PF Monk and Combat Maneuvers

[Ardantis]

OK, so I might be a little late to the party but I'm finally converting to PF. Was resistant to it, love what they've done, it also (don't judge) has the Monte Cook seal of approval, which moved my stone heart.

Anyways, PF question-

Are combat maneuvers effective? At what levels? Are they a major part of gameplay?

Are Monks better (at least at low levels)? Are they combat maneuver specialists, and/or does flurry of blows work? They make a lot more sense thematically, given the middle eastern feel of the art, but are they playable (at least a low levels)?

The other changes made sense to me, although caster balance was largely ignored.

[stack]

Certain monk archetypes can make combat maneuvers work, especially at low levels. i had great fun with a level 4 or 5 maneuver master that used tripping and dirty tricks to great effect. Flowing monk can also be interesting. Tetori makes grappling worthwhile, giving methods to grapple big enemies and negate freedom of movement. None of them will hang with Hi-op caster, but you already knew that.

Tripping fades as flying enemies become common, disarming depends of enemies having weapons, etc. A plain monk won't be using maneuvers as a primary tool past the early levels, though the archetypes extent usefulness.

For a fun tripping, get maneuver master archetype, agile maneuvers, max dex, fury's fall, improved/greater trip, combat reflexes, and vicious stomp. You can lock-down anything that is trip-able.

[Blyte]

monks are very versatile and awesome, pleanty of niches, but I recommend specializing with them and not trying to cover all the bases. focus on a few things and do it well.

combat manuevers as a whole are great, some lose their effectiveness in the late game (like trip).. some will last you a whole career making them your focus (like overrun and grapple)

[Eldariel]

Are combat maneuvers effective?

Less so than previously; they require an extra feat that requires 6 BAB to be fully functional and now tend to consume Attacks of Opportunity to get the extra attacks.

On the flipside, it's only one check which of course cuts the failure chances and many defenses are less efficient against them now.


At what levels?

Level 6 when you get the Greater feat is probably the best point. Expensive but somewhat viable. Using them naked is situationally reasonable (e.g. Trip with reach weapon can make sense with multiple allies, as can Grappling a poorly/unarmed Spellcaster while well armored, even if you lack the feats; casting while Grappling is somewhat harder in PF).


Are they a major part of gameplay?

Not especially; tripping is worse (still good), grapple is about the same (situationally useful), disarming and sunder and such have their standard problems (and thus are not really worth focusing on). You use them occasionally but you'll probably attack more.


Are Monks better (at least at low levels)?

The Core chassis is much better 'cause they have full BAB for Flurry and Combat Maneuvers now. This cuts the biggest problems but they're still stuck without ability to move and attack, which is another clutch question.

With the archetypes though you can make a very potent semi-mystical caster Monk which helps a lot.


Are they combat maneuver specialists, and/or does flurry of blows work?

They're better at combat maneuvers than they used to be though still not as good as Barbarians of course. Full attack was one major thing Pathfinder didn't fix so Flurry is still FUBAR.


They make a lot more sense thematically, given the middle eastern feel of the art, but are they playable (at least a low levels)?

Depends. Low levels have always been the worst part in a Monk; they got slightly less horrible at level 11 thanks to Greater Flurry in 3.5 (extra attacks are nice) but low level Monk has poor attack, no damage, no nothing.

Again, they're a bit better on low levels but they still suffer of poor damage, high varied attribute dependency (Wand of Mage Armor is a good investment to give to your party caster and cast on you) and difficulty of full attacking.


The other changes made sense to me, although caster balance was largely ignored.

They missed many, many easy fixes to the system. They did some things but not enough. It's a side-grade, much like 3.0 into 3.5; some things are better, others are worse. Overall, I feel they come out on top but I was hoping for more.

[Ardantis]

Thanks for the rundown guys. Sounds like Monks are more fun at low levels, but still peter out at high levels (plus no pounce is bad).

Just homebrewing full attacks into standard actions and charges is overkill, I think, but it's still a huge question of what to do with melee. I'll probably be playing below level 10, though, so only Monks and 2-weapon fighting characters get screwed over.

That being said, where are these archetypes (which books)? I need to take a look at them, I think.

Funny that now grapple and overrun (wut?) work at high levels.

[stack]

You can find them here (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/classes/core-classes/monk#TOC-Archetypes-Alternate-Class-Features).

Book sources are listed at the bottom of each one.

