They are light weapons with the monk property. They have 1d3 hit dice. Plus some stuff about how they mess with somatic components and some skills.
That is all there is to them. No unarmed strike damage.
Brawlers get a watered down version of their unarmed strike damage applied though.
Well, doesn't seem logical. Knuckles should add damage to the unarmed strike.
From what I hear it's a common house rule to just let knuckles deal unarmed strike damage. Partly because that's how it worked before it was errata'd and partly because otherwise you pretty much have to get an Amulet of Mighty Fists if you specialize in unarmed strikes.
What people want is to not have to buy the amulet of mighty fists.
Thats what everyone is after when they ask this question.
As a house rule I allow fists wraps, brass knuckles, whatever, to be used a deal your unarmed strike damage and be enchanted and provide theose bonus to your unarmed strikes. However, I also said that you cannot use a single weapon to flurry if you use this route.
The costs is maintained, which is intentional on my part. But it does open up the neck slot and exchange it for an otherwise unused slot.
What people want is to not have to buy the amulet of mighty fists.
Thats what everyone is after when they ask this question.
As a house rule I allow fists wraps, brass knuckles, whatever, to be used a deal your unarmed strike damage and be enchanted and provide theose bonus to your unarmed strikes. However, I also said that you cannot use a single weapon to flurry if you use this route.
The costs is maintained, which is intentional on my part. But it does open up the neck slot and exchange it for an otherwise unused slot.
Which still bafflingly, frustratingly, leaves weapon using Monks as superior to the iconic unarmed martial artist Monks.
Why everyone insists on applying extra costs to a weapon that is in every way inferior to many other weapons is beyond me.
Why can a Monk happily Flurry with one weapon using a Temple Sword without anybody caring, but the moment you suggest allowing them t do so with their own damn fists people flip out?
What people want is to not have to buy the amulet of mighty fists.
Thats what everyone is after when they ask this question.
As a house rule I allow fists wraps, brass knuckles, whatever, to be used a deal your unarmed strike damage and be enchanted and provide theose bonus to your unarmed strikes. However, I also said that you cannot use a single weapon to flurry if you use this route.
The costs is maintained, which is intentional on my part. But it does open up the neck slot and exchange it for an otherwise unused slot.
Which still bafflingly, frustratingly, leaves weapon using Monks as superior to the iconic unarmed martial artist Monks.
Why everyone insists on applying extra costs to a weapon that is in every way inferior to many other weapons is beyond me.
Why can a Monk happily Flurry with one weapon using a Temple Sword without anybody caring, but the moment you suggest allowing them t do so with their own damn fists people flip out?
Doesn't that apply to anyone who is TWF?
Personally I allow people to enchant fists and natural attacks using the usually ignored but existing Rune Slot in the form of tattoos. It opens some design space for other homebrew rune slot items.
It does apply to everyone that TWF, which is exactly why I maintain the cost.
I'm sorry the TWF/Flurry dynamic creates doubles the cost for weapons. To clarify, in case you misunderstood me, I meant that if they wanted to use the option all flurry (with weapons or not) cannot be done with a single weapon (including a single unarmed strike). So it wouldn't leave weapon using monks better off, it would make them relatively equal with "unarmed" monks who are now using fist weapons.
I don't see why that's necessary at all. It's a nice special feature of Flurry you get as a reward for being forced to TWF and not having the option to not do so. There shouldn't be an item tax to use your main class feature, that doesn't make any sense.
Have a look at the original core brass knuckles, which let you use unarmed strike (if i remember right), enchanting them as normal weapons.
They errata'd it before the whole monk debate about enchanting costs, when they made so Amulet of Mighty fists cost as normal weapons.
The issue here is that the game develops, which is seen in the rules of new content. However old content is printed/errata'd with the old mentality, leaving it obsolete. Many of this comes from Pathfinder's 3.5 inheritance that it needed to maintain to not lose its compatibility.
TL DR Original printed Brass Knuckles rocked, stay with those they dont break anything.
What people want is to not have to buy the amulet of mighty fists.
Thats what everyone is after when they ask this question.
