TOZ wrote:What gets me is they say 'any combination of unarmed strikes or special monk weapons' and then try to say 'all attacks with one weapon' doesn't count. Last I heard, any meant ANY.
If I'm being generous, I can see a potential ambiguity between interpreting it as "you can use any combination of attacks that's allowed to a normal TWF user" and "you're a TWF user, except you can use any combination of attacks instead". And if they had said three years ago that it works exactly like TWF, full stop, then so be it.
But what drives me nuts is saying "hey guys, Flurry of Blows has always worked exactly like TWF, despite all of the modules we've published in the past 3 years that contradict what I'm saying now, and in related news, we've always been at war with Eastasia".
Let me try to understand the implications being made here. Saying that Flurry works exactly like TWF, and thus your off-hand weapon must be a different weapon, does that mean purely unarmed monks cannot use Flurry? It still says in the PF rules that an unarmed strike is any body part (fist, knee, foot, etc), so punching twice with your left fist is the exact same rules-wise as punching once with each hand.
Come see Sprockets & Serials
How do you confuse a barbarian?
Put a greatsword a maul and a greataxe in a room and ask them to take their pick
I think the implications being made here is... if you want to be an effective Monk in 3e/3.5/PF your best option is *still* to just play a cleric with Imp Unarmed Strike and rebrand all your class features and shit with words like "ki Powers" "Meditation" and "Unlocking Chakra Gates"
There is stupid idea floating around the WoTC boards recently that you have 2 "hand slots". Meaning, your left and right hand count as different weapons. Kicks and headbutts are illegal or must be assigned to a "hand slot" depending on who you ask.
Came about as a result of suggesting someone use claws and unarmed strikes (kicks are just insanity and not allowed).
Possible he read that and thought there was some logic to it? This allows unarmed monks to flurry, because they assign a fist to each "hand slot". You could also assign a headbutt and a fist if you want. Using a fist/headbut/kick is not allowed, because you don't have that many "hand slots".
Perhaps they are equating "hand slot" with "natural attack" such as a Slam, which is usually tied to a limb slap.
I'd rather go with the Tome solution of simply giving Monks a Slam or two, define which body parts are attached to a Slam, and be done with it.
IUS and vanilla 3e Monk attacks are so varied that I might as well say "I use my pelvis thrust and glute crush to deliver a fatal blow to his head" and it's a valid statement.
sake wrote:I think the implications being made here is... if you want to be an effective Monk in 3e/3.5/PF your best option is *still* to just play a cleric with Imp Unarmed Strike and rebrand all your class features and shit with words like "ki Powers" "Meditation" and "Unlocking Chakra Gates"
That gives me an idea.
A Monk remake that uses Cleric buffs as Chi-themed Maneuver boosts and stances.
Last edited by JonSetanta on Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:11 am, edited 1 time in total.
Just ask if you can take a monk as an animal companion, is probably a downgrade anyway.
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
sigma999 wrote:
That gives me an idea.
A Monk remake that uses Cleric buffs as Chi-themed Maneuver boosts and stances.
Frankly I'm a little surprised PF hasn't turned the Monk/Cleric/Sacred Fist concept into it's own base class like the Magus yet. I mean, the sensible reason against doing that would be that such a class would instantly make the Monk obsolete, no matter how shitty you made it. but I suspect the PF reason against it is that they all actually think that just the core Monk is already horribly overpowered... giving it 1/2 or 3/4 casting would just make it a tier 0 pun-pun class.
sigma999 wrote:
That gives me an idea.
A Monk remake that uses Cleric buffs as Chi-themed Maneuver boosts and stances.
Frankly I'm a little surprised PF hasn't turned the Monk/Cleric/Sacred Fist concept into it's own base class like the Magus yet. I mean, the sensible reason against doing that would be that such a class would instantly make the Monk obsolete, no matter how shitty you made it. but I suspect the PF reason against it is that they all actually think that just the core Monk is already horribly overpowered... giving it 1/2 or 3/4 casting would just make it a tier 0 pun-pun class.
I'm 90% sure this is legitimately SKR's line of thinking.
Didn't they already release a 'spellcaster' monk or smt?
Gary Gygax wrote:The player’s path to role-playing mastery begins with a thorough understanding of the rules of the game
Bigode wrote:I wouldn't normally make that blanket of a suggestion, but you seem to deserve it: scroll through the entire forum, read anything that looks interesting in term of design experience, then come back.
