PDA

View Full Version : On Monks: A Compendium And Discussion



Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 01:18 AM
This is intended to become a resource for monk builds, monk guides, and a nice place to kip up and chat about the limits of the monk as written as well as your favorite fixes. However, for the purposes of the build compendium, I'm going to cordially ask that you assume a reasonable set of gentleman's agreements:

Keep your points to the readily defensible regions of the game, either strict RAW readings adhering to an exclusionary policy, or cases where the RAI of the ability in question is generally agreed on. The opinion of the CO community will be used as a primary meter for overall correctness of rules interpretations.
No out and out game breaks, so no mention of His Koboldness or TBoS or Algernon, etc.
No mention of homebrew or house-rules in builds themselves.
Full access to magical items as per life in a planar metropolis.
For our purposes, wands come in 50 and 10 charge increments.
No assume supernatural ability.

Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 01:20 AM
Builds will go here.

Keld Denar
2009-08-07, 01:22 AM
In progress - Tashalatora - More monk than your monk can handle!

THA SWAG!

Monastic Training [General] Eberron Campaign Setting pg. 57
Benefit: Pick one class. Taking levels in this class does not prevent you from taking monk levels. If you take levels in any othe class, you lose your ability to progress as a monk as usual. If the selected class also has restricted advancement, such as the paladin class, taking monk levels does not prevent you from advancing in that class.
Special: A monk can take this feat as his bonus feat at 1st, 2nd, or 6th level.

Tashalatora [General] Secrets of Sarlona pg. 119
Prereqs: Autohypnosis 5 ranks, Concentration 5 ranks, Monastic Training (psionic class), ability to manifest 1st level powers.
Benefit: Your levels in the psionic class you selected for Monastic Training stack with your monk levels to determine your AC bonus, flurry of blows attacks, and unarmed damage from the monk class.


Discussion

What does this mean? It means that you get all the best features of a monk, the most monkly features of a monk, on top of a host of other sweet abilities. Unarmed Strike damage progression, Flurry progression, AND AC bonus? Nothing else a monk gives is worth it if we can just preserve these aspects.


Builds

Obviously, core-only won't work, given that ECS, Secrets of Sarlona, and anything with psionics aren't core. Neglecting that and going with just the material from the Expanded Psionic Handbook (found in the SRD), we can build some really fun stuff.

Expanded Core build (PHB, DMG, XPH +2 feats)

Tashalatoran smacker
Human, Dwarf, or Half-Orc Monk2/PsyWar18
Str > Wis > Con > Dex > Int > Cha
M1 Improved Unarmed Strike
M1 Improved Grapple
1 Improved Initiative
M2 Monastic Training
3 Tashalatora
P1 Weapon Focus: Unarmed Strike
P2 Psionic Meditation
6 Practicied Manifester
P5 Psionic Fist
9 Improved Natural Attack
P9 Greater Psionic Fist
12 Power Attack
P11 Unavoidable Strike
15 Cleave
P14 Psionic Body
18 Speed of Thought
P17 Unconditional Power


Multisourse builds
Tashalatora Grapple King

1/2 Giant Monk2/PsyWar17 (Buy off 1 LA if possible, still good without)
Str > Wis > Con > Dex > Int > Cha
M1 Improved Unarmed Strike
M1 Improved Grapple
1 Scorpion's Grasp (Sandstorm)
M2 Monastic Training
3 Tashalatora
P1 Psionic Meditation
P2 Practicied Manifester
6 Snap Kick (Tome of Battle)
P5 Link Power (Complete Psionic)
9 Improved Natural Attack
P9 Power Attack
12 Improved Toughness (Complete Warrior)
P11 Unconditional Power
15 Improved Bullrush
P14 Expanded Knowledge: Metamorphosis
18 Shocktrooper
P17 Leap Attack

sofawall
2009-08-07, 01:22 AM
I hope it works a bit better.


Cthulinja'd!

Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 01:22 AM
Hopefully I can be a better OP this time aroun'. But I don't trust my impartiality, so I brought in some friends. The point of this thread is to compile, as objectively as possible, a list of the current standards in monk builds, and compare them to a few benchmarks accepted in the community to see how they stack up. It's basically a guide to building monks, pit-traps to avoid, and low-hanging fruit. Here is a catalog of existing builds, including some of my favorites, and also some existing guides:

Monks And Psionics (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-822311)
________ of Smack (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-883674)
Trip Monk-ey (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-316793)

Zenzei's guide. (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=978174)
Giacomo's Guide (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=80704)

sofawall
2009-08-07, 01:29 AM
Psionics: Talk about low hanging fruit...

Core only: Usually not worth. I actually can't think of a situation where I'd rather have a monk than something else other than a no-magic situation. As in the whole campaign was no magic.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-07, 01:33 AM
Fistbeard Beardfist, from my sig, modified to be even better:

Ranger 1/Thug Fighter4/Monk2/Ranger2/Deepwarden2/Fist of the Forest 3/Drunken Master 4 / PrC 2

The old feats apply, but we get Combat Reflexes at level 5 instead of 15. We can squeeze in Stand Still at level 6 instead of WF: Unarmed STrike, and free up a feat at level 15.

We need another PrC of 2 levels to fill this out. Thoughts?

Myrmex
2009-08-07, 01:33 AM
What makes it count as a "monk" build?

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-07, 01:35 AM
At least one level in monk, and the ability to beat people up with fists.

sofawall
2009-08-07, 01:36 AM
Based around what the monk is based around. It doesn't have to have the monk class, but it has to do what the PHB monk iconically does. If someone looks at your build in action and thinks "Wow, awesome punchy-fisty-jump-up-walls guy!", you're doing it right.

That is my opinion.

And Pharaoh ninja's with extreme succinctness.

Myrmex
2009-08-07, 01:39 AM
So psychic warrior 20 could potentially qualify?

sofawall
2009-08-07, 01:39 AM
In my opinion, yes, although many would disagree. I'm not sure if this is supposed to be monk-class or monk-iconic.

EDIT: Monk2/Psiwar 18 is actually a very common monk build. Effective, too.

Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 01:42 AM
Ideally, more than two levels in monk. Any less, and you might as well play ye olde Monk 2/ Tashalatoran Psychic Warrior 18.

Ninja'd via an edit!

Kelpstrand
2009-08-07, 02:55 AM
@giamoco.

Hypothetically, if the challenge were different, such that real spell loss applied on death and polymorph was allowed, how would you build your monk? How would said Monk build fight differently when not polymorphed, which is something you cannot avoid? How would you justify a level 13 Monk with 8 Str who didn't have access to polymorph until level 10 when he finally managed to get it?

Would you be willing to take part in a 1-20 core dungeon made by people totally impartial to the Monk question (it's a published module) with the houserules I provided, to whit:

It is a giant dungeon challenge provided by a jerk God, who specifically is doing it as a challenge. This means a few things:

1) If you try to leave the dungeon, he just brings you back.
2) If you or any Wizard or whatever attempts to use Planar Binding spells or Gate, the spells are negated by the God.
3) Any time you want, you can snap your fingers and a Noble Djinn will appear. He will be invisible to all non PCs on the dungeon, and will never take part in combat, you have no power over him and he may leave at any time, any attacks on him, including spells such as Dimensional Anchor will result in the God teleporting him out.

His sole purpose is to accept from you any items in your possession and in return give you gold equal to half it's DMG value, and to take an amount of Gold, and provide to you any DMG item that you specify (for these purposes, any wand or scroll at different from normal CL will be considered a DMG item, as long as it is of a Core spell). (However, as per the DMG rules, all Wands are created at 50 charges, while lower ones might exist, they are definitionally not DMG items. You are welcome to get 50 charge wands though, and as a matter of fact anything you need 10 of, you'll need 50 of.)

Also, there will need to be a Death houserule. There actually doesn't we could just use WBL and level loss buys raise dead, but if anyone died in the first 8 levels, it would have no solution. So:

4) Each time you die you will respawn were you last took safe rest one hour later and lose one point. When you have lost 20 points, the God will no longer bring you back to life personally.

Obviously all rules apply equally to all players. Some ideal characters might be: Rogue/Wizard/Druid/Monk since in specifics the question of Wildshape versus polymorph is in question.

elliott20
2009-08-07, 02:58 AM
oh man, I totally forgot the epicness of Giacomo's monk guide thread.

I absolutely cannot believe the discussion actually managed to hit 55 pages in total. I think I gave up after about 10 pages or so. and what I ended up learning from this is:

- I need to get Dungeonscape
- someday, I need to run a factotum character named batman with his rogue cohort named nightwing.
- UMD is an awesome skill.

edit: censor filtered out Nightwing's civilian name.

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-07, 04:24 AM
I'd say that a proper Monk build is one that deals with the usual things that Monks are supposed to do, but somehow they don't. It also involves doing that with one level of Monk, instead of taking a Monk's Belt and saying you're one (that would be insanely cheesy).

So, that would technically mean progressing the features of unarmed damage, wisdom bonus to AC and level-based AC progressions, fast movement, getting daily uses of Stunning Fist at least once based on one of your levels, Evasion, perhaps Still Mind (if someone actually finds a use to it), and the flurry if you wish to consider it the quintessential Monk class feature (most Monk PrCs aside from a pair actually don't do this, which is bizarre...) At the same time, it should fix the basic Monk problems, which are:

1) Is it a melee character or a damage dealer? As in, should I treat it like a Fighter, stand up and take beefy amounts of damage while resisting it, or should I treat it as a Rogue and be all sneaky and shady?

2) The terrible scaling of class abilities. This starts with Still Mind (which is almost like having...I dunno, a racial ability? Like Elves do?), then with the horribly fixed Wholeness of Body, and then...the every bit as painful 1/week Death Fist OF DOOOOM!!!!

3) It's confusing enough that it doesn't have a fixed role, what they give it for the last levels certainly tries to pigeonhole the Monk into something that, sadly, perhaps will never be able to do. That is? Be the nightmare of spellcasters. Since, you know, that DR is more harmful than beneficial, you can't actually raise it the way you raise your AC, and the other benefits have very stringent limits.

So basically, if you can make the Monk be either a superb melee fighter, a superb stealthy guy that simply put can't be detected by anything, or it makes Batman have a run for its money, it's a good Monk build.

So, the traps:
VoP, the Vow of Poverty (and the Vow of being Nerfed unless you're extraordinarily awesome) Everybody just agrees with Admiral Ackbar on that one. Unless...well, you're a druid, or perhaps a Totemist. But it was never meant for a Monk, that's for sure.

Full Monk. Much like going full Fighter, or actually going full class for anything aside from, perhaps, Druid levels. Or ToB classes. Some would argue that the Monk class is a 2 level class; I'd say that taking two levels and then going another class makes the build a not-Monk class, even if you can grow the "base" Monk abilities. I mean, if you can get a dip in Rogue and then get a load of Sneak Attack dice, but your main class is, say...a Swordsage, or a Fighter, then it's a Swordsage build or a Fighter build, not a Rogue build. I'd say that 4 levels or 6 levels makes for a real Monk build, but I won't argue with those that believe otherwise.

For the record, a Monk 2/Psionic Class 18 with Tashalatora and Monastic Training does not a Monk build make, regardless of what the community say, at least in my humble opinion.

And, as for what a Monk build should actually DO:
Define the Monk's purpose. If you really can make a build that specializes in grappling and using the Monk's unarmed damage effectively, it's a go (even if Grapple is easily avoided). If the Monk can stand up and block virtually all attacks, then you've done...a decent work (and it *can* be done, it's just that you need some serious build-fu for it) If your Monk can move around and deal insane amounts of damage with a full attack, you've done a decent work. If your Monk is the king of attacks of opportunity and side effects, you've done a pretty awesome build (and promptly give you the title of King of...oh, wait, it already exists!?) But that should be an idea.

So...well, that's my 2 coppers for it. Perhaps not a useful source of discussion, but it's mostly a reason to debate what a build should actually do. Or at least, point something about the Monk that's readily understood or easy to work around.

And for the record, it's actually possible to make the Giamonk work a bit better. It requires some Dragon content, so it may not be always legal, but it's possible. It involves a fighting style, actually.

Arakune
2009-08-07, 06:59 PM
awsome stuff

How about making it a solo campaign with cohort like helpers like neverwinter nights?

Of course, the wizard is a gnome blaster, or an half-orc barbarian/sorcerer (yes, those are actual companions from NwN).

ColdSepp
2009-08-07, 07:09 PM
The best monk builds don't have monk levels, it seems... that is very sad. I mean, by that standard, wouldn't an Unarmed Swordsage be a monk build? :smallconfused:

The Glyphstone
2009-08-07, 07:15 PM
It's like a train wreck, I just can't bring myself not to click on it.....

Internet Backdraft Go!



On-topic, I'd say under certain circumstances, Monk 5 could make an exit point as well as Monk 2 - such circumstances being, for example, a campaign that you know won't go all the way to 20. In that case, the reduction to your Flurry penalty becomes more valuable, since you don't have to concern yourself as much with ensuring BAB16+.

Myrmex
2009-08-07, 07:24 PM
What would be a good arcane monk build?

quick_comment
2009-08-07, 07:30 PM
What would be a good arcane monk build?

Unarmed Arcane Swordsage.

Or just regular unarmed swordsage, and call desert wind and shadow hand arcane power.

Or arcane swordsage, and take improved unarmed attack, superior unarmed attack and get a monk's belt.

Myrmex
2009-08-07, 07:36 PM
Unarmed Arcane Swordsage.

Or just regular unarmed swordsage, and call desert wind and shadow hand arcane power.

Or arcane swordsage, and take improved unarmed attack, superior unarmed attack and get a monk's belt.

Arcane swordsage isn't really a class. It's an idea for an ACF.

I was hoping something more along the lines of Enlightened Fist or something, with real spells.

Signmaker
2009-08-07, 07:43 PM
My current ToS tinker-build is a monk, incidentally. One which dabbles in Use Magic Device, Truenaming, and Tome of Battle.

She's actually handling pretty well, I'd think.

Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 07:58 PM
For arcane monks, you have a serious uphill battle against the other options, as noted..
But there is a class called carmedine (SP?) monk. Can I get a page cite on it?

Signmaker
2009-08-07, 07:58 PM
Champions of Valour, I believe. And it's a feat, not a class.

Kylarra
2009-08-07, 08:04 PM
For arcane monks, you have a serious uphill battle against the other options, as noted..
But there is a class called carmedine (SP?) monk. Can I get a page cite on it?
Feat in Champions of Valor pg 28

It requires you to be part of an organization, but most DMs handwave fluff requirements like that.

Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 08:23 PM
Whoops, thought it was an ACF. Excellent.

ColdSepp
2009-08-07, 09:08 PM
Whoops, thought it was an ACF. Excellent.

It does the same thing as Kung Fu Genius, I believe.

Signmaker
2009-08-07, 09:16 PM
It's actually a smidge better, due to its Script ability.

PId6
2009-08-07, 09:28 PM
I'm wondering, what kind of boosts does the monk need for VoP to be viable? I know there's AC boost, flight, damage, beating DR, anything else?

Doc Roc
2009-08-07, 09:31 PM
Bluntness time:
A VoP monk would need to be able to use magical gear normally to be viable.

PId6
2009-08-07, 09:38 PM
Bluntness time:
A VoP monk would need to be able to use magical gear normally to be viable.
But which magic gear specifically? I'm wondering for the purpose of house-ruled monk changes that can actually make VoP work, so which magic gear are absolutely necessary?

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-07, 11:14 PM
One of the traps for Monks: Unarmed damage. It's not worth boosting.
At level, say, 11, with Monk's Belt and SUS(RAW they apparently don't stack but IMHO that's a mistake), Large with INA(which is basically all the easy size increases outside of a Talashtora build) deals 6d8(27) per hit. That's nothing at 11th, and other than maybe a couple more size increases when you can afford them, will never get higher. And you've spent 2 feats, 13K, and spent something to get large to do so.

12th is the last break point for Monks. Your Flurry and damage maxes at 11th, you snag Dim Door, +1 BAB and saves, at 12th, and then you get out before 13th smacks you in the face.

Also, is the monk damage table off or something? I thought 2d10 scaled up to 4d6(since 1d10 is 2d6 when large), not 4d8.

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-08, 12:42 AM
One of the traps for Monks: Unarmed damage. It's not worth boosting.
At level, say, 11, with Monk's Belt and SUS(RAW they apparently don't stack but IMHO that's a mistake), Large with INA(which is basically all the easy size increases outside of a Talashtora build) deals 6d8(27) per hit. That's nothing at 11th, and other than maybe a couple more size increases when you can afford them, will never get higher. And you've spent 2 feats, 13K, and spent something to get large to do so.

Well, you'd technically do a tad extra points of damage than a Rogue, mostly all the time (instead of relying on Invisibility/flanking/etc.). Sure, a Rogue may do it most of the time, but four creatures cause it some trouble (Constructs, Undead, Plants, Oozes), various spells and powers make it less than worthwhile (Gaseous Form/Ectoplasmic Form and Iron Body/Oak Body, for example), and it's generally less hard to resist than a single attack. The smart way is getting to Tashalatora and getting Expansion as a first level power, since by this moment you use one power to get to Huge (and thus gaining the best kind of reach), then Hustle to move and full attack (or Psionic Lion's Charge if you're of the charging kind)

At the same time, a Rogue could go with...perhaps Craven, TWF, a Truedeath Crystal, and Invisibility to deal just a tad more damage (6d6 + weapon damage + Str mod, if any)

So I don't see anything wrong with raising Unarmed Strike damage, since only a PA barbarian, two-hander Fighter or martial adept can out-damage a Monk in Core (and perhaps outclass it with some optimization and extra material) I don't see it as a trap, aside from the fact that you need to spend a bit more to enchant your weapons.

Or use Scorpion Kama, which is pretty awesome since you can actually enchant that weapon and it's already a +1...

Recall that unarmed strike has some benefits compared to other weapons, including:

You naturally can't be disarmed, sundered, or have your weapon destroyed because of acid damage, and it'll still deal the same damage (bludgeoning, though...)

You can use it for some things, such as grapple (if for some reason it actually becomes viable or the caster actually forgot to cast Freedom of Movement)

It's technically a light weapon, but you can use Power Attack for it (in the bizarre case you actually have it and want to use it)

It's actually one of the few weapons that can actually exceed the damage ratio while being light (you need very heavy and exotic two-handed weapons to get roughly the same amount of damage later on, even though the whole idea is that static damage >> variable damage)

It doesn't encumber you (if your DM gets too strict on that one, consider that your best weapon is actually part of your weight, not counts against it)

Sure, most of those "advantages" are silly when you think about them, but it doesn't mean that the Monk's unarmed strikes are a trap. Actually...neglecting your Unarmed Strike on a Monk build is actually the trap. Since, otherwise...on what would you apply the feats to? Power Attack and Shock Trooper are the feats of uberchargers, and the Stunning Fist based feats aren't as good aside from the Complete Warrior ones which are pretty decent. They build upon the build (no pun intended), not weaken it by some odd and strange reason.

Now, 12th level is a real trap, tho. You get...the BAB which is nice, except that quite probably you're trying to rely less into BAB and more into other kinds of attack bonus (though it's not bad). You get...the saves, which is a good saving grace except that if you multiclass before, you probably will get a chance of +2 on at least two of your saves. And getting that excuse for Dimension Door IS the real trap: everyone else can just spend 20k ot get the very same ability placed on their armor (a bit expensive, but nonetheless out of the +X pricing costs so it's good to consider), casters do that at will, and you probably found a better way to get that anyways.

11th isn't a bad leaving spot, but as I said, it's a bit risky. It's best for those who want to strike with as many strikes as possible, going for a veritable flurry build (perhaps Scorpion Kama, TWF, ITWF, GTWF, some method of Haste, Snap Kick, Greater Flurry, 16+ BAB), and even then it's pretty much difficult to work that out unless you have a really good way to do it. 6th or 9th are much better, and 2nd as a parting level certainly looks as laughable for a Monk build (since it really acts like a dip, not a build column, regardless of the items or Tashalatora)

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-08, 12:49 AM
But which magic gear specifically? I'm wondering for the purpose of house-ruled monk changes that can actually make VoP work, so which magic gear are absolutely necessary?

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_q5yyamR6js8/SlUUZ7P999I/AAAAAAAAAK0/IuCKuEFRruc/s400/red-bull+boks.jpg

PId6
2009-08-08, 12:55 AM
I already mentioned flight, but thanks.

Keld Denar
2009-08-08, 12:58 AM
Tha Pharoh speaketh the trueth. Flight is one of the major items a melee character needs to be a contender. Without it, hes just a chump on the ground waiting for a buff. It pretty much becomes a must have around level 13 or so. Winged Boots are pretty acessable, with Wings of Flying or Phoenix Cloak being the holy grail of melee movement.

Other things include:

Short range teleports to get out of grapples/swallows/forcecages/fogs/etc
Haste
Miss Chance
DR crackers
and random utility items like Qual's Feathered Trees and Decanters of Endless Fun

And probably a couple other things that I'm forgetting...

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 01:03 AM
So I don't see anything wrong with raising Unarmed Strike damage, since only a PA barbarian, two-hander Fighter or martial adept can out-damage a Monk in Core

Actually, Rogues by far deal the most damage in Core. They just, well, don't get to do that damage against some types or outside of 30ft. (Not that a Monk in core can do damage outside 30ft, but yeah).

At level 11 a rogue has 6d6 SA and can either:

1) TWF for 7d6+whatever damage on 4-5 attacks.
2) Rapid Shot with a bow for 6d6+1d8+whatever for 3-4 attacks.
3) TWF Rapid Shot with thrown weapons for 7d6+1 on 5-6 attacks.

That usually out damages a Monk hitting for +4d6+whatever on 4-5 attacks.

Doc Roc
2009-08-08, 01:09 AM
Feathered. Wings. Rock.
Fiend Folio, fiendish graft. Totally worth it.

Talic
2009-08-08, 01:13 AM
Actually, Rogues by far deal the most damage in Core. They just, well, don't get to do that damage against some types or outside of 30ft. (Not that a Monk in core can do damage outside 30ft, but yeah).

At level 11 a rogue has 6d6 SA and can either:

1) TWF for 7d6+whatever damage on 4-5 attacks.
2) Rapid Shot with a bow for 6d6+1d8+whatever for 3-4 attacks.
3) TWF Rapid Shot with thrown weapons for 7d6+1 on 5-6 attacks.

That usually out damages a Monk hitting for +4d6+whatever on 4-5 attacks.

Actually, in core, I'd dispute that mages can, in fact, deal more damage. There's just little reason for them to do that, when they can do better things than deal damage.

peacenlove
2009-08-08, 01:21 AM
But which magic gear specifically? I'm wondering for the purpose of house-ruled monk changes that can actually make VoP work, so which magic gear are absolutely necessary?

A guess would be (since i had a monk player):
Miss chance ala displacement
Dimensional anchor effects
Belt of Battle
RANGED ATTACKS
HP/DR/weapon special abilities on his fist
More HP/DR :smallwink:

Surely more would be out there but that was what he got.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 01:25 AM
Actually, in core, I'd dispute that mages can, in fact, deal more damage. There's just little reason for them to do that, when they can do better things than deal damage.

I was referring mostly to single target damage, but even including multiple targets a level 11 rogue can be doing 42d6 damage per round no save, and a Wizard isn't going to be doing more than 11d6 to four targets, with a save.

