An unarmored foe can still twist certain joints on an armored foe to breaking or grapple someone to immobility...and if the environment permits, a grapple can be turned into suffocation.
-
NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.
Why does nobody complain about the monk?
- Thread starter xXxTheBeastxXx
- Start date
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
I remember a feat from a non-core WotC book somewhere giving you Wis to attack instead of Str, can never remember the name of it when I'm in "build a Monk" mood though, which I currently am.Or it could have been Wis instead of Con.. Probably in one of the pisonic books, they got more love than Monks ever did.
I do like the idea of needing Dex, Wis, Str, Con though. More for the theme than mechanically, theme wise it's brilliant. The elite of the elite, above mere mortals. Mechanically it's a b***h. Could leave them for a high powered game where people start with better than normal stats? Or one of those "roll 4d6 6 times, take out the lowest number for each", generally gives at least one 18 and no low scores, even better when you can move points around at a 1:1 ratio. 18 Wis, 18 Str, 16 Dex, 14 Con, 12 Int, 10 Cha? 10 Int if Human, and could completely drop Cha realistically.
My perfect Monk is gestalt with Fighter, Rogue, Assassin, possibly Hellbreaker levels anyway. And a class that gives Dimension Door more than once.. Still looking for that. Mental movie turns into thought experiment turns into quite a bit of reading.
About to get highly off topic, but the one character where MAD fits thematically is Monk. Save them for NPC's and high powered games. Or start reading non-core books and don't do an unarmed Monk.
The feat you're thinking of is Intuitive Attack. It is an exalted feat, so in addition to spending a feat, you have to be super duper double-plus good to qualify. And even then, it only helps attack rolls. Not damage, grapple, or anything else a monk needs strength for.
As for MAD fitting thematically...if monk were the best class in the game, maybe it'd be ok if only the elite of the elite could be one effectively. Not my cup of tea for game balance, but whatever. But...even if you got many 16s and 18s and no one else had nearly as good stats (I use point buy, myself)...you'd STILL be merely equal to the next worst core class, Fighter. If they have the same stats as you? You still suck the most.
Thread's kind of old, I'd just like to add that with each passing day I seem to find new examples of "holy crap, Pathfinder's designers HATE monks!" I didn't even notice until two weeks ago...all physical stats are on a single item now and cost MORE to get multiple different boosts of (ie, 10k for str and dex +2, instead of 8k, can't do str +4 and dex +2, either, have to upgrade all at once). There's no text anywhere I can find for the +50% in wrong body slot and +100% for no body slot rules, either. Sure sucks to be a MAD class...
And yes, it can't be said enough. The designers actually going in after the fact to add completely contradictory errata specifically to screw monks out of Improved Natural Attack is total bs. I think I'll add that sentence to every single post I make in this thread from now on, in fact. It really bears repeating...
I forgot one exception- if I'm planning on a Monk/Kensai build, Con is the third highest stat.
This is because the Kensai PrCl has a power that grants a +8Str bonus, reusable as many times as you make a Concentration check (of increasing difficulty). This is quite handy- my Dex/Wis/Con monks routinely get a couple extra uses out of it.
re
Like others I haven't found the monk to be a problem.
Fighters are such damage beasts now that all other classes barely compare to them in terms of raw damage.
The defensive abilities of the monk help him stay alive without as much aid from the casters. But give the fighter some caster support, his damage beastliness still makes the monk look like he's throwing pebbles.
The Paladin can be beastly when smiting. But on average the fighter still hammers harder than the paladin.
Ranger and barb pretty much same thing.
It depends on the levels as well. But as you progress, the fighter is the clearly superior damage dealer to all other classes. Fighters are so beastly dealing damage that all other classes pale in comparison to them. The additional special abilities make for great flavor and do help the other classes shine in a lot of situations. But when it comes to beating stuff down, the fighter is on average the top guy.
And this game is all about killing stuff. Survival can help, but you have clerics to keep you alive. When it comes down to it, specialzed damage dealers like the fighter are so unbelievably beastly no one can compare to them.
Like others I haven't found the monk to be a problem.
Fighters are such damage beasts now that all other classes barely compare to them in terms of raw damage.
