Pathfinder Monk

[Lord.Sorasen]

So, I've heard it a lot that the monk is no better in Pathfinder than in 3.5. And I am trying to figure out why. From what I can see, monks in Pathfinder have several advantages that they didn't have in 3.5. A lot of these advantages have, to a small extent, been recommended as quick monk fixes. So I want to see what you all have to say about this, because my system mastery is way below.

The advantages I am seeing:

- The two-weapon fighting tree: The monk gets two-weapon fighting, improved two-weapon fighting, greater two-weapon fighting, and double-slice for free in the form of flurry of blows, albeit with limitations. What's more, a monk doesn't need to meet the prerequisites for these, meaning they can at least theoretically have a decent strength score for the sake of damage. To add to this, a monk can use brass knuckles to deal his monk damage and still add enchantments (though this may change very soon) and can even flurry with a single two-handed weapon such as the Sansetsukon, meaning it's cheaper to enhance (being 1 rather than two weapons) and can deal 1.5x strength modifier damage, something no other two-weapon fighter can do. And they can use ki to gain additional flurry attacks

- While a monk still can't fly, he can certainly jump places. He gets his class level to all jump checks (and since jump is now as aspect of acrobatics, he is almost certain to have this maxed out) and is always at a running start. He can spend ki to bring it up an additional 20. A monk can also cast dimension door as a move action... Actually when I wrote this I was assuming a monk could dimension door/grapple the airborne creature, but looking at it now I realize the monk can dimension door to a flying creature and then do nothing until the next round, which sounds terrible actually.

- It's not the same as full BAB, but it's a thing still isn't it?

- Also, since size matters less, it seems like the most would be more efficient at the whole combat maneuvers thing.. But I don't think I quite get how that works yet.

So that's my analysis. Please rip it to shreds.

[Randomguy]

The pathfinder Monk has another advantage: It can ALMOST fit a party role. On the downside, it's class features still don't synergies, (Can't flurry and use fast movement at the same time.) and it still has lots of MAD.

[MeeposFire]

Just so you know that sentiment is primarily for the standard monk with no archetypes. But in terms of bad for the standard monk (and just the standard monk).

1) Flurry sucks. It still is a full attack action which does not need help with your great mobility. making it two weapon fighting also means that it is less accurate than 3.5 flurry and it means you can not combo it with two weapon fighting like in 3.5 (you need ways to become more accurate but at least it was there).

2) Imp natural attack and similar stuff no longer works with fist eliminating the basic damage OP for monks (and one of their few decent abilities).

3) Full BAB all the time wouldn't change its overall power in the grand scheme of things and making it contingent on flurry is confusing and insulting. It should have just been full BAB just for simplicity.

4) maneuvers still have size issues even if they get a mod to make it work (such as tripping things many times larger than you). if your trick does not work against your more dangerous opponents then it is not a good trick overall (at least as your basic trick).

That is just a taste.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

PF Monk is great, especially with archetypes.

[Gnaeus]

So, I've heard it a lot that the monk is no better in Pathfinder than in 3.5. And I am trying to figure out why. From what I can see, monks in Pathfinder have several advantages that they didn't have in 3.5. A lot of these advantages have, to a small extent, been recommended as quick monk fixes. So I want to see what you all have to say about this, because my system mastery is way below.

The advantages I am seeing:

The monk does get some small advantage in terms of numbers. The biggest problem is that most other classes are helped MORE. Compare the monk with the fighter, who actually got class features for the first time, but is still near the bottom of the class power & versatility scale.

What monk does get is some nice ACFs. Qigong monk and hungry ghost are most pleasant.



So that's my analysis. Please rip it to shreds.

I don't think the analysis is bad, but some people might argue that it is incomplete. There are several quiet nerfs to melee in PF (splitting combat feats, weakening some common buffs, maybe the change in combat maneuvers was a nerf depending on who you talk to and/or campaign assumptions). Some of those things may outweigh the benefits monk gets, or may not, depending on your campaign, optimization level, and point of view.

[MeeposFire]

Also the monk does not get 1.5 str using two handed weapons like the staff

"A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."

Also the brass knuckles aren't that big of a deal as there were ways of getting enchanted fists in 3.5 such as the mighty arms graft and a battle fist.

[Psyren]

It started out not much better than 3.5 Monk, but the archetypes gave it a substantial edge; the right ones can get it up to T4.

[Lord.Sorasen]

1) Flurry sucks. It still is a full attack action which does not need help with your great mobility. making it two weapon fighting also means that it is less accurate than 3.5 flurry and it means you can not combo it with two weapon fighting like in 3.5 (you need ways to become more accurate but at least it was there).

I always heard that two-weapon fighting for a monk was debatable as a move in the first place. But also, is it not a thing that the monk can spend ki points to get an additional flurry attack without penalty? Sure 1 extra attack is not quite as much as 2, but it does seem to be a bit of a thing maybe? I don't know, the part that interested me about flurry now is that bit about not needing prerequisites and using 2-handed weapons.


Also the monk does not get 1.5 str using two handed weapons like the staff

"A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."

Also the brass knuckles aren't that big of a deal as there were ways of getting enchanted fists in 3.5 such as the mighty arms graft and a battle fist.

I was wondering about that bit, actually. I just assumed that that phrase meant that a monk got his full strength bonus to attacks with the offhand as well, rather than half the strength bonus.


Either way this is helpful information. So, as a follow-up, what makes Hungry-Ghost monk good? Qinggong monk is obvious.

[Paul H]

Hi

Synthesist (Summoner Archetype) can help with MAD, grants Nat AC, as well as spells like Mage Armour, PFE, Magic Fang & Shield.

