The same way that weapon focus (unarmed) will not add to your grapple CMB. Atarlost is right here.You have miscalculated your CMB by adding your weapon enhancement to maneuvers other than trip, disarm, and sunder.Wrong. Tell me how I would grapple without using my body?
You have an FAQ reference?
"For other maneuvers, either you’re not using a weapon at all, or the weapon is incidental to making the maneuver and its bonuses shouldn’t make you better at attempting the maneuver. For example, just because you have a +5 greatsword doesn’t mean it gives you a +5 bonus on dirty trick checks (Pathfinder RPG Advanced Player’s Guide 320), and just because you have a +5 dagger doesn’t mean it gives you a +5 bonus on grapple checks. Of course, the GM is free to rule that in certain circumstances, a creature can apply weapon bonuses for these maneuvers, such as when using a sap in a dirty trick maneuver to hit an opponent in a sensitive spot." --Sean K Reynolds
Any part of the monk is considered a weapon(EDIT: Only fist, elbows, knees, and feet). He uses this to grapple. I fail to see how enhancement bonus doesn't apply.
Wrong. Tell me how I would grapple without using my body?Doesn't matter if you use your body, you're not using your Unarmed Strike.
"At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk's attacks may be with fist, elbows, knees, and feet."
What am I grappling with then?
There is Weapon focus (unarmed strike) and weapon focus (grapple), they are diferent.
How do I grapple something without using my fists, elbows, knees, and feet?
Grappling is diferent than hitting.There is Weapon focus (unarmed strike) and weapon focus (grapple), they are diferent.How do I grapple something without using my fists, elbows, knees, and feet?
So is tripping and disarming.
Especially since an unarmed character is ripping the weapon out of the target's hands during a disarm.
Grappling is diferent than hitting.There is Weapon focus (unarmed strike) and weapon focus (grapple), they are diferent.How do I grapple something without using my fists, elbows, knees, and feet?So is tripping and disarming.
Especially since an unarmed character is ripping the weapon out of the targets hands during a disarm.
And those are specifically stated in the FAQ qhile your example is not.
Yes you don't use a Greatsword to grapple. But how do you not use your fist, elbows, knees, and feet during a grapple?
*Is anyone going to argue that I couldn't bullrush with my fist, elbows, knees, or feet?
Well, lets try something diferent. DO you have a quote from a dev of a FAQ that explicitely allow what you are saying?
Which it makes me so mad that even with limiting the discussion to the CRB we still run into a situation where an FAQ is needed.
On one hand you have weapon focus calling grapple a weapon.
On the other you have monks with special training that can unarmed strike with fist, elbows, knees, and feet. I can't find a description of unarmed strike that says whether or not non-monks can unarmed strike with anything but their fist.
Then you have SKR saying that if you use the weapon during the maneuver it's enhancement bonus is added.
Which a monk ripping a weapon out of a target's hand counts as using unarmed strike.
Which leaves me wondering how someone can grapple without using their fists, elbows, knees, or feet.
Really I don't care that much either way (my CMB is too low anyways for creatures CMD, 5 more or less doesn't change me needing a nat 20 to grapple most CR 20 monsters). But I do like playing by the rules. So if anyone can find an answer to my question "how do you grapple without using fists, knees, elbows, or feet?".
My monk is still more mobile. Being able to DD and move 90ft per round is nice. The only time the fighter and the monk can have equal movement is if the fight requires flying, but not so much flying that DD would be useful.
I'm sorry, you keep citing this, and I keep shaking my head. The ability to dimension door into melee with an enemy is a huge liability, not some massive mobility enhancing ability. It's worse than charging even, since instead of trading 1 attack for an enemy's full attack you are trading zero attacks for an enemy's full attack to the face.
