The
new edition of Astonishing Swordsmen & Sorcerers of Hyperborea has
been released to Kickstarter backers in PDF.
I will not be reviewing the complete document, but instead focus on how
the changes affect the character I play in Kevin Madison’s Reavers of Thule
campaign. My character, Amar, is a 7th
level Monk with relevant statistics of Strength 13 and Dexterity
18.
This
is the 3rd edition of the game and is now called just Hyperborea. I will refer to it as 3e and the previous
edition as 2e. From what I remember in
the development of 3e, the Monk class underwent the most revision. As we will see, there are big changes between
the 2 editions for the class.
The
following class abilities are gone in 3e:
1. Accurate Strike – this granted a +1 to
damage every 3 levels for all non-missile attacks in lieu of a Strength
bonus. This was a pretty good ability that
increased with level; my 7th level Monk has a bonus +3 to all
non-missile damage, which is equivalent to a 18 Strength damage bonus.
2. Empty Hand – this granted a +1 to-hit
bonus for unarmed attacks. whenever
fighting without weapons, your attacks were one Fighting Ability
higher. This was a decent ability as
well; a 1st level Monk fought as a 2nd level Fighter when not
using weapons.
3. The stunning blow
ability of Empty Hand – this ability now only activates on a natural 20,
versus the 2e version activating on a 19-20. This is a loss, but the
ability rarely came up in our game and with Roll20 indicating when you score a
20, it will be easier to use. As far as I can tell, these are the only
"losses" from the 2e Monk.
The
following class abilities are new or improved in 3e:
1. Defensive Ability – in 2e, this was an AC
bonus that improved every odd level, but could not be combined with the AC
bonus from Dexterity. That
restriction is gone in 3e, which is a welcome change. Neither version of the Monk can wear
any type of armor and therefore will almost never (barring magic) have any
DR. This changes Amar’s base AC at 7th
level from 5 to 3.
2. Extraordinary bonuses –
previously, the Monk gained a bonus +8% to Extraordinary Feats of
Dexterity. In 3e, the class also
gains a bonus +8% to Extraordinary Feats of Strength. I would call this a minor change; Amar now
has an equivalent 15 Strength as it pertains to this.
3. The quivering palm
ability of Empty Hand – previously this only worked on Small or Medium sized
creatures. Now, there are no size
restrictions. While I like it, I would
have liked the no size restriction applied to stunning blow as
well.
4. Empty Hand as magical weapon – at 5th
level in 2e, Empty Hand counted as a magical weapon for the
purpose of harming creatures that were only vulnerable to magic weapons.
In 3e, it also grants a +1 to-hit. The importance of this will be
illustrated later.
5. Empty Hand as weapon-like damage –
in 2e, this was a 1dx increasing every 4 levels plus either Strength bonus
or Accurate Strike bonus. Amar
was 1d4+1 at 1st level, 1d6+2 at 5th level, and 1d6+3 at
7th level. In 3e, this is a
xd4 increasing every 3 levels. Since Accurate
Strike is gone, only Amar’s Strength bonus would apply, so it would
be 1d4+1 at 1st level, 2d4+1 at 4th level, and 3d4+1 at 7th
level. This is a big improvement I will
illustrate below.
6. Fighting Ability – in 2e, the Monk
improved like the Cleric, starting out with Fighting Ability 1 at
1st level, improving to 2 at 3rd level, 3 at 4th
level, 4 at 6th level, and 5 at 7th level. In 3e, you start at 1st level with
a 0 Fighting Ability, but then undergo a mostly linear progression. For the 1st through 4th
level Monk, this is actually a downgrade. At 5th level, the 3e progression
is better than the 2e one. I have created
the following table to illustrate some of the previous points.
