Posted by James Mishler  7/14/2020 9:00 pm | #1 |
Maybe I'm missing a rule somewhere, but it appears that the Monk in AS&SH does not get multiple attacks with their Empty Hand attack, is that correct?
It seems the only way to get multiple attacks is to use the advanced combat rule for "Two-Weapon Fighting," and then that only gains a single attack per round. In this case their class-based damage bonus is applied, as non-Strength-based damage bonuses are not affected, correct?
***
James Mishler
|
Posted by BlackKnight 7/14/2020 9:43 pm | #2 |
Look under two-weapon attacks, there is a specific example of a Monk's use of Hands as two weapons
.N.B.: A monk using the two-weapon fighting technique with his empty hands is treated as if wielding WC 0 weapons.
[size=100]Then, Looking at that statement, WC 0 Weapons have no Attack penalty, thus based on the following are the Monks Primary and Secondary hand Penalties...
DX. WC 0 (P)/ WC 0 (S)
13-16. 0/-2
17. 0/-1
18. 0/0[/size]
Last edited by BlackKnight (7/14/2020 9:51 pm)
--
BlackKnight, AKA Sausage
Older than Dirt, Crusty, and set in my ways. Been playing TTRPGs for over 45 years...
|
Posted by James Mishler 7/14/2020 10:16 pm | #3 |
Ah, sorry, I should have been more specific in my first sentence... what I meant was, the Monk does not gain any multiple attacks with Empty Hand due to rise in levels, unlike, say, the Monk from various editions of D&D (where they advance, for example in 1st edition, from 1/1 to 5/4, 3/2, 2/1, 5/2, 3/1, and eventually 4/1).
The only way for a Monk to do a multiple Empty-Hand attack is using the two-weapon rules, correct? Which then maxes out at 2/1, but can be used at any level.
***
James Mishler
|
Posted by Spider of Leng 7/15/2020 12:28 am | #4 |
Yeah, that looks right to me. And personally it's a big reason not to play a monk in this game as you lose arguably their coolest ability. In my regular 1e/OSR games I also ditch the rule whereby monks don't get ability score bonuses for strength and dexterity. And guess what, it doesn't break the game at all. So I say, if you want to just use the standard AD&D or S&W or LL monk open hand attacks, go for it! It's your game.
"Could you fancy me as a pirate bold? Or a longship Viking warrior with the old gods on his side? Well, I'm an inshore man and I'm nobody's hero. But I'll make you tight for a windy night and a dark ride."--Jethro Tull
|
Posted by mabon5127 7/15/2020 5:58 am | #5 |
Spider of Leng wrote:
Yeah, that looks right to me. And personally it's a big reason not to play a monk in this game as you lose arguably their coolest ability. In my regular 1e/OSR games I also ditch the rule whereby monks don't get ability score bonuses for strength and dexterity. And guess what, it doesn't break the game at all. So I say, if you want to just use the standard AD&D or S&W or LL monk open hand attacks, go for it! It's your game.
I would agree with this house rule. I have a Hyperborean Monk in my campaign that gets stat bonuses and I would consider giving them multiple attacks as well as Mastery and Grand Mastery with open hand attacks. Heroic fighting with Open hand makes sense as they could def win a bar fight!!! They are always the weirdest of classes.
“How can I wear the harness of toil
And sweat at the daily round,
While in my soul forever
The drums of Pictdom sound?”
|
Posted by rhialto 7/15/2020 8:16 am | #6 |
Yeah, that looks right to me. And personally it's a big reason not to play a monk in this game as you lose arguably their coolest ability. In my regular 1e/OSR games I also ditch the rule whereby monks don't get ability score bonuses for strength and dexterity. And guess what, it doesn't break the game at all. So I say, if you want to just use the standard AD&D or S&W or LL monk open hand attacks, go for it! It's your game.
I would agree with this house rule. I have a Hyperborean Monk in my campaign that gets stat bonuses and I would consider giving them multiple attacks as well as Mastery and Grand Mastery with open hand attacks. Heroic fighting with Open hand makes sense as they could def win a bar fight!!! They are always the weirdest of classes.
I've house-ruled in stat bonuses for Monks, but not multiple attacks: I like the Mastery and Grand Mastery with unarmed attacks idea, though!
"It is all very well to point out that the man lacks facility; as he asserts, sheer force can overpower sophistication."
Jack Vance, Rhialto the Marvellous
|
Posted by Ghul 7/15/2020 10:45 am | #7 |
Yeah, that looks right to me. And personally it's a big reason not to play a monk in this game as you lose arguably their coolest ability. In my regular 1e/OSR games I also ditch the rule whereby monks don't get ability score bonuses for strength and dexterity. And guess what, it doesn't break the game at all. So I say, if you want to just use the standard AD&D or S&W or LL monk open hand attacks, go for it! It's your game.
I would agree with this house rule. I have a Hyperborean Monk in my campaign that gets stat bonuses and I would consider giving them multiple attacks as well as Mastery and Grand Mastery with open hand attacks. Heroic fighting with Open hand makes sense as they could def win a bar fight!!! They are always the weirdest of classes.
I've house-ruled in stat bonuses for Monks, but not multiple attacks: I like the Mastery and Grand Mastery with unarmed attacks idea, though!