As a house rule I allow fists wraps, brass knuckles, whatever, to be used a deal your unarmed strike damage and be enchanted and provide theose bonus to your unarmed strikes. However, I also said that you cannot use a single weapon to flurry if you use this route.
The costs is maintained, which is intentional on my part. But it does open up the neck slot and exchange it for an otherwise unused slot.
Old debate I guess. Why does a 2 handed weapon fighter spend 2k to do more damage than you (or generally 3/4 bab two-weapon classes, see rogue/monk) and you instead need to pay twice or deny yourself the neck slot? This is why Amulet of Mighty fists got changed.
It's your ruling, but I don't think it would be something to follow. The part where you can enchant the other items though is golden. /Opinions and stuff
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
If they fixed everyone's problems with the Monk tomorrow, people would invent new ones. Suddenly it would be "Why are brass knuckle using monks better than the iconic bare-handed Monk? Yet another slap in the face to Monk-fans from Paizo!"
Griping about the game is the official past-time of the boards. :)
Ummm....Errant Mercenary I'm a little confused by your statement. I think there was stuff you left out, or I missing the connection.
In any event, the cost of an Amulet of Mighty Fists is the same as enchanting two weapons (at the same rate). So, it's no less advantageous than TWF, which flurry of blows is essentially all the TWF and Double Slice feats rolled into a class feature. Now whether or not TWF should be a better combat style is a fair quesiton, but for me TWF and Flurry should work out to be about the same.
I've always considered the ruling that you could flurry with a single weapon to be a mistake, and made flurrying a two handed weapon better than using fists. Or just using a weapon in general.
I'm not sure what change you are referring to with the Amulet of Mighty Fists, it was more expensive and then they lowered the price to make it the equivalent of two weapons.
Also, I will add the my option lifts the arbitrary limit of maximum of a +5 total enhancement, though they are still restricted by the +10 total enhancement (+5 enhancement bonus cap).
If they fixed everyone's problems with the Monk tomorrow, people would invent new ones. Suddenly it would be "Why are brass knuckle using monks better than the iconic bare-handed Monk? Yet another slap in the face to Monk-fans from Paizo!"
Griping about the game is the official past-time of the boards. :)
I seriously think this is because Pathfinder is crunch-heavy and has a sense of balance that isn't consistent with how some players play things out. This is as opposed to the rules being a serious detriment to playing.
I explained myself rather murkily, sorry...my thought is that:
The ruling says you can FoB with one weapon (fist, stick, anything that you can flurry with, source).
Essentially making it cheaper to stick to a 2-handed weapon(or just 1 normal weapon). So why if there is this option, is the other option paying double, with the same results? To me it feels archaic and a remnant of old 3.5/core rules rather than sense, considering the erratas. Perhaps I am missing something huge (unarmed damage is not huge, more a nice little plus).
So going to your post, I meant that while allowing to enchant those items for + to weapons is amazing, the part where it costs as 2 weapons is not, for me. I did for a moment think that AoMF cost the same as enchanting just 1 weapon though, but you woke me up from that swiftly.
Hope it clears it :)
|
At my table we rule that power attack's multiplier for damage is always equal to your strength multiplier for damage. As such, the only difference between attacking all with one weapon and all with two is weapon cost.
As much as people harp on the "double cost" issue, I don't think they realize how little of a difference that makes (aside from making things a pain for TWFers). The wealth scale is exponential, as is the costing system. Two +3 weapons is 36k, a single +4 weapon is 32k. Two +4 weapons is 64k, a +5 is 50k, and so on. Go even higher and the TWFer just has 3 fewer equivalents (two +7s is 196k, one +10 is 200k).
Until you get to really high levels (13+ at minimum) the difference tends to be +1 between the two. So why get worked up over a +1 to-hit on a fighting style that already takes a -2? Just let them have their single-pricing flurry and get over it. It's the special thing you get for being monk that no-one else gets and I view it as the one thing that makes monks /actually/ special. That is, until they let Brawler do the same, but that's besides the point. It helps make up for the whole full-melee-with-no-attack-bonus-class-ability thing.
