| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
... which I very much consider a control effect because getting up only helps their offensive unless they like crawl and stand up...Point of note, if a target is in a position to provoke a reaction with a Stand action, then they will also provoke with a Crawl action.Yep. My player tried this last night. I had to inform him of the bad news.
He asked if Mobility worked for standing up or crawling. I wasn't sure. i don't believe it works for standing up, but crawling at half speed? Maybe I would think. So two actions to crawl slowly 5 feet away, then stand up.
That was generous. Mobility applies to Climbing, Flying, Striding, and Swimming but not Crawling...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Nimble Crawl is a feat. So is Kip up.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
I wish there was a second skill feat that buils on nimble crawl that lets you avoid the -2 to hit while prone, so you can just start combat by lying down and rolling everywhere.
Give me a "Sloth Stance" please.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That was generous. Mobility applies to Climbing, Flying, Striding, and Swimming but not Crawling...... which I very much consider a control effect because getting up only helps their offensive unless they like crawl and stand up...Point of note, if a target is in a position to provoke a reaction with a Stand action, then they will also provoke with a Crawl action.Yep. My player tried this last night. I had to inform him of the bad news.
He asked if Mobility worked for standing up or crawling. I wasn't sure. i don't believe it works for standing up, but crawling at half speed? Maybe I would think. So two actions to crawl slowly 5 feet away, then stand up.
If a player has mobility and is willing to spend 2 actions crawling, I can be a nice DM.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'd like to see more magic items for the big-hitters and many-swingers, not just the accurate hitters.
There are a ton of synergies in this game for being very accurate and not a lot for making more, less accurate swings beyond the things that enable that playstyle in the first place. And many of the things that do exist just aren't good. Poor Forceful...
|
What if, at some appropriate level (not sure what level), Flurry of Blows upgraded to not apply MAP until both attacks were made. And that this was implemented in a way no one else got access to it.I think the "feels good" change to the monk being annoyed that other people can poach their basic trick at 10th level is to simply build an improvement into Flurry of Blows for the monk at some point in their career.
Multiclass Barbarians can rage but never get the 7th and 9th level improvements from your instinct. Multiclass Rangers can Hunt Target but never get the Hunter's Edge add-ons. Multiclass Rogues are limited to 1d6 sneak attack.
It's generally rare for a multiclass archetype to give you the full power identical version of a major ability the class itself gets.
Wouldn’t that be too much, like more efficient in combat than all other martial classes at the same level ?
Wouldn’t that be too much, like more efficient in combat than all other martial classes at the same level ?What if, at some appropriate level (not sure what level), Flurry of Blows upgraded to not apply MAP until both attacks were made. And that this was implemented in a way no one else got access to it.I think the "feels good" change to the monk being annoyed that other people can poach their basic trick at 10th level is to simply build an improvement into Flurry of Blows for the monk at some point in their career.
Multiclass Barbarians can rage but never get the 7th and 9th level improvements from your instinct. Multiclass Rangers can Hunt Target but never get the Hunter's Edge add-ons. Multiclass Rogues are limited to 1d6 sneak attack.
It's generally rare for a multiclass archetype to give you the full power identical version of a major ability the class itself gets.
What does that even mean "more efficient?" Do you mean more damage? More effective as an overall class? What do you mean by making this statement? It provides no metrics and asks a question with no means to answer it.
A monk is not a power class. Isn't listed as a high performing class by damage or any other metric than mobility. Everyone talks of the monk's legendary mobility. How valuable is mobility in a group game where the players need to stay in melee range to share the damage and support each other?
If you run ahead of everyone else to engage an enemy, is that a good idea if they descend on you and you end up taking all the attacks?
Do you need much mobility to move into a flank position? How useful in group play is their mobility?
They don't do more damage than other classes, in fact they are the low end of martial damage.
Their AC is 1 higher than a heavy armor martial. 2 higher than a medium or light armor martial. 1 lower than a champion with Legendary armor. With no armor specialization to assist them.
The monk has an action economy enhancer that according to some if their damage enhancement ability by providing an extra attack per round. From tracking damage with multiple classes, the monk is on the low end of the damage scale regardless of style with their higher damage performing style being Wolf Style across levels after the normalization of Heaven's Thunder.
What metrics are you using to measure this so called "efficiency"?
|
|
Wouldn’t that be too much, like more efficient in combat than all other martial classes at the same level ?What if, at some appropriate level (not sure what level), Flurry of Blows upgraded to not apply MAP until both attacks were made. And that this was implemented in a way no one else got access to it.I think the "feels good" change to the monk being annoyed that other people can poach their basic trick at 10th level is to simply build an improvement into Flurry of Blows for the monk at some point in their career.
Multiclass Barbarians can rage but never get the 7th and 9th level improvements from your instinct. Multiclass Rangers can Hunt Target but never get the Hunter's Edge add-ons. Multiclass Rogues are limited to 1d6 sneak attack.
It's generally rare for a multiclass archetype to give you the full power identical version of a major ability the class itself gets.