|
LEVEL |
2e FA |
3e FA |
2e EH
FA |
3e EH
FA |
2e EH
DAM |
3e EH
DAM |
2e
DAM RNG |
3e
DAM RNG |
2e
DAM AVG |
2e %
DAM AVG |
3e %
DAM AVG |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1d4+1 |
1d4 |
2-5 |
1-4 |
3+ |
75.0% |
50.0% |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1d4+1 |
1d4 |
2-5 |
1-4 |
3+ |
75.0% |
50.0% |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1d4+1 |
1d4 |
2-5 |
1-4 |
3+ |
75.0% |
50.0% |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
1d4+2 |
2d4 |
3-6 |
2-8 |
4+ |
75.0% |
81.3% |
|
5 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
1d6+2 |
2d4 |
3-6 |
2-8 |
5+ |
66.7% |
62.5% |
|
6 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
1d6+2 |
2d4 |
3-6 |
2-8 |
5+ |
66.7% |
62.5% |
|
7 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
7 |
1d6+3 |
3d4 |
4-9 |
3-12 |
6+ |
66.7% |
84.4% |
|
8 |
5 |
7 |
6 |
8 |
1d6+3 |
3d4 |
4-9 |
3-12 |
6+ |
66.7% |
84.4% |
|
9 |
6 |
8 |
7 |
9 |
1d8+3 |
3d4 |
4-9 |
3-12 |
7+ |
62.5% |
68.7% |
|
10 |
7 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
1d8+4 |
4d4 |
5-12 |
4-16 |
8+ |
62.5% |
86.3% |
|
11 |
7 |
10 |
8 |
11 |
1d8+4 |
4d4 |
5-12 |
4-16 |
8+ |
62.5% |
86.3% |
|
12 |
8 |
11 |
9 |
12 |
1d8+4 |
4d4 |
5-12 |
4-16 |
8+ |
62.5% |
86.3% |
Legend: FA = Fighting Ability; EH = Empty Hand; DAM =
damage; RNG = range; AVG = average; % DAM AVG = the percent chance your damage
die roll is equal to or greater than damage average.
For unarmed
combat purposes, the 2e Monk will hit more often and more like a Fighter
for the first 4 levels. However, the
damage output is slightly better for minimum damage. At 5th level, the 3e Monk
adds the +1 to-hit bonus from the new Empty Hand and fights as a Fighter
of equivalent level, outpacing the 2e version by 1 for 5th through 7th,
by 2 for 8th through 10th, and by a whopping 3 for 11th
and 12th.
For damage
purposes, the 3e version becomes better that the 2e class at 4th
level. The Monk now does one less
minimum and 2 more maximum damage, which I view as better. At 7th level, the damage is 1 less
than the 2e but is now 3 more maximum, and that changes to 4 more at 10th
level. Another thing to keep in mind is
you go from a die with equivalent probability for any number result to a bell
curve number result that is less “swingy”.
The last 3
columns provide the best illustration I could devise. Since the 2e version uses only 1 (even) die,
the 2e DAM AVG column shows what would be the minimum average damage. On a 1d4, the average is 2.5, but you can’t
roll that, so I consider it a 2 and then add the Accurate Strike bonus
for a 3 or greater on average roll. The
next column, 2e % DAM AVG shows the odds of rolling the 2e DAM AVG or greater
and the last column shows the same for 3e.
Again, the 4th
to 5th level area is where things turn better for the 3e Monk. The 4th level version in 3e is not
hitting as often as the 2e one, but he does better damage on average. At 5th level, the 3e version is
now hitting more on average with only a slight reduction in average damage
chances. At 7th level, the 3e
version is now superior in both to-hit and average damage compared to the 2e
one.
As for Amar,
he now adds a +1 Strength bonus to his 3e EH DAM column, so his would
look like this:
|
LEVEL |
2e FA |
3e FA |
2e EH
FA |
3e EH
FA |
2e EH
DAM |
3e EH
DAM |
2e
DAM RNG |
3e
DAM RNG |
2e
DAM AVG |
2e %
DAM AVG |
3e %
DAM AVG |
|
1 |
1 |
0 |
2 |
0 |
1d4+1 |
1d4+1 |
2-5 |
2-5 |
3+ |
75.0% |
75.0% |
|
2 |
1 |
1 |
2 |
1 |
1d4+1 |
1d4+1 |
2-5 |
2-5 |
3+ |
75.0% |
75.0% |
|
3 |
2 |
2 |
3 |
2 |
1d4+1 |
1d4+1 |
2-5 |
2-5 |
3+ |
75.0% |
75.0% |
|
4 |
3 |
3 |
4 |
3 |
1d4+2 |
2d4+1 |
3-6 |
3-9 |
4+ |
75.0% |
93.8% |
|
5 |
3 |
4 |
4 |
5 |
1d6+2 |
2d4+1 |
3-8 |
3-9 |
5+ |
66.7% |
81.3% |
|
6 |
4 |
5 |
5 |
6 |
1d6+2 |
2d4+1 |
3-8 |
3-9 |
5+ |
66.7% |
81.3% |
|
7 |
5 |
6 |
6 |
7 |
1d6+3 |
3d4+1 |
4-9 |
4-13 |
6+ |
66.7% |
93.8% |
|
8 |
5 |
7 |
6 |
8 |
1d6+3 |
3d4+1 |
4-9 |
4-13 |
6+ |
66.7% |
93.8% |
|
9 |
6 |
8 |
7 |
9 |
1d8+3 |
3d4+1 |
4-11 |
4-13 |
7+ |
62.5% |
84.4% |
|
10 |
7 |
9 |
8 |
10 |
1d8+4 |
4d4+1 |
5-12 |
5-17 |
8+ |
62.5% |
94.1% |
|
11 |
7 |
10 |
8 |
11 |
1d8+4 |
4d4+1 |
5-12 |
5-17 |
8+ |
62.5% |
94.1% |
|
12 |
8 |
11 |
9 |
12 |
1d8+4 |
4d4+1 |
5-12 |
5-17 |
8+ |
62.5% |
94.1% |
As you can see,
at 5th level the 3e version of Amar is superior.
