| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I don't think the subclasses should majorly rework the class, I think it would be just nice to give the monk an extra feat equivalent at the top. Like you could make "Stance Savant" a subclass instead of a feat, and it would be fine. I strongly suspect the reason that's a 12th level feat is so you can't poach it from multiclassing and not for any other reason.
IMO the worst thing is that they left outwit as is. They could have literally baked outwit into Hunt Prey and most people wouldn't have noticed.
Also, do we know because only the strongest rogue subclasses were buffed while the weaker ones were left as is?
Paizo seems to evaluate the non combat benefits of a class as on par with the direct combat benefits.
Otherwise they would have buffed mastermind for rogue, outwit for ranger, RK in general. But they didnt I think because they really value those things.Monk isnt getting those kinds of benefits, its a combat oriented class so they probably will see monk buffs in the remaster to make it better at combat. i don't think they will get legendary at unarmed, it will make the choice between a weapon monk and an unarmed monk less of a choice.
If they do have paths like we are guessing weapon unarmed and ki then we will probably see more feat support for Ki and weapon monks.
I would rather see them put weapons into stances and allow each stance to benefit each path monk differently. This makes all monks invest in stances and the path just defines the additional benefit you get from the stance.
If that happens then the additional benefits you get in each stance might make stance changes at higher levels more appealing as an extra bonus.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Paizo seems to evaluate the non combat benefits of a class as on par with the direct combat benefits.
Otherwise they would have buffed mastermind for rogue, outwit for ranger, RK in general. But they didnt I think because they really value those things.
Given how many things changed or didn't get changed in striking or odd ways I'm not sure it's reasonable to try to make value judgements like this. Like you say they would have buffed Outwit, but they value out of combat abilities so highly, but almost nothing got changed about the Ranger period.
Plus Mastermind's core benefits are purely combat focused so I'm not sure the point even really makes sense.
Paizo seems to evaluate the non combat benefits of a class as on par with the direct combat benefits.
Otherwise they would have buffed mastermind for rogue, outwit for ranger, RK in general. But they didnt I think because they really value those things.Given how many things changed or didn't get changed in striking or odd ways I'm not sure it's reasonable to try to make value judgements like this. Like you say they would have buffed Outwit, but they value out of combat abilities so highly, but almost nothing got changed about the Ranger period.
Plus Mastermind's core benefits are purely combat focused so I'm not sure the point even really makes sense.
Being int based the mastermind has all the out of combat benefits of mores skills and knowing a bunch of stuff with greater ease. That is an innate benefit of int outside of combat. In fact couldn't a master mind rogue be trained in every non lore skill at level 1 giving them a leg up at any out of combat situation. This is what i believe Paizo highly values against direct combat benefits.
Outwit rangers are even better at skills against prey, that can be a combat benefit but it can also be an out of combat benefit.
In fact couldn't a master mind rogue be trained in every non lore skill at level 1 giving them a leg up at any out of combat situation.Literally every type of rogue can do this.
Well, not exactly. Most rogues start with 10 or 11 trained skills at 1st level, but mastermind rogues in particular since they are likely starting with a +2 or +3 on Int start with 13 or 14. That's not all skills but pretty much is.
I think the major problem comes from the inconsistencies. Scoundrel and mastermind are pretty much carbon copies of each other, but before the Remaster for some weird reason mastermind did work with ranged weapons while scoundrel didn't, and after the remaster they could have granted that same benefit to scoundrels but yet decided to give them a free step action which now makes mastermind be the weird one because it stayed as is. Also, even if Paizo values having more starting skills as a mastermind as something to consider in balance, I would argue that the fact that you have to spend all your skill increases into RK skills compensates that in the worst way possible, more so when most of the RK skills have really bad skill feats for the most part (which is a huge pain for a class like the rogue, since its easy already to not know what to do with your skill feats) and some of them even stop having skill feats alltogether after a certain point. The only optimal way to play a mastermind is with FA since you can take loremaster, Kreighton's Cognitive Crossover, and use all your skill increases and skill feats for other skills making you really versatile.
