| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO Monks should get Monk weapon proficiancy by default and be able to use Flurry with them, and Monastery Weapon would instead become 'Can use Flurry and gain prof on all martial weapon'This cannot and should not happen.
Monk should not be able to flurry with D12 weapons or pick any with high quality traits. They have too much on the chassis already.
You say that like it'd be some tremendous upgrade.
d10 0-hand backswing attacks are already an option. d12 two-handers are barely an upgrade damage wise and probably worse overall given how little you're gaining for the vastly worse hand economy.
Most of the fears over monk weapon choices are just wildly misplaced given what they already have.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
...if you yourself say a d8 agile weapon is better than a d10 or d12 weapon for monks then what's the problem of allowing them to use one if they want? The game isn't all about building the most effective character, its about playing a character you want, and if you want to flurry with a greatsword, you can't do that and really there isn't a reason to prohibit that.
I am not saying that. I'm saying they are best right now with a d8 agile or finesse weapon. That damage level is right for them.
Giving them things like greatpicks and mauls and such with Flurry and critical specializations would be overkill.
I don't think it will happen and I certainly wouldn't ask for it.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
IMO Monks should get Monk weapon proficiancy by default and be able to use Flurry with them, and Monastery Weapon would instead become 'Can use Flurry and gain prof on all martial weapon'This cannot and should not happen.
Monk should not be able to flurry with D12 weapons or pick any with high quality traits. They have too much on the chassis already.
You say that like it'd be some tremendous upgrade.
d10 0-hand backswing attacks are already an option. d12 two-handers are barely an upgrade damage wise and probably worse overall given how little you're gaining for the vastly worse hand economy.
Most of the fears over monk weapon choices are just wildly misplaced given what they already have.
Given what a monk has overall, yes, it is a concern.
I've seen a level 20 monk. They are absolutely brutal and perhaps the strongest martial in the game. Their damage potential with higher end weapons with better critical specializations, deadly, and fatal and such need not be improved unless you take something away.
Monk has the following:
Second best AC of any martial.
Best saves of any martial due to flexibility
Fastest movement of any martial
Best action economy of any martial
Master spell attack and DC proficiency built into class chassis
Some of the best feats of any martials, on par with the rogue
Amongst the best with maneuvers
Lots of damage boosting feats:
Heaven's Thunder
Ki Strike (improved after focus point change)
Ki Form
Deadly d12 added to unarmed strikes at level 20 combined with 20 fast healing with Golden Body
I see no reason to add d10 and d12 martial weapons with Flurry to their damage options with critical specializations.
The high level monk is a pretty amazing martial, incredibly versatile, and one of the best in the game. I see no reason to add more to them given what they already have.
It's not a matter of how much it would boost their damage, it's that it would at all. Why let a single martial have so much on a single class chassis where they are dipping into d10 and d12 weapons that are the purview of fighters and barbarians? To make monks the absolute best martial at level 20? I don't think that would be balanced.
I don't want to see it and I don't support it.
I've seen a lot of high level monks. I have a player that plays almost nothing but monks. I've played a few myself. I even have a party with two monks right now. They rip the enemies apart. Monks don't need more.
I wouldn't mind an upgrade to FoB so they're the best at it. Do they need it? No. They don't really need it.
That's quite a change of opinion from before (i.e. half a year ago or such), Deriven, where you were asking for buffs to monks. I guess seeing a lvl 20 monk in action changed your opinion?
Unless I'm misremembering here and it was Secret Wizard who asked for buffs and you were against it back then. Getting older isn't making my memory sharper, I fear. Where are those 1E buffs to my mental stats? ^^
IMO Monks should get Monk weapon proficiancy by default and be able to use Flurry with them, and Monastery Weapon would instead become 'Can use Flurry and gain prof on all martial weapon'This cannot and should not happen.
Monk should not be able to flurry with D12 weapons or pick any with high quality traits. They have too much on the chassis already.
You say that like it'd be some tremendous upgrade.
d10 0-hand backswing attacks are already an option. d12 two-handers are barely an upgrade damage wise and probably worse overall given how little you're gaining for the vastly worse hand economy.
Most of the fears over monk weapon choices are just wildly misplaced given what they already have.
Given what a monk has overall, yes, it is a concern.
I've seen a level 20 monk. They are absolutely brutal and perhaps the strongest martial in the game. Their damage potential with higher end weapons with better critical specializations, deadly, and fatal and such need not be improved unless you take something away.
(snip)
I understand issues about level twenty performance. How about in earlier levels? Is it so bad to give the features at level one, or five, or ten?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That's quite a change of opinion from before (i.e. half a year ago or such), Deriven, where you were asking for buffs to monks. I guess seeing a lvl 20 monk in action changed your opinion?
Unless I'm misremembering here and it was Secret Wizard who asked for buffs and you were against it back then. Getting older isn't making my memory sharper, I fear. Where are those 1E buffs to my mental stats? ^^
Yeah. Seeing a level 20 monk and a couple of level 14 plus did change my mind.
Their AC gets really good compared to other martials at high level as do their saves.
Their martial arts allowing a d8 agile and finesse weapon with traits is really nice including trip.
Their ability to use maneuvers is probably the best in the game when taking Mixed Maneuver and Flurry of Maneuvers.
Their movement allows them to take advantage of feats like Cloud Jump better than other martials.
As more of your damage becomes rune stacking, monk damage goes up. Add in Ki Strike or Heaven's Thunder with a Sneak Attack feat from Rogue Archetype, their damage gets pretty harsh.
They get a ton of attacks per round hasted, often with agile while mixing in a maneuver.
They are the easiest class to acquire flight and movement abilities like flight, burrowing, or any mode of movement they are the best at.
They stack enormously well with the rogue archetype or just about any archetype including champion.
Give them a shield to further boost their AC.
They have built in AoE attacks with variable damage with something like Ki Blast.
Their Ki Form is really nasty at level 16.
They get a really useful, nice no action level 19 ability that almost guarantees they hit the first time in any round.
Their level 20 feats are very good including Golden Body or the extra movement one.
Their strike's ability to count at a metal like cold iron, silver, or adamantine makes them quite potent against certain creatures without having to pay for something like high grade material. They punch right through golem armor. Lots of powerful creatures are vulnerable to cold iron or silver.
