Monks have a reputation for having a high AC, and yet whenever I build one their AC seems to lag behind other characters by a few points unless I (1) add a shield, (2) prioritize Dexterity over Strength, or (3) make them high enough level that I can get 20 Dex even as a secondary attribute.
What else might I be missing?
If I'm unwilling to compromise damage or wield a shield, what is your advice for keeping AC parity throughout the character's career?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, you can also look at Mountain Stance, or at the Dragon-Blooded Heritage and its Scaly Hide feat as additional ways to fill out their AC at a lower DEX.
If you don't want a shield but want some similar action, you can always look at weapons and unarmed attacks with Parry (and supporting feats), at the Shielding Arm spell, at getting a Shield Cantrip, etc.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mountain Stance.
OK, tongue-in-cheek answer aside, I'm thinking this is an overall balance and character expectations thing.
What it feels like is that you want a martial character that does the per-Strike damage of a 1-hand weapon Fighter, the free-hand nature of unarmed attacks, the action compression of Flurry of Blows, and still has above-par AC. All at the same time.
Fast, cheap, or good: you can only pick two.
So yeah, if you want the maximum AC from the unarmored proficiency boost, you are going to need maximum Dex. Which will likely make your STR lag a bit more than you were hoping for.
So the tradeoff is: is losing those points of STR damage per Strike a reasonable cost for having an AC that is 2 points higher than standard?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
AC that is 2 points higher than standard?Why higher though? O_o How? Or what the 'standard' is?
The standard Finoan is probably referring to is the armor proficiency of fighters and rangers, which monk is almost always one proficiency above.
Monks do not shine until very high level. They are not that impressive at low level. If you run a monk past level 15 and all the way to 20, they become fighter level strong. They become a powerful martial machine far more versatile in combat than a barb or fighter with high AC, incredible action economy, and some crazy feats as well as doing pretty nutty damage.
If you only play a monk to level 5 to 10, they won't seem very impressive. They're not bad, but the monk is one class that doesn't start to seem insane until very high level.
They're a bit like the martial version of a caster. Their high level feats are really good. All their abilities eventually come together to create a martial death machine as good as any in the game.
P.S. I usually play a monk with a shield at low level since they start with great action economy. This does help their AC. But due to the way stat increases work and the monk not being able to wear armor, they don't maximize their AC until they hit level 10 and can obtain a +5 dex modifier. That's one of their scaling problems pre-10th level and also means not making a dex-based monk isn't a great idea.
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Others have already mentioned some Stance options. Mutagens of various sorts are other ways that can boost the raw numbers.
Having played a monk for a 12 level campaign, I would say don't overlook another way to increase your defense: Stride away. Flurry of blows, or any number of other useful Monk feats that help with action compression mean you can more easily than most classes get the same amount of offense off with an action left to retreat. Making the enemy waste actions coming after you are actions they then don't have for an extra Strike or to use a 3-action attack (or sometimes even a 2-action one after moving.
TBF, a Monastic Archer Stance monk (possibly switch-hitting with Monastic Weaponry and a bow staff [finesse in melee]) with Qi Spells (inner upheaval) and Elemental Fist can be decent as a Dex-based monk. Probably as a human (any heritage) for Natural Ambition to pick up an extra 1st level monk feat.
Probably not the "kick-ass melee combatant" you are seeing in your mind, however.
Well, you should never prioritize str over dex, for one. Mountain stance is a trap that springs shut the moment you need to fly or swim and should be avoided in any game that goes past level 5ish.
Not like you're compromising damage either. You have much higher damage potential with wolf stance (agile, backstabber, works with archetype sneak attack) vs something like dragon. Just run +2 or +3 str to start.
Max dex then puts them 2 above baseline (rogue) and 1 above non-legendary plate. If you don't want to take it further with shields and the like that's on you. If you just don't like the image of a monk with a shield ask your gm to flavor it as a parry or qi-infused cloth or bracers or whatever.
I'm a big fan of both the high damage stances, like Dragon, or the defensive ones, like Crane. Tiger is pretty cool too for the mobility.
Most of my monk builds to date have been in the ballpark of level 10, give or take a few levels.
