Alright with update on simple weapon proficiency equaling unarmed, I am considering making a Rogue/Monk instead of monk.
Take the thief racket, monk dedication at 2, stance at 4 (wolf or tiger), monk moves at 8 and of course flurry at 10.
Won't always need to stance as the base fist is as good as a shortsword, agile, finesse qualities.
Better range option with a shortbow which I can carry and then drop and go straight to punching
Sneak attack.
Great access to skills and skill feats.
Monk on the other hand has better AC, hit points, lvl 1 access to flurry and access to style savant.
I prefer monk+rogue honestly. Strength is fun and has adventure uses, and you don't even need to go too deep into it.
Plus rogue feats are okay but not stellar. I'd get nimble dodge and call it a day.
I'd also go Monk > Rogue, though I would probably end up taking some more rogue feats along the way. Tiger Stance with Skirmish Strike is pretty nice, for example.
Mobility can cover quite some distance with the monk speed bonus.
You can also get sneak attack (even if only 1d6) and later upgrade it with Sly Striker to work even against non-flatfooted enemies.
Blave wrote: I'd also go Monk > Rogue, though I would probably end up taking some more rogue feats along the way. Tiger Stance with Skirmish Strike is pretty nice, for example.
Mobility can cover quite some distance with the monk speed bonus.
You can also get sneak attack (even if only 1d6) and later upgrade it with Sly Striker to work even against non-flatfooted enemies.
Skirmish is a flourish so won't work with flurry, you also wouldn't be able to take it until 12 and if I was going full monk I would want style savant at 12.
Sly Striker is not available until level 16
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items.
Doompatrol wrote: Blave wrote: I'd also go Monk > Rogue, though I would probably end up taking some more rogue feats along the way. Tiger Stance with Skirmish Strike is pretty nice, for example.
Mobility can cover quite some distance with the monk speed bonus.
You can also get sneak attack (even if only 1d6) and later upgrade it with Sly Striker to work even against non-flatfooted enemies.
Skirmish is a flourish so won't work with flurry, you also wouldn't be able to take it until 12 and if I was going full monk I would want style savant at 12.
Sly Striker is not available until level 16 Flurry might not always be the best option. Having another flourish doesn't hurt. Maybe you use it to get into flanking position for a Tiger Slash or something.
Sky Striker comes late but is still pretty nice to have. The good thing about late feats is experience. By the time it is available, you'll know whether or not it's actually a boon to you, depending on party tactics and the like. It also easily enables sneak attack at range.
And the feats I mentioned are probably not the only things you can get from the rogue archetype. They just happened to come to mind when I saw your post.
You've pointed out some of the main differences, so it sounds like you know enough to make the decision. If on the fence, I'd look at the party you're planning on playing with.
If they need more skills, then go Rogue+.
If they need more of a warrior (or already have somebody relying on precision damage), go Monk.
In PFS, go Rogue+ just to cover all the "party needs somebody trained in, even if mediocre" skills like Medicine, Thievery, Diplomacy, etc. That's assuming you're equally able to fulfill your concept w/ either choice.
Some extra factors to consider:
The Rogue/Monk needs 14 Str, which is an unfortunate cost for a Rogue.
As you've pointed out, a punch is similar to a short sword...except a short sword doesn't need a Dedication feat. Nor does a gauntlet (though only agile, not finesse).
Would a monk-skinned Rogue work w/o taking any Monk feats? Assuming you have an image of your PC, could you build them with a gauntlet (as backup "martial art") and Rogue weapons, or is unarmed the main shtick?
Monks have ridiculous mobility and hardly need a ranged weapon (though do have crossbows) so a Rogue's shortbow shouldn't be a factor.
(Rogue's are no slouch either, though less likely to want to separate during combat.)
Monks get Stunning Fist at 2nd, maybe the best early combat feat in the game. It's at 12th for Rogue/Monk due to needing Flurry first.
Even though a Rogue does well in combat (when they can use precision damage that is), the Monk is plain superior.
The inverse is true in regard to skills except a Rogue is ridiculously OP for skills & skill feats (to the point it's close to having a second ladder of class feats).
In the context of the campaign & the GM's style, what's your preference on combat vs. skills?
