| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Uh I think the flurry is two attacks for one action from my reading of it. Oh also monk feats further increase the unarmed damage up to a d10 I think 1d8 is average.
| 14 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think you need to actually read the entry for the Monk and try again. For one, you've completely missed the unique unarmed strikes that a Monk gets.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah you need to check out the monk feats.
Got to ninja the lich. Nice!
*vanishes*
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, Flurry is two attacks as one action. This lets you move up, attack twice, then move away, or a host of other options.
Using it to get a fourth attack is generally not the most optimal use, but neither is using your third action on attacks as a Fighter, and having two non-attack actions is better than one.
You definitely need to take a look at the Class Feats, though, Styles can make the Monk's unarmed attacks do up to 1d10 damage. That's a lot more than 1d4.
EDIT: Ninja'd. Still, I think the point stands. :)
While I have you guys here so If I flurry my first attack the MAP would still be -0 -5 -10 etc. correct? not -0 -0 -10 right?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
With stances, most monk strikes go to 1d8, and are agile. Dragon stance makes it 1d10, with backswing but no agile. And if you choose not to take a stance (which you probably should), Ki Strike lets you do a more powerful attack with an extra d6 damage (although only once per fight).
Also, fighters would take a -2 penalty if trying to do lethal damage with an unarmed attack. Monks are the only class who don't take this penalty.
Flurry essentially gives you a free attack per round - your first attack is two attacks, and there's no reason to ever not use it.
Monks seem fine, and I'm super excited to start playing mine in Age of Ashes on Saturday!
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I have you guys here so If I flurry my first attack the MAP would still be -0 -5 -10 etc. correct? not -0 -0 -10 right?
This is correct; your two flurry attacks are calculated at 0 and -5. If you attack a third or fourth time both of those attacks will be at -10.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I wonder if a brawler build is beneficial at all You know monk multi-class fighter? I think it might be the other way around but I don't think the monk really gains anything that way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I wonder if a brawler build is beneficial at all You know monk multi-class fighter? I think it might be the other way around but I don't think the monk really gains anything that way.
The Fighter dedication is absolutely terrible for a Monk but as with all martial classes there are Fighter class feats that can be very attractive. The other way around gives the Fighter access to style stances, though again the dedication itself is awful.
Maybe we can just get like a special brawler one or that class brought back later it is one of my favorites.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So I wonder if a brawler build is beneficial at all You know monk multi-class fighter? I think it might be the other way around but I don't think the monk really gains anything that way.
Probably not much. Monastic Weaponry specifically says it applies only to monk weapons, so you can't flurry with a long sword. You can get AoO at level 4, and there's probably some useful fighter feats, but the dedication itself isn't much use.
EDIT: Monk/rogues ninjas seem to be unbeatable
In-game wise, while not applicable for direct combat power upgrade, a 14+ Monk is the most reliable way to achieve freedom from death by aging. Multiclassing can never achieve this in PF2, so is a Philosopher's Stone (as de-aging elixirs which are usually brewed with the extra money you milk from said stone are missing from Core).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I've (roughly) outlined a monk tank fighting with a bo staff, using Stand Still with reach for area control, stunning fist to slow down weaker enemies and Ironblood Stance for damage resistance. Seemed like a pretty good concept and while I haven't done the math in detail, I'm reasonably sure the number should work out.
While I have you guys here so If I flurry my first attack the MAP would still be -0 -5 -10 etc. correct? not -0 -0 -10 right?
Don't forget that fists are agile, so it'd be -0/-4/-8.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
While I have you guys here so If I flurry my first attack the MAP would still be -0 -5 -10 etc. correct? not -0 -0 -10 right?This is correct, yes. The Flurry action lacks any language changing MAP.
EDIT: Lots of multiclassed Monk/Rogues in this thread...
Also most unarmed are agile so its usually -0 -4 -8.
EDIT: That Monks famous speed in play.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
While I have you guys here so If I flurry my first attack the MAP would still be -0 -5 -10 etc. correct? not -0 -0 -10 right?Don't forget that fists are agile, so it'd be -0/-4/-8.
Some unarmed attacks a Monk makes are not Agile (Dragon Style leaps to mind), but yes, this is true of the ones that are.
In-game wise, while not applicable for direct combat power upgrade, a 14+ Monk is the most reliable way to achieve freedom from death by aging. Multiclassing can never achieve this in PF2, so is a Philosopher's Stone (as de-aging elixirs which are usually brewed with the extra money you milk from said stone are missing from Core).
Druids also have this at 14.
I thought that would be 0/0/-10 too. Happens the same with Power attack and similar?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Power Attack is only one attack, so no. Most things that are two attacks are subject to MAP unless they specifically state that it only increases after the attacks are completed.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think power attack actually is -0 (counts as 2 even though its one attack) then -10. Even though people keep thinking power attack is -5 it is not. (unless you use it on your second attack.)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Also don't sleep on no-action no-cost stunning fish every single round
Hehehehehe.