They can focus on the core four: Str, Dex, Con, and Wisdom for their ability boosts, which further synergizes well as you level.
They can become immortal and stop aging and it's actually a good feat too take mechanically as well.
Monks become very powerful at high level. Even their damage becomes quite brutal and the entire class becomes a pain due to their combination of defensive and offensive power and versatility.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I understand issues about level twenty performance. How about in earlier levels? Is it so bad to give the features at level one, or five, or ten?IMO Monks should get Monk weapon proficiancy by default and be able to use Flurry with them, and Monastery Weapon would instead become 'Can use Flurry and gain prof on all martial weapon'This cannot and should not happen.
Monk should not be able to flurry with D12 weapons or pick any with high quality traits. They have too much on the chassis already.
You say that like it'd be some tremendous upgrade.
d10 0-hand backswing attacks are already an option. d12 two-handers are barely an upgrade damage wise and probably worse overall given how little you're gaining for the vastly worse hand economy.
Most of the fears over monk weapon choices are just wildly misplaced given what they already have.
Given what a monk has overall, yes, it is a concern.
I've seen a level 20 monk. They are absolutely brutal and perhaps the strongest martial in the game. Their damage potential with higher end weapons with better critical specializations, deadly, and fatal and such need not be improved unless you take something away.
(snip)
Monks start off a bit slower needing a 20 Dex to max AC, which they cannot get until level 10.
Their FoB is always good. Their damage is low until their runes increase as they are more reliant on runes than other classes as their Ki Strike damage booster works once per round, so rely on rune stacking and lots of attacks to boost damage.
They can be built so many different ways, hard to say.
I generally build maneuver control monks, they are fine early on. But get tons of better past level 10 or so.
They don't really need any changes at low level, but any changes to improve low level damage will improve their high level damage as they keep doing much the same thing just with more stuff as they level like moving in three dimensions and adding more runes.
If you stop at level 10, I think your monk experience will not be quite as fun as level 10 is when you start to take off.
Thanks, Deriven, for the great summary. :)
Is that assessment based on monks with certain stances and feats? Not all monk stances look equivalent.
This is the benefit of putting the weapons in stances that both make sense with the style of fighting the stance represents and not mechanically overtuning the stance by giving it weapons that break it.
It also lets the stance design to be altered slightly to let the weapons included take on some of the stances benefits included with the given strike.
I wanted to avoid trying to say which weapons fit and witch don't because I think others here would probably be better at figuring out what doesn't work. But Ill take a stab here.
For example dragon stance monks are str based so the stance should not give proficiency with finesse weapons, probably also not agile weapons. Also don't include weapons with more than a d10 as that is the damage dice attainable with dragon tail. But War flail or greatclub sounds like weapons that fits the feel of the stance. The fact that they take two hands to use meaning the monk using these weapons loses free hands to use for maneuvers not included on the weapon should be enough to make up for the traits.
Is that assessment based on monks with certain stances and feats? Not all monk stances look equivalent.
This is the benefit of putting the weapons in stances that both make sense with the style of fighting the stance represents and not mechanically overtuning the stance by giving it weapons that break it.
It also lets the stance design to be altered slightly to let the weapons included take on some of the stances benefits included with the given strike.I wanted to avoid trying to say which weapons fit and witch don't because I think others here would probably be better at figuring out what doesn't work. But Ill take a stab here.
For example dragon stance monks are str based so the stance should not give proficiency with finesse weapons, probably also not agile weapons. Also don't include weapons with more than a d10 as that is the damage dice attainable with dragon tail. But War flail or greatclub sounds like weapons that fits the feel of the stance. The fact that they take two hands to use meaning the monk using these weapons loses free hands to use for maneuvers not included on the weapon should be enough to make up for the traits.
Wolf Style and any d8 Finesse and Agile is probably best for damage.
Dragon Style can be fun on a Strength based monk.
Ripple Style is very good for the trip maneuver.
If you want to make a ranged monk, Monastic Archery Style or Wild Winds Initiate once you hit level 8 is good.
If you want weapons, Temple Sword or Bo Staff, you can do ok. Kusari-gama is probably the best monk weapon.
I don't much care if they make monk weapons an innate part of the class as that wouldn't change much but one less feat. I don't think it should go above d8 myself. That seems like a good cut off given all the monk gets and the booster feats they get for damage at higher level.
That's the problem with some of the classes and balance. Some are front-loaded like the fighter, barbarian, and rogue and kind of go up in a linear fashion. Some are slower build with a somewhat steeper power curve that goes up more at higher level. Monk tends to fall into that steeper power curve where at lower level they feel a bit underpowered and at higher level maybe a bit over or at least very much on par.
Honestly, I still don't see why allowing monks to flurry with, say, a greatsword would be that problematic. As I said earlier, a dragon stance monk effectively already flurris with an slightly weaker greatsword that allows him to have two free hands and a pseudo-agile in backswing if you miss your first attack. Both would be pure Strength builds, which means that they will have less AC than most monks, and the greatsword effectively has less traits (and certainly less useful traits), so beyond being kinda weird to imagine a monk attacking really fast with a huge sword, I don't feel that it would really buff monks that much. With a quick glance, the only martial weapons that would truly be a huge buff for monks would be the boarding pike, gill hook, guisarme, and ranseur due to all of them having reach, which also isn't that huge of a boost since monks already have access to d8 reach weapons (kusarigama, bo staff), so in practice you are trading free hands in exchange for a couple of points of damage, which is IMO doesn't sound that broken.
I can't really say if a high level monk is that much strong or not since I haven't played one, but if someone would want to restrict it a little then something like Monastic Archery Stance but for melee weapons (Monastic Weaponry Stance?) could be created to force monks to be in a stance to use weapons that aren't for monks.
I don't much care if they make monk weapons an innate part of the class as that wouldn't change much but one less feat.
Agreed it is a very minor style problem whether a particular weapon X is a monk weapon or not. That is the perfect thing to sort out with your local GM.
1 low level feat is about as small a difference as the system gets. It is ridiculous to have balance at that level. (without the D&D4 equivalence that every one hated anyway)I don't think it should go above d8 myself.
Yes weapons need to be different than fists or it eats into the space of the other martial classes. If your main class feature is the extra Flurry attack then you have to expect to have a relative damage difference somewhere.