Not sure one how great overrun is, but the tetori can be a nasty grappler. Fun bonuses with a dhampir if you mainly face one type of enemy, too.

If you want to go ranged instead, zen archer is great.

[Eldariel]

Just homebrewing full attacks into standard actions and charges is overkill, I think, but it's still a huge question of what to do with melee.

It's really not. PF doesn't have most of the charge multipliers and you can limit them to one attack anyways. Or even if not on Charge, just limiting the full attack to normal standard action is still fine.


That being said, where are these archetypes (which books)? I need to take a look at them, I think.

You can find the Archetypes under each class in the SRD along with the book it's from. (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/)


Funny that now grapple and overrun (wut?) work at high levels.

I don't see why they'd work any better now than before.

[Blyte]

I was speaking about combat manuevers seperate from monks, altho monks do have archetype built to trip and grapple.. I threw overrun in there only because its viable late game because you can overrun flyers and swimmers and other monsters typically immune to trip.

I preferr barbarian overrun

[StreamOfTheSky]

"Are combat maneuvers effective? At what levels?"

Generally, no. They're more effective at low levels (though enemies can often kill things in 1-2 hits anyway at those levels) and against weakling noncaster humanoid types, so of course the answer will vary. But maneuvers are much tougher to succeed at in PF overall.

"Are they a major part of gameplay?"

IME, no. You can intentionally make a maneuvers build and force the issue, but I've found the best AND easiest option in PF is to just ignore maneuvers entirely and focus on damage output.

"Are Monks better (at least at low levels)?"

They're much worse, and slightly worse at low levels. Monks were nerfed in countless ways across all levels. The inability to combine natural attacks after a flurry of blows stings right from level 1 (a dude using the actual TWF feat with unarmed is free to do so), for example. As you grow in level, you will learn to enjoy repeated kicks in the groin as you realize things like, "oh, my fast movement only applies to land speed now, so flight invalidates one of my major features!"
Or, "...they seriously felt the need to ban Improved Natural Attack (unarmed)?"
Or, "Wait, now in order to get the benefit of 3E Improved Trip I have to wait till 9th level (BAB requirement), spend 2 feats (Combat Expertise and Greater Trip), and drop a 13 into one of my only dump stats?!"
Hell, paizo even felt the need to make completely pointless nearly unnoticeable nerfs like removing Diplomacy as a class skill.

This isn't even getting into the "global system nerfs" that hit things 3E monks tended to use a lot or rely on. Like the nerfs to combat maneuvers, Tumbling becoming suicidally difficult, and all physical stat upgrades now occupying the same single body slot and thus costing much much more to upgrade all 3 (as a monk would want to).

"Are they combat maneuver specialists, and/or does flurry of blows work?"

Monks are poor maneuver specialists The introduction of the Greater feats making monks wait longer than other martials to obtain the sorts of feats they could normally get at level 1 and/or needing to get the pre-reqs for maneuver feats they used to be able to skip on with their class bonus feats. Poor accuracy reflects in CMB, which is basically an attack roll with some different mods. Other classes got combat buffs to attack rolls Monk did not, making them seem like they got worse in comparison. Also, the lack of reach hurts as much as it did in 3E.

Flurry of blows does not work. It is inferior to the actual TWF line, which is...pretty sad.

[Ardantis]

Stream of the Sky~

Thanks for the look under the hood. The base numbers have improved for the Monk but their major accessories which I hadn't considered have been nerfed.

I have to think about this- only because I have a friend who enjoys maneuvers to the point of building a trip-and-disarm based rogue for another game who is (shockingly) ineffective, and is looking forward to the possibility of making a maneuver-based Monk in PF.

Out of curiosity, have you seen a maneuver-based Barb used effectively in PF? Or is that even more of a waste, considering the potential damage output of a Barb? There are some Rage Powers which support this might work.

EDIT: I also looked up the Archetypes, some of which might be surprisingly effective. The Tetori especially looked amusing, although he's almost a monster class, in a way. The Zen Archer could be effective, although he's gotta spend a LOT of ki (high Wisdom), and the Maneuver Master seemed underpowered.

[StreamOfTheSky]

I don't think even the base numbers have improved.