What does that even mean "more efficient?" Do you mean more damage? More effective as an overall class? What do you mean by making this statement? It provides no metrics and asks a question with no means to answer it.
A monk is not a power class. Isn't listed as a high performing class by damage or any other metric than mobility. Everyone talks of the monk's legendary mobility. How valuable is mobility in a group game where the players need to stay in melee range to share the damage and support each other?
If you run ahead of everyone else to engage an enemy, is that a good idea if they descend on you and you end up taking all the attacks?
Do you need much mobility to move into a flank position? How useful in group play is their mobility?They don't do more damage than other classes, in fact they are the low end of martial damage.
Their AC is 1 higher than a heavy armor martial. 2 higher than a medium or light armor martial. 1 lower than a champion with Legendary armor. With no armor specialization to assist them....
I assess the in-combat efficiency of Martial PCs through the ability to down opponents without being downed themselves. So, yes, mostly damage expectancy (= average amount of damage x probability to hit).
Wouldn’t that be too much, like more efficient in combat than all other martial classes at the same level ?
I don't know about that. Perhaps my understanding of "Double Slice" is incorrect but it allows for two attacks "each using your current MAP". The way I understand that, is if you have no MAP yet (you haven't made any attacks this round) then both attacks are made at no MAP.
No Double Slice does have a few additional restrictions, such as must be made with agile weapons or you get a -2 penalty on the second attack, and both attacks must be made against the same target. It also cost 2 actions instead of flurry's one.
So how about we modify this a bit.
I think we can make this either an 11th level class feature or perhaps an 11th level class feat.
Precise Flurry! - When you make a Flurry of Blows attack use your current MAP for both attacks. If the second attack is made without an agile weapon you take a -2 penalty. These attacks must be made against the same target, unless the first target is made unconscious or killed by the first attack, and then you may make the second attack against another target in range.If both attacks hit, combine their damage, and then add any other applicable effects from both weapons. You add any precision damage only once, to the attack of your choice. Combine the damage from both Strikes and apply resistances and weaknesses only once.
So now, what I'm suggesting is basically like a 11th level version of double slice. But what's sad is it's still very very good. Because it's like a bonus to your 2nd attack and provides a reason to use agile attacks (slightly better accuracy) or non-agile monk style because both are still getting increased accuracy on their second attack. But it's literally just double slice for monks without spending a second action. But it's also something no one else can poach whether it's a class feat or feature because at level 11 no one else can reach a level to take the feat. I think this is exactly the kind of thing the monk needs to put it in the same realm as other damage focused classes.
I'd be very interested to see how this theoretical class feature would make a monk compare to a fighter at level 11 and above, if someone who is a better at using the DPR tool that has floated around this site wanted to set it up.
While I can calculate DPR by hand, I don't want to do it for each level and I don't know how to use that tool well.
Assuming three attacks for two actions for the monk at 0,0,-8, MAPless flurry wolf stance monk is slightly better than non-double slice fatal pick builds of fighter before accounting for reaction attacks. Assuming both get their reaction attack off, fighter pulls ahead.
If you add sneak attack through rogue archetype, monk beats all non-double slice fighters and is equal to the double slice build with high de/buffing
Assuming three attacks for two actions for the monk at 0,0,-8, MAPless flurry wolf stance monk is slightly better than non-double slice fatal pick builds of fighter before accounting for reaction attacks. Assuming both get their reaction attack off, fighter pulls ahead.
If you add sneak attack through rogue archetype, monk beats all non-double slice fighters and is equal to the double slice build with high de/buffing
Is that keeping in mind that with my proposed version you would only get sneak attack of one of the two improved flurry attacks. And that the 3rd attack while it could benefit from sneak attack, is obviously at a higher MAP (though with wolf style chances are they're prone).
I'm also curious if the fighter double slice build were to take sneak attack how does that compare. Because adding sneak attack to one but not the other isn't exactly a fair comparison.
Is that keeping in mind that with my proposed version you would only get sneak attack of one of the two improved flurry attacks. And that the 3rd attack while it could benefit from sneak attack, is obviously at a higher MAP (though with wolf style chances are they're prone).
I'm also curious if the fighter double slice build were to take sneak attack how does that compare. Because adding sneak attack to one but not the other isn't exactly a fair comparison.
The sneak attack limit and -8 MAP on agile 3rd attack are accounted for. Sneak attack on the double slice brings it up very slightly since you're only possibly triggering it on one of the double slice attacks and not the other or the opportunity attack.
Should also probably be noted that agile grace wolf stance flurry (+2, -1, -4) fighter is still stronger than this though you are giving up 3+ feats, a point of AC and delaying combat reflexes to 14 to make this work on top of the general awkwardness of it.
You could keep adding things to consider like energy mutagen, weapon siphons, ki strike, and so on, but the result is fairly stable I think.
Personally, I think it's mostly fine as the monk is still paying a bunch of feat taxes, an action tax to stance (or another feat tax for savant), has no reach, is stuck with piercing, etc, etc.
