So I've been looking through the monk lately, as it'll be my first 2e character as playtests pop up over roll20, and I have some opinions on the matter.
I like how they aren't "as" MAD as they used to be. The fact your stance kinda determines whether or not you're strength based or dex based does it justice. (Granted as is, the dex stances are remotely better than dragonstyle, as dragonstyle to work requires cha building for intimidate. Wheres my stre to intimidate feat paizo??)
I have beef with paizo removing my wisdom to AC stuff. Right now, the max AC without reactions or circumstance bonuses, is 16 for monk. As a front liner. If I wanted low AC on a front liner, I'd play rogue. Monk was the nice mix of fighter and rogue, with the unarmed flavor I've always loved. Honestly, if paizo just added a very simple "Your wisdom mod is added to your ac while unarmed." as a bonus instead of unarmored proficiency, I feel it would be MUCH better. Yes removal of this makes monk less MAD. Yes you don't have to pick ki power stuff.
However at this point, we're playing a brawler, not a monk.
Ki is the butter to a monk's bread. Laying it behind a feat tax feels very lazy in how they went about letting people choose to have a ki power or not. Honestly, with how stances are now, I'd almost say either give us more ki powers drawn up from 1e and make them spread themselves out every 3 levels (so dead levels without class feats, and every 2 class feats you get 1 ki power choice) to balance them out, OR just make stances a seperate monk choice, where you pick 1 stance for free, and get its higher tiered stances at their levels and make getting the others cost feats. It would lessen the almost forced human choice for monk at this point, especially at level 1.
TL;DR I feel stances and ki powers are janky, and I miss wisdom to AC.
What's everyone else's thoughts on this?
Personally, I think anything to make them less MAD is a good thing.
1e monks were unplayable unless your GM gave you a 40 point buy.
2e monks are worse than any other martial (except maybe ranger) but are at least playable.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Unchained monks I felt were fine though. You'd dump charisma for min maxing of course, keep con to 12, and bump up your wisdom and dex, and focus more on agile and finesse attack memes for damage and hits. (Amulet of mighty fists, guided enchant was my favorite combo where I'd just get my wisdom to 40+ and have my to hit, damage, and AC all based around 1 stat)
Though 2e monks still feel MAD, but more in how each stance works, (mainly Dragon Stance needing a bit of charisma for intimidation bonuses)
I'd like them to go more in the route of major the Monks into DEX and WISDOM instead of Dex and Strength.
Brawlers are Strongmen.
Monks are Meditative Ki users.
Its how I've always differenciated the two, but if you don't take ki strike feat, you're a brawler basically.
DEX is no more meditative than STR. Training body and mind doesn't mean letting your arms be noodles.
@Vessa: 1E CRB Monks were good past 30 point buy, not 40. UnMonk is good at 20 point buy with a good build, and amazing at 25 point buy.
|
2 people marked this as a favorite.
|
I find the monk would be better if it didn't pretend strength monks were a viable option, and if ki strike and weapon proficiencies were actually part of the class by default.
Ki strike would still be junk, but at least it wouldn't be a tax to open up later abilities.
Telling players they just shouldn't participate at ranged combat or flying encounters is just outright bizarre, and fundamental design problem for several classes or options (animal totem barbarian as well)
Blazerawl wrote: Wheres my stre to intimidate feat paizo?? Right here.
http://paizo.com/threads/rzs3gsue?Physical-vs-Verbal-Intimidation#1
It's a mistake that's gone on too long.
Blazerawl wrote: What's everyone else's thoughts on this? Monks are not in a good place right now. They seem more of a MAD class than ever.
It seems like you should be able to create a monk with the prime stat as either Str, Dex, or Wis. But I haven't been able to figure it out yet.
When I made a Dragon Style monk with an 18 Str but we felt forced into taking 16 Dex as well, and even now his AC is horrible at only 15. Basically he has the same AC as other martials but in the process he has nothing left for any other stats because he had to have a high Str and Dex.
Monks in PF1 didn’t do as much damage, but they were compensated by being extremely front loaded with lots of abilities. Now, they get almost nothing at 1st level and need to spend feats to get what they previously had! I feel that monks need more class feats than other classes.
And I have no idea how to make a Dex monk (crane style I assume) if you don't get Dex to damage.
And how do you make a Wis monk, when you have only 4 spell points per day? So you get 4 attacks per day? Sigh. You’d need monk cantrips to support it.
If I misunderstand, let me know.
Pathfinder Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
I'm playing a 4th-level monk in the playtest. We've run the first couple of encounters and there do seem to be some issues. I'm running 14 STR, 18 DEX, 10 WIS with 20 AC and Dragon Stance. I know this isn't min-maxed, but I'm looking specifically for how viable non-optimized builds are in the playtest.
The first problem I came across is that monk equipment isn't compatible with the potent consumables. Oil of potency doesn't work with Handwraps of Mighty Fists or Bracers of Armor meaning that they can't pop those items for more difficult fights. This seems like an oversight.