My monk is still more mobile. Being able to DD and move 90ft per round is nice. The only time the fighter and the monk can have equal movement is if the fight requires flying, but not so much flying that DD would be useful.I'm sorry, you keep citing this, and I keep shaking my head. The ability to dimension door into melee with an enemy is a huge liability, not some massive mobility enhancing ability. It's worse than charging even, since instead of trading 1 attack for an enemy's full attack you are trading zero attacks for an enemy's full attack to the face.
Flying creature attacks party expecting arrows and spells.
Instead he gets a monk right next to him. Now the flying creature has to avoid the monk, trade full attacks with the monk, or focus the rest of the party while taking full-attacks.
I don't make the charge comparison because my monk charges faster on land than the fighter and at equal speed in the air. Regardless, if a charge would do the job, I wouldn't be using DD.
If it's really that much of an issue I can DD just out of reach+10ft from the creature.
In addition to what Peter Stewart said...
what kind of fight at 20th level doesn't involve flying?!?
Ones that happen inside...
My monk is still more mobile. Being able to DD and move 90ft per round is nice. The only time the fighter and the monk can have equal movement is if the fight requires flying, but not so much flying that DD would be useful.I'm sorry, you keep citing this, and I keep shaking my head. The ability to dimension door into melee with an enemy is a huge liability, not some massive mobility enhancing ability. It's worse than charging even, since instead of trading 1 attack for an enemy's full attack you are trading zero attacks for an enemy's full attack to the face.Flying creature attacks party expecting arrows and spells.
Instead he gets a monk right next to him. Now the flying creature has to avoid the monk, trade full attacks with the monk, or focus the rest of the party while taking full-attacks.
I don't make the charge comparison because my monk charges faster on land than the fighter and at equal speed in the air. Regardless, if a charge would do the job, I wouldn't be using DD.
If it's really that much of an issue I can DD just out of reach+10ft from the creature.
or the creature simply takes a withdraw action and leaves the monk floating there.
or the creature simply takes a withdraw action and leaves the monk floating there.Flying creature attacks party expecting arrows and spells.
Instead he gets a monk right next to him. Now the flying creature has to avoid the monk, trade full attacks with the monk, or focus the rest of the party while taking full-attacks.
I don't make the charge comparison because my monk charges faster on land than the fighter and at equal speed in the air. Regardless, if a charge would do the job, I wouldn't be using DD.
If it's really that much of an issue I can DD just out of reach+10ft from the creature.
Great! Monk chases the creature while the rest of the party unloads into it.
*Dude you got a +5 recently. Where did it go?
or the creature simply takes a withdraw action and leaves the monk floating there.Flying creature attacks party expecting arrows and spells.
Instead he gets a monk right next to him. Now the flying creature has to avoid the monk, trade full attacks with the monk, or focus the rest of the party while taking full-attacks.
I don't make the charge comparison because my monk charges faster on land than the fighter and at equal speed in the air. Regardless, if a charge would do the job, I wouldn't be using DD.
If it's really that much of an issue I can DD just out of reach+10ft from the creature.
Great! Monk chases the creature while the rest of the party unloads into it.
*Dude you got a +5 recently. Where did it go?
it comes and goes, mainly to dissuade mythic appliance collectors. Some creatures might find it worth it to attempt an attack and move, although that provokes hmmm.
I'm not used to posting builds in formats people other than me can read, so I copied Nicos.