The defensive abilities of the monk help him stay alive without as much aid from the casters. But give the fighter some caster support, his damage beastliness still makes the monk look like he's throwing pebbles.
The Paladin can be beastly when smiting. But on average the fighter still hammers harder than the paladin.
Ranger and barb pretty much same thing.
It depends on the levels as well. But as you progress, the fighter is the clearly superior damage dealer to all other classes. Fighters are so beastly dealing damage that all other classes pale in comparison to them. The additional special abilities make for great flavor and do help the other classes shine in a lot of situations. But when it comes to beating stuff down, the fighter is on average the top guy.
And this game is all about killing stuff. Survival can help, but you have clerics to keep you alive. When it comes down to it, specialzed damage dealers like the fighter are so unbelievably beastly no one can compare to them.
Walking Dad
First Post
Really? They made a DRP Olympics on the paizo board, but nerved all selfbuffs for being egoistic, or some casters and pet classes would have blown him out of the water.
pawsplay
Hero
When I was working on the Martial Artist, I pulled apart the monk class and figured out that the only reason they have medium BAB is legacy. Between their overly complicated flurry of blows mechanic and full CMB, they are a full BAB class in all ways except:
- About 1 less hit point per level
- A lower attack bonus on a standard attack or a single attack
Monks need and deserve a full d10. Further, the latter seems to actually discourage their schtick, which is mobility. For instance, Spring Attack + Stunning Fist should be awesome, but for a monk raises accuracy issues.
Now, based on their damage, a monk could be considered, in a certain light, to be a high damage, low accuracy class. In a certain sense, I can understand how monks would have more trouble hitting heavily armored foes. However, the reality is that a focused fighter can out-damage the monk bare-handed. So I think the flavor works fine, but the monk needs help. W Focus (unarmed strike) is shockingly efficient, of course.
But really, the monk needs to be able to take Improved Critical (unarmed strike) at about the same time as the other martial classes, and needs some kind of scaling to-hit bonus, like a fighter's weapon training, paladin smite, ranger's favored enemy, barbarian's escalating Str bonus. If I were absolutely committed to legacy medium BAB, I would take a peek at 3.0 and modify the concept thusly; full BAB on attacks when fighting unarmed or using any monk weapon, period (full or standard attack). Then, with the high damage, is it as if the monk had a scaling to-hit bonus and traded it in for an inherent Power Attack type bonus.
I think the amulet of mighty fists type item is correctly priced at a higher level; it affects all limbs, and affects multiple attacks (primarily natural attacks or flurry attacks). Further, the monk with, say, a +3 item when the fighter has a +5 is consistent with the theme, lower accuracy with more effects (stunning, high damage, etc.).
The knuckles are not a good idea. Apart from the street fighter stylistic problems, slapping an enhancement bonus on top of monk damage at the higher rate leads to somewhat inflated numbers. In other words, everyone goes straight for the knuckles, and that's not what I want monks to do in my campaigns. Brass knuckles shouldn't be a superior option to nunchaku or a quarterstaff. There are very few real world styles that teach them, for that matter. And it really doesn't go into detail about readying, disarming, or sundering brass knuckles.
- About 1 less hit point per level
- A lower attack bonus on a standard attack or a single attack
Monks need and deserve a full d10. Further, the latter seems to actually discourage their schtick, which is mobility. For instance, Spring Attack + Stunning Fist should be awesome, but for a monk raises accuracy issues.
Now, based on their damage, a monk could be considered, in a certain light, to be a high damage, low accuracy class. In a certain sense, I can understand how monks would have more trouble hitting heavily armored foes. However, the reality is that a focused fighter can out-damage the monk bare-handed. So I think the flavor works fine, but the monk needs help. W Focus (unarmed strike) is shockingly efficient, of course.
But really, the monk needs to be able to take Improved Critical (unarmed strike) at about the same time as the other martial classes, and needs some kind of scaling to-hit bonus, like a fighter's weapon training, paladin smite, ranger's favored enemy, barbarian's escalating Str bonus. If I were absolutely committed to legacy medium BAB, I would take a peek at 3.0 and modify the concept thusly; full BAB on attacks when fighting unarmed or using any monk weapon, period (full or standard attack). Then, with the high damage, is it as if the monk had a scaling to-hit bonus and traded it in for an inherent Power Attack type bonus.
