Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Thief_of_Hope 11-05-07, 06:40 PM	I had a player who was hoping to play a monk, and asked me if the Superior Unarmed Strike feat, from the Book of Nine Swords, stacks with the Monk's Belt wondrous item from the DMG, for a total of having a monk's unarmed strike damage be treated as 9 levels higher. Anyone know? Many thanks for any and all help!
risner 11-05-07, 07:03 PM	I had a player who was hoping to play a monk, and asked me if the Superior Unarmed Strike feat, from the Book of Nine Swords, stacks with the Monk's Belt wondrous item from the DMG, for a total of having a monk's unarmed strike damage be treated as 9 levels higher. Anyone know? Many thanks for any and all help! DM call, but as written no. "As if 4 levels higher" references the base levels. If it said "provides 4 effective monk levels for the purpose of determining damage" would likely stack. You should (unless the DM rule 0's it) end up with the higher of the two, namely 5 levels higher.
Thief_of_Hope 11-06-07, 12:17 AM	Thank you very much, risner! You have been most helpful.
Darth Sephiroth 11-06-07, 03:31 PM	I believe that it has been stated to stack elsewhere, however by doing so at higher levels you have wasted a feat since there isn't an epic unarmed damage progression.
Legdiwena 11-06-07, 05:15 PM	So, we need more cowbell, and an epic unarmed damage progression.
risner 11-06-07, 11:39 PM	I believe that it has been stated to stack elsewhere, however by doing so at higher levels you have wasted a feat since there isn't an epic unarmed damage progression. I know of no place where they say it stacks. I've seen several things that hint it doesn't. Can you enlighten us?
Pandapeep 11-07-07, 02:03 PM	I've asked this question before and you are the first person to say it doesn't stack Riser. But, that said, it does get wasted, as you can't progress beyond lvl 20 in dmg. However, take this with Improved natural attack and at lvl 11 you'll be doing 4d8 dmg.
Merestil Haye 11-07-07, 02:47 PM	The Belt and the feat don't stack. This is what the text of the Belt says :The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.The feat uses the same terminology. What that means is that both abilities look to determine what your Monk level is, and then add some number to it. A 10th level monk is a 10th level Monk for the [urposes of the feat and for the purposes of the item. Thus the two increases apply separately, meaning that the monk has the unarmed damage of a monk 4 levels higher or 5 levels higher. Which would you prefer?
StruckingFuggle 11-07-07, 05:34 PM	I'm not so sure. I'm also not sure quite how to articulate this, but ... it looks at your monk level for unarmed damage, and raises your monk level for that. You're "treated as a monk X levels higher", so shouldn't that also ... bah. I'll come back to this. When you have Boost2 for unarmed damage, it should add to <Monk Levels + Boost1>, they both raise your level but if you have both, then your level for unarmed damage is already higher from one of them.
risner 11-07-07, 06:14 PM	When you have Boost2 for unarmed damage, it should add to <Monk Levels + Boost1>, they both raise your level but if you have both, then your level for unarmed damage is already higher from one of them. Key point is that neither Boost1 nor Boost2 say that you are consider a Monk of level RealLevels+Boost.
EjoThims 11-08-07, 01:06 PM	Key point is that neither Boost1 nor Boost2 say that you are consider a Monk of level RealLevels+Boost. Both treat you as a higher level monk for certain things with no qualifiers. A checks increase your Monk level X for a,b, and c. For a,b, and c, your monk level is now X+A. B also increases X for a,b, and c, and in no way states or implies that it cannot be combined with A or that it only applies to your original X with no modifiers. So both of them make your monk level for a, b, and c X+A+B. They stack, simply because neither implies in any way (no mention of 'true,' 'original,' 'unmodified,' or any such terms, simply levels for determining certain items, which the feat and item both themselves show can be raised beyond the original) that they don't and the stacking rules don't either. Monk's belt is an item that's been around for a while, and is well-known. it's not some obscure source reference or oft-overlooked class ability. It would have been very, very easy to make it plain and clear that they do not work togther, but they chose not to do this. The reason this question comes up so often is because it is odd that they let them stack, but that is exactly what they did.
risner 11-08-07, 02:26 PM	Both treat you as a higher level monk for certain things with no qualifiers. The reason this question comes up so often is because it is odd that they let them stack, but that is exactly what they did. It is inconsistent with all the rules including the stacking rules. Unless you get a sage advise/FAQ/or some other official statement that they stack, you shouldn't be saying something that clearly is written to not stack as "stacking" less you confuse others.
