Hey everyone, hopefully your days are going well :)
I'm going to be running Hell's Rebels soon, and one of my players asked if I'd be allowing the Unchained classes.
I wasn't certain so I started looking into them. The monk already seems WAY better than it was and the fighter progression with Flurry of Blows makes me wonder if they're actually more powerful than I should allow. The unchained Barbarian seems good and more streamlined, to be honest.
It mostly just seems like the monk was given a HUGE buff. Curious on peoples' thoughts on if they'd allow for the Unchained classes or not. Much appreciated :)
They already get full BAB with flurry of blows, but not when they are not flurrying.
Most people think the monk came out even due to other changes and most people here have no problem allowing most aspects of the book.
Just tell the player you will allow it on a trial basis. That way he will understand he might not be able to keep it.
Oh! I guess you are indeed correct on them having full BAB with flurry. Though the new one just gets a new attack at full BAB without a penalty, no? So now they just get an extra attack? Though that also means at higher levels they get far less attacks. So I suppose that does indeed balance out.
Thanks for the input, wraith :) Always a pleasure.
Aye, that's very true. Well, at least so far nobody has said anything against them, but they sound very favorable for choices :D
Yes. The Summoner is a bit of a downgrade, the Barbarian is about where it was anyway and the Rogue and Monk get much, much needed boosts that actually allow them to look like real characters and not something that should be pointed and laughed at. Neither of them are as potent as the Barbarian usually is, but they won't make a player feel pointless either.
Yup. Summoner maybe a downgrade, but note that Paizo said the original spell-list was a screw-up which they simply never bothered to Errata, only releasing the INTENDED spell list with Unchained.
Barbarian mixed bag, some things helped, some things hindered. Personally I don't see the old version as over-complicated to use, but the new version isn't bad either, although you can't do all the same builds now.
Monk already Flurried with Full BAB (and used that bonus for Power Attack etc. when Flurrying), now just get to use it for single attacks, Standard attacks, AoOs etc. And don't call it Fighter progression, they don't get Weapon Training... We can call it WARRIOR progression.
Rogue gets some nice stuff, nothing really crazy powerful, but they needed it.
And it all pretty much works with every Rogue Archetype out there.
The other Unchained classes do run into issues there, you may want to allow using "Chained" base class for Archetypes that either need it, or work much better with it. (Monk/Barb I'm thinking of... Summoner just needed the Unchained "nerf" IMHO)
I found Unchained underwhelming but my recommendations are below.
Monk- A wash, will not break games even if optimized to death, allow if wanted. I would just allow both old and new monk.
Rogue- Better than OG rogue but still not anywhere near the power of classes such as bard or inquisitor.* I recommend simply replacing OG rogue with this.
Summoner- Nerfed, and not really anything great here. I personally allow OG summoner but would recommend telling your players that either is fine. Newer players may find UC summoner more playable due to simpler use.
Barbarian- Attempt to stealth nerf via "simplification". I would recommend just using OG barbarian. However if someone wants to play this let them, but warn them it will generally be slightly lower in max ability than old barb.
Hope this helps.
Yes. The Unchained Monk fixes the problems with the monk that people without a ton of system proficiency and optimization prowess will run into.
The Unchained Rogue makes more viable the other weakest class in the core game (and people always want to play rogues for flavor reasons.)
The Summoner was a class I banned in my games because the original one was vastly overpowered. I dislike the flavor of the class (the spiritualist is much better here), but if someone really wanted to play a summoner I would allow only the Unchained variant thereof.
The Barbarian I would allow either chained or unchained, but I don't allow rage cycling in home games I'm in charge of anyway, since it's the worst kind of cheese.
The Monk is a powerhouse, but it basically combined lots of archetypes into one package. There are a few cool new abilities, but the majority are things you can get anyway with some smart archetype cherry-picking. They're pretty powerful, but nothing broken, IMHO. I've seen one pull off some amazing stunts with Ki powers, but those are just a few times a day, so he needs to choose when to use them. They have some cool new tricks that mainly help them with utility and help them be more reliable in combat.
The Rogue got a deserved boost. I've seen an Unchained Rogue in action, I like what it's capable of pulling off.
Barbarian is mainly a streamline of its original class, with some new rage powers. No sense in disallowing it, IMHO.
Summoner is actually a downgrade from its original form, you'd be mad to disallow the new version.
Unchained Barbarian in fact allows tactics which previously required Rage-Cycling (e.g. Knockback) without needing to Rage Cycle now...