A human Mastermind rogue with +4 to Int, Skilled heritage, and natural skill feat can have all skills trained and possibly have a lore as well from background.
Thais a lot of investment and probably not advisable but it can be done.
Edit: Sorry you only need skilled heritage as a mastermind rogue human, the ancestry feat can be anything and you can have all skills and a lore from background.
|
I hope Monastic Weaponry either becomes something that monks have innately or, in the case they want to keep it as a feat for some reason, that it also gives you trained proficiency in advanced monk weapons (I mean, they IMO deserve it).
Brawling Focus being a feat and not something you get naturally at 5th level is really weird for a martial class. Even the "half-martials" have baked in critical specialization and monks that are literally limited to just unarmed attacks don't for some reason.
What if it was a 'choose one or the other' class ability, so you at least have the choice to be a brawler monk or weapon monk? I personally don't think every monk should be both.
Ki Blast needs a buff like, right now. The fact that a cleric can fulfill the hadouken / kamehameha flavor much better with Inner Radiance Torrent is really funny to me.
Someone earlier mentioned that it is very likely that Flurry of Blows is going to be renamed. I don't know why but "Fist Barrage" or "Barrage Strike" sound fitting to me. Also someone mentioned that Michael Sayre already confirmed monks aren't going to be getting legendary on unarmed attacks, which is IMO a lost opportunity since getting legendary on both unarmed and unarmored could have simbolized reaching physical perfection. They didn't even need to give them expert at the beggining if they didn't want it, but rather give them legendary at 19th level alongside unarmored kinda like how fighters get legendar with their non-weapon group weapons.
I wouldn't mind if they have a feat to allow them that Legendary proficiency bump to their unarmed strikes...
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
First thing I would do is giving them a free stance/Monastic Weaponry for free at level 1, then pick an actual level 1 feat.
I would make FoB the central piece of the gameplay and give the class more ways to change it or improve it through feats. As it is now you barely use any other form of striking with monks, let's double down on that to give them a sharper identity.
And I think that's it really, I think monk is mostly fine as it is. If you want more damage, you can archetype to get it and the base chassis is really solid already.
Edit: Oh, I would also drop the Ki spells requirement of needing another ki spell beforehand, needing Ki Strike/Rush to get the others is needlessly restrictive.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe just remove the monk trait from weapons altogether.
Make flurry only useable while in a monk stance first and then provide each stance with weapons useable with that stance. You become trained in any weapons useable in that stance along with the unarmed attack it provides.
I am feeling pretty strong on this splitting up weapons into stances thing. This way you never have a monk using a weapon that was not balanced for a stance or flurry of blows but you can remove the monk trait from weapons entirely. It does mean all monks will have an action tax to get into a stance before they can actually flurry.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm expecting something like the following even if literally no other changes are made:
Something something Monk Class Path/Discipline: At first level select one of the three following Disciplines: Ki Adept, Monastic Weaponry Expert, Stance Disciple
Ki Adept: Choose from either Ki Strike of Ki Rush, gain this as a bonus Monk Class Feat and add an additional Focus Point to your Focus Pool. (You start with 2 Focus Points)
Monastic Weaponry Expert: You gain the Monastic Weaponry Monk Class Feat, additionally at level two you also gain Ancestry Weaponry as a Monk Class Feat.
Stance Disciple: Choose from any Monk Class Feat with the Stance Trait that you have Access to, and gain this as a bonus Monk Class Feat. Additionally, once per combat, as a free Action you may switch from any active Monk Stance into another Monk Stance that you've learned provided you meet the requirement for the new Stance.
paths like the ones you mentioned are probably it. In fact the changes to monk are probably already drafted.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe just remove the monk trait from weapons altogether.
The monk trait still exists in the Remaster. It's on PC1 at least.
Maybe just remove the monk trait from weapons altogether.
Make flurry only useable while in a monk stance first and then provide each stance with weapons useable with that stance. You become trained in any weapons useable in that stance along with the unarmed attack it provides.