If there's one thing I've noticed, is that most characters keeping up their AC up will have about a 30 at level 10.
My monks consistently seem to have 28 or 29 instead.
EDIT: Just looked up my various monk builds.
LVL / AC (multiple values indicate multiple characters of the same level)
01 / 18, 18, 19 (all also have shields; not included here)
05 / 23
06 / 24
09 / 27, 27,
10 / 29, 29, 29
13 / 35, 35
15 / 38
Almost 2/3 of them have Strength as 1 higher than Dexterity. Roughly 1/3 of them tied Strength and Dexterity. Only one of the level 1 characters had a higher Dexterity than Strength, and it was toting around a Tower Shield along with a lesser drakeheart mutagen, and Rain of Embers Stance. XD
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If you want something crazy I'm trying now, imagine getting to level 20 and taking Kaiju Stance and Golden Body for insane crits.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I'm a big fan of both the high damage stances, like Dragon, or the defensive ones, like Crane. Tiger is pretty cool too for the mobility.
Most of my monk builds to date have been in the ballpark of level 10, give or take a few levels.
If there's one thing I've noticed, is that most characters keeping up their AC up will have about a 30 at level 10.
My monks consistently seem to have 28 or 29 instead.
That's likely because you don't prioritise DEX while not taking Scaly Hide.
A Monk that goes +4 DEX at Level 1 and upgrades it at every possible instance ends up with AC 30 (10 base + 10 level + 5 DEX + 4 expert + 1 item) at level 10 without a shield (though I despise monks with shields).
Champions and Guardians are going to be 31 (10 Base + 10 level + 4 Expert + 7 item), Animal Instinct Barbarians who take Animal Skin will be AC 30 (same as the Monk, but +3 DEX and +3 Item instead of +5/+1), everyone else with Heavy Armor is going to be 29 (same as Champion or Guardian, -2 because of Trained), everyone else with Light/Medium is going to be 28 (-1 compared to Heavy due to item bonuses), and non-Monk Unarmored folk are going to be 27 (-1 on Light Armor because they will have 1 less item bonus). All of these w/o shields and assuming they fill their DEX cap (or in the case of Casters, have +4 DEX) of course.
Every point of DEX you shave off hurts the Monk's AC unless you can get a bonus elsewhere. Scaly Hide (from Dragonblooded) is the best bet because it continues to use your Unarmored Proficiency and allows you to keep maximum AC with DEX at only +3 from 5th level onwards, freeing up your boosts for STR.
Drakeheart Mutagens also work wonders but they have drawbacks and will be very expensive both gold-wise and action-wise to upkeep unless you have an Alchemist friend to keep you topped up.
Mountain Stance is another option in theory but it's horrible compared to alternatives and should not be seriously considered if you want to optimise.
That's basically why your Monks have low AC. You don't need super high STR as a Monk unless you want to use Monk Weapons. Stumbling, Tiger and Wolf Stance give you d8 finesse/agile attacks which is more than good enough to contribute if you want to do damage.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I have never felt that my monk characters have an AC that is lacking, but I've also never built a monk without +4 (or 18) Dex at level 1.
Like a major draw of the Monk class is your access to d8 Finesse attacks.
monk standces are basically advanced two-handed weapons
very good profiles
if you play a monk you should take 2+ dex boosts at the start of the game
you start with expert proficiency in unarmed defense, thats +2 free AC
the two ways to use it:
if you take only 2 you are at the same defensive level as basically every martial and grow a little faster
if you take full 4 boosts you are ahead of the curve of every martial with champion and guardian at some point catching up (potentially getting slightly ahead on the cost of mobility)
and dont forget that your mobility can also be leveraged for defense, another strength of the monk
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Mobility is big for the monk if you don't need to stand in close to Reaction attacks. A monk with rogue archetype and mobility can move around a battlefield without provoking AOOs causing a monster to have to exchange movement for your attacks. No one can kite as well as a monk, especially after picking up something like Air Walk.
Mobility is big for the monk if you don't need to stand in close to Reaction attacks. A monk with rogue archetype and mobility can move around a battlefield without provoking AOOs causing a monster to have to exchange movement for your attacks. No one can kite as well as a monk, especially after picking up something like Air Walk.