Is that keeping in mind that with my proposed version you would only get sneak attack of one of the two improved flurry attacks. And that the 3rd attack while it could benefit from sneak attack, is obviously at a higher MAP (though with wolf style chances are they're prone).
I'm also curious if the fighter double slice build were to take sneak attack how does that compare. Because adding sneak attack to one but not the other isn't exactly a fair comparison.
The sneak attack limit and -8 MAP on agile 3rd attack are accounted for. Sneak attack on the double slice brings it up very slightly since you're only possibly triggering it on one of the double slice attacks and not the other or the opportunity attack.
Should also probably be noted that agile grace wolf stance flurry (+2, -1, -4) fighter is still stronger than this though you are giving up 3+ feats, a point of AC and delaying combat reflexes to 14 to make this work on top of the general awkwardness of it.
You could keep adding things to consider like energy mutagen, weapon siphons, ki strike, and so on, but the result is fairly stable I think.
Personally, I think it's mostly fine as the monk is still paying a bunch of feat taxes, an action tax to stance (or another feat tax for savant), has no reach, is stuck with piercing, etc, etc.
Where do you rank the monk versus the fighter and the rest of the martial hierarchy?
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
As far as I'm concerned, they're in the big blob of 2nd rate martials where most of the crb classes are. They're good and functional, unlike 3rd rates like the swashbuckler, but they'll never be as good as fighter or bow magus and don't have the skill niche of rogue to give them that extra edge.
I could ponder the actual ordering of them, but I'm not that concerned about it.
As far as I'm concerned, they're in the big blob of 2nd rate martials where most of the crb classes are. They're good and functional, unlike 3rd rates like the swashbuckler, but they'll never be as good as fighter or bow magus and don't have the skill niche of rogue to give them that extra edge.
I could ponder the actual ordering of them, but I'm not that concerned about it.
That seems about right.
I like the monk as I like the visual class fantasy. But they really do not hold up well as you gain levels. They are about in that ranger tier for me where they need some help to make them competitive.
Monk damage is low. The important skill Athletics can be matched by nearly any class. Their mobility can be taken by a level 1 spell. Their AC is 1 better than a Heavy Armor Martial master. Their Flurry of Blows can be taken by the archetype at level 10. They have no real damage enhancer like a sneak attack, precision damage, or rage. The monk is lacking. Similar to a non-Giant instinct barbarian who has one big damage schtick, but is not great most other places and too easy to crit.
Wish Paizo would make monks, non-giant barbarians, rangers, and swashbucklers more competitive, but they don't seem to notice these classes are lacking and too many on the forum do not care if they are lacking because they are not comparing their capabilities against other class capabilities to see they are suboptimal and lacking in important key areas by which martials are measured.
Dragon I don't like because resistance is common enough it can be a problem, magic immunity completely negates their rage damage as it is listed as evocation, and there are too many situations where their damage can be reduced by spells when prepared for. If the dragon damage were a true breath weapon and not magical, then they would definitely be number 1.
Animal isn't bad for a defensive type barbarian. Lower damage, but better defenses.
Giant is good in a group when all you need is a weapon the party supports that can do huge damage and take a beating. They improve as you level. At low level the barbarian can get knocked out fairly easy, but at high level they have enough hit points to take the big hits and they dish out so much pain that not much lasts long against them.
It's the inverse of a monk or ranger which starts out pretty good with precision damage providing a nice bump at low level and Flurry of Blows providing a nice action economy boost, then they both fall off in the martial competition as their damage scaling abilities don't scale well and their other abilities don't make up for the lack of scaling.
A giant barbarian scales well. They are absolutely brutal damage dealers at high level, especially against debuffed creatures or groups of mooks where they are a wrecking ball even better than a fighter when using Whirlwind Attack while huge.
Monks and rangers don't scale well. The swashbuckler might scale well if not for the panache issue.
Rogues, fighters, and magus scale well. Bow magus is up there because of being the absolute best ranged damage dealer in the game. Even a regular Magus is up there for damage because their ability scales well, even though they have other issues when squaring off against AoO creatures.
It does strike me as a little stark how much the monk benefits from something that adds damage, like Heaven's Thunder or Multiclassing into Psychic for Psi Strikes.
Something like that in class wouldn't go amiss.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It does strike me as a little stark how much the monk benefits from something that adds damage, like Heaven's Thunder or Multiclassing into Psychic for Psi Strikes.
Something like that in class wouldn't go amiss.
I agree. If Ki Strike lasted a minute, it might be enough. Ki Strike for a focus point for one flurry is ridiculously high cost for a weak ability. Not sure who wrote Ki Strike up, but it is terrible.
When Heaven's Thunder was over-tuned, monk was the best damage dealer in the game. I let a player use it and they were wrecking everything and it scaled well. Way too powerful an ability.
