The weakest sides of the Unchained Monk... or is it just my impression?


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 263 of 263 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

1 person marked this as a favorite.
CryntheCrow wrote:
the stances as move actions go completely against the flavor of a raging mass of power. "Hold on guys, let me FOCUS MY ANGER INTO A STRICTLY DEFINED PURPOSE." Easily the worst.

Yeah, stances were one of those things that really bugged me with the unchained barbarian. While I like the idea of different combat stances that provide a variety of bonuses, I really don't understand why on earth they're a barbarian class feature. What about the barbarian makes them the masters of using specific carefully trained stances, far above and beyond any other martial character. Especially when the Barbarian is usually seen as the class least associated with formal training or the sort of detailed, careful, precise positioning associated with stances.

Personally, I'd say that thematically stances would have made a lot more sense as a fighter class feature, or just make them into feats that any martial class can take.

Honestly, it makes me wonder if stances were written as a feature for the Unchained Fighter, and after they scrapped that idea Buhlman just decided to toss them onto the Ubarb because they were already written up, so he might as well use them somewhere.


CryntheCrow wrote:
Unchained Monk: Very much an upgrade imo.

An upgrade compared to non-archetyped Classic Monk. An upgrade compared to several of the better Classic Monk archetypes . . . I'm not yet convinced. Especially if you are in a campaign where everything is trying to Mind-Control you.

CryntheCrow wrote:
Unchained Rogue: Stronger than what you can do with just core, but altogether weaker than a normal rogue if you know what you're doing.

Is this opinion based on losing access to certain Classic Rogue Talents? Because other than that, Unchained Rogue doesn't seem to lose anything compared to Classic Rogue.

CryntheCrow wrote:
Unchained Barbarian: Straight downgrade. Besides rage cycling, it also lost access to furious weapons, as well as some of the best rage powers. Core Barb's Strength Surge might has well have been an 'I win' button for any maneuver you could possibly want, and the stances as move actions go completely against the flavor of a raging mass of power. "Hold on guys, let me FOCUS MY ANGER INTO A STRICTLY DEFINED PURPOSE." Easily the worst.

I THOUGHT something didn't feel right, but couldn't put my finger on it . . . .


The way I see it, UnRogue looses two things: First, the "Ki Pool" Rogue talent. No problem, because if you want Vanishing Trick, you should just be a Ninja, anyway.
Second, you loose Offensive Defense. Not a problem because Debilitating Injury is better unless DI stacks with itself (RAW it does that, but if you try to convince your GM of that, prepare to be punched).

Regarding Rage Stances: Yeah, the idea feels kinda orphaned - they should at least give us a "Master of Many Rage Styles" archetype! Just like the "you can only do this with a (punch/kick)" thing the Style Strikes have. My very first idea when I read the UnMonk was to build two archetypes that focus on only kicks or only punches (and aren't allowed to take other ones), but can do more Style Strikes. I kinda based those two archetypes on Hitmonlee and Hitmonchan. Anyone interested?^^

Grand Lodge

Chengar Qordath wrote:
CryntheCrow wrote:
the stances as move actions go completely against the flavor of a raging mass of power. "Hold on guys, let me FOCUS MY ANGER INTO A STRICTLY DEFINED PURPOSE." Easily the worst.

"Stance" is the wrong name for whats happening; though how to describe when raging you get an addition X-buff that can't be stacked with the other similar X-buffs at a glance is truly a complicated wordsmithing problem. "Angry-accuracy" or "Angry-defense" doesn't really work; and something like "focusing anger" or "cold rage" doesn't at a glace state they can't be combined without lots of extra word count either. Stance mechanically, works and in fact builds on prior uses of the word; even if there is massive thematic dissonance. Only thing I can think of off the top of my head that would work similarly is either Totems, which is already used; or Ancestor Spirits, which brings in baggage that would not always be appropriate for a barbarian character.


9mm wrote:
"Stance" is the wrong name for whats happening; though how to describe when raging you get an addition X-buff that can't be stacked with the other similar X-buffs at a glance is truly a complicated wordsmithing problem. "Angry-accuracy" or "Angry-defense" doesn't really work; and something like "focusing anger" or "cold rage" doesn't at a glace state they can't be combined without lots of extra word count either. Stance mechanically, works and in fact builds on prior uses of the word; even if there is massive thematic dissonance. Only thing I can think of off the top of my head that would work similarly is either Totems, which is already used; or Ancestor Spirits, which brings in baggage that would not always be appropriate for a barbarian character.

Rage Posture? Rage Bearing?


I've always looked at Conan movies and how he held his sword as "stances". I like them for the theme. If you don't like them it's not like the whole character revolves around them. Plus with things like vital strike, you're hardly speed in your tracks.


Cavall wrote:
I've always looked at Conan movies and how he held his sword as "stances". I like them for the theme. If you don't like them it's not like the whole character revolves around them. Plus with things like vital strike, you're hardly speed in your tracks.

I tend to see Conan more like a Barbarian/Fighter multiclass character than a pure Barbarian..


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Conan was, without a shadow of a doubt, a Slayer.

Unless you are talking the movie one.

Liberty's Edge

Secret Wizard wrote:

Conan was, without a shadow of a doubt, a Slayer.

Unless you are talking the movie one.

This.

He maybe had a level or two of Barbarian, if you want, but Slayer was no doubt his primary class.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

I'm no Conan expert, but would Slayer VMC Barbarian work?

* * * * * * * *

Back on topic of Unchained Monk, didn't somebody publish a 3rd party collection of archetype conversions for it just a few months after Pathfinder Unchained came out? No such thing shows up on www.d20pfsrd.com or Archives of Nethys, though.


Cuz you'z gotta buy the Everyman Gaming material, son.


UnArcaneElection wrote:

I'm no Conan expert, but would Slayer VMC Barbarian work?

* * * * * * * *

Back on topic of Unchained Monk, didn't somebody publish a 3rd party collection of archetype conversions for it just a few months after Pathfinder Unchained came out? No such thing shows up on www.d20pfsrd.com or Archives of Nethys, though.

Yeah, Everyman Gaming put it out. Its not up for free anywhere but its also a very cheap PDF.


Conan is the 3.5 barbar, but needs all 20 levels.

251 to 263 of 263 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / The weakest sides of the Unchained Monk... or is it just my impression? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.