So,
Human 20 pt Build:Str 13 Dex 13 Con 12 Int 10 Wis 18 Cha 12
With Eidolon: Str 16 Dex 14 Con 13......
Plus +4 Nat Armour, Darkvision, spells, etc.
15 HP, AC 16 (exc spells or Dodge feat)

At 2nd level add +4 Wis to AC

Thinking of using this to go Zen Archer.

Thanks
Paul H
Edit: Of course, Synth 2 grants Darkvision, Evasion, Str 17 Dex 15 Con 13 Wis 20, +4 Nat AC, spells, etc. But is a 2 level dip worth it?
(Or you could add have Con 15 instead Wis 20)

[Lord Bingo]

Also the monk does not get 1.5 str using two handed weapons like the staff

"A monk applies his full Strength bonus to his damage rolls for all successful attacks made with flurry of blows, whether the attacks are made with an off-hand or with a weapon wielded in both hands. A monk may substitute disarm, sunder, and trip combat maneuvers for unarmed attacks as part of a flurry of blows. A monk cannot use any weapon other than an unarmed strike or a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows. A monk with natural weapons cannot use such weapons as part of a flurry of blows, nor can he make natural attacks in addition to his flurry of blows attacks."

I am not sure I am right on this, might be semantics, but my reading of that which you have bolded is that a Monk applies full strength bonus on his off-hand, not that he/she does not apply 1.5 times strength when wielding a two handed weapon

[Hiro Protagonest]

PF Monk is great, especially with archetypes.

It got better. Saying it's great is a big overstatement, it's tier 4- with anything less than the hungry ghost/quinggong trick.

[Curious]

So, as a follow-up, what makes Hungry-Ghost monk good?

Hungry ghost is the only way to gain extra ki in a day, which is invaluable, seeing as all of the powerful monk abilities (mainly gained through Qinggong monk) require ki expenditure. It also has a few nice goodies like gaining temp hp from hitting opponents, which helps with the Monks lack of HP.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

Master of Many Forms and Martial Artist should both get honorable mentions at least. Look at the style feats and then tell me getting a bunch of them without paying the prerequisites (and being able to use several of them at once) isn't awesome. Charging over difficult terrain, doing elemental damage based on WIS modifier, saying "no" to opponent's attacks...not all of them are amazing, but definitely viable. Martial Artist is nice because so many of its abilities are active all the time and from reasonable levels.

[Lord.Sorasen]

Hungry ghost is the only way to gain extra ki in a day, which is invaluable, seeing as all of the powerful monk abilities (mainly gained through Qinggong monk) require ki expenditure. It also has a few nice goodies like gaining temp hp from hitting opponents, which helps with the Monks lack of HP.

Ah ok, that makes a lot of sense.

[gourdcaptain]

Also, the fact that all of a Monk's attacks are mainhand means their power attack ratio is -1/+2, I believe.

[Prime32]

Master of Many Forms and Martial Artist should both get honorable mentions at least. Look at the style feats and then tell me getting a bunch of them without paying the prerequisites (and being able to use several of them at once) isn't awesome. Charging over difficult terrain, doing elemental damage based on WIS modifier, saying "no" to opponent's attacks...not all of them are amazing, but definitely viable. Martial Artist is nice because so many of its abilities are active all the time and from reasonable levels.Using two style feats at once is something you should have been able to do anyway, and Master of Many Styles also gives up Flurry of Blows and some of the more interesting bonus feat options.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

For Monk, check out this boss I'm building: Right here (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=219396).


With his single attack, expending one use of Elemental Fist and one use of Stunning Fist:

1d8 + 1 1/2 STR modifier + 2d6 cold + WIS (cold damage) + 1/2 STR damage
-Reach of +5 ft
-Fort save or become entangled in ice for 1d4 rounds
-Fort save or become stunned for one round and shaken for 1d4 rounds +STR mod

He'll have 8/9 uses of elemental fist/day and 6/7 uses of stunning fist/day.

[Talentless]

The dimensional feat chain.

Damn thing should be among the Monk Bonus feat options after abundant step becomes available.

And Monks are still MAD, not some extreme extents like in 3.5 (mostly because there is a weapon enchant that allows them to sub wis for str)

but still need WIS>CON=DEX>STR with it, and only if you start at high enough level to afford it off the bat.

if you can't afford it off the bat, it goes WIS>CON>DEX=STR

3-4 high stats required to even make an effective Monk



Using two style feats at once is something you should have been able to do anyway, and Master of Many Styles also gives up Flurry of Blows and some of the more interesting bonus feat options.

Meh, giving up Flurry of Blows in favor of multiple styles active at once feels even. Mostly because you can at least synergize your abilities with fast movement.

[ericgrau]

Flurry gets full BAB on full attacks, when full BAB matters most. Especially for secondary attacks. Compared to other martial classes PF boosted the monk a lot. He can even use light armor. Handy if that's better than your wis, or if you don't want the wis MAD. The zen archer variant makes pretty good archers because of this, for example, because not having heavy armor proficiency was one of the few drawbacks remaining.

I think the remaining complaints amount to "they're not wizards". I'd say it's possible that PF went too far except that grappling got screwed over as a build focus (based on the new grapple rules; CMB/CMD is another issue) and all the other classes got a bump too.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

He can even use light armor.

Nope (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk).


Monks are not proficient with any armor or shields. When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.

[ericgrau]

Eh then multiclass and dip a level. Or grab a feat, since PF gives out a gazillion. It doesn't interfere with his abilities anymore except the AC bonus, and that's all that really matters.

Even then the only abilities that needs light armor are evasion and tumbling; he can go heavy otherwise.

[marcielle]

Well, while it's not a dum stat, a monk doesn't seem to really need STR or Dex much. You'll rely on size of damage dice for actual damage and Dex only really affects sklls since your reflex is awesome and you get Improved evasion. So, it seems to me (and I might just be derping here) that only Wis and Con are really needed for a monk. Not that this makes up for it, I just never understand why Monk need more than 10 in Str and Dex in PF. Unless they are specifically incorporating tricks like trip(which, as mentioned earlier, is simply screwed over by size modifiers).