I have not seen one, but I know a maneuver-based Barbarian can be done effectively, as long as you limit yourself to 1 maneuver per round (can do more, but tough odds of success with them). How? The same way any optimied Barbarian should be built in PF - rage cycling. Get fatigue immunity (easiest way is to dip a level in Oracle, get Lame Curse, and wait until ECL 9, when you have effective Oracle level 5 for curse bonuses) and you can drop out of rage each round and re-enter a new one, turning all 1/rage powers into 1/round powers (this really isn't even that powerful; the 1/rage powers are pretty mediocre overall). Strength Surge, which lets you add your Barb level to a maneuver check, is a 1/rage power...

Monk Archetypes:
Tetori fixes some problems inherent with grappling, but is still a weak archetype and you're still a monk, I would rather play several other classes before Tetori if making a grappler.
Zen Archer actually is good (good, as in, is fairly evenly matched with Fighter and Ranger archers all around, still nowhere near "caster-good"), but is good by basically no longer being much of a monk at all. Granted, that's the general secret to making a decent monk, but still...
Maneuver Master is underpowered, though I could see some use of it as a dip anywhere from 1-6 levels for other builds.

[Blyte]

"Are combat maneuvers effective? At what levels?"

Generally, no. They're more effective at low levels (though enemies can often kill things in 1-2 hits anyway at those levels) and against weakling noncaster humanoid types, so of course the answer will vary. But maneuvers are much tougher to succeed at in PF overall.

I disagree. I find them to be as effective as your build would allow. In the upper levels with a good build, you can get a lot of synergy allowing for both control and damage output through maneuvers. As well as damage output for your fellow party members. I can think of a maneuver master monk setting up party melee for all sorts of AoOs with the greater line of maneuvers.


"Are they a major part of gameplay?"

IME, no. You can intentionally make a maneuvers build and force the issue, but I've found the best AND easiest option in PF is to just ignore maneuvers entirely and focus on damage output.

maneuvers give melee options in combat, sometimes you are bound to lose a damage race and it is quite effective to have a capacity to provide melee control.

on the other side of the DM screen they are constantly a major part of game play, I can't tell you how many monsters have grab/trip (particularly grab) built into their attacks, and in a small party, how deadly that can be.

and if you want to focus on damage entirely, I believe a STR build, dragon style monk (with perhaps a dip or two), can hold their own fairly well pitted against other melee DPS.


"Are Monks better (at least at low levels)?"

They're much worse, and slightly worse at low levels. Monks were nerfed in countless ways across all levels. The inability to combine natural attacks after a flurry of blows stings right from level 1 (a dude using the actual TWF feat with unarmed is free to do so), for example. As you grow in level, you will learn to enjoy repeated kicks in the groin as you realize things like, "oh, my fast movement only applies to land speed now, so flight invalidates one of my major features!"
Or, "...they seriously felt the need to ban Improved Natural Attack (unarmed)?"
Or, "Wait, now in order to get the benefit of 3E Improved Trip I have to wait till 9th level (BAB requirement), spend 2 feats (Combat Expertise and Greater Trip), and drop a 13 into one of my only dump stats?!"
Hell, paizo even felt the need to make completely pointless nearly unnoticeable nerfs like removing Diplomacy as a class skill.

This isn't even getting into the "global system nerfs" that hit things 3E monks tended to use a lot or rely on. Like the nerfs to combat maneuvers, Tumbling becoming suicidally difficult, and all physical stat upgrades now occupying the same single body slot and thus costing much much more to upgrade all 3 (as a monk would want to).

I didn't play monks in 3E, so I don't really want to go there, but I do believe that monks do well in pathfinder groups and don't get particularly out shined in many facets of pathfinder.

There are tweaks I feel that could be made, like the cost disparity between magic weapons and amulets of mighty fist.

I feel that everyone feels the pain of the overlap of stat increasing items, particularly it is felt by those who consider monks to be MAD, and refuse to not specialize their monk, and insist that their monk must have high stats in every stat that could potentially affect a role on a monk ability.



"Are they combat maneuver specialists, and/or does flurry of blows work?"

Monks are poor maneuver specialists The introduction of the Greater feats making monks wait longer than other martials to obtain the sorts of feats they could normally get at level 1 and/or needing to get the pre-reqs for maneuver feats they used to be able to skip on with their class bonus feats. Poor accuracy reflects in CMB, which is basically an attack roll with some different mods. Other classes got combat buffs to attack rolls Monk did not, making them seem like they got worse in comparison. Also, the lack of reach hurts as much as it did in 3E.

Flurry of blows does not work. It is inferior to the actual TWF line, which is...pretty sad.