That's the problem with some of the classes and balance. Some are front-loaded like the fighter, barbarian, and rogue and kind of go up in a linear fashion
Yes and for most people level 17+ are irrelevant as they just don't play there much at all. 95% of my PF2 gaming experience caps out at level 15. So if there are unbalanced level 18 and 20 features in a class I just don't care that much. I expect level 20 games to be over the top, and I'm OK with that.
Honestly, I still don't see why allowing monks to flurry with, say, a greatsword would be that problematic. As I said earlier, a dragon stance monk effectively already flurris with an slightly weaker greatsword that allows him to have two free hands and a pseudo-agile in backswing if you miss your first attack. Both would be pure Strength builds, which means that they will have less AC than most monks, and the greatsword effectively has less traits (and certainly less useful traits), so beyond being kinda weird to imagine a monk attacking really fast with a huge sword, I don't feel that it would really buff monks that much. With a quick glance, the only martial weapons that would truly be a huge buff for monks would be the boarding pike, gill hook, guisarme, and ranseur due to all of them having reach, which also isn't that huge of a boost since monks already have access to d8 reach weapons (kusarigama, bo staff), so in practice you are trading free hands in exchange for a couple of points of damage, which is IMO doesn't sound that broken.
I can't really say if a high level monk is that much strong or not since I haven't played one, but if someone would want to restrict it a little then something like Monastic Archery Stance but for melee weapons (Monastic Weaponry Stance?) could be created to force monks to be in a stance to use weapons that aren't for monks.
Dragon Stance is a d10 flurry with a blunt attack with at best the brawling group crit spec.
Give them weapons and they can flurry with an ogre hook or greatsword or maul, doing as good or better damage than a fighter with the same weapon. They can do this with one action when no other class can use such weapons in that fashion. They suddenly become the most action efficient class with every weapon in the game.
They can do this while getting all the other bonuses they get which is higher AC than the fighter and better saves than the fighter or champion.
You going to let them ki strike with these weapons? Or Ki Form? Or do flurry of maneuvers tripping with the ogre hook and then hitting them while prone?
You basically turn the monk into the best weapon user in the game if you give them FoB with all martial weapons. You're looking at this ability as a single factor in relation to a class that already carries an enormous number of advantages on the class chassis.
Do you think the fighter should have monk movement if you give the monk incredible action economy with every weapon? What exactly do you do to balance that out with everything the monk already gets? Lower their AC? Reduce one of their saves?
Monk is already receiving a cornucopia of advantages. Why do they need anther one even if it was not what some consider substantial?
I would like weapons to be more of an option. Something like being trained in all martial weapons and monk weapons by default.
But I don't want those options to be so good that no one will ever bother with unarmed strikes.
Saying that "they become the most efficient class with every weapon in the game" ignores the fact that, unlike a fighter, they don't benefit from a higher proficency and class feats built around using weapons. Even if we compare it to its closest equivalent, Double Slice, which I feel has way more system support than FoB which only improvement is using trip or other skill actions with it. All martials have their benefit when using weapons, either accuracy, damage, or other effects. The monk's benefit is action economy, in contrast they are the weakest martial damage-wise since they don't have accuracy or damage booster of any kind. Does a dragon stance monk with Ki Strike outdamages a fighter? I don't know if it does at high levels (I doubt it), but it certainly doesn't at 10th level or lower. Don't sleep on Dragon Stance either btw, because bludgeoning damage is one of the least resisted weapon damages in the system (or at least I don't remember a single monster with resistance to bludgeoning) and brawling is one of the best weapon crit specs of the game. I honestly don't see most martial weapons being that much of an upgrade to that, if anything, I see them as sidegrade options.
Saying that "they become the most efficient class with every weapon in the game" ignores the fact that, unlike a fighter, they don't benefit from a higher proficency and class feats built around using weapons. Even if we compare it to its closest equivalent, Double Slice, which I feel has way more system support than FoB which only improvement is using trip or other skill actions with it. All martials have their benefit when using weapons, either accuracy, damage, or other effects. The monk's benefit is action economy, in contrast they are the weakest martial damage-wise since they don't have accuracy or damage booster of any kind. Does a dragon stance monk with Ki Strike outdamages a fighter? I don't know if it does at high levels (I doubt it), but it certainly doesn't at 10th level or lower. Don't sleep on Dragon Stance either btw, because bludgeoning damage is one of the least resisted weapon damages in the system (or at least I don't remember a single monster with resistance to bludgeoning) and brawling is one of the best weapon crit specs of the game. I honestly don't see most martial weapons being that much of an upgrade to that, if anything, I see them as sidegrade options.
Double Slice sucks and is worse than Flurry of Blows.
Monks do get weapon enhancers. Their ki feats with martial arts work with weapons. So they could use Ki Strike with some big, brutal d10 or d12 fatal or deadly two handed weapon.
Then there is the fact that damage reduction counts once for Flurry of Blows, making their two hits reduce damage less when dealing with damage reduction including all runes.
You just listed another advantage of the monk: very easy to switch damage types with bludgeoning built into the class for no action cost. A wolf stance monk can do piercing damage with wolf jaw strikes, but if fighting an ooze switch to bludgeoning fists without changing weapons with full runes.
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10 and d12 weapons? I don't see that ever happening. Monk doesn't need more.
You're trying to sell this narrative as one of just damage and ignoring everything else the monk gets or what they can do with ki powers to enhance unarmed strikes which would apply to weapons if flurry is allowed.
It's not going to happen. Monks don't need more.
Double Slice sucks and is worse than Flurry of Blows.
The Double Slice Fighter I played from 1st to 13th level begs to differ.
Then there is the fact that damage reduction counts once for Flurry of Blows, making their two hits reduce damage less when dealing with damage reduction including all runes.
So does Double Slice, and I don't have MAP on the second attack unlike FoB.
You just listed another advantage of the monk: very easy to switch damage types with bludgeoning built into the class for no action cost. A wolf stance monk can do piercing damage with wolf jaw strikes, but if fighting an ooze switch to bludgeoning fists without changing weapons with full runes.
So you are agreeing with me that FoB with a greatsword isn't that much of a boost then?
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10 and d12 weapons? I don't see that ever happening. Monk doesn't need more.