The Kind of Relevant Archer
Fighter 20
Human
=== Stats ===
Str 26, Dex 30, con 20, Int 9, Wis 16, Cha 7
=== Defense ===
AC: 41 (+11 Armor, +9 Dex, +5 Natural, +5 Deflection, +1 Insight)
Touch AC: 25
FF AC: 41
Hp: 264 (20d10 + 140)
CMD: 54
DR: 5/-
=== Saves ===
Fort: +24
Ref : +23
Will: +16 (+21 vs. Fear)
=== Attacks ===
Speed: 30 ft
+14 Initiative
Ranged +35/+35/+35/+30/+25/+20 (1d8+34 19-20/x4)
=== Feats===
1. Point Blank Shot, Precise Shot, Rapid Shot
2. Deadly Aim
3. Weapon Focus: Composite Longbow
4. Weapon Specialization: Composite Longbow
5. Improved Initiative
6. Manyshot
7. Toughness
8. Greater Weapon Focus: Composite Longbow
9. Iron Will
10. Greater Iron Will
11. Improved Precise Shot
12. Greater Weapon Specialization: Composite Longbow
13. Penetrating Strike
14. Great Fortitude
15. Improved Great Fortitude
16. Greater Penetrating Strike
17. Lightning Reflexes
18. Improved Lightning Reflexes
19. Improved Critical (Composite Longbow)
20. Far Shot
Yeah, I really didn't need all these feats--the CRB barely has enough to be worthwhile. You can tell when I got lazy picking them.
=== Special ===
Weapon traning 4 (Bows)
Armor traning 4
Bravery +5
=== Gear ===
+5 Speed Composite Longbow (128k)
+5 Mithril Breastplate of Fire Resistance (47k)
Winged boots (16 K)
Belt of physical perfection (144K)
+5 Cloak of Resistance (25 K)
Greater Bracers of Archery (25 K)
+6 Headband of wisdom (36 K)
+5 ring of protection (50 K)
+5 amulet of nat armor (50 K)
Robes of eyes (120 K)
Ring of evasion (25 K)
Dusty rose Ioun stone (5 K)
Irridescent Spindle Ioun Stone (18 K)
Hand of the Magi + Ring of Freedom of Movement (48 K)
Manual of Quickness of Action +1 (27.5 K)
Manual of Gainful Excercise +4 (110 K)
3x Efficient Quiver (5.4 K)
Eyes of the Eagle (5 K)
For Reference, vs. the Balor, that's 272.95 DPR and note that's full attacking with Rapid Shot and Deadly Aim on while ignoring concealment, cover, and standing 110' away, without much drop off in DPR from farther away (267.18 from up to 220', 253.7 from up to 330', etc.). That's well out of Dominate Range, by the way. With a few buffs, say a Bard's Inspire Courage and Good Hope/Heroism, this fighter could kill a Balor in one round on average.
Without checking his math, Marthkus's Monk is only rockin' 110.37 DPR if he gets a full flurry off (without power attacking, since that ruins his DPR due to hideous innaccuracy). Realize this also means that he's in melee with the thing, it's not the first turn because he had to move (and eat an AoO, since he has no reach), and he's taking damage every time he hits.
And just to be fair, Nicos fighter beats the archer in DPR (302.4), but does also have to be in melee, which, without pounce, means you're basically hoping a friendly wizard or cohort or something is dimension dooring you next to the Balor before you attack.
Oh, and spending a Ki point for a bonus attack adds just shy of 25 DPR to the Monk.
Builds will come later, but from what I can figure at high levels monks will have:
Better AC.
Better Saves.
Better immunities.
Better SR.
Better mobility.
More Attack options.
Better CMB for many maneuvers.
Better CMD.
More Skill points.The only places where the fighter is better is that a fighter will have:
Higher DPR
1 point of health per level more
1 point higher strength
Higher flat footed ACTo keep things simple I am only looking at CRB material for both classes. When you go outside of that, both classes get neat options. Let's assume for a moment that both of them are equally boosted by non-CRB material.
Anyone disagree? Is the extra DPR worth the flaws the Fighter has at high levels?
What is this, I don't even...
AC: Fighter has higher, and higher flatfooted; Monk has higher TOUCH AC. That full plate the fighter wears like it's light armor is adding quite a lot of AC, +14 when enhanced to +5.
Saves: Yeah, monk wins here.
Immunities: Disease and Poison? *Yawn*
SR: Does more harm than good.
Mobility: At high levels, both are flying. Because PF nerfed monk Fast Movement, he no longer has any mobility edge at high levels, at all.