Single price flurry, whether for US or any other monk weapon, is fine. Especially given that monks and brawlers can no attack bonus boosts to work with, unlike every other melee-centric class out there. That's why Sacred Fist is so popular: They get flurry but also actually get to-hit/damage boosts (via Divine Favor/Power). In other words, it's actually worthwhile.
Right, I think were mostly on the same page now.
Except, as I said, my fix includes removing the ability to flurry with a single weapon. I am aware of the FAQ, but I don't like it.
So no matter what, with my version you have to pay for two weapons (of course this isn't any more expensive then it was before for the unarmed strike monk and opens up the neck slot and allows for a higher total enhancement on the weapons. It is still an improvement.
Lets be honest, the ability to flurry with a single weapon is significantly better than normal TWF or the normal way flurry would be employed. Right now, the one of the most effective flurry user is a Sacred Fist flurrying his deity's favored weapon. Doesn't that bother anybody?
Does is not bother anyone from logical perspective that despite working like TWF it only requires one weapon? But it was designed primarily to be used with fists, but because of this ruling is actually better for weapon unless you make a special weapon for them to use.
It just bothers me too much.
I like your house rule on Power Attack. Denies the using of power attack using a 2 handed weapon without a STR rating by use of bonus feats (ironskin monk for example) but it probably makes sense. Especially if you play with Piranha Strike (we dont, I think). Good argumentation all around.
Would be nicer to see more weapons at the table...Falchion, Katana, etc gets a bit bland. Anyone packing knuckle dusters at my table does get leniency I admit.
edit
Claxon: I missed that part were you house rule the errata, woops. Well, we differ there a lot. Yeah it bothers me that Sacred Fists are better monks than monks but for me the solution is to bring monk up, not others down.
Also I think this stems from you comparing FoB with TWF. I compare it to full attacking by anyone using whatever means. This means 2 handed attacking is always ahead, more so since monks dont have static boni added. In this light, to me, putting penalties to cost as well as the existing to hit in unnecessary.
Flavour/visually, I want to see that monk with the huge spear that bends to whack enemies unexpectedly, ala shaolin. So FoB for me works without the TWF clause visual.
|
|
Right, I think were mostly on the same page now.
Except, as I said, my fix includes removing the ability to flurry with a single weapon. I am aware of the FAQ, but I don't like it.
So no matter what, with my version you have to pay for two weapons (of course this isn't any more expensive then it was before for the unarmed strike monk and opens up the neck slot and allows for a higher total enhancement on the weapons. It is still an improvement.
Lets be honest, the ability to flurry with a single weapon is significantly better than normal TWF or the normal way flurry would be employed. Right now, the one of the most effective flurry user is a Sacred Fist flurrying his deity's favored weapon. Doesn't that bother anybody?
Does is not bother anyone from logical perspective that despite working like TWF it only requires one weapon? But it was designed primarily to be used with fists, but because of this ruling is actually better for weapon unless you make a special weapon for them to use.
It just bothers me too much.
Easy solution: Give the monk and brawler a bonus-to-hit with their unarmed strike (roughly +1 at lvl 2, further +1 every 4 levels thereafter). This is on top of what AoMF could give. Suddenly they could actually (almost) match what a vanilla Fighter can put out (if you ignore the capstone).
Does it bother me that Sacred Fist is basically flat-out better at flurrying than the two classes that get flurry naturally? Yes, it does, but that's an issue with the archetype, not with flurry. If that's your problem then make sacred fist pay for 2 weapons and leave the flurry-with-one-weapon ability a property of monk/brawler.
Either way, even a flurry-with-one-weapon Sacred Fist doesn't scare me with respect to balance. If anything, that's the power level monk should have already been at.
Ummm....Errant Mercenary I'm a little confused by your statement. I think there was stuff you left out, or I missing the connection.
In any event, the cost of an Amulet of Mighty Fists is the same as enchanting two weapons (at the same rate). So, it's no less advantageous than TWF, which flurry of blows is essentially all the TWF and Double Slice feats rolled into a class feature. Now whether or not TWF should be a better combat style is a fair quesiton, but for me TWF and Flurry should work out to be about the same.
