Unpopular opinion: Is the PF1 monk now a fighter?


Prerelease Discussion

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

The new fighter looks ver interesting with styles and follow up moves for combat. What does the monk class need that couldn't be accomplished by choosing the right feats as a fighter?

Perhaps folks would want an archetype for getting rid of the weapon and armor proficiencies, but a monk should probably have very good unarmed weapon proficiency and that should spill over to monk weapons.

I guess folks are wanting KI powers again that do magical things, but it seems like spell points are something pretty different. KI powers seem a lot more like special skill feats, which the fighter still gets.


10 people marked this as a favorite.

I hope PF2 fighter breaks the boundaries of what it is humanly possible, while staying under the laws of physics, while monks break what it is physically possible in this reality.

As an example, a legendary fighter could jump over a house, parry a catapult Boulder with his shield, or cut a tank by half. A monk can teleport, be in several places at once, or become intangible


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm guessing the stance / open / press moves may potentially be cross class feats shared between the fighter and monk. On top of this shared pool, the fighter gets all sorts of gear boosts to be better with weapons and equipment, and battlefield control stuff. Meanwhile the monk gets stuff related to unarmed and unarmored combat, maneuvers, mobility and supernatural abilities.


4 people marked this as a favorite.

I'm not going to argue with you on it, because I could honestly see it. The problem comes from the way this system is built (that we can see so far) with so much customizability that a monk being an unarmed fighter with a bit of pseudo-magical ability is looking more and more like a fighter who picks unarmed as his weapon focus of choice and a few pseudo-magical abilities. I can absolutely see a few choices made in the fighter class getting very close to the monk concept. Fighter as we've had it described seems to be more similar to 1st Ed Brawler than anything else, which narrows the gap between these two heavily martial classes. The question for me isn't "can we make a monk using fighter class" so much as it is "what can we do to monks to make them more distinguished from fighters".

I think the biggest difference will be in how monks get better options for those pseudo-magical aspects, more mobility choices, and a different base chassis. If fighter and monk both get improved evasion, monks should be available earlier and also come with a buff later like rerolls 1/day or can choose to move as part of a successful reflex save. If the fighter can use twf to more or less mimic flurry of blows, the monk should take fewer penalties for the same thing, or gain bonuses when doing so like a free trip or disarm attempt at any point in the series. On the other hand, a fighter should have better armor options and perhaps more HP, perhaps have a few abilities geared towards dirty moves a monk might find distasteful, and be better at working as part of a team rather than a lonely wanderer monk.

Naturally these tend towards assumptions about the type of people that will be monks vs fighters, and should be options not mandatory for that reason. The main thing is, there's lots of ground to cover where they can overlap without being the same. I'm looking forward to hearing about what a monk can do that a fighter can't, and what options they lose for that power.


I have the same response to this as I did to making the witch a wizard archetype, I dont think i'd like how it feels. It makes design sense, but ultimately, I think you wont have an actual monk at all, just a fighter with a little monk flavor.

I do see a potential PF2 lite coming out of all this to help tables that want to shed as much complexity as possible. That could be a good thing, but a thing I would have no use for. YMMV


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Well, we’re getting Monk as a class.

My guesses:
- Unarmed attack stuff. Fighter is weapon-focused, and fighting unarmed will mean not getting the benefits of many features.
- Unarmored bonuses. Fighter gets decent armor proficiencies, which can apply to bracers as well, but that’s still giving up the benefits of those heavier armor proficiencies without much reason.
- Styles will be different than stances. Stances seem to be simple benefits like “it doesn’t take an action to raise your shield”. I’m guessing styles will be a type of Monk feat or feature that’s a little more involved. A reaction to deflect an attack with Perception, for instance.
- Movement focus. I expect Monk to get better movement as a feature, and feats for things like moving through the air or teleporting.

Fighter can probably take the right feats to be like a Monk, but then why not be a Monk and have all your feats free for whatever you want? You have to ignore a lot of Fighter features to play them as a Monk.

Liberty's Edge

4 people marked this as a favorite.

Could you do this with an Archetype? Maybe. Will they? No.