Do you mean wind jump?
Air walk is a legacy spell that wasn't reprinted in Remaster (presumably replaced by fly).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Do you mean wind jump?
Air walk is a legacy spell that wasn't reprinted in Remaster (presumably replaced by fly).
Probably not. Air walk remains the best aerial mobility spell in the game and if they don't print a nerfed version of it, it's still legal.
I played a monk with a starting Dex of 12 and it worked because there was a champion and a cleric in the party who wanted an ally who got hit a lot. I still played a lot of kiting, but with the intention of wasting one enemy action to move and still getting hit at least once or twice a round for their reaction abilities. My monk could also cast spells very well so I used defense spell casting options from a fairly early level, spending a lot of my gold (that wasn’t going into my hand wraps) on scrolls. It certainly didn’t seem like the party felt burdened by his lower AC.
I would have built my monk differently if I was not joining a party that already went so heavy into defending and healing, but wasting character building resources on defense when the party was lacking both a striker and a wizard/non-support caster feels like it would have been more detrimental to the party.
But monks don't cast spells. So now you need both permission from the GM to use legacy content as well as a heavy archetype investment.
Air Walk can be cast on a buddy so as long as you have anyone who can cast Divine or Primal spells and your GM allows it, you shoudl be fine.
It is a team game after all.
But monks don't cast spells. So now you need both permission from the GM to use legacy content as well as a heavy archetype investment.
1) You don't need permission to use common options.
2) You don't need permission to use legacy options so long as they haven't been reprinted.3) Let's not pretend that a single dedication feat for scrolls/wands is "heavy archetype investment." Especially when multitalented exists.
4) It could always just be the local caster buffing you before rank 4 scrolls are cheap enough to buy in bulk.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A GM can absolutely rule that older content is not allowed in their game, obviously. But there's no default expectation that it wouldn't be.
Although the point that monks really don’t come online until level 10 is somewhat depressing (I play a PFS monk that doesn’t see much play), I will say that the Bo staff with its parry trait is a nice low level third action for a boost in AC. I’m still unsure as to whether I’ll train out of monk weaponry when/if she gets higher level.
But monks don't cast spells. So now you need both permission from the GM to use legacy content as well as a heavy archetype investment.
I never used air walk. A monk only needs one archetype feat for casting mostly from scrolls because their DCs and attacks advance automatically at a rate better than archetype casting. It is a pretty minimal investment.
You don't need permission to use legacy options so long as they haven't been reprinted.
You keep telling yourself that. While supported by the devs, I don't believe it's actually printed among the rules anywhere. It doesn't take much to find a GM that disagrees with the statement.
In my experience GMs don't take kindly to players telling them how to run their games with no rules backing them up.
Let's not pretend that a single dedication feat for scrolls/wands is "heavy archetype investment." Especially when multitalented exists.
Last I heard, you you need Basic Spellcasting in order to qualify for scrolls, wands, and staves. That's at least two feats and likely a lockout of ther archetype options as well.
|
Let's not pretend that a single dedication feat for scrolls/wands is "heavy archetype investment." Especially when multitalented exists.Last I heard, you you need Basic Spellcasting in order to qualify for scrolls, wands, and staves. That's at least two feats and likely a lockout of ther archetype options as well.
No. The dedication is enough and it has been this way from the start of PF2.
The Remaster clarified it even further : "The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype also allows you to use Cast a Spell activations of items (such as scrolls, staves, and wands)."
And you get a spellcasting ability right from the dedication since you get to cast Cantrips.
No. The dedication is enough and it has been this way from the start of PF2.Let's not pretend that a single dedication feat for scrolls/wands is "heavy archetype investment." Especially when multitalented exists.Last I heard, you you need Basic Spellcasting in order to qualify for scrolls, wands, and staves. That's at least two feats and likely a lockout of ther archetype options as well.
That has been contested since the start of PF2.
The early versions of PF2 were, in fact, much more specific that it required more than just the dedication feat. There are still some vestiges of that remaining.
|
|
No. The dedication is enough and it has been this way from the start of PF2.Let's not pretend that a single dedication feat for scrolls/wands is "heavy archetype investment." Especially when multitalented exists.Last I heard, you you need Basic Spellcasting in order to qualify for scrolls, wands, and staves. That's at least two feats and likely a lockout of ther archetype options as well.That has been contested since the start of PF2.