Origomar
2009-08-08, 01:28 AM
i have a huge monk fix that basically changes the class mechanics to a AS focus to make the monk less MAD... i have yet to post it because i have low self esteem.

Doc Roc
2009-08-08, 01:29 AM
I... Think that probably the damage kings in a lot of ways are psionic in nature, in core, thanks to Ego Whip. :)

Keld Denar
2009-08-08, 01:37 AM
Overchannel > 9000

What people don't realize is that Overchannel adds Verbal and Somantic components to where Psionics normally don't.

WITH YOUR MIND!!!! AHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!! *Sweat drop*

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 01:41 AM
I... Think that probably the damage kings in a lot of ways are psionic in nature, in core, thanks to Ego Whip. :)

Um. Except Psionics not being Core...

tyckspoon
2009-08-08, 01:42 AM
I was referring mostly to single target damage, but even including multiple targets a level 11 rogue can be doing 42d6 damage per round no save, and a Wizard isn't going to be doing more than 11d6 to four targets, with a save.

Scorching Ray responds really well to metamagics. A simple combo like Maximized Scorching Ray + (Rod) Quickened Maximized Scorching Ray at CL 11 puts out 144 damage. It's a little under the Rogue's average, but the Wizard has the advantage of making touch attacks by default and should be less likely to miss (Core only, the only easy way I can think of for the Rogue to get touch attacks is to be an alchemical grenadier.) He shares the Rogue's problem of enemies that the trick just doesn't work against, although they're a different set. The Wizard also can't be boned by rolling below-average damage, although I think probably many DMs would just have you average your damage anyway if you were dumping 42d6 worth of Sneak Attack on a single target.

Admittedly the spells and especially the metamagic support aren't there for a Core-restricted Wizard to truly excel in direct damage, but he can compete. And nobody in Core-only is really good at area damage unless you take to detonating Necklaces of Fireballs. Expand it to OGL/SRD content, and the Psion does alright.

PId6
2009-08-08, 01:43 AM
Short range teleports to get out of grapples/swallows/forcecages/fogs/etc
Haste
Miss Chance
DR crackers
and random utility items like Qual's Feathered Trees and Decanters of Endless Fun
They already have teleport, they just can't do it right. That can be fixed. Actually, Freedom of Movement wouldn't be too bad to have as well. Haste is a nice boost but they have Flurry+Fast Movement; I'll leave that for the buffing. Miss chance is a problem; not sure how to negate that without going too far out of monk fluff. VoP gives True Seeing but that probably comes way too late. DR is easy; they already have Ki Fist for that, it's not hard to fix.

Random utility items... well, you gotta make some sacrifices.


A guess would be (since i had a monk player):
Miss chance ala displacement
Dimensional anchor effects
Belt of Battle
RANGED ATTACKS
HP/DR/weapon special abilities on his fist
More HP/DR :smallwink:

Surely more would be out there but that was what he got.
Dimensional Anchor effects? You mean trapping enemies or getting trapped himself? Not sure what you mean here. Belt of Battle isn't that necessary on a properly made monk class, I think. Ranged attacks... hmm, not sure how to fix that. That might just be something to leave for his allies. VoP already handles HP/DR. Which weapon special abilities are most helpful for a monk?

tyckspoon
2009-08-08, 01:51 AM
Dimensional Anchor effects? You mean trapping enemies or getting trapped himself? Not sure what you mean here. Belt of Battle isn't that necessary on a properly made monk class, I think. Ranged attacks... hmm, not sure how to fix that. That might just be something to leave for his allies. VoP already handles HP/DR. Which weapon special abilities are most helpful for a monk?

Presumably trapping enemies, as part of the problem of having limited mobility options is not being able to pursue opponents that want to kite you; it's not that useful removing your own ability to teleport. There should definitely be some viable ranged option; even if your allies can handle it better and will probably do the bulk of solving the particular situation, it's just not all that fun to run into fast fliers or something and go "well.. huh. I guess I'll just sit down and contemplate the infinite or something. Poke me when you're done shooting them down." I don't know how you would go about doing it in a way that makes any sense, tho- maybe just loosen the terms of the Vow so the Vow-ee could use a sling with proper bullets instead of random rocks. It's a nice mendicant kind of weapon already.

For weapon properties, well, you've already got some suggestions in the first half- stuff that helps handle enemy miss chances and DR. Make the higher levels of Ki Fist grant the equivalent of Transmuting instead of Lawful Adamantine, for example. Or just rip off the Kensai's mechanic entirely and let the Monk enchant his own Unarmed Strike directly with enhancements of the player's choice.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-08, 01:52 AM
VoP already handles HP/DR. Which weapon special abilities are most helpful for a monk?

How much DR do you get at most?

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-08, 01:58 AM
Actually, Rogues by far deal the most damage in Core. They just, well, don't get to do that damage against some types or outside of 30ft. (Not that a Monk in core can do damage outside 30ft, but yeah).

At level 11 a rogue has 6d6 SA and can either:

1) TWF for 7d6+whatever damage on 4-5 attacks.
2) Rapid Shot with a bow for 6d6+1d8+whatever for 3-4 attacks.
3) TWF Rapid Shot with thrown weapons for 7d6+1 on 5-6 attacks.

That usually out damages a Monk hitting for +4d6+whatever on 4-5 attacks.

PA two-handers deal even more damage, even more if they find a way to reduce the attack bonus penalty. Consider:

A Rogue deals probably 7d6 damage, probably no Str since it's not as important. A Monk can deal 1d10 if unoptimized, 2d8 with INA, 3d6 with Monk's Belt, plus any Strength it may actually net around. Meanwhile, a Barbarian deals 1d12 damage by that. The difference?

Rogue deals, on average, 21-27 damage per hit. Can be less, can be more. The weapon by that moment can be a +2 - +3, so it's highly probable it reaches 24-30. You can stretch a bit more with Craven and some Str. Find a character immune to sneak attacks, and the damage output is nuked badly. Even worse, find yourself fighting alone...

Monk deals between 5 damage, 9 damage, perhaps even 10 at average. Get it larger, it can deal a wee bit more damage. Add Greater Magic Weapon/Fang, and by this moment the Monk deals a wee 12-13 on average.

A Barbarian by this moment has 24 STR or more, so that's roughly 1d12 (or 2d6 with a greatsword) + 10 damage, which already ruins the Monk. Add Power Attack, nuke your BAB, and you're dealing a minimum of 32 points of damage. ALWAYS. Unless, for some reason, you somehow get dented by DR. The Barbarian isn't raging, tho: that can raise the STR to 30, which is a solid +15 to damage, +37 while Power Attacking. Single-class, if I may. By this moment, the Barbarian already out-damaged your Rogue constantly.

The weaknesses:
Rogue gets dented by many late-game creatures, and needs some aid to do it alone (such as Invisibility)
Monk was already ruined to begin with.
Barbarian has low attack bonus because of reducing his attack bonus, though the huge boost to Strength and probably a magic weapon reduces that a bit.

We didn't went with Shock Trooper (you WILL get hit, but it's not like you can't shrug it off, and besides, that means you hit just well enough to actually maul your opponent off). But, it can only be done once...unless you go Lion Totem, which grants Pounce.

Sure...I probably went the ubercharger method, but it shows you something: the Barbarian already out-damages the Rogue, with not so much effort. A Fighter doesn't have the Strength bonuses of the Barbarian, but it has the method to get the feats and multiclasses earlier to do the same thing.

A Warblade just laughs and rips you off with Pouncing Charge, while adding a very nice boost. Or probably already has Ruby Nightmare and smears you off the land with it.

I went with both paths to show you the thing: the Rogue isn't the biggest damage dealer, not even in Core (what I mentioned with the Barbarian was just using Power Attack, Greater Rage, and perhaps a +3 magic weapon/GMW boosted weapon) A Barbarian clearly ends up dealing more damage because you're looking at mostly fixed damage, which is far more reliable than a roll with 1,1,2,3,4,3,2 (which is entirely possible), and already far better than the Rogue's average.

To make it simpler: striking three times for a minimum of 96 damage aside from all the other nifty benefits you might add it will do much more than doing a hypothetical 42d6, which implies hitting six times (unlikely, at least more unlikely than the Barbarian hitting all three), and then doing damage roughly similar to your average (which as stated, is between 21-27 multiplied by six).

Also, isn't Disintegrate a 6th level spell? That's what a Wizard might cast you, and it deals currently 22d6 points of damage, can be Maximized for a very decent 132 points, requires a single ranged touch attack, deals damage even if it misses the save, and can be empowered. And that's just mentioning one of the ones that might be used: by now, they're already using something worse (like...Empowered Split Ray Twinned Enervation?)

ShneekeyTheLost
2009-08-08, 02:11 AM
Okay, here's a monk build I feel is actually rather viable: The Hulk (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=120593). It's actually a monk build, in that it starts with two levels of Monk, and it makes unarmed attacks, or throws random debris when opponents are not in melee range.

However, for a more monkish feel, try this less feat-starved version on for size:

Build:

Monk11/Crusader1/Stoneblessed3/Barbarian1 (mountainous rage, lion-totem from CC)/Warhulk7

Feats:
Power Attack (monk bonus), Improved Bull Rush (monk bonus), Cleave (1st level, since you already have Power Attack), Leap Attack (6th), Stone Power (12th), Shards of Granite (15th), Shock Trooper (18th)... still have a lot of room for extra feats

Discussion:
Mountainous Rage is a Goliath sub-level that actually makes him Large when he rages. As Large, he qualifies for Warhulk. Because Mountainous Rage doesn't specifically say anything about the speed, we can also sacrifice the Barbarian's speed bonus (since the monk bonus is so much better anyways) for Pounce.

Now, the fun part about Warhulk (other than the massive STR boost): Mighty Swing: Hit 3 adjacent opponents... as an attack action. With Greater Flurry and Haste, he's making six attacks... which turns into 18 attacks with enough opponents nearby!

Now, why Crusader1? Simple, grab the stance which heals you two points per time you hit an opponent. It also lets you pick up a couple of Stone Dragon maneuvers so you can grab Stone Power and Shards of Granite. This lets you negate opponent DR and effectively negate the first 10 points of damage per round. Couple this with the ability to heal 2 damage per opponent you hit, and he's not too worried about getting hurt all that badly.

Even better, you could build this as a Strongheart Halfling, because the Mountainous Rage ability flat makes you Large.

So he's effectively level 16 monk (thanks to monk's belt) and unarmed attacks get another size increase, so his base unarmed damage is 6d8. He's got a +14 Strength from Warhulk. Also, if he starts out as a Small size, then grows to large size, he gets a +12 Size bonus to his Strength. So, assuming a base strength of 6, plus 26, ends up a 32. That's a Str mod of +11. +5 from Collision. Plus he's got Shock Trooper madness involved. Since he's got Skillful, his BAB is treated as +15, which means another +30 to damage per hit.

So his damage per hit is going to be 6d8 + 5 (collision) + 30 (PA+Leap Attack) + 11 (Str), or 6d8+46. Not in the league of a dedicated Ubercharger, but then you consider you're getting 6 hits a round on multiple opponents, and it stacks up pretty quickly.

Swag:
He's surprisingly equipment-light.
* Monk's Belt
* Necklace of Natural Attacks +1 of Valorus, Skillful, and Collision
That's... pretty much it. Boots of Speed for Haste, if necessary

PId6
2009-08-08, 02:24 AM
Presumably trapping enemies, as part of the problem of having limited mobility options is not being able to pursue opponents that want to kite you; it's not that useful removing your own ability to teleport.
Well, there is the problem of Forcecage + Dimensional Lock + Cloudkill, but then, not much isn't beaten by that.

With his speed boost, he'd be pretty damn fast, and he's definitely getting some kind of flight; you see plenty of that going on in Chinese martial arts films, after all. He'd also have Abrupt Step, which is going to not suck (swift action, more than 1/day, can take action after teleport). I'm not sure anything (besides wizards) can kite that effectively against someone who can fly 90 ft per move action and teleport 800 ft as a swift action.


There should definitely be some viable ranged option; even if your allies can handle it better and will probably do the bulk of solving the particular situation, it's just not all that fun to run into fast fliers or something and go "well.. huh. I guess I'll just sit down and contemplate the infinite or something. Poke me when you're done shooting them down." I don't know how you would go about doing it in a way that makes any sense, tho- maybe just loosen the terms of the Vow so the Vow-ee could use a sling with proper bullets instead of random rocks. It's a nice mendicant kind of weapon already.
Ki-blast! Ki-fireball! Ki-disintegrate! Yeah, anyway.

With his speed, I'm hoping ranged weapon won't be necessary. But if it is... shuriken? Find a way to actually do damage with them, maybe.


For weapon properties, well, you've already got some suggestions in the first half- stuff that helps handle enemy miss chances and DR. Make the higher levels of Ki Fist grant the equivalent of Transmuting instead of Lawful Adamantine, for example. Or just rip off the Kensai's mechanic entirely and let the Monk enchant his own Unarmed Strike directly with enhancements of the player's choice.
I'll just add Ki Strike (materials) and Ki Strike (alignment). Unarmed strike can also be changed for bludgeoning/slashing/piercing whenever you want them, since a martial arts master should be able to use his body for a variety of effects. I found a way to beat concealment by giving him Blindsight 5, so that's no longer a problem. Any other weapon properties that are needed?


How much DR do you get at most?
DR 10/evil and a completely separate DR 10/magic. But I don't know of that many ways to get DR easily with magic items, and it rarely seems to be of much concern. Better to just get more AC and not take anything altogether.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 02:27 AM
TG, all of your analysis has basically no bearing because the stipulation was damage Core only. So Shocktrooper isn't an option, and lowering AB cuts into average damage considerably.

A Rogue doesn't need help to go it alone at level 11, he can easily be rocking an intelligent ring of blinking, and we are talking about 100-140 damage per round as an attack on flat footed touch AC.

A Barbarian Burning all his BAB into Power attack is going to have a lower AB, and be targeting regular AC.

Also, the fact that the rogue can do his damage at range, even if the range isn't great, means he can generally pull off a full attack a lot more.


Well, there is the problem of Forcecage + Dimensional Lock + Cloudkill, but then, not much isn't beaten by that.

Actually, practically nothing is beaten by that. SRD CR 15 and up monsters analysis upcoming:

Dragons of CR 15 and greater: Too big to enclose in Forcecage.

Aboleth Mage, Frost Giant Jarl: Beaten by tactic.

Hound Archon Hero, Planetar, Solar, Balor, Maralith, Cornugon, Pit Fiend, Formian Queen, Greater Stone Golem, Tarrasque, Nightwalker, Nightcrawler, Mummy Lord, Marut: Immune to poison.

Titan: Greater Dispel at will, dispels Cloud kill, and Summons Celestial Charger to cast restoration and lesser restoration.

Talic
2009-08-08, 02:27 AM
I was referring mostly to single target damage, but even including multiple targets a level 11 rogue can be doing 42d6 damage per round no save, and a Wizard isn't going to be doing more than 11d6 to four targets, with a save.

However, the rogue needs attack rolls, can only do that damage from close range, and relies on being in position at the start of his action. I.E. he needs a full round action. Further, in order to maintain the ability for all 6 attacks, he'd need Greater Invisibility or flanking. Greater invis being the more likely one.

I generally consider Saves vs Attack Rolls to be a wash, roughly even in power.

Setup and distance are major factors as well, the rogue needing a very specific setup to reach optimal damage. Given typical starting situations, the rogue may need to work for three or four rounds to be in position for a 42d6 nova strike.

Level 11 wizard can quite easily pump out his damage in almost any situation. While the rogue has a higher maximum single round damage, the Wizard has higher overall damage output, due to the damage being more universal, and more easily applied.

In this instance, we're both right, depending on whether you're looking for overall damage, or highest damage potential.

PId6
2009-08-08, 02:54 AM
Hound Archon Hero, Planetar, Solar, Balor, Maralith, Cornugon, Pit Fiend, Formian Queen, Greater Stone Golem, Tarrasque, Nightwalker, Nightcrawler, Mummy Lord, Marut: Immune to poison.
Right, forgot that Cloudkill counts as poison. Well, I guess monk won't have to worry about it then.


Actually, practically nothing is beaten by that. SRD CR 15 and up monsters analysis upcoming:
Monsters are usually too big or immune to cloudkill, true, but I was more referring to character classes. Most noncaster classes are screwed by that combination unless they have some kind of immunity to poison or they have high UMD and scrolls of Greater Dispel Magic handy.

Actually, does Forcecage allow squeezing?


Aboleth Mage, Frost Giant Jarl: Beaten by tactic.
Tactic? What do you mean by that?

Myrmex
2009-08-08, 02:58 AM
Bluntness time:
A VoP monk would need to be able to use magical gear normally to be viable.

A VoP Monk2/Psion8/Illithid Slayer 10 wouldn't be horrible.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 02:58 AM
Most noncaster classes are screwed by that combination unless they have some kind of immunity to poison or they have high UMD and scrolls of Greater Dispel Magic handy.

Tactic? What do you mean by that?

1) By tactic I am referring to Dimensional Anchor-Cloudkill-Forcecage. IE Aboleth Mages and Frost Giant Jarls are defeated by the combo.

2) Most character classes are immune to poison by that level. See spell "Hero's Feast"

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-08, 02:59 AM
TG, all of your analysis has basically no bearing because the stipulation was damage Core only. So Shocktrooper isn't an option, and lowering AB cuts into average damage considerably.

Of course, if you notice the Barbarian, I never added the Shock Trooper bonus. Notice that otherwise it would have been around 48-64 fixed damage?

Just so you notice:
Starting with STR 17-18, then three points in Strength, then perhaps a Belt of Giant Strength or a cast of Bull's Strength makes a STR of 24-25, which makes it a +7 to attack and damage.

With a two-hander, it adds 1.5 to damage, so that would make +10 to damage.

Using all of your BAB for Power Attack makes it +11, but you're using a 2-hander which makes it +22. That makes it a minimum of 32 damage, fixed, which is by the moment higher than a single strike of your Rogue.

Of course, you're lowering your BAB, but you're mostly compensating with your heightened Strength. Which gets slightly better with Rage, since by that moment you get Greater Rage which gives an extra +6 to Strength.

Your Rogue has a lower BAB than the Barbarian (compare a +11 which is completely lost against a, say, a +8?), which you are lowering even more because you're using TWF in the optimal way (using a light weapon in your off-hand for a -2). Barring all equal things aside (Rogue using Weapon Finesse, Gloves of Dex +4, Dex 21 at least for the level, same enhancement bonus to weapon; just going plain Str 21/BoGS works as well), the Rogue only out-classes the Barbarian's full AB by +6 without Raging, +3 while raging. However, the Barbarian only attacks at that moment 3 times (three iterative attacks), while you may only attack about 4 times, depending on your feat choice. Also, TWF + Rapid Shot means a -4 penalty, so you're pretty much sacrificing also BAB for range.


A Rogue doesn't need help to go it alone at level 11, he can easily be rocking an intelligent ring of blinking, and we are talking about 100-140 damage per round as an attack on flat footed touch AC.

A Barbarian Burning all his BAB into Power attack is going to have a lower AB, and be targeting regular AC.

I fail to see how an intelligent Ring of Blinking will aid you since the Barbarian can just ask for the same, and probably will have the WBL to do so since unless you invest on a bow, and your WBL will be much lower (investing on two weapons or investing on at least 5 throwing, returning weapons). You also have a 20% miss chance to fail your attack because of blinking to the Ethereal Plane, which is the kind of incorporeality that it gives you. And, while incorporeal in an ethereal way, you wouldn't be capable of striking since you're not on the Material Plane. And no, Ghost Touch weapons don't help on that area, I recall (otherwise, the Barbarian can get a Ghost Touch weapon as well)

The point is that what's equal isn't a dis/advantage. If you depend on a magic item which isn't rogue-locked, the barbarian can get it too (there is no taboo on barbarians using magic items; quite the contrary, barbarians tend to be the ones with magic items most of the time). What I can only reckon is that you'll probably be hitting a bit more, but the difference may not be even considerable enough to fret around it.


Also, the fact that the rogue can do his damage at range, even if the range isn't great, means he can generally pull off a full attack a lot more.

But at the expense of a bit more feats. And even then, the distance can sometimes be a punishment (you can't flank while on range, and you almost forcefully need to be invisible such as using that ring you mentioned to actually deal that damage)

Thing is, the rogue's biggest disadvantage is the fact that, while the Barbarian can have some troubles hitting some creatures, their damage is consistent. The Rogue's damage is inconsistent, and particularly easy to block.

Besides, "intelligent"? REALLY!? I mean, you need to have a pretty good DM to allow you an intelligent weapon of your same alignment and that won't force its Ego upon you.

PId6
2009-08-08, 03:26 AM
2) Most character classes are immune to poison by that level. See spell "Hero's Feast"
That's assuming party help. I was talking about a self-sufficient way to do it, since a monk could just as easily get buffed by the cleric as the fighter. But this is really a non-issue now that I realized Diamond Body is actually good for something.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 03:26 AM
Your Rogue has a lower BAB than the Barbarian (compare a +11 which is completely lost against a, say, a +8?), which you are lowering even more because you're using TWF in the optimal way (using a light weapon in your off-hand for a -2). Barring all equal things aside (Rogue using Weapon Finesse, Gloves of Dex +4, Dex 21 at least for the level, same enhancement bonus to weapon; just going plain Str 21/BoGS works as well), the Rogue only out-classes the Barbarian's full AB by +6 without Raging, +3 while raging. However, the Barbarian only attacks at that moment 3 times (three iterative attacks), while you may only attack about 4 times, depending on your feat choice. Also, TWF + Rapid Shot means a -4 penalty, so you're pretty much sacrificing also BAB for range.

But the Rogue is targeting flat footed touch AC, and therefore hits on a 2 on the vast majority of enemies.


I fail to see how an intelligent Ring of Blinking will aid you since the Barbarian can just ask for the same, and probably will have the WBL to do so since unless you invest on a bow, and your WBL will be much lower (investing on two weapons or investing on at least 5 throwing, returning weapons). You also have a 20% miss chance to fail your attack because of blinking to the Ethereal Plane, which is the kind of incorporeality that it gives you. And, while incorporeal in an ethereal way, you wouldn't be capable of striking since you're not on the Material Plane. And no, Ghost Touch weapons don't help on that area, I recall (otherwise, the Barbarian can get a Ghost Touch weapon as well)

1) You aren't incorporeal in any way, you are merely ethereal sometimes and material others.

2) The Ring of blink is addressing the Rogue needing aid to sneak attack, when he doesn't.

3) You are throwing flasks or shooting arrows, which amongst other things means that you have no miss chance with blink, as per the rules on spell effects ending when objects leave your possession. They revert to the material plane.


The point is that what's equal isn't a dis/advantage. If you depend on a magic item which isn't rogue-locked, the barbarian can get it too (there is no taboo on barbarians using magic items; quite the contrary, barbarians tend to be the ones with magic items most of the time). What I can only reckon is that you'll probably be hitting a bit more, but the difference may not be even considerable enough to fret around it.

1) Everyone has magic items, barbarians do not tend to be the ones with magic weapons.

2) The point is that a ring of blink gives the rogue much more than it does the barbarian, especially because he is using ranged attacks.


But at the expense of a bit more feats. And even then, the distance can sometimes be a punishment (you can't flank while on range, and you almost forcefully need to be invisible such as using that ring you mentioned to actually deal that damage)

It's not a punishment to need something you have.