More attack options: What, exactly? The Stunning Fist? Dazing/Stunning Assault feats (available earlier to Fighter than Monk) are way better than that anyway.
Better CMB: Have you taken leave of your god**ed senses?!! Fighter has WEAPON TRAINING! And less MAD! He's winning the CMB race, easily.
Better CMD: By a little. Monk AC is largely offset by not getting full BAB to it.
Skill Points: Only two more. No advantage at all if Fighter is a Lore Warden.
Attack bonus: Fighter wins. Heavily.
Number of attacks: Fighter wins if built for TWF like Monk (earlier access to the TWF feats *and* can chain natural attacks as secondary after them) or built for reach + AoO.
Damage per hit: Fighter wins. Heavily.
Health: Might be +2 hp per level due to Monk's MAD. Depends.
Monk is barely marginally better out of combat do to fighters simply not *having* out of combat class features. Monk is winning the out of combat not on its own merits but solely because his foe forfeited. In combat, Fighter is much better than a monk, laughably so.
"For Reference, vs. the Balor, that's 272.95 DPR and note that's full attacking with Rapid Shot and Deadly Aim on while ignoring concealment, cover, and standing 110' away, without much drop off in DPR from farther away (267.18 from up to 220', 253.7 from up to 330', etc.). That's well out of Dominate Range, by the way. With a few buffs, say a Bard's Inspire Courage and Good Hope/Heroism, this fighter could kill a Balor in one round on average.
Without checking his math, Marthkus's Monk is only rockin' 110.37 DPR if he gets a full flurry off (without power attacking, since that ruins his DPR due to hideous innaccuracy). Realize this also means that he's in melee with the thing, it's not the first turn because he had to move (and eat an AoO, since he has no reach), and he's taking damage every time he hits."
"And just to be fair, Nicos fighter beats the archer in DPR (302.4), but does also have to be in melee, which, without pounce, means you're basically hoping a friendly wizard or cohort or something is dimension dooring you next to the Balor before you attack.
Oh, and spending a Ki point for a bonus attack adds just shy of 25 DPR to the Monk."
Oh my monk can kill the Balor in 3 rounds of trading full attacks. Thanks for that DPR calculation.
Yep that archer DPR is great. Where is your melee weapon? Because if the Balor teleports next to you, the archery won't be all that useful.
Now in a party setting. Hands down, archer does more to bring down the Balor. At a bare minimum, a Balor with prior knowledge of the party is forced to fee or teleport right into the middle of the party. If the archer wins initiative and doesn't kill the Balor, the balor will be forced to flee.
I've actually seen a pally archer in one of my PF campaigns. The GM asked him to retire the character because my GM would have to either shut down the pally with things like wind-wall or let the pally devour encounters. From a pure mechanics standpoint this is neither here nor there.
Now a possibly absurd question from me. When is DPR overkill? If you are one shoting monsters what is the rest of the party doing?
Cue up the high heels as a weapon jokes.You mean this thread here?
Ha, thanks for that. I had no idea!
P.S. I tihnk Clustered Shots is a must have. If you think otherwise, I'd love to hear about that.
AC: Fighter has higher, and higher flatfooted; Monk has higher TOUCH AC. That full plate the fighter wears like it's light armor is adding quite a lot of AC, +14 when enhanced to +5.
You may want read through the thread. Posted fighters have had ACs of 51, 45, and 41.
My monk had 41 AC.Both the 51 and 45 were shield fighters. Two-handed, Archers, and a shield fighter had equal AC.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Markthus, if someone is one-shotting the monsters, the rest of the party is benefiting from not using their own resources. That extends the adventuring day. What they choose to do with their combat round isn't all that important if the balor got shot to pieces in the first round; maybe mopping up minions? And if the wizard and cleric don't have to use their own magic to deal with the enemy, they'll be ready for the next thing the GM throws at them.
Yep that archer DPR is great. Where is your melee weapon? Because if the Balor teleports next to you, the archery won't be all that useful.