The early versions of PF2 were, in fact, much more specific that it required more than just the dedication feat. There are still some vestiges of that remaining.
I do not remember ever seeing it explicitly written that the dedication feat by itself was not enough for scrolls, wands and staves. In fact those are explicitly mentioned.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Contested by people in denial maybe. They killed needing anything past the initial dedication 4ish years ago via dev comment and then they re-killed it in the remaster.
Fortunately, we're all a few rungs below "active dev with his name on the front cover" so without additional commentary or errata it's pretty clear who has the right of it.
You keep telling yourself that. While supported by the devs, I don't believe it's actually printed among the rules anywhere. It doesn't take much to find a GM that disagrees with the statement.
Good thing "supported by the devs" and "the pfs ruling" are pretty good arguments and more than enough to get legacy content at every table I've ever heard of. Possibly because of how much would simply have stopped existing when the remaster first hit.
If a gm wants to make a house rule, that's fine, but I'm not going to account for deviation from the default when I make any sort of recommendations or arguments. Much like how I don't assume anything with a rarity tag without a common access point is legal, since you need gm permission to deviate from lack of access.
I do not remember ever seeing it explicitly written that the dedication feat by itself was not enough for scrolls, wands and staves. In fact those are explicitly mentioned.
Again, you can't prove lack of ambiguity by showing how your ruling doesn't violate the rules. You can only prove your ruling to be unambiguously right if you can disprove the opposing ruling.
And the opposing ruling is based in the item activation rules explicitly saying that you need a Spellcasting class feature, the spellcasting archetype rules previously saying that the Basic Spellcasting feat is what counted as the Spellcasting class feature (not the Dedication feat), and that the line you reference about being allowed to use scrolls, wands, and staves says "A spellcasting archetype allows..." not "the Dedication Feat allows...". The Basic Spellcasting feat is also part of the spellcasting archetype.
So go ahead and actively disprove any of that.
Or admit that the rule is ambiguous and worthy of being contested.
Contested by people in denial maybe. They killed needing anything past the initial dedication 4ish years ago via dev comment and then they re-killed it in the remaster.
Fortunately, we're all a few rungs below "active dev with his name on the front cover" so without additional commentary or errata it's pretty clear who has the right of it.
The Cast a Spell item activation still says:
You must have a spellcasting class feature to Activate an Item with this activation.
And currently nothing in the Spellcasting Archetypes rules grants that class feature.
So the rules are more ambiguous now than they were in the beginning. Not less ambiguous.
So what part of an archetype grants spellcasting ability exactly?
Edit: It appears the post showing errata regarding this issue that I was responding to has been deleted.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The clarification is this:
Page 215: The magic items you can activate with a spellcasting archetype included a limited list, but was not meant to be that narrow. Under Spellcasting Archetypes, change the final sentence of the first paragraph to, “ The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype also allows you to use Cast a Spell activations of items (such as scrolls, staves, and wands).”
The text that was being edited was:
Some archetypes grant you a substantial degree of spellcasting, albeit delayed compared to a character from a spellcasting class. The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype also allows you to use Cast a Spell activations of items (such as scrolls, staves, and wands).
If we look at a specific Dedication feat, we'll see where this comes in. Using sorcerer dedication as an example:
You cast spells like a sorcerer. You gain access to the Cast a Spell activity. You gain a spell repertoire with two common cantrips from the spell list associated with your bloodline, from the spells granted by your bloodline, or any other cantrips of that tradition you learn or discover. You’re trained in the spell attack modifier and spell DC statistics. Your key spellcasting attribute for sorcerer archetype spells is Charisma, and they are sorcerer spells of your bloodline’s tradition. You don’t gain any other abilities from your choice of bloodline.
Other caster multiclass dedications will have those exact lines vary, but they are all giving you spellcasting in the dedication.
So what part of an archetype grants spellcasting ability exactly?
Yeah. That's the problem.
