So : the CRB lists a number of weapons monks are known to be proficient with.
UC and other sources introduce a number of weapons qualified as 'monk weapons', namely because a monk may flurry with them.
Is a monk automatically proficient with all 'monk weapons' or does he have to take martial/exotic weapon proficiency with those that are not on the short list if he fancies them?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
CRB Monk? Not proficient. Do note that the CRB Monk is proficient with the Temple Sword.
Unchained Monk on the other hand is proficient with all the monk weapons because it's not a joke class. <3
OK, check description, and if not, take adequate proficiency... looks like I'm out one feat if I want to play with a sansetsukon.
OK, check description, and if not, take adequate proficiency... looks like I'm out one feat if I want to play with a sansetsukon.
Or yannow, play an UnMonk <3
I'll do that a) when I own PF Unchained, as I like to have the paper document at hand for reference, and b) IF my DM accepts it, which is not guaranteed at all.
If they don't accept it, you might as well play a wizard or druid and show them what an actually broken class can do. Unchained Monk is hardly over the top.
I'll do that a) when I own PF Unchained, as I like to have the paper document at hand for reference, and b) IF my DM accepts it, which is not guaranteed at all.
Just print the pages that you need from Paizo's website. They give you the info for free.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You know, at this point, I'm just gonna quote myself from another thread:
Print out the Tier List in font size 20, then hit your GM with that list on his head until he admit's that he's been stupid.
Apart from that... since unarchetyped CMonk is probably the weakest PC class in the entire game, you're looking at archetypes, anyway. Sohei (plus, as always, Qinggong Monk) is the default archetype for weapon based CMonk and comes with proficiency with all martial weapons, which includes Sansetsukon.
Hear, hear! Next the OP will tell us that his GM doesn't allow Swashbucklers because they're so amazing…
Since you mentioned the Qingong archetype, I think it's pretty telling that they straight up rolled it into the Unchained Monk. Even Paizo saw that it was pretty much necessary to be competent.
Also, it slightly bugs me that they called the three-section staff a sansetsukon. Yes, it's an accuratetemr for it, but Golarion doesn't have Japan, why are things given Japanese names?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Hear, hear! Next the OP will tell us that his GM doesn't allow Swashbucklers because they're so amazing…
Since you mentioned the Qingong archetype, I think it's pretty telling that they straight up rolled it into the Unchained Monk. Even Paizo saw that it was pretty much necessary to be competent.
Also, it slightly bugs me that they called the three-section staff a sansetsukon. Yes, it's an accuratetemr for it, but Golarion doesn't have Japan, why are things given Japanese names?
The same reason they borrow names from everywhere else?
OK, check description, and if not, take adequate proficiency... looks like I'm out one feat if I want to play with a sansetsukon.You could also take a 1 level dip into a martial class to get martial weapon proficiency.
Unarmed Fighter works well. One level gets you proficiency in all Monk Weapons plus a style feat for which you can ignore prerequisites.
eh, I never think of dips, but yeah, though unarmed fighter in itself might get nixed too, my DM is a beginner with a tiny library (CRB and not much else ) and he tends not to validate what he doesn't have the book for
eh, I never think of dips, but yeah, though unarmed fighter in itself might get nixed too, my DM is a beginner with a tiny library (CRB and not much else ) and he tends not to validate what he doesn't have the book for
It is on the PRD, and that is a Paizo source.
Well, I can direct him there and see if that will mollify him. but first, get the PF UNC for myself, I prefer to have books for my collection to loose leaves that get misplaced more easily.
To me the greatest appeal of the UnMonk is that you need only three otherwise great books to make it work: Unchained, Ultimate Combat (Dragon Style) and Ultimate Magic (Qinggong Monk powers).
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also, it slightly bugs me that they called the three-section staff a sansetsukon. Yes, it's an accuratetemr for it, but Golarion doesn't have Japan, why are things given Japanese names?
Golarion doesn't have an England, why are things given English names?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Golarion doesn't have an England, why are things given English names?
Also, it slightly bugs me that they called the three-section staff a sansetsukon. Yes, it's an accuratetemr for it, but Golarion doesn't have Japan, why are things given Japanese names?
Not to mention half of the English words are not even English words but stuff that English mugged from other languages in a dark alleyway.
CRB Monk? Not proficient. Do note that the CRB Monk is proficient with the Temple Sword.
Unchained Monk on the other hand is proficient with all the monk weapons because it's not a joke class. <3
Funny. You could have fooled me, since it gets all the joke weapons.
Most monk weapons aren't really worth it. Past the Sansetsukon (which is 'exact same thing as the temple sword that monks were already proficient in, but bludgeoning and ever so slightly larger hit dice), how many of those new weapon proficiencies do you use?