In fact MORE powerful than Rage Cycling because you no longer have to deal with down-sides of Rage Cycling (giving up 1/2 of benefit of Rage, either on/off your own turn, and needing to commit to that trade-off ahead of time)
Unchained is also a god-send for Switch-Hitter Barbs, since the attack bonus is attack-stat agnostic (albeit only Thrown Weapons not Bows).
The Temp HP change basically negates the need for several Rage Powers ameliorating Rage HP loss, basically free Rage Powers (and free HPs/healing each Rage).
No more Morale Bonus means you can now stack it with more stuff (although forgoing effects which would increase Morale bonuses).
(and no Morale bonus/effect coincidentally now makes Undead Barbarians no longer an issue/problem)
Main down-side is losing access to some Rage Powers, and also the STR bonus to CMD.
Over-all stronger, albeit negating several previously strong build options, so evening out it's optimization curve.
If my players had any interest in them, absolutely.
|
I actively encourage use of the Unchained classes when my players are creating new characters.
The Unchained Summoner spell list and evolution costs are basically mandatory, though I have allowed players to retain the more permissive eidolon creation process from the base class.
Unchained Barbarian is basically a wash with the core Barbarian power-wise, though it tends to be much more table friendly and easier for newer or less mechanically savvy players to run.
Unchained Rogue is a much needed upgrade to the core Rogue, and when someone wants to play a Rogue I basically just hand them Unchained and say "Here, use this one" (assuming there's not a 3pp option or another core class that actually fits their concept better).
Unchained Monk is much friendlier for new players, at least that's been my experience, but I tend to treat it as a possible monk archetype, since there are a lot of incompatible archetypes for the core Monk that are really good. I basically allow both versions at the table, but encourage players to consider the UnC option if they aren't planning on taking an archetype.
Unchained rogue has replaced the base rogue.
Unchained monk and barbarian is only used when it's compatible with an archetype the player wants.
Unchained summoner is ignored.
Ours is a very player friendly environment so there's almost no restrictions beyond self-restrictions. We trust each other so it works out.
Both the monk and the rogue got major improvements in unchained. The reason for that is that both classes were actually pretty weak. Both classes got major upgrades so they are now on par with other similar classes. Rogues especially needed the upgrade as it used to be that there was absolutely nothing a rogue could do that could not be done better by another class. The monk was not quite as bad but still had a lot of problems. The monk had a couple of good archetypes that made it playable but the base class was underpowered compared to other martial classes.
Allowing the unchained rogue is a no brainer and would even allow current characters to rewrite using the unchained version. Since none of the monk archetypes are legal for the unchained monk I would leave that up to the player. If they want to play an archetype they can use the original monk, but if they want to play an unchained monk that is perfectly fine also .
What they said.
Hey everyone, hopefully your days are going well :)
I'm going to be running Hell's Rebels soon, and one of my players asked if I'd be allowing the Unchained classes.
I wasn't certain so I started looking into them. The monk already seems WAY better than it was and the fighter progression with Flurry of Blows makes me wonder if they're actually more powerful than I should allow. The unchained Barbarian seems good and more streamlined, to be honest.
It mostly just seems like the monk was given a HUGE buff. Curious on peoples' thoughts on if they'd allow for the Unchained classes or not. Much appreciated :)
CORE monk got a buff.
But practically no one used core monks. They always archetyped.
I mean...just in punchy and slashy fighting aspects, sohei is already a match. It gets weapon training that can bring its attack bonus on par with unchained for standard actions, and its flurry is much stronger due to that same weapon training. That put it as a direct competitor to full BAB classes when it flurries (and things like pummeling style, flurry happened a lot more often)
Sohei both allowed flurry with high crit weapons (nodachi as a simple, straightforward one) or reach, and it also has access to light armor (notable due to brawling armor for another +2 attack/damage; also, more survivable early on without turtling the monk's stats). It has a lot of nice items it can get its hands on, and use them very well.
And other archetypes had their own gimmicks that could be fantastic. Maneuver master with dirty tricks, for example.
The thing with unchained monks is that they are incompatible with most archetypes- certainly the ones people usually turned towards. So I actually worry that they are slightly weaker. They certainly have to actually think about their will save.
Overall, it is enough of a wash that I would say allow it if the player wants to use the monk, but don't remove the core monk if the player wants to use different builds. Basically, I question if it was necessary. I practically view it as a specific archetype on its own.