The new Heaven's Thunder might be decent, but the player was so pissed off about the nerf he got rid of Heaven's Thunder and refused to take it again even though it was still his best option. So I did not get a chance to see how well it did after the change.
The monk really needs a damage enhancer. When I roll damage as a high level monk in a group with other martials, it's laughable how weak the monk damage is compared to fighter or rogue. I always think back to that scene in Harlem Nights when Arsenio Hall and his goon are shooting Tommy Guns at Eddie Murphy's character and the driver is shooting a 22 pistol. That's how the monk feels at higher level like you're the comedy damage while the other martial classes are the Tommy Guns.
I'm sure no one not from my age range knows the reference and I'm showing my age. I don't like being the comedy damage martial while the others are firing heavy machine guns.
As for Monk changes that I'd personally want:* A bo staff/polearm stance. Just copying and pasting Whirlwind Stance from the Staff Acrobat archetype would be fine. It's wild that the class has sword and bow stances but not a stance for one of the iconic martial arts weapons.
* Monks (and Champions) to get their bump from Expert to Master (un)armor(ed) proficiency at level 11, when fighters, rangers, and maguses get their bump to Expert, rather than 13 so you don't have a weird two-level interlude where half of the offense-focused martial classes are just as good at defending themselves as the two martials that are hyperspecialized in defense.
Love it, I think this could be a viable solution:
1. Bake in Monastic Weaponry
2. Add a ton of specialized Stances for specific weapons (that require you to be unarmored so that multiclass is less appealing)
But even then... it still seems to me like baking in Stances as a whole as a Subclass and then really souping them up with power is a much more interesting class than what we have.
Having the Monk be about flowing from Stance A to B during a fight makes much more sense to me as a class fantasy than what we have right now, which feels like you can easily compare to other classes because all you have for you is action economy... and other classes also solve for action economy too.
How upset would people be if flurry was taken out of the Monk archetype? While I don't think Monk itself has any problems it is a pretty major feels bad that other classes can steal their class feature. It is basically equivalent to being able to get Legendary weapon proficiency from Fighter archetype.I don't think it's the right solution. I think the best course is making the Monk's FoB much better right around the time other characters have access to it.
Like reducing MAP. Giving the monk something like Agile Grace would go a long way to fixing things.
The monk really needs a damage enhancer. When I roll damage as a high level monk in a group with other martials, it's laughable how weak the monk damage is compared to fighter or rogue. I always think back to that scene in Harlem Nights when Arsenio Hall and his goon are shooting Tommy Guns at Eddie Murphy's character and the driver is shooting a 22 pistol. That's how the monk feels at higher level like you're the comedy damage while the other martial classes are the Tommy Guns.
I'm sure no one not from my age range knows the reference and I'm showing my age. I don't like being the comedy damage martial while the others are firing heavy machine guns.
It's one of two scenes from that movie I can remember. ^^
Anyway, since I haven't yet played a game of 2E since that one session in the playtest, this is a bit concerning for me as a GM and player. Could you give me a rough estimate how much of a difference in damage we are talking about per average hit? I have no idea how long fights last in the high level range in 2E, either (1E fights generally were over in 2-3 rounds, maximum), so a rough comparison of how much health an average Monk takes off an enemy compared to an average Fighter would be interesting, too.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The monk really needs a damage enhancer. When I roll damage as a high level monk in a group with other martials, it's laughable how weak the monk damage is compared to fighter or rogue. I always think back to that scene in Harlem Nights when Arsenio Hall and his goon are shooting Tommy Guns at Eddie Murphy's character and the driver is shooting a 22 pistol. That's how the monk feels at higher level like you're the comedy damage while the other martial classes are the Tommy Guns.
I'm sure no one not from my age range knows the reference and I'm showing my age. I don't like being the comedy damage martial while the others are firing heavy machine guns.
It's one of two scenes from that movie I can remember. ^^
Anyway, since I haven't yet played a game of 2E since that one session in the playtest, this is a bit concerning for me as a GM and player. Could you give me a rough estimate how much of a difference in damage we are talking about per average hit? I have no idea how long fights last in the high level range in 2E, either (1E fights generally were over in 2-3 rounds, maximum), so a rough comparison of how much health an average Monk takes off an enemy compared to an average Fighter would be interesting, too.
I can do that a bit. Explain why it happens.
I think I've seen you on here enough to understand how striking runes work as that ties in to why the damage is not great.
The group I was tracking:
Monk Wolf Style with Rogue Archetype with Sneak Attack and trip.