Besides, "intelligent"? REALLY!? I mean, you need to have a pretty good DM to allow you an intelligent weapon of your same alignment and that won't force its Ego upon you.

It's not an intelligent weapon, it's an intelligent ring, and I don't see why buying an intelligent ring of blinking would be any harder than buying a regular one, other than the increase price.

Talic
2009-08-08, 03:36 AM
Further, note that anything that can see invisibility (which gets more and more prevalent as levels increase) can see blinking characters, which negates the entire concept, and limits it to melee flanking, rather than close range attacks. This includes any creature with True Seeing, as well, both of which are easily available at level 11.

On top of that, a blinking character has, at best, a 24% miss chance. (95% hit chance x 80% blink hit chance = 76% hit chance - this is using ranged touch weapons like alchemist's fire). 6 attacks, with such an attack scheme, will yield, on average, about 4 hits, for 28d6 damage, or 98 average damage. Now, if the creature has a respectable AC, and is only hit, say, 75% of the time (6 or better), then the accuracy goes down to 60%.

In short, potential damage is mitigated by the penalty of shooting yourself in the foot on accuracy, and/or being vulnerable to the tactic's negation by most detection magics.


In addition, alchemist's fire and adic have vulnerabilities to creatures which are immune to them. Not highly common, but now we have:
Fire/Acid subtype/Prot from energy resistances
Crit damage immunity
special detection methods
Blink miss chance

And the list mitigates the effectiveness of that 42d6.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 04:28 AM
1) Blinking throws cease to be effected by the blink spell when thrown, and revert to the material plane. No miss chance on ranged blink attacks with objects.

2) See invisibility doesn't stop blink from attacking as if invisible, since see invis does not grant sight into the ethereal. True Seeing does however.

Talic
2009-08-08, 04:34 AM
1) Blinking throws cease to be effected by the blink spell when thrown, and revert to the material plane. No miss chance on ranged blink attacks with objects.

2) See invisibility doesn't stop blink from attacking as if invisible, since see invis does not grant sight into the ethereal. True Seeing does however.

1) Nothing in the description of the spell indicates that ranged attacks are exempt from Blink's effect. You suffer a 20% miss chance on all attacks. That includes spells, ranged, and melee. If this were intended to be limited to spells and melee only, the spell would state it.

2) Reread the description of See Invisibility. Don't feel bad on this one, I was corrected on it myself a couple months ago. See Invisibility does indeed detect Ethereal creatures.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 04:51 AM
1) Nothing in the description of the spell indicates that ranged attacks are exempt from Blink's effect. You suffer a 20% miss chance on all attacks. That includes spells, ranged, and melee. If this were intended to be limited to spells and melee only, the spell would state it.

It's not in the spell's description, it's the rules on spell durations. Spells cast on a creature affect it's attended objects. When those objects are no longer attended, the spell ceases to affect them.

Talic
2009-08-08, 04:59 AM
Incorrect. Spells that function in that manner explicitly state so. Examples include Invisibility, and Polymorph.

Yes, a spell that affects a creature also affects its attended object. Spells do not, however, continue to check for legality.

For example: Someone casts Charm Person on you. You fail, and are charmed. You then have Polymorph any object cast on you, and become an outsider. You are still charmed, because the spell doesn't cease to affect you. It's not constantly checking to see if you're a humanoid.

In other words, if, at the time the spell is cast, an object is attended, it is affected. It does not cease to be affected if it is no longer attended, unless the spell's description explicitly says so.

For other examples, there are many spells that buff you and any target within 30 feet of you (or 15). Those targets need not stay within 15 feet of you to retain the buff, unless the spell says so.

So yes, your attended items are affected by the spell, and they blink for 1 round per level, same as you. This is true, regardless of whether or not they remain attended.

Adumbration
2009-08-08, 05:09 AM
So this place is open for builds? Well, let's see... This is a bit of a work in progress, so feel free to point out improvements.

Notes:
The purpose of this build is to recreate the archetype of the 'Old' monk, the master, sensei. Even though the name says Master Splinter, and the character does have some characteristics of the cartoon one, I am not attempting that specifically. Just so you know.


Title: Master Splinter
Race: Venerable Dragonwrought Kobold
Build: Monk 5/The Disciple of the Eye 5/Dragon Descendant 10.

Starting stats (presuming 32 pb, to give a general outline.): Str 12, Dex 16, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 18, Cha 12. Stats at level 20 (minus tomes/enhancement boni, I'm not going to magic items): Str 16, Dex 17, Con 12, Int 12, Wis 18, Cha 12.

Abilities:

- Flurry of blows as 10th level monk, fast movement as 20th level monk, 15th leveled monk unarmored AC bonus and unarmed damage.
- Attacked enemies are Shaken for 1d4 rounds, Will saves, DC 10+1/2 char. l. + Cha.
- +2 NA
- Darkvision 120 ft, Low-light vision, Blindsense 30 ft
- 5/d glare that frightens enemies if already shaken, if not, shakens. Will saves.
- 5 mins/d small invisible dragon to scout for you
- Draconic ancestors that can give many benefits, such as boni on attacks, ray attack, boni on hide/move silently, free karmic strike without penalties, boni on saves, DR/cold iron.
- Bardic knowledge with concentration check.

What do you think, folks? This was a bit hastily put together, I'm sure there's a lot of room for improvement.

Fishy
2009-08-08, 07:22 AM
It may or may not count as a Monk Build (tm), but I like to use a pair of Monk levels with my Horizon Trippers: Ranger 1/Monk 2/Ranger 3/Horizon Walker.

Monk gets you the bonus feats that you'd normally pick up from Barbarian or Fighter, Unarmed Strike lets you threaten the area around you while holding a Glaive without resorting to those dorky Armor Spikes, and... you basically ignore your WIS bonus and flurry because you wear armor like a ranger.

The fun part is Shifting Planar Mastery at level 11, combined with the Sun School feat you take at either 9 or 12: Because what's more fun than free teleportation all day? Free teleportation all day with extra attacks.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-08, 07:24 AM
In what order do you prioritize your stats, Master Splinter?


Unarmed Strike lets you threaten the area around you while holding a Glaive without resorting to those dorky Armor Spikes
You'll need to enchant your unarmed strikes at later levels.

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-08, 08:07 AM
But the Rogue is targeting flat footed touch AC, and therefore hits on a 2 on the vast majority of enemies.

With the aid of an item, which means the Barbarian can do too. That's the whole point of, ahem, pointing out that.

Besides, since when do you attack touch AC? Unless you have a Ghost Touch weapon, your incorporeal attacks would have a miss chance.

Not to mention that the incorporeality of Blink is roughly similar to that of the Ethereal Jaunt spell, which means you can't attack the person even with Ghost Touch. Period.

Otherwise, Plane Shift would be even more broken.


1) You aren't incorporeal in any way, you are merely ethereal sometimes and material others.

2) The Ring of blink is addressing the Rogue needing aid to sneak attack, when he doesn't.

Then how do you attack touch AC? Use a Brilliant Energy weapon?


1) Everyone has magic items, barbarians do not tend to be the ones with magic weapons.

2) The point is that a ring of blink gives the rogue much more than it does the barbarian, especially because he is using ranged attacks.

1) Exactly. What's equal isn't a disadvantage. What I pointed out: I was debating the fact that you were treating the barbarian as if it didn't had a reason for magic items. What with the, quote, "targeting regular AC", unquote. Your statement appeared as "the Rogue will have the item, the Barbarian won't", rather than your revised statement (the Rogue will have a better use for Blink than the Barbarian), hence the statement of "barbarians usually have magic weapons in fiction".

2) Talic addressed that one. Also, Wind Wall. Or Control Winds. Or simply battling against the wind, period. It's far less reliable to use a ranged attack on a caster (barring beating the caster's initiative somehow) than to use a melee attack.


It's not an intelligent weapon, it's an intelligent ring, and I don't see why buying an intelligent ring of blinking would be any harder than buying a regular one, other than the increase price.

Except that, IIRC, you don't buy an intelligent item. You find it as a treasure. The cost of an intelligent item is way more than the one given to create one.

And the reason why I said that is because I fail to understand the need for an intelligent item, when the normal one is enough (you get Blink at-will on command). There must be a reason why to do so, unless for some reason you want to have the Improved Blink ability,

And finally...


It's not a punishment to need something you have.

Which is what I kept on this.

Basically, not only did I wanted to address the point of "Rogues aren't the only, or even the undisputed best, damage dealers in Core", but also the point you addressed before that "Unarmed Strike is pointless to improve". The benefits increasing size grants (increased range, increased Strength, increased damage) are always worthwhile, given what you sacrifice (some AC, some Dex which means less AC and Reflex, target area) So far, what you mean is that you need between two or three feats, a specific set of magic items, and some setup to work the Rogue's nova attack. Why it's that actually bad on the Monk, which can probably attack a bit better than the Rogue since it's dealing damage, not precision damage?

The idea was to drag you towards noticing that your build was roughly contrived, compared to the Barbarian whose damage build is a bit simpler (just one feat, just one weapon which doesn't need to be magical).

Adumbration
2009-08-08, 08:42 AM
In what order do you prioritize your stats, Master Splinter?


To be straightforward, none. With Venerable Dragonwrought kobold, you can actually almost afford the MAD of the monk. If I had to choose, it would probably be along the lines of Wis > Str > Dex > Con, with intelligence and charisma improved by 1 point each to get 12 to them.

I like Disciple of the Eye becouse it's a flavorful, solid improvement to monk with it's Frightful attack, Keen senses and Blindsense. Dragon Descendant I chose becouse it adds very much versatility. You can choose your ancestor as a standard action, or swift action at later levels, and the abilities are quite solid, in my opinion.

To continue rambling, I think a quarterstaff would be the best weapon in this case. It fits the flavor, and if you can afford to take the two-weapon fighting feat line, it will also add significantly to the number of attacks. I confess that particularly at higher levels your damage output isn't much to brag about, but at the very least you will be efficient at dispatching mooks, skillmonkeying to a degree, and very hard to kill. If you have flaws at your disposal, you can also take dragon wings for flight.

Now that I think of it, this might actually work with VoP quite well.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-08, 02:44 PM
With the aid of an item, which means the Barbarian can do too. That's the whole point of, ahem, pointing out that.

Besides, since when do you attack touch AC? Unless you have a Ghost Touch weapon, your incorporeal attacks would have a miss chance.

1) Barbarians can't attack touch AC, that's the point.

2) With thrown alchemy weapons.

3) You still aren't incorporeal. Incorporeal and ethereal are two entirely different things.


Not to mention that the incorporeality of Blink is roughly similar to that of the Ethereal Jaunt spell, which means you can't attack the person even with Ghost Touch. Period.

Once again, you aren't incorporeal. You are ethereal sometimes.


Then how do you attack touch AC? Use a Brilliant Energy weapon?

Thrown alchemy.


1) Exactly. What's equal isn't a disadvantage. What I pointed out: I was debating the fact that you were treating the barbarian as if it didn't had a reason for magic items. What with the, quote, "targeting regular AC", unquote. Your statement appeared as "the Rogue will have the item, the Barbarian won't", rather than your revised statement (the Rogue will have a better use for Blink than the Barbarian), hence the statement of "barbarians usually have magic weapons in fiction".

2) Talic addressed that one. Also, Wind Wall. Or Control Winds. Or simply battling against the wind, period. It's far less reliable to use a ranged attack on a caster (barring beating the caster's initiative somehow) than to use a melee attack.

1) it's not equal. The barbarian attacks "regular AC" IE the one with armor and natural armor. The Rogue attacks touch AC, ie the one without that stuff.

2) Wizard casts teleport. I'm not saying it's a universal attack that works regardless of other peoples defenses against Wizards. It works on 100% of the MM (The attack form, not the SA), unless the monsters specifically spend standard actions to stop it, which is not quite true of melee attacks.


Except that, IIRC, you don't buy an intelligent item. You find it as a treasure. The cost of an intelligent item is way more than the one given to create one.

Anything you can find as treasure you can buy, and they don't actually cost much more at all, depends on what other features they have.


Which is what I kept on this.

Basically, not only did I wanted to address the point of "Rogues aren't the only, or even the undisputed best, damage dealers in Core", but also the point you addressed before that "Unarmed Strike is pointless to improve". The benefits increasing size grants (increased range, increased Strength, increased damage) are always worthwhile, given what you sacrifice (some AC, some Dex which means less AC and Reflex, target area) So far, what you mean is that you need between two or three feats, a specific set of magic items, and some setup to work the Rogue's nova attack. Why it's that actually bad on the Monk, which can probably attack a bit better than the Rogue since it's dealing damage, not precision damage?

The idea was to drag you towards noticing that your build was roughly contrived, compared to the Barbarian whose damage build is a bit simpler (just one feat, just one weapon which doesn't need to be magical).

I never said any of that. You need to take your argument up with someone else. I merely contradicted the statement that no one could do more damage than a Monk in Core by pointing out that a Core Rogue can easily do more damage than a Monk, just not against certain types of enemies.

You are looking for another poster who said, "Unarmed Strike is pointless to improve."

Talic
2009-08-08, 09:56 PM
1) Barbarians can't attack touch AC, that's the point.

2) With thrown alchemy weapons.

3) You still aren't incorporeal. Incorporeal and ethereal are two entirely different things.



Once again, you aren't incorporeal. You are ethereal sometimes.



Thrown alchemy.



1) it's not equal. The barbarian attacks "regular AC" IE the one with armor and natural armor. The Rogue attacks touch AC, ie the one without that stuff.

2) Wizard casts teleport. I'm not saying it's a universal attack that works regardless of other peoples defenses against Wizards. It works on 100% of the MM (The attack form, not the SA), unless the monsters specifically spend standard actions to stop it, which is not quite true of melee attacks.



Anything you can find as treasure you can buy, and they don't actually cost much more at all, depends on what other features they have.



I never said any of that. You need to take your argument up with someone else. I merely contradicted the statement that no one could do more damage than a Monk in Core by pointing out that a Core Rogue can easily do more damage than a Monk, just not against certain types of enemies.

You are looking for another poster who said, "Unarmed Strike is pointless to improve."

Assuming that the rogue has a +8 on his 6th iterative attack, he has a 76% accuracy ratio.

42d6 average damage is: 147
76% accuracy factored in: 111.7
Average value, expressed in dice: 32d6.

Bear in mind, with blink, you'll likely want to be 30 feet away. Assuming Far Shot, such items are range increment 20.

-2 from range increment
-2 from two weapon fighting
-10 3rd iterative attack.

Final attack has a -14 penalty. This means your level 11 rogue needs a +22 to hit in order to maintain 32d6 average damage.

BAB at level 11: +8
Point blank: +1
Dex +8 (assume 20 dex starting, +3 from levels, +4 Enhancement bonus)
Size: +1
Halfling Racial: +1

That's a +19, there. This would give the first 4 attacks 76% accuracy. The final 2 attacks have 64% accuracy. Overall accuracy for this would be 72%.

Average dice for that (factoring accuracy, assuming all targets are AC 10, and have no deflection or other applicable bonuses) is about 30d6. Not bad, but a good sight shorter than original estimates.

Signmaker
2009-08-08, 09:59 PM
Talic applies math to DnD like a pro.

Xenogears
2009-08-09, 12:02 AM
Feathered. Wings. Rock.
Fiend Folio, fiendish graft. Totally worth it.

As long as you dont mind being evil (or going insane) and being unable to tell even simple lies to good NPC's then yes 10k for permanent, non-magical, almost impossible to get rid of flight is quite good. While we are mentioning fiendish grafts then go grab the long arm too. 2-5k (i forget) for 5ft extra reach is nice for a non-magical source.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-09, 12:09 AM
Assuming that the rogue has a +8 on his 6th iterative attack, he has a 76% accuracy ratio.

42d6 average damage is: 147
76% accuracy factored in: 111.7
Average value, expressed in dice: 32d6.

Bear in mind, with blink, you'll likely want to be 30 feet away. Assuming Far Shot, such items are range increment 20.

-2 from range increment
-2 from two weapon fighting
-10 3rd iterative attack.

Final attack has a -14 penalty. This means your level 11 rogue needs a +22 to hit in order to maintain 32d6 average damage.

BAB at level 11: +8
Point blank: +1
Dex +8 (assume 20 dex starting, +3 from levels, +4 Enhancement bonus)
Size: +1
Halfling Racial: +1

That's a +19, there. This would give the first 4 attacks 76% accuracy. The final 2 attacks have 64% accuracy. Overall accuracy for this would be 72%.

Average dice for that (factoring accuracy, assuming all targets are AC 10, and have no deflection or other applicable bonuses) is about 30d6. Not bad, but a good sight shorter than original estimates.

Talic, how are you getting -10 for 3rd iterative from a +8 BAB character? They don't have a third iterative.

A level 11 Rogue would have let's say 26 dex for +8.
+1 size. +1 racial. +1 Point blank shot. +2 for attacking invisible
+8 BAB.
-2 range increment, -2 rapid shot, -2 twfing.

+15/+15/+15/+10/+10. Or, 95%/95%/95%/95%/95% against flat footed touch AC 12. Since flat footed touch AC is merely 10+size, I don't think you are often going to find an AC over 12. Except for creatures/characters with uncanny dodge.

For hasted rogue (IE by boots) +17/+17/+17/+17/+12/+12

I have no idea where you came up with -10 for third iterative on a +8 BAB character.

Talic
2009-08-09, 12:54 AM
Your 26 dex is very generous.

That requires max starting dex, +2 racial, Full level boosts in Dex, and an additional +4. A 16,000g item's a bit unreasonable, if we're also talking about a high cost intelligent ring of blinking. So that leaves short duration buffs that are unreliable. That said, Even a +6 dex will hit AC 10, which is generally good against anything without a deflection bonus to AC.

Still, See invisibility, True Seeing, Uncanny Dodge, Blindfight, Energy Resistance/Immunity, Crit immunity all mitigate it.

About 25% of creature types are immune to the above, and the items used are blocked by the most common immunities in the game.

76% accuracy brings you to an effective 32d6 damage. Powerful, but not overpoweringly so. A good power attacker can hit the 112 damage in a solid round at level 11. With a single enlarge person, they can effectively hit up to 20 feet out, which is comparable effective reach.

EDIT: And how are you getting 42d6 from a 5 attack character?
And an intelligent blinking ring, +4 dex item, boots of speed...? How much WBL do you get, exactly? I see 1d6 base, +6d6 sneak... That's 35d6. After accuracy is taken into account, it's effectively 27d6 (well, just shy of it).

EDIT2: Note, the subject of whether the extra attack granted from haste stacks with the extra attack granted from rapid shot is not a clear one. If that's the case, then the hasted rogue would still only have 5 attacks, though it would be at +19/+19/+19/+14/+14 (no rapidshot penalty).

Kelpstrand
2009-08-09, 01:08 AM
Your 26 dex is very generous.

I choose dex 26 specifically because you choose dex 26. I was running your numbers.


Still, See invisibility, True Seeing, Uncanny Dodge, Blindfight, Energy Resistance/Immunity, Crit immunity all mitigate it.

1) Yes, I already called out that a Core rogue is not effective against Golems and Oozes and most elementals and undead.

2) Acid immunity is incredibly rare, and all core instances of it are susceptible to either fire or holy water. Creatures resistant to both are also pretty much always outsiders too.

3) True Seeing and See Invisibility don't even exist at level 11 except on full caster monsters and full caster characters. They don't have always on stuff until much higher level, where yes, a Rogue needs help to full attack a Balor to death. So does a Core fighter. What else is new.

4) Blindfight doesn't apply. It only works on melee attacks.


About 25% of creature types are immune to the above, and the items used are blocked by the most common immunities in the game.

The items being Acid damage the third least common immunity after force and sonic?


76% accuracy brings you to an effective 32d6 damage.

No one has 76% accuracy. They have 95% accuracy.


EDIT: And how are you getting 42d6 from a 5 attack character?
And an intelligent blinking ring, +4 dex item, boots of speed...? How much WBL do you get, exactly? I see 1d6 base, +6d6 sneak... That's 35d6.

Haste is not exactly a hard effect to find. 7d6+1 damage times 6 attacks with haste.

WBL is 66,000gp at level 11,

12,000gp boots of speed.
27,000gp Ring of blinking.
16,000gp +4 dex.

55,000gp

The other 11,000 can be spent on a Handy Haversack, the extra effects of a minor intelligence, and whatever else you want with a few thousand GP.

EDIT: No, it is perfectly clear that the extra attack from Rapid Shot and haste stack.

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:13 AM
The extra attack from haste doesn't stack with similar effects. This is not restricted to magical effects. There is a very good argument that the extra attack from Rapid shot is similar (provides an extra attack at highest base attack bonus, when making a full attack action).

An extra attack that would not be similar would be Improved Trip or Cleave. These attacks are at the same base attack as the attack which triggered them, which is not always highest base attack.

Under this interpretation, a hasted rogue cannot benefit from an extra attack from haste and an extra attack from rapid shot.

EDIT: Thus, it is NOT "perfectly clear". It is a ruled answer, based on interpretation, and the general consensus I've seen is "No". This is not universal, so I'm not ruling it out, but it's not an open and shut case.

sofawall
2009-08-09, 01:17 AM
Every effect I can think of that doesn't stack with haste contain the line "Does not stack with haste or other similar effects". I could argue that haste is just being fast, while rapid shot is having the training to be fast. Magically quick and skillfully quick are different, therefore they stack.

Also, how do you end up with any chances to hit that aren't multiples of 5%? Do you hit on a 16.4 or something?

Xenogears
2009-08-09, 01:18 AM
The extra attack from haste doesn't stack with similar effects. This is not restricted to magical effects. There is a very good argument that the extra attack from Rapid shot is similar (provides an extra attack at highest base attack bonus, when making a full attack action).

An extra attack that would not be similar would be Improved Trip or Cleave. These attacks are at the same base attack as the attack which triggered them, which is not always highest base attack.

Under this interpretation, a hasted rogue cannot benefit from an extra attack from haste and an extra attack from rapid shot.

If you have to make an interpretation I feel you should go with the one that makes the most logical sense. In this case does it make more sense that a character who has trained himself to throw stuff faster than normal people when under the effect of a spell that makes him faster than normal is not going to get more attacks? It just doesn't sdeem logical that way and since the rules require interpretation anyway i feel the logical answer is best.

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:19 AM
Every effect I can think of that doesn't stack with haste contain the line "Does not stack with haste or other similar effects". I could argue that haste is just being fast, while rapid shot is having the training to be fast. Magically quick and skillfully quick are different, therefore they stack.

Also, how do you end up with any chances to hit that aren't multiples of 5%? Do you hit on a 16.4 or something?

Multiple miss chances.

Hit on a 2 or better: 95% chance to hit.
This attack also has a 20% miss chance from blink: 80% chance to hit.

The odds of rolling both a 2 or better, and succeeding the blink effect are:
0.95 x 0.80 = 0.76, or 76% hit chance. This equates to a 24% miss chance.


If you have to make an interpretation I feel you should go with the one that makes the most logical sense. In this case does it make more sense that a character who has trained himself to throw stuff faster than normal people when under the effect of a spell that makes him faster than normal is not going to get more attacks? It just doesn't sdeem logical that way and since the rules require interpretation anyway i feel the logical answer is best.

By RAW: Fire an arrow. It moving at a couple hundred feet per second. Miss your target. It stops, in the square it was fired, every time.

By RAW: Someone's bleeding out, at -7 HP. Dunk their head under water. They're now at -1.