Stuff we're pretty positive to get on Monk that Fighter won't:

-Better defenses (probably at the expense of offense...Fighters get Legendary in their weapon, I expect Monks to max out at Master barring specific investment). Wis to AC is very possible, and Legendary Proficiency in unarmored defense is a near certainty.
-Likewise, better Saves. They've said that, by the new standards, Fighters still aren't great at Will Saves, and I doubt they get Evasion. Monks will likely do better in both those arenas. They may have worse Fortitude to compensate, here.
-Unarmed combat. Monks are gonna focused on this in a way Fighters likely aren't.
-More mystical Class Feats. Fighters will get some superhuman physical stuff, I'm sure, but they aren't gonna be teleporting or becoming incorporeal. Monks can. Ki Powers of various sorts sit here and are quite likely.
-Different Stance, Open, and Press abilities. Monks will have abilities in all these categories, I'm sure, but they won't be remotely the same as the Fighter's.
-Skills. Monks won't be better at these, but they are likely to have a somewhat different selection.

And that's all just off the top of my head.


gustavo iglesias wrote:

I hope PF2 fighter breaks the boundaries of what it is humanly possible, while staying under the laws of physics, while monks break what it is physically possible in this reality.

As an example, a legendary fighter could jump over a house, parry a catapult Boulder with his shield, or cut a tank by half. A monk can teleport, be in several places at once, or become intangible

A physicist would likely greatly enjoy those two statements. :) (No insult meant, I understand the gist of it)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if I'm understanding, in this model the fighters would be more on the level of the Hulk or the Thing, the Monks would have more like X-men level of powers, and Wizards more like... Dr. Strange perhaps?

Shadow Lodge

Deadmanwalking wrote:

Wis to AC is very possible, and Legendary Proficiency in unarmored defense is a near certainty.

-Likewise, better Saves. They've said that, by the new standards, Fighters still aren't great at Will Saves, and I doubt they get Evasion. Monks will likely do better in both those arenas. They may have worse Fortitude to compensate, here..

On the first bit, maybe an option for another mental score to AC is possible. A few archetypes made it into PF1 after all.

On the second.... maybe one better save, going off the Unchained Monk losing their High Will save(which still makes no sense).


I'd just increase the Monks focus on the mystical aspects of the concept. Especially with occult magic and manasaputras in the setting.

Liberty's Edge

Dragonborn3 wrote:
On the first bit, maybe an option for another mental score to AC is possible. A few archetypes made it into PF1 after all.

Possible, but I expect the corebook Monk to be definitively Wis based.

Dragonborn3 wrote:
On the second.... maybe one better save, going off the Unchained Monk losing their High Will save(which still makes no sense).

I'd expect them to be good at both Reflex and Will and okay at Fort. That's only two Good Saves (which is on par with several other Classes revealed in PF2 including Druids and Rogues).


3 people marked this as a favorite.

I mean that a fighter could do things that are not possible for a human being, but are not impossible to happen. A human being cannot pierce a tank with a thrown spear, but piercing a tank is not impossible: a rail gun could do it. A human being could do it, if he could throw the spear with the speed/strength a rail gun does.

On the other hand, monks do things that are not possible in this world, at least not with our current understanding of the world. A monk could, for example, teleport. Teleportation breaks the rules of reality, not just the rules of what is possible for a human being.

If you want to use an X-men example, a fighter could be Wolverine, who can survive hits no human being could, and is stronger and meaner than any human and can go and face toe-to-toe with monsters a human being has no bearing facing against (like facing Hulk). A monk could be Kitty Pride, who can pass through walls and become intangible, which is something that simply can't happen. A wizard is the Scarlet Witch, who do things that cannot happen to others, affecting not just herself, but the reality around her.

(all of this, talking about legendary play. At lower levels, it's the same but toned down. For example, I could see a low level monk levitating while meditating, or running up walls, while the fighter endure hits lower mortals can't and such)


3 people marked this as a favorite.
gustavo iglesias wrote:

I mean that a fighter could do things that are not possible for a human being, but are not impossible to happen. A human being cannot pierce a tank with a thrown spear, but piercing a tank is not impossible: a rail gun could do it. A human being could do it, if he could throw the spear with the speed/strength a rail gun does.

On the other hand, monks do things that are not possible in this world, at least not with our current understanding of the world. A monk could, for example, teleport. Teleportation breaks the rules of reality, not just the rules of what is possible for a human being.