How much times do I have to mention Dragon Stance? You still haven't mentioned a weapon that would be truly problematic for monk to use, and if the problem is reach weapons, it is as simple as leaving those out. After all, Monastic Archery Stance works only at half your first increment, so it makes sense to limit it to weapons without reach too (except for those that have reach and the monk traits like the bo staff).
You're trying to sell this narrative as one of just damage and ignoring everything else the monk gets or what they can do with ki powers to enhance unarmed strikes which would apply to weapons if flurry is allowed.
I literally went over how monks already have access to the best weapons in the game in their unarmed options, and you haven't proved otherwise.
Your whole argument stands on your opinion on having played a high level monk to justify the monk being strong, but you don't even need to play a high level TWF character to know that Double Slice + Flensing Slice + Dual-Weapon Blitz at 10th level is far from "sucking". If I add high level options such as Dual Onslaught or Two-Weapon Flurry which effectively turns Double Slice into FoB then I'm not seeing how monks competes with that, except for Flurry of Maneuvers.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Whatever happens, Flurry of Blows should remain limited to Unarmed Attacks and Monk weapons.
Double Slice sucks and is worse than Flurry of Blows.The Double Slice Fighter I played from 1st to 13th level begs to differ.
Then there is the fact that damage reduction counts once for Flurry of Blows, making their two hits reduce damage less when dealing with damage reduction including all runes.So does Double Slice, and I don't have MAP on the second attack unlike FoB.
You just listed another advantage of the monk: very easy to switch damage types with bludgeoning built into the class for no action cost. A wolf stance monk can do piercing damage with wolf jaw strikes, but if fighting an ooze switch to bludgeoning fists without changing weapons with full runes.So you are agreeing with me that FoB with a greatsword isn't that much of a boost then?
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10 and d12 weapons? I don't see that ever happening. Monk doesn't need more.How much times do I have to mention Dragon Stance? You still haven't mentioned a weapon that would be truly problematic for monk to use, and if the problem is reach weapons, it is as simple as leaving those out. After all, Monastic Archery Stance works only at half your first increment, so it makes sense to limit it to weapons without reach too (except for those that have reach and the monk traits like the bo staff).
You're trying to sell this narrative as one of just damage and ignoring everything else the monk gets or what they can do with ki powers to enhance unarmed strikes which would apply to weapons if flurry is allowed.I literally went over how monks already have access to the best weapons in the game in their unarmed options, and you haven't proved otherwise.
Your whole argument stands on your opinion on having played a high level monk to justify the monk being strong, but you don't even need to play a high level TWF character...
Two-weapon fighting sucks. If you haven't tracked your damage, then you don't realize how much it sucks and are using an inferior option without knowing it is inferior.
I have already had two people try a Dual Weapon Warrior. It's action economy is bad. It's damage was on the inferior side. You are spending two actions to use two d8 or lower weapons.
Flensing Slice is a trap as you will rarely meet the requirements to use it. The number of times I saw Flensing Slice used was almost zero. Too much movement and if you miss with even one attack, you can't apply it. If you move first, even if you hit with both attacks you can't use it.
Dual Weapon blitz provokes reaction movement attacks. It requires a very good movement to use effectively. It uses MAP for every attack. So by the time you use it on the second target, you're at -8 to 10 to hit and possibly taking a beating from reactive strikes.
I've seen Dragon Stance in action, so you can stop bringing it up. Wolf Stance is better. Dragon Stance is an ok martial art giving you a d10 attack.
Nothing you've stated changes anything. You are looking at the monk without mentioning any of its defensive advantages. You're completely focusing on their unarmed combat.
It's already set at the right level for unarmed combat. They don't need even a mild weapon upgrade.
A Two-weapon warrior will not outdamage a well built monk save in perfect circumstances. TWF action economy is terrible. If you want to choose an obviously inferior option, have at it. I've already tracked and compared TWF to two-handed weapons and the monk and rogue, it's very inferior.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10
You realize they can already do that, right?
I'm not even arguing that monks really need buffs or anything, but the idea that the game would fall apart if monks could give up both their hands for like half a point of extra damage is just... kind of extreme and overblown.
It wouldn't even be very good.
Double Slice sucks and is worse than Flurry of Blows.The Double Slice Fighter I played from 1st to 13th level begs to differ.
Then there is the fact that damage reduction counts once for Flurry of Blows, making their two hits reduce damage less when dealing with damage reduction including all runes.So does Double Slice, and I don't have MAP on the second attack unlike FoB.
You just listed another advantage of the monk: very easy to switch damage types with bludgeoning built into the class for no action cost. A wolf stance monk can do piercing damage with wolf jaw strikes, but if fighting an ooze switch to bludgeoning fists without changing weapons with full runes.So you are agreeing with me that FoB with a greatsword isn't that much of a boost then?
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10 and d12 weapons? I don't see that ever happening. Monk doesn't need more.How much times do I have to mention Dragon Stance? You still haven't mentioned a weapon that would be truly problematic for monk to use, and if the problem is reach weapons, it is as simple as leaving those out. After all, Monastic Archery Stance works only at half your first increment, so it makes sense to limit it to weapons without reach too (except for those that have reach and the monk traits like the bo staff).
You're trying to sell this narrative as one of just damage and ignoring everything else the monk gets or what they can do with ki powers to enhance unarmed strikes which would apply to weapons if flurry is allowed.I literally went over how monks already have access to the best weapons in the game in their unarmed options, and you haven't proved otherwise.
Your whole argument stands on your opinion on having played a high level monk to justify the monk being strong, but you don't even need to play a high level TWF character...
Double slice requires two 1 handed weapons usually with one that's agile so each strike with it will be weaker than flurrying with a greatsword. Double strike also needs two actions to use and Flurry takes 1. There is not comparison when action economy is the most valuable thing you have in this game and your getting bigger damage dice. Having that d12 weapon also means your reactive strikes are heavy hitters doing more damage than a twoweapon fighter can do with a 1 handed weapon
The difference in damage becomes more pronounced with each rune upgrade.
As I already said, your whole argument revolves around your experience of playing a high level monk. I can't say if that's true or not, but you are literally dismising my own experience to prove your point. I'm always the one that deals the most damage in combat, and while I agree Flensing doesn't have a reliable proc, most of my turns revolve in (1st round) Dual-Weapon Blitz + Flensing Slice or Aid (since I have Deft Cooperation and Swordmaster Dedication through FA) and (2nd round) Double Slice + Aid if I had procced Flensing Slice or Flensing Slice if I didn't. I use a falcata and a shortsword, and I'm pretty sure I could replace the shortsword for something more optimal, but just from the higher fighter proficiency that makes me crit often I can deal 100+ damage just with the falcata attack alone. The shortsword does deal lame damage, but my overall damage is far from "sucking".