Sorry, just a typo, I know. But for some reason I found it hilarious. :)
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I think the new Monk is awesome. They really nailed the “give players many ways to make strong but mechanically distinct Monks” angle. For example:
—A Str focused Dex-dumping Monk w Mountain Stance and a Shield (using Human to pick up Shield Block at lvl 1). That yields an AC 19 (21 if you’re raising the Shield!), the ability to block up to 5 damage as a reaction every turn if you raise your shield, and +7 forceful attacks that do 1d8+4. And you have a lot more stats to play with because you don’t need Dex.
—A Dex focused Monk with decent Str and Int and Tiger Stance, a Nimble Elf who starts w a 35’ speed (40 after they take Fleet at 3rd), and who multiclasses into Wizard at 2, getting Shield cantrip and a ranged attack option cantrip, and opportunistically picks out more Wizard MC feats in the future, picking spells with a “supernatural Monk” vibe (Mage Armor, Jump, Feather Fall, Longstrider, True Strike, etc).
—And then there are Wolf Style Monk-rogues for a Ninja vibe, Dragon-Style DPR Monks, and...
So many good options.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So your saying its kraken you up?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also don't sleep on no-action no-cost stunning fish every single roundHehehehehe.
Sorry, just a typo, I know. But for some reason I found it hilarious. :)
"Don't sleep on a no-action no-cost stunning fish..." sounds like an excellent fish marketing campaign, or ancient words of monkish wisdom, assuming the stunning fish is an actual animal, and sleeping on fish is a common practice.
So it seems there is some confusion about how Power Attack and Flurry work with MAP. Is there a concise, simple presentation of the rules for either that we can link on d20PFSRD or AON? I’m kinda frustrated by nt having any physical books, which is exacerbated by these discussions of what I feel are basic functions. This doesn’t feel streamlined.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Flurry of Blows and Power Attack. Neither is especially unclear.
Also don't sleep on no-action no-cost stunning fish every single roundHehehehehe.
Sorry, just a typo, I know. But for some reason I found it hilarious. :)
Stunning fish, courtesy of Monty Python.
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It's very clear to me just reading the Feats. Flurry of Blows says 'Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes normally.' while Power Attack says 'This counts as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty.'
Those are both extremely clearly and unambiguously worded, honestly.
i'm not that clever, i just have a terrible autocorrect on my phone^^
also, you need to hit with EITHER to activate, not both.
Ah! You're right. Still getting used to all the little stuff...
Flurry of Blows and Power Attack. Neither is especially unclear.
Ok, let’s see.
Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature, combine their damage for the purpose of resistances and weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes normally. As it has the flourish trait, you can use Flurry of Blows only once per turn.
For a beginner. Is that symbol “one action”? And I have three actions, but Flourish means I can only use it once per turn. Where in the turn? Can I use flurry as my first, second or third action? And if I do, do I apply my MAP to both of the flurry’s strikes as if they were that first, second or third attack/action?
Already, attack and action are getting confusing. Multiple attack penalty, due to using multiple actions. Hmm. I’m sure it will come together over time. At the moment, clear isn’t helped by having no examples.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And now...
You unleash a particularly powerful attack that clobbers your foe but leaves you a bit unsteady. Make a melee Strike. This counts as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty...
What does that mean? I use the penalty for making a second attack as the penalty for this attack, even if it is my first attack? What if the Power Attack is my second attack? I’m sorry DMW, but honestly, for a beginner, it isn’t clear. I’m sure it will be once you explain it to me and I understand the explanation.
Flurry of Blows and Power Attack. Neither is especially unclear.Ok, let’s see.
Make two unarmed Strikes. If both hit the same creature, combine their damage for the purpose of resistances and weaknesses. Apply your multiple attack penalty to the Strikes normally. As it has the flourish trait, you can use Flurry of Blows only once per turn.For a beginner. Is that symbol “one action”? And I have three actions, but Flourish means I can only use it once per turn. Where in the turn? Can I use flurry as my first, second or third action? And if I do, do I apply my MAP to both of the flurry’s strikes as if they were that first, second or third attack/action?
Already, attack and action are getting confusing. Multiple attack penalty, due to using multiple actions. Hmm. I’m sure it will come together over time. At the moment, clear isn’t helped by having no examples.
If you use it as your first action, you make one attack at -0 and one attack at -5.
If you move as an action, then flurry, you still make one attack at -0 and one attack at -5.
If you move, then strike, then use flurry, your flurry attacks will be at -5 and -10.
If you move, then feint, then flurry as your third action, your flurry attacks are still at -0 and -5, because you haven't made any strikes yet this round.
If you strike, strike, then flurry, your flurry attacks will both be at -10.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
And now...
You unleash a particularly powerful attack that clobbers your foe but leaves you a bit unsteady. Make a melee Strike. This counts as two attacks when calculating your multiple attack penalty...What does that mean? I use the penalty for making a second attack as the penalty for this attack, even if it is my first attack? What if the Power Attack is my second attack? I’m sorry DMW, but honestly, for a beginner, it isn’t clear. I’m sure it will be once you explain it to me and I understand the explanation.