I am feeling pretty strong on this splitting up weapons into stances thing. This way you never have a monk using a weapon that was not balanced for a stance or flurry of blows but you can remove the monk trait from weapons entirely. It does mean all monks will have an action tax to get into a stance before they can actually flurry.
That would be a perfect niche for a Warrior Poet adaptation to PF2e.
Something like: "Graceful Warrior Stance" (the name of the feature in PF1e that gives finesse to glaives and similar weapons). Or maybe a new, more flavorful name like "Chrysanthemum Stance" (the name of a flourish/talent).
I would love to play that type of character now that my group doesn't play PF1e anymore.
Monk probably going to end up like the ranger with almost nothing.
All I want is two different paths to go offense or defense, hard or soft styles as I see it. If you take the hard path, then you can only take martial styles have the hard style trait and are focused on damage. If you take the soft style, you take the defensive style traits. I think that would be a cool path that fits the monk theme.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would a hard path be strictly superior to a soft path?
Without the ability to protect allies as well a defensive path is kinda bad. Maybe a defense control path vs an offense path would work, at least defense control can keep enemies from getting full rounds on allies.
Honestly, after thinking it for a while, two paths to choose (one defensive, one offensive) kinda seems fitting for the monk. The monk can already determine which saves he wants to increase, so choosing between expert unarmed or expert unarmored at 1st level makes a ton of sense.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Would a hard path be strictly superior to a soft path?
Without the ability to protect allies as well a defensive path is kinda bad. Maybe a defense control path vs an offense path would work, at least defense control can keep enemies from getting full rounds on allies.
A soft path would be a defender/control build. Compete with the champion defender role.
A hard path would be damage. For those players who want to be the damage dealer. Be more competitive with a fighter or rogue damage role.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My big hope for monk in the remaster is that they do something about the feat taxes, it shouldnt take 2 class feats(ontop of a ancestry feat) to use a ancestries weapon which for many are worse than what a monk can do normally.
No there needs to be a cost or every Monk would do it. Using weapons instead of unarmed strikes is an advantage that gets around one of the limitations of a Monk - having to touch things.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
All I want is two different paths to go offense or defense
I'm pretty sure one thing we will absolutely not get is "legendary in attacks" since the Monk's theming has been defense for multiple editions.
Like the fact that Monks get legendary unarmored is a hat tip to the Monk's "AC Bonus" class feature in PF1, much like how the Fighter and Gunslinger's legendary attacks are hat tips to the "Weapon Training" and "Gun Training".
The fighter (and gunslinger) are supposed to be the classes with the highest "to-hit" roll, while the monk is supposed to be one of the classes with the best defense.
I'm expecting something like the following even if literally no other changes are made:
Something something Monk Class Path/Discipline: At first level select one of the three following Disciplines: Ki Adept, Monastic Weaponry Expert, Stance Disciple
Ki Adept: Choose from either Ki Strike of Ki Rush, gain this as a bonus Monk Class Feat and add an additional Focus Point to your Focus Pool. (You start with 2 Focus Points)
Monastic Weaponry Expert: You gain the Monastic Weaponry Monk Class Feat, additionally at level two you also gain Ancestry Weaponry as a Monk Class Feat.
Stance Disciple: Choose from any Monk Class Feat with the Stance Trait that you have Access to, and gain this as a bonus Monk Class Feat. Additionally, once per combat, as a free Action you may switch from any active Monk Stance into another Monk Stance that you've learned provided you meet the requirement for the new Stance.
It's more simple and balanced just give an extra level 1 monk's feat and remove the once per round Stance change restriction. IMO monks don't needs subclasses for this and the switch between different Stance aren't a problem for monk's action economy, the main problem is that you can do only once per round this makes unfeasible get multiple Stances.
So I don't think that monk really needs subclasses unless they use the Deriven Firelion's idea of have an offensive and a defensive subclass.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm not sure why people keep suggesting giving a fighter class feature to monks. It's kind of a weird suggestion, like asking for sneak attack or rage.
I feel like class-specific improvements to FoB are a lot more likely (though imo nothing is most likely of all).