I'm also agree that Dragon Stance is worse than pretty much all the other stances the monk has, but your whole point is that it would be broken for a monk to FoB with a d10 or higher weapon when the monk literally can do that already and people don't care about it, and dragon stance is better than most martial d10 or d12 weapons already.
I don't need to bring the defensive abilities that monks have because I'm not comparing the monk's damage to another martial's damage, I'm comparing Dragon Stance to other martial weapons and I still haven't seen a convincing argument to make me believe any martial weapons are better than Dragon Stance in being a better weapon, so if martial weapons aren't better than Dragon Stance, an arguably subpar monk option, then why restrict monks flurrying with a martial weapon?
You also argue that I'm the one that only brings up damage in this discusion, but you yourself say a TWF monk can outdamage any martial in the damage, so probably I'm not crazy for bringing up how other martials have damage and accuracy boosters, right?
I'm not saying the monk sucks, I'm saying that I can't see a monk outdamaging other martials with a similar playstyle, though monks still have more options to do with FoB than a TWF martial, not to mention ki focus spells and other monk options, which certainly contribute to the overall power of a class but not to their damage, which is the thing you are bring out here.
The difference in damage becomes more pronounced with each rune upgrade.
1 point of damage in average per weapon die (so 4 during your whole career) in exchange for your two hands and backswing isn't that fantastic IMO.
|
Double slice ain't even bad. Not sure why that's a sticking point. Fighter has great dual weapon support throughout their career.
For monks alone, d12 s wouldn't make much of a difference. The main issue would be poaching. You can poach a d10 weapon now though with the khakkara, so I wouldn't be that worried over balance. Giving them all martial weapons would hurt its identity more than anything imo.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Giving them all martial weapons would hurt its identity more than anything imo.
If you mean the identity of monk as the class that's mainly good at punching things, I'm with you--albeit only in so far as granting martial weapons as a baseline. I want any monk who decides to spec into them to be good with weapons as they are with punches.
If you mean martial weapons coverage would hurt the identity of the monk as the "exotic" weapons wielder, yes, but nothing of value would be lost. I find it more than a little obnoxious that monks remain the only class with an arbitrary, bespoke weapon group, and not only that, this list is almost entirely comprised of east Asian weapons. Why should a monk be able to flurry with a bo, but not a staff? Why a temple sword and not a long sword? Why a sai and not a dagger? Kama but not sickle? I could go on.
Further, if monks only wield these weapons to retain its identity as the "east Asian class"... what happens when you play in Tian Xia these weapons are just common weapons in the region? Likewise, if you're in Ustalav fighting an initiate of Urgathoa, it would a bit weird if they pulled out a set of nunchaku instead of something more grounded in the history of their own monastery, which so far as I know had no meaningful connection to Tian Xia.
Don't get me wrong, I love Monks and I love martial arts and I love east Asian weapons. I just think the game would be better served if we acknowledged that it's a little weird how certain martial artists have to conform to a real-world stereotype of what weapons it's appropriate for them to wield that is so clearly drawn along cultural inspiration lines and not along any other practical consideration (whether that's "only staves and knives" or "anything d8 and lower")
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10You realize they can already do that, right?
I'm not even arguing that monks really need buffs or anything, but the idea that the game would fall apart if monks could give up both their hands for like half a point of extra damage is just... kind of extreme and overblown.
It wouldn't even be very good.
Yes.
It's not half a point of extra damage if you have built around high quality weapons and once you apply all the monk advantages to those weapons as though they are unarmed strikes.
It's too much work to be monks can use all martial weapons but the really high value two-handers that will make their damage far too high.
I don't know why some have problems calculating all the advantages when they try to focus on this singular factor that seems so small. It's not small when you factor in everything such as the action economy of FoB and their insane movement, then tossing in things like Ki Strike stacked with say an Ogre Hook with deadly d10 and pick critical hit specialization. These bonuses add up and providing them all with monk action economy is too much.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As I already said, your whole argument revolves around your experience of playing a high level monk. I can't say if that's true or not, but you are literally dismising my own experience to prove your point. I'm always the one that deals the most damage in combat, and while I agree Flensing doesn't have a reliable proc, most of my turns revolve in (1st round) Dual-Weapon Blitz + Flensing Slice or Aid (since I have Deft Cooperation and Swordmaster Dedication through FA) and (2nd round) Double Slice + Aid if I had procced Flensing Slice or Flensing Slice if I didn't. I use a falcata and a shortsword, and I'm pretty sure I could replace the shortsword for something more optimal, but just from the higher fighter proficiency that makes me crit often I can deal 100+ damage just with the falcata attack alone. The shortsword does deal lame damage, but my overall damage is far from "sucking".
I'm also agree that Dragon Stance is worse than pretty much all the other stances the monk has, but your whole point is that it would be broken for a monk to FoB with a d10 or higher weapon when the monk literally can do that already and people don't care about it, and dragon stance is better than most martial d10 or d12 weapons already.
I don't need to bring the defensive abilities that monks have because I'm not comparing the monk's damage to another martial's damage, I'm comparing Dragon Stance to other martial weapons and I still haven't seen a convincing argument to make me believe any martial weapons are better than Dragon Stance in being a better weapon, so if martial weapons aren't better than Dragon Stance, an arguably subpar monk option, then why restrict monks flurrying with a martial weapon?
You also argue that I'm the one that only brings up damage in this discusion, but you yourself say a TWF monk can outdamage any martial in the damage, so probably I'm not crazy for bringing up how other martials have damage and accuracy boosters, right?
I'm not saying the monk sucks, I'm saying that I can't see a...
I have tracked Double Slice and dual weapon fighter. I don't know what your group composition is, but dual weapon fighter would not be the high damage guy in most of our groups too often. Flurry rangers are better two-weapon users than fighters.
I've explained to you why to restrict monks with martial weapons. Weapons are like other class features in that there are some better than others.