Have fun,
Cheers.
Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E.
Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then).
Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then). I figured that might be the case. It also lends styles that specifically use other parts of your body, like Dragon Style and its roundhouse kicking, a bit more relevance outside simple damage die. It's a bit of a bummer that all monks are now effectively boxers unless they pick a style, but I'll also need to see how it works in praxis before getting bent out of shape about it.
Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then). I think Flurry of Blows indicates that it can be done with kicks and whatnot.
prototype00 wrote: Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then). I think Flurry of Blows indicates that it can be done with kicks and whatnot. Flurry of Blows just says you make two unarmed Strikes. The only unarmed Strikes you have are Fists and any from Stances or other sources like Heritage or spells. Never mentions other body parts.
Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then). I figured that might be the case. It also lends styles that specifically use other parts of your body, like Dragon Style and its roundhouse kicking, a bit more relevance outside simple damage die. It's a bit of a bummer that all monks are now effectively boxers unless they pick a style, but I'll also need to see how it works in praxis before getting bent out of shape about it. Yeah, I get that. Though as an actual martial artist I will say there are loads of ways to flavor hand strikes that arent just boxing, lol. Even if you take "fist" fully literally, Monks would probably throw out plenty of the hard straight punches you find in karate, not just hooks and jabs (IDK if there's a greater breadth of punches in actual boxing though).
But yeah, kicks are definitely a thing. I imagine it's hard to do really proper-form kicks with your hands full though, arm position and balance is surprisingly important in landing harmful kicks.
|
6 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Edge93 wrote: prototype00 wrote: Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then). I think Flurry of Blows indicates that it can be done with kicks and whatnot. Flurry of Blows just says you make two unarmed Strikes. The only unarmed Strikes you have are Fists and any from Stances or other sources like Heritage or spells. Never mentions other body parts. Flurry of Blows
You can attack rapidly with fists, feet, elbows, knees, and other unarmed attacks. You gain the Flurry of Blows action.
you can use any part of your body.
Unarmed Attacks
Source Core Rulebook pg. 278
Almost all characters start out trained in unarmed attacks. You can Strike with your fist or another body part, calculating your attack and damage rolls in the same way you would with a weapon. Unarmed attacks can belong to a weapon group (page 280), and they might have weapon traits (page 282). However, unarmed attacks aren’t weapons, and effects and abilities that work with weapons never work with unarmed attacks unless they specifically say so.
Table 6–6: Unarmed Attacks lists the statistics for an unarmed attack with a fist, though you’ll usually use the same statistics for attacks made with any other parts of your body. Certain ancestry feats, class features, and spells give access to special, more powerful unarmed attacks. Details for those unarmed attacks are provided in the abilities that grant them.
it's in the rule book twice.
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Huh, my bad. So it is. I must have glossed over it, and I was silly and looked only at the FoB action, not the feature.
Well, that's pretty nice I suppose.
Oh, and the Unarmed trait specifically says only fists and grasping appendages are held by the restrictions of the free-hand trait.
Archer with Monk MC be sounding even better now. XD
|
1 person marked this as a favorite.
|
Rogue Ruffian or Thief with tiger stance monk can do some nasty damage sneak attack with tiger attacks with either str or dex to damage.
Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Perpdepog wrote: Edge93 wrote: Rogue Monk can definitely be a pretty good switch-hitter. Unless I misunderstand bows, you don't even have to drop them to switch to punching, just hold them in one hand, so you can even switch back if needed. D8 Finesse weapon with Dex to damage and Sneak is scary, too. On an unarmed strike no less, so even if you're holding a bow you can still draw and use items. Unless I'm getting editions mixed up somehow, can't you also just kick 'em?
It's possible the rule about any part of your body being viable for an unarmed attack might also no longer exist in 2E. It doesn't actually exist anymore as far as I know. The base unarmed strike is now specifically named Fist, and I have yet to see anywhere the "any body part" language of PF1 (which I often forget was specifically a Monk thing even then). I figured that might be the case. It also lends styles that specifically use other parts of your body, like Dragon Style and its roundhouse kicking, a bit more relevance outside simple damage die. It's a bit of a bummer that all monks are now effectively boxers unless they pick a style, but I'll also need to see how it works in praxis before getting bent out of shape about it. Yeah, I get that. Though as an actual martial artist I will say there are loads of ways to flavor hand strikes that arent just boxing, lol. Even if you take "fist" fully literally, Monks would probably throw out plenty of the hard straight punches you find in karate, not just hooks and jabs (IDK if there's a greater breadth of punches in actual boxing though).