EjoThims 11-08-07, 07:58 PM	something that clearly is written to not stack Except it's not clearly written that way. And it does not go against stacking rules, as they are unnamed bonuses from different sources.
risner 11-09-07, 10:50 AM	Except it's not clearly written that way. And it does not go against stacking rules, as they are unnamed bonuses from different sources. They are written the same as Monkey grip and Powerful Build. I suppose now you are going to say MG and PB stack?
StruckingFuggle 11-09-07, 01:19 PM	They are written the same as Monkey grip and Powerful Build. I suppose now you are going to say MG and PB stack? Are they? Doesn't one or the other specifically call out that it doesn't work with the other, in the case of MG and PB?
EjoThims 11-09-07, 04:41 PM	They are written the same as Monkey grip and Powerful Build. I suppose now you are going to say MG and PB stack? Monkey Grip and Powerful build aren't eevn written the same (the key difference is in Monkey Grip). And many thought they did, before there was official clarification to the contrary. With the current rules, there is nothing to prevent them from stacking, so unless you houserule it, they stack.
risner 11-09-07, 06:01 PM	Are they? Doesn't one or the other specifically call out that it doesn't work with the other, in the case of MG and PB? I couldn't find anything in either to reference the other. Monkey Grip and Powerful build aren't eevn written the same (the key difference is in Monkey Grip). And many thought they did, before there was official clarification to the contrary. Which brings up my point, many may think Monk Belt and SUS stack before they make an "official clarification to the contrary." They have not as of yet clarified, but as the abilities are strikingly similar to MB/PB do we need them to come out and clarify all things that are clear? It is like the Complete Mage errata on Expanded Spellbook, there was no need to errata the ability. It was clear it already restricted you to Wizard spells, but they added errata to include "wizard spells" due to the ability being interpreted in odd ways (such to allow any spells from any list) when it was crystal clear it did not do so. This case (Monk Belt/SUS) isn't exactly crystal clear like Expanded Spellbook, but it is compelling that they are written to not stack due to the wording.
EjoThims 11-10-07, 03:52 AM	do we need them to come out and clarify all things that are clear? No. But again, this is not clear. The wording is not the same, and neither references original level. Even though it may be a similar situation, the abilities work differently and are written differently, and are not prevented from stacking by any of the current rules. Until there is some kind of clarification to the contrary, these stack.
Merestil Haye 11-10-07, 08:55 AM	No. But again, this is not clear. The wording is not the same, and neither references original level. Even though it may be a similar situation, the abilities work differently and are written differently, and are not prevented from stacking by any of the current rules. Until there is some kind of clarification to the contrary, these stack.No they don't. Firstly, the text of Monk's Belt.The wearer’s AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.That does not say that the character's monk level is increased. And it most certainly does reference the Monk level of the character, or it wouldn't know what the result of its effect was. The relevant line from the SUS feat is as follows.Special: If you are a Monk you instead deal unarmed damage as a monk four levels higher.Now that's worded the same way, so it's doing the same thing. Looking at the character's actual Monk level and increasing it by 4 for the purposes of determining unarmed damage. That's why they don't stack. An example of a feat that does increase level for some purposes, to show how the text would be worded if the level was actually increased (for comparison purposes) is Practiced Spellcaster. It says the caster level for the chosen spellcasting class "increases by 4." Thus there is no doubt that that is a genuine increase that stacks with other increases. If the Monks Belt or SUS (or both) used the phrase "Your Monk level increases by..." then I would agree that the two effects stack. They do not, so the two do not (as written) stack. I looked at the Powerful Build / Monkey Grip comparison, and agree that they are worded similarly. Both say that for some purposes you are treated as bigger than you really are.