An ogre hook is better for damage than a halberd for straight hits due to its crit specialization effect and deadly d10. D12 with maxed striking runes does more damage on hits and crits than a d10 weapon. So you suddenly have to design weapons with the idea of balancing them for a monk, which they have already done with monk weapons.
Monk has incredible action economy and movement as well as damage boosters that work with monk weapons to build up their damage as they level. The defensive capacity of a class must be balanced against their offensive capacity. If you have noticed classes like the fighter are fairly well rounded, but more offense oriented with weaker defenses, specifically saves. The champion is maxed out defense on heavy armor, so their damage options are generally lower than offensive classes. The rogue is heavy offense and fairly weak defensively.
Monk the has 10 hit points per level, second highest AC, best and most flexible saves, and incredibly mobility. Thus their offense has been capped at d10 with dragon style or heave and earth style tied to a strength based monk. Their dex-based styles are capped at d8 finesse and agile. Their weapons been capped at d8.
This is to balance out all that goes into their class. So you suddenly bump them up to d12, you're going to have to give something up. What would they give up to step up another dice in damage along with everything else? I don't know and I don't want to know.
Monk is fine as is and needs nothing to perform well.
You want to look only at the class through the lens of "It is just a half point of damage or 4 points at major striking", but I think you need to look at the entirety of the monk class, all that it has. Then decide what it must give up to have more offensive power. That would likely be Legendary Unarmored Defense and maybe a Legendary save as well, which the fighter gives up for more offense or the champion gives up for best AC. You want to have the weapon action economy with all weapons, that's worth something, pretty big something too. No class can do two attacks with a two-handed d10 or d12 weapon in a single action. So what do you give up to get that? How powerful is it everything else a monk has?
Answer that question rather than continue to look at it thinking, "It's only a few points of damage." It's more than that as you level and take into account weapon traits and crit specializations.
|
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10You realize they can already do that, right?
I'm not even arguing that monks really need buffs or anything, but the idea that the game would fall apart if monks could give up both their hands for like half a point of extra damage is just... kind of extreme and overblown.
It wouldn't even be very good.
Yes.
It's not half a point of extra damage if you have built around high quality weapons and once you apply all the monk advantages to those weapons as though they are unarmed strikes.
It's too much work to be monks can use all martial weapons but the really high value two-handers that will make their damage far too high.
I don't know why some have problems calculating all the advantages when they try to focus on this singular factor that seems so small. It's not small when you factor in everything such as the action economy of FoB and their insane movement, then tossing in things like Ki Strike stacked with say an Ogre Hook with deadly d10 and pick critical hit specialization. These bonuses add up and providing them all with monk action economy is too much.
I just don't understand; all the benefits you're describing here also apply to the unarmed strikes that Monks get; you have described your balance of monks as including their strikes getting the deadly d12 trait on all unarmed strikes; what about a d10 (backswing, deadly d12, brawling crit spec) is so much worse than a d10 (deadly d10, trip, pick crit spec) that it's worth all this fuss about the balance? Even if we ignore the deadly d12 from high-level monk abilities, I'm not convinced that trading 2 hands for deadly d10 is necessarily a large power increase; if it were, I think one could likely remove Metal Strikes from applying to Monastic Weaponry strikes and it would be balanced enough, as that already seems a strange interaction to justify.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monk weapons already exist in the Remaster though, so it seems incredibly unlikely that that trait is not going to be used to define what weapons a monk can use, although we will still likely get a way for ancestral weapons to be useable as well.
Was it necessary to cordon off some specific weapons for possibly working with flurry of blows (but also every other monk ability like Ki strike, metal strikes, stunning fist, One-inch punch, etc)?
Well, Stances require actions to activate and block you out of other stances that could give you other benefits. Many of those will restrict what attacks you can make, and the only one that gives you a d10 locks you out of wearing armor, so flurry would have to be made off limits entirely out of class if a first level feat let you use any weapon with it.
But requiring a stance to do high damage instead of just holding a weapon is a pretty big action cost until level 12, and then costs another feat to get that first round action back. Additionally, I think One-Inch punch with d12 fatal weapons probably is too much as a whole. Wolf drag cannot be used with either one inch punch nor flurry of blows. I think that having a set of limitations on what weapons can be used as just "unarmed attacks" without any limits for use with other monk abilities probably would have the net result of requiring dialing back feats like one-inch punch, ki strike, stunning fist, etc, to be much more limited to fighter levels for feats instead of getting a little bit something extra. At that point you are kind of pulling the magic out of the monk class.
A monk swinging an Ogre Hook is a too close to a Fighter or Ranger IMO.
So even if it was balanced, I still wouldn't want it.
And if you where going to make a weapon monk, I would do something like Falling Ogre Stance.
You may swap weapons to Ogre Hooks when you enter this Stance. While in this stance, Ogre Hooks count as monk weapons and the only Strike you can make is the Falling Oger Strike.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The more that I think about all of this more I'm convinced that I don't think Flurry of Blows is going to survive the Remaster at all. Not just changing the name to distance the system from the OGL legacy that FoB came from but also to simply get rid of all the half-measure options on how to fix the strangeness surrounding it and to keep it from being better used on Classes other than Monk via poaching but to also free up a ton of "budget" so each of the to-be-released sub-class options that Monk is going to get so they can each do something new that is actually meaningfully powerful.
I'm sure something similar to FoB will be put out via an option you can purchase at level 1 or perhaps 4 via a Class Feat but in terms of the chassis, it just soaks up too much room for them to do anything interesting with Monk unless they see other significant nerfs, probably to their defensive stats.
The name "flurry of blows" may need to change, I don't know, I am no lawyer. But the mechanic of "spend 1 action to make 2 unarmed attacks, apply multiple attack penalty as normal," is not something anyone needs to worry about crossing any copyright lines, it would be a meaningless mechanic in most other games that have different kinds of actions, like move actions, standard actions, etc.
It is a great level 1 class feature because it lets the Monk make 2 attacks and do a lot of other stuff in a turn, like move before and after attacking (often farther than enemies can move with one action). Losing it would really limit the mobility of the class, which feels like an intended niche of the class.
You want to look only at the class through the lens of "It is just a half point of damage or 4 points at major striking", but I think you need to look at the entirety of the monk class, all that it has. Then decide what it must give up to have more offensive power. That would likely be Legendary Unarmored Defense and maybe a Legendary save as well, which the fighter gives up for more offense or the champion gives up for best AC. You want to have the weapon action economy with all weapons, that's worth something, pretty big something too. No class can do two attacks with a two-handed d10 or d12 weapon in a single action. So what do you give up to get that? How powerful is it everything else a monk has?