So, the 3e
version of the Monk is better in general. However, there is a change in the rules that
is not specific to the Monk, but does “nerf” an ability my 2e version
occasionally took advantage of: two-weapon
fighting.
In 2e,
depending on the Weapon Class (WC, a measure of size/speed of a weapon)
and the character’s Dexterity, two-weapon fighting suffered to-hit penalties
ranging from minus 2/minus 4 to minus 1/minus 1. For WC purposes in 2e, an unarmed attack for
a Monk counted as WC 0, so no penalties were realized when fighting Empty
Hand. For Amar, when fighting two-handed
with weapons with an 18 Dexterity, if they were both WC 1, he suffered a
minus one to both, for WC 2/1 he had a minus 2/minus 1, and if both were WC 2,
both were at minus 2. This has recently
become important for Amar. As a 7th
level 2e Monk, his Empty Hand attacks were 2/1 at FA 6 (or FA 5
+1 to-hit) for 1d6+3 (4-9 range, average 6 or more) damage each. He recently received two magic weapons, one
WC 2 at 1d8 +3 hit/damage and one WC 1 at 1d6 +2 hit/damage. Dual wielding them at FA 5, Amar was +1 to-hit
for 1d8+6 damage (7-14 range, average 10 or more) and +1 to hit for 1d6+5
damage (6-11 range, average 8 or more). Comparing
to the table above, the to-hit bonuses balance out with the FA difference, i.e.
a FA 6 with no to-hit bonus is equivalent to a FA 5 with a +1 to-hit
bonus. However, the damage output was
significantly greater with the magic weapons, which is what Amar just started
using.
In 3e, all
of this changes. Dexterity no
longer plays a role in the WC penalty adjustment, although attack bonuses from
higher Strength would. The to-hit
penalty to a WC 2/1 combination is now -3 to BOTH weapons. Amar would now be at FA 6 with no to-hit
bonus at 1d8+4 damage (5-12 range, average 7 or more) and -1 to-hit at 1d6+3
damage (4-9 range, average 6 or more). Obviously,
Amar is better off Empty Hand with FA 7 (or FA 6 +1 to-hit) for 3d4+1 damage
(4-13 range, average 7 or more).
What does
all this mean? In my experience, Amar
was usually ineffective against high AC foes with DR and/or high HP. The 2e Monk played a bit more like the
cinematic monk you see dropping “mooks” relatively easily. The way to improve the 2e version versus
higher AC/DR/HP enemies was through magical weapons, preferably dual
wielded. The 3e version retains most of
the “mook” combat features, but now magical weapons have almost no use. However, the 3e version of Empty Hand
should now work much better against those higher AC/DR/HP enemies.
Overall, I
like the improvements for the 3e Monk, but I still feel there should be
a better balance between Empty Hand and magical weapons. I don’t feel it should be an either/or. For both editions, it appears you only need a
base +1 to-hit magical weapon for certain powerful monsters; I could not locate
a monster that listed a higher magical to-hit was required. Many magical weapons also come with other
benefits; in Amar’s example, it is a +3 rod of smiting. If you have a high Strength, then dual
wielding becomes better. Although Strength
is an attribute requisite for Monk in both editions, it’s only a 9 and
is not a Prime Requisite. I’ve
always felt the class is best represented by the high Dexterity and that
applied to both unarmed and armed melee attacks. I’m sure there was some basis for the change
in two-weapon fighting, but I’m not a fan.