If you want to use an X-men example, a fighter could be Wolverine, who can survive hits no human being could, and is stronger and meaner than any human and can go and face toe-to-toe with monsters a human being has no bearing facing against (like facing Hulk). A monk could be Kitty Pride, who can pass through walls and become intangible, which is something that simply can't happen. A wizard is the Scarlet Witch, who do things that cannot happen to others, affecting not just herself, but the reality around her.

(all of this, talking about legendary play. At lower levels, it's the same but toned down. For example, I could see a low level monk levitating while meditating, or running up walls, while the fighter endure hits lower mortals can't and such)

Monk has never been a fighter, not since it's creation in D&D0E. They have ki abilities, scaling unarmed damage, super evasion, mental defenses, healing, teleporting, Kenshiro stuff.

It would be a disservice to call a Monk just a Fighter that punches enemies, and most people realize that.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

The body of lore/folklore about what in D&D/Pathfinder are "monks" from Earth history alone is staggeringly broad and deep.

Previous posts on the topic have been made. A few 3rd-party supplements touch on some of these abilities in PF1.

It will be fascinating to see where this goes in PF2.


I agree that it is unlikely to be the case that the monk is turned into an archetype, but I do wonder how different it will be than a rogue or a fighter with a focus on unarmed and unarmored combat (neither of which feel like they will be completely outside of the realm of a couple of feats or proficiency choices). The KI system will be interesting and probably should be a bigger part of the class upfront than the PF1 Monk, which means it will need to occupy the design space of spell points. This will be a little tricky because, contrary to the religious historical background of the monk, they don't occupy the healing/buffing design space of divine magic.

I too am hoping that the monk occupies a more interesting design space than "martial artist" since that feels like it really should fall in the fighter's domain. But I'd rather see the monk folded into the fighter if "martial artist" is the design goal, or whatever the paladin/defensive holy champion design space is if the divine powers are the bigger goal, than have another vestigial class that feels forced into a game that doesn't have something more interesting to do with the class. Especially if 3 splatbooks into the system we end up with archetypes that dumps a bunch of unarmed, unarmored fighters, rogues and paladins into the mix.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

As others have said, there's plenty of design space for Monks (and similarly, Barbarians) to differentiate themselves from Fighters with a focus on supernatural abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up giving Monks a spell point pool they can use for ki powers, really.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber
Arachnofiend wrote:
As others have said, there's plenty of design space for Monks (and similarly, Barbarians) to differentiate themselves from Fighters with a focus on supernatural abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up giving Monks a spell point pool they can use for ki powers, really.

It would be really weird if they didn't.

Although that brings up a point. We know now that even powers are attached to a spell list, even if you can't use a slot to cast them. Do we think Monks are getting Arcane or Occult powers? I can see an argument made for either, and both might shape the direction the class goes in different ways.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

While we're at it, I'd like to see the Kundalini chakra stuff become ki powers / class feats, not an awkward feat chain and an archetype to make them usable. Great flavor, awkward first attempt. Baking that in not as a requirement of all monks but a well thought out and intended viable option from the start might really add to the class as it compares to other martials and semi-martials.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
As others have said, there's plenty of design space for Monks (and similarly, Barbarians) to differentiate themselves from Fighters with a focus on supernatural abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up giving Monks a spell point pool they can use for ki powers, really.

It would be really weird if they didn't.

Although that brings up a point. We know now that even powers are attached to a spell list, even if you can't use a slot to cast them. Do we think Monks are getting Arcane or Occult powers? I can see an argument made for either, and both might shape the direction the class goes in different ways.

Depending on the "school" (for lack of a better term),a Monk's Qi powers may access any one of the spell lists.


Pathfinder Adventure, Adventure Path, Starfinder Adventure Path Subscriber

Ooh, what if Monks got schools that differentiated themselves by allowing their students to pick from different casting traditions? We can start small and pick up two martial oriented schools and two more magically inclined, with the ability to tap elements might or channel the chakra of themselves or others (as Shiroi mentioned), Later on we might get monk schools that allowed domain powers of thier deities, or became fiendish, and later on a couple schools that either allowed wildshape (shifters return!) or became one with animals and plants.

Edit:

The Mad Comrade wrote:
Depending on the "school" (for lack of a better term),a Monk's Qi powers may access any one of the spell lists.

As you can see, I just realized that was the obvious answer, but has it actually been confirmed?