Yes it will. Does the Balor have Combat Reflexes? If not, then I'm only taking one hit (that is not guaranteed to hit) in order to drop just about 3/4 of its hp, plus I've set up all my melee allies by luring him in.
If I get to use any supplements, I am not provoking, and if I'm a Paladin (my favorite archer), my AC is high enough that I don't care if I provoke.
Now a possibly absurd question from me. When is DPR overkill? If you are one shoting monsters what is the rest of the party doing?
In this specific case? Probably fighting the other Balor (or 2) that actually makes this encounter worthy of level 20s.
In general? Conserving spells for the things you can't one shot (and buffs to make you more able to one shot), cheering their ally on and pleased that he's actually useful in combat because he's dead weight for the entire rest of the game (except noticing stuff, I guess), since magic is basically required to meaningfully interact with noncombat challenges at level 20, and maybe in the back of their mind wishing that he'd make a replacement character with spells who can still do enough DPR to get by (rather than "overkill").
Fighter archer doesn't provoke with a bow after 9th level.
Or just take the feat Point Blank Master. Problem solved.
Ironically, monks make great archers too. :P Juast ask StreamOfTheSky. Pretty sure he has a build or two out there for one.
Yep that archer DPR is great. Where is your melee weapon? Because if the Balor teleports next to you, the archery won't be all that useful.Yes it will. Does the Balor have Combat Reflexes? If not, then I'm only taking one hit (that is not guaranteed to hit) in order to drop just about 3/4 of its hp, plus I've set up all my melee allies by luring him in.
If I get to use any supplements, I am not provoking, and if I'm a Paladin (my favorite archer), my AC is high enough that I don't care if I provoke.
Now a possibly absurd question from me. When is DPR overkill? If you are one shoting monsters what is the rest of the party doing?In this specific case? Probably fighting the other Balor (or 2) that actually makes this encounter worthy of level 20s.
In general? Conserving spells for the things you can't one shot (and buffs to make you more able to one shot), cheering their ally on and pleased that he's actually useful in combat because he's dead weight for the entire rest of the game (except noticing stuff, I guess), since magic is basically required to meaningfully interact with noncombat challenges at level 20, and maybe in the back of their mind wishing that he'd make a replacement character with spells who can still do enough DPR to get by (rather than "overkill").
Actually the Balor does have combat reflexes. Luring him in is good, but your fighters contribution after that has dropped. (Question: Doesn't the AOO connecting prevent the attack?)
To your second point, I would suggest the monk. Who contributes out of combat just fine.
What they choose to do with their combat round isn't all that important if the balor got shot to pieces in the first round;
That could be considered a problem for some groups. Other people like to feel important when fighting.
My opinion is that monks can be as good as fighters but they must adhere to a specific set of builds to do so.
Fighters have the luxury of being able to customise as seen fit. Monks, sacrifice that build versatility to gain the inherent utility its ki usage brings.
I once read somebody describe this so succinctly using halfling fighter as an example but I just can't find it now..
I just realised that I've been trying to measure size with the OP because I got somewhat annoyed that his argumentation seems to run along the lines of "you're wrong because I am right and my monk kan beat a balor single-handed".
I'd love to see a factual comparison between the party-relevant capabilities of the Fighter and the Monk, but I'm afraid that it won't happen in this thread. I hope the OP will start listening to some of the excellent arguments that has been made on behalf of the fighter, but I rather doubt it.
I flabbed my lips about making a Bard build to outshine the OP's Monk build, but I realised that it would just be me wasting hours that I could use better, like watching paint dry, or grass grow.
So I'm out. Sorry for having wasted anyone's time, it will probably happen again, but that's the joy of these forums, we all get to waste time here getting smarter about the hobby and our fellow gamers :)
On the whole, way better offensively, with easily equal mundane defences, and worse Will and Reflex saves.Yep. The question is whether or not the extra DPR is worth the worse will save and other magical defenses.