Of course, theres the old trick of carrying a tripping reach weapon in hands and kick with your feet. Which works well with punishing kick and even better if you can convince your DM that the 'does not provoke AoO' clause only applies because its a 5 ft mov and hence the monks improved version WILL provoke AoO(Shaky, but hey your a monk, its not like your gonna break the game...)

[Ravens_cry]

With the Guided (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/magic-items/magic-weapons/magic-weapons-non-core/weapon-property---guided) weapon property added to a Amulet of Mighty fists, you need Strength even less.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

Eh then multiclass and dip a level. Or grab a feat, since PF gives out a gazillion. It doesn't interfere with his abilities anymore except the AC bonus, and that's all that really matters.

Even then the only abilities that needs light armor are evasion and tumbling; he can go heavy otherwise.

Except for Fast Movement (not all that great, but still) and Flurry of Blows (so a monk whose Archetype doesn't give Flurry, like MoMS, doesn't care).

[ericgrau]

Flurry of blows isn't affected in PF anymore. I missed fast movement but it's an enhancement bonus so it's still easy to replace until level 12, by which point you don't need to wear armor anymore anyway as you can probably get more AC unarmored.

Attack bonus and damage are based on strength (or dex if you finesse). I'm tired of monk players dumping their primary stat. If you can't get both then dump wis, dip 1 level to wear armor and grab the extra ki feat at higher levels. You can't even hit with your wis based abilities without str attack bonus; it's dumb to make it lower than any other stat.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

Flurry of blows isn't affected in PF anymore.

Here's (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/classes/monk.html#_monk) a link to the official Pathfinder srd.

Here's a quote from it (emphasis mine):


Weapon and Armor Proficiency: Monks are proficient with the club, crossbow (light or heavy), dagger, handaxe, javelin, kama, nunchaku, quarterstaff, sai, shortspear, short sword, shuriken, siangham, sling, and spear.

Monks are not proficient with any armor or shields.

When wearing armor, using a shield, or carrying a medium or heavy load, a monk loses his AC bonus, as well as his fast movement and flurry of blows abilities.



Attack bonus and damage are based on strength (or dex if you finesse). I'm tired of monk players dumping their primary stat. If you can't get both then dump wis, dip 1 level to wear armor and grab the extra ki feat at higher levels. You can't even hit with your wis based abilities without str attack bonus; it's dumb to make it lower than any other stat.

If you use a Guided weapon, you get WIS to attack and damage rolls, making STR a lot less necessary; before you have enough money for a guided weapon, STR is important, sure. See above about wearing armor as a Monk. Dex is still nice because it applies to most of your important skills, AC, and initiative.

[ericgrau]

Ugh why couldn't they put that under flurry of blows right at the start like 3.5. I keep missing these things when skimming. So the armor restrictions haven't changed. Guided weapon is beyond obscure. Go ahead and try to bring the source book to a game to show to your DM and see if he doesn't raise an eyebrow when you bring a campaign module to try to use a single item from it. Or, heck, explain it verbally without bringing the module, then take a photo of his face for me please.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

Go ahead and try to bring the source book to a game to show to your DM and see if he doesn't raise an eyebrow when you bring a campaign module to try to use a single item from it. Or, heck, explain it verbally without bringing the module, then take a photo of his face for me please.

Well, seeing as I'm the DM, I own the entire Curse of the Crimson Throne adventure path, it's on the SRD, and it's a reasonable item (I personally feel that it should be a class feature of the Monk) that brings one of the weakest classes to playable levels, I think I'll allow it for my players, and furthermore, allow them to enchant their own fists with it.

I thought they added it in Ultimate Combat...I must have either been thinking of Guided Hand (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/ultimateCombat/ultimateCombatFeats.html#guided-hand) or learned about the property at about the same time UC came out.

[ericgrau]

It's been a while since it came to my attention. They could have added it to a new book. Otherwise it works more like a house rule than book material, as you have to feed it to your group for them to even know of its existence. It also becomes a bit of an item tax when everyone needs to get it to keep up; may as well give it out for free or something similar if you want to give an upgrade.

I've seen at least one pretty good monk in play and going over the class I think they can already keep up with other melee (or archers, with variants). But OTOH most boosts people tack on only go so far anyway.

[ThatLovin'Elan]

Sort of off topic, but I feel like it's the responsibility of the DM to have a good grasp on system mastery to help their players create effective characters, and can warn them away from the rubbish that is 90% of all 3.5/PF material published, as per Sturgeon's Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sturgeon's_Law).

So, for example, if you player tells you "I want to be a Monk!", you can explain what the strengths and weaknesses of the class are, and give them small concessions to shore it up a little.

When your player comes to you and tells you, "I want to be a Wizard!" you'll similarly know to watch out for them destroying your campaign and steer them towards battlefield control/buffing/debuffing roles that will help the party instead of overshadowing them.

I'll give three examples from my current players.

The first is a Psion who has been building and playing for years. I basically just need to look over his character sheet once in a while to make sure he did his math right and suggest a feat once in a while. He debuffs and crowd controls like a pro in combat.

The second is a Summoner who has never played a tabletop game before. His poor Eidolon was going to be casting Ray of Frost and had gills in a campaign with almost no aquatic elements; he was in the back of the party casting Acid Splash. I made some suggestions, and now the Eidolon a four-armed monster and the party is thanking him for Haste and the spells from wands using his pumped UMD check.

The last is a Rogue who only plays Rogues, almost never opens a book, prefers roleplaying to combat, but likes to get into melee and sneak attack. I've been sitting down with her and showing her the Tome of Battle, Ultimate Combat, and other books to make sure she's keeping up with the rest of the party.