Maul Fighter with Champion Paladin MC
Rogue Thief
I'll try to detail this by level:
1st to 7th or so level average damage per hit:
Monk Wolf with Striking Rune: 2d8+5 (16 str and specialization)
Average damage per hit: 14
Rogue Thief with rapier: 2d6+6 (18 Dex and +2 spec) with 2d6 sneak attack
Average damage per hit: 13 plus 7 Sneak attack for 20 per hit with sneak attack
Maul fighter: 2d12+7 (18 str and +3 spec due to Master in weapon group)
Average damage per hit: 20
8th to 15th level:
Monk Wolf with greater striking Rune: 3d8+10 (18 str and specialization)
Average damage per hit: 24
Rogue Thief with rapier: 3d6+10 (20 Dex and +6 spec) with 3d6 sneak attack
Average damage per hit: 20 plus 10 Sneak attack for 20 per hit with sneak attack with another +1 for backstabber
Maul fighter: 3d12+13 (20 str and +8 spec due to legendary in weapon group)
Average damage per hit: 33
So you see the striking rune scaling higher with weapon die and the rogue's sneak attack scaling with level.
Let me list a few more reasons as to why the monk suffers to terribly:
Relevant damage abilities:
Monk:
Flurry of Blows: Very good action economy booster at low level.
Ki Strike: Poorly scaling ability and focus point cost for damage.
Stand Still: Reaction based attack keys off movement.
Ki Form: Better Ki strike type ability progression. Not a bad ability for damage boosting.
Rogue:
Gang Up: Flanking from any point around the target as long as ally in range. Improves accuracy.
Opportune Riposte: Easy to trigger reaction based attack that gives another sneak attack.
Rogue Debilitations and relevant Thief Feat for type: Thief allows you to improve sneak attack damage by 2d5 and bully applies a weakness to slashing, piercing, or bludgeoning damage that boosts your damage and maybe some party member damage.
Preparation: Allows you to prepare another reaction for Opportune Riposte a MAPLess attack. Can be good if fights last long and you position well.
Double Debilitation: You can apply the extra sneak attack damage boost or weakness and some status modifier to reduced opponent AC increasing accuracy that stacks with flanking.
Fighter:
Legendary weapon proficiency and critical specialization effects: Provides +2 to hit which improves critical hit chances and stacks with spells like heroism, flanking, and the like. And activates crit specialization effects like prone with the maul.
Combat Reflexes: Extra reaction for attack of opportunity.
Attack of Opportunity: Activates an extra MAPless attack when an opponent does certain triggers like move or use a manipulate action which occurs with every interact and somatic spell component use or standing up after getting knocked prone.
You will notice that the monk doesn't really have much to boost damage from the base striking runes.
No improvement on Flurry of Blows.
And weak additive damage enhancers from Ki Spells.
And an inability to gain more reaction based attacks as well as starting off with a weaker reaction ability as part of the base class requiring them to spend a Feat tax to take Fighter MC and then take AoO to have access to a slightly upgraded version of Stand Still.
The sum total of all these differences as you level up is making monk damage scale very, very badly to the point it is pathetic compared to what a rogue or fighter is dishing out on a per round basis.
I see. While the base damage numbers are not too far away from each other (although "only" 24 - 31 average damage at level 15 seems low, compared to 1E numbers. I'm sure it works out in the system when played, though), the additional abilities from the Fighter and Rogue give them extra possibilities to inflict damage which the Monk apparently doesn't get. I presume multiclass archetypes don't give that possibility, either. Also some people probably want to play a "pure" single class Monk.
Well, I hope the class is improved a bit in the Remaster. We'll see in a few months, I guess.
Thank you for the write-up!
Yes. Raw numbers with a round of attacks and the numbers look reasonably close.
Once you add in the other abilities that allow each class to improve on their key class abilities like the rogue improving on backstab and the fighter improving on reaction attacks, the damage gap opens wide on top of the increased accuracy which leads to more critical hits which when doubling damage and adding in traits like deadly damage really shoots the other classes damage way up while the monk stays pretty static.
This would be ok if the other abilities they have made up for this difference, but PF2 is more of a group synergy game and mobility doesn't synergize well with a group. On top of that mobility is only as good as the area in which you are fighting and not too many areas allow full use of monk mobility on top of not being desirable desirable to have the monk move in and out of combat like a skirmisher because it leaves the other martials and casters open to attack.
Then couple that with AC that is mainly to avoid critical hits rather than truly avoid getting hit and you really don't have much to offer in comparison to higher value classes as a monk.
It's nowhere near the worst class in the game, but like the ranger needs some work to make it competitive with higher value martials.
not being desirable desirable to have the monk move in and out of combat like a skirmisher because it leaves the other martials and casters open to attack.
Which is the whole problem with the skirmisher style of play. If there are other PCs that your enemy can attack are you really gaining much by becoming that difficult to attack? If the rest of the party goes down then you have lost and will have to retreat in failure.
