The ranger and the monk

[Jack Daniel]

Well, I've got a couple of alternate classes, new for 3.5, up for download right here. The ranger's been shown before (though it has been changed now that we all know what the 3.5 PHB looks like), but my monk is new. To quote Bubs of Homestar Runner fame, "Check it out!"

 

[LGodamus]

why did you feel the need to make different unarmed damage charts for different styles...?
just wondering

 

[Jack Daniel]

Because that's how it was in 1st and 2nd edition AD&D, and I'm used to it. Hard styles did more damage than hard/soft styles, which in turn did more damage than soft and vital styles. Plus, it prevents martial arts from being "cookie cutter" identical to one another. If ninjutsu deals damage as a dagger, kungfu deals damage as a club, and karate deals damage as a heavy mace, there are suddenly different reasons to use different styles, and that's a good thing.

 

[LGodamus]

but it would make a ninjutsu monk weaker than a karate monk of the same level...and thats a bad thing.

 

[Jack Daniel]

Generally speaking, when you lower a damage die by one step, raising the threat range or the critical multiplier by one step balances out, in terms of average damage per round. That's why a rapier and a longsword are balanced, for example.

 

[LGodamus]

ahh jack sorry, I didnt see that you had changed that until I got to the weapon section. You might consider adding it to the text for the class.