I've always considered the ruling that you could flurry with a single weapon to be a mistake, and made flurrying a two handed weapon better than using fists. Or just using a weapon in general.
I'm not sure what change you are referring to with the Amulet of Mighty Fists, it was more expensive and then they lowered the price to make it the equivalent of two weapons.
Also, I will add the my option lifts the arbitrary limit of maximum of a +5 total enhancement, though they are still restricted by the +10 total enhancement (+5 enhancement bonus cap).
You're missing one very, very important detail on Unarmed Strikes.
They will always be, at best, 19-20/x2 weapons, whereas the main good TWFing weapons are going to hit 17-20/x2 and 15-20/x2.
So TWFing still comes out on top.
....
You mean 19-20? Good point...I keep seeing those feats for unarmed strike that do wonderful fun things...on a critical strike. I skip those.
No, I'm not missing that detail. Monks don't need to pickup those 3 feats or necessarily have the requisite dex to use them that others would. True, most people build dex based monks. But if you are willing to sacrifice AC to an extent you can build a strength/wisdom based and largely ignore dex. There are pluses and minuses to each side.
I have no intention of trying to bring the monk up to the level of others. That is not my goal. As a player, you get to decide what your preferred option is and decide if it is acceptably balanced or not.
Anyways, we really diverted off of the rules discussion, which we all agreed on.
Again, my rule doesn't make things worse for monks who want to use unarmed strikes. They don't pay anymore than they would otherwise. It opens the neck slot and increases the amount they can enhance their fists effectively. You can keep saying that's not enough, and I will keep saying I think it is.
Everything clear and minor opinion differences. Thanks for the monk thread discussion though, it had been a while and was already missing them, bet Rynjin had been craving for one too :)
(will add your house rule - the half I liked - into my table!)
It doesn't make things worse, but it doesn't make things better either. Losing the neck slot IME is kind of a moot point since you can trade your s+&~ty Slow Fall or High Jump for Barkskin and not need an AoNA anyway.
So it makes things the same for unarmed Monks, and worse for weapon using Monks.
But meh.
It doesn't make things worse, but it doesn't make things better either. Losing the neck slot IME is kind of a moot point since you can trade your s+#%ty Slow Fall or High Jump for Barkskin and not need an AoNA anyway.
So it makes things the same for unarmed Monks, and worse for weapon using Monks.
But meh.
The rules is optional Rynjin, my monk players do not have to use it. So, if they want to focus on weapons instead they can use the rules normally. It is their choice. So either, they can get the "fist wraps" and enchant them as though they were normal weapons. Gaining the neck slot and paying the same as if they were going to use an AoMF anyways. Or they can just use the normal rules.
I don't like the FAQ about a single weapon, but I am willing to let players utilize it if the decide they want to. I believe I failed to make that clear earlier, so there's that.
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
WotC also did the same in 3.5 Gauntlets, they only allow lethal and not monk unarmed damage.
If you allow Gauntlets/Brass Knuckles then there simply isn't any point in having the Amulet of Mighty Fists.
When I build monks, I usually have silver, adamantine, and/or cold iron brass knuckles for the DR bypass. 1d3+STR is better than 1d10+STR-10.
If you allow Gauntlets/Brass Knuckles then there simply isn't any point in having the Amulet of Mighty Fists.
Except for anyone who uses natural weapons.
What people want is to not have to buy the amulet of mighty fists.
Thats what everyone is after when they ask this question.
As a house rule I allow fists wraps, brass knuckles, whatever, to be used a deal your unarmed strike damage and be enchanted and provide theose bonus to your unarmed strikes. However, I also said that you cannot use a single weapon to flurry if you use this route.
The costs is maintained, which is intentional on my part. But it does open up the neck slot and exchange it for an otherwise unused slot.
I am going to allow the option of using the wraps at the price of 1 weapon but it affects only punches, and having "greater wraps" at the same price as the AoMF. The greater version will affect all of the monk's unarmed strikes. However they will not affect natural attacks.
I think requiring the AoMF for monks focused on unarmed strikes was bad game design.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you allow Gauntlets/Brass Knuckles then there simply isn't any point in having the Amulet of Mighty Fists.