*cries* I really want the monk blog post nooooow*cries*

Shadow Lodge

1 person marked this as a favorite.
AnimatedPaper wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
As others have said, there's plenty of design space for Monks (and similarly, Barbarians) to differentiate themselves from Fighters with a focus on supernatural abilities. I wouldn't be surprised if they end up giving Monks a spell point pool they can use for ki powers, really.

It would be really weird if they didn't.

Although that brings up a point. We know now that even powers are attached to a spell list, even if you can't use a slot to cast them. Do we think Monks are getting Arcane or Occult powers? I can see an argument made for either, and both might shape the direction the class goes in different ways.

I could divine in the way of self-enlightenment.


Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I definitely want the monk to be its own class, have loved it since 1st Ed (Grand Master of Flowers, classic); many of its abilities/features fall outside of a fighter.

As for the unarmoured deal, I do hope they offer a way for other classes to go without armour, like the barbarian, cleric, maybe a certain paladin archetype.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

One thing that I think they will definitely try to fix is the complete lack of viable build options the PF1 monk had.

I really hope PF2 monk can be built in a number of different ways and still be effective and fun.

And I really really hope that there are options that can be chosen that'll make the monk go deep into the land of Wuxia.

Another set of options could make the monk into a street fighter or a bar brawler or a drunken master or a maneuver master, or a mystic wanderer performer of Wisdom based miracles.

And there's of course the very very popular Zen Master archer that would be great to be able to build right from core.

If 2E can allow an All monk party to be viable then that would be astounding.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Hopefully, you'll be able to make a fighter into a brawler, so that class would be unneeded.

But for the monk, differentiating with the ki mysticism is probably a good idea.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
FedoraFerret wrote:
Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.

^THIS^ Also if I am not mistaken, my understanding is this pool of points is the same for all characters so (Ki, Spell, Rogue Talents, eventually Grit) are all fulled from the same points. So your 9th level cleric will have the same amount of points as the Cleric 3/Monk 3/Rogue 3.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Justin Franklin wrote:
FedoraFerret wrote:
Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.
^THIS^ Also if I am not mistaken, my understanding is this pool of points is the same for all characters so (Ki, Spell, Rogue Talents, eventually Grit) are all fulled from the same points. So your 9th level cleric will have the same amount of points as the Cleric 3/Monk 3/Rogue 3.

I hope not.

Liberty's Edge

1 person marked this as a favorite.

Officially, only Spell Points cross class thresholds (and even then, they just use whatever stat is highest, like Ki points for a Monk/Ninja in PF1).

They've specifically stated that no non-spell resources will use Spell Points. I can definitely see Ki Powers falling under the spell point banner but Rogue things or Grit? No.

Silver Crusade

Pathfinder Companion, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Officially, only Spell Points cross class thresholds (and even then, they just use whatever stat is highest, like Ki points for a Monk/Ninja in PF1).

They've specifically stated that no non-spell resources will use Spell Points. I can definitely see Ki Powers falling under the spell point banner but Rogue things or Grit? No.

Then there's also Rage.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Monks probably add the Forceful, Sweeping, and Agile property to their fists as a class feature.
This helps with emulating flurry of blows.
Forceful: +1 damage if same person in an additional attack (stacks)
Sweep: +1 to hit a second person in an additional attack (stacks)

That helps them tremendously I think.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Justin Franklin wrote:
FedoraFerret wrote:
Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.
^THIS^ Also if I am not mistaken, my understanding is this pool of points is the same for all characters so (Ki, Spell, Rogue Talents, eventually Grit) are all fulled from the same points. So your 9th level cleric will have the same amount of points as the Cleric 3/Monk 3/Rogue 3.

I dont think a cleric 3/monk 3/rogue 3 will even be possible in PF2. It would be a cleric 9 with feats from the rogue and monk pool.


Planpanther wrote:
Justin Franklin wrote:
FedoraFerret wrote:
Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.
^THIS^ Also if I am not mistaken, my understanding is this pool of points is the same for all characters so (Ki, Spell, Rogue Talents, eventually Grit) are all fulled from the same points. So your 9th level cleric will have the same amount of points as the Cleric 3/Monk 3/Rogue 3.
I dont think a cleric 3/monk 3/rogue 3 will even be possible in PF2. It would be a cleric 9 with feats from the rogue and monk pool.

I must have missed that being how multiclassing will work, but I have to say, if that true, that really increases my enthusiasm for PF2 (along with paladin's righteous spirits and more monsters having special gimmick moves). I was impressed by 4e and 5e's "fixes" for multiclassing, but this might be the best.