I will answer you with Arcaian's response:
I just don't understand; all the benefits you're describing here also apply to the unarmed strikes that Monks get; you have described your balance of monks as including their strikes getting the deadly d12 trait on all unarmed strikes; what about a d10 (backswing, deadly d12, brawling crit spec) is so much worse than a d10 (deadly d10, trip, pick crit spec) that it's worth all this fuss about the balance? Even if we ignore the deadly d12 from high-level monk abilities, I'm not convinced that trading 2 hands for deadly d10 is necessarily a large power increase; if it were, I think one could likely remove Metal Strikes from applying to Monastic Weaponry strikes and it would be balanced enough, as that already seems a strange interaction to justify.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
My hope for monk is actually in it's dedication.
I want them to remove or weaken the feat that gives any class flurry of blows. Personally.
|
|
It's not about them needing to change the rules, or even the name, to protect the company from threats or exposure to litigation but rather about taking the thing that made the Monk the Monk over the last 25 years and which was sculpted by WotC and carried forth nearly unchanged, they have the best opportunity possible to abandon those old clothes and reshape what Paizo needs Monk to be for their own setting and game.
You know all my thoughts on balance or what makes sense aside ever since I played dungeon siege 2 I have always liked the ideo of the character i made for that game. he used two handed swords and lighting magic and i specd into swinging that twohanded sword as fast a possible.
I guess being able to pick up flurry on a greatsword with the monk archtype on a magus would accomplish that.
I just don't understand; all the benefits you're describing here also apply to the unarmed strikes that Monks get; you have described your balance of monks as including their strikes getting the deadly d12 trait on all unarmed strikes; what about a d10 (backswing, deadly d12, brawling crit spec) is so much worse than a d10 (deadly d10, trip, pick crit spec) that it's worth all this fuss about the balance? Even if we ignore the deadly d12 from high-level monk abilities, I'm not convinced that trading 2 hands for deadly d10 is necessarily a large power increase; if it were, I think one could likely remove Metal Strikes from applying to Monastic Weaponry strikes and it would be balanced enough, as that already seems a strange interaction to justify.
Now you want them to be able to flurry with d10You realize they can already do that, right?
I'm not even arguing that monks really need buffs or anything, but the idea that the game would fall apart if monks could give up both their hands for like half a point of extra damage is just... kind of extreme and overblown.
It wouldn't even be very good.
Yes.
It's not half a point of extra damage if you have built around high quality weapons and once you apply all the monk advantages to those weapons as though they are unarmed strikes.
It's too much work to be monks can use all martial weapons but the really high value two-handers that will make their damage far too high.
I don't know why some have problems calculating all the advantages when they try to focus on this singular factor that seems so small. It's not small when you factor in everything such as the action economy of FoB and their insane movement, then tossing in things like Ki Strike stacked with say an Ogre Hook with deadly d10 and pick critical hit specialization. These bonuses add up and providing them all with monk action economy is too much.
It is extremely easy to do the math on this. So not sure what you're saying. It's an increase in offensive power allowing d10 and d12 weapons with desirable traits to a class with as much as it has right now.
Why is this so hard for you to understand? The balance of the monk is set with its current offensive capabilities or you give them too much. It's that simple. This idea it's only a small upgrade is like saying Legendary Armor for the fighter is just a small upgrade. It's a big upgrade to a class balanced based on their current offensive capabilities.
It's easy to see.
You want to look only at the class through the lens of "It is just a half point of damage or 4 points at major striking", but I think you need to look at the entirety of the monk class, all that it has. Then decide what it must give up to have more offensive power. That would likely be Legendary Unarmored Defense and maybe a Legendary save as well, which the fighter gives up for more offense or the champion gives up for best AC. You want to have the weapon action economy with all weapons, that's worth something, pretty big something too. No class can do two attacks with a two-handed d10 or d12 weapon in a single action. So what do you give up to get that? How powerful is it everything else a monk has?I will answer you with Arcaian's response:
I just don't understand; all the benefits you're describing here also apply to the unarmed strikes that Monks get; you have described your balance of monks as including their strikes getting the deadly d12 trait on all unarmed strikes; what about a d10 (backswing, deadly d12, brawling crit spec) is so much worse than a d10 (deadly d10, trip, pick crit spec) that it's worth all this fuss about the balance? Even if we ignore the deadly d12 from high-level monk abilities, I'm not convinced that trading 2 hands for deadly d10 is necessarily a large power increase; if it were, I think one could likely remove Metal Strikes from applying to Monastic Weaponry strikes and it would be balanced enough, as that already seems a strange interaction to justify.
Backswing is a crappy trait.
Deadly d12 at level 20 is fine. Deadly d10 at level 1 on is not.
This is extremely easy to see the problem. You want to ask for something that you will not get because it breaks the monk class balance. You for some reason are willfully ignoring all the monk gets to push this idea of making them the most action efficient with every weapon, which they should not have. Period.
Since I don't have to worry about this ever happening, you can house rule if in your personal game if you want. No one with any semblance of desiring the monk to be balanced would push for this.
That's what I always understood the niche of the monk to be. They aren't the highest damaging class, or the tankiest, but they are the kings of mobility and battlefield positioning for you and your enemies.The name "flurry of blows" may need to change, I don't know, I am no lawyer. But the mechanic of "spend 1 action to make 2 unarmed attacks, apply multiple attack penalty as normal," is not something anyone needs to worry about crossing any copyright lines, it would be a meaningless mechanic in most other games that have different kinds of actions, like move actions, standard actions, etc.
It is a great level 1 class feature because it lets the Monk make 2 attacks and do a lot of other stuff in a turn, like move before and after attacking (often farther than enemies can move with one action). Losing it would really limit the mobility of the class, which feels like an intended niche of the class.
They do a lot of damage at high level as well. Rune Stacking and exploiting weaknesses stacks a lot of damage. They are one of the only classes to be able to exploit cold iron, silver, and adamantine for no additional cost stacked with runes to exploit weaknesses and picking up ancestry feats to stack weaknesses. Monks exploit a lot of weaknesses at very easily as they level up.