I honestly do not see how having 2 fixed subclasses is better than being able to mix and match class feats
Some people want to be a damage monk. Some people wanted to be a defensive monk. Right now it is mostly set up for defense and control.
I don't see why adding offensive or defensive choices would be so bad. Offensive monk unarmed attack legendary and defense master. Defensive monk unarmed attack master and unarmed defense legendary. Further leans into the monk's versatility.
Some people would like to be a damage monk that hits as hard as fighter or rogue, but has less defense for doing so.
Same as they have a war priest versus a cloistered cleric.
|
I think of it the same way as an alchemist's field of study. They can learn and prepare all the alchemical items, but their subclass gives them subtle benefits to certain ones which helps dictate their play style.
I like the three options of Ki adept, Stance disciple, and Monastic weaponry expert. Because these are the three major paths that most monks develop down.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
also what do you mean with "limitations of a Monk - having to touch things. " i dont think ive ever seen/heard that sort of thing come up if anything unarmed is usually more nichely advantageous cause it cant be taken away from you.
There are more than a few spells/abilities that punish 5ft reach and/or unarmed strikes. Reach weapons are everywhere and bypass this sort of thing.
It's more niche, but unarmed also can't benefit from energy mutagen which is another damage loss and missed energy type for monks vs other martials
Yeah the weapon and ancestral weapon dont need to be separated into two feats. There is too much a monk wants to have as it is and making weapon using monks take two feats just to use flurry with an already limites selection of ancestral weapons is too much.
You still need to get the ancestral feat too so really its 3 feats as it is.
IMO the entire weapon parts with exception of stances needs to be features of the monk not feats. There's no good reason to Monastic Weaponry feat to exist instead of this be a part of chassis.
Monastic Weaponry being a feat is probably there for Monks who have no interest in weapons, so they can express this by "not taking the feat."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monastic Weaponry being a feat is probably there for Monks who have no interest in weapons, so they can express this by "not taking the feat."
I mean, if you want to play a samurai and use fighter for that, even if you solely dedicate yourself to katana, wakizashi, and maybe nodachi, you still have proficiency with weapons that a normal samurai didn't even know existed or weapons that didn't exist at the time like a bec de corbin, earthbreaker, or most firearms. If you don't have interest in weapons as a monk, don't use them, but don't tax a feat on those that do want to use them.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monastic Weaponry being a feat is probably there for Monks who have no interest in weapons, so they can express this by "not taking the feat."I mean, if you want to play a samurai and use fighter for that, even if you solely dedicate yourself to katana, wakizashi, and maybe nodachi, you still have proficiency with weapons that a normal samurai didn't even know existed or weapons that didn't exist at the time like a bec de corbin, earthbreaker, or most firearms. If you don't have interest in weapons as a monk, don't use them, but don't tax a feat on those that do want to use them.
In all honesty, my instinct would be to build this character as a fighter. If your description of a character is "they use all these different weapons" the "class that is best at weapons" seems like the best choice.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Maybe just remove the monk trait from weapons altogether.
Make flurry only useable while in a monk stance first and then provide each stance with weapons useable with that stance. You become trained in any weapons useable in that stance along with the unarmed attack it provides.
I am feeling pretty strong on this splitting up weapons into stances thing. This way you never have a monk using a weapon that was not balanced for a stance or flurry of blows but you can remove the monk trait from weapons entirely. It does mean all monks will have an action tax to get into a stance before they can actually flurry.
Most existing stances that add the ability to flurry with specific weapons *removes* your ability to flurry with unarmed. I really like your idea, but I don't see them changing that part.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In all honesty, my instinct would be to build this character as a fighter. If your description of a character is "they use all these different weapons" the "class that is best at weapons" seems like the best choice.Monastic Weaponry being a feat is probably there for Monks who have no interest in weapons, so they can express this by "not taking the feat."I mean, if you want to play a samurai and use fighter for that, even if you solely dedicate yourself to katana, wakizashi, and maybe nodachi, you still have proficiency with weapons that a normal samurai didn't even know existed or weapons that didn't exist at the time like a bec de corbin, earthbreaker, or most firearms. If you don't have interest in weapons as a monk, don't use them, but don't tax a feat on those that do want to use them.
