Why Monk never access Legendary rank in unarmed attack ? Also some idea for reaction.


Scarab Sages

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Just why ?

We are talking about THE fantasy class for martial art character that rely on unarmed attack (and some weapon if the feat is taken) but somehow they never get better than master while the figurer (who probably used a manufactured weapon 98% of the time) somehow become Legendary in unarmed weapon.

On another topic I found the Monks felt underwhelming because they have no reaction until High level.

Maybe we could add some reaction (general or locked in stances ?).

Here are some options :

- Trip/push opponent that use actions with the "move" or "concentrate" trait.
- Counter-attack if someone miss you by 1 (locked in Grue maybe ?)
- Take a step when hit (for the "mobile" feel)

Just random ideas. Would need more research to make it balanced.

I also that as a whole every classes would Feel better with more reactions.

A Dodging Panache-style reaction would be best.

2 people marked this as a favorite.
Pathfinder Companion, Maps, Starfinder Adventure Path, Starfinder Maps, Starfinder Roleplaying Game, Starfinder Society Subscriber; Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber

And why do they only start out as trained with unarmed attacks? Since the fist is a simple weapon, this gives them no advantage over most characters.

If Monks started out with expert proficiency in unarmed strikes and every ability that improves monk unarmed strikes advanced proficiency one step higher, both problems would be solved.

2 people marked this as a favorite.

For the same lack of reason that noboby gets Legendary proficiency in Light Armor. The classes were all poorly written in regard to having access to the proficiencies they need. Every nonspellcasting class (Alchemist*, Barbarian, Fighter, Monk Paladin, Ranger, and Rogue*) should at the very least become a Master of their optimum proficiency set through level-advancement (light armor, reflexes, and finesse weapons in the rogue's case for example), legendary in most of that set (say 2/3rds), and have the ability to become legendary in the remainder of that set without archetyping. Many classes don't even come close... Archetypes are a fine place to give out legendary proficiencies you cannot otherwise have... But a Fighter shouldn't have to become a Grey Maiden/Stalwart Defender just to 'cap-out' their heavy armor and shield proficiencies. Nor should a Paladin need to archetype to become legendary in proficiency with their chosen weapon, nor should a Monk for Unarmed Attacks.
*Arguably, the Alchemist and Rogue could be considered support classes, but they should still be able to compete in combat in their own way (just like the Barbarian can compete in a social encounter, but might lag behind a little)

Also despite being 'counted as a simple weapon' those classes which advance Unarmed Attack proficiency always do so seperately from 'other' simple weapons, and the unarmed trait makes it explicitly clear that unarmed attacks are not actually weapons. Fist is literally only given a table entry for ease of reference, and because unarmed attacks can possess weapon traits despite not being weapons. I think the entry in the equipment chapter might be in error, and it was really just supposed to say that every player character class (except wizard?) is assumed to be trained in Unarmed Attacks (just like how they're all trained in Unarmored Defense)

I have assumed it was an oversight. the monk should start out as expert in unarmed.

Community / Forums / Archive / Pathfinder / Playtests & Prerelease Discussions / Pathfinder Playtest / Player Rules / Classes / Why Monk never access Legendary rank in unarmed attack ? Also some idea for reaction. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Classes