The sheer volume of attacks with feats like Ki Form, Rogue Archetype with sneak attack, and any other feat that allows damage stacking like Heaven's Thunder (even reduced current form) adds up to a lot of damage.
All this while having a great AC, great saves, and huge movement able to cross the battlefield with complete ease. If you pick up Rogue Archetype with the Mobility feat, they have the equivalent of a 30 foot plus Step.
Monks shine very brightly in PF2 in all areas. Monk gains more from taking other archetypes than other classes gain from taking theirs. FoB don't mean as much in the hands of other classes as it does for the monk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Man, it's getting tiresome to discuss with you.
Mention a single martial weapon that would be better than Dragon Stance. Just a single one. If you are going to keep using the argument of "monk is the best martial that ever existed" without mentioning not even a single example of why giving martial weapons to monk would break the class I won't bother answering to you. Just a single weapon that doesn't do something that a monk weapon can already do and that has a similar damage.
And before you mention a reach weapon, I already mentioned what they could do about them.
Since I don't have to worry about this ever happening, you can house rule if in your personal game if you want. No one with any semblance of desiring the monk to be balanced would push for this.
Oh, you are so sure? Do I have to remind you that in PC1 thieves add Dex to damage with unarmed attacks? That's literally way more broken than allowing monk to use martial weapons since most monk stances are way better than all rogue weapons, while the best monk weapons for monks are already on their class; their stances.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Monks also stack well with casting archetypes. FoB let's them do stuff like attack twice and use something like electric arc. Monk action economy is very nice for building characters.
Man, it's getting tiresome to discuss with you.
Mention a single martial weapon that would be better than Dragon Stance. Just a single one. If you are going to keep using the argument of "monk is the best martial that ever existed" without mentioning not even a single example of why giving martial weapons to monk would break the class I won't bother answering to you. Just a single weapon that doesn't do something that a monk weapon can already do and that has a similar damage.
And before you mention a reach weapon, I already mentioned what they could do about them.
Since I don't have to worry about this ever happening, you can house rule if in your personal game if you want. No one with any semblance of desiring the monk to be balanced would push for this.Oh, you are so sure? Do I have to remind you that in PC1 thieves add Dex to damage with unarmed attacks? That's literally way more broken than allowing monk to use martial weapons since most monk stances are way better than all rogue weapons, while the best monk weapons for monks are already on their class; their stances.
Yes. I am 100% sure.
It is getting equally tiresome listening to you ignore everything else the monk has to push this thing that will never happen and that they should not have.
Who cares if the Thief Rogue gets Dex damage to unarmed attacks. Thief rogues use Elven Curve blades to max damage. If some thief rogue wants to archetype into monk archetype to get FoB and Wolf Stance, no one cares as they will have 8 hit points, weak Fort saves, and a lower AC. They are softer targets than a monk.
I recently ran a monk and rogue in the same group up to level 20. The monk ended up stronger by the end of the game than the rogue as far as straight combat. Rogue still had to rely on not being seen or hit or they get wrecked.
Monk had the second best AC behind the champion. And was unloading a truck ton of attacks doing nutty damage and cruising all over the battlefield with ease with Rogue Archetype, mobility, and Sneak Attack as well.
So you want to let the monk do this with a big old weapon, so they can be the ultimate martial class better than every other class giving up nothing to do this? Paizo knows how good the monk is. They capped their offense where it is, same as they did the Thief Rogue.
I've had my fun in this debate. It's a pointless one that you keep trying to turn into this one factor debate rather than the monk class as a whole which you haven't even built well it sounds like. Build the monk class well, you will see it needs absolutely no increases in offense. It's a brutal, brutal class as is that builds a little slower than other martials, but pays off big if you play it long-term and learn it well.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Monks also stack well with casting archetypes. FoB let's them do stuff like attack twice and use something like electric arc. Monk action economy is very nice for building characters.
It is awesome to see that you’ve come around on the monk. In high level fights, there really are a lot of creatures with highly exploitable weaknesses and monks really can feast.
But in response to the question “why no Flurry of Bliws with martial weapons?” And then comparing everything to dragon tail…
…stances require an action to enter and are, for most of the game, exclusive. Flurry of blows has no limit on armor, so out of class poaching with weapons would be absurdly broken. I think minimally, any martial weapon using monk ability would probably have to require a stance and maybe not work with any other monk feats. Again, at that point, it’s not really a monk any more. Just the ability to flurry and ki strike with a great pick or a bastard sword or a maul would be an absurd amount of damage. Them eventually getting deadly as well would just be silly.
Why is Dragon Stance inferior? I will explain this to my viewpoint.
Dragon Stance requires a strength-based monk. Dex-based monks are better for maxing out AC and saves.
If you are take Dragon Stance, you funnel your monk character into strength as their primary stat requiring starting with a maxed out strength rather than Dex.
This will weaken your AC and saves, while providing only a minor increase in damage at low levels that will become insignificant at higher level.
So for this d10 martial art with a fully -5 and -10 penalty with the fairly weak trait of backswing, you create a suboptimal monk with a lower AC that will remain lower likely until level 15 since you are starting with an 18 str and likely 16 Dex. Given how ability work ups work, that means no 20 Dex until level 15 meaning no max AC until level 15.
Monk is built around Dex, not strength. They are suboptimal as a strength class and will play weak. If you want a strength-based unarmed fighter, better to go barb or fighter and archetype into monk.
That is why you stay away from Dragon Stance.
If Paizo wants to create an option for a Strength-based monk with abilities to equalize AC, they will have to modify it as that option is not great right now.
Current monk is built to be dex-based. The d10 Dragon Stance is a trap option I'd stay away from unless you go in to it because you like the concept and want to play a suboptimal option for fun.
Monk has been balanced around Dex for offense and defense to maximize the class capabilities. You can do a workable strength based monk with Mountain Style to balance Dex, but dragon style is willfully making your defense weaker until level 15 and focusing more ability increases into strength than is optimal for the monk.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I’ve played a dragon stance monk. It is fun. You can cover your defenses in other ways but it takes mobility and party support.
But the key is that dragon stance locks you out of armor. Unless using weapons with monk abilities also locks you out of using armor, it makes armored monk with a 2 handed weapon the top damaging monk, which is just a fighter at this point. Fighters get ways to make extra attacks every round. That is not the defining feature of a monk.