Rules for the game aren't always about common sense. Sometimes it's about simplicity, to keep things moving.

Are two effects that grant an additional attack on a full attack action similar? If yes, then they don't stack. Note: They don't need to be identical. Just similar. If they're not deemed to be similar, then they don't. Explaining training versus magic, and the like has no bearing on what's allowed by the rules.

And there's a solid argument both ways.

sofawall
2009-08-09, 01:20 AM
Ah, I hadn't noticed blink.

Use Greater Blink. Much better. 5th level, but much better. UMD it or something.

Keld Denar
2009-08-09, 01:22 AM
I think I speak on behalf of Mr Tidesinger when I respectfully as Mr Talic, Mr Kelpstrand, and Mr T.G.Oskar to take your discussion of rogues and barbarians to another thread? This is a compendium for the discussion and optimization of those who need it far more than either of those classes.

Thank you.

Still to come, Tashalatoran tentacle lord!!!!

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:25 AM
Ah, I hadn't noticed blink.

Use Greater Blink. Much better. 5th level, but much better. UMD it or something.

The discussion was "in core". Greater blink is not.


I think I speak on behalf of Mr Tidesinger when I respectfully as Mr Talic, Mr Kelpstrand, and Mr T.G.Oskar to take your discussion of rogues and barbarians to another thread? This is a compendium for the discussion and optimization of those who need it far more than either of those classes.

Thank you.

Still to come, Tashalatoran tentacle lord!!!!

Note: The above rogue was sumbitted as a comparison note for damage comparison between classes, for precision, power attack, and monk styles.

Rebuttals involve inaccuracies with the given comparison. It is on topic. Note, discussing monk by its very nature involves comparing it to other classes. But we need accurate combinations of other optimized builds for comparison.

This particular venue may not be one you're interested in, but it is relevant. If that is the case, and you're not interested, by all means, skim over these posts when you review the thread.

sofawall
2009-08-09, 01:32 AM
I seem to remember a tentacled monstrosity being a strong contender for a level... 2 was it? contest. it had something like 5 natural attacks.

sofawall
2009-08-09, 01:34 AM
The discussion was "in core". Greater blink is not.


Again, hadn't noticed. All your* posts had too many numbers :smallredface:

*By your I mean the whole discussion, not just you, Talic.

Xenogears
2009-08-09, 01:39 AM
The discussion was "in core". Greater blink is not.



Note: The above rogue was sumbitted as a comparison note for damage comparison between classes, for precision, power attack, and monk styles.

Rebuttals involve inaccuracies with the given comparison. It is on topic. Note, discussing monk by its very nature involves comparing it to other classes. But we need accurate combinations of other optimized builds for comparison.

This particular venue may not be one you're interested in, but it is relevant. If that is the case, and you're not interested, by all means, skim over these posts when you review the thread.

Actually I disagree. You were not debating wether the Monk was better at dealing damage than either of them. You were in fact discussing which of them beat the monk by the most. The debate had been settled as it pertained to monks and proceeded to become off-topic at that point. Discussing wether a rogue or monk deals more damge is on topic. discussing wether a rogue or barbarian deals more when it's already been agreed upon that both outdamage the monk is off-topic. Not to sound rude or pompous or anything... Seriously does it sound rude? I don't mean to.

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:43 AM
I will likely take top performers for the monk builds and put together class comparisons for judging the effectiveness of monk in each area. Skills, Damage, Frontline fighter, that sort of thing.

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:45 AM
Actually I disagree. You were not debating wether the Monk was better at dealing damage than either of them. You were in fact discussing which of them beat the monk by the most. The debate had been settled as it pertained to monks and proceeded to become off-topic at that point. Discussing wether a rogue or monk deals more damge is on topic. discussing wether a rogue or barbarian deals more when it's already been agreed upon that both outdamage the monk is off-topic. Not to sound rude or pompous or anything... Seriously does it sound rude? I don't mean to.

I want to establish reliable baselines for comparison in the different roles.

Striker/Blasty Damage rogue is a very different role than a Frontline Fighter Barbarian.

In other words, Monks are hailed by some as versatile, capable of filling multiple roles, from light support skill fighter to frontline combatant. It's important to evaluate their strengths against benchmarks in each area.

Origomar
2009-08-09, 01:49 AM
To stay on topic and im just curious. Would just changing the monks BAB to full fix alot of their dmg problems?

quick_comment
2009-08-09, 01:50 AM
To stay on topic and im just curious. Would just changing the monks BAB to full fix alot of their dmg problems?

No. It would not.

The problem is that the monk's class features are almost entirely worthless.

Xenogears
2009-08-09, 01:54 AM
No. It would not.

The problem is that the monk's class features are almost entirely worthless.

It would help though...

From what I've gathered that would be an important change. Another one would be to allow flurry as a standard action or give them pounce or something so they can move AND attack. I'd also like to see them get their dimension door changed to a lot more often and have it a swift action so they can pop behind someone and wail on them with their mighty fists of fury.

I suppose if I really wanted to try and fix the monk class I'd start with giving them intuitive attack (Wis to atk) for free at first level, the stuff I already mentioned (Full BAB, Move and Attack, better DimDoor), an ability to enchant their fists like a kensei can enchant weapons. That make them a bit better. Not amazing but good at least...

Doc Roc
2009-08-09, 01:54 AM
I will likely take top performers for the monk builds and put together class comparisons for judging the effectiveness of monk in each area. Skills, Damage, Frontline fighter, that sort of thing.

That would be a great boon. If you do it in some share-able format, I will first post it, or the link to it as a major resource.


My experience with the test of spite indicates that changing their BAB to full is a huge help to builds that want to use 2 or 4 levels of monk. This is what we were aiming for at the ToS, given our standard policy of minimal change for maximum effect, but for a more traditional venue, I'm going to suggest that it's probably not enough. A lot of the problem stems from the fact that not only are their features relatively weak, they're very limited in uses per day.

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:55 AM
To stay on topic and im just curious. Would just changing the monks BAB to full fix alot of their dmg problems?

Not really. That would make them more accurate, but the large reason the monk doesn't have high damage is the following facts:

Monk weapons are more difficult/costly to enchant.

Monk attacks rely on hitting multiple times, over individual hard hits. This renders them highly susceptible to DR.

Monks lack the ability to both have a high offense, and a reliable level of defense to withstand CR appropriate attacks. If they focus on damage, and stay close enough to full attack, they leave themselves very exposed. If they don't stay close enough to full attack, they lose more than half of their available damage, as they rely more on multiple strikes than single powerful strikes.

A simple BAB boost won't address all of these issues, though it will put them on par with other classes for mid-high AC foes with limited DR.

quick_comment
2009-08-09, 01:57 AM
Give monks access to a bunch of ToB schools. Im thinking desert wind, diamond mind, shadow hand, stone dragon and tiger claw.

Doc Roc
2009-08-09, 01:57 AM
Just to re-iterate, Talic is speaking from experience, as we use full-bab monks in the ToS.

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:58 AM
That would be a great boon. If you do it in some share-able format, I will first post it, or the link to it as a major resource.


My experience with the test of spite indicates that changing their BAB to full is a huge help to builds that want to use 2 or 4 levels of monk. This is what we were aiming for at the ToS, given our standard policy of minimal change for maximum effect, but for a more traditional venue, I'm going to suggest that it's probably not enough. A lot of the problem stems from the fact that not only are their features relatively weak, they're very limited in uses per day.

Yes, I do want to use Kelp's rogue as one of the baseline classes for Non-Frontline Damage. To do so, I need to iron out my concerns with the build.

Adumbration
2009-08-09, 01:58 AM
I want to establish reliable baselines for comparison in the different roles.

Striker/Blasty Damage rogue is a very different role than a Frontline Fighter Barbarian.

In other words, Monks are hailed by some as versatile, capable of filling multiple roles, from light support skill fighter to frontline combatant. It's important to evaluate their strengths against benchmarks in each area.

{Scrubbed}

Talic
2009-08-09, 01:59 AM
Give monks access to a bunch of ToB schools. Im thinking desert wind, diamond mind, shadow hand, stone dragon and tiger claw.

They did that. They're called Swordsages.

Origomar
2009-08-09, 02:00 AM
Not really. That would make them more accurate, but the large reason the monk doesn't have high damage is the following facts:

Monk weapons are more difficult/costly to enchant.

Monk attacks rely on hitting multiple times, over individual hard hits. This renders them highly susceptible to DR.

Monks lack the ability to both have a high offense, and a reliable level of defense to withstand CR appropriate attacks. If they focus on damage, and stay close enough to full attack, they leave themselves very exposed.

A simple BAB boost won't address all of these issues, though it will put them on par with other classes for mid-high AC foes with limited DR.

Why not just change ki strike to earlier levels and increase its effectiveness in bypassing DR(example)

Ki strike at level 4 is treated as a magic weapon for purposes of bypassing DR

Ki strike at level 8 is treated as a adamantium weapon for purposes of bypassing DR

ki strike at level 12 can now bypass all types of DR

I also thought it would be neat to allow them a feat that if they are proficient with a weapon they now take this feat and can use FoB with it. This would allow them to use more weapons with greater effectiveness.

Edit: also make it once you get greater flurry you can as a standard action attack with your BAB bonus(aka attack multiple times with a standard action) but you wouldnt get the flurry bonus attacks if you used a standard action. That would limit the loss of having to take a full round action to do anything useful.

quick_comment
2009-08-09, 02:02 AM
They did that. They're called Swordsages.

Really? No wai!


Seriously though, without a complete overhaul of the grappling rules, monks are nothing other than gimped fighters.

Just remove the monk, replace with swordsage. "But I dont want a mystical monk!"

Sucks to be you, the core monk gets DR/magic, tongue of the sun and moon and dimension door. He is already supernatural.

Xenogears
2009-08-09, 02:03 AM
Really? No wai!


Seriously though, without a complete overhaul of the grappling rules, monks are nothing other than gimped fighters.

Well they can throw out grappling, give them some serious boosts, and basically have them be like fighters that use fists and speed at the cost of endurance.

Talic
2009-08-09, 02:04 AM
{Scrubbed}

I respect your view. However, I disagree. I would appreciate if you not try to tell me, personally, to go elsewhere with my comments. I've shown the relevance for this particular subject, as it pertains to the monk discussion. It is not off topic. If you have a specific concern about the posts I've made, or feel I am de-railing the thread, I invite you you consult with whatever board authorities you feel you need to. Otherwise, I feel that this discussion on whether or not I should post what I'm posting and where it should be posted... Well, I most certainly feel that this particular discussion is not contributing to the thread, and do not intend to continue this particular line of reasoning. If you have further issues with me that are not pertaining to the topic of the thread, I am more than willing to discuss them via PM. Not here, however. Thank you for your consideration in this regard.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-09, 02:19 AM
Talic. Your attack from BAB is a similar effect to a hasted attack. They are both attacks at your maximum BAB derived from different sources.

And yet, a level 1 Fighter with haste still get two attacks because "similar effects" does not mean "attacks" it means "things that grant extra attacks via increasing speed."

Are you going to claim that Monks can't use Haste with a flurry? That TWFers can't use haste because TWFing is an extra attack?

It's very clear that while "similar effects" could possible mean anything at all, including "anything that grants a bonus of any kind" that is not what it actually means.

The statement, "This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed" is highly indicative of what type of things constitute a similar effect.

olentu
2009-08-09, 02:22 AM
I also thought it would be neat to allow them a feat that if they are proficient with a weapon they now take this feat and can use FoB with it. This would allow them to use more weapons with greater effectiveness.

I think there are some feats that do something like this. Unorthodox flurry for light weapons I think. Also something like pole master for polearms. There are probably others as I sort of remember something for longswords perhaps.

Talic
2009-08-09, 02:32 AM
Talic. Your attack from BAB is a similar effect to a hasted attack. They are both attacks at your maximum BAB derived from different sources.Incorrect. Your attack from BAB is the baseline rule. That's how things work with no effects. Effects are things that modify the baseline.

And yet, a level 1 Fighter with haste still get two attacks because "similar effects" does not mean "attacks" it means "things that grant extra attacks via increasing speed."Incorrect. A level 1 fighter gains 1 attack from Basic combat rules of the D20 system. Haste is an additional effect granting an additional attack. That is, in addition to the ones you normally get.


Are you going to claim that Monks can't use Haste with a flurry? That TWFers can't use haste because TWFing is an extra attack?
With a flurry? Yes. With two weapon fighting? No. Any chararcter can two weapon fight, without any abilities, feats, or otherwise.

That is because attacks granted by using two weapons in combat are basic rules. They apply to everyone. That isn't an effect.


It's very clear that while "similar effects" could possible mean anything at all, including "anything that grants a bonus of any kind" that is not what it actually means.And again, it's not "very clear". The burden you have is to show how Rapid Shot and Haste are not, in fact, similar. Bringing in other things, especially fallacy by misusing base rules as effects, is not relevant to that.

It has been shown that one way of showing that they are not similar is "training" versus "magical enchantment". A valid reasoning, and it supports your case.

It's been shown that it could be viewed as similar under my reasoning. Also valid, and supporting mine.

In this instance, I tend, for personal analysis, to assume more restrictive interpretations for the baseline groups, to dispel any illusion that I am not practicing fair play, or that I am unfairly ruling against the monk.


The statement, "This effect is not cumulative with similar effects, such as that provided by a weapon of speed" is highly indicative of what type of things constitute a similar effect.
And the bonus attack granted by a weapon of speed is phrased the same way as the bonus attack granted by haste, and also by rapid shot, and flurry of blows. They could all be viewed as similar.

sofawall
2009-08-09, 02:37 AM
So we have another of dozens upon dozens of conditions where it can be easily ruled in two different ways, both with supporting arguments.

Another point for different, Rapid Shot imposes a penalty, haste does not. Mechanically they're slightly different as well.

Talic
2009-08-09, 02:50 AM
Why not just change ki strike to earlier levels and increase its effectiveness in bypassing DR(example)

Ki strike at level 4 is treated as a magic weapon for purposes of bypassing DR

Ki strike at level 8 is treated as a adamantium weapon for purposes of bypassing DR

ki strike at level 12 can now bypass all types of DR

I also thought it would be neat to allow them a feat that if they are proficient with a weapon they now take this feat and can use FoB with it. This would allow them to use more weapons with greater effectiveness.

Edit: also make it once you get greater flurry you can as a standard action attack with your BAB bonus(aka attack multiple times with a standard action) but you wouldnt get the flurry bonus attacks if you used a standard action. That would limit the loss of having to take a full round action to do anything useful.

Ki strike, in my opinion, should count as a magical weapon for all purposes. That would make it possible for monks to hit incorporeal creatures. (Ki strike currently does not allow that, as the incorporeal effect is not a DR based effect).

Talic
2009-08-09, 02:53 AM
So we have another of dozens upon dozens of conditions where it can be easily ruled in two different ways, both with supporting arguments.

Another point for different, Rapid Shot imposes a penalty, haste does not. Mechanically they're slightly different as well.

Slightly different doesn't mean they're not similar. Just that they're not identical. Moreover, Haste's bonus to attack rolls is seperate and distinct from the bonus attack it grants (you get the bonus even if you don't get the extra attack). Rapid shot could be viewed the same way, same as flurry.

Sir Giacomo
2009-08-09, 08:24 AM
Well, here we go again...:smallsmile:

My contributions for now before leaving for holidays until the end of August:


1. Monk builds

- Again, I'll enter the joker monk for the core environment (see my sig below). I might do an update at a later point, though.

- Another core monk (level 12) is the one currently trying to survive a dungeon of Tidesinger's making (test of spite-the monkening), run by Saph, with Stoopidtallkid as a druid, Pharao's fist as an evoker wizard and mostlyharmful as a rogue. The build can be found here. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6409074&postcount=4)
That core monk is intended as a tank - so he tries to draw ( a bit too sucessfully sometimes :smallbiggrin:) opponent attacks and control the battle field with AoO and unarmed or spiked chain trips (he does not need a proficiency with the spiked chain for touch trip attacks). Redoing it, I'd try to aim for a higher constant AC, though.

- Finally, (ab-:smallbiggrin:)using the many possibliities outside core, I did a old man build (http://forums.gleemax.com/showpost.php?p=18520878&postcount=242) over at the WoTC forums.
This one was originally designed to show how a single class lvl 20 monk outdclasses a single class lvl 20 fighter (devoted to unarmed fighting) also at unarmed fighting including non-core material.
What the monk does is focus on WIS (with the help of intuitive attack), get 24d8 base damage and double-stun per round (with the feat rapid stun).
Particularly lethal imo is the ability of that monk with the help of the sun school feat (complete warrior) and snap kick feat (ToB) to dimension door next to any opponent and directly attack twice, including two stuns. Most opponents succumb to this kind of attack, and it's extremely deadly in any kind of duel, even against those with contingency-dim-door (since the monk then simply does it again with a wand of dimension door in the next turn).


2. General comments on monk discussions:

- the typical advice "play a swordsage" depends on a DM working out a new class for the player, since the ToB just leaves you with one sentence and many questions and disadvantage when playing an unarmed swordsage (for instance, you need first get improved unarmed strike and armour proficiency-light armour from you regular feats - so as a non-human the first "freely choosable" feat is at level 6. Great. Also, none of the monk-boosting items like monk's belt apply to swordsage class levels)
Better cherry-pick the ToB maneuvers you need either through feats, multi-classing or items. Or houserule the monk class outright.

- superior unarmed strike and monk's belt do not stack, as per FAQ (and RAW). This makes taking more monk levels more attractive.

- A monk does not only the highest unarmed base damage, he does the highest overall base damage of all weapons in the game (even exceeding sneaks by far in non-core. Just get as many size increases or monk level boosters as possible. Some (almost absurd) ideas are here (http://forums.gleemax.com/wotc_archive/index.php/t-987182.html)

- monk "fixes" that ask for full BAB should not forget the many, many ways that a monk will receive bonuses to attack that full BAB classes do not get that often: a) they have the full stealth set of skills, so they often can strike vs flat-footed opponents b) they have stun that also provides many bonuses (apart from the obvious advantage) c) they have tumble with which they can get well into flanking positions and d) most importantly, they get TWO MORE ATTACKS AT HIGHEST ATTACK BONUS by level 11. This is better than what the fighter and rogue get. (edit: with TWF tree, which the monk even can take on top as well).

- with the high unarmed base damage and high number of attacks combined, the monks rank equally or sometimes better than the other melee classes from around levels 11-12. Before that, they can rely more on stealth and grappling (there are gauntlets in the SRD rules that give +8 to grappling, for instance).


- Giacomo

Kelpstrand
2009-08-09, 09:46 AM
{Scrubbed}

An effect is anything at all basically. Getting an effect of a single attack is an effect that is granted by the base rules. It is similar to haste in that the effect granted is identical, but the source of that effect is very different.

It is technically possible to rule anything at all as a similar effect, because anything in D&D is going to be an effect that is similar to haste in that it is an effect in the same game.

{Scrubbed}

However, the haste spell does make clear that it is talking about magical speed increases, not all effects that might be in any way similar, and your assertions that "similar effects" includes anything that can be said to be similar and an effect by any possible definition of either word is incredibly asinine and pointless.

Sir Giacomo
2009-08-09, 10:20 AM
I agree with Kelpstrand here.
Of course haste works with flurry and other stuff that provides extra attacks not keyed to a haste effect.

- Giacomo

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-09, 06:36 PM
Gosh, things move fast when I'm not here.

@Kelp: I excuse for thinking you made the "Unarmed Strike is a trap" statement; I went a bit too fast there. Yet, I still reckon that the Barbarian can do a hefty amount of damage that can accumulate, and a bit more reliable damage than a Rogue given that the damage is fixed.

Also, why didn't you indicate you were using splash weapons at first instance? I was breaking my head trying to figure out how you do that with weapons, mostly because I usually don't seem to apply sneak attacks to splash weapons. Had you pointed that out first, I might have noticed.

Don't be assuming everybody knows every single trick. Some are still learning, y'know...

Finally, I reckon I said otherwise. I said that a Monk does more damage in Core (given size and INA) unless it's a PA Fighter or Barbarian, who deal much more damage. You stated the Rogue as dealing much more damage, to which I thank since you pointed out a rather well optimized example. Of course, not always considering the things that block Sneak Attack most of the time (then again, the Barb won't always hit unless it's pulling a similar trick as the Rogue, and I reckon that's entirely possible; hence why the first thought was Brilliant Energy, even with the disadvantages it has)

'Course, a bit expensive, but so is buying several flasks of alchemy in the long run. Just how long a run that is, determines the full cost...

@Haste controversy: as far as I reckon (and my reckoning may not be the best), the "similar" effect applies mostly like buffing and spell effect stacking apply. If the bonus is of the same name, it doesn't stack: technically, that bit wouldn't apply since it's not a bonus. The second (spell effect stacking) does apply, though: if you have an extra attack because of Haste, and you try to get an extra attack from a Speed weapon or a Boots of Speed or an item that has Haste as a prerequisite, then the effects don't mix. It may apply along with Flurry (class ability-based extra attack along with spell-based extra attack), Rapid Shot and TWF and Snap Kick (feat based extra attacks along with spell-based extra attack). I'd say there would be a controversy between TWF line and Rapid Shot, but the moments where it applies are different (you'd need Quick Draw to have both apply, and it would imply throwing as many thrown or splash weapons as possible for both feats to apply without ending out of ammunition), so they stack.

Incidentally, that would mean a Monk with Greater Flurry, Haste and Snap Kick would technically have all those extra attacks (2 from BAB, 1 from Haste depending on whether it applies or not, and 1 from Snap Kick which always applies (even on standard attacks!). Heck, add the TWF line and perhaps a few specific Monk weapons (Scorpion Kama, even if it's not Core), and you're talking of a massive bunch of attacks (at the cost of, perhaps, accuracy)

I was actually thinking on something obscure, bizarre, and possibly hilarious, mixing levels in Monk, any psychic class, Psion Uncarnate, Tashalatora, Ghost Shroud and Ring of Blinking (I'm so stealing part of Kelp's idea), then making sure to get certain feats and powers (like, say, Expansion, Metamorphosis, ...Form of Terror?)

Though, I'm particularly fond of Githzerai monks for that (and yet, I find starting as Thri-Kreen even more interesting for the latter build), and finding ways to get high AC and saves. Makes for an interesting tank, with psionics to boost out a bit.

Though, I am sorely disappointed that Enlightened Fist cannot apply to an Artificer. That, plus a Warforged, makes for big laughs.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-09, 07:22 PM
Incidentally, that would mean a Monk with Greater Flurry, Haste and Snap Kick would technically have all those extra attacks (2 from BAB, 1 from Haste depending on whether it applies or not, and 1 from Snap Kick which always applies (even on standard attacks!).

Uh, I have heard talk of Snap kick working on standard attacks, not going to look it up right now, but haste/flurry specify that it must be a full attack.

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-09, 07:55 PM
Uh, I have heard talk of Snap kick working on standard attacks, not going to look it up right now, but haste/flurry specify that it must be a full attack.

I was referring that Snap Kick always applies, even on standard attacks. Not the entire full attack action, tho. I was just pointing the benefit of the feat.