Rogue- yeah, replacement is fairly fine there. It seemed more mindful of things like archetypes. Not too out of bounds, and rogues needed it.
Summoner and Barbarian- that is something you put in because the original versions scare you.
Overall, it is enough of a wash that I would say allow it if the player wants to use the monk, but don't remove the core monk if the player wants to use different builds. Basically, I question if it was necessary. I practically view it as a specific archetype on its own.I don't question if it was necessary. I'm absolutely certain it wasn't. It's very close to being a strict downgrade from Brawler, which fills exactly the same thematic role.
I would strongly discourage anyone from using it, just like I would strongly discourage anyone from playing an original rogue.
Oh, certainly. Full BAB class that doesn't actually have high will, does flurry, and maybe some pounc-y option (pummeling style is basically my response to one of the few rather good options that unmonks have).
It mostly comes out as redundant than anything.
The big difference is that UnMonk can flurry with a 2 handed weapon, doing 2 handed damage, which is better than the brawler's schtick. But there's very little reason to make a unarmed character with it.
Meh. You already got 2 handed power attack with monk, brawler, and unmonk. Not quite as impressive in comparison. So the different is relatively light.
That characterizes the advantages of unmonk- slight number advantages, but it just doesn't bring much that is really 'new' to the table. just ever so slightly tweaked version of current advantages. It isn't as differentiated from its competitors as much as brawler differentiated from monk.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I was impressed by flying kick when I was GMing and saw it in use. There were a lot of fairly cramped fights, but the player was able to use it to often be the first one to close the distance AND be the first to get a full attack.
UnMonk doesn't have a lot of things I'm super excited about, but that thing really made it seem much more dynamic than old monk.
|
The Unchained Summoner spell list and evolution costs are basically mandatory, though I have allowed players to retain the more permissive eidolon creation process from the base clas
That is the best compermise I've seen since Unchained came out. I'll have to keep it in mind if I ever get into a home game with a GM who's skittish about the Advances Summoner.
Why is this thread so long?
The answer to OP's question is yes.
|
|
I'd allow all of them in my games if players wanted to play them.
The Unchained Rogue is better than the base Rogue, but the base Rogue needed an upgrade. The Unchained Rogue pretty much exists as a replacement for it for me now (but I'd allow someone to play the old one if they wanted to).
The Unchained Monk is better than the base one in some situations / for some builds. I personally prefer the original Monk with Archetypes and the high Will Save, but I'd allow either.
The Unchained Barbarian and Unchained Summoner are worse than their original versions and not really something I use much, but I'd allow a player to use them if they wanted to.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why is this thread so long?
The answer to OP's question is yes.
This is both a rogue thread and a monk thread.
I think it will take at least a few hundred posts before this loses momentum.
Why is this thread so long?
The answer to OP's question is yes.
This is both a rogue thread and a monk thread.
I think it will take at least a few hundred posts before this loses momentum.
Don't forget that its also a summoner thread.
|
|
Why is this thread so long?
The answer to OP's question is yes.
A lot of us have strong opinions about some of the Unchained changes and like to express them. Plus, the OP asked for people's thoughts on th3 matter.
Speaking of those! OP, if you're still listening, go ahead and use Unchained classes. UC Monk is a sidegrade if you compare it to some of the more popular archetypes for the old Monk (like Zen Archer) so you should be fine.
For Summoners, Unchained toned down the raw power for Eidolons while simultaniously inspiring and hampering its roleplay potential. The APG version has more disruptive capabilities than the Unchained counterpart, but both of them require just a bit of party coordination helps a ton when making sure that the battlefield won't get too crowded and spotlights won't be stolen.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Why is this thread so long?
The answer to OP's question is yes.
A lot of us have strong opinions about some of the Unchained changes and like to express them. Plus, the OP asked for people's thoughts on th3 matter.
Speaking of those! OP, if you're still listening, go ahead and use Unchained classes. UC Monk is a sidegrade if you compare it to some of the more popular archetypes for the old Monk (like Zen Archer) so you should be fine.
For Summoners, Unchained toned down the raw power for Eidolons while simultaniously inspiring and hampering its roleplay potential. The APG version has more disruptive capabilities than the Unchained counterpart, but both of them require just a bit of party coordination helps a ton when making sure that the battlefield won't get too crowded and spotlights won't be stolen.