But yeah, kicks are definitely a thing. I imagine it's hard to do really proper-form kicks with your hands full though, arm position and balance is surprisingly important in landing harmful kicks. Thankfully it looks like monks can do them too now. Huray!
Also talking about punch-happy monks has me looking forward to Paizo re-introducing Jabbing Style to the game. I think it could be done quite a bit of service from the new action system.
I'm just not sure you gain enough by going Rogue/monk.
Styles are indeed an upgrade to your normal weapon, but Flurry is much more debatable since at level 10 that you can get it there's already the powerhouses of rogue feats.
Both Vicious and Precise Debilitations at 10 (depending on your Racket) are a huge upgrade for your/your party damage, at 10 as well Sneak savant is just insane.
And then there's the Flourish tag, restricting other quite potent Flourishes you could use already just by being rogue.
For me, a Rogue/Monk's strength is the very early "wear no armor to get a better weapon" choice, but that has the drawback that your AC will suffer a bit till level 10 that you get 20 Dex (since stances require no armor after all)
|
3 people marked this as a favorite.
|
Pathfinder Lost Omens, Rulebook, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
I do not believe that a Thief racket rogue would get Dexterity to damage, as a word of warning.
Quote: When you attack with a finesse melee weapon, you can add your Dexterity modifier to damage rolls instead of your Strength modifier.
If I understand it correctly, unarmed attacks do not count as melee weapons (instead, they are specifically Unarmed Attacks). So unless there is a Thief-only class feat you want, it might not be the best choice for the class.
Xethik wrote: I do not believe that a Thief racket rogue would get Dexterity to damage, as a word of warning.
Quote: When you attack with a finesse melee weapon, you can add your Dexterity modifier to damage rolls instead of your Strength modifier.
If I understand it correctly, unarmed attacks do not count as melee weapons (instead, they are specifically Unarmed Attacks). So unless there is a Thief-only class feat you want, it might not be the best choice for the class.
By crikey I think you’re right.
Oh well, you need 14 Str to get into the monk anyway. Ruffian seems a bit wasted too since you won’t be going for weapons or medium armor. Scoundrel I suppose until a new racket is introduced.
Rek Rollington wrote: Xethik wrote: I do not believe that a Thief racket rogue would get Dexterity to damage, as a word of warning.
Quote: When you attack with a finesse melee weapon, you can add your Dexterity modifier to damage rolls instead of your Strength modifier.
If I understand it correctly, unarmed attacks do not count as melee weapons (instead, they are specifically Unarmed Attacks). So unless there is a Thief-only class feat you want, it might not be the best choice for the class.
By crikey I think you’re right.
Oh well, you need 14 Str to get into the monk anyway. Ruffian seems a bit wasted too since you won’t be going for weapons or medium armor. Scoundrel I suppose until a new racket is introduced. you don't need the medium armor any more than a Strength based monk.
d8 agile, or going into mountain style for d8 "one hander" and +4 ac is still good for early game for a Ruffian.
Scoundrel has actually pretty terrible "combat feats" as opposed to the other two rackets, and going for Monk MC is only for combat, so i don't think that going Scoundrel is good.
Yeah scoundrel requires a good Cha to make the feint reliable which is pretty difficult when you need high Str & Dex and save something for Con. With all the movement options available as Rogue/Monk flanking shouldn’t be too difficult as long as you have a flanking buddy.
Doesn’t seem like any of the rackets 1st lvl options add anything to the Rogue/Monk so if will come down to those later feats.
You can’t apply sneak attack to Mountain Style as they are not finesse or agile unarmed attacks and the Ruffian racket allows all simple weapons which unarmed attacks do not fall into.
So it seems unavoidable you’ll need to go high str and dex and pick the racket that gives you the best feat options later down the line.
|
