single weapon style for monks?

alaundo

Do the monks fist count as single weapon? Rasaad could benefit greatly from the +AC modifier but im not sure if it works..

bbear

nope. Monks dont get benefit from any weapon style for fighting unarmed.

Humanoid_Taifun

I heard that if you take a monk by his feet and swing him at your enemies, that counts as a two-handed weapon.

Edit: That probably doesn't help you though.

Dee

I've been fighting for this one since March, actually. There's a reason for why it works like that, but I don't recall what it is.

Wanderon

I'm afraid I just can't see why anyone might want to take a monk along in BG1 (well perhaps except for RP reasons but still)-

I readily admit I'm not fond of the class to start but mostly it seems to me that almost every benefit they might have comes at higher levels than you will ever see in BG1 - am I missing something?

PhillUp

I think the only true way to play a monk is unarmed, but Wanderon is right in some way. The big question is what the maximum Level is in BG:EE.

sazaland

Monks are pretty strong by the end of BG1, d12 fists are pretty good if you have the strength to back it up, a PC could have up to 19 Str with the tome.

I think the reason the styles don't work is because unarmed monks are using something invisible in their offhand, due to a kludgy implementation of monk combat in the engine. Might also be because they aren't technically using a weapon.

alaundo

Ok so does their stunning blow at least work when they use a weapon?

Alesthes

Should I get from this thread that a Monk using a weapon, even if specialized, is necessarily going to be inferior to an unharmed Monk?
I am asking it because I was planning to take Rasaad into being a katana user, but I now wonder if this is just going to gimp his effectiveness...

marktheshark

I think a Monk is more effective with a weapon until level 6, when his fists do 1d10 damage. Although, I think they get a 2nd attack at 4th level (not quite sure). The real problem with Rasaad's unarmed combat is that his THACO sucks.

marktheshark

Forgot to add that single weapon style plus weapon improves his AC by 1. Which is huge, since he can't use armor.

Humanoid_Taifun

@marktheshark (damnit, I messed up the link)
The worse your AC, the less important an individual point.

Calculation:
Fighter A can be hit with 95% probability. One of these is a critical because he can't wear a helmet.
He improves his AC by 1 point.
He can now be hit with 90% probability. In other words, he takes 19/20 or 95% as much damage as before.

Fighter B can be hit with 20% probability. One of these hits is a critical because he does not wear a helmet.
He improves his AC by 1 point.
He can now be hit with a 15% probability. In other words, he takes 4/5 or 80% as much damage as before.

The one point difference is for Fighter B 400% as effective as for fighter A.

Vuki

I played with monk in BG2 several times. I like them very much and they can be powerful even in BG1 if you know how to use them. But I agree that they cannot show their real muscles in BG1.

Monk should use low level (level 1-2) a weapon and use only the unarmed attack in special case. Darts are not a bad choice or you can go with katana or scimitar. Later you can learn single weapon proficiency (or if you do not like darts, give him/her scimitar+single wpn. prof). Later you can start to use his unarmed attack and use only weapon if enemy can be hit only by magical weapon.

The big advantage of monk is the stunning blow ability. That is simple awesome against some enemies. If you are fighting against an enemy spellcaster then let the monk do the job. Even if the enemy has 100% magic resistance, spell turning, stoneskin and every possible defense switched on (except mirror image) the monk stunning blow can affect it. Enemy spellcasters usually cannot really resist the stun and then party can easily hack it in a round. Again, it is very important to notice that MR does not protect against this effect because it is not magic! It is also affecting enemies proctected by stoneskins (monk cannot make damage but stun still affect enemy).

Apart from that big advantage monk can be really strong on higher levels. 5/2 attack per round and 1D12 damage is really nice. Additionally monk can use the bracers that helps unarmed attacks (I do not remember the name of the bracer), +4 attack / +4 damage is really beautiful. Monk can reach level 9, at that level monk THAC0 is: 12 (base) + 1 (from hit as +1 - yes, that also counts) +4 from this bracer = THAC0 7. Base damage is 1D12+4 that is still much better then for example the 1D8+2 for a +2 long sword.

So, monk is not a monster in BG1 but it gives a nice plus to the game and on high level it can keep up with other characters.

Alesthes

Thanks for the answers. So, as far as I can understand, a Monk in his BG1 career should mostly take advantage of a 1-hand weapon, while in his BG2 career he will be penalized by using it...
Not really what I hoped, but that's it.

Southpaw

I neither of the BGs did a fist count as a single weapon (BG1/BG2/BGTutu). It only works with normal 1-handed weapons. Like Scarlet Ninja-to in BG2. A weapon tailor-made for monks and for monks only. +3 Ninjato, 2 AttacksPerRound and an acid attack to it. I guess it was there for the monks to have an option to kill the Trolls which were loads of in BG2.

I actually played a monk in BG1 on several occasions. Get him the Single weapon style trait and let him wield a magical scimitar till level around 7 (Drizzt's +3 scimitar or +5 Defender is best (only if you kill him, and only for good monks)). He will be stuck with 1 AttackPerRound, but he will have a better AC and THAC0. Because his APR with fists goes up, there's little incentive to wield a weapon after 7-8th level on regular basis.


Monk in BG1 is viable/desired for 2 reasons in BG1
a) to get +ability tomes and import the monk into BG2, where he will shine (str 19 without belts). It's a pain to play a monk in BG1, but not impossible. However knowing where to get certain equipment asap is a must. (to boost AC and THAC0, shield amulet etc...)
b) roleplay or difficulcity challenge

bigdogchris

I do not want Monks fist added to 1 handed weapon style. Plus, they were balanced with no proficiencies in mind.

AHF

Alesthes said:

Thanks for the answers. So, as far as I can understand, a Monk in his BG1 career should mostly take advantage of a 1-hand weapon, while in his BG2 career he will be penalized by using it...
Not really what I hoped, but that's it.

I would use fists for most of BG:EE for melee. By 4th level, the monk gets 3 attacks every 2 rounds with his fists doing 1d8 damage versus 1 attack with any other weapon (other than a dart) so from that point I am going with fists except where a magic weapon is required.

By 7th level, the monk is doing 2 attacks per round at 1d10 damage which is clearly superior to using a weapon unless you are truly desperate for that one point of AC from the single weapon style.

In BG2, it isn't even a question. The class becomes a powerhouse reasonably early in the game as a monk's AC goes from the poor to mediocre range of BG1 to very good, he gets a instant killing blow attack, he gets the highest non-Viconia magic resistance in the game, is immune to charm, poison, slow, etc., is immune to normal weapons, and has 3-4 attacks per round at a more effective thac0 and dealing d20 damage + strength and item bonuses.

Humanoid_Taifun

@bigdogchris
Baldur's Gate has balancing now? When did that happen?

bigdogchris

@Humanoid_Taifun

I'm not saying Monks are "balanced" compared to other classes, I'm just saying that when they were designed the developers gave them the abilities they had, knowing they did not have proficiencies.

Monks were not in BG1 for a reason.

smeagolheart

Humanoid_Taifun said:

I heard that if you take a monk by his feet and swing him at your enemies, that counts as a two-handed weapon.

Edit: That probably doesn't help you though.

You can't do this?