The monk's robe grants:

If the wearer has levels in monk, her AC and unarmed damage is treated as a monk of five levels higher.

The Monk of the Silver Fist archetype from Dreamscarred Press replaces the standard monk's unarmed strike ability, with a new ability that scales Gauntlet damage instead of Unarmed damage.

Would a monk of the silver fist gain increased gauntlet damage from his monk's robe, due to this replacement?
If not, would he gain increased unarmed damage as a monk of 5th level?

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ I added a tag to indicate that the referenced material isn't Paizo material. It sometime affects answers. \$\endgroup\$ – Ifusaso Apr 25 '18 at 15:07
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Ifusaso 3pp was burninated last year. Instead an alternative would be tagging it with the 3rd party publisher itself, such as [dreamscarred-press], or mentioning it in the question ("DSP's Monk of the Silver Fist archetype"), or leaving answerers to make sure they've read the referenced links & material properly. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 26 '18 at 8:30
  • \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener I can agree to using the name of the publisher... But simply 3pp is both extremely useful for searching/reading (at least Pathfinder if not others) and enough information in most cases. How do I propose redacting the burnination? \$\endgroup\$ – Ifusaso Apr 26 '18 at 8:53
  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ @Ifusaso There isn't a formal process for contesting a burnination after it's happened yet. We haven't had to do it before. I suggest post an answer to that original burnination request, or open a new meta question (probably [discussion]) suggesting that it's still useful to have and why or when it's useful. Posting a new question would probably work best and give you a cleaner floor for the discussion — link back to the original burnination request when you do. \$\endgroup\$ – doppelgreener Apr 26 '18 at 9:06
  • \$\begingroup\$ @doppelgreener following your advice concering tags for 3pp, I will add the dreamscarred-press tag and make it clear in the text of the question. \$\endgroup\$ – royalmurder Apr 26 '18 at 9:44

At my own table, a Monk of the Silver Fist (MoSF) wearing a monk's robe would be treated as being able to make unarmed strikes as if a normal Monk of 5th level (i.e. 1d6 damage), with no change to their gauntlet damage. I would also allow them to gain the AC bonus of a monk 5 levels higher (since the MoSF still has this ability).

Note, however, this is likely open to specific GM interpretation (as another answer here shows), due to the now-ambiguous wording of the item. The Monk's Robe is from the Core rulebook, and when written, there was no such thing as a Monk without the core abilities. Thanks to archetypes, that assumption has not held true. If the item were written today, I expect it would refer to those specific abilities as being improved, rather than the class.

  • \$\begingroup\$ Treating the monk of the silver fist as a non-monk for the purposes of unarmed strikes is a solid enough approach to handling things, but it’s in no way supported by the rules (as you address well in the second paragraph). Your current phrasing might give the impression that it is, so you might want to reconsider the wording of the first line. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Apr 25 '18 at 23:51
  • \$\begingroup\$ @KRyan I thought I DID handle that - that's why I used words like 'In my opinion' to indicate it's not clearcut. How would you suggest I phrase this? \$\endgroup\$ – YogoZuno Apr 26 '18 at 1:37
  • 3
    \$\begingroup\$ So the way I read that sentence first is that this is your opinion on what the rules say, rather than what you would do at your games or how you think things should be. I would probably use phrasing like “In my games,” instead of “In my opinion,” to introduce that sentence. That makes it clear where you’re coming from, and then the second paragraph explains 1. why you felt the need to restrict the claim to your games, and 2. why you would make that choice in your games. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Apr 26 '18 at 2:28

As written, no, the monk’s robe does nothing for a monk of the silver fist.

As a houserule, it’s reasonable enough; I would probably allow it. Actually, I would probably caution you that a monk’s robe isn’t a great item for a monk, since its benefits amount to basically +1 AC, +1 damage, and +1 daily use of Stunning Fist. 13,000 gp is a lot for those meager benefits.

  • 1
    \$\begingroup\$ AFAIK, wiith Monk Robe, you never gains Wis to AC although she does not add her Wisdom bonus to her AC. \$\endgroup\$ – aloisdg Apr 26 '18 at 7:02
  • \$\begingroup\$ @aloisdg Right, they nerfed it, but without reducing the price. Now it’s just a worthless item. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Apr 26 '18 at 12:12
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kryan Don't tell that to my own monk-type guy, who was so overjoyed to find one in a treasure horde... \$\endgroup\$ – YogoZuno Apr 26 '18 at 20:34
  • \$\begingroup\$ @YogoZuno Well, OK—it’s worth something, just not its actual value or anything close to it. If it was found, and the GM mentally considers it worth less than the book says it is when considering future loot vis à vis WBL, then it’s fine. \$\endgroup\$ – KRyan Apr 26 '18 at 20:49
  • \$\begingroup\$ @Kryan Valu aside, I'm still curious how you think the robe should apply in general? Would you only allow a non-archetyped monk, with all of the mentioned abilities, to get any benefit? Or Do you apply each ability on a case-by-case basis? \$\endgroup\$ – YogoZuno Apr 26 '18 at 22:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.