ElyasRavenwood 11-10-07, 09:44 AM	The crux of this discussion seems to be a very simple one. From the player’s perspective, who wouldn’t want a +9 level boost to their unarmed strike damage? This combo is perfect for the power gamer in all of us. DM's often have a slightly different perspective. Often they are a little more interested in that mysterious thing called "game balance". Game balance can be defined in a variety of ways. For my purposes here I am going to say game balance entails keeping your players in relative line with each other power wise, and in line with the Challenge Ratings of the monster's and such that they will face. Maintaining game balance is an art, not a science. For the most part players will always want to figure out a new way to "power up" their characters with a new combination of feats, skills, character classes, spells, magic items, psionic powers etc. And DM's for the most part will be trying to maintain "game balance". There are of course exceptions to everything. I am merely pointing out tendencies. As a DM you are well within your rights to allow or refuse this combination, regardless of what is written in any of the rule books. Those rules are after all suggestions. As a DM you are free to set what ever parameters you want for you home game. That being said all of this is a balancing act. If you are completely dictatorial you players will howl in outrage and frustration and may eventually drift off to other games. The same can happen if you let anything go. Other players who want to play by the rules will howl with outrage and frustration and go find a game where "real" D&D is played. They might feel as if you play favorites or pay the most attention to the squeaky wheel rules lawyer. So it all comes down to this simple question. Do you as a DM want a player with +9 levels of monk unarmed damage running around in your campaign? If the answer is yes, by all means allow the combination. If the answer is no and if you worry if other players might grow resentful at the monks power or how he might wreck your carefully laid plans with your villain dieing with a boot to the head, then do not allow the feat and item to stack. On a similar power gaming note: If I have a fighter, and I take Improved unarmed strike and then I take Superior unarmed strike, I will get the damage progression listed in the Superior unarmed strike feat yes? Can I then take Improved Natural Attack? If I do this will increase the damage my fighter can do by one "size” right? If this is the case, then my character will have the unarmed damage of a monk of an equivalent level correct? The caveat being my character will not have flurry of blows, nor any of the DR bypass that the Ki strike class ability of the monk offers I assume. What if I apply this same combo of superior unarmed strike and improved natural attack to a Sword sage using the unarmed strike adaptation in exchange for the loss of the light armor feat? Will this mean that my sword sage doing unarmed damage will have the benefit of doing unarmed damage of a monk four levels higher and one size category larger then him. I would also expect neither Flurry of blows nor any Ki strike stuff. Well those are my two cents for what they are worth. I hope it helps
risner 11-10-07, 10:44 AM	Until there is some kind of clarification to the contrary, these stack. Since there is no current clarification, can you even give me a clarification of a similarly worded set of abilities that do stack? I am failing to see why you feel so strongly they stack, since I can't think of anything written the way they are written that do in fact stack.
Archangel_Tyrael 11-10-07, 01:20 PM	Key point is that neither Boost1 nor Boost2 say that you are consider a Monk of level RealLevels+Boost. Worded this way a Monk 6/Sacred Fist 4 would not benefit at all from Superior Unarmed Strike because you claim the feat only increases your *true monk level*. Is that what you're saying?
EjoThims 11-10-07, 04:37 PM	Worded this way a Monk 6/Sacred Fist 4 would not benefit at all from Superior Unarmed Strike because you claim the feat only increases your *true monk level*. Is that what you're saying? Exactly. And that would simply be absurd. So we can assume, until clarification is given, that this is not the way it works. And as none of the other stacking rules prevent it, and the only way the wording limits it is to interpret it in a manner that leads to such obviously ridiculous scenarios, then until such a time as clarification arrives, allowing it to stack is the most reasonable course of action. I believe they stack for the simple reason that we have text specifically granting these abilities and no text that supports them not working together. With MG/PB, the ninja/monk ac, and many other similar situations, the fact that they do not work together has to be pointed out in the text or in clarifications to that text. Their ability to stack doesn't need to be stated, as we have precedent that it should be stated if they do not.
risner 11-11-07, 07:25 PM	Worded this way a Monk 6/Sacred Fist 4 would not benefit at all from Superior Unarmed Strike because you claim the feat only increases your *true monk level*. No, "A sacred fist’s class levels stack with his monk levels" means exactly that, his monk Unarmed damage is considered to be the total of his monk and Sacred Fist levels. Then SUS stacks on top of that total, and all other "as a monk of X levels higher" effect compete for the "highest" since they don't stack. If SUS was worded "add four levels to your effective monk level for the purpose of unarmed damage, this effects stacks with all classes that grant monk unarmed" then it would stack with all others and count for bonus levels. With MG/PB, the ninja/monk ac, and many other similar situations, the fact that they do not work together has to be pointed out in the text or in clarifications to that text. Correct me if I am wrong (show me quotes), but none of those abilities have any text to point out they don't stack. We know they don't stack because they don't appear to stack and there is no text (like in the Sacred Fist PrC) that specifically says they do stack.
