Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="billd91" data-source="post: 5296655" data-attributes="member: 3400">I just think you have to consider their point of view and goal for high backward compatibility so people could continue to use their old 3.5 stuff. If you assume that prestige classes and feats that weren't part of the 3.5 core (splatbook and 3rd party) were designed with the abilities of the core classes in mind, then they were built with the assumption that monks had a medium BAB and that may have affected they way they were designed or balanced. Giving the monk high BAB changes that assumption. The end effect may not be very significant... or it might depending on the resources the DM and players are using. And Paizo decided they didn't want to go to the effort to go there. I understand and empathize, given their goal of backward compatibility which I think is still a good goal for them to have had.Without that goal in mind, I'm sure giving the monk a full BAB would have been on the table. Enough of the monk's special abilities (combat maneuvers and flurry) work around the difference that I'm convinced just going out and giving full BAB would have been considerably easier from a design point of view.</blockquote>