Balancing the Monk class with a Monster Race [Archive] - Wizards Community

Balancing the Monk class with a Monster Race [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
araznblair
10-19-05, 09:33 AM Ok a player of mind is wanting to play a Monk and a race created from the Savage Species book. The race is a Gaurdinal (Leonal) which has a natural weapon of claws. So our question is does the Natural Claw damage stack with a Monks Flurry Of Blows damage?

Also I want to see if the following stacks for a Monks AC:

Base +10, Natural AC +14, Wis (26) +8, Cloak of Prot +5, Amulet of NAC +5, Monk AC bon +3, Dex (22) +6, Bracers of Armor +8

This is a total AC of 59.

I think that this is high.

Before the scribes go balistic, he has created a 16th lvl Monk with a 7 HD race that is also a LA+7. This is a NPC for an idea that my group has about creating a campaign of 30th level characters so we are testing things out.

Any opinions and criticism will be greatly appreciated as well as advice.

Cheers!
Chobemaster
10-19-05, 09:45 AM I don't have the RAW in front of me, but I would allow EITHER claw damage or monk damage, not stacking...claws must be employed a certain way...high level monk damage represents various "moves" that are NOT just swipes w/ claws. An elbow to the gut, whip the forearm/back of the hand up into the nose wouldn't involve claws at all.

I'm probably wrong, but are you sure you can stack amulet of natural armor with existing natural armor? aren't they the same bonus type?
alecthemad
10-19-05, 09:48 AM I do not believe the claws stack with the monk's unarmed attacks. The attacks of a monk are described as using his entire body: legs, arms, hands, elbows, knees etc. So any particular blow will likely not use the claws. I would handle the claws as an off hand attack. The PC can take feats to gain more than one additional claw attack. This is my own guess based upon my understanding of the rules. Some particular rule may contradict me.
araznblair
10-19-05, 10:03 AM To an extent I do agree with both of you that the claw attack is different form of fighting then the Flurry, however a monk can use his fist, elbows, knees feet interchangably and not all at once. So if the Monk chooses to just use his fists for the flurry (just slap the crap out of the opponent) then could the claw damage stack?

I do believe that the Amulet of Natural AC does stack with racial Natural AC. A lich gains a +2 to Natural AC and can still use the amulet. Though I also do not have the RAW in front of me, could a scribe who does weigh in on this?
Millennium
10-19-05, 10:33 AM To an extent I do agree with both of you that the claw attack is different form of fighting then the Flurry, however a monk can use his fist, elbows, knees feet interchangably and not all at once. So if the Monk chooses to just use his fists for the flurry (just slap the crap out of the opponent) then could the claw damage stack?
Flurry doesn't work that way. You don't choose what to use in a blow until it's time to do it; you just use whatever comes most naturally and strikes the quickest. That's why you can't flurry with weapons in your hands unless they're specifically designed to be used in flurries (i.e. the special monkish weapons); they would get in the way. Even when you use monkish weapons in a flurry, this restricts you enough that you don't deal extra damage with the weapons. A kama always deals 1d6 damage in a flurry, whether your unarmed damage is 1d4 or 2d10.

A non-humanoid practicing humanoid martial arts certainly couldn't use natural attacks in a flurry initially, because those arts were designed by humanoids. They don't take into account claws, fangs, tails, and other things humanoids don't have, because why would a humanoid bother to design techniques he couldn't ever use, but which could be used against him by others? This isn't to say that they couldn't eventually learn to adapt those things into their own unique fighting styles, but it would require additional training and practice above and beyond the norm, and the claws would be akin to other monkish weapons: the damage does not stack. I'd use feats to emulate this, perhaps as follows:

FLURRY OF CLAWS
Prerequisites: Ability to make a claw attack, Greater flurry class feature
Effect: You may choose to use your claw attack as a special monk weapon when using your flurry of blows. When using your claws, you do normal damage as for claw attacks, but all attacks in the flurry also take on all other properties of your claw attacks (including slashing damage).
Normal: Claw attacks may not be used in a flurry of blows.