Sohei monk (he can use martial weapons)+ Empyreal sorcerer (use WIS instead of CHA)-> Eldritch Knight is one way to do a magic using monk without changing the rules.
Instead of a Chi pool, you have Arcane Magic. You also shoot rays of heavenly fire that heal the good and harm evil for teeny single digits.
I'm not intimately familiar with pathfinder though, do you know if there's feats that let me use WIS for melee attacks too? I think WIS for ranged attacks is only by archetype now and not a feat.
Last edited by OgreBattle on Tue Mar 13, 2012 2:28 am, edited 1 time in total.
There is also a 3rd party PF conversion of the Psychic Warrior which made it *even more* monk like then it already was, and not surprisingly does indeed make the core monk feel small in the pants. But I know to some people, "Third Party" and "Psionics" are practically dirty words.
OgreBattle wrote:
I'm not intimately familiar with pathfinder though, do you know if there's feats that let me use WIS for melee attacks too? I think WIS for ranged attacks is only by archetype now and not a feat.
If you become a cleric of <god whose favored weapon you want> you can take a feat to use Wis for all attack (I forget if it includes damage as well) rolls. Just pick the right god and dip a level of an awesome class (and get your favorite domain abilities) to get it!
I was looking at the rules of piecemeal armour, boy do they need some editing. For instance, the example isn't even right, they use the wrong values for plate arm armour. It will let the intrepid minmaxer put together a suit of armour about as good as mithral plate (9 AC, 3 max dex, 4 armour check) for under 500 gold though. Maybe its supposed to be a stealth buff for classes who need armour?
Yes, there are some oddities in the armor rules from Ultimate Combat. For instance, kikko armor provides the same protection as scale mail, but it's cheaper, lighter, has a better max Dex mod, a lower armor check penalty and a lower arcane spell failure chance.
I've also read complaints about the piecemeal system along the lines of what you're suggesting (i.e. you can make armor that's better than existing armor for cheaper).
Last edited by hogarth on Tue Mar 13, 2012 2:55 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Ow. The Piecemeal Armor section is clearly someone writing Hamlet Monkey Style to fill up wordcount and pagespace. It's way too long and fairly incoherent. And even a cursory reading of it makes it obvious that it doesn't do anything that any sane person would want it to do.
FrankTrollman wrote:Ow. The Piecemeal Armor section is clearly someone writing Hamlet Monkey Style to fill up wordcount and pagespace. It's way too long and fairly incoherent. And even a cursory reading of it makes it obvious that it doesn't do anything that any sane person would want it to do.
Cf. Words of Power from Ultimate Magic.
And I bet the Master Race Handbook that's coming out will have a similar hot mess with its "build-your-own-race" optional rules.
The thing that most immediately jumps out at me is that you can't have enchanted gauntlets on an otherwise mundane suit but get to have a magic chestpiece in an otherwise mundane suit. That is just dumb; if anything the other way around has more genre support and it would make the most sense to have a system that permits either, like letting you use the enchantments on the item with the highest bonus.
DSMatticus wrote:It's not just that everything you say is stupid, but that they are Gordian knots of stupid that leave me completely bewildered as to where to even begin. After hearing you speak Alexander the Great would stab you and triumphantly declare the puzzle solved.
hogarth wrote:
And I bet the Master Race Handbook that's coming out will have a similar hot mess with its "build-your-own-race" optional rules.
We saw the previews. Wanna bet they change nothing?
OgreBattle wrote:"And thus the denizens learned that hating Shadzar was the only thing they had in common, and with him gone they turned their venom upon each other"
-Sarpadian Empires, vol. I
CapnTthePirateG wrote:
We saw the previews. Wanna bet they change nothing?
I haven't seen the previews but I'll look. I'm betting there will be a raucous uproar of whining and moaning from Paizo fans, and the whole thing will be nerfed to oblivion.
EDIT: OK I'm looking at it right now, and it seems to be fairly well thought out.
Except... it's all point based with little microcalculations that seem similar to M&M or GURPS, and I hate that. I hated it with Summoner Eidolons too.
They could have done something like Lesser and Greater Traits for simplicity.