EjoThims 11-12-07, 08:23 AM	Correct me if I am wrong (show me quotes), but none of those abilities have any text to point out they don't stack. We know they don't stack because they don't appear to stack and there is no text (like in the Sacred Fist PrC) that specifically says they do stack. For the ninja, from Cadv: "This ability does not stack monk's AC bonus ability (a ninja with levels of monk does not add the bonus twice)." Any time that something would be allowed by the standard stacking rules but does not stack anyway, it is specifically called out, either in the original text or in errata/FAQ clarifications to that text.
risner 11-12-07, 11:05 AM	Any time that something would be allowed by the standard stacking rules but does not stack anyway, it is specifically called out, either in the original text or in errata/FAQ clarifications to that text. Well that is a good point, except the issue we are discussing isn't something that would stack with standard stacking rules. So you need text explicitly allowing it to stack, like say "you could as the higher level for effects that use your Monk level for unarmed" or some such.
EjoThims 11-13-07, 11:10 AM	So you need text explicitly allowing it to stack We have this. It's part of the standard stacking rules. Unnamed bonuses from different sources always stack (unless specifically stated otherwise).
risner 11-13-07, 01:18 PM	Unnamed bonuses from different sources always stack (unless specifically stated otherwise). Which has nothing to do with what we are discussing. Can do Blah as a Blah2 of X levels higher. and Can do Blah as a Blah2 of Y levels higher. Can not meaningfully stack, since you take Blah2+X or Blah2+Y, whichever is higher. You seem to think it says: You add Z levels to your Blah2 ability of Blah. It does not. Trust me, I desperately want it to work like you because I have a Monk which could make exceptional use of it the way you suggest, but it isn't RAW and I don't want to play a character that isn't RAW.
Frozen Yakman 11-13-07, 04:21 PM	Trust me, I desperately want it to work like you because I have a Monk which could make exceptional use of it the way you suggest, but it isn't RAW and I don't want to play a character that isn't RAW. Except RAW allows all interpretations of the rules to be equally valid. Even interpretations that result in you playing Monopoly. Both interpretations are equally valid under RAW (since RAW is a meaningless qualifier). I believe the acronym you're looking for is RWR0 (Rules w/o Rule 0) which is a completely different, unfun, pedantic game. The important question is whether having a feat/item combo that gives a +9 level bonus to monk unarmed damage is balanced or not.
Tedronai 11-13-07, 04:48 PM	An 11th level monk wearing a Monk's Belt is treated as a 16th level monk for the purposes of unnarmed strike damage. If that same monk has SUS, he/she instead deals damage as a monk of 4 levels higher, or 20th level. If you apply them in the reverse order, they do not stack, but since the order of such abilities is up to the user, that's a moot point. They stack. If you don't like it, houserule it.
EjoThims 11-15-07, 09:26 AM	Can not meaningfully stack, since you take Blah2+X or Blah2+Y, whichever is higher. I see nothing (nor have yet been shown anything) in the rules that isn't a clarified exception that specifies that you cannot take Blah2+X+Y when they both treat the same ability as X or Y levels higher. The only basis we have to go on for if they stack is the rules that applyw hen you wish to stack affects. These are the stacking rules. Regardless of how these abilities are worded, their benefit is a bonus to your effective level with certain abilities. This bonus in unnamed and from different sources, and never references only enhancing the base ability, nor has it's status as exempt from the standard rules been called out in either ability's text or clarifications thereof. You have still not shown anything to prevent this from working other than the fact that allowing them to stack would be very powerful (but still less powerful than other combinations, even post-clarifications).
risner 11-16-07, 02:38 PM	They stack. If you don't like it, houserule it. By RAW, they don't appear to stack. If you allow your line of thinking, do these stack: 1) Powerful Build and Monkey Grip? You should 2) Phylactery of Undead Turning and Scepter of the Underworld? The point may be debated, so you can no say you are right and everyone else is wrong (unless you like being rude.) So I reject your assertion that anyone who says they don't stack is houseruling.
strenoth 11-16-07, 02:59 PM	I have to admit, number 2 there I am inclined to allow to stack. number 1... well, maybe if some one REALLy wanted to play cloud strife...
EjoThims 11-16-07, 04:22 PM	As well, unlike SuS and Monk's Belt, Monkey Grip and Powerful Build are worded slightly differently. Powerful Build lets you wield weapons as if you were one size larger. Monkey Grip let's you wield weapons one size larger than you are. The distinction is small, but the difference is enough so that enhance different abilities and have a much less stable support fo stacking, even before RAI or clarification.