Incidentally, I forgot about the two strikes from flurry at no penalty. So, a full attack would look like at level 11:

Flurry alone: +8/+8/+8/+3
With Haste (if applies to flurry): +9/+9/+9/+9/+4
With Haste & Snap Kick: +7/+7/+7/+7/+7/+2
With Haste, Snap Kick and TWF+ITWF: +5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+0*

*along one or two Scorpion Kama (+1 enhancement bonus not added)

That's...eight attacks minimum dealing 1d8 damage (1d10 if using Monk's Belt, 2d8/-1 AB if Large, 3d6/-1 AB if Large and using Monk's Belt)

Of course, it needs some workout (hence psionics, to get Hustle and thus make a move action and full attack), but it's a nice basic setup for the uber-flurry (of misses!!!!)

Keld Denar
2009-08-09, 08:22 PM
With Haste, Snap Kick and TWF+ITWF: +5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+0*


Close. Should be this:
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+0/+0

With the bolded attacks being 1/2 str for being offhanded (yes, a monk CAN have an offhand if you give him one with TWF)

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-09, 08:37 PM
Close. Should be this:
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+0/+0

With the bolded attacks being 1/2 str for being offhanded (yes, a monk CAN have an offhand if you give him one with TWF)

Aye, missed that. Thanks for the fix.

As for the off-hand, that's a debate I wouldn't want to wake up. I've seen how thin is that thread. You could consider the kama as the off-hand weapon, and the unarmed strike as the main, though.

It would still require an Amulet of Mighty Fists/Necklace of Natural Weapons, though, to grant the unarmed strike an enhancement bonus. Or augmented Metaphysical Weapon, if you like.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-09, 10:17 PM
I did a monk rewrite who remained very defensive but replaced a lot of the typical 3.5 "monk abilities" with abilities that would allow them to be something of a status inflicter, thereby defining their role and then allowing their abilities to back it up without conflicting. You can see it here.


Well, here we go again...:smallsmile:

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v216/FaxCelestis/giacomo.png

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-09, 11:07 PM
Close. Should be this:
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+0/+0

With the bolded attacks being 1/2 str for being offhanded (yes, a monk CAN have an offhand if you give him one with TWF)No, he can't.

RAW: "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed". Little-known fact, the TWF feat doesn't allow you to fight with 2 weapons, you can already do that. it reduces the penalties for it. Monks can't fight with 2 unarmed strikes, so reducing the penalties doesn't help.

RAI: "A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. " The Monk already uses his entire body to fight with. What's the second weapon he's wielding?

Signmaker
2009-08-09, 11:13 PM
RAI: "A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. " The Monk already uses his entire body to fight with. What's the second weapon he's wielding?

Reckless abandon.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-09, 11:17 PM
No, he can't.

RAW: "There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed". Little-known fact, the TWF feat doesn't allow you to fight with 2 weapons, you can already do that. it reduces the penalties for it. Monks can't fight with 2 unarmed strikes, so reducing the penalties doesn't help.

RAI: "A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. " The Monk already uses his entire body to fight with. What's the second weapon he's wielding?

Filthy lies.


The description of the flurry of blows ability says
there’s no such thing as a monk attacking with an off-hand
weapon during a flurry of blows. What does that mean,
exactly? Can the monk make off-hand attacks in addition to
flurry attacks?

Actually, the text to which you refer appears in the entry
for unarmed strikes. When a monk uses her unarmed strike
ability, she does not suffer any penalty for an off-hand attack,
even when she has her hands full and attacks with her knees
and elbows, using the flurry of blows ability to make extra
attacks, or both.

The rules don’t come right out and say that a monk can’t
use an unarmed strike for an off-hand strike (although the exact
wording of the unarmed strike ability suggests otherwise), and
no compelling reason why a monk could not do so exists.
When using an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack, the monk
suffers all the usual attack penalties from two-weapon fighting
(see Table 8–10 in the PH) and the monk adds only half her
Strength bonus (if any) to damage if the off-hand unarmed
strike hits.

To add an off-hand attack to a flurry of blows, stack
whatever two-weapon penalty the monk has with the penalty (if
any) from the flurry. Attacks from the flurry have the monk’s
full damage bonus from Strength, but the off-hand attack gains
only half Strength bonus to damage. If the off-hand attack is a
weapon, that weapon isn’t available for use in the flurry (if it
can be used in a flurry at all, see the previous question). For
example, a 4th-level monk with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat
and a Strength score of 14 decides to use a flurry of blows and
decides to throw in an off-hand attack as well. The monk has a
base attack bonus of +3 and a +2 Strength bonus. With a flurry,
the character can make two attacks, each at +3 (base +3, –2
flurry, +2 Strength). An unarmed strike is a light weapon, so
the monk suffers an additional –2 penalty for both the flurry
and the off-hand attack, and the monk makes three attacks,
each at an attack bonus of +1. The two attacks from the flurry
are primary attacks and add the monk’s full Strength bonus to
damage of +2. The single off-hand attack adds half the monk’s
Strength bonus to damage (+1).

If the monk in our example has two sais to use with the
flurry, plus the off-hand attack, she can use both in the flurry
(in which case she must make the off-hand attack with an
unarmed strike) or one sai for the off-hand attack and one with
the flurry. The sai used in the off-hand attack is not available
for the flurry and vice versa.


Can a monk fight with two weapons? Can she combine
a two-weapon attack with a flurry of blows? What are her
penalties on attack rolls?

A monk can fight with two weapons just like any other
character, but she must accept the normal penalties on her
attack rolls to do so. She can use an unarmed strike as an offhand
weapon. She can even combine two-weapon fighting with
a flurry of blows to gain an extra attack with her off hand (but
remember that she can use only unarmed strikes or special
monk weapons as part of the flurry). The penalties for twoweapon
fighting stack with the penalties for flurry of blows.
For example, at 6th level, the monk Ember can normally
make one attack per round at a +4 bonus. When using flurry of
blows, she can make two attacks (using unarmed strikes or any
special monk weapons she holds), each at a +3 bonus. If she
wants to make an extra attack with her off hand, she has to
accept a –4 penalty on her primary hand attacks and a –8
penalty on her off-hand attacks (assuming she wields a light
weapon in her off hand).

If Ember has Two-Weapon Fighting, she has to accept only
a –2 penalty on all attacks to make an extra attack with her off
hand. Thus, when wielding a light weapon in her off hand
during a flurry of blows, she can make a total of three attacks,
each at a total bonus of +1. At least one of these attacks has to
be with her off-hand weapon.

A 20th-level monk with Greater Two-Weapon Fighting can
make eight attacks per round during a flurry of blows.
Assuming she wields a light weapon in her off hand, her three
off-hand weapon attacks are at +13/+8/+3, and she has five
attacks (at +13/+13/+13/+8/+3) with unarmed strikes or any
weapons she carries in her primary hand. If the same monk also
has Rapid Shot and throws at least one shuriken as part of her
flurry of blows (since Rapid Shot can be used only with ranged
attacks), she can throw one additional shuriken with her
primary hand, but all of her attacks (even melee attacks) suffer
a –2 penalty. Thus, her full attack array looks like this:
+11/+11/+11/+11/+6/+1 primary hand (two must be with
shuriken) and +11/+6/+1 off hand.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-09, 11:27 PM
Filthy lies.Sig.

Sage, custserv, and FAQ are not RAW. In many cases, they're outright wrong.
Pulling out of your quotes: When using an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack, the monk suffers all the usual attack penalties from two-weapon fighting (see Table 8–10 in the PH) and the monk adds only half her Strength bonus (if any) to damage if the off-hand unarmed strike hits.
And the SRD: A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-09, 11:30 PM
Sig.

Sage, custserv, and FAQ are not RAW. In many cases, they're outright wrong.
Pulling out of your quotes: When using an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack, the monk suffers all the usual attack penalties from two-weapon fighting (see Table 8–10 in the PH) and the monk adds only half her Strength bonus (if any) to damage if the off-hand unarmed strike hits.
And the SRD: A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

So what you're saying is that it's impossible for a monk to punch with both fists, but a rogue can stab with two daggers. That's patently ridiculous.

AmberVael
2009-08-09, 11:35 PM
To add on to Fax's comment...

By RAW, a character, or monk, could potentially use two gauntlets in TWF.

So they can use two fists if they're encased in something, but not two bare fists?
That is patently absurd.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-09, 11:38 PM
So what you're saying is that it's impossible for a monk to punch with both fists, but a rogue can stab with two daggers. That's patently ridiculous.The Monk is already striking with both fists, his elbows, knees, feet, head, and the occasional pelvic thrust. There are no fists left for him to wield off-hand.

And Monks aren't proficient with gauntlets.

AmberVael
2009-08-09, 11:38 PM
And Monks aren't proficient with gauntlets.

So what? They can still use them.

Talic
2009-08-10, 12:01 AM
An effect is anything at all basically. Getting an effect of a single attack is an effect that is granted by the base rules. It is similar to haste in that the effect granted is identical, but the source of that effect is very different.

It is technically possible to rule anything at all as a similar effect, because anything in D&D is going to be an effect that is similar to haste in that it is an effect in the same game.

However, the haste spell does make clear that it is talking about magical speed increases, not all effects that might be in any way similar, and your assertions that "similar effects" includes anything that can be said to be similar and an effect by any possible definition of either word is incredibly asinine and pointless.

While I do disagree here (the haste spell does not reference "magical" in any way, nor does this section of it reference a character's speed in any way), the point is that there are possible and valid interpretations for both views, based on judgement.

I've seen several persons, representing both pro-monk and anti-monk parties, advocating the stacking of haste with non-magical effects that increase the number of attacks a character gets. To this end, I'll endeavour to include both in my analysis. If time constraints prevent me from analyzing statistics for both methods, I will provide analysis assuming that haste stacks with the feat Rapid Shot and the class ability Flurry of Blows. In that case, similar will be viewed as "any magical effect which grants a bonus attack at your highest base attack bonus when using the full attack action, or non-magical effects with the non-stacking clause used in haste".

Again, the interpretation of this all depends on how you view the effects, and whether or not you consider them to be similar. I see it as being possible to view it both ways. I've seen it argued both ways. It's not as clearly defined as it could be.

The alternative, however, is grappling, where any attacks not from BAB are excluded, by RAW. Flurry, haste, snap kick, natural attack progression... All are out. In that instance, the definition of rules went too precise, and excluded many things that should likely be allowed in a grapple.


So what? They can still use them.

They would, however, take a -4 penalty for nonproficiency when using gauntlets, and, since they aren't monk weapons, they'd be unable to flurry with them.

Talic
2009-08-10, 12:14 AM
Sig.

Sage, custserv, and FAQ are not RAW. In many cases, they're outright wrong.
Pulling out of your quotes: When using an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack, the monk suffers all the usual attack penalties from two-weapon fighting (see Table 8–10 in the PH) and the monk adds only half her Strength bonus (if any) to damage if the off-hand unarmed strike hits.
And the SRD: A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

The general statement: "And the SRD: A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes."

The specific statement: Off hand strikes gain 1/2 damage from strength."

In this instance, whether a monk gains full or half damage from an off-hand attack goes to primary source, which is the off-hand strike section.

Thus, when making an off hand unarmed strike, monks only gain 1/2 strength to damage.

As for the issue on two weapon fighting with unarmed strikes alone?

It's a slippery slope. Unarmed strikes are defined as being able to be made with Head, hands, feet, elbows, knees... That means a level 1 monk could multiweapon fight and gain 9 attacks. Such an interpretation is imbalanced. Hence, why there is a rule stating that it is not possible to consider unarmed strikes as both main and offhand weapons in a two weapon fighting setup.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-10, 12:19 AM
The general statement: "And the SRD: A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes."

The specific statement: Off hand strikes gain 1/2 damage from strength."

In this instance, whether a monk gains full or half damage from an off-hand attack goes to primary source, which is the off-hand strike section.

Thus, when making an off hand unarmed strike, monks only gain 1/2 strength to damage.I'd say you have those backwards. One is talking about a rule that applies to all characters, the other is talking about a single ability of a single class.

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 12:29 AM
Unless I'm mistaken, none of the nonmagical abilities that add additonal attacks have the clause that they don't stack. All the magical ones (I'm lookin at you Righteous Wrath, Valiant Fury, Haste, Snakes Swiftness, and -of Speed) have the clause that they don't stack with Haste. Flurry of Blows/Strikes doesn't. TWF doesn't. Rapid Shot doesn't. Whirling Frenzy doesn't. Spinning Halbred doesn't. Snap Kick, which was printed most recently, doesn't. Heck, even the extra attacks you get from adding natural weapons via Illithid Heritage or Abberant Blood don't. There is nothing that connects the 2. All of the pseudo-haste abilities have that clause and SPECIFICALLY don't stack with each other. None of the non-pseudohaste abilities say they don't stack with any of the others, or with Haste.

And Sstoopidtallkid, we've debated this before. There is a difference between "offhand" and "Offhand". A monk has no "Offhand" normally, but can attack with their "offhand". IF you choose to claim an extra attack in a round with your "Offhand" via the rules in Combat under Fighting with Two Weapons, you gain an "Offhand" attack. "Offhand" attacks specifically deal only half +str damage, unless you have an ability that overrides this (Bloodclaw Master, for example).

If you TWF with a Greatsword and Armor Spikes, your Armor Spike attacks aren't made with ANY "hand", yet are considered an "Offhand" attack because they are additional attacks you claim with the Two Weapon Fighting attack action. They deal half +str damage because they are "Offhand" even though they are technically not "offhand".

One is a defined rules term, a game mechanic. The other is mearly descriptive text. A for a monk attacking normally with unarmed strikes, flurry or not, no attack is "offhand" because they can attack with any part of their body, hand or otherwise. Additional attacks from TWF give a monk "Offhand" attacks though, and nothing says they can't gain them, other than a misunderstood piece of flavor text. The reason you can't make Offhand attacks with the same weapon that you make mainhand attacks with is due to the fact that you can't physically swing one weapon that fast without more training. You can, however, attack with another weapon at the same time. Since you have multiple body parts with which to make Unarmed Strikes with, your Unarmed Strike doesn't suffer from the same penalty and can serve as both Mainhand and Offhand. Compare with Spinning Halbred, except that YOU ARE THE HALBRED.

Simulationistwise: It simulates a more frenzied rate of attacks. More hits may slip past their foes guard, but those extra hits aren't as well coordinated and don't have the monks full weight behind them and thus receive only half bonus damage from strength.

Talic
2009-08-10, 12:38 AM
I'd say you have those backwards. One is talking about a rule that applies to all characters, the other is talking about a single ability of a single class.

I'd say not. One is a rule applying to a monk's attacks with unarmed weapons in general.

The other is a rule applying to a single, specific method of attack (two weapon fighting).

When referencing two weapon fighting (which is what we're referencing here), the section on two weapon fighting in the PHb is primary source.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-10, 12:49 AM
And we spin our wheels yet again.
And Sstoopidtallkid, we've debated this before. There is a difference between "offhand" and "Offhand". A monk has no "Offhand" normally, but can attack with their "offhand". IF you choose to claim an extra attack in a round with your "Offhand" via the rules in Combat under Fighting with Two Weapons, you gain an "Offhand" attack. "Offhand" attacks specifically deal only half +str damage, unless you have an ability that overrides this (Bloodclaw Master, for example).And I still don't get what you're getting at there. The Monk doesn't have an offhand attack with the unarmed strike. That's the RAW. He can't attack with an unarmed strike in his offhand because there isn't one. If a Rogue only has one weapon, he can't TWF and 'claim' an off-hand attack. The Monk specifically has TWF removed.

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-10, 01:18 AM
I just make a wee bit commentary and the thread derails again... And I settled for a Kama, even...

Still.

I've read the dman's Monk Handbook, and I seem to differ on his position about energy attacks. Of the few worthwhile powers for a full attack, Energy Claw/Weapon seems to be one of the few best, if only because it adds a minimal, yet worthwhile energy property on your weapon (1d6 isn't something impressive, but at least you have Sonic which is barely, if ever, resisted). Also, I believe on the ability to combine that with Fiery Fist (1d6 fire damage only for a round and by consuming one Stunning Fist attempt) for dealing a slight bit more damage, and pretty much screw anyone who forgets to invest in a Ring of Universal Energy Resistance. At the bare minimum, it's an extra 1d6 energy damage which adds to the big load of attacks. Normally, it can add at least 2d6 of different energies. If lucky, you might deal 3d6 (because you struck the rare vulnerability). If EXTREMELY lucky, 4d6 (you've just hit someone weak to fire!)

I'd also go with giving all of those hits and settling for Wounding. Sure, anything that blocks ability damage screws it (and at around spell level 3-4, there's already a long lasting spell that does just that...), but it severely punishes those who actually don't. I also find the rare Stygian Disruption power (from Complete Psionic) a hilarious choice. Wis-based DC (which makes the Monk pretty good in that), bludgeoning weapon (unarmed strikes are bludgeoning), disruption effect. Of course, only on a weapon, but Monk's unarmed strikes count as natural AND manufactured weapons, so...

Also, raising unarmed strike damage is one of the other ways to deal enough valid damage for the Vampiric Blade power (again, taking advantage of treating unarmed strikes as manufactured weapons for that), aside from the classic _____ of Smack build. This one gets better with the Decisive Strike ACF, which I've found it's awesome for Karmic-Robilar AoO builds.

So...any other ideas?

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 01:49 AM
If a Rogue only has one weapon, he can't TWF and 'claim' an off-hand attack. The Monk specifically has TWF removed.

Spinning Halbred allows a person to make multiple attacks with different parts of the same weapon, yet some attacks are designated as Mainhand and some as Offhand. A monk already has the ability to attack with multiple parts of his "weapon", and doesn't need an extra feat to open that up.

The passage you cite every time only has bearing on a monk who doesn't claim additional attacks in a round from Two Weapon Fighting. Normally, a monk doesn't have an Offhand. BUT, when you use the TWFing option in the Combat chapter of the PHB, you specifically override that by GIVING the monk an Offhand attack.

By RAW, a fighter doesn't have an Offhand attack either. He can hold 2 weapons, one in either hand, and heck, even have armor spikes which don't occupy a hand, and attack with any number of them in the same round, as long as he doesn't exceed the normal number of attacks alotted to him by his BAB. If he does, he's considered to be TWFing, and his 2nd weapon in his offhand becomes an Offhand weapon. Does that make sense?

Talic
2009-08-10, 01:51 AM
When providing information for analysis, I'd like you to offer, on your build entries, what roles you feel the character is able to fulfill in the specific build.

Then, please list any benefits the character has in each area.

For example:

Roles: Frontline Fighter, Skillmonkey

Frontline Fighter:Attack Bonus: +13 at level 5, +20 at level 10, +35 at level 20.
Full Attack: +11/+11 at 5, +19/+19/+19/+14 at level 10, +33/+33/+33/+28/+28/+23/+23 at level 20.
Damage per attack on full attack: 1d6+9 at level 5, 2d6+13 at level 10, 4d8+25 at level 20.
Armor Class: 24 at level 5, 29 at level 10, 37 at level 20
HP: 5d8+15 at level 5, 10d8+40 at level 10, 17d8+3d10+120 at level 20
Saves: 7/6/7 at level 5, 14/15/15 at level 10, 27/27/33 at level 20
Relevant Abilities: DR at levels 10 and up, Evasion, Mettle (level 16), Power Attack/Shock Trooper (level 14)

Skillmonkey: 6+int skills at all levels, monk skill list for 17 levels, XXX skill list for 3 levels. Int modifier: +3 at levels 1-16, +6 at levels 17-20

Talic
2009-08-10, 01:56 AM
Spinning Halbred allows a person to make multiple attacks with different parts of the same weapon, yet some attacks are designated as Mainhand and some as Offhand. A monk already has the ability to attack with multiple parts of his "weapon", and doesn't need an extra feat to open that up.The text that grants a monk the ability to attack with multiple parts of his "weapon" does not grant more or more advantageous attacks for doing so. Spinning Halberd does.

Note, with the exception of double weapons, characters may not use a single weapon for both main and off hand attacks. Characters may not juggle a single longsword for main and off hand attacks. The whole concept of two weapon fighting is that you need two distinct weapons.

And a monk's unarmed strike is considered a single weapon, regardless of what part of the body is used. Thus, it is not eligible to be used as both main and off hand.

Origomar
2009-08-10, 02:10 AM
Unarmed strikes are defined as being able to be made with Head, hands, feet, elbows, knees... That means a level 1 monk could multiweapon fight and gain 9 attacks. Such an interpretation is imbalanced.


Is it imbalanced, is it really? or is it just the kind of interpretation we are looking for :smallbiggrin:

Talic
2009-08-10, 02:17 AM
Is it imbalanced, is it really? or is it just the kind of interpretation we are looking for :smallbiggrin:

Fact remains, you can't two weapon fight, using the same shortsword as both a main hand and offhand weapon (in the same full attack action).

You can't two weapon fight with only unarmed strikes, because an unarmed strike is a single weapon, regardless of how many different parts of the body is used.

Xenogears
2009-08-10, 02:23 AM
"A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet"

May. Means might be. A possibility. Not always true. So a monk COULD attack with just their right hand. So you are saying that a monk whose style is to attack with just say right jabs couldn't gain an additional attack by throwing in a quick jab with their left hand?

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 02:24 AM
No offence, but thats kinda a silly nitpick. You can hold a dagger in each hand and make stabbing motions, but you can't drop the daggers and make punching motions wit both fists?

And thats not even getting into all of the really unorthodox weapons in Complete Scoundrel...

Boot blades and elbow blades and mouthpicks and weighted cloaks and braid blades and whatnots. You can attack with any part of your body as long as you can hold/tie/ducttape a weapon with it, but a person with special training in fighting with their whole body can't fight in the same way?

Thats nitpicking, and reading what you want out of RAW, rather than being open to multiple interpretations. Who are you to claim knowledge of RAI?

Kylarra
2009-08-10, 02:28 AM
"A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet"

May. Means might be. A possibility. Not always true. So a monk COULD attack with just their right hand. So you are saying that a monk whose style is to attack with just say right jabs couldn't gain an additional attack by throwing in a quick jab with their left hand?But then you're opening yourself up to the multi-weapon option as well. Since if you can "gain an additional attack" by throwing in a quick jab with your left, whose to say that you can't gain an additional one by throwing in both elbows, both knees, and a kick from either leg for 8 attacks?

Talic
2009-08-10, 02:31 AM
"A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet"

May. Means might be. A possibility. Not always true. So a monk COULD attack with just their right hand. So you are saying that a monk whose style is to attack with just say right jabs couldn't gain an additional attack by throwing in a quick jab with their left hand?

By RAW? That's exactly what I'm saying.


No offence, but thats kinda a silly nitpick. You can hold a dagger in each hand and make stabbing motions, but you can't drop the daggers and make punching motions wit both fists?Correct. Well, you can, but you will get no more attacks than if you were punching with one fist only.


And thats not even getting into all of the really unorthodox weapons in Complete Scoundrel...

Boot blades and elbow blades and mouthpicks and weighted cloaks and braid blades and whatnots. You can attack with any part of your body as long as you can hold/tie/ducttape a weapon with it, but a person with special training in fighting with their whole body can't fight in the same way?Correct.


Thats nitpicking, and reading what you want out of RAW, rather than being open to multiple interpretations. Who are you to claim knowledge of RAI?
More accurately, it's reading what is said in RAW, rather than trying to glean a hidden RAI meaning that isn't put in or explained. Who are we to determine the intent of the designers? We don't know their motives, and are not in a position to behave as if we do. RAW is so much simpler to discuss.