The devs have done a lot of errata work to resolve this, but they always seem to stop short of actually naming a Feat that grants the ability. It instead says things like 'the archetype' or 'the spellcasting ability of the archetype'.
So it is still ambiguous.
And that is all that I am saying. Don't read more into it than that.
I am not saying that it is incorrect or a houserule to run the game with the Dedication feat alone allowing using Cast a Spell items. I can't disprove that ruling, so I concede that it is a valid ruling.
I am also not saying that it is a balance problem to run the game with either ruling. If I thought there was a significant balance problem with one of the rulings, I would be invoking the Ambiguous Rules rule and stating boldly that one of the rulings is unequivocally the best way to play the game.
I am simply saying that the rule is ambiguous and contested. So it would be best to not give advice that relies on one ruling, and more importantly, you should not be criticizing or shaming people who hold the other ruling or stating that the rules are not ambiguous on this matter.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The power of the wild world flows through you. You are a spellcaster and can cast spells of the primal tradition using the Cast a Spell activity (see Casting Spells).
...
At 1st level, you can prepare two 1st-rank spells and five cantrips each morning from the common spells on the primal spell list, or from other primal spells to which you gain access and learn via Learn a Spell.
...
Since your key attribute is Wisdom, your spell attack modifier and spell DC use your Wisdom modifier.
__
You cast spells like a druid. You gain the Cast a Spell activity. You can prepare two common cantrips each day from the primal spell list or any other primal cantrips you learn or discover. You’re trained in the spell attack modifier and spell DC statistics. Your key spellcasting attribute for druid archetype spells is Wisdom, and they are primal druid spells.
Cast spells using Cast a Spell. Check.
Key spellcasting attribute. Check.Spell list. Check.
Cantrips not being a separate ability from spellcasting. Check.
Premaster dev commentary that the dedication feat was enough. Check.
On the other end we have.
Trying to claim you don't have spellcasting until you take the basic spellcasting feat.
Yeah, real ambiguous.
Cast spells using Cast a Spell. Check.
Key spellcasting attribute. Check.
Spell list. Check.
Yeah. And none of those are referenced as mandatory for Cast a Spell item activation.
Cantrips not being a separate ability from spellcasting. Check.
Citation needed.
Premaster dev commentary that the dedication feat was enough. Check.
Irrelevant. They didn't think it was important enough to put into errata properly. On a 3rd party platform, a game dev is just another person. And one game dev making a remark alone does not have the same weight as a peer-reviewed official announcement.
*more than I can quote clearly*
Also citation needed.
Where does it say that 'The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype' must be referring to the ability to use the Cast a Spell activity and not the Basic Spellcasting feat?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
What are we aerguing about? That post remaster requires more than the dedication feat?
On page 215 of the player core it says explicitly that the spell casting abilities you get from the dedication lets you cast spells and use scrolls and other items that require spell casting.
“ Some archetypes grant you a substantial degree of spellcasting, albeit delayed compared to a character from a spellcasting class. The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype also allows you to use Cast a Spell activations of items (such as scrolls, staves, and wands).”
The dedications give you Cast a Spell activity explicitly. Certainly the Animist one does.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
The clarification is this:
Page 215: The magic items you can activate with a spellcasting archetype included a limited list, but was not meant to be that narrow. Under Spellcasting Archetypes, change the final sentence of the first paragraph to, “ The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype also allows you to use Cast a Spell activations of items (such as scrolls, staves, and wands).”The text that was being edited was:
Some archetypes grant you a substantial degree of spellcasting, albeit delayed compared to a character from a spellcasting class. The spellcasting ability from a spellcasting archetype also allows you to use Cast a Spell activations of items (such as scrolls, staves, and wands).If we look at a specific Dedication feat, we'll see where this comes in. Using sorcerer dedication as an example:
You cast spells like a sorcerer. You gain access to the Cast a Spell activity.If you maybe notice, nothing at all is said about Dedication feat or what exactly 'spellcasting ability' is.
And the text that was being edited was:
"A spellcasting archetype allows you to use scrolls, staves, and wands in the same way that a member of a spellcasting class can."
Not what you quoted, you quoted the final variant. As anyone can see, it's not about when you can use any items, it's about which items you can possibly use. Not scrolls, staves, and wands only, but any Cast a Spell activated items.