And the better maneuvers and ranged attacks, don't forget. Think of the party context: keep a few spells back to prevent the fighter getting his weaker Will save targeted, and you have in return a shed-load of damage to dish out. The monk requires less defending, but against some foes is struggling to do anything at all.
The fighter wins hands-down as a party addition.
My monk is still more mobile. Being able to DD and move 90ft per round is nice. The only time the fighter and the monk can have equal movement is if the fight requires flying, but not so much flying that DD would be useful.
Mobility is nice, and DD isn't useful because it ends your turn. In the aerial fight, you zap somewhere, the flying creatures move on, and you may as well not have bothered.
*Also my monk has a ring of regeneration instead of a ring of evasion. Obviously not a huge deal, but worth mentioning.
Minor equipment choices, really. It's handy, and certainly better than relying on wholeness of body (which is an ability that sucks, let's be honest).
Personally I would rather have better defenses against the things that can one-shot me, than being able to kill things faster.
What's a Will or Reflex save that can one-shot you? Most death effects are Fort based, the the fighter is strongest there. On the flip side your monk is much harder to help from the rest of the party thanks to his SR.
Cue up the high heels as a weapon jokes.
Monk of the empty hand, obviously...
@Dabbler
I'm not sure you love monks the way you say you do.
I'm a realist: the class is weak. I know it's weak because I've played them through from low to high level and hit all the problems. I do love the monk, I want it to be a good class people can enjoy playing, but that isn't the class as is right now. It needs a boost - check out the changes I am suggesting here, that I think just about fix up the monk's problems without making him brokenly good.
Monk turns Ethereal. As a move action in place of his standard action.
Monk uses DD. As a move action.
Stealth check.
Good luck finding my monk.
How long can you stay ethereal? Dragon circles, burning away cover and looking for you for ten minutes. He's got a 250' fly speed so he's probably searching a good square mile you cannot get out of before your time is up, even with your movement.
Even if you do get away, a level 20 character having to run from a CR16 encounter is....kinda sad.
Oh, and I may not have an FAQ reference but I know you don't add weapon focus or the AoMF bonus to grapple checks, because you are not grappling with an unarmed strike or natural weapon. And you DO have to subtract the flurry penalty to your pseudo-full BAB for maneuvers.
Hmm, just crunchged my fighter's DPR vs the ballor, and it's 280.8 if I power attack. Ouch. If I get lucky, it's not going to last two rounds. If it is lucky, it might live to the end of round 2.
In terms of party contribution, I'd say that's set.
To your second point, I would suggest the monk. Who contributes out of combat just fine.
Yes, he's average for all classes at OOC contributions, and the fighter is worse. A lot of classes are a lot better.
http://xkcd.com/386/
Awesome.
I just crunched some more numbers (being as OCD as I am) and worked out a few things.
1) Marthkus' monk can kill the balor in four rounds with 110 DPR. In three rounds of full-attacks, there is a 30% chance a round of at least one natural 20 from the balor, given it's 7 attacks. Over four rounds that's a 65.7% chance that within three rounds of one 20, meaning the monk's head is separated from his body before the balor dies - 86% if the balor won initiative. Odds are on, the monk dies before the balor.
2) My fighter kills the balor in two rounds, with 280 DPR. There is a 50/50 chance, given the extent of my critical hit damage, that I will kill the balor in the first round (I crit 10% of the time, automatically confirmed, with a x4 multiplier, so with 5 attacks per round there is a 50% chance of a crit, and that with my unadjusted average damage for the round kills him dead). So if I win initiative, the balor has a 50% chance of getting one full attack in, for a 15% total chance of killing my fighter outright before he kills the balor (not sure if Fortification applies to Vorpal hits, so I will ignore it). If I lose initiative, a total chance of the balow winning the fight is around 60% in total.