I think the amulet of mighty fists type item is correctly priced at a higher level; it affects all limbs, and affects multiple attacks (primarily natural attacks or flurry attacks). Further, the monk with, say, a +3 item when the fighter has a +5 is consistent with the theme, lower accuracy with more effects (stunning, high damage, etc.).
The knuckles are not a good idea. Apart from the street fighter stylistic problems, slapping an enhancement bonus on top of monk damage at the higher rate leads to somewhat inflated numbers. In other words, everyone goes straight for the knuckles, and that's not what I want monks to do in my campaigns. Brass knuckles shouldn't be a superior option to nunchaku or a quarterstaff. There are very few real world styles that teach them, for that matter. And it really doesn't go into detail about readying, disarming, or sundering brass knuckles.
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
I disagree. The reason to use Spring Attack is defensive: you dart in and out and make only one attack to keep the enemy from full attacking you, or even reaching you if you have the speed. If your Stunning Fist is actually working each round and stunning the person, you don't need to hit and run to protect yourself; he's just as much a non-threat to you stunned in melee as he is stunned 30 ft away. Better to beat the tar out of the enemy with a full attack at that point.
No it's not. It doesn't let my monk take Vital Strike at level 6, Improved Crit at 9 (as you noted), etc...
It's priced correctly for a monster with many natural weapons. Not for a monk. As I said before, mechanically it doesn't matter if a monk attacks with hands, feet, head, etc... It's all the same unarmed strike. Yes, it can never be disarmed or neutralized (short of paralysis), but that's part of the inherent benefits of unarmed combat. For some of the inherent drawbacks, consider enemies with reach weapons, enemies you don't want to touch, enemies resistant or immune to bludgeoning damage...
It's not consistent with anything. Monk's paying the same price for lower attack AND damage. Unless the theme you want to maintain is monk sucking at melee combat. Then the disparity expands that theme wonderfully.
Brass Knuckles are superior to the amulet because the amulet is highway robbery. And because once more, mechanically it doesn't matter what appendage you use for your unarmed strikes. I like the flavor of mixing up kicks, knees, etc... But I'm not paying tens of thousands of extra gold for artistic license. You also seem to have a problem with unarmed strike being better than weapons when all else is equal (touching the monster won't burn your hand, you don't need a different damage type, etc... as mentioned above). Monk is the designated unarmed fighting class, whether you like it or not, that's it's purpose (or a portion of it). It's ideally supposed to do unarmed combat well enough to fare roughly equally well with someone using armor and weapons.
Brass knuckles wouldn't need any more readying or be subject to disarm anymore than gauntlets would. It's ultimately just an excuse to let the monk magic up his fists because the designers realized they erred anyway.
pawsplay
Hero
If you hit. If they are stunned. In fact, those are two things which may not be likely at all. If you can only make one attack, and your opponent has a decent Fortitude, then medium BAB just isn't going to cut it. Even a more straightforward monk who simply tumbles past opponents to make a Stunning Fist attack is giving up a substantial amount of accuracy. Yet by design, shouldn't the monk be encouraged to do exactly that, rather than encouraged to stand in place and make a full attack?
So how long does it take to ready a gaunlet? It doesn't usually come up for gaunlets, because gaunlets, by design, don't interfere with anything. How long does it take to shuck a pair of knuckles? If you take them off, what do you do with them? Where does it say knuckles aren't any more subject to disarm attempts than gauntlets?
Why do knuckles allow monk damage, and gauntlets don't? Or do they?... gauntlets are specified as simply making unarmed strikes lethal.
That's a big assumption. It appears that the monk was originally designed under the assumption that they would fight unenhanced with their firsts, occasionally using monk weapons when they needed something with special properties. The problem is that the AC benchmarks ended up, seemingly, a lot higher than would be practical for an unenhanced warrior to hit regularly. That leaves monks as medium BAB characters using weapons in toe to toe combat.