D&D is a game that focuses more on keeping things moving than keeping things accurate. There are contradictions, there are rules that don't make sense.

I can throw a 2000 pound rock at a 100 pound man. Whether it hits or misses, it stops in that square.

I can throw a 1 pound dagger at someone. Whether it hits or misses, it stops in that square.

I can throw a 1 pound alchemist's fire at someone. If it hits, it affects that square. If it misses, it scatters based on distance thrown.

All of these are RAW. There are inaccuracies. Some things don't make sense. But they are what they are.

In other words, when discussing what is and isn't possible in D&D, Common Sense is not a valid argument unless it is also supported by existing RAW.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-10, 02:45 AM
Filthy lies.

Bluff is not a class skill for monks.

lord_khaine
2009-08-10, 04:12 AM
Sig.

Sage, custserv, and FAQ are not RAW. In many cases, they're outright wrong.
Pulling out of your quotes: When using an unarmed strike as an off-hand attack, the monk suffers all the usual attack penalties from two-weapon fighting (see Table 8–10 in the PH) and the monk adds only half her Strength bonus (if any) to damage if the off-hand unarmed strike hits.
And the SRD: A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

The FAQ might not be RAW, but it does tell us when we are misunderstanding the RAW, meaning that monks can indeed use two-weapon fighting, if they are crazy enough to take all the penalties that follow.

And as for the gauntlet isseu, there isnt anything RAW or official on it, meaning its something that will depend on the GM in question.

Talic
2009-08-10, 04:58 AM
The FAQ might not be RAW, but it does tell us when we are misunderstanding the RAW, meaning that monks can indeed use two-weapon fighting, if they are crazy enough to take all the penalties that follow.

And as for the gauntlet isseu, there isnt anything RAW or official on it, meaning its something that will depend on the GM in question.

When FAQ and RAW disagree, FAQ is wrong. When a monk's standard attacks are listed as coming from any or all sources for an unarmed strike, it does not make sense that those same sources could also be used to make off hand attacks.

Unarmed Strike is a single weapon. It cannot be used for Two weapon Fighting, unless another, non-unarmed strike weapon, is used as well.

As for the gauntlet issue? Yes, there is RAW.

A Gauntlet is a weapon. (Weapons entry, PHb, or SRD)
It is not a listed monk weapon. (Monk Class Entry)
A monk may not use certain class features, such as Flurry of Blows, with weapons that are not designated monk weapons. (Monk Class Entry)

Conclusion: Therefore, a monk may not use such class features with a gauntlet.

...
A gauntlet is a weapon. (Weapons entry, PHb, or SRD)
A monk is not proficient with a gauntlet, by default. (Monk Class Entry)
When a character that is not proficient with a weapon attempts to use it, they suffer a nonproficiency penalty. (Combat Entry)

Conclusion: Therefore, a monk attempting to use a gauntlet (unless granted Gauntlet proficiency through a feat or another class) suffers the nonproficiency penalty for doing so.

All of the above premises are RAW. They are all official. The conclusions are applications of the above premises.

Faleldir
2009-08-10, 08:07 AM
The problem with the old "a Monk's entire body is one weapon" argument is that by RAW, you can play a Brilliant Energy anthro-bat King Of Smack who summons other Monks with Call Weaponry.

AmberVael
2009-08-10, 08:29 AM
Sometimes, common sense really does have to take precedence. We can see this in the fact that monks are not proficient with their unarmed strike- a rule so pathetic that no one ever really argues it- yet it is almost undisputably RAW. :smallannoyed:

So when you think about a monk being able to two weapon fight with monk weapons, or a character being able to fight with two of any other weapon (specifically, as I was trying to say before- a gauntlet- which you could two weapon fight with whether you had proficiency with it or not), and then suddenly say "oh, but they can't fight with two fists, that's against RAW..."

Well, you're just getting silly, if you ask me, especially considering there isn't any rule truly against it. (You point out something that says that they can't, and I'll concede this, but so far the best argument has been 'their entire body is an unarmed strike' which is quite dubious, if you ask me.)

You can rule the monk can't, but really, what is the point? They're not going to be broken, they're probably just going to be making things even worse for themselves. They won't be able to gain bonus attacks from Multiweapon fighting (they still don't have three arms), and even if they can qualify for multiattack it won't be useful as they have no secondary attacks (unarmed strike doesn't allow secondary attacks, just the ability to gain the benefit from spells and effects for natural weapons).

So really, I just think it is pretty silly nitpicking at this point.

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 09:48 AM
Also, there is psychological phenomenon where two different people with 2 different stances on a subject can read the same sentance or passage and conclude that it supports their own very different view points. Which one is right? I don't remember the name of it, but I'm sure someone will be along in a minute or 2 to add it.

So, because you feel for some reason that monks SHOULDN'T be able to TWF, maybe because they aready have flurry, or whatever, that they can't because of the rules you've cited. I feel like they should, and have cited rules. Are your rules more right than mine? I dunno. Baring some sort of official ruling that we probably won't get, I think its ambiguous. You see what you think is right, I see what I think is right.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-10, 10:04 AM
Re: TWfing Monks.

No you really can't. It's not an issue of the RAW being nonsensical even. It's seriously an issue of the rules making sense.

Monks are trained to fight with their entire body. The benefit they get from this is a flurry progression that operates exactly like TWFing but better. They are already fighting with both sides of their body.

What you are so demanding it that my Thri keen Monk 1 who takes Multi Weapon Fighting should have an attack routine of:

+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5

Excuse me while I say no, you can't TWF by saying, "well I throw all my attacks of my flurry with just one hand, and then I TWF with the other hand."

A flurry is already fighting with multiple body parts.

"When unarmored, a monk may strike with a flurry of blows at the expense of accuracy."

How do you manage a flurry of blows with a single hand?

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 10:07 AM
Re: TWfing Monks.

No you really can't. It's not an issue of the RAW being nonsensical even. It's seriously an issue of the rules making sense.

Monks are trained to fight with their entire body. The benefit they get from this is a flurry progression that operates exactly like TWFing but better. They are already fighting with both sides of their body.

What you are so demanding it that my Thri keen Monk 1 who takes Multi Weapon Fighting should have an attack routine of:

+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/+5/
+5/+5

Excuse me while I say no, you can't TWF by saying, "well I throw all my attacks of my flurry with just one hand, and then I TWF with the other hand."

A flurry is already fighting with multiple body parts.

"When unarmored, a monk may strike with a flurry of blows at the expense of accuracy."

How do you manage a flurry of blows with a single hand?

Uh, no.

A thri-kreen monk 1 with MWF and flurrying gets five attacks, at -4. Two for his primary, flurrying attack routine, three more (one for each hand). So his attack routine isn't lol+5s, it's -4/-4/-4/-4/-4. Try hitting a goblin with that.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 10:19 AM
Faaaaax, screen got streeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeetched.

Fix'd, I think?

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 10:32 AM
Now who's making up rules, Mr Kelpstrand. The rules don't say you HAVE to alternate body parts while making a FoBs. NOWHERE. If you make a succession of furious right jabs...its a FoB. If you give em the ol' one-two, its a FoB. If you lead with a right cross, strike with your elbow, and then spinning roundhouse kick to the face, its a FoB. The rules state ANY body part.

And yea...like what Fax said, a Thri'keen monk wouldn't get attacks anywhere close to that.

Try looking at it this way. You can Flurry with a Shuriken, right? Thats in the rules. Can you Rapid Shot with a Shuriken? Yes, its thrown. Can you combine Flurry of Blows and Rapid Shot? Yes. Can you combine TWFing and Rapid Shot? Again, yes. Why is it so hard to believe that Flurry with TWFing?

lord_khaine
2009-08-10, 11:11 AM
When FAQ and RAW disagree, FAQ is wrong. When a monk's standard attacks are listed as coming from any or all sources for an unarmed strike, it does not make sense that those same sources could also be used to make off hand attacks.

Unarmed Strike is a single weapon. It cannot be used for Two weapon Fighting, unless another, non-unarmed strike weapon, is used as well.

As for the gauntlet issue? Yes, there is RAW.

A Gauntlet is a weapon. (Weapons entry, PHb, or SRD)
It is not a listed monk weapon. (Monk Class Entry)
A monk may not use certain class features, such as Flurry of Blows, with weapons that are not designated monk weapons. (Monk Class Entry)

Conclusion: Therefore, a monk may not use such class features with a gauntlet.


When FAQ and RAW disagree, you should considder that maybe you are reading the rules wrong.

as for the gauntlet issue,
This metal glove lets you deal lethal damage rather than nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes. A strike with a gauntlet is otherwise considered an unarmed attack, and thats taken straight from the SRD.

I belive i have heard all your arguments to the contrary, and til you find some new ones, then i will considder it raw that you can use a gauntlet to flurry with.


A gauntlet is a weapon. (Weapons entry, PHb, or SRD)
A monk is not proficient with a gauntlet, by default. (Monk Class Entry)
When a character that is not proficient with a weapon attempts to use it, they suffer a nonproficiency penalty. (Combat Entry)

Conclusion: Therefore, a monk attempting to use a gauntlet (unless granted Gauntlet proficiency through a feat or another class) suffers the nonproficiency penalty for doing so.

I have newer statet anything else myself, and allways said the price of using a gauntlet is that you either have to use a feat on weapon proficiency, or take a dip in another class.


All of the above premises are RAW. They are all official. The conclusions are applications of the above premises.

No, this is Rules as YOU read them, meaning that they are no more official than Rules as I read them, and all the conclussions above are just Your conclussions.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 11:15 AM
I belive i have heard all your arguments to the contrary, and til you find some new ones, then i will considder it raw that you can use a gauntlet to flurry with.

Turnabout is fair play:


Can a monk use a +5 gauntlet in an unarmed attack,
gaining all of her class benefits as well as the +5 bonus on
attack rolls and damage rolls from the gauntlet?

Gauntlets are indeed a weapon. If a monk uses any weapon
not listed as a special monk weapon, she does not gain her
better attack rate. She would, however, gain the increased
damage for unarmed attacks.

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-10, 11:19 AM
When providing information for analysis, I'd like you to offer, on your build entries, what roles you feel the character is able to fulfill in the specific build.

Well...technically, the School of Multiple (Missing?) Strikes Monk should count as a skirmisher of sorts, since it relies on run-and-hit tactics (basically, moving to the enemy and dealing the flurry with all those strikes), although the way it should be prepared might also deal with high defenses (but it doesn't qualify as a tank)

The basic set up is:
Monk 11
BAB: +8
Dex > Wis, both as high as possible (assume at least Dex and Wis 16 at start)
Feats:
1st: Two-Weapon Fighting
3rd: Weapon Finesse (or Intuitive Attack)
6th: Snap Kick
9th: Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
Bonus: any, though Stunning Fist -> Fiery Fist -> Fiery Ki Defense or Ki Blast (if possible) preferred

Items: Gloves of Dex and Periapt of Wis +2/+4, Boots of Speed, Amulet of Mighty Fists (or Necklace of Natural Weapons), Scorpion Kama

Attack (assuming Dex 18 and Gloves +4, AoMF or NoNW +1)
Standard: +15 (normal), +13/+13 (with Snap Kick)
Full: +15/+10 (normal), +13/+13/+8/+8 (with ITWF), +11/+11/+11/+6/+6 (with Snap & ITWF), +11/+11/+11/+11/+6/+6 (with Snap, ITWF and Boots of Speed active), +11/+11/+11/+11/+11/+11/+6/+6 (all of before + flurry)
Damage: 1d10 (normal), 1d10 + 1d6 fire (with Fiery Fist)

Defenses (assuming Dex 18, Wis 16, Gloves and Periapt +4:
AC 23 (+6 Dex, +7 class), Touch 23, Flat-footed 17
Fort +(7+Con mod), Ref +14, Wis + 13


Of course, the early set-up is not as useful. It's the core, from which the varied build-ups grow around. It's meant to issue the biggest weaknesses, and the additions. No flaws or anything, since the idea is to do it as smooth as possible.

The build I mostly think of, is:
Monk 6/Psionic Fist (or Zerth Cenobite) 5
BAB: +7
Dex =< Wis, both as high as possible (assume at least Dex and Wis 16 at start)
Race: Human (extra feat), Silverbrow Human (extra feat, Feather Fall), Psionic Githzerai (naturally psionic, Dex and Wis bonuses, psi-like abilities, power resistance, LA +2)
Feats:
Human: Wild Talent
1st: Two-Weapon Fighting
3rd: Weapon Finesse (or Intuitive Attack)
6th: Snap Kick
9th: Improved Two-Weapon Fighting
Bonus: any, though Stunning Fist -> Fiery Fist -> Fiery Ki Defense or Ki Blast (if possible) preferred

Items: Gloves of Dex and Periapt of Wis +2/+4, Boots of Speed, Amulet of Mighty Fists (or Necklace of Natural Weapons), Scorpion Kama, Monk's Belt or Tattoo, ghost shrouds

Attack (assuming Dex 18 and Gloves +4, AoMF or NoNW +1, Weapon Finesse)
Standard: +14 (normal), +12/+12 (with Snap Kick)
Full: +14/+9 (normal), +12/+12/+7/+7 (with ITWF), +10/+10/+10/+5/+5 (with Snap & ITWF), +10/+10/+10/+10/+5/+5 (with Snap, ITWF and Boots of Speed active), +9/+9/+9/+9/+9/+4/+4 (all of before + flurry)
Damage: 1d10 (normal), 2d6 (with Monk's Belt/Tattoo), 1d10 + 1d6 fire (with Fiery Fist), 2d6 + 1d6 fire (with Belt/Tattoo and Fiery Fist)

Defenses (assuming Dex 18, Wis 16, Gloves and Periapt +4, Monk's Belt/Tattoo, ghost shrouds):
AC 25 (+6 Dex, +8 class, +1 deflection), Touch 25, Flat-footed 19
Fort +(6+Con mod), Ref +16, Wis + 15

Preferred powers by level:
1st-inertial armor, force screen, expansion, metaphysical weapon
2nd-animal affinity, hustle
3rd (if possible) - vampiric blade


This set-up isn't as potent, since it mostly loses a flurry attack, but it exchanges with the base psionic set-up. It *does* require a hefty bit of build-up, item-wise, but it allows for a larger amount of move & strike maneuvers. It's also PP-intensive, which is only slightly remedied by the high Wisdom.

That should be the base setup, the rest is mostly nit-picking and refining the concept.

lord_khaine
2009-08-10, 12:12 PM
Turnabout is fair play:


Quote:
Originally Posted by FAQ
Can a monk use a +5 gauntlet in an unarmed attack,
gaining all of her class benefits as well as the +5 bonus on
attack rolls and damage rolls from the gauntlet?

Gauntlets are indeed a weapon. If a monk uses any weapon
not listed as a special monk weapon, she does not gain her
better attack rate. She would, however, gain the increased
damage for unarmed attacks.


oh well, then i guess they finaly got to update that piece of information into the FAQ.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-10, 12:50 PM
Uh, no.

A thri-kreen monk 1 with MWF and flurrying gets five attacks, at -4. Two for his primary, flurrying attack routine, three more (one for each hand). So his attack routine isn't lol+5s, it's -4/-4/-4/-4/-4. Try hitting a goblin with that.

First of all, they get Str to attack roles just like every other character in the game.

Second of all, you missed the part where Multiweapon fighting goes:

"Multiweapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisites

Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit

Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.
Normal

A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special

This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms."

Since the contention of the Monks can TWF argument is that they can make their regular flurry attacks, and then magically turn monk unarmed strikes into offhand attacks, Thri keen fighting goes like this:

I flurry with my right upper hand: -2/-2
But then I add offhand attacks: -4/-4 ...
My off hand attacks (because unarmed strike from any part of body can be turned into an offhand attack, and multi weapon fighting has a limit on offhand attacks as the number of weapons you have): right lower hand, left upper hand, left lower hand, right upper elbow, right lower elbow, left upper elbow, left lower elbow, right upper forearm, right lower forearm, left upper forearm, left lower forearm, left foot, right foot, left knee, right knee, left shin, right shin, headbutt, bite, back slam, ect.

For an attack routine of -4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4/-4

But add BAB to each of those attacks, and add Str modifier.

That is the logical consequence of declaring that a Monk can use his unarmed strike from any part of his body as an off hand.

Luckily, the rules very explicitly state that the Monk cannot use his unarmed strikes as offhand attacks.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 12:52 PM
Luckily, the rules very explicitly state that the Monk cannot use his unarmed strikes as offhand attacks.

Luckily, the Flurry, TWF, and MWF rules also very explicitly state exactly how many attacks you get. You don't get to flurry with your off-hand weapon(s); flurry very expressly states that you get an extra attack. So no, you don't get to flurry with your primary hand, then your off hand...

Sendal
2009-08-10, 01:18 PM
You are missing his point. Forget flurry, the monk is choosing not to use it. He mearly takes advantage of the fact that the DM has unwisely ruled that a monk's "unarmed strike" can be considered an off hand weapon, without altering the RAW which says a monk can use any part of his body to make the unarmed strike.

multiweapon fighting gives you one extra attack for each "weapon" you have. every part of the monk can be considered a separate weapon, a separate unarmed strike. Cheezy to the extreem, and fortuantly avoided by a monk unarmed strike being explicitly disalowed from being considered an off hand.

hense: pinky finger strike, ring finger strike, middle finger strike, index... etc.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 01:19 PM
Multiweapon Fighting also explicitly states "hands".

Sendal
2009-08-10, 01:24 PM
Multiweapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisites

Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit

Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.
Normal

A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special

This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms."


you need three arms to qualify, but after that it references weapons. "off hand" could mean armour spikes, bladed boots or monk's left buttok for all the feat cares.

If you house rule that monk's strikes can be considered "off hand" that is, which you shouldn't.

Amphetryon
2009-08-10, 01:28 PM
Dex 13, three or more hands.:smallsmile:

Sendal
2009-08-10, 01:30 PM
yes, to Qualify. A thri keen has that, but the actual attacks needn't be hands as written.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 01:47 PM
yes, to Qualify. A thry keen has that, but the actual attacks needn't be hands as written.

Uh.


Multiweapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisites

Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit

Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.
Normal

A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special

This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two arms."

Aside from that.


Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a -6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a -10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways:

* If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. (An unarmed strike is always considered light.)
* The Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.
From this we can infer that fighting with an unarmed strike as either your primary or secondary weapon is acceptable.


Unarmed Strike

A Medium character deals 1d3 points of nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike. A Small character deals 1d2 points of nonlethal damage. A monk or any character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat can deal lethal or nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes, at her option. The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike.
From this we can see that wielding an unarmed strike is like wielding any other weapon.


Unarmed Strike

At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed: a monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

Usually a monk’s unarmed strikes deal lethal damage, but she can choose to deal nonlethal damage instead with no penalty on her attack roll. She has the same choice to deal lethal or nonlethal damage while grappling.

A monk’s unarmed strike is treated both as a manufactured weapon and a natural weapon for the purpose of spells and effects that enhance or improve either manufactured weapons or natural weapons.

A monk also deals more damage with her unarmed strikes than a normal person would, as shown on Table: The Monk. The unarmed damage on Table: The Monk is for Medium monks. A Small monk deals less damage than the amount given there with her unarmed attacks, while a Large monk deals more damage; see Table: Small or Large Monk Unarmed Damage. The bolded statement indicates that a monk never suffers the penalty to damage for using an unarmed strike as a secondary weapon.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 01:48 PM
Multiweapon Fighting [General]
Prerequisites

Dex 13, three or more hands.
Benefit

Penalties for fighting with multiple weapons are reduced by 2 with the primary hand and reduced by 6 with off hands.
Normal

A creature without this feat takes a -6 penalty on attacks made with its primary hand and a -10 penalty on attacks made with its off hands. (It has one primary hand, and all the others are off hands.) See Two-Weapon Fighting.
Special

This feat replaces the Two-Weapon Fighting feat for creatures with more than two two arms."

your emphesising partial terms. The concept of "off hand" and "Primary hand" is well deffined and reffers to many forms of attack. You are aware that a bear's bite is an "off hand" attack, despite not being a hand?

A wolf's bite is a "primary hand" attack, in that it is not an "off hand" attack. These terms reffer to an attack having your full strength behind it or not. The reference to a hand is mearly a feature of the name of the ability.

Besides, the reason I am explaining this clearly rediculous concept is to show why a monk's unarmed strike should not be considered an "off hand attack"



Originally Posted by SRD: Two-Weapon Fighting
Two-Weapon Fighting

If you wield a second weapon in your off hand, you can get one extra attack per round with that weapon. You suffer a -6 penalty with your regular attack or attacks with your primary hand and a -10 penalty to the attack with your off hand when you fight this way. You can reduce these penalties in two ways:

* If your off-hand weapon is light, the penalties are reduced by 2 each. (An unarmed strike is always considered light.)
* The Two-Weapon Fighting feat lessens the primary hand penalty by 2, and the off-hand penalty by 6.

From this we can infer that fighting with an unarmed strike as either your primary or secondary weapon is acceptable.

no, from this we can infer that unarmed strikes take a penalty when disarming, and if they were considered an off hand attack whilst TWFing, they would suffer a lesser penalty. It says nothing about whether or not it can be used as an off hand weapon. Medium sized weapons can be used as off hand, just at a slightly learger penalty.




Quote:
Originally Posted by SRD: Weapons
Unarmed Strike

A Medium character deals 1d3 points of nonlethal damage with an unarmed strike. A Small character deals 1d2 points of nonlethal damage. A monk or any character with the Improved Unarmed Strike feat can deal lethal or nonlethal damage with unarmed strikes, at her option. The damage from an unarmed strike is considered weapon damage for the purposes of effects that give you a bonus on weapon damage rolls.

An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon. Therefore, you can use the Weapon Finesse feat to apply your Dexterity modifier instead of your Strength modifier to attack rolls with an unarmed strike.

From this we can see that wielding an unarmed strike is like wielding any other weapon.

Again, no. From this we can see that it acts like a normal weapon in these specific instances described, and that it is sufficinetly different from a normal weapon that it warrented its own section describing the situations where it is not different. You don't get this for a dagger. Thats because a dagger is like wielding any other weapon.




There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed.A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

The bolded statement indicates that a monk never suffers the penalty to damage for using an unarmed strike as a secondary weapon.


Actualy, it says there is no such thing as an off hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. If there was such a thing, then he might apply full strength to damage, but is says there isn't. This is also irrelevant to the Thri Keen example, as I never mentioned damage.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-10, 02:04 PM
And the statement made by the "Monks can use offhand attacks" crowd explicitly stated that "off hand" attacks don't need to be made with a weapon.

Off hand merely means the attack taking the penalty. Armor Spikes are an "off hand" attack. Therefore, if a Monk can use unarmed strikes for off hand attacks (which it can't) a Thri Keen monk would be able to have as many off hand attacks as you can name.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 02:08 PM
And the statement made by the "Monks can use offhand attacks" crowd explicitly stated that "off hand" attacks don't need to be made with a weapon.

Off hand merely means the attack taking the penalty. Armor Spikes are an "off hand" attack. Therefore, if a Monk can use unarmed strikes for off hand attacks (which it can't) a Thri Keen monk would be able to have as many off hand attacks as you can name.

If a monk can't make off-hand attacks with an unarmed strike (which is a weapon, as I defined above), then a rogue can't make off-hand attacks with a dagger (since it, too, is a weapon).