I consider Zen Archer to have no place in this type of conversation. It's a mechanically sound archetype, as so is Sohei, but both fail at delivering the core fantasy of the concept of monk.
"I wanna be a Monk! " should not have to be followed by "ok, so an archer or a glaive monk? "
"I wanna to be a monk" should probably be followed by the rest of Eight Diagram Pole Fighter (seriously, watch that movie, it's amazing.)
Alas, there doesn't seem to be a monk archetype that enables "amazing pole fighter" as a concept.
A more productive discussion about Unchained should be about how to implement other optional rules (e.g. background skills, "unchained" skills, and stamina pools.) Since that's more of a shades of gray situation than "should you allow this class" since, after all, none of the Unchained classes are as good as the Bard from the core book.
|
|
I consider Zen Archer to have no place in this type of conversation. It's a mechanically sound archetype, as so is Sohei, but both fail at delivering the core fantasy of the concept of monk.
"I wanna be a Monk! " should not have to be followed by "ok, so an archer or a glaive monk? "
I dunno. After playing a little bit of Jade Empire, and more than my fair share of Soul Calibur, I am more than welcoming of any weapon-wielding martial artists. I present to you Exhibit A.
For the unarmed focus Monks, I can understand. Unarmed combat is something that's the sole domain of the Monk (and it's hybrid offshoot) so it feels more iconic to have pucnhy dudes.
When I think Monk, I think of Bruce Lee, Ip Man, the Dalai Lama, robed medieval Christians with the weirdest bald spots, and Shaolin guys in orange robes. In Pathfinder, that more or less translates to Clerics and the Monk class. When I think of Bruce Lee, Ip Man, and the Shaolin guys, I mostly think of martial artists who focus on punching their opponents. It wouldn't be out of place to see Bruce Lee with a pair of nunchucks, Ip Man with a 15-foot pole, whacking every enemy in reach, or a Shaolin monk with those iron arm rings or a glaive, but the first weapon I think of Monks using is their fists. To be fair, a kyudo practitioner is pretty far from my first (or second) thoughts of what a monk would be.
When I think of Monk, I think of a quirky detective with numerous psychological issues.
...but that probably doesn't add too much to the conversation.
When I think Monk, I think of Bruce Lee, Ip Man, the Dalai Lama, robed medieval Christians with the weirdest bald spots, and Shaolin guys in orange robes. In Pathfinder, that more or less translates to Clerics and the Monk class. When I think of Bruce Lee, Ip Man, and the Shaolin guys, I mostly think of martial artists who focus on punching their opponents. It wouldn't be out of place to see Bruce Lee with a pair of nunchucks, Ip Man with a 15-foot pole, whacking every enemy in reach, or a Shaolin monk with those iron arm rings or a glaive, but the first weapon I think of Monks using is their fists. To be fair, a kyudo practitioner is pretty far from my first (or second) thoughts of what a monk would be.
Ah, this. I love the image of the warrior who claims to have trained herself so well she's beyond weapons, having forged her own body into one. (And not just transformed into a ballista or something.) I wouldn't mind testing out an unchained monk sometime.
Except that right now I have an unchained barbarian, and while some things feel weirder now, temporary hit points instead of real ones you lose and keep lost have helped me more than once so far. We also have an unchained rogue; not sure how much more he's enjoying things yet.
"I wanna to be a monk" should probably be followed by the rest of Eight Diagram Pole Fighter (seriously, watch that movie, it's amazing.)
Alas, there doesn't seem to be a monk archetype that enables "amazing pole fighter" as a concept.
A more productive discussion about Unchained should be about how to implement other optional rules (e.g. background skills, "unchained" skills, and stamina pools.) Since that's more of a shades of gray situation than "should you allow this class" since, after all, none of the Unchained classes are as good as the Bard from the core book.
Seen that movie, love it, never knew the name, so thankful you've mentioned it.
But I'm still talking about the core fantasy. A class delivers it's core fantasy when it plays as what the predominant cultural imagery of the class conveys.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would you allow the unchained classes in your game?
- Yes i would. they are balanced.
When I think of Monk, I think of a quirky detective with numerous psychological issues.
...but that probably doesn't add too much to the conversation.
True story:
A doctor I had an appointment with a couple of years back had his office in the same building as Andy Breckman's offices. I was scanning the building's directory, and there's a listing for "Adrian Monk, P.I.". When I got into the doctor's office, I asked his receptionist, "OK, why does the building directory say..."
She cut me off right there and explained it. :)