For some, this is a desirable outcome.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If they fixed everyone's problems with the Monk tomorrow, people would invent new ones. Suddenly it would be "Why are brass knuckle using monks better than the iconic bare-handed Monk? Yet another slap in the face to Monk-fans from Paizo!"
Griping about the game is the official past-time of the boards. :)
That and arguing with people who are complaining. That is why I am here.
The general purpose of the brassknuckles is to give monks a punchy weapon that they can enhance normally without too much trouble. Basically, they are like temple swords, but light weapons and have a punchy flavor.
The idea of unarmed strikes is that they are harder to use than normal weapons (for fairly obvious reasons- you are fighting dragons barehanded). They can be good, but the style requires sacrifices (expensive item that takes up amulet slot, or using greater magic weapon/fang, but not ignoring DR). They can be extremely good now that you have pummeling style floating around, but again, they require sacrifices (the greater magic weapon/fang option is much more viable now though).
This is Paizo's general design principle around TWF-like styles in general (unarmed strikes is just meant to compound this and add more options with styles and such). High potential damage, but they are expensive, require a lot of resources (feats typically), and can be difficult to get working (standard action vs. full round attacks).
This is the main reason why they have not made a general dex to damage feat that applies to light weapons- they do not want TWF to be easy. It is currently restricted to 1 handed weapons to make it impractical to use in TWF. They could try to add rules to such feats to prevent TWF...but they tried that with dervish dance, and I have seen too many 'can I use unarmed strikes and have the dex to damage apply to them too?' threads to believe that would actually work.
Brass Knuckles deal Brass Knuckles damage.
Not unarmed strike damage.
I thought APG, page 176 = Enter on Brass Knuckles = last line said
"Monks are proficient with brass knuckles and can user their monk unarmed damage when fighting with them "
So an 8th level monk could do 1d10 damage while using them.
An 12th level monk could do 2d6 damage while using them.
The advantage to brass knuckles, was that they could be enchanted with enchantment bonus or enchantment effect, like flames, bane, or keen, etc.
So Pathfinder Companion: Adventurer's Armory Paperback – June 1, 2010, 32 page softcover book, with an errant, got to overrule.
Pathfinder Roleplaying Game: Advanced Player's Guide Hardcover – August 24, 2010, 320 page Hardback, that does not have an errant listed for the item in its errant section.
.................................................
Oh well.... YAAAAAAAAAA i do not have the Adventurer's Armory Paperback ...............
I still get to use the Monk Unarmed Damage with the weapon :P for the time being :D
Why i stick to Hardback book :)
I was just trying to find out were the rules were listed with the errant.
I was also just, joking around about not having the book, that had the errant, that i did not know about.
|
What people want is to not have to buy the amulet of mighty fists.
Thats what everyone is after when they ask this question.
As a house rule I allow fists wraps, brass knuckles, whatever, to be used a deal your unarmed strike damage and be enchanted and provide theose bonus to your unarmed strikes. However, I also said that you cannot use a single weapon to flurry if you use this route.
The costs is maintained, which is intentional on my part. But it does open up the neck slot and exchange it for an otherwise unused slot.
Old debate I guess. Why does a 2 handed weapon fighter spend 2k to do more damage than you (or generally 3/4 bab two-weapon classes, see rogue/monk) and you instead need to pay twice or deny yourself the neck slot? This is why Amulet of Mighty fists got changed.
It's your ruling, but I don't think it would be something to follow. The part where you can enchant the other items though is golden. /Opinions and stuff
I will look into that amulet.
My solution is tested here: http://paizo.com/threads/rzs2pn0f?Some-Monk-Suggestions-playtested
I didn't dump the AoMF, I just gave ki-strike an actual enhancement bonus (among other tweaks) which is what it should have had to begin with. The biggest problem with the AoMF is not the cost or the slot - it's the total +5 limit on combined properties and enhancement, which is a further nerf to an already nerfed weapon. This way the AoMF is still needed (for properties) but the monk has a usable weapon with it's own "thing" as it should be.