Edit: Forgot to include my point XD

I don't mind digging through books and posting on forums to find things to make the game more fun for my players.

[Psyren]

Guided is indeed great but it's always safest to assume that adventure-path/campaign material will be disallowed unless stated otherwise.

A really nice option for PF Monks is the Psychic Fist. Not quite as powerful as Tashalatora Psywar, but significantly stronger than the 3.5 version since you can progress Psywar manifesting with it now. A number of Paths synergize with monk as well, like Brawler, Ascetic, Feral, Assassin, and even more to come in PsiEx like Dervish.

[Hiro Protagonest]

I think the remaining complaints amount to "they're not wizards".

*sigh*

They're not just worse than wizards. They're worse than unarmed swordsages. I'll take Shadow Stride over Abundant Step any day of the week. And Child of Shadows over Deflect Arrows. And Time Stands Still over Tongue of the Sun and Moon.

[Redrat2k6]

Pathfinder Monk is way good, but just like any class you have to know how to play it.

Human Monk 1 (Sohei Archtype, Master of Many Styles Archtype)

Trait: Reactive +2 Init

Feats
(B Human) Dodge
1 Crane Style
(B Monk) Crane Wing

This guy at level 1 is blocking 1 melee attack per round, always acts in the suprise round, and assuming dex and wis modifiers equal a total of +5 has an AC of 18 because he fights defensively.

This is at level 1. At higher levels he can do some crazy stuff because of his bonus style feats that don't have to meet the requirements, and fusing two of those styles together at the same time.

I read the thread and I don't think people really understand Pathfinder monks because all they have read about pathfinder is Saph's guide or someone's opinion. Pathfinder gives all classes archetypes which extends the versatility of all classes, making them more balanced and powerful IF you take the time to understand them.

[Hiro Protagonest]

Pathfinder Monk is way good, but just like any class you have to know how to play it.

Human Monk 1 (Sohei Archtype, Master of Many Styles Archtype)

Trait: Reactive +2 Init

Feats
(B Human) Dodge
1 Crane Style
(B Monk) Crane Wing

This guy at level 1 is blocking 1 melee attack per round, always acts in the suprise round, and assuming dex and wis modifiers equal a total of +5 has an AC of 18 because he fights defensively.

This is at level 1. At higher levels he can do some crazy stuff because of his bonus style feats that don't have to meet the requirements, and fusing two of those styles together at the same time.
Crane's Wing requires monk level 5.

Edit: monk feats don't need to meet prerequisites. :smallannoyed:

I read the thread and I don't think people really understand Pathfinder monks because all they have read about pathfinder is Saph's guide or someone's opinion. Pathfinder gives all classes archetypes which extends the versatility of all classes, making them more balanced and powerful IF you take the time to understand them.

I've read the CRB and APG cover to cover, and can look at UM and UC with a click of a button.

[Redrat2k6]

Edit: Curse you double Post.

[Redrat2k6]

@Jade Dragon

May I respectfully point out an error in your assumption.



This is at level 1. At higher levels he can do some crazy stuff because of his bonus style feats that don't have to meet the requirements, and fusing two of those styles together at the same time.

Emphasis mine. This is because of the Archetype Master of Many Styles with which you are unfamiliar with despite your knowledge and reading. This is not to say that you have not read, because I believe you when you say you have.

It just helps illustrate my point that it takes a lot of time to understand and master a class. But when done it can perform well. I'm not saying it is as powerful as a wizard, but to answer the OP's question if pathfinder monks are better the answer is a resounding YES!

[Anarchy_Kanya]

2) Imp natural attack and similar stuff no longer works with fist eliminating the basic damage OP for monks (and one of their few decent abilities).
Care to explain?

[Axinian]

Care to explain?

Here (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterFeats.html). It specifically calls out unarmed strikes as not working.

[Starbuck_II]

Emphasis mine. This is because of the Archetype Master of Many Styles with which you are unfamiliar with despite your knowledge and reading. This is not to say that you have not read, because I believe you when you say you have.


Bah, styles feats are just ToB Manuevers or stances. Snake Style is Baffling Defense from ToB.
WotC is nice enough not to sue over it.

[MeeposFire]

Here (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterFeats.html). It specifically calls out unarmed strikes as not working.

In addition somewhere else they specify that your fist is no longer a natural attack. Consequently all of those cool 3.5 abilities that boost natural attack damage that we used to make high damage no longer with your unarmed attacks.

[Blisstake]

Bah, styles feats are just ToB Manuevers or stances. Snake Style is Baffling Defense from ToB.
WotC is nice enough not to sue over it.

I'm sorry, I can't tell over this medium, but you are joking, yes?

[Starbuck_II]

I'm sorry, I can't tell over this medium, but you are joking, yes?

You have read both of them, correct.
If not, please read them again. Spot the differences.
I'll wait.

Back? There now you agree. I don't need to joke when reality is so funny.

[Blisstake]

Because one stance in ToB is pretty much the same as a PF feat means that the entire style feat system was cribbed off of ToB? I apologize, but that does seem unreasonable, especially since maneuvers/stances system has different means of aquisition and usage when compared to the relatively simplistic feat-based styles of Ultimate Combat. Is there significant overlap within the entire system?

So yes, that's why I assumed you were joking. Especially since that has pretty much nothing to do with the conversation at hand.

[Zherog]

*sigh*

They're not just worse than wizards. They're worse than unarmed swordsages. I'll take Shadow Stride over Abundant Step any day of the week. And Child of Shadows over Deflect Arrows. And Time Stands Still over Tongue of the Sun and Moon.

That's great and all, except the swordsage doesn't exist in the Pathfinder rules. So you're looking at a class from a (slightly) different game and saying that a class in Pathfinder is terribad because it's not equal to that class from the different game.