Last edited by JonSetanta on Tue Mar 13, 2012 8:51 pm, edited 1 time in total.
hogarth wrote:
And I bet the Master Race Handbook that's coming out will have a similar hot mess with its "build-your-own-race" optional rules.
We saw the previews. Wanna bet they change nothing?
I'll take that bet. I'm 99% sure they'll change one or two things (without really improving anything) and they'll add one or two all-new ridiculous options as well.
sigma999 wrote:EDIT: OK I'm looking at it right now, and it seems to be fairly well thought out.
CapnTthePirateG, back on page 54 wrote:This is going to be the one true book to rule the PF optimization forums. Seriously, you could make the most boss wizard race ever with 10 points. See if you guys can top this.
We start by going for the +4 int, -2 str, -2 cha option, which gives us a point.
We also make our species a humanoid (elf), this is free and opens up that elven magic bs. That and medium. So far, we have gained 1 point.
Might as well throw on slow speed. He's a damn wizard, he can use expeditious retreat if he needs to, and at 9th+ level he flies around all day and just doesn't give a shit. So now we are up by 2 points.
We take the xenophobic language array, because tongues exists. Why the fuck are you charging me points for languages I could be using for fucking damage reduction? Sigh.
Now that we have 12 points, we can put them all into advanced intelligence 3 times so our wizard race can start with a +10 intelligence bonus...wait, what the FUCK? Seriously, that's it, we're done. It doesn't matter at this point. I have seriously created a +10 intelligence race which has no level adjustment or penalties besides -2 str, -2 cha, and a 20 foot movement speed. I have just fucking won. No one is going to make this guy's save DCs. The book tells me this is balanced with the standard races. I consider myself a lenient DM, and I allow a lot, but if a player showed up to my game with this shit I would be forced to congratulate him on his audacity but firmly tell him no.
In conclusion, this book is a steaming pile of shit.
EDIT: Apparently the +10 int doesn't work because you need to get an advanced race. However, see the +18 int, +1 ECL monstrosity below (and the ECL goes away at level 5).
Hmm, my bad, you apparently need to start with 20 points to take the Ability Boost (i.e not core race).
Still, I bet we could break that. You are 1 level behind from levels 1-5, and that's the only drawback. So I guess throw in 3 more boosts, K's lightbringer combo, and increase the drawback to paragon weakness (physical) for a 4th boost, and you get +18 int, -2 str -2 dex -2 con, +1 CL with light spells, can't be blinded or dazzled by bright light, and you move at 20 feet. Blows the drow noble out of the water, and that guy apparently 22 RP.
hogarth wrote:Cf. Words of Power from Ultimate Magic.
And I bet the Master Race Handbook that's coming out will have a similar hot mess with its "build-your-own-race" optional rules.
As a player, I really don't like Words of Power, but as a DM with unruly players they could be useful. From what I read WoP is one of the most systematic nerfs to traditional Vancian casting ever proposed, it does more to close the power divide between casters and non-casters than everything else Paizo has printed put together. Pity it sucks in so many other ways.
Oh thank God, finally a thread about how Fighters in D&D suck. This was a long time coming. - Schwarzkopf
CapnTthePirateG wrote:
We saw the previews. Wanna bet they change nothing?
I haven't seen the previews but I'll look. I'm betting there will be a raucous uproar of whining and moaning from Paizo fans, and the whole thing will be nerfed to oblivion.
EDIT: OK I'm looking at it right now, and it seems to be fairly well thought out.
Except... it's all point based with little microcalculations that seem similar to M&M or GURPS, and I hate that. I hated it with Summoner Eidolons too.
They could have done something like Lesser and Greater Traits for simplicity.
Wait a second...they're seriously releasing a book called the MASTER RACE HANDBOOK? I know it's meant to be parsed differently, but still HOLY FUCKSTICKS.
O.o
For a minute, I used to be "a guy" in the TTRPG "industry". Now I'm just a nobody. For the most part, it's a relief.
Trank Frollman wrote:One of the reasons we can say insightful things about stuff is that we don't have to pretend to be nice to people. By embracing active aggression, we eliminate much of the passive aggression that so paralyzes things on other gaming forums.
hogarth wrote:As the good book saith, let he who is without boners cast the first stone.
TiaC wrote:I'm not quite sure why this is an argument. (Except that Kaelik is in it, that's a good reason.)
