[3.5] Monk weapons.

[Reynard]

Yes. Another Monk Thread.

Anyway, while this will likely devolve into the usual nonsense that all monk threads do, I want to ask the Playground's opinion on something I've been pondering to help out the beleaguered class.

As it is, only their Unarmed Strikes increase in damage as they level. But would the end result be too unbalanced (ha!) if Monk levels increased the damage done by all monk weapons?

For example, the damage of a quarterstaff would become (Not including modifiers):
Normal, non-monk damage: 1d6/1d6
Lv 1: 1d8/1d8
Lv 4: 1d10/1d10
Lv 8: 2d6/2d6
Lv12: 2d8/2d8
Lv16: 2d10/2d10
Lv20: 2d12/2d12

This would apply to any weapons that the monk was capable of flurrying, such as all martial weapons through use of Shou Disciple.

In addition, these are what I'd say should be added to the monks proficiency list*:

Spoiler

Show

From core:
Simple:
>Punching Dagger
>Shortspear
>Dart

Martial:
>Kukri

Exotic:
>Bolas

Any suggestions from other sources?

And finally, keep away from discussing the other myriad weaknesses and flaws in the class in general. They're not why this thread is here. At lest not yet.

*Yes, I know monks weren't proficient with unarmed strikes by RAW.

[Frosty]

If the other weapons get increased damage as well, then why would monks want to use unarmed strikes? Weapons have the advantages of being able to be enchanted magically without going through hoops.

[Worira]

Not to mention that a monk using a weapon other than a spear, for the d8 die before boost, would be worse off than one using a spear.

[Reynard]

Good point about the spear. *removes*

As for making regular unarmed strikes pointless, weren't they sort of already? It's usually been too much of a rigmarole to keep up with the other beatsticks in terms of damage, even if you use Kensai. UA still has use when being taken captive and losing your equipment, or in grapples.

Situational, yes, but punching things barehanded really should be a last resort if you have a weapon handy.

[Greenish]

Situational, yes, but punching things barehanded really should be a last resort if you have a weapon handy.

Much like not wearing armour should be the last resort, if you can afford it.

The whole monk concept isn't very realistic, even without going into it's supernatural abilities. If you're going to use weapons (and mayhap even wear armour), you might as well pick a better class.

[El Dorado]

I like it. How about if unarmed strikes get an enhancement bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls equal to 1/4 of the monk level? (similar to a druid with the shapeshift alternative class feature).

[Tetsubo 57]

I wouldn't increase the monk weapon damage. But one thing I want to do is make monk weapons more 'universal'. Each would do the standard damage amount. But any of them could use all of the traditional special weapon abilities. Only one ability could be used in any one round (say Trip) on all attacks made in that round. Basically the skill in the weapons is built into the class rather than being intrinsic to any of the weapons themselves. Each monk weapon could use any and all of the weapon characteristics. But only one at any one time.

But monk weapons are just an excuse to carry magical enhancements. :)

[Reynard]

Much like not wearing armour should be the last resort, if you can afford it.

The whole monk concept isn't very realistic, even without going into it's supernatural abilities. If you're going to use weapons (and mayhap even wear armour), you might as well pick a better class.

Some people love the concept though. And some think that Monk(concept) need to used the Monk(class). Swordsages might just be better, but they don't fix the Monk's problems, only completely replace the class.

I like it. How about if unarmed strikes get an enhancement bonus on attack rolls and damage rolls equal to 1/4 of the monk level? (similar to a druid with the shapeshift alternative class feature).

That could work. Plus, it'd also make Kensai shenanigans easier.

I wouldn't increase the monk weapon damage. But one thing I want to do is make monk weapons more 'universal'. Each would do the standard damage amount. But any of them could use all of the traditional special weapon abilities. Only one ability could be used in any one round (say Trip) on all attacks made in that round. Basically the skill in the weapons is built into the class rather than being intrinsic to any of the weapons themselves. Each monk weapon could use any and all of the weapon characteristics. But only one at any one time.

Hmm. Interesting idea. But I could see people (Fighters, Barbarians, etc) using monk dips to get this universal weapon shtick. Would you also let Monks (maybe at a higher level) deal any sort of damage (Piercing, Slashing, Bludgeoning) with any weapon?

But monk weapons are just an excuse to carry magical enhancements. :)

Do Monks really need one? they tend to have the highest need for full (or higher) WBL, and that's just to stay not too far behind.

[Tetsubo 57]

I would only allow a single weapon to deal any one type of damage. I like the ascetic I guess. Different weapon forms and all.

Some magical enhancements are different from what a monk can do alone. Additionally it means there are things the monk does not have to touch... which can be important depending on the nature & physical make-up of an enemy...

[Greenish]

Some people love the concept though. And some think that Monk(concept) need to used the Monk(class). Swordsages might just be better, but they don't fix the Monk's problems, only completely replace the class.

But the "not using weapons" is pretty central to the concept, no? You're trying to fix monk's problems by changing the concept, which I was pointing out.