So let's extend your comparisons some more...

Pathfinder monk is worse than WoW RPG Druid. Probably Mage, too.

Pathfinder monk is worse than d20 World of Darkness's mage, and probably werewolf and vampire as well.

Pathfinder monk is worse than building a martial artist in Mutants & Masterminds.

I mean, if you want to say the pathfinder monk is bad because it doesn't compare to classes other classes in Pathfinder, awesome! That's a wonderful argument to put forth. But making comparisons to classes outside of Pathfinder is meaningless.

[Hiro Protagonest]

That's great and all, except the swordsage doesn't exist in the Pathfinder rules. So you're looking at a class from a (slightly) different game and saying that a class in Pathfinder is terribad because it's not equal to that class from the different game.

So let's extend your comparisons some more...

Pathfinder monk is worse than WoW RPG Druid. Probably Mage, too.

Pathfinder monk is worse than d20 World of Darkness's mage, and probably werewolf and vampire as well.

Pathfinder monk is worse than building a martial artist in Mutants & Masterminds.

I mean, if you want to say the pathfinder monk is bad because it doesn't compare to classes other classes in Pathfinder, awesome! That's a wonderful argument to put forth. But making comparisons to classes outside of Pathfinder is meaningless.

PF is 3.5 with a bunch of little house rules and some bigger house rules.

ToB is the best thing to happen to melee in 3.5.

ToB is easily adaptable to PF.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Here (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/monsters/monsterFeats.html). It specifically calls out unarmed strikes as not working.
Yes, an unarmed strike. Note that a Monks unarmed strike is special, it counts as both manufactured and natural weapon.


In addition somewhere else they specify that your fist is no longer a natural attack. Consequently all of those cool 3.5 abilities that boost natural attack damage that we used to make high damage no longer with your unarmed attacks.
See above.

[MeeposFire]

That's great and all, except the swordsage doesn't exist in the Pathfinder rules. So you're looking at a class from a (slightly) different game and saying that a class in Pathfinder is terribad because it's not equal to that class from the different game.

So let's extend your comparisons some more...

Pathfinder monk is worse than WoW RPG Druid. Probably Mage, too.

Pathfinder monk is worse than d20 World of Darkness's mage, and probably werewolf and vampire as well.

Pathfinder monk is worse than building a martial artist in Mutants & Masterminds.

I mean, if you want to say the pathfinder monk is bad because it doesn't compare to classes other classes in Pathfinder, awesome! That's a wonderful argument to put forth. But making comparisons to classes outside of Pathfinder is meaningless.

If you are not going to allow a swordsage to monk comparison then when we compare the 3.5 monk to the PF monk then the PF should not get access to 3.5 materials. Either take everything or take nothing you can't just pick and choose.

[Hiro Protagonest]

If you are not going to allow a swordsage to monk comparison then when we compare the 3.5 monk to the PF monk then the PF should not get access to 3.5 materials. Either take everything or take nothing you can't just pick and choose.

He wasn't using 3.5 stuff for the PF monk.

But yeah, if you can't compare unarmed swordsage, you can't compare it to 3.5 monk.

[Talentless]

Guided is indeed great but it's always safest to assume that adventure-path/campaign material will be disallowed unless stated otherwise.

A really nice option for PF Monks is the Psychic Fist. Not quite as powerful as Tashalatora Psywar, but significantly stronger than the 3.5 version since you can progress Psywar manifesting with it now. A number of Paths synergize with monk as well, like Brawler, Ascetic, Feral, Assassin, and even more to come in PsiEx like Dervish.

Look, if you are going to assume that Adventure Path/Campaign material will be disallowed... why should a non Paizo designed class/abilities be allowed as well*?

Both are rules and items included in the Pathfinder SRD, so arbitrarily banning one of them because it came from a Paizo published adventure path and not a rulebook is stupid.

*Despite being quasi official as Paizo declared their work good and that they never planned on updating Psionics to Pathfinder.

[Zherog]

He wasn't using 3.5 stuff for the PF monk.

But yeah, if you can't compare unarmed swordsage, you can't compare it to 3.5 monk.

The premise of the OP is that the PF monk is better and more robust than the 3.5 monk. He made no mention of swordsage. The premise isn't to compare PF monk to all of 3.5; it's to compare PF monk to 3.5 monk. And on that comparison, the OP is correct - there are improvements, some of them pretty important. And some of the early repliers are correct, too - there's still synergy issues such as high movement speed by flurry still requiring a full round action.

edit:


Look, if you are going to assume that Adventure Path/Campaign material will be disallowed... why should a non Paizo designed class/abilities be allowed as well*?

Both are rules and items included in the Pathfinder SRD, so arbitrarily banning one of them because it came from a Paizo published adventure path and not a rulebook is stupid.

*Despite being quasi official as Paizo declared their work good and that they never planned on updating Psionics to Pathfinder.

Just to pick nits... the psionics material is not contained in the official Pathfinder SRD (found here (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/)). What it's included on is a site that takes advantage of the OGL and re-publishes Pathfinder material from both Paizo and 3rd party publishers.

[Curious]

The premise of the OP is that the PF monk is better and more robust than the 3.5 monk. He made no mention of swordsage. The premise isn't to compare PF monk to all of 3.5; it's to compare PF monk to 3.5 monk.


However, you also have to compare the PF Monk to the USS because the USS is a strong monk class published for what is essentially the same game system. Just comparing the PF monk to the 3.5 monk isn't enough, considering that there are no less than two other classes within the same system that embody the same concept and flavor, only in a much more crunchy manner.

[Psyren]

Just to pick nits... the psionics material is not contained in the official Pathfinder SRD (found here (http://paizo.com/pathfinderRPG/prd/)). What it's included on is a site that takes advantage of the OGL and re-publishes Pathfinder material from both Paizo and 3rd party publishers.