I'm still now more convinced that dedication is enough than before the remaster. But your argument doesn't help. And they still didn't make the text actually unambiguously clear.
The dedication feat for Druid (for example) starts as follows:
"Druid Dedication
Feat 2
Archetype Dedication Multiclass
Source Player Core pg. 218
Archetype Druid
Class Druid
Prerequisites Wisdom +2
You cast spells like a druid. You gain the Cast a Spell activity. You can prepare two common cantrips each day from the primal spell list or any other primal cantrips you learn or discover. You’re trained in the spell attack modifier and spell DC statistics. Your key spellcasting attribute for druid archetype spells is Wisdom, and they are primal druid spells."
I do not see how it is not crystal clear that this is enough to fulfill the requirements of the Cast a Spell activation.
|
|
Cantrips not being a separate ability from spellcasting. Check.Citation needed.
"Cast a Spell
Source Player Core pg. 299Spells can vary in how many actions they take, as shown in the spell’s stat block. You cast cantrips, spells from spell slots, and focus spells using the same process, but must expend the spell when casting a spell from a spell slot and must spend 1 Focus Point to cast a focus spell. Some rules will refer to the Cast a Spell activity, such as “if the next action you use is to Cast a Spell.” Any spell qualifies as a Cast a Spell activity, and any characteristics of the spell use those of the specific spell you’re casting."
Mobility is big for the monk if you don't need to stand in close to Reaction attacks. A monk with rogue archetype and mobility can move around a battlefield without provoking AOOs causing a monster to have to exchange movement for your attacks. No one can kite as well as a monk, especially after picking up something like Air Walk.Do you mean wind jump?
Air walk is a legacy spell that wasn't reprinted in Remaster (presumably replaced by fly).
whatever that feat is that let's the monk walk on air with an acrobatics check.
I was not talking about the air walk spell, though that makes it easy if you have access.
Mobility works with flight, so not a big deal. Flurry of blows makes it easy to fly and attack.
Wind Jump focus spell allows monk to fly at speed.
You'll be just fine with Wind Jump and eventually Ki Form with Rogue archetype for mobility for avoiding reaction abilities triggered by movement.
Irrelevant. They didn't think it was important enough to put into errata properly. On a 3rd party platform, a game dev is just another person. And one game dev making a remark alone does not have the same weight as a peer-reviewed official announcement.
There's also the fact that I remember Devs saying that the Dedication wasn't enough, even though everyone thought otherwise.
We're going to have to start citing sources to get anywhere I think.
Not sure why there is this side tangent on items. I have played multiple monks. I don't use items like scrolls or consumables. There are ways to get to flight other than scrolls or consumables. Monk feats at high level give flight for a focus point.
Mobility works with flight.
So this whole side tangent is irrelevant. Monk mobility works without the need for taking a casting archetype to use consumables.
Yeah, I also disfavor consumable items just in general (in all games) but monks do have an advantage over other classes in terms of consumable use since they will almost always have a free hand (basically always unless the scene involves something like the old Onion headline "Jackie Chan attacked while holding world's most expensive wedding cake.")
Yeah, I also disfavor consumable items just in general (in all games) but monks do have an advantage over other classes in terms of consumable use since they will almost always have a free hand (basically always unless the scene involves something like the old Onion headline "Jackie Chan attacked while holding world's most expensive wedding cake.")
If you want to fight while holding something for comedy like Jackie Chan, monk is the class to do that with.
But monks don't cast spells. So now you need both permission from the GM to use legacy content as well as a heavy archetype investment.
You need five feather wreath spellheart on your gauntlet (or a wand if prebuffing, which you often can) and either a divine/primal spellcasting archetype or the trick magic item you already needed for all your wand buffs anyways.
And you don’t need permission from the GM to use legacy content. You need them not banning it. Which they could, but that’s not standard.
And you don’t need permission from the GM to use legacy content. You need them not banning it. Which they could, but that’s not standard.
That's fair.
I've encountered more who are inclined towards banning it than not though. (Mind you it generally seems to come from a "I'd rather just not deal with it" sort of attitude.)