I feel monks are fantastic maneuver specialists, and often qualify for the greater line of feats before other melee, because it is expressly written into the feat/class and/or available in their archetype bonus feats. where most other melee (all except the fighter) must wait until level 7, and use a hard feat, rather than a bonus feat. also many of the qualifying feats are waved for the maneuver specialists, and you can skip straight to the maneuver (IE no need for combat expertise for a flowing monk, as improved trip is a bonus feat)

why do you bring their CMB up as a determent, in a question about maneuvers and flurry of blows? their CMB for those purposes is at maximum, as it equals their character level.

[Ardantis]

Dang.

Well, let's see...

I know the base numbers have improved, because of the following-

Flurry of Blows now acts exactly like TWF for attack bonuses, which is way better than Flurry in 3.5.

You now add your full strength bonus to all attacks.

You add your Monk level to CMB instead of your BAB, which still sucks.

Unfortunately, all those other problems you mentioned (natural attacks, Improved Natural Attack, breaking up Improved Trip into two feats with lame prereqs) add up to a big gimp to an already gimped class. They now appear to play better "out of the box" but they lack all the accessories to make them really fun and effective.

I feel like at low levels, it might work for my friend, but I may need to houserule/allow some non-core things to make it feasible.

The Barbarian note on Rage Cycling was interesting, too. I doubt I'll build one, but it's good to know.

Thank you.

[Blyte]

I have not seen one, but I know a maneuver-based Barbarian can be done effectively, as long as you limit yourself to 1 maneuver per round (can do more, but tough odds of success with them). How? The same way any optimied Barbarian should be built in PF - rage cycling. Get fatigue immunity (easiest way is to dip a level in Oracle, get Lame Curse, and wait until ECL 9, when you have effective Oracle level 5 for curse bonuses) and you can drop out of rage each round and re-enter a new one, turning all 1/rage powers into 1/round powers (this really isn't even that powerful; the 1/rage powers are pretty mediocre overall). Strength Surge, which lets you add your Barb level to a maneuver check, is a 1/rage power...

an overrun barbarian need not hold to one maneuver per round.

initially you will want to knock over the largest target with the aid of "strength surge", and then run down easier marks with via "overbearing onslaught".. when you marginally fail a role, you want to use "auspicious mark" to get an extra d6.

I was routinely overrunning 2-4 monsters in a round with my 6barb/1mnk/3ftr.

11 from STR 32 [20base+2lvl+4rage+4item+2enlarge]
+2 from relentless racial trait from adopted by dwarves
10 from BAB
+4 from overrun feats
+6 strength surge

= +33 to overrun CMB on the 4 legged huge critter that just got knocked over

followed by +25, +23, and +21 on the biped large humanoids accompanying it.. I would then end my move amongst the little guys to make them pay for standing (if they so desired) if I rolled low on any of those checks, I had auspicious mark to help with an extra D6.

there was also a drug you can take called "all night" or something, that made you immune to fatigue/exhaustion allowing you to rage cycle, and repeat the carnage.

all of those overruns, also triggered 2 AoOs from me and 1 from party members. Greater overrun + vicious stomp. the first monster also took armor spike damage via "iron destroyer" and they all took str damage via "overbearing advance"

I found the build more effective than the ever popular level 10 straight barbarian pounce build, but less effective than the level 12 pure barbarian "come and get me" build.

what was key was, getting a flying item and a cloak of the manta ray, as well as the dragon style feat, making you an all terrain barbarian overrunning machine.

[avr]

Overrun doesn't work on opponents more than one size larger than you; neither improved nor greater overrun negates this, so your medium size dwarf shouldn't have been able to overrun a huge creature. Maybe if you were enlarge person'd, but that wasn't in your math at least.

I think at least some GMs would add consequences to the long-term use of amphetamines.

[Blyte]

Enlarge was in the math, look under strength, and I agree but there are no side effects in the raw. Use at your own risk.. and my barb was a human adopted by dwarves and especially cheesey. But its the sacrifices we make to run APs with 2 players

[Gnaeus]

I have seen effective maneuver monks in PF. The best one I saw was a tripper, which used Greater Trip Combined with Ki Throw to throw enemies into the middle of her group, thereby provoking half a dozen AOOs from party members. Now, this requires a bunch of party members who all had combat reflexes, and it was pretty much only awesome against humanoid types, but when it worked, it was devastating.

[Blyte]

This sounds like a fantastic build. When trip starts to become obsolete, you can upgrade to improved ki throw, which opperates off bull rush, and nothing seems immune to.