Conceptually, I would rather make monks more capable without loading them down with magical doodads for their fists. Some kind of enhancement (via amulet or whatever) is acceptable, but should not be mandatory, and knuckles should be an option, but not THE option. Rather than building in a fighter-type "unarmed training" the most direct route would be to increase BAB, either generally, or when making unarmed strikes.
I do not really think that there is any hope for a Monk class in its current shape. And so fixing it, in my not so humble opinion, is like painting walls of a ruin.
Latest example: quite a few opponents in Legacy of Witchwar adventure (PFRPG module, 17th level characters recommended) damage creature striking them. And so lightly hitting opponents with multiple melee attacks are a bit, shall we say, inefficient.
One of my earliest attempts to rebuild the class was to get rid of close combat dependency, increasing the number of available options and fitting it with abilities capable of meshing with those of base classes.
Hmm. Aww, let me share a few notes just in case someone finds it useful:
-----
1. Monk is a spellcaster class based on Bard (just change the name, class skills and spells, also strip class abilities). Spellcasting statistic is Wisdom.
2. Class spell list features maneuvers - specialized Monk spells, which require either Swift Action, Immediate Action or Free Action to cast. Some spells come with prerequisites - they can be cast only in a succession (i.e. spell B can be cast only after spell A was cast).
Note: Maneuvers include all standard Monk abilities and then some.
3. The spells cast by Monk are subject to Monk spell template:
- does not provoke attack of opportunity
- does function in a Dead Magic/Antimagic area if the Monks makes a caster level check
- identifying them with spellcraft is subject to -5 penalty
- spells cast by Monk are considered to be arcane and are subject to arcane spell failure rules (i.e. wearing armor imposes chance of arcane failure)
4. In addition to base spell list, the Monk may learn spells from Bard and Sorcerer/Wizard spell list. However, there is a hard limit to the number of such spells equal to the sum of Wisdom bonus and Monk class level.
Such spells are still cast with Monk spell template.
Note: Monk's spell progression is similar to that of a Bard - the class will never gain access to arcane spells beyond 6th spell level).
5. Special class features:
- all old class abilities are converted to spells, available at spell levels corresponding to old class levels
- the spell Monk template allows the Monk to cast spells in combat
- Monk's learn attack patterns of their opponents - if fighting the same opponent for more than a single round, Monks gain special bonus which can be applied to attack, damage, armor or saves. The bonus can be also applied as Damage Reduction or Resist Elements against the opponent. The number of applications (and the size of the bonus) to be used simultaneously grows with Monk level
6. Monk spells last only several rounds.
7. Monk spells include:
- single and mass debuffs (several different spells applying penalties to attack, saves, armor class)
- inflict conditions on single targets and crowds,
- simple ranged damage spells (rays, lightning bolts, firebolts, fireballs... incidentally, ninjas of Naruto series were inspiration for this)
- pounce (i.e. full attack after move action)
- rake (additional damage applied automatically after several attacks hit)
- flurry (additional melee attacks)
- death attack (as per assassin)
- expending Attacks of Opportunity to parry or dodge opponent attacks
- Acrobatics skill buff
- movement enhancements
- personal attack and damage buffs
Consequently, Monk would be a skirmisher with high number of options, able to lock down opponents, create unfavorable conditions. Its main limitation would be number of spell slots available... as per this rule: "you're a king as long as you have spells to cast".
----
Well, that was as far as I got. Eventually, the idea was abandoned as no one wanted to be a Monk.
Regards,
Ruemere
Latest example: quite a few opponents in Legacy of Witchwar adventure (PFRPG module, 17th level characters recommended) damage creature striking them. And so lightly hitting opponents with multiple melee attacks are a bit, shall we say, inefficient.
One of my earliest attempts to rebuild the class was to get rid of close combat dependency, increasing the number of available options and fitting it with abilities capable of meshing with those of base classes.
Hmm. Aww, let me share a few notes just in case someone finds it useful:
-----
1. Monk is a spellcaster class based on Bard (just change the name, class skills and spells, also strip class abilities). Spellcasting statistic is Wisdom.
2. Class spell list features maneuvers - specialized Monk spells, which require either Swift Action, Immediate Action or Free Action to cast. Some spells come with prerequisites - they can be cast only in a succession (i.e. spell B can be cast only after spell A was cast).