Skirmishers really only work if
- you are much more vulnerable than the rest of the party (unlikely if you are a monk but maybe if you are a glass cannon character of some sort), but it might be temporarily true, or
- if the whole party is doing this tactic, or
- the rest of the party have good other ways to defend themselves.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The monk was not designed with the expectation that you spend 3 actions attacking. Really the only 2 classes where that works out is the fighter and the flurry ranger. Neither of whom have significant damage boosters and rely entirely on accuracy and feats that allow action compression. ( I guess technically the fighter gets a very small damage booster in the form of the legendary weapon specialization boost, so’ll change this statement to significant damage boosting)
Yes, they have the highest agile damage die option, which is poachable early for the fighter, who is a “attack as much as possible class, but the design of the monk is to stick and move. It is why you have so much speed and so many ways to move in ways that other creatures struggle to follow. You are setting yourself up for failure if your goal is to make as many attacks as possible and you pick the monk class. The compression of flurry of blows allows you to spend only one action a turn attacking and still get two hits in. This is better than sudden charge because you can split up the movement and not have to end the turn next to the enemy that you attacked twice. I think that is the real issue with flurry of blows being poachable, using it to get 2 more -8 attacks at best is not playing tactically.
The advantage of getting a legendary save is very undervalued by players, especially one that you get to pick in play after getting a sense of what the campaign is throwing at you. It’s not just +2 to that saving throw, it is never critically failing saves again and only ever taking half damage on a failure. With the feat that gives you a flat +1 to save vs magic, you can be almost immune to the most common magical attacks you face. Then there is the golden body capstone feat that I have never seen in play and doubt most GMs would allow because 20 fast heal all the time if you are not at 0 hp is already a cap stone but also getting deadly d12, when another level feat just gives you deadly d10? But level 20 feats are so far out of most players play experience , I guess the worst thing that happens from over powered options is maybe 2 or 3 encounters gets spoiled.
I think the bigger problem many players face with the monk is, “what am I supposed to do with this class?” I have good HP, good AC, exceptional saving throws, and feats that feel pretty tanky, am I the party tank? Well, you have no marking/sticky element by default and getting champions reactions are incredibly costly for you. Stand still is available pretty early, but it is worse than AoO, and it is very hard for the monk to draw fire if the character has gone all in on being unattackable. So maybe you want to attack as much as possible instead? Well, I think many players want to go this route, but will end up feeling like deriven when they realize that one extra attack with no damage or accuracy boosting really can not compete with the fighter.
The only reason I accept that the fighter is currently a better controller than a monk is because hammer and flail crit specializations knock prone without a save, making them the best control option against foes with high reflex saves, but with that going away, prone locking is not going to be nearly as reliable a combat strategy as it has been thus far. I think that change is going to have much larger ripples than players realize because prone lock controlling is probably the closest thing PF2 has to a strategy that can reliably be used against almost every target without worrying about having to change tactics. Its reliability is 109% dependent on fighters being able to do it just by attacking. Knock down and improved knock down will still work well enough for this to be a good tactic, but if you’ve played it, you know that it is the debuffed AoO attack that often has a 25% chance if critting or better that creates the real powerhouse lock down. Taking away the certainty of knocking them back down on that crit (especially with a not great class DC) is going to make a big dent in the kinds of foes this tactic works against.
So the monk is tanky, very good at making 2 or maybe 3 attacks a turn , is very fast, and has a lot of flexibility in getting focus spell options. It is an incredibly versatile chassis with little opportunity for giving away its versatility options to get more focused specialization. I think people forget that the monk was the master/master hybrid attack/caster class right out of the gate in PF2. Which is understandable because you can build a monk that doesn’t even cast spells, but as soon as you pick up one focus spell, you get the equivalent of multiple archetype feats in proficiency boosting.
not being desirable desirable to have the monk move in and out of combat like a skirmisher because it leaves the other martials and casters open to attack.Which is the whole problem with the skirmisher style of play. If there are other PCs that your enemy can attack are you really gaining much by becoming that difficult to attack? If the rest of the party goes down then you have lost and will have to retreat in failure.
Skirmishers really only work if
- you are much more vulnerable than the rest of the party (unlikely if you are a monk but maybe if you are a glass cannon character of some sort), but it might be temporarily true, or
- if the whole party is doing this tactic, or
- the rest of the party have good other ways to defend themselves.
This is why I like the low dex dragon stance casty monk build. You are a squishy caster that is begging to be attacked, and hitting hard enough to be an obvious threat. Even if they don’t come to you, if they have to move to attack your ally they have wasted an action and you have a decent chance of catching them flanked on your turn. You don’t always have to kite. You can kite until the party is ready to fully spring the trap against 1 for or kite to spread out multiple foes.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Thinking about it, the monk is getting a lot of buffing from the remaster errata. 3 focus points is pretty easy for them, a human can have it by level 2 or more reasonably by level 4 to 6, and the change to flail/hammer crit specializations will bring fighters down a peg.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Flurry of Blows: Very good action economy booster at low level.
Ki Strike: Poorly scaling ability and focus point cost for damage.
Stand Still: Reaction based attack keys off movement.
Ki Form: Better Ki strike type ability progression. Not a bad ability for damage boosting.
What do you mean bad at scaling? +1 is massive, it's the foundation for my Monks dealing crazy damage.
I feel like if Ki Strike has a "nova option" and a "1 minute buff" option, I'd feel a lot better about taking it.