Every time you attack, your multiple attack penalty increases. You roll an attack with what the penalty was before your attack (so your first attack of the round is at +0, and it increases your penalty to -5, or -4 for an agile weapon). Power Attack counts as two attacks for this purpose, but like all other attacks it only increases after the attack is completed, going to -10, or -8 for an agile weapon.
Multiple attack penalty is calculated per attack, not per action, so actions that involve multiple attacks (such as Flurry of Blows) increase your penalty after each individual attack, unless the specific ability says otherwise.
Some additional details can be found here.
@Garretmander: thank you. Hopefully that is all correct. I have no idea what feinting is, but I’ll check it out.
In the first example you gave, is it possible to make a fourth attack with my third action (two strikes with first action, attack with second action, attack again with third action, but at some impossible penalty?
For people like me, all the discussions and -x/-x/-x/ looks like so much algebra until a crystal clear example breaks it down. For folks who have digested the playtest, and played the playtest and now have the rulebooks it is second nature. For me, I have no understanding of the relative weight of options. Thanks for being patient.
|
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
What does that mean? I use the penalty for making a second attack as the penalty for this attack, even if it is my first attack? What if the Power Attack is my second attack? I’m sorry DMW, but honestly, for a beginner, it isn’t clear. I’m sure it will be once you explain it to me and I understand the explanation.
This sounds like you're confused by the basic way Multiple Attack Penalties work rather than the Feat itself. That makes more sense.
The thing to remember is that multiple attack penalties are applied after an attack.
So the first attack in a round, no matter what it says about MAP, is always at -0 from MAP because there were no attacks before it, the second is at -5 (barring things like Agile that reduce it, but they just change the number, not the structure), because there was one before it, and the third and later ones are at -10 because there were two or more before them. Note that all of the abover references only attacks, the number of actions is irrelevant.
So a Power Attack done as the first thing in a turn is at -0. An attack performed after it would be at -10 because it says it counts as two attacks for that purpose. If you make attacks before the Power Attack, it would take penalties like any other attack.
Flurry of Blows is just two attacks at a reduced action cost and interacts with this system completely normally.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
@Garretmander: thank you. Hopefully that is all correct. I have no idea what feinting is, but I’ll check it out.
In the first example you gave, is it possible to make a fourth attack with my third action (two strikes with first action, attack with second action, attack again with third action, but at some impossible penalty?
For people like me, all the discussions and -x/-x/-x/ looks like so much algebra until a crystal clear example breaks it down. For folks who have digested the playtest, and played the playtest and now have the rulebooks it is second nature. For me, I have no understanding of the relative weight of options. Thanks for being patient.
-10 is the maximum penalty (excluding Agile), so you can flurry and make two more strikes, two would be at -10. Which two depends on if you flurry first, second or third.
I’m very sorry to derail the thread.
So Power Attack is only one action, a Melee Strike but it causes the following attack (if there is one) to receive a penalty as if two attacks had been made instead of one.
Is that right?
Every check that has the attack trait counts toward your multiple attack penalty, including Strikes, spell attack rolls, certain skill actions like Shove, and many others.
Just a question on nomenclature. Why “check”? Is this a shorthand/code for making a roll? I’m still trying to wrap my head around Actions, attacks, Strikes etc. It’s simple, eventually, but the capitalisations and their usage are awkward, even though they are meant to be keywords.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’m very sorry to derail the thread.
So Power Attack is only one action, a Melee Strike but it cause the following attack (if there is one) to receive a penalty as if two attacks had been made instead of one.
Is that right?
Correct. It's a single attack that pulls you off balance so a second attack is harder to land a decent hit with.
Every check that has the attack trait counts toward your multiple attack penalty, including Strikes, spell attack rolls, certain skill actions like Shove, and many others.Just a question on nomenclature. Why “check”? Is this a shorthand/code for making a roll? I’m still trying to wrap my head around Actions, attacks, Strikes etc. It’s simple, eventually, but the capitalisations and their usage are awkward, even though they are meant to be keywords.
Yes. A check is a d20 roll. Technically an "attack roll" is an "attack check" but good luck getting that changed in the general discussion
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Any d20 roll is a check, yes. Power Attack is a single Strike, but it takes two actions and counts as two attacks for multiple attack penalty.
At the beginning of the 'Turns' section you can see the different icons for one action, two actions, three actions, reactions, and free actions.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I’m very sorry to derail the thread.
So Power Attack is only one action, a Melee Strike but it causes the following attack (if there is one) to receive a penalty as if two attacks had been made instead of one.
Is that right?
Every check that has the attack trait counts toward your multiple attack penalty, including Strikes, spell attack rolls, certain skill actions like Shove, and many others.Just a question on nomenclature. Why “check”? Is this a shorthand/code for making a roll? I’m still trying to wrap my head around Actions, attacks, Strikes etc. It’s simple, eventually, but the capitalisations and their usage are awkward, even though they are meant to be keywords.
"Playing the Game" pg 443, Checks. Pretty much any time you roll a d20.