"Takes advantage" is awfully negative when Jeremy himself approved the d20PFSRD folks posting their books up there. He even voluntarily e-mails them all the latest errata. Check the discussion thread on paizo's site under Psionics Unleashed.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

But yeah, if you can't compare unarmed swordsage, you can't compare it to 3.5 monk.
What relevance does a Swordsage have in a comparison between Monks? :smallconfused:

[Zherog]

"Takes advantage" is awfully negative ...

That's not an unreasonable interpretation, but I assure you it wasn't intended as a negative. I love love love that the folks over at d20PFSRD contact 3rd party publishers and get their permission, even though they don't have to. And I love love love that they honor 3rd party publisher's wishes about when - if ever - content hits the site. The folks at d20PFSRD run a fantastic site, and I wasn't in any way looking to besmirch them with the phrasing of my comment - just merely pointing out that their site isn't the official PRD, and so therefore - pedantically speaking -- psionics (and other 3rd party stuff) isn't actually in the PRD.

[Ravens_cry]

Tetori Monk looks fun. It can grapple when others can't, it can grapple things no one else can. You know how annoying it was to try and grapple that wizard, who would then cast dimension door and/or freedom of movement?
Not any more (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk/archetypes/paizo---monk-archetypes/tetori).

[Talentless]

That's not an unreasonable interpretation, but I assure you it wasn't intended as a negative. I love love love that the folks over at d20PFSRD contact 3rd party publishers and get their permission, even though they don't have to. And I love love love that they honor 3rd party publisher's wishes about when - if ever - content hits the site. The folks at d20PFSRD run a fantastic site, and I wasn't in any way looking to besmirch them with the phrasing of my comment - just merely pointing out that their site isn't the official PRD, and so therefore - pedantically speaking -- psionics (and other 3rd party stuff) isn't actually in the PRD.

Yes I know, but you know, I did mention that it was Quasi-Official. Would Semi-Official have made it easier to grasp what I meant? Probably, but semi-official is an even stronger form of quasi-official, so some meaning would still be lost.

What I meant is that Psionics are 3rd party, so why should they be allowed for a comparison purpose if you are going to disallow a 1st party source published by Paizo?

Psionics and the Guided weapon property both fall under the same boat of not being in the main rule books. So to recap the initial question,

Why would Guiding weapon property be disallowed if Psionics are allowed?

[Zherog]

Because guiding comes from a Paizo source, even if it's not part of the "core" set. It's much the same reason that during 3.5 discussions, people generally bring in material from any WotC source but not 3rd party publishers. Tome of Battle isn't "core" in 3.5, but it is WotC; whereas books such as Quintessential Monk (from Mongoose Publishing) are 3rd party. ToB stuff (particularly the swordsage class) comes up all the time in 3.5 monk discussions. QM stuff never comes up.

edit: wait! I misread your question at the end of your post. Disregard everything I say here. (I know I could remove it, but I'd rather leave it as some folks have likely already read it.)

[Psyren]

Why would Guiding weapon property be disallowed if Psionics are allowed?

Note: I would not necessarily disallow Guiding myself.

Having said that, Guiding is from a specific adventure path. A DM could be forgiven for thinking the property to either only apply to or be balanced within the confines of that particular adventure.

PsU, by contrast, was designed from the ground up to fit into any Pathfinder game.

[Teron]

Yes, an unarmed strike. Note that a Monks unarmed strike is special, it counts as both manufactured and natural weapon.


See above.
But it's still an unarmed strike, which the feat plainly says you can't pick. In fact, that part was errata'ed in specifically to bar monks from using it. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/pathfinder-faq#TOC-Improved-Natural-Attack-to-Increase)

[Hiro Protagonest]

What relevance does a Swordsage have in a comparison between Monks? :smallconfused:

Because unarmed swordsage fills the exact same damn concept. Unarmed and unarmored (or lightly armored) warrior who can use semi-mystical abilities, Judo (that's pretty much what the Throw line is), and Kung Fu/Karate/Taikwando.

[Ravens_cry]

Because unarmed swordsage fills the exact same damn concept. Unarmed and unarmored (or lightly armored) warrior who can use semi-mystical abilities, Judo (that's pretty much what the Throw line is), and Kung Fu/Karate/Taikwando.
And if you are playing Pathfinder exclusively or near elusively and/or the DM, for whatever reason, has banned ToB?
What do you do then?

[Anarchy_Kanya]

But it's still an unarmed strike, which the feat plainly says you can't pick. In fact, that part was errata'ed in specifically to bar monks from using it. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/extras/pathfinder-faq#TOC-Improved-Natural-Attack-to-Increase)
That's stupid as hell.


Because unarmed swordsage fills the exact same damn concept. Unarmed and unarmored (or lightly armored) warrior who can use semi-mystical abilities, Judo (that's pretty much what the Throw line is), and Kung Fu/Karate/Taikwando.
So? Unarmed Swordsage isn't the Monk and OP isn't comparing concepts. He's comparing specific classes - PF Monk and 3.5 Monk.

[Hiro Protagonest]

And if you are playing Pathfinder exclusively or near elusively and/or the DM, for whatever reason, has banned ToB?
What do you do then?
Then you play a PF monk. But not until then.

So? Unarmed Swordsage isn't the Monk and OP isn't comparing concepts. He's comparing specific classes - PF Monk and 3.5 Monk.

If monk is mentioned, swordsage is mentioned. I consider than an unwritten rule. How do you know that the OP has looked at swordsage?

PF monk is a solid tier 4 with the right archetype. It's still not tier 3.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Swordsage still has no place in a comparison between two versions of the Monk.