I can sympathize with the idea of stat bonuses for the monk being allowable in a future revision, but it would probably compel me to revise (slightly decrease) the damage bonuses incrementally gained through level advancement. I am opposed to the Monk or any other non-fighter class from gaining the benefits of Mastery and Grand Mastery, because these are designed to be the purview of fighters (mastery and grand mastery) and fighter subclasses (mastery) alone. Fighters do a few things really well. Like fight. And fight! And that means grand mastery! Monks get to talk to pine trees, dogs, and fall down a cliff without getting hurt. They can also heal themselves, and stun an opponent with a single blow. I say give fighters their due, and let them be the masters of what they are the masters of without letting some cleric subclass rain on their parade. ALL THIS BEING SAID: House rule as desired, friends -- I want you guys to do that! My opinions and even the written rules are all but guidelines, for you are the master of your own game.
Now, as far as multiple attacks go, I would rather bake in the 2/1 for monks as part of the class rather than have it be a component of two-weapon fighting, which is an OPTIONAL rule. Not every referee is going to embrace advanced combat actions, because although they provide interesting options, there is no doubt that they can slow down combat. That's why they're optional. Referee's prerogative.
HYPERBOREA- A Role-Playing Game of Swords, Sorcery, and Weird Science-Fantasy
|
Posted by rhialto 7/15/2020 6:28 pm | #8 |
I would agree with this house rule. I have a Hyperborean Monk in my campaign that gets stat bonuses and I would consider giving them multiple attacks as well as Mastery and Grand Mastery with open hand attacks. Heroic fighting with Open hand makes sense as they could def win a bar fight!!! They are always the weirdest of classes.
I've house-ruled in stat bonuses for Monks, but not multiple attacks: I like the Mastery and Grand Mastery with unarmed attacks idea, though!
I can sympathize with the idea of stat bonuses for the monk being allowable in a future revision, but it would probably compel me to revise (slightly decrease) the damage bonuses incrementally gained through level advancement. I am opposed to the Monk or any other non-fighter class from gaining the benefits of Mastery and Grand Mastery, because these are designed to be the purview of fighters (mastery and grand mastery) and fighter subclasses (mastery) alone. Fighters do a few things really well. Like fight. And fight! And that means grand mastery! Monks get to talk to pine trees, dogs, and fall down a cliff without getting hurt. They can also heal themselves, and stun an opponent with a single blow. I say give fighters their due, and let them be the masters of what they are the masters of without letting some cleric subclass rain on their parade. ALL THIS BEING SAID: House rule as desired, friends -- I want you guys to do that! My opinions and even the written rules are all but guidelines, for you are the master of your own game.
Now, as far as multiple attacks go, I would rather bake in the 2/1 for monks as part of the class rather than have it be a component of two-weapon fighting, which is an OPTIONAL rule. Not every referee is going to embrace advanced combat actions, because although they provide interesting options, there is no doubt that they can slow down combat. That's why they're optional. Referee's prerogative.
The stat bonuses just make sense to me, but I can see (and agree with) saving Mastery and Grand Mastery for Fighter sub-classes and Fighters, respectively...
"It is all very well to point out that the man lacks facility; as he asserts, sheer force can overpower sophistication."
Jack Vance, Rhialto the Marvellous
|
Posted by gizmomathboy 7/15/2020 7:10 pm | #9 |
Yep, I might house rule the stat stuff.
I do agree that one of the best parts about Hyperborea is that the fighter is unique amongst all of the other D&D derivatives to make them...special. Sub-classes are just fighters plus some extra stuff.
As Ghul pointed out, there are lots of things monks can do that fighters can't. It's all a trade-off and balancing act.
About the only other house rule I might consider for monks is to extend the two handed fighting to a lower DX range with additional penalties.
All in all, Ghul did a decent job of making the monk very playable as compared to the 1e monk.
What? Me worry?
|
Posted by Spider of Leng 7/16/2020 11:14 pm | #10 |
I think my favorite take on the monk is the Swords & Wizardry version, but they're still hard to keep track of with respect to all their abilities and bonuses. But, because of my love of kung fu films and wuxia, I like some monks in my parties, though we haven't had one in our AS&SH game. The Labyrinth Lord party has a monk in it, though.
"Could you fancy me as a pirate bold? Or a longship Viking warrior with the old gods on his side? Well, I'm an inshore man and I'm nobody's hero. But I'll make you tight for a windy night and a dark ride."--Jethro Tull
|
Posted by Big Shiny 7/17/2020 4:37 am | #11 |
Maybe I'm missing a rule somewhere, but it appears that the Monk in AS&SH does not get multiple attacks with their Empty Hand attack, is that correct?
It seems the only way to get multiple attacks is to use the advanced combat rule for "Two-Weapon Fighting," and then that only gains a single attack per round. In this case their class-based damage bonus is applied, as non-Strength-based damage bonuses are not affected, correct?
Hey there neighbor!
Nice to see you on here!
Are you running an AS&SH game of some kind?
And more importantly, do you need players? (hint, hint)
|
Posted by gizmomathboy 7/17/2020 7:35 am | #12 |
I think my favorite take on the monk is the Swords & Wizardry version, but they're still hard to keep track of with respect to all their abilities and bonuses. But, because of my love of kung fu films and wuxia, I like some monks in my parties, though we haven't had one in our AS&SH game. The Labyrinth Lord party has a monk in it, though.
I encourage my parties in Hyperborea to have either a monk or a runegraver now. Otherwise I consider them suicidal :-)
Because those are the only 2 classes that can cure disease and neutralize poison at first level. This helps with the random encounter with zombies and rats. I rule shamans can deal with rat bites but not zombie bites.
What? Me worry?