Sendal
2009-08-10, 02:12 PM
the rogue doesn't have an entry that says:

"there is no such thing as an off hand attack for a rogue striking with a dagger"

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 02:13 PM
no, from this we can infer that unarmed strikes take a penalty when disarming, and if they were considered an off hand attack whilst TWFing, they would suffer a lesser penalty. It says nothing about whether or not it can be used as an off hand weapon. Medium sized weapons can be used as off hand, just at a slightly learger penalty....which means, as it is a weapon (seriously, it's on the table with the rest of the weapons), it is usable as an off-hand weapon.


Again, no. From this we can see that it acts like a normal weapon in these specific instances described, and that it is sufficinetly different from a normal weapon that it warrented its own section describing the situations where it is not different. You don't get this for a dagger. Thats because a dagger is like wielding any other weapon.Nearly every weapon has it's own description like this. Further, "An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon." If you can't TWF with your fists, you can't TWF with two daggers. They're both light weapons.


Actualy, it says there is no such thing as an off hand attack for a monk striking unarmed. If there was such a thing, then he might apply full strength to damage, but is says there isn't. This is also irrelevant to the Thri Keen example, as I never mentioned damage.The placement of the statements indicates that the reference to "no off-hand" is to clarify that you do not take penalties on your damage for two-weapon fighting with your fists. Both the quotes from the FAQ I posted earlier support this.


the rogue doesn't have an entry that says:

"there is no such thing as an off hand attack for a rogu striking with a dagger"

The fact that the statement is immediately followed with how to apply damage to your off-hand unarmed strikes ("A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.") should be indicative that you can wield your unarmed strike as your second weapon in a TWF routine.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 02:32 PM
...which means, as it is a weapon (seriously, it's on the table with the rest of the weapons), it is usable as an off-hand weapon.


it doesn't mention in the TWF feat that monks are not alowed to make off hand unarmed strikes, but it does say so in the monk class section. You know, the "No such thing as" bit thats been quoted many times already.



Nearly every weapon has it's own description like this. Further, "An unarmed strike is always considered a light weapon." If you can't TWF with your fists, you can't TWF with two daggers. They're both light weapons.

that is just rediculous. The fact that one class has been specificaly disalowed from using one light weapon in this manner does not require every light weapon to carry the same restriction for every class. It just doesn't. This is a monk specific, unarmed specific restriction.


The placement of the statements indicates that the reference to "no off-hand" is to clarify that you do not take penalties on your damage for two-weapon fighting with your fists

"No such thing as" is not the same statement as "Can do without penalty". In fact, Its hard to think of two statements more opposed. And RAW trumps FAQ. As has been mentioned, they often have contradictory answers.


The fact that the statement is immediately followed with how to apply damage to your off-hand unarmed strikes ("A monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.") should be indicative that you can wield your unarmed strike as your second weapon in a TWF routine.


The only way you ever add half strength to attack is through an off hand attack, as Far as I can think of on the spot, though I may be forgetting some obscure feat or something. I see this statement as a reitteration of the previous. If a monk makes an unarmed attack, it must be a primary hand attack, because he isn't alowed to make off hand ones, so always add full damage.

I think its to avoid the misunderstanding that might arrise otherwise where a player says:

"I flurry for 4 attacks. I give him the old 1 2, folowed by a roundhouse kick and then a final right hook"

DM:
OK, so thats 1 right hand for full strength., left for half. Roundhouse for, hmmmm call that a 2 hander, str and a half and another right, full str.

Its sort of suplerfluous, but to avoid misunderstandings.

Talic
2009-08-10, 02:36 PM
At 1st level, a monk gains Improved Unarmed Strike as a bonus feat. A monk’s attacks may be with either fist interchangeably or even from elbows, knees, and feet. This means that a monk may even make unarmed strikes with her hands full. There is no such thing as an off-hand attack for a monk striking unarmed: a monk may thus apply her full Strength bonus on damage rolls for all her unarmed strikes.

From this, we see that when looking at Monk that, when striking unarmed, monks can not make off-hand attacks. There's no such thing. Even if it is interpreted in the way that allows them to be offhand attacks without being offhand attacks, then they'd just get to choose. Is Unarmed strike the primary weapon, or the offhand? You don't get 1 weapon used for main and offhand attacks. And the rules make very clear that it's the same unarmed strike, whether it comes from a hand, a foot, a headbutt, or an elbow.

Further, a Bear has two forms of attack. Primary Weapon, and secondary weapon. For most creatures with defined natural attacks, that is all they get. Off-hand is a feature that applies pretty much exclusively to manufactured weapons... With the exception of monk's unarmed strikes, by the paragraph above.

Further, as for "unarmed strikes" and monks not being proficient, and common sense rulings...

I consider it such only if it's nearly universally accepted as the converse. Drowning does not heal people, and all characters are proficient with unarmed strikes. Or, more precisely, no character suffers a nonproficiency penalty for using an unarmed strike.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 02:38 PM
that is just stupid. The fact that one class has been specificaly disalowed from using one light weapon in this manner does not require every light weapon to carry the same restriction for every class. It just doesn't. This is a monk spcific, unarmed specific restriction.Wait wait wait wait. So a rogue with Improved Unarmed Strike and Two-Weapon Fighting can punch with both fists, but a monk can't? How...how can you possibly think that's right?


"No such thing as" is not the same statement as "Can do without penalty". In fact, Its hard to think of two statements more opposed. And RAW trumps FAQ. As has been mentioned, they often have contradictory answers.Find me a contradictory answer from WotC on that anywhere. The FAQ says in two instances that TWF is okay with monk strikes. The WotC website article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070403a) on Unarmed Attacks says it's okay. The WotC website article (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20060905a) on Two-Weapon Fighting says it's okay. Wizards has been very clear in every instance that punching someone in the face with your left hand, and then punching them in the face with your right hand is perfectly fine.


The only way you ever add half strength to attack is through an off hand attack, as Far as I can think of on the spot, though I may be forgetting some obscure feat or something. I see this statement as a reitteration of the previous. If a mok makes an unarmed attack, it must be a primary hand attack, because he isn't alowed to make off hand ones, so always add full damage.And at stuff Talic said too: What? No. That statement says that he adds his normal Strength Mod to Damage on any unarmed strike attack.

EDIT: the wording of the text is to indicate that if I smack you with my siangham and then TWF you with my unarmed strike, I still get my full strength bonus on the unarmed strike even though I normally wouldn't. Or are you saying if I stab someone with my siangham, I can't back it up with a kick to the groin?

Talic
2009-08-10, 02:44 PM
And at stuff Talic said too: What? No. That statement says that he adds his normal Strength Mod to Damage on any unarmed strike attack.

Mmhmm. It also says that when monks use unarmed strikes, there's no such thing as an offhand. So any place where you see offhand? Skip it. There's no such thing.

Even under your interpretation, the rules make it clear that an unarmed strike from left hand is the same as unarmed strike from elbow, is the same as unarmed strike from knee. If under this interpretation, you still need to follow the basic rule that you need two distinct weapons for two weapon fighting.

Unarmed strike, regardless of what limb(s), is one. Thus, it may be your main hand, or your "Full str bonus to damage offhand that's not really offhand". Choose. Then take a different weapon, and use it in for the other choice.

EDIT: I'm amenable to that decision too. But unarmed strike, by itself, cannot possibly qualify for two weapon fighting. The same logic reasoning opens up multiweapon fighting, and when that's the case, and that's allowing a rather unbalancing number of attacks.

As I cannot accept that as common sense or good for balance, I cannot accept any interpretation for sole use unarmed strikes in TWF/MWF.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 02:46 PM
EDIT: the wording of the text is to indicate that if I smack you with my siangham and then TWF you with my unarmed strike, I still get my full strength bonus on the unarmed strike even though I normally wouldn't. Or are you saying if I stab someone with my siangham, I can't back it up with a kick to the groin?

I think you missed my edit.

Talic
2009-08-10, 02:49 PM
I think you missed my edit.

I think I edited in a response to it.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 02:49 PM
adding weapons in changes things entirely.

Of course you are alowed to beat me up with your Unarmed strikes, and then stab me with your siangham as your off hand attacks. Thats fine, just not the other way around.

rogues don't get masses of base damage on their unarmed strikes, and don't get flurry. TWFing unarmed Rogue is basicly making a poor imitation of a monk flurrying. A monk is already TWFing, and then some when he flurrys.

And I meant contradicting their published works. If they want to replace what they have written, it should be in erata. FAQ should not contradict RAW, and when it does RAW takes precidence.

Talic
2009-08-10, 02:51 PM
And I meant contradicting their published works. If they want to replace what they have written, it should be in erata. FAQ should not contradict RAW, and when it does RAW takes precidence.

This is known as the Primary Source rule. Interpretations, when contradicted by RAW, are not valid.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 02:52 PM
See, I can understand the "I can't two-weapon fight with my unarmed strike because it's one weapon" argument. I don't necessarily agree with it (because it doesn't necessarily make sense from a fluff perspective), but from a mechanical standpoint it works out.

So long as you're not saying "omgwtf u cant twf w/ ur fiztz. luk it say so rite der" because, well, you can. You need a second weapon, sure.

Fax Celestis
2009-08-10, 02:54 PM
adding weapons in changes things entirely.

The original example (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6687400&postcount=116) that brought all this up was about a kama and an unarmed strike.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 03:05 PM
I wasn't part of the debate at that point, though I had read it all before I entered. I was simply arguing that a monk's unarmed strikes can not be considered an off hand attack. Because it says "There is no such thing". I also continued a previous example that explained one reason why this restriction exists.

I don't see it as an interpretation to read this as "they don't exist" "you can't do them" "you can't do anything that requires their existance"

Thats just what the words mean, though I'm sure the advocates of the counter point would say something much the same.


Note I'm not saying you can't house rule these sort of things, just that you need to be a bit careful, as just removing the restriction causes other problems. The monk needs a bit of help if its to keep up without serious optimisation, I'd be the first to admit.



And just to make my position more clear: you can TWF with unarmed strikes, even if your a monk and are flurying. The restriction is that for your off hand attacks you need to use something other than your unarmed strikes. A "second weapon" if you will. Also, I believe the "No such thing as" clause compels you to declare your unarmed strikes as your first, and not your second weapon.

Killer Angel
2009-08-10, 03:44 PM
Too many hands (and various parts of the body) flurring. My head hurts.

See? TWF&Flurry is a viable tactic for headache. :smalltongue:

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 03:48 PM
Also, I believe the "No such thing as" clause compels you to declare your unarmed strikes as your first, and not your second weapon.

And this is the part I disagree with most. What does the order matter? If its punch punch stab or punch stab punch.

MY personal opinion of the matter is the reverse of what Sstoopidtallkid said. He says that a monk not being able to have an offhand is the specific case that overrides the general case of "you can make offhand unarmed attacks" in the combat section of the PHB. I believe that the combat section of the PHB is the specific exception to the general rule that monks can't have offhand unarmed strikes. NORMALLY a monk doesn't make offhand attacks because he can attack with any part of his body. SPECIFICALLY a monk's unarmed strikes become offhand if he uses them as part of the TWF special combat action.

Either way of reading it COULD be correct.

The example I use to back up my personal opinion is that NOBODY has an offhand attack, until they use the TWF special combat action. Say Fred the Fighter has a BAB of 16, allowing him 4 attacks. Fred has a longsword in his right hand, a flail in his left hand, spikes on his armor, and an animated shield he can bash with. Fred gets 4 attacks because of his BAB, on at +16, one at +11, one at +6, and one at +1 (neglecting other bonuses). Fred can attack with his longsword 4 times, his flail 4 times, or twice with his longsword and twice with his flail, or one time with EACH of the 4 weapons. NONE of them are considered offhand attacks, and all get full +str bonus to damage. IF Fred chose to claim an extra attack, say...with his spikes, he could make 4 attacks with his longsword, or 4 attacks with his flail, or 4 attacks with his shield bash, or 4 attacks with any combination of those 3 weapons, and then one attack with his spikes (or more if he has TWF, GTWF, and ITWF respectively).

Does that make sense to anyone?

And Thri Keen multiweapon fighting is a flaw in multiweapon fighting, not monks.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 04:04 PM
the order of the attacks is not relevant. Nobody said your off hand attacks have to come last. Its just that the monk should always be putting his primary effort into his unarmed strikes. The weapon is the afterthought, and not the other way around. It sort of focuses the Monk on the archetype he is based on



And Thri Keen multiweapon fighting is a flaw in multiweapon fighting, not monks.

Not realy, because if he were anything but a monk he couldn't attack with any part of his body as an unarmed strike. He would get 1 attack per natural weapon, AKA each hand. Exactly as intended.

The reason I think monks actualy can't do off hand strikes rather than that they just usualy don't is because the wording is so strong. "There is No such thing" as an off hand attack sounds rather final. Not does not apply here, or monks have no need for, it does not exist.

I think the designers might have thought of the monk's very large base damage dice, and shear number of attacks at high levels, and tried to clamp down on ways a player could focus on this to make it even more powerful. You can have 20 attacks if you want, but you can't have your monk unarmed damage on all of them.

Of course, as it turns out they overreacted a bit. It sounds scarry at first, until you realise hes never going to hit anything anyway.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-10, 04:51 PM
Wasn't the whole flurry/two-weapon thing already answered "officially" (http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a and http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Main35FAQv06302008.zip

Keld Denar
2009-08-10, 04:52 PM
It sort of focuses the Monk on the archetype he is based on

No...it needlessly restricts the monk from doing something perfectly sensical and reasonable, that is, attack REALLY fast with just his fists.

Your interpretation limits player options, mine expands players options. If it doesn't overpower the PC (and it would have to be pretty significant, which this clearly ISN'T), then I'm for it.

As I've shown, EITHER way of reading it is valid. If it increases player fun, I'd rather read it in the most inclusive way.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 05:04 PM
hitting realy fast with his fists is what flurry is meant to be.

I'm not seeing what your interpretation is. what are the two weapons he is TWFing with? his improved unarmed strike and his improved unarmed strike? how is that different then me dualwielding my 1 greatsword?

If you want to rule that this is alowed in the monk's special case then fine, do that, but that is a house rule.

and that link isn't working for me, I think the search page expired.



I'm not actualy limmiting the options of the character. He can still punch realy fast with just his fists (Flurry) He can still fight with 1 weapon and his unarmed strikes (Unarmed is primary) All these arguments change is the mechanics that govern these actions. some options may become more or less favourable from a purely mechanical point of view if you stick with the RAW as I read them. I am aware it would be arogant to to claim that my reading is the correct one, but I see little latitude for debate in the fact that off hand attacks "do not exist" in this situation.

You can argue that they should exist, and houserule accordingly, but in RAW they just don't.

Faleldir
2009-08-10, 05:46 PM
It's different because an unarmed strike is not an object or a natural weapon; it is the act of attacking without a weapon. There is no rule that says a creature has only one unarmed strike to use; in fact, unarmed strikes are almost always referred to in plural.
Do you follow every rule literally, even when it's insane? By your logic, a locked gauntlet doesn't prevent you from dropping a weapon when stunned, because it only grants a numerical bonus to specific checks.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 05:50 PM
I fail to see how its insane that a monk can't dual wield his Judo.

Honestly. Some people seem to think that "monk" reads "Boxer"

And if I change a rule because its insane, I tell my players I'm instituting a house rule. I don't wait until they pull me up on it, then argue with them at length about how it realy means something else than is written on the page. I have frequently said that if you don't like the rules as they are, then house rule it to how you want, to just admit that thats what your doing is all I ask.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-10, 06:20 PM
It's different because an unarmed strike is not an object or a natural weapon; it is the act of attacking without a weapon. There is no rule that says a creature has only one unarmed strike to use; in fact, unarmed strikes are almost always referred to in plural.
Do you follow every rule literally, even when it's insane? By your logic, a locked gauntlet doesn't prevent you from dropping a weapon when stunned, because it only grants a numerical bonus to specific checks.

Yes it's silly. Although your octupus monk has more natural attacks than your snake monk, the octopus monk has the same flurry as a snake monk, of the same level of course. But it could be even sillier...

Kelpstrand
2009-08-10, 07:09 PM
Yes it's silly. Although your octupus monk has more natural attacks than your snake monk, the octopus monk has the same flurry as a snake monk, of the same level of course. But it could be even sillier...

Well actually, Flurry only applies to BAB attacks.

So if you had a Snake with a Bite attack that took one level of Monk, He would full attack with: UAS/UAS/Bite

An Octopus with a Single Monk level however would be: UAS/UAS/TentacleX8/Bite

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-10, 08:06 PM
Well actually, Flurry only applies to BAB attacks.

So if you had a Snake with a Bite attack that took one level of Monk, He would full attack with: UAS/UAS/Bite

An Octopus with a Single Monk level however would be: UAS/UAS/TentacleX8/Bite

Er from the WotC link above...http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=dnd/rg/20070410a



Monks and Natural Weapons

As we saw in Part Two, a creature with natural weapons can use them for secondary attacks when using the full attack action. A monk character with natural weaponry has the same option.

For example, an 8th-level lizardfolk monk with a Strength score of 17 has a base attack bonus of +7 (+1 for its 2 humanoid Hit Dice and +6 for its monk levels). The character has three natural weapons: two claws (1d4) and one bite (1d4). For this example, we'll assume the character also has the Multiattack feat.

With the full attack action, our example monk can make two unarmed attacks thanks to its +7 base attack bonus. After adding in the +3 bonus from the monk's Strength score of 17, our example character's unarmed attacks have the following attack bonuses: +10/+5. Thanks to the monk's class level and Strength score, damage for the unarmed strikes is 1d10+3.

The example monk also can attack with its claws and bite as secondary natural attacks at a -2 penalty (thanks to the character's Multiattack feat). Each natural weapon uses the character's +7 base attack bonus and +3 Strength modifier, except that the Strength bonus on damage is halved because these are secondary attacks: 2 claws +8 (1d4+1) and bite +8 (1d4+1).

As noted last week, there are no two-weapon or off-hand penalties for these attacks.

The example monk cannot use a flurry of blows because a flurry doesn't work with natural weaponry.


Like I said, it can get very silly...

On the other hand WotC says in it's FAQ (finally found it) http://www.wizards.com/dnd/files/Main35FAQv06302008.zip



To add an off-hand attack to a flurry of blows, stack
whatever two-weapon penalty the monk has with the penalty (if
any) from the flurry. Attacks from the flurry have the monk’s
full damage bonus from Strength, but the off-hand attack gains
only half Strength bonus to damage. If the off-hand attack is a
weapon, that weapon isn’t available for use in the flurry (if it
can be used in a flurry at all, see the previous question). For
example, a 4th-level monk with the Two-Weapon Fighting feat
and a Strength score of 14 decides to use a flurry of blows and
decides to throw in an off-hand attack as well. The monk has a
base attack bonus of +3 and a +2 Strength bonus. With a flurry,
the character can make two attacks, each at +3 (base +3, –2
flurry, +2 Strength). An unarmed strike is a light weapon, so
the monk suffers an additional –2 penalty for both the flurry
and the off-hand attack, and the monk makes three attacks,
each at an attack bonus of +1. The two attacks from the flurry
are primary attacks and add the monk’s full Strength bonus to
damage of +2. The single off-hand attack adds half the monk’s
Strength bonus to damage (+1).


So there you go. WotC has officially settled the issue...

Kelpstrand
2009-08-10, 08:34 PM
Rules of the Game is Skip Williams talking about rules without even looking them up before hand. (Back in 3.0, he even admitted that when writing Sage articles he didn't look up the rules before answering questions.)

If you want to argue that those are the actual rules, refer to the actual rules instead of some guys opinion.

Because I'm nice, I went ahead and assembled you best argument:

"When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons"

Your assertion: this prevents them from attacking with natural attacks as separate attacks that round.

Counter Assertion: This means the flurry attacks must be unarmed or special monk, but that following attacks that round can be of any kind, including natural attacks.

EDIT: See above comment about arguing with actual rules instead of the opinions of people with a track record for being wrong about 40% of the time.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-10, 08:37 PM
Rules of the Game is Skip Williams talking about rules without even looking them up before hand. (Back in 3.0, he even admitted that when writing Sage articles he didn't look up the rules before answering questions.)

If you want to argue that those are the actual rules, refer to the actual rules instead of some guys opinion.

Because I'm nice, I went ahead and assembled you best argument:

"When using flurry of blows, a monk may attack only with unarmed strikes or with special monk weapons"

Your assertion: this prevents them from attacking with natural attacks as separate attacks that round.

Counter Assertion: This means the flurry attacks must be unarmed or special monk, but that following attacks that round can be of any kind, including natural attacks.

No my point was exactly that this whole issue has been muddled from the beginning by the people who wrote/were supposed to interpret the rules. (Hence the two conflicting examples still published on WotC site. Hence the inexact RAW which can be interpreted different ways.) This debate is nothing new.

In the end, the monk is still going to suck. So I say, let the flurry/TWF combo work.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 08:51 PM
the first step to improving the monk is to understand what it is now, and what is wrong with it. How do his special unarmed attacks work? why do they work that way? should they work that way?

And again, FAQ is not errata as seems to be clearly demonstrated now.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-10, 10:20 PM
People, people, it is Ranger/Rangers who can dual wield their dual wields, not monks.

Talic
2009-08-10, 10:26 PM
No...it needlessly restricts the monk from doing something perfectly sensical and reasonable, that is, attack REALLY fast with just his fists.

Your interpretation limits player options, mine expands players options. If it doesn't overpower the PC (and it would have to be pretty significant, which this clearly ISN'T), then I'm for it.

As I've shown, EITHER way of reading it is valid. If it increases player fun, I'd rather read it in the most inclusive way.

Unarmed Strikes can be made with hands, feet, elbows, and knees, by the monk entry.

Balance typically does promote fun, or at least, warping abilities don't. There's a reason that people get bored of games a couple weeks after they get the cheat codes for them.

If TWF is allowed with just unarmed strikes (your "increase options") idea, then the same reasoning allows Multiweapon fighting. And if the only thing you use to justify TWF is the reasoning, not the rules, then it's rather hard to allow one without the other.

This leads to a level 1 human monk (16 Str, Weapon focus:Unarmed Strike), capable of +0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0 (hand, hand, elbow, elbow, knee, knee, foot, foot, flurry).

Tell me, is a level 1 character with a 9 attack full attack not "clearly overpowering"?

Yes.

Thus, rather than consider each part of the body a distinct weapon, we assume that for a trained monk, his body is the weapon.

Just not the weapons. Unarmed strike is very flexible, in that it can be done with hands full (Greatsword + Unarmed Strike, for instance). It can benefit from weapon finesse AND power attack, something no other weapon can do.

Piling on too many things to unarmed strike? No, that's not the fix.

The fix would be a class ability allowing monks, and monks only, to TWF, and TWF only, with unarmed strikes. It would be allowing monks to enchant their fists, rather than just increasing the damage. It would be allowing monks to enchant their bodies with armor enchants. A select list, perhaps. Brilliant energy fists don't make much sense, but wounding and speed certainly do. Even Flaming and Shock have their movie implications.

To work with monk, this would need to be a fix to the monk class, not a fix to unarmed strikes in general. Flurry seems to be that fix, except that all the attacks it offers are at lower penalties and at the highest BAB.

In other words, Flurry was designed to replace TWF, not supplement it.

Doc Roc
2009-08-10, 10:28 PM
Please PM me any posts you feel deserve first-posted links, or any excellent builds that have come up during the thread. I'd like to keep this as thoroughly productive as possible.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-10, 10:41 PM
The fix would be a class ability allowing monks, and monks only, to TWF, and TWF only, with unarmed strikes.