Additionally monks don't have good options for a 3rd level item as Bracers of Armor and Bracers of Missile Deflection are mutually exclusive.
It seems that you can either go stance-based or power-based making a choice between STR or WIS, but DEX feels like a must. And with the addition of Flurry, it really does feel like the monk is designed to be exceptionally mobile class. I can move around a bunch and still make multiple attacks, weaving in an out. With that though, it feels like Guarded Movement should just be baked into the class.
Additionally low-level monks have a very limited array of options for ranged weaponry. Monastic Weaponry feels like a must-take a lot of the time, though you could just take the -2 penalty for using a bow. One weirdness is that if you're going to take a penalty anyways, there's no reason not to go all the way and pick up an exotic weapon instead. Though one thing confused me -- if you do take Monastic Weaponry that doesn't mean you can actually find any as they're still uncommon.
Vessa wrote: Personally, I think anything to make them less MAD is a good thing.
1e monks were unplayable unless your GM gave you a 40 point buy.
2e monks are worse than any other martial (except maybe ranger) but are at least playable.
25 wasn't to bad. far from unplayable anyways. 30 and they got pretty strong. never tried 40 although I did want to try an all 18's game so that probably wouldn't be to far off from that.
SuperSheep wrote: Though one thing confused me -- if you do take Monastic Weaponry that doesn't mean you can actually find any as they're still uncommon. Monastic Weaponry gives you access to all uncommon weapons with the monk trait.
Monks IMO are class that I assume to play as backfield disruptors, 2 strides and flurry which gives you lots of mobility without losing damage.
They also have feats that deal with grappling, teleporting, leaps and some self-heals, which to me also confirms the idea of mage killers, get in and lock down a problematic enemy while being separated from rest of the group that is engaged in the main melee.
they are not frontline fighters, and they are not rogues, they are class that specializes in high mobility to deal with key backline enemies
Vessa wrote: Personally, I think anything to make them less MAD is a good thing.
1e monks were unplayable unless your GM gave you a 40 point buy.
2e monks are worse than any other martial (except maybe ranger) but are at least playable.
1e Monks were great if you took the Tetori, flowing monk, or zen archer archetypes. Mostly because they all eliminated strength as a required stat. Also because Grappling and Archery were ridiculous cheese... And flowing monks being impossible to hit and tripping+repositioning people all over the place was really irritating. It was also doable if you picked up an Agile Amulet of Mighty Fists so that you could ignore needing strength that way.
Jason S wrote: Monks in PF1 didn’t do as much damage, but they were compensated by being extremely front loaded with lots of abilities. Now, they get almost nothing at 1st level and need to spend feats to get what they previously had! I feel that monks need more class feats than other classes. I completely agree. I think Monks are really hurt by this new system of picking your class features. Because now they do have some vaguely reasonable combat options, but you have to pick them over the fun, situational powers the old monk had as a given. It's not a fun choice to pick between being helpful in combat and having cool, situational abilities, because you'll feel pretty pressured to always pick the first option.
Maybe if they separated out the stance/offensive feats from the ki powers/utility feats into their own pools? And when they get a class feature they get one of each (or get both every other class feature if they feel that gives monks too many abilities). That way they can get both without being too good at combat (or having too many utility powers).
also if there is no backline, like mages or archers, high mobility lets them get into flanking positions easy, and if engaged in combat while flanking flowchart would be, something(stance, ki power, grapple..) + flurry + assist(cooperative human will get it at -6 + flank).
This can be done with every monk no matter the build.
Zorae, for me it seems monks have different builds now, rather than good stuff and cool stuff, and I am sure they will get more options on release.
Even stuff like catching arrows and throwing them back is really useful if you play smart and know your role.
So you go against archers and mages primarily or providing flanking and assists, you will be usually targeted by archers since you will be closest, and with your mobility, you can position yourself to get a screening with the enemy you engage, which means you can capitalize on those second or third ranged attacks against you
duje wrote:
Zorae, for me it seems monks have different builds now, rather than good stuff and cool stuff, and I am sure they will get more options on release.
Even stuff like catching arrows and throwing them back is really useful if you play smart and know your role.
So you go against archers and mages primarily or providing flanking and assists, you will be usually targeted by archers since you will be closest, and with your mobility, you can position yourself to get a screening with the enemy you engage, which means you can capitalize on those second or third ranged attacks against you
Arrow Snatching is the same level as Evasion :/ (and Tangled Forest Stance which sounds hecka cool and useful)
Deflect Arrow (the pre-req for throwing the arrow back) is the same level as slow fall (a fun situational ability that's got even less applications than arrow snatching but gosh darn is it iconic and cool) and what is essentially the new mobility (seems pretty important if their new role is supposed to be high mobility skirmisher).
Recent threads in Classes
|