Ki strike scales +1d6 every 4 spell levels. You don't start casting level 5 spells until level 9 and level 9 spells until level 17. If you were imagining that the monk is primarily supposed to function as a striker, then the scaling probably should be closer to sneak attack. This actually makes me curious about whether focus spells and cantrips will continue to heighten by rank, instead of by level in the remastery. The Kineticist heightening by level both made a lot of sense, but is also unduly confusing because of the spell heightening mechanic. If everything not in a spell slot just heightened by level, and only spell slots, which actually pay attention to spell rank, heightened by what slot they were in, I think it would be a lot clearer to many players.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What do you mean bad at scaling? +1 is massive, it's the foundation for my Monks dealing crazy damage.Flurry of Blows: Very good action economy booster at low level.
Ki Strike: Poorly scaling ability and focus point cost for damage.
Stand Still: Reaction based attack keys off movement.
Ki Form: Better Ki strike type ability progression. Not a bad ability for damage boosting.
BTW, have you written a 2E Monk guide? I loved your work on your 1E Unchained Monk guide (basically built my UM, which I finally can start playing tomorrow in a new Iron Gods campaign, around your Jabbing Striker build), so I'd be very interested to see what you might have written up about the 2E Monk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
... but if you’ve played it, you know that it is the debuffed AoO attack that often has a 25% chance if critting or better that creates the real powerhouse lock down...
What debuff are you referring to? IF you are referring to the -2 AC from the target being Prone, there is an error on that play. When a character moves to Stand, they do not leave the square so the action completes before the reaction happens. Consequently, AoO triggered by a prone target standing does not get the benefit of the prone debuff as the target is no longer prone when the AoO happens.
... but if you’ve played it, you know that it is the debuffed AoO attack that often has a 25% chance if critting or better that creates the real powerhouse lock down...What debuff are you referring to? IF you are referring to the -2 AC from the target being Prone, there is an error on that play. When a character moves to Stand, they do not leave the square so the action completes before the reaction happens. Consequently, AoO triggered by a prone target standing does not get the benefit of the prone debuff as the target is no longer prone when the AoO happens.
My maul fighter had a greater fearsome rune. Once I crit once in an encounter the enemy was in a lot of trouble. I know different tables play the prone thing differently. At our table it rarely mattered because once someone went down, it was a pile up and someone was always flanking with the fighter.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Is it just me or am I taking crazy pills that this whole "prone lock" thing isn't really an issue. In the games I've been in, once a person is knocked prone we run it as (and this probably isn't correct by the rules) that if the person provokes, yes the penalties of prone apply, but they cannot be knocked prone because they still have the prone condition on them.
However, even if you ruled that the character loses prone penalties (and status) and then the AoO happens, and on the unlikely chance you crit (it's probably less than 25% chance to crit unless you're fighting enemies lower than your level), the enemy gets knocked back down once. Now they can stand up again, and they could move away or make other smart tactical decisions. They could also after this has happened once, crawl away. Sure, it might provoke but you could get yourself out of range (if they don't have reach weapons or weren't adjacent) and don't have to worry about getting knocked prone a second time. Also, if the enemy has been knocked prone once and didn't get killed that time, and lived long enough to get away and stand they should probably do something to help themselves not be in a situation to let that happen again.
Enemy's moving back towards their allies or even retreating to get help should be a thing.
Is it just me or am I taking crazy pills that this whole "prone lock" thing isn't really an issue. In the games I've been in, once a person is knocked prone we run it as (and this probably isn't correct by the rules) that if the person provokes, yes the penalties of prone apply, but they cannot be knocked prone because they still have the prone condition on them.
However, even if you ruled that the character loses prone penalties (and status) and then the AoO happens, and on the unlikely chance you crit (it's probably less than 25% chance to crit unless you're fighting enemies lower than your level), the enemy gets knocked back down once. Now they can stand up again, and they could move away or make other smart tactical decisions. They could also after this has happened once, crawl away. Sure, it might provoke but you could get yourself out of range (if they don't have reach weapons or weren't adjacent) and don't have to worry about getting knocked prone a second time. Also, if the enemy has been knocked prone once and didn't get killed that time, and lived long enough to get away and stand they should probably do something to help themselves not be in a situation to let that happen again.
Enemy's moving back towards their allies or even retreating to get help should be a thing.
That is indeed the incorrect way to run it. And you may have missed the point. Yes, the enemy can get up again or move away, but look at how many actions have been lost doing that. By the power of prone you've burned a pair of enemy actions while doing a bunch of damage. If baseline success is 60% and the enemy is level+3, then fighter is looking at a 55% hit rate and 5% crit rate before we consider the obvious de/buffs. At minimum you're probably looking at flat-footed/flank circ -2, status +1, status -1 for a 25% chance to crit a +3 boss. If the enemy is under synesthesia that's another 10% chance to crit. If you've got another source of aid, that's another 5-20%. If you've got something bigger than inspire courage or heroism 3rd that's another 5-10%. You can pretty easily reach a 50~65% crit chance on stand which, let's remember, also refreshes the duration on phantasmal doorknob.