I don't think this really qualifies as a fix at all. We talk a lot about the problem with the Monk, and none of them has ever been that they get too few attacks on a full attack action.

Extra Flurry attacks on standard actions, sure, but not really more attacks on a full attack. Especially not ones that give it -2 penalties.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-10, 10:48 PM
This leads to a level 1 human monk (16 Str, Weapon focus:Unarmed Strike), capable of +0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0/+0 (hand, hand, elbow, elbow, knee, knee, foot, foot, flurry).

This is the whole slam vs natural attack vs unarmed strike vs improved unarmed attack vs monk unarmed strike vs weapon attack debacle. The problem is not the attacks forms by themselves but how they relate. Does a vampire monk get to energy drain with each unarmed strike? Does a thri-kreen get more unarmed attacks than a human? Does a one unarmed human get less monk attacks than a two armed human? Does an awakened snake monk get unarmed attacks...or rather any attacks? Does a grappled monk who can't use his arms or legs?

That was never thought out at the beginning and it was never corrected in a coherent manner.



The fix would be a class ability allowing monks, and monks only, to TWF, and TWF only, with unarmed strikes.

No reason to limit TWF with unarmed strikes to monk's only. But it would be simpler to get rid of flurry altogether give monks the TWF chain with unarmed strike/monk weapons as additional bonus feats (with full strength bonus for the "off-hand weapon"). You ould give TWF at level 1, improved TWF at 6 and greater TWF at 11. By itself that would just make them suck a little more. Monk's need full BAB (at least) or something like the self-buffs you suggest (quoted below) just to keep up with fighters.



It would be allowing monks to enchant their fists, rather than just increasing the damage. It would be allowing monks to enchant their bodies with armor enchants. A select list, perhaps. Brilliant energy fists don't make much sense, but wounding and speed certainly do. Even Flaming and Shock have their movie implications.

Sendal
2009-08-10, 10:56 PM
The design concept behind the monks flurry is clearly that he should have lots of attacks, but each one is less acurate and/or less damaging than a fighter.

On an average oponent, fighter and monk should deal similar net damage.

On low AC/DR oponents, the monk should come out ahead, and on High AC/DR oponents the fighter should fare better.

The problem is they didn't balance it apropriatly to get this effect, and worded some abilities obscurely as well. They chose to give the monk a lower base attack and no penalties for flurry(eventualy), though a similar effect could be reached by gving him full base attack and some penalties to flurry.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-10, 11:27 PM
The design concept behind the monks flurry is clearly that he should have lots of attacks, but each one is less acurate and/or less damaging than a fighter.

On an average oponent, fighter and monk should deal similar net damage.

On low AC/DR oponents, the monk should come out ahead, and on High AC/DR oponents the fighter should fare better.

The problem is they didn't balance it apropriatly to get this effect, and worded some abilities obscurely as well. They chose to give the monk a lower base attack and no penalties for flurry(eventualy), though a similar effect could be reached by gving him full base attack and some penalties to flurry.

So that's another question: what should be the monk's role(s)?

Not to turn the discussion to 4e -- though I here 4e is the new 3e -- it comes down to whether the monk should be a defender or striker or something else.

The existing class is 3.x is some mixed back of melee/mobility/gish/skill monkey that is just underpowered -- though you can still play it for fun.

That's why at the top of this thread a build like monk/psywar is featured. That's why the Sir Giacomo's build stays away from melee when he does not have advantage.

Talic
2009-08-10, 11:39 PM
So that's another question: what should be the monk's role(s)?

Not to get too 4eish -- though I here 4e is the new 3e -- it comes down to whether the monk should be a defender or striker or something else.

The existing class is 3.x is some mixed back of melee/mobility/gish/skill monkey that is just underpowered -- though you can still play it for fun.

That's why at the top of this thread a build like monk/psywar is featured. That's why the Sir Giacomo's build stays away from melee when he does not have advantage.

Monks have been declared to have multiple roles. That remains to be fully demonstrated and evaluated.

I intend to compare their roles as follows:

Skills: vs Rogue, Beguiler
Frontline: vs Barbarian, Psywar
Mobile Damage: vs Rogue, Sorceror, Barbarian
Battlefield Control: vs Fighter, Wizard

If someone provides me with solid examples of each, or different examples that meet criteria, I'll consider including them.

Talic
2009-08-10, 11:59 PM
if the monk is to be expected to cover multiple roles, its not going to match up with specialists all that well, particularly non-core ones like some of those. Best to balance it with core as a starting point before including all that splat material.

Personaly, I think some reasignment of ability scores would be a help. weapon finesse as a bonus feat perhaps? Maybe even key bonus damage off wisdom if we're feeling generous.

Every one has a core option in there, and I intend to do either.

A single monk build will not have to do everything. I will expect any role to have at least modest combat ability. They must be able to contribute to combat (Mobile striker is probably easiest to blend into a skill role), but needn't be as good as a specialist in areas that aren't their primary focus.

But the monk must be able to do either one role as good as a specialist, or multiple simultaneous roles with a solid level of proficiency.

If he can't be versatile in multiple roles, or great at one, then you're taking a disadvantage when you choose one over a specialist.

Make no mistake, the monk is competing with these other classes for party space. If it's not as good, and it wins out, the party is weaker. That's the purpose of the analysis. Can the monk effectively contribute on the level of others?

I will start with a theory. I doubt the monk will be able to battlefield control as well as a wizard. In or out of core. Fighter? We'll see. Trip build fighter is what I intend for comparison.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-11, 12:05 AM
Fighter? We'll see. Trip build fighter is what I intend for comparison.

Hm. Improved Trip + Knock-Down with FoB may yield interesting results.

Sendal
2009-08-11, 12:07 AM
I imagine the monk will do quite well using many of the same tricks. Arm him with a reach weapon and his impressive unarmed damage alows him to effectively threaten the 5ft within the reach weapon's threatened area. No need to burn EWP for spike chain, though he may benefit from a fighter dip for some feats.

Gets combat reflexes as a bonus if memory serves, a must for this build. Might struggle dealing real damage at the extent of his reach though. Hitting touch AC shouldn't be a problem even with reduced BAB, but not much for powerattack to work with.

Sstoopidtallkid
2009-08-11, 12:10 AM
I imagine the monk will do quite well using many of the same tricks. Arm him with a reach weapon and his impressive unarmed damage alows him to effectively threaten the 5ft within the reach weapon's threatened area. No need to burn EWP for spike chain, though he may benefit from a fighter dip for some feats.Still needs to dip or spend a feat for a reach weapon, they aren't proficient with any.

Talic
2009-08-11, 12:11 AM
Hm. Improved Trip + Knock-Down with FoB may yield interesting results.

Well, options will be in and out of core, and out, I do intend to also use stand still as an option as well.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-11, 12:14 AM
Do you think Improved Trip and Knock-Down stack for the attacks you get?

Talic
2009-08-11, 12:15 AM
Do you think Improved Trip and Knock-Down stack for the attacks you get?

Knockdown: deal 10 damage, make a free trip attempt.
Imp Trip: Trip someone, get a free attack.

Different triggers, different actions granted, so yes.

Xenogears
2009-08-11, 12:27 AM
Does a vampire monk get to energy drain with each unarmed strike?

3.0 or 3.5? I made a vampire monk in 3.0 for this very reason as my 2nd character (didn't hurt any that I confused CR increase and LA...) but in 3.5 it says something along the lines of "a vampire can only energy drain once per turn" or something like that. So atleast one of your questions has an answer...

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-11, 12:42 AM
3.0 or 3.5? I made a vampire monk in 3.0 for this very reason as my 2nd character (didn't hurt any that I confused CR increase and LA...) but in 3.5 it says something along the lines of "a vampire can only energy drain once per turn" or something like that. So atleast one of your questions has an answer...

Yes I know. My point was exactly that these are the kinds of questions that have been around for years, whose answers were inexact and/or changed...and all along the basic, mechanical problems of the class were not addressed.

Xenogears
2009-08-11, 12:44 AM
Yes I know. My point was exactly that these are the kinds of questions that have been around for years, whose answers were inexact and/or changed...and all along the basic, mechanical problems of the class were not addressed.

I still miss 10+ negative levels per round...

Talic
2009-08-11, 12:45 AM
I still miss 10+ negative levels per round...

Necrotic Focus weapons bypass the restriction.

HamsterOfTheGod
2009-08-11, 12:45 AM
Just FYI This (http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/martialartist.htm) was actually one of the better homebrewed fixes for the monk that I've seen and is several years old.

Keld Denar
2009-08-11, 01:25 AM
Talic, I know you know that Knockdown's interaction Improved Trip was errata'd in Sword and Fist. I know the errata wasn't included in the version of Knockdown thats in the SRD. Still, this is one case where you CAN argue RAI as a valid interpretation because it was errated once already (clear conveyence of the developers will). The fact that the errata didn't make it into the revised printing was probably an editor's mistake.

Regardless of the reasons, to construe that Knockdown effectively doubles your attacks in most cases is blatent disregard for what has come before. At least put a disclaimer on it or something when telling people about it. I mean, its kinda irresponsible not to. Knockdown is plenty good without the followup attack. Adding the followup attack to Knockdown is knowingly breaking the intent because an oversighted ommision.

Kelpstrand
2009-08-11, 01:35 AM
Just FYI This (http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/martialartist.htm) was actually one of the better homebrewed fixes for the monk that I've seen and is several years old.

This (http://www.tgdmb.com/viewtopic.php?t=28547) is the best Monk homebrew fixes I've ever seen. We often talk about the MAD problems of Monk where they need Str to trip or grapple and attack roles and damage, Dex and Wis to AC to be not even as good as a Fighter, Con because everyone needs it, ect.

Honestly, of all the fixes I've seen to Monk MAD:

Wilow Step (Su): A true monk does not seek to outrun the fist, but to anticipate it. If a Monk would be allowed to add his Dexterity modifier to a Reflex Save or Armor Class, he may add his Wisdom bonus (if positive) instead.

+

Armored in Life (Su): A Monk has a special Armor bonus whenever they are not using armor or shields that he is not proficient in. This Armor Bonus applies against Touch Attacks and Incorporeal Touch Attacks, and has a value of +4. Every even numbered class level, the Armored in Life bonus increases by 1. If the Monk wears armor which he is proficient in (for example: normal clothing) that has an enhancement bonus, that enhancement bonus applies to his Armored in Life Armor Bonus.

is a really good fix, because it allows you to be a Str/Wis/Con monk, or a Wis/Str/Con monk. and it just makes you only care about three stats with a perfunctory score in another, like a Fighter.

Talic
2009-08-11, 01:36 AM
Talic, I know you know that Knockdown's interaction Improved Trip was errata'd in Sword and Fist. I know the errata wasn't included in the version of Knockdown thats in the SRD. Still, this is one case where you CAN argue RAI as a valid interpretation because it was errated once already (clear conveyence of the developers will). The fact that the errata didn't make it into the revised printing was probably an editor's mistake.This was a case where we had an updated version that was reversed. You can argue anything as a valid interpretation. However, the interpretation isn't RAW. And when RAW and your interpretation of RAI collide?

RAW wins. At least, for discussions such as this, which is about class capabilities, by the mechanics rules.


Regardless of the reasons, to construe that Knockdown effectively doubles your attacks in most cases is blatent disregard for what has come before. At least put a disclaimer on it or something when telling people about it. I mean, its kinda irresponsible not to. Knockdown is plenty good without the followup attack. Adding the followup attack to Knockdown is knowingly breaking the intent because an oversighted ommision.
Adding the followup attack is using abilities that synergize. The ability was errata'd before. Yet, in 3.5's entire lifespan, they haven't errata'd it since.

When one suggests other abilities that synergize, it's fine. But this one's wrong?

No. It's RAW. You can argue that they don't interact, but if you can't cite rules that would indicate that? Well, the argument's only as good as the supporting evidence. Knockdown's MRP is the valid one. Improved Trip's MRP is the valid one.

The two mention nothing about not working together. Other feats do mention when they don't (Empower and Maximize, anyone?). One can only assume that if it was done before... and the next time around, having the ability and means to do it again, they didn't include it, nor did they later repeat their errata...

That it wasn't their intent to do so. That's all the RAI that you need. It wasn't included. Much like many other things that changed in the 3.5 revision.

EDIT: What I like from your post is that when a designer errata's something for 3.0, it's design intent for 3.5.

When they print the ability fresh in 3.5, the legal version is editor oversight.

Can't it be that they chose to revert it based on field observations and differing mechanics between 3.0 and 3.5?

Keld Denar
2009-08-11, 02:01 AM
I'm sorry, it just seems like you always take the most difficult road when interpretting RAW. Between here and with UAS/TWFing, you've picked the 2 routes that, to me, are the least intuitive and steamline. I know you aren't ignorant, your reasoning is very well thought out, your knowledge of the wording and phrasing is staggering, and I respect it greatly. I know RAW is precious, and the only thing that can really be debated on the forums, but such strict adherance to one viable reading of something without ever consideration or notation for the other side just seems like...I dunno, irresponseble reporting or something. Maybe I'm just dumb for not seeing thing right, but it seems to me like you are always taking the hard way.

Especially when you and others then say that hard way is unbalanced or doesn't work. If by RAW, you can read something 2 different ways, why take the more difficult? Why not state other possible meanings? Why not inform other players and let them make their own informed decisions about which interpretation they choose to follow?

Talic
2009-08-11, 02:26 AM
I'm sorry, it just seems like you always take the most difficult road when interpretting RAW. Between here and with UAS/TWFing, you've picked the 2 routes that, to me, are the least intuitive and steamline. I know you aren't ignorant, your reasoning is very well thought out, your knowledge of the wording and phrasing is staggering, and I respect it greatly. I know RAW is precious, and the only thing that can really be debated on the forums, but such strict adherance to one viable reading of something without ever consideration or notation for the other side just seems like...I dunno, irresponseble reporting or something. Maybe I'm just dumb for not seeing thing right, but it seems to me like you are always taking the hard way.

Especially when you and others then say that hard way is unbalanced or doesn't work. If by RAW, you can read something 2 different ways, why take the more difficult? Why not state other possible meanings? Why not inform other players and let them make their own informed decisions about which interpretation they choose to follow?

Because, even when I acknowledge that it's not the best way, I must go with my gut when I say that it is the Technically correct way.

Only when we establish the technically correct way can we understand the strengths and weaknesses of the class.

Then we can start with implementing the corrections and the insight of what would make it work better, after analyzing the impact those alterations would have.

To be more precise? I'm not a reporter. This isn't reporting.
I'm an analyst. And when analyzing, I prefer to start from square 1. That which is technically correct. From there, we can update, edit, or correct, as needed. But the baseline must be established before we can streamline.

We need to know what we're working with, before we can sculpt it.

Kaiyanwang
2009-08-11, 02:58 AM
Talic, your Your "square 1" is not technically correct. You cannot analize something omitting data.

If you analize Knockdown leaving off the S&F errata, you are omitting data.

Talic
2009-08-11, 03:21 AM
Talic, your Your "square 1" is not technically correct. You cannot analize something omitting data.

If you analize Knockdown leaving off the S&F errata, you are omitting data.

Incorrect. The SRD is 3.5 legal, and has the knockdown feat.
Sword and Fist is 3.0 Legal, and has the knockdown feat.

In this instance, primary source is the 3.5 printed material, or the most recent printing. Its text holds precedence over any 3.0 printings and revisions. Generally, when text printed before (in 3.0) has a 3.5 release (as this one does), the more recent printing is known as a "3.5 update", and overwrites the 3.0 original printing.

My analysis takes the Knockdown feat as it currently stands, by RAW. How things used to be has no relevance in this analysis. I am looking at how things are, by RAW.

I am glad you raised that point, however. Whenever there are doubts to my methods, I like to evaluate them on their merit, and discuss any reservations or misgivings.

Pharaoh's Fist
2009-08-11, 03:37 AM
Talic, your Your "square 1" is not technically correct. You cannot analize something omitting data.

If you analize Knockdown leaving off the S&F errata, you are omitting data.

If the errata does not exist in 3.5, how do we know if that was a result of an oversight, or if it was done deliberately?

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-11, 03:46 AM
Monks have been declared to have multiple roles. That remains to be fully demonstrated and evaluated.

If someone provides me with solid examples of each, or different examples that meet criteria, I'll consider including them.

Well, I submitted a build earlier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6691895&postcount=156), but I think it got lost in the discussion. It's mostly a cookie-cutter build meant to be refined, but having the base features for mobile damage and perhaps some defenses. It's not particularly potent, but it might get potent with judicious use of magic items (yeah, ironically), as well as Expanded Knowledge for gaining important powers (Schism, Psionic Fly, Metamorphosis, and any other valuable power of up to 4th level)

Talic
2009-08-11, 04:28 AM
Well, I submitted a build earlier (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showpost.php?p=6691895&postcount=156), but I think it got lost in the discussion. It's mostly a cookie-cutter build meant to be refined, but having the base features for mobile damage and perhaps some defenses. It's not particularly potent, but it might get potent with judicious use of magic items (yeah, ironically), as well as Expanded Knowledge for gaining important powers (Schism, Psionic Fly, Metamorphosis, and any other valuable power of up to 4th level)

I shall look at it and run some number analysis. Note: In order for it to be considered a monk build, it must satisfy the following criteria:

1) Majority of levels must be in Monk or a PrC with monk-based requirements.
2) It must demonstrate the effectiveness of the abilities provided in the Monk base class. It need not use every monk ability effectively; however, it must demonstrate at least one monk class feature as a primary concept.

By this: A monk 5/Psionic Fist 10/swordsage 5 would count.
A monk 2/Paladin 4/Pious Templar 10/Warblade 4 would not.

Kaiyanwang
2009-08-11, 04:46 AM
My analysis takes the Knockdown feat as it currently stands, by RAW. How things used to be has no relevance in this analysis. I am looking at how things are, by RAW.



If the errata does not exist in 3.5, how do we know if that was a result of an oversight, or if it was done deliberately?

IIRC, is usually assumed that knockdown is there "almost accidentally" (luckily, I love the feat :smalltongue:).

Has been inserted "blindly" in the SRD because was in deities and demigods, together with feats that weren't intended to be updated like Plant Defiance and Plant control (I said this because Knockdown has not been inserted in Complete Warrior, or PD and PC in Complete DIvine, as an example).

So, even this makes Knockdown available, the feat has not been "followed" by wotc as a feat in one 3.5 book. So, for his update, we must match the one in its original source, S&F (and so S&F errata).

What you say could be valid if were an "udated errata", saying that "Knockdown works that way". Whitout that, I use the old errata, because there's nothing in the sage reasoning about how the feat works that changed in the 3.0 ---> 3.5 swithc.

Otherwise, is like say "Oriental Adventures errata and FAQs are not valid, because does not exist a 3.5 version"*



*barring Dragon magazine #318 :smallwink:

T.G. Oskar
2009-08-11, 04:50 AM
I shall look at it and run some number analysis. Note: In order for it to be considered a monk build, it must satisfy the following criteria:

1) Majority of levels must be in Monk or a PrC with monk-based requirements.
2) It must demonstrate the effectiveness of the abilities provided in the Monk base class. It need not use every monk ability effectively; however, it must demonstrate at least one monk class feature as a primary concept.

By this: A monk 5/Psionic Fist 10/swordsage 5 would count.
A monk 2/Paladin 4/Pious Templar 10/Warblade 4 would not.

Oh, this one certainly fills the bit. Psionic Fist is a 10-level PrC (and so does Zerth Cenobite), and it uses the bonus feats and flurry effectively (so to speak). The magic items are meant to increase the overall damage which is a bit limited, as well as increase Dex and Wis for purposes of several overall traits (AC, Reflex, Will, Initiative, Dex and Wis based skills, Stunning Fist DC, power points, and attack bonus)

Of course, it's a pretty weak build (so far), but the idea is to mostly use psionics as part of the fixes, to reduce the massive leverage in outside buffs or magic items. It can be increased, even if it requires a big load of magic items nonetheless (I reckon that's not a trouble, though?)

Besides, it's level 11 (not level 20), so it allows for some improvement. The idea is to work it a bit better. Also, working the three leap points I mentioned earlier (6th level, 9th level for Imp. Evasion, and 11th for Greater Flurry) I also deliberately skipped using flaws, but if capable of using them, then the damage can be increased a little bit more.

Talic
2009-08-11, 05:10 AM
IIRC, is usually assumed that knockdown is there "almost accidentally" (luckily, I love the feat :smalltongue:).

Has been inserted "blindly" in the SRD because was in deities and demigods, together with feats that weren't intended to be updated like Plant Defiance and Plant control (I said this because Knockdown has not been inserted in Complete Warrior, or PD and PC in Complete DIvine, as an example).

So, even this makes Knockdown available, the feat has not been "followed" by wotc as a feat in one 3.5 book. So, for his update, we must match the one in its original source, S&F (and so S&F errata).

What you say could be valid if were an "udated errata", saying that "Knockdown works that way". Whitout that, I use the old errata, because there's nothing in the sage reasoning about how the feat works that changed in the 3.0 ---> 3.5 swithc.

Otherwise, is like say "Oriental Adventures errata and FAQs are not valid, because does not exist a 3.5 version"*

The SRD is a 3.5 Printing. It's online, but copies need not be in paper to be official. The entry is in a legal 3.5 source (the SRD). Therefore, you go with the legal 3.5 source.

This is more or less a moot point, since it is in a section explicitly prefaced by "deities may take these feats". My interpretation is that, as it stands, in its final form, it fully stacks with Two Weapon Fighting Improved Trip... And is available to any deity that wishes to take them.

I assume we are not using deities in this, which makes the whole issue rather moot.

Talic
2009-08-11, 05:14 AM
Besides, it's level 11 (not level 20), so it allows for some improvement. The idea is to work it a bit better. Also, working the three leap points I mentioned earlier (6th level, 9th level for Imp. Evasion, and 11th for Greater Flurry) I also deliberately skipped using flaws, but if capable of using them, then the damage can be increased a little bit more.

Builds intended for comparison in Core may not use flaws (as they are not Core).

Builds intended for comparison in non-core (all-WotC material, with the exception of Dragon magazine/Dungeon Magazine, only one campaign-specific setting allowed - I.E. No using Eberron specific information AND Faerun-specific. One or the other) are certainly eligible to use flaws, though I suggest following the UA suggested guideline of a 2 flaw maximum. Note: Feel free to include dungeon/Dragon magazine, or mix campaign settings. I will not be processing/analyzing such builds, however, as these are non-plausible guidelines.

Kaiyanwang
2009-08-11, 05:14 AM
rce.

This is more or less a moot point, since it is in a section explicitly prefaced by "deities may take these feats". My interpretation is that, as it stands, in its final form, it fully stacks with Two Weapon Fighting... And is available to any deity that wishes to take them.
.

TWF? WTF?

I was talking about the double attack (IMHO) S&F errata about Knockdown.

For TWF + Flurry, copypaste Keld Denar.

(Anyway, we can end the derailment I think :smallwink:)

Talic
2009-08-11, 05:17 AM
TWF? WTF?

I was talking about the double attack (IMHO) S&F errata about Knockdown.

For TWF + Flurry, copypaste Keld Denar.

(Anyway, we can end the derailment I think :smallwink:)

Edited for accuracy/clarity. Improved Trip was the intended reference.