A similar "Flurry of Slams" feat could be made for slam attacks. I'm not sure that "Flurry of Bites" or "Flurry of Tail Slaps" would work very well, though.
alecthemad
10-19-05, 02:57 PM I looked up the SRD on the flurry of blows and it gives examples of using special monk weapons as part of the flurry. So at best I would allow the player to substitute claw damage for unarmed monk damage. But the SRD does make the point that "The monk can’t use any weapon other than a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows." so that could be considered to rule out the option I just gave.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
araznblair 10-19-05, 09:33 AM	Ok a player of mind is wanting to play a Monk and a race created from the Savage Species book. The race is a Gaurdinal (Leonal) which has a natural weapon of claws. So our question is does the Natural Claw damage stack with a Monks Flurry Of Blows damage? Also I want to see if the following stacks for a Monks AC: Base +10, Natural AC +14, Wis (26) +8, Cloak of Prot +5, Amulet of NAC +5, Monk AC bon +3, Dex (22) +6, Bracers of Armor +8 This is a total AC of 59. I think that this is high. Before the scribes go balistic, he has created a 16th lvl Monk with a 7 HD race that is also a LA+7. This is a NPC for an idea that my group has about creating a campaign of 30th level characters so we are testing things out. Any opinions and criticism will be greatly appreciated as well as advice. Cheers!
Chobemaster 10-19-05, 09:45 AM	I don't have the RAW in front of me, but I would allow EITHER claw damage or monk damage, not stacking...claws must be employed a certain way...high level monk damage represents various "moves" that are NOT just swipes w/ claws. An elbow to the gut, whip the forearm/back of the hand up into the nose wouldn't involve claws at all. I'm probably wrong, but are you sure you can stack amulet of natural armor with existing natural armor? aren't they the same bonus type?
alecthemad 10-19-05, 09:48 AM	I do not believe the claws stack with the monk's unarmed attacks. The attacks of a monk are described as using his entire body: legs, arms, hands, elbows, knees etc. So any particular blow will likely not use the claws. I would handle the claws as an off hand attack. The PC can take feats to gain more than one additional claw attack. This is my own guess based upon my understanding of the rules. Some particular rule may contradict me.
araznblair 10-19-05, 10:03 AM	To an extent I do agree with both of you that the claw attack is different form of fighting then the Flurry, however a monk can use his fist, elbows, knees feet interchangably and not all at once. So if the Monk chooses to just use his fists for the flurry (just slap the crap out of the opponent) then could the claw damage stack? I do believe that the Amulet of Natural AC does stack with racial Natural AC. A lich gains a +2 to Natural AC and can still use the amulet. Though I also do not have the RAW in front of me, could a scribe who does weigh in on this?
Millennium 10-19-05, 10:33 AM	To an extent I do agree with both of you that the claw attack is different form of fighting then the Flurry, however a monk can use his fist, elbows, knees feet interchangably and not all at once. So if the Monk chooses to just use his fists for the flurry (just slap the crap out of the opponent) then could the claw damage stack? Flurry doesn't work that way. You don't choose what to use in a blow until it's time to do it; you just use whatever comes most naturally and strikes the quickest. That's why you can't flurry with weapons in your hands unless they're specifically designed to be used in flurries (i.e. the special monkish weapons); they would get in the way. Even when you use monkish weapons in a flurry, this restricts you enough that you don't deal extra damage with the weapons. A kama always deals 1d6 damage in a flurry, whether your unarmed damage is 1d4 or 2d10. A non-humanoid practicing humanoid martial arts certainly couldn't use natural attacks in a flurry initially, because those arts were designed by humanoids. They don't take into account claws, fangs, tails, and other things humanoids don't have, because why would a humanoid bother to design techniques he couldn't ever use, but which could be used against him by others? This isn't to say that they couldn't eventually learn to adapt those things into their own unique fighting styles, but it would require additional training and practice above and beyond the norm, and the claws would be akin to other monkish weapons: the damage does not stack. I'd use feats to emulate this, perhaps as follows: FLURRY OF CLAWS Prerequisites: Ability to make a claw attack, Greater flurry class feature Effect: You may choose to use your claw attack as a special monk weapon when using your flurry of blows. When using your claws, you do normal damage as for claw attacks, but all attacks in the flurry also take on all other properties of your claw attacks (including slashing damage). Normal: Claw attacks may not be used in a flurry of blows. A similar "Flurry of Slams" feat could be made for slam attacks. I'm not sure that "Flurry of Bites" or "Flurry of Tail Slaps" would work very well, though.
alecthemad 10-19-05, 02:57 PM	I looked up the SRD on the flurry of blows and it gives examples of using special monk weapons as part of the flurry. So at best I would allow the player to substitute claw damage for unarmed monk damage. But the SRD does make the point that "The monk can’t use any weapon other than a special monk weapon as part of a flurry of blows." so that could be considered to rule out the option I just gave.