A good party has no issue doing terrible things to big enemies and lower level enemies just mean you can use less for the same result as the level scaling does the work for you. Fighter's second reaction makes trying to stand a second time particularly painful as well.
When auto-prone on crit goes away though, not much will change. Phantasmal doorknob crit blind isn't going anywhere. Bola ammo prone on hit and stun on crit isn't going anywhere. You can still just prone normally with knockdown or athletics trip. All that's lost is the chain prone comedy hour and the occasional opening prone on sudden charge. It's annoying but not the end of the world.
Ki strike scales +1d6 every 4 spell levels. You don't start casting level 5 spells until level 9 and level 9 spells until level 17. If you were imagining that the monk is primarily supposed to function as a striker, then blah blah blah.
Ki Strike is about the +1 to attack, the damage is gravy.
You already have access to a lot of great rider effects, what you need is accuracy. So between finding different ways to lower enemy AC and increase your attack with the environment, the no-questions-asked +1 is magnificent to me.
BTW, have you written a 2E Monk guide? I loved your work on your 1E Unchained Monk guide (basically built my UM, which I finally can start playing tomorrow in a new Iron Gods campaign, around your Jabbing Striker build), so I'd be very interested to see what you might have written up about the 2E Monk.
I tried! But I found out I didn't have anything interesting to say.
I did the 1E UnMonk guide because I thought building them was hard but rewarding, and that sharing that knowledge could be a good thing for the community.
2E Monk... get your ability scores right, pick your favorite feats, find a use for your Third Action... you can't really go wrong.
I really like the Monk of this edition, I do! I just feel like a lot of the classes don't have a deep mechanical identity, and because they don't, it's tough to say something interesting about one class in particular that doesn't apply to the rest.
EDIT: WAAAAIT is this the same Jabbing Style Monk than the one you posted in TWENTY TWENTY ONE? DAMN MAN. What happened with the Strange Aeons campaign?
I tried! But I found out I didn't have anything interesting to say.
I did the 1E UnMonk guide because I thought building them was hard but rewarding, and that sharing that knowledge could be a good thing for the community.
2E Monk... get your ability scores right, pick your favorite feats, find a use for your Third Action... you can't really go wrong.
I really like the Monk of this edition, I do! I just feel like a lot of the classes don't have a deep mechanical identity, and because they don't, it's tough to say something interesting about one class in particular that doesn't apply to the rest.
Ah, well. I guess when this edition gets older and more options become available, maybe you'll find the class expansive enough for a guide. At least I hope so, your work is really pretty good.
EDIT: WAAAAIT is this the same Jabbing Style Monk than the one you posted in TWENTY TWENTY ONE? DAMN MAN. What happened with the Strange Aeons campaign?
Actually that's another campaign on another day. I just finished three different games (two entire campaigns, Hell's Rebels and Curse of the Crimson Throne, as well as Rasputin Must Die! as a one-shot adventure) and now Strange Aeons started up in my Tuesday group three weeks ago, we are continueing Ironfang Invasion in the first Friday group and in the second Friday group (we run both groups concurrently on a bi-weekly basis) the Iron Gods campaign for my Unchained Monk, Lucien Kell, is starting up tomorrow evening. All in all, I can't really complain, being a player in three campaigns after only GM'ing for three years in a row. ^^
But, yeah, the UM was originally planned for Strange Aeons, only that in the end, because of some shuffling around of ideas and the GM of the Ironfang Invasion campaign not liking the idea of an Alchemist joining the wilderness focused campaign, I'm playing an Alchemist in Strange Aeons, a Sylvan Sorcerer in Ironfang Invasion and an Unchained Monk in Iron Gods. Can't say that I don't love the variety of characters I can try out. :)
But, yeah, the UM was originally planned for Strange Aeons, only that in the end, because of some shuffling around of ideas and the GM of the Ironfang Invasion campaign not liking the idea of an Alchemist joining the wilderness focused campaign, I'm playing an Alchemist in Strange Aeons, a Sylvan Sorcerer in Ironfang Invasion and an Unchained Monk in Iron Gods. Can't say that I don't love the variety of characters I can try out. :)
Sounds like a hella of a time!
Can't recommend the Dwarf FCB enough for Iron Gods...
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
The monk was not designed with the expectation that you spend 3 actions attacking. Really the only 2 classes where that works out is the fighter and the flurry ranger.
They literally get an extra action of everyone else until their power gets poached at level 10.
What else are they supposed to do except skirmish or flurry?I mean they do have some good two and threee action attacks like One Inch Punch and Wold Drag that are the opposite of Flurry of Blows in that they do extra stuff all for the cost of one MAP. A few of the Ki powers are OK but you will run out of them.
What are you as a Monk supposed to do with your extra action that everyone else doesn't get? I'm not seeing much in class support for anything.
The advantage of getting a legendary save is very undervalued by players.
It is nice but it is not everything. AC is 3 times as important as a save.