Advice on 9th level Monk doing 6d6 damage per strike...

[Infiniti2000]

I'd point you to the previous discussion, but as I am a non-paying member, I do not have search capability.

I could not find it. It might have been lost in the crash. Maybe someone (hint hint) could post a (public) yes/no poll?

 

[Patryn of Elvenshae]

At any rate, regardless of your decision on INA, it appears that the ring and the feat won't stack.

Each operates under the "increased one size" wording.

Feat: What's the unarmed damage of a monk who has increased one size? [e.g.] 3d6.

Ring: What's the unarmed damage of a monk who has increased one size? [e.g.] 3d6.

Together: What's the unarmed damage of a monk who has increased one size? [e.g.] 3d6.

 

[pawsplay]

The fang's ring is underpriced. Once you get rid of that and the bogus Large damage, things are pretty manageable. Compare to a goliath wielding a Large greataxe or greathammer (3d6 with a x4 crit multiplier!).

 

[Moon-Lancer]

raw is a myth to make people feel right. raw this raw that. Really gets on my nerves. Faq says one thing, you can say another... meh, but don’t fool yourselves that somehow saying the word "raw" makes you infallible or your argument solid. Well if golath cant have more damage with a monk, that’s a pretty weak level adjustment don’t you think?

I would say though, that the ring doesn’t stack with the feat to improve the natural weapon damage and maybe because the golath is already improving the monk fists it may not stack with the feat.

You can twf with just your fists. Everyone knows a monk can attack with any part of the body right? the faq says they can twf says they can use unarmed strike and offhand unarmed strike. Twf is just a feat that gives you a extra attack.

paws has a good point. golath hammer, or fists... the hammer will do better damage, this guy is just barely keeping up once you take away the size and the feat.

I would say a feat IS an effect. Its a general term. Your not going to beable to define it with raw this or that. It’s been debated to death at many stand stills. faq goes the way of INA working. Its just how these things go sometimes.

However one must remember a spell can enhance a monk’s fist like magic fang. so why not a feat as well? It’s considered to be a natural weapon is it not? The only reason they never said the monks unarmed strike was actually a natural weapon is because it uses iterative attacks, and natural weapons don’t work like that. At least that’s the way I see it.

The player is really pumping the cheese though, but when it comes to sticking up for the monk, i usaly do that, but i admit, the player is going a bit too far and something needs to be done. i think 4d6 is ok but not 6d6

 

[WinnipegDragon]

Yeah, I've made my call.

No to Large unarmed damage for Goliaths. Yes to Belt. Yes to Ring. Yes to INA. No to Ring and INA stacking.

Thanks for the debate everyone.

On another note, someone mentioned earlier that Goliaths are large whenever it's beneficial, but that's not the case. They are treated as Large if it is beneficial in a special defense capacity. The example they give is that they are treated as large for the purposes of defending against a Swallow Whole attack.

Thanks again!

 

[Thanee]

Sounds like a reasonable decision.

Bye
Thanee

 

[RigaMortus2]

Just to help your player out , there is a General feat in Tome of Battle called Superior Unarmed Strike. It does the following..

Superior Unarmed Strike
Prereq: Improved Unarmed Strike, +3 BAB
Benefit: You deal more damage with your unarmed strikes, as shown on the table below.

Character level........Unarmed Damage
3rd..........................1d4
4th-7th....................1d6
8th-11th..................1d8
12th-15th................1d10
16th-20th................2d6

Special: If you are a monk, you instead deal unarmed damage as a monk four levels higher.

 

[RigaMortus2]

Just on the subject of INA...

From the PHB, a monk's unarmed strike "is treated as both a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either."

I was not aware that Improved Natural Attack as a spell or an effect. I thought it was a feat?

 

[irdeggman]

See post number 10.

They have some characteristics of large creatures, and not others.

I knew that.

My point was that they are not "Large" creatures. If they were then they would get all of the benefits. SInce they only get "some" then the only ones they get are the ones specified. Increased damage due to being Large is not one of them. Also it specifically says that their benefits stack with those that a creature gets for being increased in size (increasing damage is one of those).

 

[satori01]

I was not aware that Improved Natural Attack as a spell or an effect. I thought it was a feat?

Is not the "effect" of the feat to increase natural damage by one size increment?

To be percise Magic Fang and Magic Weapon do not do anything...but their effects are marvelous...