[Psyren]

I see nothing wrong with just mentioning swordsage. It's not as if it causes all the other posts discussing pure monk to spontaneously delete themselves or anything.

[The Boz]

My houserules for fixing the monk:
1. Full BAB. I could never understand why the hell they never gave him full BAB. He is a melee damage class, why the hell does something like that exist without full BAB? (I don't consider the rogue to be a melee damage class)
2. 3 new feats, one is added to his bonus feat list at level 1, two for the bonus feat list at level 6. Weapon Finesse is added to his bonus feats at level 2, along with Guided Hand (Wis instead of Str on unarmed attack roll). Bloody Finesse (Dex instead of Str to melee damage w/ light and unarmed) and Guided Pain (Wis instead of Str to unarmed damage) to level 6. This takes care of a lot of MAD, leaving him with Wis, Con and Dex, a slightly more manageable ability dependence. Also, another bonus feat at level 4, so that you can take whatever you really needed (but not really really needed, such as WF or GH) while still "young".
3. Flurry always simply doubles his number of attacks while unarmed or with monk weapons. If using special maneuvers, Flurry always gives him one free attack as well as the maneuver. When charging, you get two attacks, and both benefit from the charge bonus. The same penalty still applies, and pairs of attacks use the same BAB.
4. Tongue of the Sun is gained at level 8, allows communication with all humanoids capable of communicating. Tongue of the Moon is gained at level 11 and allows communication with living non-humanoids. Tongue of the Earth is gained at level 14, allows communication with non-living things capable of communication.
5. At level 20, the monk can CHOOSE to count either as an outsider AND his race, only an outsider or only his race whenever prompted. This choice is available regardless of any effects might limit the monk's perception, action or sanity.
6. Gains Invisibility as a 2pt ki power at level 7 lasting 10 rounds. This increases to Greater Invisibility at 11 with the same duration.
7. Wholeness of Body is monk level * Wisdom modifier.
8. Another use of ki, +4 to one save (before rolling) for 1 point. And another for 2 points that allows him to ignore all magical enchantments, protections and buffs on the target for one round.
9. Maneuver Training is changed so that his maneuvers can NEVER be turned, and he can turn any maneuver that he successfully defends against (in monk vs monk combat, the never rule takes precedence).
10. Quivering Palm can be used to either stun(DC 15+), kill(DC 10+), interrupt spellcasting (DC 20+) or apply any Stunning Fist effect.
Wow, I can't believe that it took ONLY TEN houserules to make him work!
Feedback appreciated.

[Retech]

I like those houserules. If I ever play a monk (which is probably not going to happen), I will try to bring it up to the DM.

Alternatively, optimize crazily in my low-OP group to make it balanced.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

I see nothing wrong with just mentioning swordsage. It's not as if it causes all the other posts discussing pure monk to spontaneously delete themselves or anything.
The thing is, Swordsage isn't just mentioned. He's saying that you can't compare 3.5 Monk to PF Monk without the Swordsage. And that PF Monk is somehow worse the 3.5 Monk because it's worse the the Swordsage. But that's irrelevant to this discussion, because we're comparing here Monks, not classes that are good for a monk-concept. :smallannoyed:

[The Boz]

I like those houserules. If I ever play a monk (which is probably not going to happen), I will try to bring it up to the DM.

Alternatively, optimize crazily in my low-OP group to make it balanced.

If you make it, I expect feedback and comments.

[MeeposFire]

That's stupid as hell.


So? Unarmed Swordsage isn't the Monk and OP isn't comparing concepts. He's comparing specific classes - PF Monk and 3.5 Monk.

Also note that the unarmed strike is not a natural weapon in PF. Is it dumb? Yes but that is the rule (do notice that they did not tie up all the loose ends from that decision).

[Lord.Sorasen]

The thing is, Swordsage isn't just mentioned. He's saying that you can't compare 3.5 Monk to PF Monk without the Swordsage. And that PF Monk is somehow worse the 3.5 Monk because it's worse the the Swordsage. But that's irrelevant to this discussion, because we're comparing here Monks, not classes that are good for a monk-concept. :smallannoyed:

As the OP here, I'm going to have to say I think the swordsage deserves mention here. Way I see it, the swordsage is the way a lot of people here choose to play a monk concept. Seeing how PF monk stacks up is nice.

I really like the tier 4/tier 3 range, so as long as the PF monk falls in there I consider it fine, and all this sort of confirms my theories while adding some new things. I had no idea there was such a thing as wisdom to attack/damage rolls for a monk! That seems like a neat idea. Like zen archery, if you will.

But I don't like all the conflict about it. I keep looking at the paladin, my favorite PF remodel. I just love how nice they made it, and I can't imagine going back to the 3.5 paladin. With monk I'm not really seeing that, and that's disappointing. And I still can't see why they didn't give it full BAB, if only because that'd be way less ugly.

[Anarchy_Kanya]

You're confusing me. If you don't want to compare Monks then why in the OP you say "Lets compare Monks"? :smallsigh:
You should say "Lets compare PF monk to 3.5 monk or Swordsage". Everything would be more clear then. :smallannoyed:

[Hiro Protagonest]

You're confusing me. If you don't want to compare Monks then why in the OP you say "Lets compare Monks"? :smallsigh:
You should say "Lets compare PF monk to 3.5 monk or Swordsage". Everything would be more clear then. :smallannoyed:

Monk is a concept, not a class. When I hear "monk" I think "Tashalatora, Psionic Fist, Enlightened Fist, Sacred Fist, Fist of the Forest, psychic warrior, unarmed swordsage, Superior Unarmed Strike, oh, and that tier 6 class".