I don't think their point was that monks couldn't fit this specific character concept. It is that other classes don't have their weapon proficiencies limited to the ones they actually plan to use, so why is that the case for monks? This goes back to the "choosing to be bad at specific things" idea you've talked about before.
Most existing stances that add the ability to flurry with specific weapons *removes* your ability to flurry with unarmed. I really like your idea, but I don't see them changing that part.Maybe just remove the monk trait from weapons altogether.
Make flurry only useable while in a monk stance first and then provide each stance with weapons useable with that stance. You become trained in any weapons useable in that stance along with the unarmed attack it provides.
I am feeling pretty strong on this splitting up weapons into stances thing. This way you never have a monk using a weapon that was not balanced for a stance or flurry of blows but you can remove the monk trait from weapons entirely. It does mean all monks will have an action tax to get into a stance before they can actually flurry.
It would be a lot of work to implement it. At this point i am guessing they've probably already finished what they want to change about monk.
But who knows if an idea is good enough and they see it they may course correct lol.
Small tangent, but the samurai had firearms for most of there existence. Firearms would be completely on brand.Monastic Weaponry being a feat is probably there for Monks who have no interest in weapons, so they can express this by "not taking the feat."I mean, if you want to play a samurai and use fighter for that, even if you solely dedicate yourself to katana, wakizashi, and maybe nodachi, you still have proficiency with weapons that a normal samurai didn't even know existed or weapons that didn't exist at the time like a bec de corbin, earthbreaker, or most firearms. If you don't have interest in weapons as a monk, don't use them, but don't tax a feat on those that do want to use them.
Yeah, I'm aware. I guess it was my bad since I was speaking mostly about the idea of "samurai" that people on west have that is "katana warrior" rather than what samurai really were. I also wasn't implying that monks should have the option to be samurai (as I think someone that replied my comment thought I was saying that) but rather to make a comparison that there's classes that have proficiencies with weapons that probably don't even exist in the places where the character comes from, yet they still are technically proficient with them because it would be dumb for the system to make a case-by-case scenario to give you proficency with something. If you don't want those proficiencies ignore them, but don't force those that do want to use them to take a feat for that (which is what it is currently happening with monks that want weapons).
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
if I were to guess I think Paizo probably didnt think weapons were going to be very popular after they introduced all of the cool unarmed attacks from stances.
I always saw Monastic Weaponry as the equivalent of a Stance (ie costs a class feat to access specific attacks) except that it opens up more variety and does not cost an action.
This felt more like the result rather than the reason. I kinda saw the unarmed attacks these stances gave and though oh wow these are cool, why would I want to take a feat to use weapons when many of these options are better.
Or maybe Paizo decided they wanted to design a class that specializes in unarmed attacks and part of making such a variety was restricting what weapons they can use.
The feat to get weapons looked like they were put in as an afterthought for what likely was expected to be a minority of players wanting weapons on a monk.
I mean if you look at the original core rulebook monk feats, weapons do not have much interplay with most feats and look like they were not really a consideration in any of the feat design. The additional content added things like the peafowl stance. I mean if it werent tacked on after designing the monk, stances like tangled forest would have been explicit about having a reach weapon and likely it would have said enemies within reach of your lashing branch attacks and not just within your reach. But My guess here is they made the monk without considering how weapons would interact with stances and then added the monastic weapons feat afterward and fit it in without fully fleshing out interactions with every stance already incorporated in the design.The remaster is now their chance after seeing how many players are interested in monks using weapons and unarmed strike to really incorporate weapons into monk abilities.
Now that I think about it I would love to see some feats that let you flurry with a combination of 1 action Kiblast and strike. Or make a special augment to a flurry that incorporates a weapon attack and an unarmed attack from a stance and has some kind of additional effect that makes the flavor of the attack cool and mechanical effect worth using.