Most monk weapons are objectively terrible. A good representative swath of the good ones are already given to core monks by default. The rest fall into the general dumping pit we place most exotic weapons.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nine-section whip. Same stats as the temple sword, but has blocking and works better than a three-section staff for Crane Style.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Really? I think that the nine-ring broadsword, nine-section whip, sansetsukuon, temple sword, dan bong, sibat, and seven-branched sword are perfectly serviceable weapons for the unMonk.
The temple sword might not be better than the sansetsukuon in many things besides killing zombies, but it can be used one-handed which is pretty good for grappling and being grappled.
Not to mention half of the English words are not even English words but stuff that English mugged from other languages in a dark alleyway.Golarion doesn't have an England, why are things given English names?
Also, it slightly bugs me that they called the three-section staff a sansetsukon. Yes, it's an accuratetemr for it, but Golarion doesn't have Japan, why are things given Japanese names?
And then there's the Lucerne hammer ... and its cousin, the bec de corbin.
As far as the original topic? Unless the weapon calls itself out, it's no good. The only ones I can see are brass knuckles, cesti, and temple swords.
maybe I'll just go for temple sword... one less feat to eat
eh, I never think of dips, but yeah, though unarmed fighter in itself might get nixed too
Actually, Unarmed Fighter sounds way better then it is. On an unarmed monk, you'd definitely want a style feat chain, and ignoring the prereqs of only the first feat doesn't do anything. An off-chain style would be unusable most of the time. On an armed monk, there aren't many styles that are useful - basically, only Crane Style (which further increases the existing accuracy problems) and Ascetic Style (which doesn't do much for a CMonk), both without annoying prereqs.
my DM is a beginner with a tiny library (CRB and not much else ) and he tends not to validate what he doesn't have the book for
It sounds harsh, but in that case, don't play a monk. The monk desperately needs archetypes and options from other books to be a functional PC class. Same would be true for Fighter and Rogue. My first char was a monk without a class improving archetype and the prenerf Crane Wing feat was the only thing that prevented him from being a total joke.
The nice thing about temple sword is that you can attack two-handed (on a CMonk only useful for Power Attack) and then switch to one-handed at the end of your turn. That way you have a free hand for Deflect Arrows but can still make AoOs. And yes, a proficiency feat for Sansetsukon would be a total waste, that's a mere +1 average damage. Indeed, over 99% of the time, weapon proficiency feats are a waste.
While I agree that the unchained monk is better overall, there are reasons why one would want to play the core monk instead.
Namely, archetypes? Sohei, Zen Archer and Far Strike have additional proficiencies included. Tetori wants to stay unarmed anyway, which leaves Maneuver Master (does anyone actually uses that one?) and Sensei.
So, why not issue an errata for the core monk giving it proficiency with all monk weapons as well?
Because that's not how Pathfinder works. Paizo doesn't update stuff, they replace it.
To avoid misunderstandings, I totally agree that not giving a monk proficiency with all monk weapons is stupid. Paizo seems to agree, too, which is why they fixed that with UnMonk.
Please forgive my word choice, but for monks to not be proficient with all monk weapons is stupid. Sure, you can use them for monk's flurry, but since monks are not proficient with them, wouldn't they take a -4 penalty on attack rolls? If so, it makes no sense to use those weapons even when flurrying.
And please don't tell me that one should play an unchained monk instead of the core monk. While I agree that the unchained monk is better overall, there are reasons why one would want to play the core monk instead. And why is it that the unchained monk was given proficiency with all monk weapons anyway? To me, it seems like an oversight that was corrected when creating the unchained monk. So, why not issue an errata for the core monk giving it proficiency with all monk weapons as well?
I don't think monks should get 'all' monk weapons, but yes- the martial category monk weapons are silly in how they avoid being useful to pretty much anyone (...although the 3 section whip does get a place as 'blugeoning weapon with good crit range and dice'). Regular monks only get 'some' simple weapons, and martial characters lack flurry to use the monk property.
Exotic weapons are exotic. Most people have to spend a feat for that stuff (there are, of course, arguments against exotic weapons in general, but that is separate from the monk weapons).
Heck, I would worry about giving my monk all present and future exotic monk weapons. Why is my monastic swordsman trained in how to use rope darts? And I am sure you could add more silly things from martial arts movies in there (I am surprised the flying blade isn't in thee). I can write off a martial character knowing martial weapons, since many of them are just various blades, bludgeons, and polearms- the basic theory of 'use the sharp point end' would apply. But exotic weapons get some of the more outlandish stuff that seems like it would need specialized training to not kill yourself with.
So basically- why did my cool swordsman train in all this crazy gimmicky junk? Because using [insert crazy exotic weapon here] seems like something that needs training to do.