[Ravens_cry]

Monk is a concept, not a class. When I hear "monk" I think "Tashalatora, Psionic Fist, Enlightened Fist, Sacred Fist, Fist of the Forest, psychic warrior, unarmed swordsage, Superior Unarmed Strike, oh, and that tier 6 class".
Wizard is also a concept. If someone is discussing the differences between between Pathfinder and D&D Wizards, is a Warlock relevant to this discussion, despite sharing thematic similarities?

[Hiro Protagonest]

Wizard is also a concept. If someone is discussing the differences between between Pathfinder and D&D Wizards, is a Warlock relevant to this discussion, despite sharing thematic similarities?

No, but PF sorcerer could be. And people are fine with wizard being used for the wizard concept because it's powerful enough to do it. Warlock would be relevant, as would beguiler, if tier 1 and 2 are banned.

[Ravens_cry]

No, but PF sorcerer could be. And people are fine with wizard being used for the wizard concept because it's powerful enough to do it. Warlock would be relevant, as would beguiler, if tier 1 and 2 are banned.
If we are explicitly discussing PF and D&D Wizard, then Tier 1 & 2 can hardly are be banned, can they?

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Monk is a concept, not a class. When I hear "monk" I think "Tashalatora, Psionic Fist, Enlightened Fist, Sacred Fist, Fist of the Forest, psychic warrior, unarmed swordsage, Superior Unarmed Strike, oh, and that tier 6 class".
Really? That's weird. I always thought that Monk is a class.

[Curious]

Really? That's weird. I always thought that Monk is a class.

Really? Man, nobody plays that thing, it doesn't even really exist.
:smallamused:

[Anarchy_Kanya]

Really? Man, nobody plays that thing, it doesn't even really exist.
:smallamused:
It does. Check your PHB or SRD.

[Curious]

It does. Check your PHB or SRD.

/sarcasmdetectorfail?

[Infernalbargain]

Warlock would be relevant, as would beguiler, if tier 1 and 2 are banned.

So... the thematic similarity between two classes is a function of which tiers are allowed?

[Anarchy_Kanya]

/sarcasmdetectorfail?
Oh, I picked up your sarcasm just fine, don't worry.

If the OP wanted to compare concepts and not classes then the first post is misleading.
If he wanted to compare the class Monk from PF, and the class Monk from 3.5, then the Swordsage is irrelevant. Simple as that.

[Hiro Protagonest]

So... the thematic similarity between two classes is a function of which tiers are allowed?

Using wizard as a concept/class example wasn't a good example, because the wizard is the best at what he does, so everyone suggests wizard over every other type of arcane caster, except DN and (maybe) Beguiler since they're tier 3 (I don't really see any Beguiler threads so I don't know about that).

Fighter concept, however: play a warblade or crusader. Or barbarian. Or dungeoncrasher or Zhentarim fighter.

[Infernalbargain]

Using wizard as a concept/class example wasn't a good example, because the wizard is the best at what he does, so everyone suggests wizard over every other type of arcane caster, except DN and (maybe) Beguiler since they're tier 3 (I don't really see any Beguiler threads so I don't know about that).

Fighter concept, however: play a warblade or crusader. Or barbarian. Or dungeoncrasher or Zhentarim fighter.

So would saying "play a wizard" be relevant to a beguiler discussion?

[Hiro Protagonest]

So would saying "play a wizard" be relevant to a beguiler discussion?

An illusionist, yes.

[Psyren]

So would saying "play a wizard" be relevant to a beguiler discussion?

Yes, because if all you want out of Beguiler is the magic (rather than, say, the skills) then one can demonstrate the advantages of going wizard and let the asker make a more informed choice.

Or better yet, one would suggest Wiz/Beguiler/Ultimate Magus for just as much illusory power and a great deal more punch in other areas.

[Infernalbargain]

Yes, because if all you want out of Beguiler is the magic (rather than, say, the skills) then one can demonstrate the advantages of going wizard and let the asker make a more informed choice.

Or better yet, one would suggest Wiz/Beguiler/Ultimate Magus for just as much illusory power and a great deal more punch in other areas.

If tier 1's are the optimal solution for all character concepts, boards exist to optimize characters concepts, then from whence came boards?

[Hiro Protagonest]

If tier 1's are the optimal solution for all character concepts, boards exist to optimize characters concepts, then from whence came boards?

Because not all concepts have tier 1 solutions, tiers wouldn't exist without the boards, and heavy multiclassing, PrCing, and ToBing are used quite a bit in CharOp for non-casters, which nobody would know about all the good PrCs and feats and dips without the boards, while now it's just a google search.

Plus, tier 3 is a good balance point, but if someone comes to the boards asking for optimization for something, people generally try to get as high a power level as possible.

[Infernalbargain]

Because not all concepts have tier 1 solutions, tiers wouldn't exist without the boards, and heavy multiclassing, PrCing, and ToBing are used quite a bit in CharOp for non-casters, which nobody would know about all the good PrCs and feats and dips without the boards, while now it's just a google search.

Plus, tier 3 is a good balance point, but if someone comes to the boards asking for optimization for something, people generally try to get as high a power level as possible.

Now this isn't an optimization thread now is it? It is a comparison thread of the PF monk to the 3.5 monk.

[Ravens_cry]

Now this isn't an optimization thread now is it? It is a comparison thread of the PF monk to the 3.5 monk.
Precisely.
Which is why no class, not even a same or lower tier class, has a place in this discussion. We are talking Monk (the 3.5 class) verses Monk (the Pathfinder class) and variants thereof.
With in those restrictions, optimization help is welcome I would think, but only within those restrictions.

[The Boz]

Can we please stop talking semantics and start discussing the actual matter at hand?

[Psyren]

If tier 1's are the optimal solution for all character concepts, boards exist to optimize characters concepts, then from whence came boards?

Uh... what?

T1s are the optimal solution from a power perspective, but there are other considerations to be had.

"Consider" is the operative term here - i.e. bringing something up allows it to be considered.