I don’t think we have any previews or dev statements that it works like that. We’ll have to see.


For me, the Fighter should represent a pinnacle of martial skill - he may possess abilities useful outside of combat, but apart from stuff like strategy, weapon/armour maintenance and the like, should probably not be defined by the class as they're likely to vary drastically on an individual basis.

Monks, by contrast, while physically capable, are more focused upon the spiritual and probably disdainful of warfare. As a result the monk would focus more on achieving physical and mental perfection not to overcome his enemies, but as an end in itself.

As far as competency goes, a Fighter who chooses to devote himself to unarmed combat or a monk-appropriate weapon should be roughly comparable.


Mechagamera wrote:
Planpanther wrote:
Justin Franklin wrote:
FedoraFerret wrote:
Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.
^THIS^ Also if I am not mistaken, my understanding is this pool of points is the same for all characters so (Ki, Spell, Rogue Talents, eventually Grit) are all fulled from the same points. So your 9th level cleric will have the same amount of points as the Cleric 3/Monk 3/Rogue 3.
I dont think a cleric 3/monk 3/rogue 3 will even be possible in PF2. It would be a cleric 9 with feats from the rogue and monk pool.
I must have missed that being how multiclassing will work, but I have to say, if that true, that really increases my enthusiasm for PF2 (along with paladin's righteous spirits and more monsters having special gimmick moves). I was impressed by 4e and 5e's "fixes" for multiclassing, but this might be the best.

You must be a clean shaven version of me from an alternate universe.


Rysky wrote:
I hope not.

At a guess "SLAs" are now covered by spell points (because they are spells) but Ex and Su abilities will be governed by different rules.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Planpanther wrote:
Justin Franklin wrote:
FedoraFerret wrote:
Honestly, in much the same way that Paladins have become spell point casters rather than quarter casters, I wouldn't be surprised to see monks become spell point casters as well. It would incorporate the popular Qingong archetype into the basic chassis, fit with the idea of mystical wuxia fighters, and unify all of their various ki powers and abilities into a straightforward system.
^THIS^ Also if I am not mistaken, my understanding is this pool of points is the same for all characters so (Ki, Spell, Rogue Talents, eventually Grit) are all fulled from the same points. So your 9th level cleric will have the same amount of points as the Cleric 3/Monk 3/Rogue 3.
I dont think a cleric 3/monk 3/rogue 3 will even be possible in PF2. It would be a cleric 9 with feats from the rogue and monk pool.

Yea I wasn’t sure how they would write it but that was the old standard, so I went with that.


Pathfinder Companion, Maps Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Deadmanwalking wrote:

Officially, only Spell Points cross class thresholds (and even then, they just use whatever stat is highest, like Ki points for a Monk/Ninja in PF1).

They've specifically stated that no non-spell resources will use Spell Points. I can definitely see Ki Powers falling under the spell point banner but Rogue things or Grit? No.

I just don’t want to get where we have five different pools of points to track. One pool that powers anything that costs points makes more sense, but that depends on how multiclassing works of course. Now if grit for example isn’t a pool of points anymore then that is cool too.

Liberty's Edge

Justin Franklin wrote:
I just don’t want to get where we have five different pools of points to track. One pool that powers anything that costs points makes more sense, but that depends on how multiclassing works of course. Now if grit for example isn’t a pool of points anymore then that is cool too.

I wouldn't be surprised if there's one standardized 'martial' pool (maybe Stamina Points?), or if it's a policy thing that Martial stuff doesn't usually have pools of points in the first place, but they won't use Spell Points for it.

Different pools are also being reduced, but they aren't gone entirely. Clerics have a separate pool for Channel Energy, for example. I wouldn't be surprised if Rage or Bardic Performance were also separate pools unconnected to anything else (though Bardic Performance could easily be Spell Points, too...or one action cantrips exclusive to the Bard). What would surprise me is if there were too many exclusive pools beyond those.


I'm pretty sure martial classes won't have a stamina pool they use for extraordinary abilities; that's getting a bit too close to one of the worst things about 4e (every class being functionally the same by all having a list of abilities that they spend points on). We already know Fighters are getting a combo system rather than any stamina point pool, anyways.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

Now I really want the monk preview. THANKS you teases!