Note: Maneuvers include all standard Monk abilities and then some.
3. The spells cast by Monk are subject to Monk spell template:
- does not provoke attack of opportunity
- does function in a Dead Magic/Antimagic area if the Monks makes a caster level check
- identifying them with spellcraft is subject to -5 penalty
- spells cast by Monk are considered to be arcane and are subject to arcane spell failure rules (i.e. wearing armor imposes chance of arcane failure)
4. In addition to base spell list, the Monk may learn spells from Bard and Sorcerer/Wizard spell list. However, there is a hard limit to the number of such spells equal to the sum of Wisdom bonus and Monk class level.
Such spells are still cast with Monk spell template.
Note: Monk's spell progression is similar to that of a Bard - the class will never gain access to arcane spells beyond 6th spell level).
5. Special class features:
- all old class abilities are converted to spells, available at spell levels corresponding to old class levels
- the spell Monk template allows the Monk to cast spells in combat
- Monk's learn attack patterns of their opponents - if fighting the same opponent for more than a single round, Monks gain special bonus which can be applied to attack, damage, armor or saves. The bonus can be also applied as Damage Reduction or Resist Elements against the opponent. The number of applications (and the size of the bonus) to be used simultaneously grows with Monk level
6. Monk spells last only several rounds.
7. Monk spells include:
- single and mass debuffs (several different spells applying penalties to attack, saves, armor class)
- inflict conditions on single targets and crowds,
- simple ranged damage spells (rays, lightning bolts, firebolts, fireballs... incidentally, ninjas of Naruto series were inspiration for this)
- pounce (i.e. full attack after move action)
- rake (additional damage applied automatically after several attacks hit)
- flurry (additional melee attacks)
- death attack (as per assassin)
- expending Attacks of Opportunity to parry or dodge opponent attacks
- Acrobatics skill buff
- movement enhancements
- personal attack and damage buffs
Consequently, Monk would be a skirmisher with high number of options, able to lock down opponents, create unfavorable conditions. Its main limitation would be number of spell slots available... as per this rule: "you're a king as long as you have spells to cast".
----
Well, that was as far as I got. Eventually, the idea was abandoned as no one wanted to be a Monk.
Regards,
Ruemere
Last edited:
StreamOfTheSky
Adventurer
Flurry is the primary class feature and requires a full attack, so it's just a core problem of the monk that it's very mobile but must stand still to fight anywhere near respectfully. PF if anything made the problem worse by giving monk full BAB, but only during flurry. At least before it was just a bunch of extra attacks. In PF, after a certain point, even with hte -2 flurry penalty, you're actually losing accuracy if you don't flurry. To solve this? I think PF monks should just plain have full BAB, the current set up is really silly, and the reasoning for not doing so ("backwards compatibility") is complete bs when other core classes destroyed 3E compatibility, like the barbarian's rage mechanic.
In my own thoughts for fixing monk I give them the eventual ability to chain flurry attacks onto ANY attack, turning them into devastating spring attackers, and even pretty scary at AoOs with the right feats/gear. That's still a work in progress, though.
It doesn't say, I'm just using common sense and the closest item related to the knuckles that do exist for an idea of how the knuckles should work. I don't think the knuckles by design interfere with anything either.
Gauntlets are still an unarmed strike, so they should work, they're just wonky because they force you to do lethal and more importantly...monk's aren't "proficient" with them and they aren't a monk weapon, so by RAW you'd take a -4 to hit and be unable to flurry with them, I think. The knuckles avoid these issues by specifically being called out as a special monk weapon they're proficient with, so they're well thought out in that regard, at least.
So...make the amulet cost the same as any other weapon, the knuckles become the idiot pointless novelty they should be, and everyone's happy? Even with full BAB, monk still deserves affordable magical enhancements if other warriors have them. And again, I find it to be rather sick irony that if you have buff casters or wand users available, monk becomes the easiest class to buff his weapon, since it counts for magic weapon AND fang, but suddenly when you get to permanent magic items the tables are turned. No monk player that looked into the numbers ever got the amulet, in 3E or pathfinder, you just got a wand for the mage to use. It IS useful in that you can put a +1 property on it without it having an enhancement first, but I don't think that was its intended use...