The same applies to the balor's SLAs, like blasphemy. The monk has a Will save of 25, so he saves on anything but a '1'. My fighter's Will save of 17 means he has to roll a '9' to save. However, improved iron will means he gets a second check. So in round one, there's only a 16% chance of failure, not 40%. The monk has to make three saves at least, for about an 86% chance of success over the whole fight. Not much difference, is there?
Offence is Defence.
|
I personally would put my pure PFS monk up against any pure fighter. This is a link to the build: Monk
Bear in mind the stat block you witness does not include the effects of his greater heroism or barkskin spell-like abilities, nor factor in fighting defensively, nor take into account use of lead blades or shield spells stored in ioun stones. With those things included, his combat stat breakdown is as follows:
AC 66 (+12 Dex, +8 Wis, +5 monk, +8 armor, +5 deflection, +7 dodge, +1 insight, +1 luck, +5 natural, +4 shield), touch 49, flat-footed 47
hp 174 (19d8+76)
Fort +27, Ref +34, Will +30
CMB +41 (+43 trip, +45 disarm); CMD 65 (67 vs. disarm, grapple, and reposition; 71 vs. trip)
Melee unarmed strike +37/+37/+32/+32/+27/+27/+22 (4d8+17/19-20 x2) with Flurry of Blows, fighting defensively, and lead blades
From there he can spend ki for ki dodge and use combat expertise to get his AC to 74 and CMD to 73 if direly pressed, or use piranha strike for -4 to hit/+8 damage if he is having an easy time landing blows.
I haven't even settled on what I want his level 19 feat to be yet.
|
|
Lomyr, just so you realize PFS characters are often grossly ahead on WBL (from what I understand) and this thread is specifically about using only core material. So of course your monk will look nice in comparison to fighters posted in this thread.
They're also not using large amounts of expendables or buffing before combat either.
I pointedly missed the CRB only discussion for this. My bad there. His WBL is right on though at 675,996 gp and his few potions and wands free from prestige spends.
Core Monk is a little bit rougher to work with, admittedly. Breaking past core I'd still put my money on the monk every time.
1) Marthkus' monk can kill the balor in four rounds with 110 DPR. In three rounds of full-attacks, there is a 30% chance a round of at least one natural 20 from the balor, given it's 7 attacks. Over four rounds that's a 65.7% chance that within three rounds of one 20, meaning the monk's head is separated from his body before the balor dies - 86% if the balor won initiative. Odds are on, the monk dies before the balor.
Vorpal has to confirm the hit to work.
Oh, and I may not have an FAQ reference but I know you don't add weapon focus or the AoMF bonus to grapple checks, because you are not grappling with an unarmed strike or natural weapon. And you DO have to subtract the flurry penalty to your pseudo-full BAB for maneuvers.
I'm sorry, you need facts to back up your arguments. "Knowing" the right answer isn't a rules citation.
Those two issues are minor for a high level monk, but I enjoy playing by the rules. SO if you can figure out how someone can grapple without using their fists, elbows, hands, or feet, please let me know.
Keep in mind that a monk pulling a weapon out of someones hands is considered using their fist in a disarm maneuver.
And your second argument just doesn't have a rules bases. I'm not going to play with house-rules just because that is "how things should work".
@Aldengwareny
"Of course, the GM is free to rule that in certain circumstances, a creature can apply weapon bonuses for these maneuvers, such as when using a sap in a dirty trick maneuver to hit an opponent in a sensitive spot."
Explain how do I not use my fists, elbows, keens, and feet to grapple. Keep in mind that ripping a weapon out of someones hands counts as using their fists for disarm checks.
I agree with you, Marthkus, in fact I just fully absorb Agile Maneuvers into Weapon Finesse. But if we're playing by RAW, only the listed maneuvers (and possibly reposition and drag, as per the blog that changed how trip weapons worked) definitely let you use dex if you have finesse.
If we were playing the way things should be, monk wouldn't be nearly as bad...