If they wanted a shared martial pool that remained distinct in flavor and mechanics from spell points, they could do a shared "rounds per day" pool. So kind of like how the bard and barbarian worked in PF1, you'd get a bunch of rounds up front that increased with each additional ability that tapped the pool, and could then spend it to accomplish various deeds or maintain special stances and states. Keeping up two of these "stamina" abilities simultaneously would burn the pool at twice the rate.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
If they wanted a shared martial pool that remained distinct in flavor and mechanics from spell points, they could do a shared "rounds per day" pool. So kind of like how the bard and barbarian worked in PF1, you'd get a bunch of rounds up front that increased with each additional ability that tapped the pool, and could then spend it to accomplish various deeds or maintain special stances and states. Keeping up two of these "stamina" abilities simultaneously would burn the pool at twice the rate.

Oh gawds no. One of the things I dislike most about PF1 is the rounds/day mechanic for barbarian rage and bardic performance. Those were a major letdown from the way those worked in 3.5e (uses per day that lasted until you stopped (for bards) or for X rounds (for barbarians)).


1 person marked this as a favorite.
Staffan Johansson wrote:
Fuzzypaws wrote:
If they wanted a shared martial pool that remained distinct in flavor and mechanics from spell points, they could do a shared "rounds per day" pool. So kind of like how the bard and barbarian worked in PF1, you'd get a bunch of rounds up front that increased with each additional ability that tapped the pool, and could then spend it to accomplish various deeds or maintain special stances and states. Keeping up two of these "stamina" abilities simultaneously would burn the pool at twice the rate.
Oh gawds no. One of the things I dislike most about PF1 is the rounds/day mechanic for barbarian rage and bardic performance. Those were a major letdown from the way those worked in 3.5e (uses per day that lasted until you stopped (for bards) or for X rounds (for barbarians)).

Part of my thought process was that by phrasing it as stamina, it would be in flavor for the pool to regenerate over time. At the very least, getting half of it back after a short rest, all of it back after a long rest.


I'm hoping the martial classes get more distinct things than just a stamina pool. Fighters are getting there with the combo system which I'm hoping other martials get some limited access to as well.

I'm hoping rage is more of an ebb and flow during the fight using the condition tracking system, rage(1) rage(2) giving scaling bonuses and unlocking more powerful abilities based on hitting or getting hit to increase the level.

Monks I could see getting a small ki-pool that the can meditate to regain points so they have a more encounter based feel to them and open up interesting meditation feats.


If other classes get access to the combo system I take back all of the praise I've given to it. If the point of it isn't to give Fighters a cool thing all their own, then there isn't a point at all.


Arachnofiend wrote:
If other classes get access to the combo system I take back all of the praise I've given to it. If the point of it isn't to give Fighters a cool thing all their own, then there isn't a point at all.

I wouldn't expect barbarians, paladins, rangers or rogues to get access to the combo system. But it really feels thematically right up the monk's alley, so I could see a lot of it being shared with the monk specifically.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what exactly they do go with for our martial artist class~

Liberty's Edge

Arachnofiend wrote:
If other classes get access to the combo system I take back all of the praise I've given to it. If the point of it isn't to give Fighters a cool thing all their own, then there isn't a point at all.

As Fuzzypaws notes, I'd expect Monks to get it too, but probably a very different selection of Stances and Combos.

I'd be surprised if anyone else got it.


Fuzzypaws wrote:
Arachnofiend wrote:
If other classes get access to the combo system I take back all of the praise I've given to it. If the point of it isn't to give Fighters a cool thing all their own, then there isn't a point at all.

I wouldn't expect barbarians, paladins, rangers or rogues to get access to the combo system. But it really feels thematically right up the monk's alley, so I could see a lot of it being shared with the monk specifically.

I guess we'll have to wait and see what exactly they do go with for our martial artist class~

So full circle, the fighter and the monk need to occupy the same design space: the Martial Artist.

(Tongue and cheek answer, although I am curious to see what they do with Ki energy, even though I find it a somewhat problematic construction. I much preferred how 4th edition ran with it as actual psychic energy.)


I'd be fine with only fighters getting the combo system so long as other classes can access it through multiclassing into fighter.

1 to 50 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Pathfinder Playtest Prerelease Discussion / Unpopular opinion: Is the PF1 monk now a fighter? All Messageboards