:
MAD - the monk has too many demands on their ability scores, which generally reduces their hitting score unless they make sacrifices elsewhere.
Lack of Enhancement - the AoMF lags behind other enhanced weapons, given WBL assumptions. Even the TWFing warrior can stagger his enhancement bonuses, but it's all-or-nothing with the AoMF. Also, the AoMF only works up to +5 total enhancement plus properties (another reason to get bonuses elsewhere).
Full BAB for the monk addresses neither of these problems, it merely solves - partially - the issue of attacking when not using flurry of blows. Plus, it's a major change I can't see them making in the monk.
As for extra attacks from FoB, it's variable in my view to bring in: if you get a small boost to damage, it can make too large a difference. Without a means to bypass DR, you can end up making many attacks with no damage dealt at all. It's the kind of feature that can easily do nothing on the one hand and be broken on the other, which is why I'd personally avoid it.
Paizo won't do it (though SKR also claimed that one of the reasons they wouldn't create an unarmed strike alternative to the AoMF it was that it would make no sense to create a magic item that enhances unarmed strikes but not natural attacks, then Paizo released the Brawling armor property in UE, so whatever), but I think that's kind of a moot point once you're already house ruling in multiple changes to the class that Paizo almost certainly wouldn't use either.
I think what is happening here, with players essentially performing open playtests of alternate monk rules, is a good thing and I am assuming that Paizo is actually paying some attention to it. Here's my reasoning.
Paizo has stated they recognize that monks have problems and need updates, beyond even those most recently brought about via errata. They have also indicated they have certain limits they do not wish to go beyond, constraints they at least at one point have hinted at. AoMF cannot be made obsolete. Class changes may be constrained by the depth of changes involved (I think I read that the word count or somesuch was important). There are performance expectations for certain levels. And so on. Some are specific to monks, some aren't.
When the players are putting together rules changes that follow these guidelines, playtesting those changes, and reporting the results, it gives Paizo additional information which they would not have had at the outset. Can and does Paizo do playtesting of their own? Absolutely. But ordinarily they have to do the redesign work in advance and then the open playtest begins. Here their design can be informed by the reported results. Are they likely to take all of this as gospel? Of course not. But if the results match expectations it can give them a starting point.
It also helps them know what players are looking for, how little or how much they are willing to "settle for", what folks think is interesting and so on.